121

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Universal Zetetic Society - Scientific Accreditation?

« on: December 10, 2021, 10:53:09 PM »

The only
mention, by name, of anybody connected with it was Samuel Birley Rowbotham who was
merely a preacher, and who had no scientific qualifications, despite falsely styling himself
as Dr. Rowbotham.

False.

Rowbotham was a Dr twice over. He was a doctor in that he was a qualified physician ... and he was also a doctor in that he had a PhD from the University of Edinburgh for his work on the effects of Phosphorus on the human brain. From that he invented a soft drink that he called Dr Birley's Phosphorus Tonic which was a fore runner for Dr Pepper, (They ripped his recipe off after his death). He used the money from his sales of this tonic to found the society and died a very rich man indeed. I've done a large amount of research myself into where Rowbotham might have got the human brains he needed at Edinburgh University during that time, and they undoubtedly had to come from Burke and Hare.

But hey, believe the idle drivel that Christine Garwood wrote instead if you like. She's a terrible old hack that did very little research before writing her book. Consequently she gets most things wrong.

122

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: December 10, 2021, 10:37:11 PM »

Unless the 2024 democratic ticket is devoid of both Biden and Harris it's likely we're in for another 4 years of the Donald.

There is a virtually 0% chance that Trump wins ever again.

What makes you think that? The Republican nomination for 2024 is his if he wants it, and if he runs again, I'd say he has a very good chance of winning.

I think people will be utterly sick of Sleepy Joe by then. If its vs Biden, I think Trump will win. If its against Harris, you know that black people will block vote and she'll win it. All 3 are a shitty choice. I think Ted Cruz would be a better choice for Republicans. I don't give a fuck about the dems. They are all wankers.

123

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Rama Does Acting

« on: December 10, 2021, 08:09:34 PM »

You could definitely play Aragorn in a gay porn version of Lord of the Rings.

He's more like Boromir.

124

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 10, 2021, 02:45:08 PM »

you will likely doubt that intelligent people should do the voting

This is not what I am suggesting.
I simply think that people should be engaged and informed before they cast a vote.
If they are and they then vote in (what I regard to be) a stupid way then fine. They have a right to their opinion. I just think that opinion should be based on more than "Ha ha ha! Isn't Boris funny? Do you remember when he got stuck* on a zip wire?! Hoo hoo hoo!!"

*a situation I read by the way that he entirely engineered as he knew what a brilliant photo op it would be and would play in to the "good old Boris, what is he like?!" persona he so carefully cultivates and which is depressingly effective.

You know ... not voting is an entirely acceptable option. And I would imagine most people who don't vote don't care much about politics. Anyone who does vote is expressing an opinion. They shouldn't be forced into a test to do so. Its already hard enough to get people to vote. I don't think a test is the way to go.

I used to think a 'House of Academics' would be a good way to go. So maybe bus drivers, pilots and road engineers all vote for the secretary of transport. Professional coaches and people who work in gyms get to vote for the secretary of Sport. Culture secretary is voted for by people working in showbiz etc. Doctors, nurses, Chemists etc vote for the health secretary. And then you get the very best person from each academic field being voted for by their peers ... people who know what they are voting for.

But in recent years I have seen how corrupt academics are. They pretend to be noble but they are basically available for hire to say whatever you want is 'the science'. Example ... aspartame is a vile additive. It causes a list of illnesses as long as your arm including brain cancers. It has been banned TWICE by the FDA as harmful. But, Donald Rumsfeld was the CEO of the company that invented it and he lobbied Ronald Regan to make it legal backed by huge interests like Coca Cola and Pepsi. It was made legal as 'New Science' funded by these people appeared saying it was safe after all. It isn't. Long story short ... don't drink diet soft drinks. Science is bent. You just hire scientists to create conditions that make whatever you want become the 'science' the truth and unable to be argued with. You don't want academics anywhere near politics.

125

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 09, 2021, 10:20:15 PM »

it's more a vague feeling that people in this country are, by and large, bloody idiots.

Please read the following article. By the end of it, you will likely doubt that intelligent people should do the voting and will probably accept that the status quo is about as good as it gets.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/travisbradberry/2016/05/17/8-ways-smart-people-act-stupid/

Also I got the bat and ball question wrong. If that was the question, I just lost the right to vote. 

126

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 09, 2021, 08:19:18 PM »

But when you hear stuff like “What is the EU” being the most Googled question in the UK after the Brexit polls closed
(https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2016/06/24/480949383/britains-google-searches-for-what-is-the-eu-spike-after-brexit-vote)
That does not speak to me of a well informed population who are well qualified to make informed decisions when they vote.

How do you know it was the voters doing the googling? It could well be the huge number of people who didn't vote hearing the news and wondering "What on earth is this all about?".

But it fits the remoaner BBC narrative much better to say people didn't know what they voted for because they were on the losing side.

127

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You

« on: December 09, 2021, 06:38:50 PM »

The US Senate votes to overturn the vaccine mandate:

I hope they overturn it.
I hope Biden tells everyone to stop all mandates.
I hope that only 52% of all republicans are vaccinated and 100% of democrats are.

Know why?
Because the people dying are mostly unvaccinated.  Which are mostly republicans.
And since no state is 100% full of republicans, guess what happens to those nice, red states when a few million republicans in them die?

That state goes from red to blue.


So yes, I want all mandates stopped so that no more republicans will take the vaccine.  (because they would have already if they wanted to.)
I want to see all those midwestern states go blue in the next election as they purge their voter rolls of the dead.

That’s fucked up. Hoping people die so you can win an election is some real ghoul shit.

He doesn't even live in the US. These mandates don't affect him at all. He just wants people who disagree with him to die. You find that a lot with the left. They just aren't very nice people. They like abortions and atheism and destroying the nuclear family. They are just shitty people.

128

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 09, 2021, 09:03:46 AM »

Yeah, nah.

Wow, what a brilliant refutation.

You: Belarus was a credible democracy.
Me: No it wasn't, here is why.
You: Belarus was a credible democracy.
Me: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

129

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 08, 2021, 08:19:57 PM »

I'm not picking an arbitrary point in time. Historians are picking a point in time and telling you ... 'this is when Britain became democratic'.

Can you find me a single historian saying that Britain became a democracy in 1918?

They are telling you that Britain definitely wasn't a democracy when Warpole was Prime Minister. Pick the bones out of that.

A small landowning elite is not a democracy. It is a plutocracy.

What difference does it make whether you have a million people or 67 million people voting, in terms of the likelihood of one person staying in power for a long time?

Well, a small group of people with the same interests (wealthy landowners) are aligned on most policies and would look for unending stability. An entire country is full of people with different needs. Winners and losers. And those losers will demand a change when there are enough of them.

Be we absolutely were not by any definition a democracy when Warpole was Prime Minister.

No, that's not correct. The word "democracy" comes from Greek δημοκρᾰτῐ́ᾱ, which was used over 2000 years ago to describe a system in which women, slaves and foreigners could not vote. What you mean is that you were not a democracy by modern standards, standards which did not exist in that time.

We didn't even have public elections when Warpole was appointed Prime Minster BY THE KING (George I).

But even if we accept your deeply flawed position, the longest-serving Prime Minister after the 1832 Reform Act had a tenure of nearly 14 years. Not quite 20, but not far off either.

14 years and done. There is no end in sight for Putin. Its not the same thing at all.

Really? Belarus being a functioning democracy is a hill that you are willing to die on?

No. Read what I said.

I read it. You are wrong.

Again, When Lukashenko gained power, he was installed as the first President after the fall of the Soviet Union. Belarus has never had a free and fair election in its sovereign history.

Wrong again.

The election in 1994 that brought Alyaksandr Lukashenka to power in Belarus was arguably the first and last election in the former Soviet republic that met some Western norms. In fact, a U.S. commission hailed it as a “first step toward more pluralistic democracy and a free market system.”

Yeah, nah.

130

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 08, 2021, 06:52:39 PM »

you don't get to pick an arbitrary point in time at which 40% of women were granted the right to vote and claim a sudden transition from not-democracy to democracy.

I'm not picking an arbitrary point in time. Historians are picking a point in time and telling you ... 'this is when Britain became democratic'.

We were not democratic in the 1700's.

For centuries, Parliament consisted of a small landowning elite whose priorities were their own power and prosperity.

From the 18th century onwards, the social changes brought about by industrial growth and the decline of agriculture meant that the demographic landscape of Britain was altered.

With these changes came demands from the working and middle classes for equality and fairness. It took many years for a more representative Parliament to be achieved.

A small landowning elite is not a democracy. It is a plutocracy. We need the great reform act before we can even begin to consider ourselves a democracy. But we also need the Second reform act (suffrage) and the third (women's emancipation) before we can consider ourselves a modern democracy. Be we absolutely were not by any definition a democracy when Warpole was Prime Minister.

Lukashenko heads an authoritarian government and has often been referred to by media outlets as "Europe's last dictator".[1] Elections are not considered to be free and fair by international monitors, opponents of the regime are repressed, and the media is not free.[2][3]

^That is not a democracy. That is the exact thing a democracy is pretty good at preventing.

It isn't now, but it was when Lukashenko gained power. If it weren't possible for someone to become a tyrant under democracy, then he'd be long gone.

Really? Belarus being a functioning democracy is a hill that you are willing to die on? Again, When Lukashenko gained power, he was installed as the first President after the fall of the Soviet Union. Belarus has never had a free and fair election in its sovereign history.

131

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Merkel's gone

« on: December 08, 2021, 05:43:41 PM »

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59575773

At last.

The immigrant crisis will be her lasting legacy. Good riddance to a blight on European politics.

132

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 08, 2021, 05:38:23 PM »

That is the exact thing a democracy is pretty good at preventing.

Why do you think it would be less good at preventing it if there was a simple (emphasis on that word) test to ensure that you have some clue what you're voting for.

I don't know what you think a test would achieve? People will grow weary of Boris Johnson and eventually vote him out. They don't need a test on the lies he put in his manifesto to do that.

Why can't under 18s vote?

It is a good question. There should be no taxation without representation. Personally I think 18 y/os shouldn't be able to vote, but that they should also be tax exempt as well should they choose to work.

There's already a principle that people need to have a certain maturity before they can vote, is it such a leap to extend that to making sure they have a vague understanding of what they're voting for?

No. Again, it isn't important that people know what they are voting for. They aren't really voting for anything. Let us suppose Russia invades Ukraine. Whether we go to war or not is not going to be down to whether we have a Labour or Conservative government in power. Our response will be the exact same. The civil service and military advisors ... fiercely corralled by lobbyists and investors, will determine a course of action that leads to the greatest wealth opportunity for those investors. It is that simple. It doesn't matter what you think you voted for. You are not important. All that matters is that you shut up and stop burning important things that are owned by rich people. If giving you a vote for a puppet achieves that ... so be it.

133

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 08, 2021, 05:17:20 PM »

Even in your own country, the longest-serving Prime Minister lasted 20 years.

Britain wasn't a democracy 300 years ago. We didn't have a democracy until the reform act in 1832. Less than 3% of people could vote when Warpole was in power. We don't become a fully fledged democracy until 1918 when women get the vote.

Imagine thinking Belarus is a functioning democracy.

It isn't now, but it was when Lukashenko gained power.

What the actual fuck are you talking about? Belarus gained its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. They create the office of President (read dictator) in 1994 and Lukashenko becomes the first and only President they have ever had.

Lukashenko heads an authoritarian government and has often been referred to by media outlets as "Europe's last dictator".[1] Elections are not considered to be free and fair by international monitors, opponents of the regime are repressed, and the media is not free.[2][3]

^That is not a democracy. That is the exact thing a democracy is pretty good at preventing.

134

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 08, 2021, 04:37:48 PM »

The point of democracy is that no one stays in power for too long. No other system works like that. Monarchy lasts a life time. Communism always gives you a dictator etc.

Democracy accepts that the person running the country is a self serving asshat ... but will also ensure that they won't be in power for too long. No one can get to good a grip on power before someone else knocks them off their perch. Even if it is someone in their own party. Russia have had Putin for over 20 years. That just isn't possible with democracy and that is why it is the best system. Not because you let imbeciles vote, but because there will always be a change at the top before anyone can become a proper tyrant.

So we have a system that more or less works. Now you have to get everyone to agree to it. And you do that by letting them have a say. No matter how dumb the say because it doesn't matter ... all the parties are shit. There are no good parties to choose from. This isn't a fluke. It doesn't matter who you vote for, you still have the same civil service and legal people. So nothing really changes and no one is in power long enough to change it.

But if you tell people "You failed a test, you didn't get a say" when they wanted one ... well then they will burn things until you have a change of heart.

135

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 08, 2021, 12:03:15 PM »

So what is the point in reading the manifesto if it can be full of lies?

Because if you've read it then you know it was full of lies. And that might make you think twice about voting for the person or party who promised them again. And obviously no-one reads the whole thing. But making sure someone knows the key points isn't a bad thing.

So you want to conduct a test on a manifesto that you don't expect people to fully read and despite it possibly being full of lies and empty promises anyway, if you can't regurgitate those jingoistic tropes when tested, you will lose your right to vote?

This sounds like a shitty idea.

136

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 07, 2021, 11:05:31 PM »

And sure, Thork is right in that parties lie in them. So people would have to take that in to account when they choose to vote.

So what is the point in reading the manifesto if it can be full of lies?

There are plenty of people who think a big bus lied to them in the Brexit referendum. Many think the government lied to them about the dangers of Brexit with wild doom predictions and even plagues of super gonerea. We are 5 years later and still no one really knows who told the truth, how it really effects them and whether the opposite outcome would have been better.

So "I don't like foreigners" was every bit as valid as "Brexit will save the NHS £350m a week". The manifesto pledges don't mean anything. Testing people's ability to remember who told what lies isn't helpful.

But ... absolutely everyone should be able to look at the current incumbent and think "I want that fucker out". And you don't need to know the manifestos to have such an opinion because their governance is your lived experience. And if you hope for something better, vote for it.

137

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 07, 2021, 10:30:25 PM »

One suggestion I heard was that the test would be on which policies go with which parties.

so people who are more educated and smarter get to run the country the way they want to, at the expense of dimmer people with lower incomes who are disenfranchised.

That seems like an elitist gerrymandering policy to bury the poor. Have another go.

That kind of information is not difficult to come by and would require a minimum of effort. You could even provide study guides to all prospective voters.

So intellectually lazy people don't get a a vote? Why not? They live here too?

Are you just upset that you wouldn't get a vote?

I would guess I'm more in tune with politics than the average citizen. I think it would be an unreasonably high bar if I was someone also unable to vote because of your test.

But if someone can't identify basic key policies that the parties have put in their manifestoes then on what basis are they voting?

Maybe they like the man's face. He looks trustworthy to them. That might be a better reason to vote for that candidate than that you read the candidate pledged to close down a polluting pipeline ... which that politician is lying about in his manifesto.

Because they think Boris is funny? You don't have to be particularly educated or smart to pass a test like that, you just have to be engaged. Shouldn't people be engaged and understand what they're voting for, or against?

If it was the law that whatever a politician said in their manifesto, they had to actually do when they got into power ... sure. You'd need to know what you were voting for. But being as we have a system where the biggest fucking liar wins the prize ...no. Your test is meaningless and if I want to vote for the guy with the nicest tie, its every bit as valid as your choice.

138

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 07, 2021, 10:12:39 PM »

One suggestion I heard was that the test would be on which policies go with which parties.

so people who are more educated and smarter get to run the country the way they want to, at the expense of dimmer people with lower incomes who are disenfranchised.

That seems like an elitist gerrymandering policy to bury the poor. Have another go.

139

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes

« on: December 06, 2021, 08:15:30 PM »

140

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Democracy Is Overrated

« on: December 06, 2021, 06:31:15 PM »

The same stupid video appeared in my youtube feed as well.