Difference between revisions of "User talk:Human"

From Teflpedia
(Beatles?)
(Beatles?)
Line 86: Line 86:
  
 
Not sure why someone would give a Welshman living in teh US a shoutout on this. What would be your reaction if I were to say that "The Beatles are the greatest band that have ever, or will ever exist on this or any other planet"? [[User:SuspectedReplicant|SuspectedReplicant]] 20:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 
Not sure why someone would give a Welshman living in teh US a shoutout on this. What would be your reaction if I were to say that "The Beatles are the greatest band that have ever, or will ever exist on this or any other planet"? [[User:SuspectedReplicant|SuspectedReplicant]] 20:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 +
:''I'' would say have you ever heard of the Who?! [[User:SuperJosh|SuperJosh]] 20:45, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:45, 2 September 2009

Template:WelcomeRWTemplate:RW

Hi Human... Oh, hai... Human 20:14, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Human. Giving yourself a welcome template is a very sad act.  :-) --Bob M 20:16, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
I saw it on RC and it looked tasty. Speaking of tasty, where's the goat pilaf? Human 20:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm afraid this is a goat free zone. It's all tea, biscuits and tofu here I'm afraid. --Bob M 20:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
I have some chicken on the go, if you'd like. You can pretend it's goat. --Kels 20:32, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Aw, thanks. I had some Friday Lunch Leftover Meatlover's Pizza next door, I think there was a bit of goat in it.

Planned Parenthood

Well, you heard the man. Add some references! Add some "appropriate" quotes! It's amazing to me that the moment someone adds something that's exactly in line with the ideology of the site, it's immediately written off as parody. --Kels 14:43, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Here's a good one you could use, Philip would love this.
"The racism inherent in Social Darwinism was also advocated by Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood. Writing in 1922 in her book The Pivot of Civilization, Sanger considered “inferior races” to be “human weeds” and a “menace to civilization.”" Watson, Social Darwinism: Old idea re-visited
Pack a few of those in, make some refs, pad it out a couple more paragraphs, maybe a picture, and voila! --Kels 15:06, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
With you there, Kels: my first thought was "needs more quotes" preferably quotes of quotes From unimpeachable sources (has Mr Mariano anything to say) Toast 15:11, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
"But it is only when abortion is wedded to a militant and tyrannical agenda used by a ruthlessly ambitious political figure or party that it becomes truly dangerous to dissenting individuals and to the society within which it might flourish. Such as the agenda of Planned Parenthood which was established upon racist premises, the agenda of turning “women’s rights” into ensuring no rights for the babies, the politics of the abortion movement or the Chinese forced abortion policy." - The “Atheist,” the “Muslim” and the “Christian” Murderers – and their victims: Stephen Tyrone Johns, William Long and George Tiller
"It is a fact that Sanger, an ardent evolutionist, promoted ‘race hygiene’ and getting rid of ‘human weeds’." -- From CMI itself, you can't get much more truthy than that!
Thanks, kids. I loved PJR's irrelevant "analysis" and Sterile's response! I stuffed those juicy quotoids into the PP article, it ought to be "featured" status any day now! Human 20:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Well, use PJR's "analysis" as your template, then! He wants "Introduction, detail, supporting quotes/references", then he can have 'em. You've got the quotes, you've got the references, now you just need to add a bit more that can practically be copy/pasted from any of his recent "articles", and there's nothing to complain about, is there? --Kels 20:19, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Wait, doesn't the "information" in the detail section have to have something to do with the article title? Eh, let's just get some moar awesome quotemines and add them, I'll just pepper in some text before the quotes a la Ken and voila, we kan haz eggsellent article! Human 20:40, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
No, no, and no. You've got it allwrong. The most crucial part of any article is spamming links to it on random forums. Something like
. Considering an ABORTION?!??!!? First, check out THIS hard-hitting article on mthe racist, atheistic motives for abortion. By the time you finished, you too should be converted :):):)!!! Theemperor 20:45, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Template:Vote Who thinks I should go all Ken on the PP article?

By the way, check out the 1st google hit when searching for "criticism of planned parenthood"... Human 21:03, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I like the direction of PP. The best thing about it is they don't seem to know what to do except stare and threaten. And yet, it's clearly the BPOV. Sterile 02:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I didn't realize being a moron was so easy. And the fact that they don't even know whether it's parody or serious makes the embarrassment of typing that tripe less painful. But my efforts pale before yours, oh master. Human 03:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

CopyWright

H, please alter this subhead. It's distracting me horribly. Toast 23:23, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Done. Human 23:37, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. (Dunno about the "innocent" bit though ;-) )I want smileys;; Toast 23:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Quite welcome. (It was written on the bathroom wall at Hot l Baltimore, who knows?) Human 01:07, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikisynergy

The twenty minutes I just spent on WS just scared me. I don't get those minutes of my life back, you know. Sterile 23:36, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I find it more tolerable than PJRwiki, YECers are pure nutters, at least some of the wingnuts at WS would like to try to apply scientific method to their pet fields. I'm surprised you can tolerate the time you spend at PJRwiki, but I guess it's different strokes for different folks... Human 23:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I'm pretty bored with PJRwiki right now. It's really not going any where interesting for better or worse, and we appear to be getting close to the "block first" stage of wiki decay. I will try WS some more, although reallife has me busy at the moment.... Sterile 01:15, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Real life is far better than PJRwiki. And fairly better than WS. Good for you. Human 03:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Actually, the contrast between AndyWiki/PJRWiki and WS is amusing at some level. At the former, they are a too closed-minded. At WS, they are a little too "open-minded" or at least open to "alternatives" like psi and ESP and stuff. (Can we curse now?) Sterile 01:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Indeed. No swearing until trent gets home. Then there'll be a lot. Have you read http://ethericstudies.org/journal/online_listening_trials.htm (it's an EVP thing)? It's good for about six head-desks per screen at my resolution. Human 02:23, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
I'll have to read later. Reaction on scroll-down: Tom Butler actually publishes this stuff?!? We, like, have a big kahuna in "the field." Oh, we're so in deep expletive. Sterile 03:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
The funny thing is, these people think they are doing "science" and that those that disagree are deluded. Human 03:19, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, but pissing off TOm Butler by questioning his logic is quite entertaining. I was questioning his use of the term hypothesis in relation to his pet topic, and he skirted the issue every single time!Gooniepunk2005 22:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
That Green goose guy has a really short fuse and a bad attitude, I haven't seen Butler get nasty, at least. That whole EVP thing is just hilarious. Goosey wants me to prove that static (or other random source) can make something like their "best examples". Because, if I can't of course, it has to be dead people in the ether adjusting the energy fields... Human 22:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
No shit. I have been heavily critical of the fact that Tom's EVP experiment because, basically, if he hears anything on the radio, it is automatically paranormal. I tried pointing out to him that his hypothesis for the experiment (Summary: SOmetimes, you might hear voices on the radio) still doesn't prove something paranormal, but he still won't or can't make that connection: that finding the cause, not proving something unexplained is happening, is what he should be trying to do. But, no. That's too hard, apparently.Gooniepunk2005 22:50, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
I was able to improve our EVP article a lot just by quoting WS's article and one or two of their references. What I love is how to get good EVP, you have to do the opposite of any other form of controlled observation - you use crappy equipment, set it up badly, and, well, it also helps a lot if you believe EVP comes from etheric beings. Oh, also, being very experienced at hallucinating hearing EVPs makes it more likely that you will find them. Woo indeed. Human 23:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I know. And Tom flinched when I told him his experiment lacks a control: that everyone involved in his "experiment" already knows about EVP, therefore, everyone will be biased one way or the other; skeptic or "believer." And, again, he didn't answer my call for him to show that, even if his experiment is successful, how it proves EVP and not some other random interference.Gooniepunk2005 23:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
They seem to be getting a little testy. What is it about pinning these people down to definitions and such and pointing out their reasoning issues, let alone asking for evidence? Sterile 17:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm thinking that I've not got too much more to learn from the place. On the other hand, as Human says, there seems to be good article inspiration to be had. --Bob M 18:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
To answer Sterile's question, I've noticed that the wikisynergy crowd (such as Tom Butler) are just like the citizendium crowd: fully vested in their pet topics. Tom Butler is the sirector of a group that fully purports EVP as being real, so, naturally, he doesn't want the good times and BS about EVP to end.Gooniepunk2005 22:57, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, Butler's deep into it. He gave me a bunch of links to "evidence" for EVP the other day, and even though the sites are different, they "look" the same/similar, and I was a half hour or more into trying to do some due diligence when I hit the first (!) actual example, and the woman asked her electronic toy to say "Tom Butler", and asked the toy about his cats. Uh, ok. Human 00:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
I ne'er spent much time at Citizendium. I'm having enough trouble with here, ASK and WS as it is (and RW and CP) as it is! Although, I've heard things. 01:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Lasted longer than I thought

[1] Toast 21:16, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that. He really needs to develop a consistent and appropriate block policy... Human 23:34, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
No, He really needs to shut up shop & go to CMI or AiG or something. He's absolutely over the top. Toast 23:38, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Totally Non Wiki Topic

SirChuck here, sorry to bother you on your page.... But I count 9 seperate insults or veiled references to hell... Most of which were added by the Fly himself..... He is a sick human being and I never say this, but I wish upon him the most foul things imaginable to the human mind.... I hope he gets cancer of the penis. Thank you for listening, delete away. -SirChuckBBack in Action

Hi Chuck, no need to apologize, glad you found us! And, yes, Andy's response to Kennedy's death is ghastly and vicious. Hell, I gave Reagan a one week break from criticism when he died. PS, Reagan's son Ron has a radio show, and this evening he broke with his tradition and had a guest on - his mother Nancy. Nancy was very complimentary towards the late Ted. Nice to see that a person who has seen so much and lived through so much still has a sense of perspective. Something Andy will probably never learn, although we can hope... Yeah, Andy's just an axxhole. Human 04:33, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
He's a lost cause. Words aren't good enough to describe the bitterness and pettiness which infests that man's soul. SuperJosh 19:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Isn't it funny that the "most moral" amongst us are the first ones to pick on those who (by whatever means) cannot defend themselves? I remember hearing about the Savage Weiner go on a tirade against autistic children, calling them fakers who just need to be disciplined, and (seeing as how I have a friend with Asperger's) I thought "What a fucking bully. Somebody outta kick his ass and see how he likes it"Gooniepunk2005 23:03, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

artiqules

Thanks for working on the artiqules.--Bob M 09:20, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I worked on the articles? Hmmm, I hope my edits were more coherent than my memory! Human 23:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Beatles.

decent story on the Beatles' breakup in the latest Rolling Stone. thought you'd be interested. TheoryOfPractice 04:05, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and nice of you to remember. When I saw the "new header" I thought we were going to have a fun little fight on teflonpedia to remind us of old times. Is it on their website? Human 04:09, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Nope, no smack-talkin' yoko tonight. I just saw the director's cut of Woodstock at my local rep house so I'm feelin' all peace-and-love. Dunno if it's on the web--I actually subscribe to the thing...TheoryOfPractice 04:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I think I found the article... thanks, although, this comment along a couple similar (between people John v. Paul bitchslapping) "Nothing of this article is new to me. and maybe it's because I am a big Beatles fan and I've read this before. It just sounds like anothe Rolling Stone way of recylcing yet another story thats been told over and over again. The guys got together. They broke up. Like Lennon said. The dream is over. Get over it. Next." was how the article made me feel. So some guy read some books about the Beatles and wrote a fairly vapid article. Oh well. Not to denigrate your pointing me at it at all. And of course the on-line article is not the same thing you read in your print version, from what I can tell. The on-line one was 2/6 (the last two pages) lame quotes, many not even "real", but hearsay ("John said '....'", said so and so). I guess that's the trouble with anniversaries of long-tired topics (the Beatles' break-up, not Woodstock) - people who are old enough to have been there churning out repetitive articles on long-dead topics. Anyway, as I always say, Ringo did give us a drum solo - in "A Day in the Life"; and the Beatles did have a reunion - we know it as "Abbey Road". And Paul has apologised profusely for being a prick; John likewise, although his apologies were cut short. The Concert for George showed who really made and kept friends in such a difficult business, though. Human 06:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Beatles?

Not sure why someone would give a Welshman living in teh US a shoutout on this. What would be your reaction if I were to say that "The Beatles are the greatest band that have ever, or will ever exist on this or any other planet"? SuspectedReplicant 20:24, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I would say have you ever heard of the Who?! SuperJosh 20:45, 2 September 2009 (UTC)