Kananga

2 hours ago, IvorLott said:

The Golden Palace was cheap and cheerful, at around 450-500B for a room with AC, fridge, Hot water, TV, as well as a belting pool, made it  great deal for that area - if not the entire city. Agreed, it was threadbare and a little shabby,  It was a real throwback/time capsule to the VietNam R'n'R days even down to the authentic 1960s jukebox in the coffee shop. Sadly, the hotels from that era are slipping away one by one, with only the Miami remaining. 

 

I think the Biergarten is one of the last of the 'Old School' Bangkok/Asia drinking dives, many an 'Old Asia Hand' wipes away a tear at the mention of these places.

(I wonder how a 'Best Bar in Asia' thread would read in this day an age? with so many of the standard 'classics' which used to be found in the many versions on this theme now long gone. 

The quality of the women there (The BierGarten) has fluctuated over the years, from the downright ghastly to the surprisingly hot on my last visit but maybe that is more my getting on in years....

Golden Palace? Green dump more like. 

5 minutes ago, IvorLott said:

Why not? It is anonymous after all, I'm sure most will admit to a few munters on the CV....though this place does attract more than its share of fantasists all with Hi-so Thai Chinese wives with generals for fathers..... 

Not to mention those sad losers that try and convince people they were in the CIA or worse still that they were in the Vietnam war!

Ok for me here in Singapore. Have a 4 bedder in district 9 and two kids in international school, so minimum monthly expenses are around 270,000 baht (equivalent) a month. Could probably sustain that for six months if job went south, also have a few rental properties in the UK which bring in some additional income that I could also rely on. Not worried to be honest but I do miss all the business trips and family vacations.

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. No one on an anonymous forum is going to admit to shagging a less than DDG burd.

 

Reminds me of the time a mate of mine was in LOS for his holidays. When he came back he raved about the beautiful girls he'd had. He had his snaps developed in the UK and asked me to deliver copies to the beloveds on my next trip. Being curious I had a look and my goodness they were so ugly that I felt sorry for him. Not that I let him know that though. Poor guy.

Reminds me of someone I used to know that admitted on an anonymous forum that he went out with an ugly fatty in Thailand that worked as a cook in a Sizzler to make ends meet because her farang lottery couldn't afford to support them both! Its funny, whenever he bangs on about other people having rough partners I mention this. He still always flies into a rage. Funny how he always seems to forget that when he's nasty about other people. Do you remember him TBL?

43 minutes ago, Tropicalevo said:

 

To thaibeachlovers - I see a lot of angst in your comments. Something on Samui has pxssed you off.

 

 

He's always been like this. No doubt angry with Samui as he's been priced out of the place as he made the mistake of retiring before he had the financial stability to do so.  He's had it in for everything he cant afford and anyone that can for over 10 years now.

How I wish it was earlier. I thought there were less applications made during November. So shouldn't it be slightly quicker?

I'm sure we all want answers and reassurance but the cold hard truth is that no one here is going to be able to predict when the visa will be approved. The best thing you can do is just wait and it will come when it will come.

You thinking there are less applications in November doesn't mean that there were less applications and even if there were, less applications doesn't necessarily mean faster processing times. Factor in the fact that the average for applications submitted in Oct was 10 weeks and use that as a benchmark.. However, don't be disappointed if it takes longer.

The official time-frame is 12 weeks so anything less than that should be viewed as a bonus.

Best of luck to all off you.

So at this moment what is the average processing time? 9 or 10 weeks?

Approximately 10 weeks.

Thanks for the advice. I checked BA first but as the flight is for Friday (three days away) Thai actually came out cheaper for the last minute fare. As I am booking flights for our children as well the discount was tripled. Also the Thai airways flight was much better timed for this situation leaving at midnight and getting in at 6:30am which is much better with little kids as they will sleep through most of it. The BA flight was all day. If it wasnt for that I would have booked them on BA without hesitation. Especially as it was only an extra 3000 baht each for premium economy.

Congratulations. And safe travels.

Everything approved. Flight booked for Friday. With no help from Thai Airways and their ridiculous policies. First of all I couldnt book a one way ticket over the phone from the London office as they said it would cost 3 times as much. Then I couldnt book from the Thai office as the credit card holder had to go and show the card in person. Then they said I could book on line but would have to go to London in person and fill in a form at the Thai airways office with the credit card. So, so glad to be far away from that place.

Submitted on the 17th October. Decision was made today. Will know if it was approved tomorrow.

Will be pretty pissed off if it isn't as we have been married for 8 years and have two children with British passports.

About 3 months with my current levels of expenditure.

We could rattle on for hours about the philosophical nature of constructs; the correlation of the physical and the meta-physical and so on and such:- however, the fact that numbers are required in the physical world shows that they do indeed exist, even if in an abstract sense.

There is no such evidence that God exists or Surachart would have weeded the patio by now.

My prayers went unanswered. He remains snoozing.

However if I now apply numbers to the equation and knock 50 baht off his pay, I think that will enter into the realms of reality.

He knows he has dug himself into a hole on this one because he has conveniently ignored my reply #151 which clearly explains what he can't while continuing to chase his tail on how old the Earth is according to the bible.

Watch, he'll start cherry picking the bits of replies he thinks he can contest and attempt to ignore the bits he knows he has been successfully ridiculed over. Like I said, thinks he's smarter than he actually is and doesn't take the requisite time to think before he blurts.

You hoped for something better but it was a vain hope? Dear oh dear, you need to cut back on the drama classes.

What is evident however is that the information in the bible is still incorrect and has been disproven by science. I'm sure when you turned to religion you hoped for something better, but we both know that it was a vain hope. LOL.

What is evident is, you made a categorical statement regarding 6000 years which you are unable to substantiate.

But don't feel too bad about that, you are not the only one who has done this.

Throughout this thread there are a number of other instances of people making unfounded assertions, you with your 6000 years is one example, the damnation of prostitutes is another - unfounded accusations that must come from either ignorance of the topic under discussion or a wilful denial of what the religion they are arguing against actually says.

You also choose to take a literalist view of Biblical text when the central message of the Bible is not facts - but the question of how to live our lives. A discourse central to all religions and by no means restricted to Christianity.

By all means stick to facile arguments against religion, if that's what you are comfortable with, but in doing so you miss the common central message of all religions.

The central message of the bible is how to live our lives??? By condoning rape, slavery and murder? Jesus, you have some strange moral pillar if you take instructions on how to live your life from that book.

you miss the common central message of all religions.

No I dont. The common central message of all religions is

Do as you are told. Dont think about how ridiculous it is just take it on faith, dont question anything and most of all dont upset the skydaddy or you will end up somewhere horrible.

Every single religion requires its believers to follow those ridiculous rules.

Have you ever seen a number?

I mean you've perhaps seen "1" or "๑" or maybe even "一" but they are just marks on paper or symbols on a screen.

Have you ever seen a number?

Ok, you really seem to need this question answered? I'm pretty sure that by the age of 7 or 8 the majority of us were taught that the term 'number' represents an arithmetic value and not a physical object you can see.

Actually no.

You learned to accept a construct - you learned a belief. You know you can't see numbers but you believe they exists.

Now go spend some time reading up on reality and perception.

Its not as clear cut as 'something you can see exists'.

You are jumping to the wrong conclusion. I don't believe 'numbers' physically exist as something you can see (your original point on this debate) because 'numbers' is a value. Not a physical object. I believe the universally accepted theory of what defines numbers exists but not numbers as a physical object that you can see (obviously). When this theory is put into place with creating a corresponding value with a set of physical objects it can be means tested. Quite unlike religion which is just theory with no evidence to support it. See, it really is clear cut.

You told me that I believe numbers exist and then then told me I was wrong. How did you figure that was going to play out? And now you have dug yourself into a hole because you have succumbed to your biggest recurring weakness. You think you are smarter than you actually are and you feel the need to portray this to strangers on the internet without taking the necessary time to think about what the point you are so desperate to make before you put finger to keyboard. Now you're back peddling by trying to tell me what I believe with incorrect assumptions and half baked attempts at philosophy.

Nice rant Kanaga... and all over something you don't believe in.

Since you brought it up - can you please show me exactly where in the bible it states the earth is 6000 years old?

I'll not ask you to provide references to Santa Claus, Tooth Faries or multicoloured unicorns as I understand you sometimes throw mindless garbage into your arguments to pad them out a bit.

So, over to you Kananga - Bible quotation giving the age of the earth as 6000 years .... tick tock tick tock.... I'm waiting for evidence from Mr Rational.

You add up the ages of the patriarchs from Adam to Noah and when they had their kids, and you get a date of approximately 6,000 years since Creation.

Adam/Creation to Noah/Flood - 1660 years

Noah to Abraham - 440 years

Abraham to Moses - 400 years

Moses to Jesus - 2500 years

Jesus to present - 2000 years

The story of Santa Claus isn't any less mindless garbage than judaism or christianity. Its a fairy tale told to impressionable minds in order that they conform to a set of social rules with the promise of reward for adhering to those rules and the fear of no reward if they don't confirm. Just like religion. Not going to heaven or not being reincarnated as something nice is just the same fear people are taught as not getting what you want on the 25th december.

I see so the evidence you give us, is you added up the some assumed dates, only one of which you can be sure of and from that you conclude the bible states the age of the earth is 6000 years a number which does not add up to the same number given by geologists so the bible has given the wrong number of years.

Well, it is would have given the wrong number of years - except it did not give any number of years - you made a calculation based on unfounded assumptions - one of which is a continuing date line the other is there's no missing periods.

I had hoped for something better, but I knew it was a vain hope.

You hoped for something better but it was a vain hope? Dear oh dear, you need to cut back on the drama classes.

What is evident however is that the information in the bible is still incorrect and has been disproven by science. I'm sure when you turned to religion you hoped for something better, but we both know that it was a vain hope. LOL.

Have you ever seen a number?

I mean you've perhaps seen "1" or "๑" or maybe even "一" but they are just marks on paper or symbols on a screen.

Have you ever seen a number?

Ok, you really seem to need this question answered? I'm pretty sure that by the age of 7 or 8 the majority of us were taught that the term 'number' represents an arithmetic value and not a physical object you can see. Similar to saying have you seen an inch. You've seen the word inch written and you have seen two points on a ruler but have you actually seen an inch, or have you seen time? You have seen a clock face move but have you actually seen time? No, but we know that with the laws of the universe we live in that as a dimension, time definitely exists.

Let me give you a very basic example in case you are still confused on why you can't physically see a 'value' such as a number. If your wife told you she had three eyes instead of two you would call her a stupid cretin because you know without a shadow of a doubt that the NUMBER of eyes she has is in fact two. There would be absolutely no doubt in your mind that the NUMBER of eyes she has is two because you can see them and therefore are conscious of the existence of her eyes and the NUMBER of eyes she has based on counting their numerical value.

Nice rant Kanaga... and all over something you don't believe in.

Since you brought it up - can you please show me exactly where in the bible it states the earth is 6000 years old?

I'll not ask you to provide references to Santa Claus, Tooth Faries or multicoloured unicorns as I understand you sometimes throw mindless garbage into your arguments to pad them out a bit.

So, over to you Kananga - Bible quotation giving the age of the earth as 6000 years .... tick tock tick tock.... I'm waiting for evidence from Mr Rational.

You add up the ages of the patriarchs from Adam to Noah and when they had their kids, and you get a date of approximately 6,000 years since Creation.

Adam/Creation to Noah/Flood - 1660 years

Noah to Abraham - 440 years

Abraham to Moses - 400 years

Moses to Jesus - 2500 years

Jesus to present - 2000 years

The story of Santa Claus isn't any less mindless garbage than judaism or christianity. Its a fairy tale told to impressionable minds in order that they conform to a set of social rules with the promise of reward for adhering to those rules and the fear of no reward if they don't confirm. Just like religion. Not going to heaven or not being reincarnated as something nice is just the same fear people are taught as not getting what you want on the 25th december.

What proof is that.

As I have said, and nobody is able to refute.

Science, like religion, is a construct, a pure product of the human mind.

I further state that nobody lives their life based purely on science or purely on religion - its a lot more complex than that.

I don't see any evangelical people of faith in this debate, but there are clearly some evangelical atheist (if you'll excuse the twist in the term where it fits so well).

Awe common GH. What side of the fence are you on? Are you Agnostic?

Nah, he believes in skydaddies but deep down I'm pretty sure he knows he backed the wrong horse. But finds it easier to say that the physical world with the evidence to support it is no more real than the religious fantasies that so many sheep have been indoctrinated by.

There has never been any shred of proof to suggest that any organised religion is based on fact. That is in stark contrast to science and evidence based understanding and belief.

Looks to me like guesthouse is religious but just falls short of wanting to admit to himself he believes in fairytales. There is no virtue in having 'faith' by the way.

Not at all GH knows exactly where he stands on this issue - and if you read my responses you'll find I'm pretty liberal (in the true sense of the word) in my views.

Its a position from which I find it very easy to knock holes in shallow arguments on both sides of the debate - particularly the zealotry we see from some of the anti faith camp and the ridiculous argument that 'science' is some infallible truth.

Science, like faith, is a construct - and as we see it has its self righteous zealots.

Clearly though, many expats in Thailand have a problem with religion - but you'd have to have a frank and honest examination of why before you could draw any real conclusions from that.

You find it easy to knock holes in both sides of the debate? How do you knock a hole in the side of a debate that says there is no more evidence to suggest that God exists than Santa Claus or the tooth fairy exists. Or a multi couloured unicorn called Sebastian, who flies round the world healing people with his magic horn. A side of the debate that says religions contradict each other and with the advances of science become more and more disproven. For example unlike what the bible says, the planet is not 6000 years old. Science can prove that. Advances have been made since the goat herders who made up the bible got their estimate wrong by four and a half billion years. Pretty sure science can prove that you can't build an ark out of wood and collect all the animals from all over the planet and let them live harmoniously with each other and then get dropped off at exactly the points on the planet they came from. While the rains mercilessly drowned all the women and children on the planet, because god was not happy with what they done after he gave them free will in the first place. I mean the whole thing is so ridiculously stupid it honestly defies belief that grown adults like yourself can believe anything these charlatans come out with. I reckon it was childhood indoctrination with you. I'm right aren't I? You're a life long believer in these mythical stories.

So was science

Not really. Science is quantifying/observing how things really are. Yes, it takes humans (and their machines) to crunch the data. Also, science is a contunually evolving process where claims are encouraged to be duplicated and challenged. Religion is fixed and claims (virgin birth, walk on water, etc) are discouraged from being challenged. Religion is faith-based, where as science is verifyable. Religion is based on things which can't be proved or disproved, same with metaphysics, belief in aliens, crop circles, Loch Ness monster, Philippine finger surgery, clairvoyance, tarot, etc.

If anyone asks me what I believe in, I tell 'em 'science and nature.' I actually like many of the stories wrapped around religion, particularly Hinduism. But I see them all as interesting myths, not as something I need to embrace and believe in literally. I love the story of the Buddha and Milarepa and others, and I believe those men actually lived, and that's enough.

I like the stories of Jesus and Muhammed, but especially enjoy the hypocracy of their mythicized lives compared to how their followers manifers - except, of course, when it causes harm to people and the planet - which it often does.

Understand the difference now Guesthouse?

The last time I was operated on I was more concerned with the doctors experience,knowledge and understanding of medical science and the procedure he was about to undertake, his religion or lack of played no part in my choice of having him operate on me.

Funny how apart from the wacked out sects like the Christian Scientists, religious people all seem to suddenly put their 'faith' in science and medicine when they are seriously ill instead of using their 'faith' and prayer to heal themselves or not doing anything at all because its all part of 'God's plan'. LOL.

Religion is like politics - It was invented by men and women.

So was science

Not really. Science is quantifying/observing how things really are. Yes, it takes humans (and their machines) to crunch the data. Also, science is a contunually evolving process where claims are encouraged to be duplicated and challenged. Religion is fixed and claims (virgin birth, walk on water, etc) are discouraged from being challenged. Religion is faith-based, where as science is verifyable. Religion is based on things which can't be proved or disproved, same with metaphysics, belief in aliens, crop circles, Loch Ness monster, Philippine finger surgery, clairvoyance, tarot, etc.

If anyone asks me what I believe in, I tell 'em 'science and nature.' I actually like many of the stories wrapped around religion, particularly Hinduism. But I see them all as interesting myths, not as something I need to embrace and believe in literally. I love the story of the Buddha and Milarepa and others, and I believe those men actually lived, and that's enough.

I like the stories of Jesus and Muhammed, but especially enjoy the hypocracy of their mythicized lives compared to how their followers manifers - except, of course, when it causes harm to people and the planet - which it often does.

You really don't understand the fundamentals of science do you.

Look into the philosophical discussions surrounding something as simple as 1+1 = 2.

The discourse is not 'well of course it does'

Maths and science are philosophies - they are pure constructs of the human mind.

And once again, the choice is not nor never has been Religion or Science - nobody lives their life, no society is based upon, one or the other not even on just Religion and Science.

Its a lot more complicated than that.

But as we observe, the term zealot, often cast at people of faith is equally applicable to some of their detractors.

Looks to me like guesthouse is religious but just falls short of wanting to admit to himself he believes in fairytales. There is no virtue in having 'faith' by the way.

Religion is like politics - It was invented by men and women.

So was science

Not really. Science is quantifying/observing how things really are. Yes, it takes humans (and their machines) to crunch the data. Also, science is a contunually evolving process where claims are encouraged to be duplicated and challenged. Religion is fixed and claims (virgin birth, walk on water, etc) are discouraged from being challenged. Religion is faith-based, where as science is verifyable. Religion is based on things which can't be proved or disproved, same with metaphysics, belief in aliens, crop circles, Loch Ness monster, Philippine finger surgery, clairvoyance, tarot, etc.

If anyone asks me what I believe in, I tell 'em 'science and nature.' I actually like many of the stories wrapped around religion, particularly Hinduism. But I see them all as interesting myths, not as something I need to embrace and believe in literally. I love the story of the Buddha and Milarepa and others, and I believe those men actually lived, and that's enough.

I like the stories of Jesus and Muhammed, but especially enjoy the hypocracy of their mythicized lives compared to how their followers manifers - except, of course, when it causes harm to people and the planet - which it often does.

Understand the difference now Guesthouse?

At many places the prices are much more for a Western looking person. I believe the difference at Ocean World in Siam Paragon is 500 baht more per person. And like most dual pricing establishments they conveniently put the Thai price in Thai numerals. Funny that.

I heard it was more. Not funny but pretty clever. Unless you are a tourist, and can't read the number 1-10, you are really disrespecting your adopted country.

A 2 year old kid can learn 1-10.

I know a TEACHER, been here for 17 years and can't even tell me what month it is!!I must ask him if he can write 1-10. I wouldn't be surprised if he could't.

Because someone is working in Thailand on assignment and contributing to the economy by paying far more income tax than a local even earns does not make Thailand their adopted country. And even if it did would you treat your adopted children worse than your biological ones?

They should do more than that.

Ban all old cars, ban all the "first-car buyer subsidy programs", and make driving (and owning a car) expensive as hell, just like it is in Singapore.

Trafic chaos solved.

If you like Singapore better there are daily flights leaving every day.

If you get upset by people highlighting how Thailand could improve by comparing to more successful countries there are other forums you could frequent.