Fat is a type of crazy

I needed a file once as proof of our relationship so I could bring my girlfriend to Australia .

For me, you go to the top right with the 3 lines, then Other Settings, then Export Chat History, and you can create a file. 

1 hour ago, rumak said:

I think WE ALL AGREE  that what you wrote above is true.    The only dispute is WHICH SIDE of the political spectrum is the one that was doing such evil things.   (BIG SMILE)

 

Then again,  there are a very few here that understand the REAL TRUTH (source : Rumak) .

The real truth is that EVERYONE,  every political power seeking group,  every biased institution,

every "paid for"  expert ...................... is corrupted by their own greed and desire for power.

 

That is the reason it is so humorous ( in a tragic way)  to see supposedly grown men fighting over who is to blame for the condition of this forum......... or the WORLD ,   for that matter

 

peace,  and love,  and harmony ............... all people working for the common good .     hahahaha

better turn on the Disney Channel  if you want to see that

I agree in a sense. Watching shows like Narcos, and seeing what went on behind the scenes in governments of both sides, was shocking. No doubt just the tip of the iceberg.

In that sense what happened in recent years was refreshing in that the lies came out more to the surface which was kind of a form of honesty. But it was still shocking that the lies on the surface weren't seen as lies by some. 

In some ways getting rid of news was good. Stop me thinking too much about that stuff. 

So many squash and tennis courts have disappeared in Australia. Tennis courts become blocks of apartments. My gym had two squash courts that were turned into a wellness centre. The boxing area became a women's gym. Not happy. 

On the issue of rudeness this is a general comment on the political debate here in 2020 not relating to a particular poster. 

All politicians exaggerate or lie but, to many on the left and right what happened in 2020 was something different, dangerous and baffling. Baffling in that it seemed that millions were willing to accept obvious lies as OK. Things read in books like 1984 were coming true in the United States.

When people defended indefensible outright lies, on say election fraud or on covid or on numbers at a rally,  it was hard not to reply in a strong manner and those replies may have sometimes seemed like a personal insult, because you could see the poster was reasonably intelligent in other ways, and you might want them to snap back to reality.

Of course the poster might dispute the degree to which their post veered from reality and think that the other person is stifling debate. But at some point there is some sort of objective reality and if you let that concept go then anything goes.  

This is not aimed at getting into a political debate, and some may still believe in unproven conspiracy theories, but I guess the more outlandish or lazy, in terms of fact checking, the point of view, the more someone might expect a passionate response.

Had my Pfizer shot.  No Pompem. Good speech by Biden pushing vaccination. I accept freedom of choice but when you look from outside it can seem anti vax people need a push to be saved from their own stupidity. But freedom to choose to not follow logic and common sense  is still freedom as long as it does not harm others. 

1 hour ago, club said:

A moot point! His poll numbers are in the tank. 43% approval and sinking. He sure has you Democrats fooled. Everything he does is scripted. He either reads off flash cards or a teleprompter because his dementia is eating his brain away. His press conferences with the press are a joke. He has the Questions and answers from the reporters he calls on. That's why you see him look down at his flash cards so much . Then their is the lies he tells. He is not fooling anyone. He is to busy making a fool of himself. Keep watching CNN and MSNBC for more liberal fake news     

If you look at the minutiae of what he does then you see he is a bit old, and can be a bit slow to respond, and his stutter from childhood makes him hesitate sometimes, and he can say some silly things from time to time.

Each time though you fox news loving guys says he has dementia I see him then give a good, sincere, well thought out comment or speech where he is clearly not reading. Then you all go quiet and go to a different talking point.

Just for a minute admire the man for going against the Trump lies and nonsense, with a simple message keeping to  the middle political ground, and leaving Trump crying on the floor about stolen elections. 

If we look at policies and ideas and getting stuff done, and not focus on personal shortcomings, then I think he's doing pretty good. 

2 hours ago, cmarshall said:

Did you enjoy "Mein Kampf?"  Ayn Rand is simple-minded thinker and an extraordinarily tedious writer, a lot like you-know-who as a matter of fact.  Rand's Russian family lost its wealth in the Bolshevik Revolution which fueled the lifelong grievance that underlay her "philosophy."  It's the kind black-and-white false dichotomies that are of interest chiefly to teenagers and right-wingers.

I feel like this is a case where you are basing this on what you have read about her rather than the book itself. I read it pre Google when you could give books a go with no preconceptions.

Right wing economics i.e. freedom of markets  - yes. Right wing in the Hitler sense - silly. 

The book showed no preconceived notions of any race or religion, she was an athiest , and believed in total freedom of people and the the markets.

They made a big Hollywood movie of the book in the late 40's staring Gary Cooper. 

She is loved by millions of Americans including republicans, libertarians, entrepeneurs and architects.

I am talking the Republicans of the past, that are appalling in their own way, but nothing  like the motley lot that go by that name today.

As I said,  I read it at about 26, when politics was far from my mind. I think it helped me to confirm that I am a bit to the left, but less than before,  by reading a book that talked about the benefits of right wing thinking and the free market. 

There's an interesting story how I came upon it. In the Sydney upmarket suburb  of Darlinghurst there was a shop that sold one of everything in the 90's - one really well made brief case, one beautifully designed piece of furniture, etc and one book - that book was The Fountainhead.

6 million books sold. I googled that. I am sure if I googled more I might find some bad things you talk of but to compare her to Hitler is silly. 

3 hours ago, cmarshall said:

Catholic tastes have their limit.  Ayn Rand was a crackpot.

Sometimes it's good to read someone with a different and extreme opinion. You may dismiss most of it but be left with some sense that good things and ideas on how to live, can come from far and wide, on the right and the left. I haven't picked up The Fountainhead since 1992 or so, but her story of a young architect, wanting to build something new and unique not based on concessions to City Hall, or old ideas, was not crackpot at all in my opinion.  

2 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

If only the situation were that simple. Unfortunately, the complexity of human affairs, such as health concerns and the uncertainty involved in various treatments, and the long-term side effects of approved drugs, and the different life-styles and genetic conditions which can influence the outcome of certain treatments and produce different effects on different individuals, can create a significant degree of uncertainty.

 

One of the major benefits of religious belief, that I've mentioned before in this thread, is the placebo effect. It is perhaps not realized how pervasive this effect is in all societies. It is estimated that, on average, approximately 30% of the effectiveness of treatments administered by doctors, results from a 'belief' in the doctor and the pharmaceutical industry.

 

When new drugs, during their development, are subjected to the 'double-blind' test, where one group of people is administered the real drug, and another group is administered a placebo, and neither the doctor nor the patient knows which is being administered, one might assume that the placebo (sugary pill) would have no effect. However, this is not true. The placebo group generally does experience some degree of improvement in their symptoms, but just not as great an improvement as the drug, if the drug is shown to be successful.

 

Therefore, it should not be difficult to imagine that a person who has a very strong belief in some guru, or authority with claimed magical healing powers, could experience what appears to be a miraculous recovery from their ailment, due to an exceptionally strong placebo effect.

 

Unfortunately, from a scientific perspective, the placebo effect often requires a degree of certainty which cannot be confirmed scientifically. Therefore, in certain circumstances a scientist could face a moral dilemma of either reducing a beneficial effect by honestly declaring the uncertainty, or increasing a beneficial effect by downplaying the uncertainty and exaggerating the certainty.
 

I am not sure of the link between your previous post and this one. The previous one seemed to represent a conscious decision by a scientist to put money over truth.

I think this post is talking about whether a scientist, speaking up about a dud medicine or a dud guru say, may result in the negative outcome that the placebo affect of that dud will be less effective. 

The latter would not be relevant for smoking or warming. No placebo affect is going to make them good for you.

But, as you say,  if there is no alternative, a sugar pill may be better than nothing if  the person thinks it is an actual cure.

If I was in prehistoric times and sick,  it may have helped me get better, if a witch doctor gave me a useless elixir as a placebo effect. Even if it didn't help the hope from a potential cure might limit the distress.  

5 hours ago, talahtnut said:

I start very young on the Beano, now much older, I've graduated to the Viz.

Every Christmas I like to buy the Annual.

 Does that count on one of the buttons please?

My girlfriend visited England around 1990 and brought me back a hard cover book. Billy the Fish. Sid the sexist. Fat slags.  What a beauty. Never saw it before or since. 

28 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

I'm not sure it's mainly on the deniers' side, unless you are combining the term 'denial' with 'skepticism'.

 

Skepticism, perhaps due to a sense of the irrationality of an argument, or the presence of counteracting evidence which casts doubt on the truth of an argument, is the most fundamental aspect of scientific enquiry. Without it, there would be no scientific progress.

 

The behaviour of certain scientists who were earning a living in the tobacco industry, is an illuminating example of the bias that can result when earning a living might be in conflict with a 'potential' scientific truth which is still in the process of investigation, and which could destroy one's career if eventually proven to be correct.

 

The choice would be to either resign immediately and look for another job, perhaps despite having an expensive mortgage to pay on a house and having a wife and 5 young children to support, or to continue working in the tobacco industry and attempt to downplay the significance of smoking on lung cancer, hoping that the evidence for a significant risk will never become conclusive.

 

However, this problem is faced by many scientists in various industries, including the IPCC. Which is more important, complete scientific integrity and honesty, or earning a living?
 

There's many ways people sell their souls in life and that would be one of them. I am more sympathetic to people who might lie when their life is on the line. I am not sympathetic to a scientist who could simply take a lower paying job rather than sully the name of science, that  can lead to many more deaths or just a slowing down of progress, so Johnny can go to a good college.

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

You had me until you praised Ayn Rand.

I know what you mean. Sometimes you can read a book that acts as a catalyst to wake you up. A book like The Fountainhead, apparently based on Frank Lloyd Wright, had that effect.  The book shows  the idea of self reliance and a form of selfishness and how life affirming that can be. The architect who is not willing to give in to the consensus.

 You can understand her feelings about left wing things coming from the Soviet Union. 

Then I read Atlas Shrugged which went too far. 

 So then I went back to the middle. 

To be honest the novel is a bit dead to me. In my teens and twenties I read books constantly. Like romantic and light British novels by Iris Murdoch, Kingsley Amis, Daphne Du Maurier, Evelyn Waugh, P J Wodehouse and the like. Also modern American literature, Tom Wolfe, Jay McInerney etc. Throw in a Dosteovsky, Chekhov, Tolstoy and a Kafka.

Ayn Rand books changed my life though they are a bit extreme. She turned me from a lazy left leaning person to a bit more centrist with her right wing economics. Albert Camus left a big impression with his notions of living in the moment. 

Then I stopped reading. Just had enough. Not sure why. 

I don't think long term in many aspects of life and retirement is the same. I think I'll just rent somewhere in Thailand, keep the home in Australia, enjoy the lifestyle, if it gets too hot or tiresome go back home. Covid hasn't changed a thing. 

55 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Nobody said that, it's just your fantasy.

Although this is not the right place, investigating and discussing corruption in science would be interesting,  don't you think?

 

I didn't say someone on this topic said that - it just seems to be an excuse people use on a range of topics from warming to covid.

Corruption is something that can affect science - in my opinion mainly on the deniers side e.g. affects of smoking, warming, etc - but it happens across the board in all facets of life where there is a buck to be made.

I do think if science denies the likelihood of your intelligent design theory it is extremely unlikely that it is due to those 3 reasons I mentioned. It's because it does not fit the facts at this time. 

 I haven't seen these posters all in one place since the News section was up and running.

I never had doubts but was a bit lazy to get it done. Waited a bit longer to get Pfizer rather than Astro Zeneca. Was a bit tempted to get Astro Zeneca as it used old technologies but when Pfizer got fully approved in the US I made the booking. Getting it this week. No cases in my area but still in harsh full lockdown in Melbourne Australia. 

8 minutes ago, RafPinto said:

Didn't know that TAT has now farangs on their pay list.

Just think you guys in Thailand might forget how those outside Thailand see the country. The hoops will be gone, or no more onerous than other countries, in two years. Australia has nice beaches, and there are attractive alternatives in Europe, but I think that's always been the case. Sign me up TAT. 

7 minutes ago, RafPinto said:

Didn't know that TAT has now farangs on their pay list.

Just think you guys in Thailand might forget how those outside Thailand see the country. The hoops will be gone, or no more onerous than other countries, in two years. Australia has nice beaches, and there are attractive alternatives in Europe, but I think that's always been the case. Sign me up TAT.