Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, Hummin said:

 

Someone said once «Less is more» and first time i learned that was while we edited an documentary we had done, and since then almost 20 years back, I have tried to live by it and connected it to other things in life. 
 

 

 

 

I have never been particularly focused on material possessions. Mostly bought secondhand cars, new when I could afford them. Even then, I wanted good engineering and value for money, not what was deemed a cachet brand.

It's probably a measure of my fashion sense that I have owned two suits in my entire life.

IMO many people spend a lot of time trying to impress friends and neighbors, when they would be less driven and happier if they trod their own path.

Even after retirement, I am always looking for new things to do. Currently making a series of kitchen videos for YouTube.

  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, Doctor Tom said:

The first stage for a scientist is to develop a hypothesis, some times no more than a 'thought experiment'.  Einstein was  a master at doing this. Its a 'guess' in your language 

Albert was intelligent. Most scientists are morons.

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 2
Posted
5 hours ago, Doctor Tom said:

No Sir, its logical, intelligent deduction, not stupid religious dogma. 

Im.not religious

 

Nobody knows how humans were formed

 

Nobody knows how spirits work. 

 

There is spirit in each human, where does it come from? Where does it go?

  • Sad 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Sparktrader said:

Albert was intelligent. Most scientists are morons.

Being a scientist myself, I am wondering how you acquired the intellect to make such a sweeping generalisation.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
21 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Being a scientist myself, I am wondering how you acquired the intellect to make such a sweeping generalisation.

Climate science case in point.

  • Confused 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Sparktrader said:

Climate science case in point.

Indeed. Does your intellect include the ability to define the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics, without resorting to Google? Do you understand the terms albedo and clathrate, and their significance in climate science?

  • Haha 1
Posted
On 3/17/2022 at 6:58 PM, fredwiggy said:

Over a 100 films. I remember a few, Michael, The Doctor, Broadcast News, The Big Chill, Body Heat, Changing Lanes, Children of a Lesser God, A.I., Vantage Point to name a few.

100 films ? Your off your head mate. Lol. 

  • Haha 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Sparktrader said:

Why sad? Where does the spirit come from?

As ricky gervais says you dont remember the millions of eons before you were born so those after you leave are hardly relevant.

Posted
11 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You're lucky. I haven't done half the things on my list, and probably never will.

I didn't bother to make a list. I just got on with enjoying life as it comes.

  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Indeed. Does your intellect include the ability to define the First and Second Law of Thermodynamics, without resorting to Google? Do you understand the terms albedo and clathrate, and their significance in climate science?

Do you understand fudge factors and gravy train?

  • Sad 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, StreetCowboy said:

They're certainly not as smart as you and I.  These boffins in their white coats, researching the frontiers of knowledge; buffoons to a man.  All the technology that we take for granted now - built on the shoulders of numpties.  Microchips, computers, medicine - the produce of clowns.  The engineers that have developed safe, efficient and powerful cars - clueless farm hacks.

 

To be honest, apart from you and I, the entire human race are dolts.  And I'm not so sure about you.

Most modern cars are junk. Poorly made by machines.

Posted
8 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Most modern cars are junk. Poorly made by machines.

We are all entitled to our opinions, but modern cars have far lower fatality rates and far lower failure rates than their older brethren.  While I would love to drive a classic car, I would hate to own one, and would rely on my Nissan for transport if I did.

 

Posted
5 minutes ago, orchis said:

106 credits as an actor in IMDB.

That's probably part of Putin's War On Truth.  Have you checked today the Wikipedia score for the 1966 World Cup ?

  • Haha 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

4 to 2 eng beat germany

I think Extra Time is so much better than Next Goal The Winner, up to a limit based on the reasonable stocks that a pub can be expected to hold in their cellars.  

Unlike the OP, I am not too distressed by the passing of celebrities, although I still struggle to believe that Lee Brilleaux is dead.

 

My dear old grandmother died quite late in her life, and my choice then and now would be that I would die younger.  Back in the day, I did not realise that the peril of hard living was not that one died young, but that one became old sooner before one's years.

Posted
58 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

56 years ago poor ole England.

Ne'er mind, could've been worse.
Might be tomorrow, when the shills get at it 

Posted

One of the positives of turning 50 is that you no longer need to fear dying young.

 

I liked Bill in Body Heat, which was somewhat of a rehash of Double Indemnity.  He outdid Fred MacMurray's character as the fool, IMO.  The MMatlin thing really disgusted me, I guess he liked the novelty of beating a girlfriend and not having to hear her scream -- pretty low.

 

 

Posted
8 hours ago, StreetCowboy said:

We are all entitled to our opinions, but modern cars have far lower fatality rates and far lower failure rates than their older brethren.  While I would love to drive a classic car, I would hate to own one, and would rely on my Nissan for transport if I did.

 

I doubt many died driving in a Model T Ford.

Posted
2 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

I doubt many died driving in a Model T Ford.

Best check facts .

 

An extract "

31 people
 
The Model T was released in 1908. That summer, 31 people were killed in auto accidents in Detroit alone. The cars were a fire hazard, as gas tanks were located underneath the seats, and their flat glass windshields were known to severely cut anyone ejected from the car in a crash.
  • Haha 2
Posted
23 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

I doubt many died driving in a Model T Ford.

Not so sure about that

 

"The Model T was released in 1908. That summer, 31 people were killed in auto accidents in Detroit alone. The cars were a fire hazard, as gas tanks were located underneath the seats, and their flat glass windshields were known to severely cut anyone ejected from the car in a crash. As recently as 2013, a woman in Utah died after the Model T she was riding in overturned."

 

https://www.usatoday.com/picture-gallery/money/cars/2019/07/22/ford-chevy-toyota-deadliest-cars-in-history/39682167/

  • Like 1
Posted
9 hours ago, Sparktrader said:

Do you understand fudge factors and gravy train?

I understand you don't want to answer my questions, because you can't.

Climate deniers use a number of arguments to justify their denial, yours is just one of the weaker ones.

When there are 95% of scientists agreeing global warming and climate change are man-made, and only a small fraction of those scientists actually working in the field, it demonstrates that particular argument is as dumb as a can of soup.

Look at the 5% of scientists who reject climate science if you want to know where the gravy train is.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Look at the 5% of scientists who reject climate science if you want to know where the gravy train is.

The gravy train is working outside science in finance/media.

 

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...