>> ^NetRunner:

Let me play devil's God's advocate here for a moment, and try to properly state the argument BillO only hints at.
Yes, science can predict that fluid on the Earth's surface will move in tides due to a massive object orbiting the Earth. But that's just a particularly astute observation about what is happening, a divination of some of the "code" that governs the way things work in the universe. It doesn't tell us anything about why the code is what it is, or why it's executing, or even really how it is that time breathes fire into the equations, and makes events happen.
If you think about it, it really is a marvel that all the molecules in the ocean move on their own, according to one set of universal laws of movement, without any deviation. It would take centuries of computer time to simulate the motion of every particle in the ocean for just a second, and yet it happens on its own second after second for billions of years. And never once is there a mistake -- the tides go out, and come in like clockwork, and even more amazingly, the molecules all flawlessly follow the laws of physics, without fail.
Whatever this thing is that we're all inside, it does seem to be a machine of almost incomprehensible perfection. It just works, day in, and day out, producing more miracles than we can count in every second...
Mind you, even when I do it justice, the argument still has the same yawning logical flaw. It's just a little easier to miss when you pretty it up properly.


The answer is: We're all in a computer.

>> ^NetRunner:

Let me play devil's God's advocate here for a moment, and try to properly state the argument BillO only hints at.
Yes, science can predict that fluid on the Earth's surface will move in tides due to a massive object orbiting the Earth. But that's just a particularly astute observation about what is happening, a divination of some of the "code" that governs the way things work in the universe. It doesn't tell us anything about why the code is what it is, or why it's executing, or even really how it is that time breathes fire into the equations, and makes events happen.
If you think about it, it really is a marvel that all the molecules in the ocean move on their own, according to one set of universal laws of movement, without any deviation. It would take centuries of computer time to simulate the motion of every particle in the ocean for just a second, and yet it happens on its own second after second for billions of years. And never once is there a mistake -- the tides go out, and come in like clockwork, and even more amazingly, the molecules all flawlessly follow the laws of physics, without fail.
Whatever this thing is that we're all inside, it does seem to be a machine of almost incomprehensible perfection. It just works, day in, and day out, producing more miracles than we can count in every second...
Mind you, even when I do it justice, the argument still has the same yawning logical flaw. It's just a little easier to miss when you pretty it up properly.


hold your head in the tide for 20mins... marvel at the perfection of a perfect machine that destroys it's own components?

the point is, lack of knowledge isn't a defense... someone with the knowledge can always back a religious person into the "God works in mysterious ways corner"

'and beyond the logical flaws, there's scientific flaws... like molecules flawlessly following the laws of physics... but anyhoos

Let me play devil's God's advocate here for a moment, and try to properly state the argument BillO only hints at.

Yes, science can predict that fluid on the Earth's surface will move in tides due to a massive object orbiting the Earth. But that's just a particularly astute observation about what is happening, a divination of some of the "code" that governs the way things work in the universe. It doesn't tell us anything about why the code is what it is, or why it's executing, or even really how it is that time breathes fire into the equations, and makes events happen.

If you think about it, it really is a marvel that all the molecules in the ocean move on their own, according to one set of universal laws of movement, without any deviation. It would take centuries of computer time to simulate the motion of every particle in the ocean for just a second, and yet it happens on its own second after second for billions of years. And never once is there a mistake -- the tides go out, and come in like clockwork, and even more amazingly, the molecules all flawlessly follow the laws of physics, without fail.

Whatever this thing is that we're all inside, it does seem to be a machine of almost incomprehensible perfection. It just works, day in, and day out, producing more miracles than we can count in every second...

Mind you, even when I do it justice, the argument still has the same yawning logical flaw. It's just a little easier to miss when you pretty it up properly.

if The Simpsons writers are pinheads, then billo is a dickhead.

the war on drugs has been proven to be complete failure and waste of money.

All troops on the border do is make poor people crossing take more risks.

The drugs will still come in through cars, trucks, walmart shipping containers.

What a fucking idiot BillO is.

I saw this headline from work where YouTube is blocked (i.e. I didn't see the thumbnail or YouTube description), and I just immediately knew that the guest had to be black. I guess BillO's chronic doucheitis hasn't passed.

Someone once said insanity is repeating something expecting a different outcome every time.


So, if any of you were expecting to see a non-racist Billo show, you're FUCKING LOONY!

Here ya go, people. Straight from the horses mouth arse. Please feel free to quote this out of context for the next 10 years. After all, it's What Bill Would Do.

Billo: "America has evolved and now we're a much more secular nation"

To which I say, "not nearly secular enough!"

You guys watched this? Man, I saw the title, and then that screen grab of BillO and Palin, and I just can't bring myself to press play. I can guess the contents enough to know.

Yeah, I saw it. I think that Rachel should have had at least one question that wasn't fundamentally "I found evidence that someone who worked for your organization said something sympathetic to white supremacists no less than 10 years ago, what's your response?"

However, Stein's response was "you're making that up" to all of it, and he'd just impugn her motives and credibility. She was operating on a tenuous guilt by association tactic, but he never had any response to it other than ad hominem.

Rachel had some long questions, but he definitely was trying to do a "filibuster" style interview, where he just tries to talk the whole time, without letting her ask follow ups. For the first 3 minutes or so, she didn't really get a word in edgewise until she started getting pushy.

IMO, all I really need to know about this FAIR organization is that they proudly support the new Arizona legislation -- to me, that makes me highly dubious about their motives and integrity. Moreso when their president comes on Maddow's show to basically just say she's a liar and a fraud, and BTW so is the Southern Poverty Law Center.

That's the kind of shit you expect from highly partisan organizations, not from some sort of reasonable, centrist organization.

It was painful to watch, but I don't think Rachel's really to blame -- everyone she brings on is some sort of political activist of some sort, and usually when she brings on anyone even slightly right wing, they haul out the trope about her being an unreliable partisan journalist, and just repeat that through the whole interview with increasing loudness.

It seems to work out well for them, because a lot of people come away from the interview going "wow, that was just a shouting match, I guess Rachel is just like BillO", even people who normally think Rachel is worth listening to.

I've never seen her make a factual mistake on these kind of things without issuing a correction. She's definitely got a partisan editorial stance, but I generally share her editorial viewpoint on the events of the day. I think a lot of politics these days is played on the grounds of "who's a credible voice in the media", and anyone to the right of center has a strongly vested interest in trying to diminish her credibility. It's why they never even try to really respond to her facts with anything other than "you're making that up", because it's an accusation they wouldn't dare level at a more firmly established member of the press, and that kind of shocking disrespect makes casual observers think "wow, nobody talks to real reporters that way!" and has the side effect of making people doubt her credibility.

Eh, enough with my little rant. I think the guy from FAIR is a tool, and the way he acted is what made that interview look so ugly, not what Rachel did.

In reply to this comment by lampishthing:
Hey NR, did you see Rachel Maddow's interview with Dan Stein on Thursday night? What did you think? He made some points that have been bothering me about Rachel's methods recently.

E.g. taking information from 25 years ago about one person and applying it to an organisation they are a member of today. People's views can change over that length of time and she never seems to take that into account. She also alternated between berating Stein for interrupting her (lengthy) questions and talking over him when he was trying to rebut. It was very disappointing how much it reminded me of O'Reilly.

It seems to me that she provides very discontinuous reports on organisations and people she disagrees with for the sake of making her viewers disagree with them to.

Again, I'd really appreciate your views,

James

Upvote not for the old BillO but for my favorite clippy yet. Someone give this guy a show on E!

BillO is the sane one at feux news. It's a sign of the coming apocalypse.

Look up the word HYPOCRITE in the dictionary, you will find this douchebag.

edit:Billo that is.

So they say "blah blah blah long lead times" but come on. This was a beautifully engineered Troll'ing of Sarah Palin.

The downs-syndrome character in the skit isn't acting out of the ordinary in any way, except for her speech. She's acting like an average girl on a date. The ONLY thing the character says in reference to Sarah Palin is the statement that her mother is the former governor of Alaska. She doesn't "act retarded". She doesn't actually say "Sarah Palin".

So any perception that Seth McFarland is "making fun of retarded people" or "making fun of Sarah Palin" is completely in the mind and preconceptions of the viewer.

Fucking brilliant. Of course Sarah Palin is coming out in outrage over this piece. Of course BillO is up in arms and denouncing Seth McFarland as a pinhead. He's on FOX too, for fuck's sake.

Family Guy gets all that great, free publicity.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Turn back, it's a trap!

I think this just shows that Billo's "views" are really just theater- and not actual beliefs.