Uhhh, she was "hauled off and not allowed to finish speaking" because she got off topic and started using her time to personally attack members of the legislature. Like a child.

Agent Coulson is a super hero.
He's the first hero whose super power is "No Fucks Given".

Anyone could defend humanity with super strength, invulnerability, unstoppable force...Coulson doesn't have these powers though. He walks into the fight armed with nothing less than his steel clad will and a pair of balls that must be hauled around in a semi-trailer.

Who's the real hero, Captain America?

Bloody hell, 56k was expensive as hell. I distinctly remember forking over some 400 bucks once at the end of a month in the late '90s, just for having played some Counter-Strike. Outlaws was even earlier, back when you paid for internet access with gold-pressed latinum.

No, sir, no internet gaming for radx during those days. We hauled our rigs into someone's cellar, then played until we ran out of provisions.

one way or another it will work out. either through revolt or cooler heads will eventually prevail and taxes will be raised or loopholes will be eliminated.

This kind of wealth concentration is simply not sustainable over the long haul. There is always going to be poor people, there will always be rich people, but if you don't give poor people enough money to buy stuff, then guess what. your economy is broken.

money has to flow up AND down for an economy to work and right now it's only flowing one way. One way or another, that will be corrected. The only question is: How long will it take and how bloody will the process be.

And when they haul you into court after your little murder spree you can always just tell them it wasn't really you but an evil doppelganger from an alternate universe. They will of course present "evidence" like clothing fibers, hair samples and fingerprints but they couldn't possibly admit those things when they are based on something as flimsy as empirical observations.

Empirical observation is very powerful, and obviously very useful, and I am not casting any doubt on that. Empirical evidence is good enough for most things, but usefulness does not justify it as a standard for truth. If you want to say we must have empirical evidence for everything except for the idea that we need empirical evidence for everything, then this is what is known as special pleading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_pleading

My biggest problem with inductive reasoning argument is that really it's just a simple fuck you response. The sun has risen on this planet again and again for the last 4 billion years or so but because inductive reasoning states that past performance is not a reliable predictor for the future. Holy shit! I'd better get my affairs in order because there's probably not going to be a tomorrow.

The problem of induction is simply pointing out the lack of rationale for why there should be a uniformity in nature (the constancy of natural law). Science has no answer for it; should the problem be ignored in order that the assumption may be justified? Doesn't sound very scientific to me.

By throwing in Inductive Reasoning, you are basically saying that nobody can ever really know anything, that religion and science are all the same, which I suspect is the true intent of the argument. I think some believe that if they can take science and reduce it to being just another "belief system" or "World View" then religion and science will be considered equally valid.

I think you're mistaking my position because I am not trying to equalize science and religion; I don't see any conflict between the two. In my worldview, everything that science does is completely justified. I can explain why there is uniformity in nature, and why empirical observation works and can be trusted. My worldview explains why we can know something to be true, and where our rationality comes from. The naturalistic/atheistic worldview can explain approximately none of these things. My argument, essentially, exposes the gaping holes of that position and the leaps of logic over those holes that must be made to justify it.

Empirical reasoning exists because we need some kind of shared standard for reality. Without that the court would have to acknowledge that your interpretation of reality (and that of your doppelganger) is as real and as valid as any scientifically produced evidence and you'd probably get away with murder.

So now, anytime you feel like you're losing an argument that involves scientific evidence you can just say "Inductive Reasoning" and you automatically win the argument.

Most of what I am called to do as a Christian is predicated in some way upon empirical observation. I am not challenging its usefulness at all; what I am really pointing out in this reply is that the problem of induction is only a problem for the atheist/agnostic and not the Christian.

What you seem to be saying here is that we must have a standard even if we can't explain it. If that is so, or even if it isn't, then I am here to tell you that we already have a standard given to us by the God who created you and me. He told us directly what this standard was when He sent His Son Jesus Christ into the world to die for our sins. The standard is Jesus Christ Himself, who said He is the way the truth and the life, and that no one comes to the Father but by Him. What He told us is that we must repent of our sins and believe on Him for forgiveness of our sins and that when we do we will be forgiven and receive eternal life.

And when they haul you into court after your little murder spree you can always just tell them it wasn't really you but an evil doppelganger from an alternate universe. They will of course present "evidence" like clothing fibers, hair samples and fingerprints but they couldn't possibly admit those things when they are based on something as flimsy as empirical observations.

My biggest problem with inductive reasoning argument is that really it's just a simple fuck you response. The sun has risen on this planet again and again for the last 4 billion years or so but because inductive reasoning states that past performance is not a reliable predictor for the future. Holy shit! I'd better get my affairs in order because there's probably not going to be a tomorrow.

By throwing in Inductive Reasoning, you are basically saying that nobody can ever really know anything, that religion and science are all the same, which I suspect is the true intent of the argument. I think some believe that if they can take science and reduce it to being just another "belief system" or "World View" then religion and science will be considered equally valid.

Empirical reasoning exists because we need some kind of shared standard for reality. Without that the court would have to acknowledge that your interpretation of reality (and that of your doppelganger) is as real and as valid as any scientifically produced evidence and you'd probably get away with murder.

So now, anytime you feel like you're losing an argument that involves scientific evidence you can just say "Inductive Reasoning" and you automatically win the argument.

Can't be good for the poor tranny or rear-end, esp. if this guy hauls and drops all day like this-Still, takes less human horsepower to replace a tranny and rear-end!

I do a ton of shark fishing off Mexico beach in Panama City, FL. My aunt always wants me to save her the shark fins. I usually grill the shark on a nice charcoal grill, amazing steaks.

but my Aunt makes shark fin soup a lot, and it tastes very good as well, on a lucky week I can haul in about half a ton of sharks for local fishmongers and for myself and family.

course my business is just family ran selling to fishmongers and local seafood restaurants for shark steaks and fins for soup.

I've been playing drums semi-pro for about 40 years. This kid's got chops and a good ear to boot. Very musical. I'm thinking of selling my Yamaha Recording Custom kit and getting a Whirlpool. Probably easier to haul to gigs.

if any video deserved the dark tag this would be it.
not too far off on the child-support deal either.
the courts do not care how or where you get the money,their basic philosophy is "fuck you..pay me".

and the money you do pay does not count toward any form of government subsistence either.
so no food stamps,medicare,medicaid...nothing..fuck you..pay me.

you are responsible for daycare,even though she has government subsidized,so she can go to work but you cant afford the insurance on your 15 yr old car.
that sucks buddy but fuck you..pay me.

she finds out you are moonlighting as a teacher at night school and hauls you into court where the judge promptly takes 100% of your earnings from that second job siting the "needs of the children" where-as you were just trying to make grocery money.
life is unfair...fuck you..pay me.

your visitation is revoked because she complained that your studio flat was in a "bad neighborhood" but refuses to honor the 2 hrs a week your are allowed by court order to see your son.who then turns around and tries to have your parental rights taken due to "negligence".
and all you get for all your letters to the judge is a "cease and desist" order.
fuck you...pay me.

every week a certain amount is collected from my check and every month it is sent to tallahasee and then distributed to an undisclosed recipient.like clockwork this money has never failed to make its rounds to a once young boy who will soon be graduating high school.

i am awaiting the day for a knock on my door to be greeted by a face i once knew many years ago.a round a cherubic face and he will say: thanks for nothing...fuck you dad.
*quality

Just shows his character. Instead of using his brain, he'd rather haul back and hit someone.

*promote
AS REPORTED by the BBC 17 October 2012, the decision by Home Secretary Theresa May to block the extradition of British computer hacker Gary McKinnon to the US is scrutinized by the UK press with most overjoyed that Captain Asperger gets to skate on having hoses and wires connected to him should he be hauled to the United States and made an offer he might be unable to refuse....More on this broken story, as it envelops!

Man, the best I've ever traveled was Business Class, and that was just amazing to me, and that was over 10 years ago. I need to get flown Business Class or 1st again by a company (the only way I would get to really, can never justify the huge increase in price to fly business/first over economy).

This just looks like an insanely comfortable way to do long haul flights.

What I want to know is, how does a punk band called Pussy Riot end up performing in a cathedral in the first place? And hooliganism? Who gets charged with that anymore, next I expect to see someone hauled in for lollygagging.

>> ^jmzero:

Or you could buy good PCs and see the price is pretty much the same.

Lol @budzos. Mac people have always said this, and it has always been funny. They used to have some magic wiggle room because so many parts were different (different processor, especially) - but that's mostly gone now. OK, so here you can get a quad core Mac Pro for $2499. Let's see what those parts it lists are worth:
Processor: $316 (here's the specific model)
Graphics Card: $109 (here's actually a slightly better model)
6GB of RAM: $100 (good RAM for that premium)
1TB hard disk: $100 (decent hard disk for that)
Motherboard: $250 (let's get a nice one)
Case: $250 (let's get a nice one)
Optical drive: $100
So far we're at $1225. Maybe they've got some Apple magic (whoo! Superdrive!) to make up a couple hundred more dollars - but it's going to take a lot to spend another $1275 (ie. more than double). If you prefer a Mac, go ahead and get one - but pretending they're the same price is silly.
To be clear, I don't hate Apple and some of their products are reasonably priced now. A Macbook Air, for example, has been a good deal for a while and is still much nicer than its competitors. But their hardware has historically been way more expensive, and lots of it still has a significant premium attached.


Oh please - stop it with the DIY PC vs. Mac Pro comparisons, they are just ridiculous.
A HP Z8x0 or a Dell Precision for example - those are the machines you should compare to.
You'll find that they are in the same ballpark.

Price is definitely not something I'd hold against the Mac Pro, that would be stuff like:
- weak expandability (1 PCIe16+2 PCIe4, 4 drive bays, max 64GB RAM),
- lacking features (eg. no SAS or SATA 6G, no USB3.0, weak selection of graphics/GPGPU cards)
- weak support options (no onsite support available at all?! I'm running a business here - do you really expect me to haul my workstation to the Genius Bar when a deadline is imminent?)