Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - P3nT4gR4m

Pages: 1 ... 417 418 419 [420] 421 422 423 ... 580
6286
Like pandora's box - I just had to lick it  :argh!:

NSFW
:lulz: I can't stop laughing.



I would laugh but unfortunately all I can think about is the person who sees this and gets a boner.

I don't feel I should be sharing my oxygen supply with that fucker  :evilmad:

6287
Like pandora's box - I just had to lick it  :argh!:

NSFW

6288
Aneristic Illusions / Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
« on: November 13, 2008, 05:38:09 pm »
You forgot Wagner

Most of it was down to Wagner apparently but I forget exactly how.

6289
I'm going to regret asking this but do the insects have little wangs or do they somehow mate with them using proper insect bits?

6290
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Early meditations on Mind
« on: November 13, 2008, 05:28:27 pm »
This thread is great. Also, I agree with everything Pent and Payne are saying about animal psychology in this thread. The reason cats seem so rebellious is because in their ansestoral form they were solitary. Solitary animals have survivals based only on their own merits and do not have social behavior, therefore they seem rebellious, but they aren't really rebelling against anything. Dogs, on the other hand, have an ansestoral form which was (and still is) a pack animal with very hierarchical social behavior. If you DON'T give a dog a pack like situation in which they are the omega and you are the alpha, they will walk all over you. As soon as you assert yourself as their alpha they are easier to train.

I should point out that it isn't only cat owners who exhibit the attitude/belief system I outlined above. This also applies to owners of "small yappy-type dogs" who treat their beast as some kind of surrogate child. You can spot them a mile off because the animal is usually carried in public and often wearing some form of designer garment to keep it's fur warm. These pet owners annoy the living piss out of me too. And their animals are usually ill tempered and aggressive, right up until I assert my alpha dominance over the little bastards.

The reason the cat owners bug me slightly more is because their canine coddling counterparts are usually, quite evidently, total fuckheads but a lot of people who I would ordinarily have a lot of respect for seem to become gibbering fannypads when presented with the fools gold of feline genius.

While we are on the subject of animal intellect, tho, what's your take on the debate BMW? Do you think it's a clear cut case of only humans possess the higher faculty of "self awareness/abstract thought" or, like me, do you have it on a sliding scale? Has any conclusive evidence been presented either way since I last heard of the "Washo" primate language studies?

6291
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Early meditations on Mind
« on: November 13, 2008, 03:39:49 pm »
I have to admit the whole cat thing is a bit of a hobby horse of mine. I've mentioned this before but I'm sure the problem comes because cats will ignore you and it's easier to project wilfulness upon them, whereas a dog will try to work out what you want it to do and give it a go, inevitably fucking it up completely and therefore appearing dumb.

I'm sure this is why cat owners come up with these pathetic fucking stories about what their cat did and make it sound as if the dumb little bastard was hatching a masterplan.

You know how BMW gets when people start spouting pseudoscience? Well I'm like that with animal psychology. I'm not an expert but it is an interest of mine and I know the basics so when I hear someone going on about how "tiddles has a mind of his own" and other such bullshit I'm compelled to smash them in the face until they shut up.

Of course I'm just waiting for the first person to jump on this thread with 'evidence' that their little "Fluffycunt" is the exception to this rule as inevitably happens. Cat hyperintelligence is, at best, an optical illusion and, at worst, the dumbest form of pseudoscience that ever existed. In fact I'm not sure if it even qualifies as pseudoscience, more just a case of living in cloud bloody cuckoo land.

6292
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Early meditations on Mind
« on: November 13, 2008, 02:58:25 pm »
You thought I was flaming you ??  :eek:

Holy shit you better hope I never do.

Anyroad, read my post again, I think I made my stance perfectly clear. What you refer to as "when an animal goes out of its way to avoid doing as it's told" I refer to as "the animal has no idea it's being told to do anything"

Under this pretext the human barking out the orders merely becomes another obstacle which the cat will have to circumvent in order to achieve its immediate goal.

I compared this to a dog, not because I think dogs are in some way better than cats but because a dog will respond differently and it's a good example to use - the reason the dog will attempt to obey orders is because it's hardwired to follow the commands of the pack leader. This is a gross oversimplification but, as a general rule, it works quite nicely.

If you really want to see a cat follow an order then use the "Freeze!" command and pick it up by the scruff of the neck. Cats are programmed to obey this order, although the verbal component is optional.

6293
Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Early meditations on Mind
« on: November 13, 2008, 09:45:39 am »
That's kind of my point. I consider disobedience a form of agency, and the type of disobedience a cat practices involves a lot of enginuity, which I consider the product of a pretty vast inner monologue.

You can train a dog to do something in return for something (food, a treat, whatever). Only a cat will figure out a way to get the treat while specifically avoiding what is requested. That isn't precisely all there is to intelligence -- a dog can learn things much faster than a cat, sure, but a cat is clever about avoiding doing what it's told, whereas a dog has no real motivation to develop a faculty for being clever about disobedience.

That said, this is from my POV, being a cat owner since birth, and being bitten or chased by nearly every dog that I've come within a ten foot radius of. As such, I have a bit of fear-loathing-and-pity towards dogs, and I probably put cats on a pedestal to compensate.

Do not confuse ignorance with rebellion, a cat has no idea what the fuck it's being told. They can be trained, apparently, but I think it's much harder an there's probably a lot less scope for what can be done with them.

I think the whole issue with animal intelligence is compounded because, whilst the animals might have little or no 'intellect' (for want of a better word) They still have a highly sophisticated neural net processor, capable of pulling off very impressive feats of ingenuity and adaptive response. Because, as humans, we largely take our ability for abstract thought for granted, we find it hard to imagine doing anything without it, so we project this onto animals when we see them doing things we'd have to think about.

Think about a squirrel. The leaves start falling off the trees and it starts stockpiling nuts for the winter. You'd be forgiving for thinking that the squirrel knows winter is coming but no - the squirrel is utterly incapable of imagining winter, it lacks the imaginative faculty for one thing. The squirrel is only concerned with it's immediate situation and, right now, it has a psychotic craving for nuts. That's just not a decision, it's hard wiring.

6294
Not normal AIDS, airborne AIDS featuring leprosy.


If this disease doesn't exist then it fucking well ought to  :lulz:

6295
Aneristic Illusions / Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
« on: November 12, 2008, 11:18:42 pm »
The one you haven't noticed is being waged right under your nose.

We are at war with government inc. They started it. They're winning and, unless you wise up PDQ, the chances are it'll all be over before you notice.

Run while you still have legs :lulz:

6296
Aneristic Illusions / Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
« on: November 12, 2008, 11:11:07 pm »
They never will. The government has pretty much nailed the coffin shut on this one. Right now, as we speak, "we the people" are begging on their hands and knees to have more of their rights taken away every day and the ones that oppose it are increasingly vilified and marginalised.

You might have stood a chance of organising an uprising if you'd gotten there 40 or 50 years ago but, as it stands, your constitution only means anything to the lunatic fringes. The population who you so desperately wish to save will be the first to call the cops the minute you give it a shot.

By the time the government gets bad enough to satisfy your own criterion there'll be no one left with the will to stand against them. Right now your government is rampaging across the planet, killing and torturing indiscriminately. What more would it take?


It would be foolish of me not to admit that there is a significant possibility of this being true.  But, I'm not going to resign myself to it, and certainly won't tailor my political opinions and actions as if it is.
 :sad:

If we do win this war it won't be with guns. It's how much damage you can do with your mind that'll make a difference, that and how much mental punishment you can take and still come back fighting. That's how they're winning on the domestic front. The foreign policy is merely a distraction.

Suppose they had a war and no one realised they were being killed :fnord:

6297
Aneristic Illusions / Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
« on: November 12, 2008, 10:02:09 pm »
...Because while most people may say they uphold the second Ammendent and have them to defend against government tyranny, they don't mean this (or the incoming government). 

...government's do not give a shit about hypothetical threats.

...But it ain't happening now, and there are no indicators it is about to happen.
these points i call  :cn:


Oh fuck off.  You're not even debating in good faith anymore.

Try: nearly every single government paper ever produced on deterrence.  No, I don't have the time to list them all.

Bullshit. you're spouting things and you won't back them up? 
You say people that support the 2nd amendment aren't referring to it's use on our current gov?  rather pretentious to say that because people have not yet felt that it is necessary to take up arms that they wouldn't use it on the current gov if they committed atrocities at some level. 
You say gov doesn't give a shit about hypothetical threats?  You know full well that they do give a shit. enough so that they spend good resources on planning for all kinds of unlikely events.  The shit like the continuity of govt plans that take into account armed populace proves it.  They do factor an armed populace into their equations, therefore it has some deterrent effect.  you think it isn't sufficient, say that, but don't spout off superlative statements and then tell me to fuck off when i call you on it.
You say that there isn't growing resentment towards the govt, that could lead to popular support against the govt. and i'm wondering how you can possibly say that?


They never will. The government has pretty much nailed the coffin shut on this one. Right now, as we speak, "we the people" are begging on their hands and knees to have more of their rights taken away every day and the ones that oppose it are increasingly vilified and marginalised.

You might have stood a chance of organising an uprising if you'd gotten there 40 or 50 years ago but, as it stands, your constitution only means anything to the lunatic fringes. The population who you so desperately wish to save will be the first to call the cops the minute you give it a shot.

By the time the government gets bad enough to satisfy your own criterion there'll be no one left with the will to stand against them. Right now your government is rampaging across the planet, killing and torturing indiscriminately. What more would it take?

6299
Aneristic Illusions / Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
« on: November 12, 2008, 09:06:38 pm »
Also, to quote Stalin:

"The Pope.  How many divisions has he got?"

That is the mentality of almost every successful leader.  The actual deterrence threat, right now, of guns in the arms of US citizens right now is hovering around zero.  Why?  Because while most people may say they uphold the second Ammendent and have them to defend against government tyranny, they don't mean this (or the incoming government).  Oh no, they mean some hypothetical government, one which presumably does more than just torture and lock people up without reason and so on and so forth.

The practical threat assessment, right now, would say: lone wolves, possibly self-organizing cells, minimal military experience.  Fuck, I wouldn't be scared of that, even if I only had the Swiss Guard as my military arm.

This is what I mean when I talk about breaking the political-social hegemon.  Guns are nothing more than a hypothetical threat, and government's do not give a shit about hypothetical threats.  Sure, some time in the future, maybe some sort of agarian revolution with a measure of popular support will be directed against Washington DC.  But it ain't happening now, and there are no indicators it is about to happen.  So the threat, the deterrent value, don't mean shit.

:potd: :mittens:

6300
Aneristic Illusions / Re: Indecision 08 Wingnut thread
« on: November 12, 2008, 08:58:29 pm »
Lets put this in perspective people - the second amendment was invented by a bunch of medieval fucks who were totally buzzed with their recent victory against 'the man' and feeling more idealistic than realistic.

Step forward 6 million years or however long it's been and 'the man' is now a lot closer to home, an with a ubiquitous reach that would have been unfathomable back then.

And you can stop him by buying a gun?

Yeah right!

Pages: 1 ... 417 418 419 [420] 421 422 423 ... 580