Author Topic: Seriously, Foo Fighters?  (Read 1582 times)

EK WAFFLR

  • A Fairy-Tale Princess Trapped in a Viking Manbear's Body
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 3627
  • Nordic Freakshow Armada of Sexhurt™
    • View Profile
"At first I lifted weights.  But then I asked myself, 'why not people?'  Now everyone runs for the fjord when they see me."


Horribly Oscillating Assbasket of Deliciousness
[/b]

Reginald Ret

  • 'Miserable Atrocianthrope'
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 4168
  • Interweb Gloryhole QC Inspector #23
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Foo Fighters?
« Reply #1 on: October 19, 2014, 12:40:44 am »
Meh. So being famous doesn't make you science-savvy. I'm not surprised.
Lord Byron: "Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves."

Nigel saying the wisest words ever uttered: "It's just a suffix."

"The worst forum ever" "The most mediocre forum on the internet" "The dumbest forum on the internet" "The most retarded forum on the internet" "The lamest forum on the internet" "The coolest forum on the internet"

LMNO

  • Lubricated and Rabid Lungfish of Impending Sexdoom™
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 62627
  • Internet Fuckweasel of Haunted Pork Dimensions.
    • View Profile
    • Earfatigue Productions: When it has to sound like you give a shit.
Re: Seriously, Foo Fighters?
« Reply #2 on: October 19, 2014, 01:45:00 am »
Hm. Not a big fan of FF. But the above page doesn't link to any evidence, nor provides a timeline. FF has been around for 20 years. The above link even says the page was taken down (but not when). So this has a 53% chance of being clickbait.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 77698
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Foo Fighters?
« Reply #3 on: October 19, 2014, 05:12:37 am »
Hm. Not a big fan of FF. But the above page doesn't link to any evidence, nor provides a timeline. FF has been around for 20 years. The above link even says the page was taken down (but not when). So this has a 53% chance of being clickbait.

Yeah, I was left a little skeptical myself. Not a fan of Foo Fighters, just underwhelmed by the lack of any evidence whatsoever other than this guy's say-so that their website once-upon-a-time contained a sidebar link and a banner to this HIV denial website. Rather than link to the website through Wayback Machine or provide screenshots, he provides what he claims is a transcript of their support for the organization. He then goes on to, in a rather garbled fashion, attribute writing that seems to have been on the denialist page to the Foo Fighters themselves.
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”


Doktor Howl

  • Hostile Technology Geek
  • One-Armed Jizz Moppers
  • Deserved It
  • **
  • Posts: 35686
  • si autem non vis tribulationis et angustiae, non
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Foo Fighters?
« Reply #4 on: October 19, 2014, 05:48:05 am »
Let's assume for one moment that this guy is on the level.

Who goes to entertainers for medical advice?  Not this kid.
"Daisy had syphilis, Tom died of genital warts, and Nick Carroway watched it all in mounting horror, then made off with the silverware and the maid."
~ The Good Reverend

Evil doesn't work without good people. Good people will do the most repugnant, nasty shit for what they think are "the right reasons"

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 77698
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Foo Fighters?
« Reply #5 on: October 19, 2014, 06:22:28 am »
Let's assume for one moment that this guy is on the level.

Who goes to entertainers for medical advice?  Not this kid.

Oh, I do think they could have perpetuated harm if they were spreading AIDS denial around, much as the shitneck celebrities who proselytize the anti-vaccine bullshit perpetuate harm. I just want slightly more evidence than a guy's blog post saying that they did that 14 years ago.
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”


Pæs

  • James Bond-defying Shit-Volcano Trigger Device of the Next Armageddon.
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 2925
  • I ain't even mad.
    • View Profile

Cain

  • Alea iacta est
  • Chekha
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 63886
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Foo Fighters?
« Reply #7 on: October 19, 2014, 08:31:07 am »
According to Wikipedia, as of 2012 the band's site no longer links to Chris Maggiore's group.  The group no longer mention's Alive And Well, refers to their material or publically speaks in favour of the group.

Wouldn't it be great if there were some kind of extremely cheap global communication device, whereby interested parties could contact people in other countries and ask them questions like "do you now no longer support Alive And Well, and if so, what brought about the split with the group" and "what is your stance on HIV/AIDS denialism"? 

Alas, humanity has yet to achieve such a wonderful network.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 77698
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Foo Fighters?
« Reply #8 on: October 19, 2014, 04:36:25 pm »
According to Wikipedia, as of 2012 the band's site no longer links to Chris Maggiore's group.  The group no longer mention's Alive And Well, refers to their material or publically speaks in favour of the group.

Wouldn't it be great if there were some kind of extremely cheap global communication device, whereby interested parties could contact people in other countries and ask them questions like "do you now no longer support Alive And Well, and if so, what brought about the split with the group" and "what is your stance on HIV/AIDS denialism"? 

Alas, humanity has yet to achieve such a wonderful network.

 :lulz:
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”


EK WAFFLR

  • A Fairy-Tale Princess Trapped in a Viking Manbear's Body
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 3627
  • Nordic Freakshow Armada of Sexhurt™
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Foo Fighters?
« Reply #9 on: October 19, 2014, 06:00:23 pm »
"At first I lifted weights.  But then I asked myself, 'why not people?'  Now everyone runs for the fjord when they see me."


Horribly Oscillating Assbasket of Deliciousness
[/b]

EK WAFFLR

  • A Fairy-Tale Princess Trapped in a Viking Manbear's Body
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 3627
  • Nordic Freakshow Armada of Sexhurt™
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Foo Fighters?
« Reply #10 on: October 19, 2014, 06:10:17 pm »
According to Wikipedia, as of 2012 the band's site no longer links to Chris Maggiore's group.  The group no longer mention's Alive And Well, refers to their material or publically speaks in favour of the group.

Wouldn't it be great if there were some kind of extremely cheap global communication device, whereby interested parties could contact people in other countries and ask them questions like "do you now no longer support Alive And Well, and if so, what brought about the split with the group" and "what is your stance on HIV/AIDS denialism"? 

Alas, humanity has yet to achieve such a wonderful network.

 :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
"At first I lifted weights.  But then I asked myself, 'why not people?'  Now everyone runs for the fjord when they see me."


Horribly Oscillating Assbasket of Deliciousness
[/b]

Cain

  • Alea iacta est
  • Chekha
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 63886
    • View Profile
Re: Seriously, Foo Fighters?
« Reply #11 on: October 19, 2014, 06:41:33 pm »
Seriously tho, "citizen journalism" amirite?  There's a reason real journalists tend to look down on opinion columnists, and it has a lot to do with how they talk about what they think and feel and conjecture about...rather than doing something as basic, obvious and journalistic as "ask questions".

It's a shame bloggers, uh science communicators decided that was the aspect of "journalism" they most wanted to emulate.