In other news... (humorous news items)

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Nylonathatep
NOT Nyarlathotep
Posts: 720
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 3:06 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Nylonathatep » Mon Feb 13, 2012 1:22 am UTC

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/10 ... atar-real/

First time to exploiting Native Nature worshipping Aliens! Yeah go Mankind!

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/arti ... ghter?bn=1

This one reminds me of George Orwell's other novel "The Animal Farm."

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/artic ... slave?bn=1

This one comes with a warning.
Last edited by Nylonathatep on Mon Feb 13, 2012 7:05 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Randomizer
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 8:23 am UTC
Location: My walls are full of hungry wolves.
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Randomizer » Mon Feb 13, 2012 1:44 am UTC

But people shoot their computers with guns all the time. :p Example: Trouble Shooting - The AntiVirus. If you've already got a gun why go to the trouble of buying a mallet that you're only going to use once? Computer Smashing 2007. Honestly I'd be more worried about the guy busting the CRTs - those things have lots of lead in them and should not be disposed of in that way.
Belial wrote:I'm all outraged out. Call me when the violent rebellion starts.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:31 am UTC

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/ ... named-HLS/

Male students, faculty, and visitors to the Law School’s new Wasserstein Hall will have the opportunity to use the newly christened “Falik Men’s Room”—a cleverly named restroom bequeathed by Harvard Law School graduate William A. Falik.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10498
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Feb 13, 2012 5:40 am UTC

I didn't get the joke until I realized the name was pronounced 'fall-ik', not 'fa-leek'. I.e., "phallic".

User avatar
SlyReaper
inflatable
Posts: 8015
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:09 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, Old Blighty

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby SlyReaper » Tue Feb 14, 2012 7:20 pm UTC

Image
What would Baron Harkonnen do?

User avatar
Plasma Man
Posts: 2035
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:27 am UTC
Location: Northampton, Northampton, Northampton middle England.

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Plasma Man » Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:27 pm UTC

Yeah, it's such a shame for her that she doesn't live in a country where the head of state is also the head of a religion and guarantees bishops positions in the legislature... oh, wait a minute, she does!
Please note that despite the lovely avatar Sungura gave me, I am not a medical doctor.

Possibly my proudest moment on the fora.

Radical_Initiator
Just Cool Enough for School
Posts: 1374
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:39 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Radical_Initiator » Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:35 pm UTC

I always get a good laugh out of people claiming there is such a thing as "militant secularization" - yes, I find nothing wrong with absolutely forcing you to practice whatever religion (or lack thereof) you desire as long as you don't expect me to live its tenets.
If that makes me a militant secularist, so be it. I should also warn you, however, that I am a militant non-murderist as well.
I looked out across the river today …

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Dauric » Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:51 pm UTC

Radical_Initiator wrote:I always get a good laugh out of people claiming there is such a thing as "militant secularization" - yes, I find nothing wrong with absolutely forcing you to practice whatever religion (or lack thereof) you desire as long as you don't expect me to live its tenets.
If that makes me a militant secularist, so be it. I should also warn you, however, that I am a militant non-murderist as well.


Ehh, not quite.

Secularization is the social de-emphasis of religious values for rational values. In that context "Militant Secularist" does indeed make sense as someone intent on forcing modern/rationalist values on the religiously faithful, and it meshes rather nicely if your religion has the paranoid doctrines that the rest of the world is out to get you and those of your faith and throw you in an arena with a bunch of hungry lions.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

Radical_Initiator
Just Cool Enough for School
Posts: 1374
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:39 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Radical_Initiator » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:02 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:
Radical_Initiator wrote:I always get a good laugh out of people claiming there is such a thing as "militant secularization" - yes, I find nothing wrong with absolutely forcing you to practice whatever religion (or lack thereof) you desire as long as you don't expect me to live its tenets.
If that makes me a militant secularist, so be it. I should also warn you, however, that I am a militant non-murderist as well.


Ehh, not quite.

Secularization is the social de-emphasis of religious values for rational values. In that context "Militant Secularist" does indeed make sense as someone intent on forcing modern/rationalist values on the religiously faithful, and it meshes rather nicely if your religion has the paranoid doctrines that the rest of the world is out to get you and those of your faith and throw you in an arena with a bunch of hungry lions.

Ah. Sorry, then. Perhaps I should stick to lurking.
I looked out across the river today …

User avatar
SlyReaper
inflatable
Posts: 8015
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:09 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, Old Blighty

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby SlyReaper » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:06 pm UTC

Plasma Man wrote:Yeah, it's such a shame for her that she doesn't live in a country where the head of state is also the head of a religion and guarantees bishops positions in the legislature... oh, wait a minute, she does!

Well the queen being head of the CoE doesn't really impact politics since she doesn't get involved in it. Bishops being guaranteed seats in the house of lords is somewhat more troubling of course. I didn't even know that until reading that story this morning.

Radical_Initiator wrote:I always get a good laugh out of people claiming there is such a thing as "militant secularization" - yes, I find nothing wrong with absolutely forcing you to practice whatever religion (or lack thereof) you desire as long as you don't expect me to live its tenets.
If that makes me a militant secularist, so be it. I should also warn you, however, that I am a militant non-murderist as well.

I have never heard of anyone doing anything violent in the name of atheism (or secularism), so I have no idea why people apply the word "militant" to it. There are of course plenty of examples of people doing violent things in the name of religion. It just seems that anything an atheist says or does regarding atheism is automatically judged to be 100 times more obnoxious and belligerent than a similar thing said or done by a religious person regarding their religion.

Dauric wrote:Ehh, not quite.

Secularization is the social de-emphasis of religious values for rational values. In that context "Militant Secularist" does indeed make sense as someone intent on forcing modern/rationalist values on the religiously faithful, and it meshes rather nicely if your religion has the paranoid doctrines that the rest of the world is out to get you and those of your faith and throw you in an arena with a bunch of hungry lions.

There's no forcing going on here. It's the exact opposite; undoing all the centuries of religious values being forced on those who aren't religious. If someone wants to practise a religion, that's their own choice, but it has no place in influencing government policy.
Image
What would Baron Harkonnen do?

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Iulus Cofield » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:20 pm UTC

I have never heard of anyone doing anything violent in the name of atheism (or secularism), so I have no idea why people apply the word "militant" to it. There are of course plenty of examples of people doing violent things in the name of religion. It just seems that anything an atheist says or does regarding atheism is automatically judged to be 100 times more obnoxious and belligerent than a similar thing said or done by a religious person regarding their religion.


I seem to recall a revolution in France and another in China...

User avatar
SlyReaper
inflatable
Posts: 8015
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:09 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, Old Blighty

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby SlyReaper » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:22 pm UTC

Iulus Cofield wrote:
I have never heard of anyone doing anything violent in the name of atheism (or secularism), so I have no idea why people apply the word "militant" to it. There are of course plenty of examples of people doing violent things in the name of religion. It just seems that anything an atheist says or does regarding atheism is automatically judged to be 100 times more obnoxious and belligerent than a similar thing said or done by a religious person regarding their religion.


I seem to recall a revolution in France and another in China...

I thought my grasp of history was okay, but I'm at a loss here. Care to elaborate?
Image
What would Baron Harkonnen do?

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1842
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby eran_rathan » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:30 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:
Radical_Initiator wrote:I always get a good laugh out of people claiming there is such a thing as "militant secularization" - yes, I find nothing wrong with absolutely forcing you to practice whatever religion (or lack thereof) you desire as long as you don't expect me to live its tenets.
If that makes me a militant secularist, so be it. I should also warn you, however, that I am a militant non-murderist as well.


Ehh, not quite.

Secularization is the social de-emphasis of religious values for rational values. In that context "Militant Secularist" does indeed make sense as someone intent on forcing modern/rationalist values on the religiously faithful, and it meshes rather nicely if your religion has the paranoid doctrines that the rest of the world is out to get you and those of your faith and throw you in an arena with a bunch of hungry lions.



I think the term you are looking for is Militant Agnostic (our motto: I don't know, and you don't either!").

Welcome to the parade, comrade!
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Dark567 » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:30 pm UTC

Iulus Cofield wrote:
I have never heard of anyone doing anything violent in the name of atheism (or secularism), so I have no idea why people apply the word "militant" to it. There are of course plenty of examples of people doing violent things in the name of religion. It just seems that anything an atheist says or does regarding atheism is automatically judged to be 100 times more obnoxious and belligerent than a similar thing said or done by a religious person regarding their religion.


I seem to recall a revolution in France and another in China...
Honestly France and China was done more in the name of democracy and communism, respectively, than in the name of secularism or atheism.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1842
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby eran_rathan » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:32 pm UTC

SlyReaper wrote:
Iulus Cofield wrote:
I have never heard of anyone doing anything violent in the name of atheism (or secularism), so I have no idea why people apply the word "militant" to it. There are of course plenty of examples of people doing violent things in the name of religion. It just seems that anything an atheist says or does regarding atheism is automatically judged to be 100 times more obnoxious and belligerent than a similar thing said or done by a religious person regarding their religion.


I seem to recall a revolution in France and another in China...

I thought my grasp of history was okay, but I'm at a loss here. Care to elaborate?


The French Revolutionaries were decidedly atheist (or at the very least agnostic) to the point of renaming the cathedrals as Houses of Reason. The other would be the Communist Revolution in China.
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
SlyReaper
inflatable
Posts: 8015
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:09 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, Old Blighty

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby SlyReaper » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:34 pm UTC

Dark567 wrote:
Iulus Cofield wrote:
I have never heard of anyone doing anything violent in the name of atheism (or secularism), so I have no idea why people apply the word "militant" to it. There are of course plenty of examples of people doing violent things in the name of religion. It just seems that anything an atheist says or does regarding atheism is automatically judged to be 100 times more obnoxious and belligerent than a similar thing said or done by a religious person regarding their religion.


I seem to recall a revolution in France and another in China...
Honestly France and China was done more in the name of democracy and communism, respectively, than in the name of secularism or atheism.

That was certainly my impression. The Wikipedia page on the French Revolution does mention religion in a few places (as in, the revolutionaries were peeved about religion being used to bolster the position of the hated aristocracy), but there's nothing to suggest it was a primary motivating force behind the revolutionaries.
Image
What would Baron Harkonnen do?

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Dauric » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:38 pm UTC

SlyReaper wrote:
Iulus Cofield wrote:
I have never heard of anyone doing anything violent in the name of atheism (or secularism), so I have no idea why people apply the word "militant" to it. There are of course plenty of examples of people doing violent things in the name of religion. It just seems that anything an atheist says or does regarding atheism is automatically judged to be 100 times more obnoxious and belligerent than a similar thing said or done by a religious person regarding their religion.


I seem to recall a revolution in France and another in China...

I thought my grasp of history was okay, but I'm at a loss here. Care to elaborate?


Actually the one that springs to my mind first is Stalin

Stalin followed the position adopted by Lenin that religion was an opiate that needed to be removed in order to construct the ideal communist society. To this end, his government promoted atheism through special atheistic education in schools, massive amounts of anti-religious propaganda, the antireligious work of public institutions (especially the Society of the Godless), discriminatory laws, and also a terror campaign against religious believers. By the late 1930s it had become dangerous to be publicly associated with religion.[87]


However this is... in a roundabout way the point. It's not that the people shouting "Militant Secularists" are in any way accurate, only that they're Godwinning the point by a Nazi-analog. I wasn't saying the "Militant Secularist" thing is accurate, just that it's internally consistent to the 'fundie' position. They can't conceive of a belief system that doesn't come from a central authority, or at least a central rhetorical repository. In that regard they see the shift of society away from traditional organized religions as something that must by necessity be directed by a shadowy central authority that's working to undermine their religious organizations.

Obviously Satan invented the Internet, and has controlling shares of Google and Wikipedia.

The idea that people can come to agreeable positions on ethical issues through reasoned thought or rational debates is an anathema to the common dogmatic concept that human beings are inherently evil and only through an organized religion can they be forced to behave themselves in a civil manner.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

Arrian
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:15 am UTC
Location: Minnesota

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Arrian » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:40 pm UTC

Dark567 wrote:
Iulus Cofield wrote:
I have never heard of anyone doing anything violent in the name of atheism (or secularism), so I have no idea why people apply the word "militant" to it. There are of course plenty of examples of people doing violent things in the name of religion. It just seems that anything an atheist says or does regarding atheism is automatically judged to be 100 times more obnoxious and belligerent than a similar thing said or done by a religious person regarding their religion.


I seem to recall a revolution in France and another in China...
Honestly France and China was done more in the name of democracy and communism, respectively, than in the name of secularism or atheism.


True, I'm not familiar enough with either of those to say, but I'm pretty sure the violent repression of religion didn't start in Russia until after the revolution was pretty much in the bag. I wouldn't be surprised to hear of anti-religious violence being used as a tool of the revolution in France and China, France especially since the church was so closely associated with both the state and the aristocracy.

But yeah, militant secularists would fit for Soviet communists, along with violence and death for religious peoples under their control. It wasn't their only motivation, but it certainly was one of their motivations. (The same can be said for most religiously motivated atrocities.)

User avatar
SlyReaper
inflatable
Posts: 8015
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:09 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, Old Blighty

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby SlyReaper » Tue Feb 14, 2012 9:48 pm UTC

I stand corrected.
Image
What would Baron Harkonnen do?

User avatar
Plasma Man
Posts: 2035
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:27 am UTC
Location: Northampton, Northampton, Northampton middle England.

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Plasma Man » Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:06 pm UTC

SlyReaper wrote:
Plasma Man wrote:Yeah, it's such a shame for her that she doesn't live in a country where the head of state is also the head of a religion and guarantees bishops positions in the legislature... oh, wait a minute, she does!

Well the queen being head of the CoE doesn't really impact politics since she doesn't get involved in it. Bishops being guaranteed seats in the house of lords is somewhat more troubling of course. I didn't even know that until reading that story this morning.
The question of the monarch being the head of the CoE could well have more relevance when Charles gets on the throne. He's already shown himself to be willing to get involved with politics (and talk some absolute nonsense in the process). We shouldn't have to rely on the self-restraint of someone who ends up in a position of authority purely through an accident of birth.
Please note that despite the lovely avatar Sungura gave me, I am not a medical doctor.

Possibly my proudest moment on the fora.

jareds
Posts: 436
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:56 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby jareds » Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:10 pm UTC

"This is simply someone trying to impose their values on somebody else with the arm of the government."
- Rick Santorum, complaining about the federal mandate under the PPACA that employers provide insurance that covers contraception
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-february-13-2012/the-vagina-ideologues (about 3 minutes in)

And if anyone knows about trying to impose their values using the government...

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Iulus Cofield » Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:12 pm UTC

It's not an imposition when Christian morality is used as the basis of a rights restricting law. It's saving souls.

Besides. The rest of the world owes Christians. You know, for the ongoing persecution in the first world.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Dauric » Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:25 pm UTC

jareds wrote:"This is simply someone trying to impose their values on somebody else with the arm of the government."
- Rick Santorum, complaining about the federal mandate under the PPACA that employers provide insurance that covers contraception
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-february-13-2012/the-vagina-ideologues (about 3 minutes in)

And if anyone knows about trying to impose their values using the government...


This was a beautiful catch. Thanks.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

sigsfried
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 10:28 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby sigsfried » Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:49 pm UTC

Plasma Man wrote:
SlyReaper wrote:
Plasma Man wrote:Yeah, it's such a shame for her that she doesn't live in a country where the head of state is also the head of a religion and guarantees bishops positions in the legislature... oh, wait a minute, she does!

Well the queen being head of the CoE doesn't really impact politics since she doesn't get involved in it. Bishops being guaranteed seats in the house of lords is somewhat more troubling of course. I didn't even know that until reading that story this morning.
The question of the monarch being the head of the CoE could well have more relevance when Charles gets on the throne. He's already shown himself to be willing to get involved with politics (and talk some absolute nonsense in the process). We shouldn't have to rely on the self-restraint of someone who ends up in a position of authority purely through an accident of birth.


I think it is fair to say that if he tries to do so he will be firmly reminded of what his actual authority is and will either abdicate or be very quiet.

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Iulus Cofield » Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:51 pm UTC

I'm not really sure why they keep the nobility around. I can kind of see the monarch being an important cultural thing, but don't they also have a few hundred other lesser nobles collecting money from taxpayers?

userxp
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 12:40 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby userxp » Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:26 pm UTC

Quebec woman ‘cooked to death’

A 35-year-old woman joined a seminar called Dying in Consciousness and was covered with mud, wrapped in plastic, put under blankets and immobilized with her head in a cardboard box for about nine hours. She was found unconscious with a body temperature of 40.5 ºC. She had completed 85 sessions and paid over $18,900.

sigsfried
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 10:28 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby sigsfried » Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:29 pm UTC

I'm not really sure why they keep the nobility around. I can kind of see the monarch being an important cultural thing, but don't they also have a few hundred other lesser nobles collecting money from taxpayers?
I'm not really sure why they keep the nobility around. I can kind of see the monarch being an important cultural thing, but don't they also have a few hundred other lesser nobles collecting money from taxpayers?


The House of Lords contains 809 members, 90 of which are hereditary, but the position is unpaid.
As for the aristocracy, very little of it ever did get tax money and basically now only small number of the Royal family gets any money. The Civil list, which funds everything except the protection of the Royal family, is (I think) £7.9 million per annum. This though does include upkeep on all buildings which is the majority of there budget.

I am not suggesting for one minute that the Royal family do not cost the UK substantially, they do, but it is not as bad as one might expect.

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby bentheimmigrant » Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:47 pm UTC

They don't, because we get all the profits from their lands, which are extensive.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

User avatar
RollingHead
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:47 pm UTC
Location: Italy

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby RollingHead » Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:45 am UTC


With no disrespect meant to the woman, I don't understand why she put herself in that situation. What was the "therapist" trying to accomplish?

User avatar
PhoenixEnigma
Posts: 2303
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:11 am UTC
Location: Sasquatchawan, Canada
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby PhoenixEnigma » Wed Feb 15, 2012 1:46 am UTC

RollingHead wrote:
With no disrespect meant to the woman, I don't understand why she put herself in that situation. What was the "therapist" trying to accomplish?
Getting rich, in all likelihood

</cynic>
"Optimism, pessimism, fuck that; we're going to make it happen. As God is my bloody witness, I'm hell-bent on making it work." -Elon Musk
Shivahn wrote:I am a motherfucking sorceror.

Randomizer
Posts: 284
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 8:23 am UTC
Location: My walls are full of hungry wolves.
Contact:

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Randomizer » Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:20 am UTC

Iulus Cofield wrote:I'm not really sure why they keep the nobility around. I can kind of see the monarch being an important cultural thing, but don't they also have a few hundred other lesser nobles collecting money from taxpayers?
There's actually a good 5-minute video on YouTube that explains why they keep the monarchy around very well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhyYgnhhKFw (Dunno about the lesser nobles, though)

sigsfried wrote:I am not suggesting for one minute that the Royal family do not cost the UK substantially, they do, but it is not as bad as one might expect.
Nope. They make money for the government. See video (says basically what bentheimmigrant said)
Belial wrote:I'm all outraged out. Call me when the violent rebellion starts.

User avatar
Gellert1984
Posts: 588
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:07 pm UTC
Location: South Wales UK

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Gellert1984 » Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:59 am UTC

userxp wrote:Quebec woman ‘cooked to death’

A 35-year-old woman joined a seminar called Dying in Consciousness and was covered with mud, wrapped in plastic, put under blankets and immobilized with her head in a cardboard box for about nine hours. She was found unconscious with a body temperature of 40.5 ºC. She had completed 85 sessions and paid over $18,900.


Y'know, I have this fear of being abandoned to die, it's probably the most terrible way I can imagine to die, alone knowing you're dieing, knowing someone you trusted has the ability to save but isn't going to... I hope this 'therapist' is jailed for a really long time.
The only time I question the right to Free Speech is when I watch Fox News, probably due to the fact that I don't think they really believe in it. -Elisa Scaldaferri

sigsfried
Posts: 580
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 10:28 am UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby sigsfried » Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:10 am UTC

Nope. They make money for the government. See video (says basically what bentheimmigrant said)


Which is only the case if you assume that the Crown would get control of the Crown estates if the Civil List was dropped. It wouldn't, like any other act of parliament the Crown has little choice but to do as parliament requires. And the video goes on to attribute all tourist money to the Royal family. That clearly is crazy.

User avatar
Steax
SecondTalon's Goon Squad
Posts: 3038
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 12:18 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Steax » Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:22 am UTC

In Minecraft, I use the username Rirez.

userxp
Posts: 436
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 12:40 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby userxp » Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:34 am UTC

RollingHead wrote:

With no disrespect meant to the woman, I don't understand why she put herself in that situation. What was the "therapist" trying to accomplish?

Channel Melchisedech (a Biblical figure) of course.
It's not really that mysterious. She obviously wasn't intending to kill herself in a slow and horrible way (though some people might actually do that...), she wanted to improve her consciousness, channel her spirit, rebalance her energy or some other new-age nonsense, just like you might put yourself in an MRI machine to get a scan of some part of your body. The difference is that her beliefs about the world were completely wrong, and wrapping yourself in mud does not actually have any benefits (that outweigh the risks).
A better education in science, skepticism and reducing cognitive biases would make it less prevalent, but there will always be a few people who believe crazy things and do crazy stuff.


Getting a SWAT team on your house is a serious prank and a good scare, but does not actually have any long-term consequences. On the other hand, if the police ever finds out who did the call (and it's going to be pretty easy unless he was gaming over Tor), he might have a good long stay in jail :roll:.

johnny_7713
Posts: 555
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 1:31 pm UTC

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby johnny_7713 » Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:32 pm UTC

userxp wrote:

Getting a SWAT team on your house is a serious prank and a good scare, but does not actually have any long-term consequences. On the other hand, if the police ever finds out who did the call (and it's going to be pretty easy unless he was gaming over Tor), he might have a good long stay in jail :roll:.


Unless the SWAT team is primed to be trigger happy by the 911 call and shoots an innocent person. Wouldn't be the first time it's happened, there's a thread on on it a bit lower down the board. In that case the SWAT team was executing a 'surprise search warrant' IIRC, but still.

@Iulus: I'm admittedly not an expert, but AFAIK the only people the UK's lesser nobles collect money from are tenants that live on their land. I'm pretty sure only the government has the right to collect taxes and the lesser nobles (and greater nobles for that matter) will only be receiving a share of that if they are employed as civil servants.

User avatar
Plasma Man
Posts: 2035
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:27 am UTC
Location: Northampton, Northampton, Northampton middle England.

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Plasma Man » Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:58 pm UTC

Sorry, bentheimmigrant and johnny_7713, but you don't know what you're talking about. You're completely ignoring the money raised from the property the nobility own. Charles, for example, owns the Duchy of Cornwall, which has annual revenue of around £16 - £17 million pounds (and doesn't have to pay taxes like any other corporation does).

I've also never understood the argument that the monarchy makes money for the country through tourism. It's not like people get to the top of the Eiffel Tower and say "Well, it's a great view, but the lack of a monarchy really spoils it."
Please note that despite the lovely avatar Sungura gave me, I am not a medical doctor.

Possibly my proudest moment on the fora.

Arrian
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:15 am UTC
Location: Minnesota

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Arrian » Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:01 pm UTC



The last line of the story is horrible:

Can anything be done when games are being played on the Internet, a place where even the CIA and Mexican Senate--merely recent examples--are also vulnerable?


Yes, the SAME Internet as the CIA and the Mexican Government! Because the network used to play a game is the exact same as the network that the CIA's home page is on. Then again, I shouldn't expect the news to do any less scare mongering about the Internet than it does in the real world. They always like to throw lines like that in real world stories as well: "The drug dealers were pulled over on the SAME STREET a kindergarten bus was driving along!!1!"

Plasma Man wrote:I've also never understood the argument that the monarchy makes money for the country through tourism. It's not like people get to the top of the Eiffel Tower and say "Well, it's a great view, but the lack of a monarchy really spoils it."


Or that fewer people tour Versailles because no royalty has lived there in over two centuries. There's certainly some tourism generated by the royal family, but I would imagine most of that is attending events that the family takes part in. There might also be some increased interest in touring royal sites because there is an active monarchy, but I can't imaging that not being marginal.

Webzter
Posts: 179
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:16 pm UTC
Location: Michigan, USA

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Webzter » Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:14 pm UTC

Plasma Man wrote:I've also never understood the argument that the monarchy makes money for the country through tourism. It's not like people get to the top of the Eiffel Tower and say "Well, it's a great view, but the lack of a monarchy really spoils it."


Judging by the number of US rags that were running stories about the royal wedding and still are obsessed with Kate and William, I'd say we have a pretty big obsession with the monarchy over here and likely at least some number of tourists are going to Buckingham Palace or what have you because, hey, wedding and princes and princesses and "gosh, this looks just like it did on the cover of People!"

Then again, I don't know if the monarchy is so much good for England's tourism as it is for US publishers ;)

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7594
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: In other news... (humorous news items, etc)

Postby Zamfir » Wed Feb 15, 2012 3:38 pm UTC

Or that fewer people tour Versailles because no royalty has lived there in over two centuries.

Nitpick: the king of France lived on the grounds until 1848, in a smaller palace. The main palace was still in use for royal events from time to time, also under Napoleon III after him. Whether Napoleon III counts as genuine royalty is another question, of course.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], jenny66 and 11 guests