Butthurt Street

**sumbich** · 12-13-2015

Originally Posted by uranus

I'd be willing to accompany you in taking a university course on basic logic if you like. This one seems acceptably freshman level http://www.uky.edu/~rosdatte/phi120/index.htm

I'd have been satisfied if you substantively addressed any of my points. Making generalizations and telling me my logic is bad and not even asserting exactly where and why is not a sound rebuttal much less a refutation.

Originally Posted by uranus

This whole video is great but the commentary at 22m44s is particularly apropos to this thread.

I basically already addressed this phenomenon. These "examples" have enough gung and energetic familiarity to toss around their students but not break through an unwilling opponent, which requires a much greater level of gung, and also against an unwilling opponent becomes a killing maneuver to forcibly disrupt their energy in such a manner. (I wrote other details previously that I wont write again but when you've seen someone put their money where their mouth is on the matter and even the biggest of the debunking entities turns em down on account of too dangerous...*shrugs*...wait, I thought you guys didnt believe this was possible, hmm?) One not only has to have a fantastic level of gung built up but must also be significantly more powerful than the other. e.g. my naturally talented but pretty much uncultivated friend of mine, we can do energetic push hands 3-5 inches away from each other and I can wind up pulling or pushing him to a small extent, and I can feel him push or pull me a bit, but he doesnt have enough gung to get me off my balance, but I can make him take a step back smiling and laughing saying 'you bastad' (and its not just a single push and he goes back, I have to sit and fuck with him, pushing or pulling, until I get his energy perturbed enough to then issue a larger push....if I issue a larger push from the getgo, it is easily resisted...like the Holm KO, you dont just up and kick 'em in the head, you set it up with a shit ton of punches first...)...whereas the one of my teachers I have this familiarity with, he can basically make my energy feel like its tied in knots and I'm practically in the middle of a whirlpool. *shrugs* Like I said, the data doesnt have to make sense, it just had to be truthful. Clearly established safe with permission interaction vs I'm going to destroy your energy-defenses (=attack heart.) That's dangerous and has no place in MMA. They dont allow eye gouging and blows to the back of the head for good reason too. This is a tough example because chi is a very tough to define concept and we're talking about things beyond our present ability to measure, and I wouldnt much believe in this stuff if I didnt have an ostensible privileged position in terms of certain knowledge and exposure to some individuals the like of which the vast majority of people do not ever encounter, so I've seen more than what most people have on the matter, and direct experience tends to assert itself rather impressionably.

People having no experience with this wind up being forced to logically conclude this phenomenon does not exist. But that does not mean the entirety of their logical space encompasses all possible phenomena. Basically, a failure of the control mechanism on the experiment.

an interesting anecdote from bruce frantzis - in his internal training, in sparring with training partners, the only thing not allowed was slapping because of how easily it breaks bones when combined with internal power. Having had my arm whacked with such a blow before and having it left all the bones in my arm ringing like the biggest church bell you ever saw... I am quite inclined to agree with that assessment.

Originally Posted by Higor

Alright let's talk about something 'closer' to us:
German Professor: NASA Has Fiddled Climate Data On 'Unbelievable' Scale

Global Warming is a scam.
Discussion starts now.

Good ol AGW. A ploy for a new tax revenue stream and little else.
Splicing dissimilar data sets is a BIG NO -NO. Like what Keith Briffa did with his spectacularly cherry picked Yamal data, splicing tree records with temp records and acting like "what, this noise is REAL DATA and not just noise! resolution doesnt matter!"
Long since established that nasa's GISS data set undergoes MASSIVE adjustment and does things like oversample the west antarctic and extrapolate the data to the whole of Antarctica, when they are really damn near separate climate zones due to the volcanism under the west antarctic.
CO2 heat absorption follows a logarithmic scale and current PPM is largely past the steep part,
Old sea shells reveal that co2 concentrations that some AGW freaks would assert their having a hard time forming shells did quite fine
TSI (total solar irradiance) vastly oversimplifies solar input and smashes apart relevant discrepancies
our model of the sun isnt comprehensive anyway
outer planets modulate solar tides and the sun's progression about the barycenter of the solar system and result in the deviations of the 11/22 year solar cycle - I dont like saying 11 because it ignores the polarity reversal.

Fushima is a WAYYYYYYY biger deal, esp with all the lies TEPCO put out (and since japan is also a vassal state to the USA...)

**Higor** · 12-13-2015

I wonder if activist argumenting global warming are either gullible or being intentionally targeted, it's not uncommon to see big projects canceled due to being unavailable to obtain an environmental impact report.
Then you take a look at the other side of the world and Dubai and China are making islands without any of those lol.

Originally Posted by sumbich

Fushima is a WAYYYYYYY biger deal, esp with all the lies TEPCO put out (and since japan is also a vassal state to the USA...)

Proud to live in a country 100% free of nuclear centrals, unfortunately Brazil is next to us.
Fun fact, in 2010 a bill that allows customers to produce energy and pour it back into the network was passed... because a Pulp plant from Finland needed it to operate here in Uruguay. A very strange case of actually good legistation being passed to satisfy a corporate requirement.
Hey, at least I'll be setting up lots of solar panels soon to alleviate power costs (which are up to 400% as high as in US).

**sumbich** · 12-13-2015

Originally Posted by Higor

I wonder if activist argumenting global warming are either gullible or being intentionally targeted, it's not uncommon to see big projects canceled due to being unavailable to obtain an environmental impact report.
Then you take a look at the other side of the world and Dubai and China are making islands without any of those lol.

Proud to live in a country 100% free of nuclear centrals, unfortunately Brazil is next to us.
Fun fact, in 2010 a bill that allows customers to produce energy and pour it back into the network was passed... because a Pulp plant from Finland needed it to operate here in Uruguay. A very strange case of actually good legistation being passed to satisfy a corporate requirement.
Hey, at least I'll be setting up lots of solar panels soon to alleviate power costs (which are up to 400% as high as in US).

I think the thing was, what the government wants, the government subsidizes (its basically like Eddi Murphy's Raw - "and this nigga over here's going to pay for it" meaning the people, who have jack shit of a say in the matter since the government has a blank checkbook, zero accountability, and are in the pocket of the banks....and if the people knew it was the same situation, they'd shove that box of ju jus up the banks collective asses also) - and acting like any good corporate steward, it was decided that it'd be insane to leave any potential tax monies on the table. Things like Penn St and East Anglia came way after everything was massively entrenched and the peer review process almost entirely subverted for the discipline - but it was pioneers like Hansen that had the nod from the establishment and were protected from consequences of their scientific malfeasance for 30+ years while they were allowed to spout any garbage and simultaneously keep their GISS black box contents secret.

Nuclear's a sad story mainly because it just was not ever even necessary except for nuclear bomb making materials, the entire reason they ignored thorium reactors. In a right and proper world, JP Morgan and Edison would not have conspired against Tesla and we'd have been enjoying the fruits of Tesla's efforts instead of still paying hand over fist for oilgas etc. But that's an honest world in which we do not live.

How's the panel efficiency these days? It was years since I last checked, I had considered an install on my roof but back then it wasnt quite adding up on the math side in terms of price and efficiencies. I've got a pretty good south facing roof for it.

**Higor** · 12-13-2015

The rentability of panels goes thru mostly on energy prices and panel prices, their efficiency hasn't increased much but their prices have plummeted like crazy.
And I live in the southern hemisphere, where proportionally it can produce more amounts of energy than the north.

Take a look, when it comes to clean energy, the so called underdeveloped countries have a HUGE natural advantage.

**sumbich** · 12-13-2015

nice. after I got divorced I almost left society and moved to the mountains in ecuador. I should still go visit my acquaintance some day there. for some reason my eyes went straight there on the map

**uranus** · 12-13-2015

Originally Posted by sumbich

I'd have been satisfied if you substantively addressed any of my points. Making generalizations and telling me my logic is bad and not even asserting exactly where and why is not a sound rebuttal much less a refutation.

No, I'm serious. This was not meant solely as a smug retort intended as a rebuttal. I am willing to participate in a group ( you, me, ? ) study of logic and this course is available publicly and free of charge from a reputable institution of higher learning. After all, this provides you the same opportunity as to anyone else including me. It seems the concept of "logic" is disputed enough in these discussions to merit establishing a common understanding between all of us.

What do you say?

**sumbich** · 12-13-2015

Originally Posted by uranus

No, I'm serious. This was not meant solely as a smug retort intended as a rebuttal. I am willing to participate in a group ( you, me, ? ) study of logic and this course is available publicly and free of charge from a reputable institution of higher learning. After all, this provides you the same opportunity as to anyone else including me. It seems the concept of "logic" is disputed enough in these discussions to merit establishing a common understanding between all of us.

What do you say?

It'd be viewed by you as a cop out if I declined

I just declined joining another band because I dont have the time, being in 4 bands already and running a recording studio; I'm in the middle of wiring research to figure out how I can coax a signal out of certain areas of my mixing board since a couple of problems I ran into appeared to be related to how I was grounding the signals - at any rate it'd be great to get more than 6 signals out of the thing at any given time; I just bought some transformers and am in the middle of designing a guitar amp; I'm also in the middle of designing another bass cabinet since the last one I designed and built has a couple undesirable resonances in it (I might even space truck and design at least, another super huge one on the scale of MCA's massive dual 18 jammy, I'd require much larger volumes to get a triple chamber resonating properly, which was part of the problem with my first one I built); just bought a bunch of other equipment from a venue that decomissioned so I have 3 PA speakers to troubleshoot and replace stuff on, buttload of wiring to fix or re-end....and that's aside from my handful of older tube amps I have to repair (like a nice ol harmon kardone chorale from the 60s, all tube, that's going to be beaut once its refurb'd.)
(also in the middle of recording 3 of my bands)
But perhaps I could find the time.
Trust me, I'm aware that not all of these arguments I present pass an extremely strict logic test - but I also contend that the opposing sides are so rife with logical inconsistencies, combined with the fact that all data cannot be known and some of these wind up becoming unprovable in either direction - but some, like 911, very easily prove the official version to be a falsehood. The shootings are harder to make these assertions, 911 is just easy because it was such a huge and documented event.

--- Updated ---

well that's interesting, I never saw Stanley Kubrick admitting to faking the moon landings before.

**uranus** · 12-13-2015

Originally Posted by sumbich

I never saw Stanley Kubrick admitting to faking the moon landings

Have you determined that you have now seen Stanley Kubrick admitting to faking the moon landings?

**sumbich** · 12-14-2015

Originally Posted by uranus

Have you determined that you have now seen Stanley Kubrick admitting to faking the moon landings?

touche - I've kept a certain level of precision thus far but if we're going to have to be superlatively accurate with verbiage - its still unlikely to convince me the effective difference here is beyond semantics. substantive points would have been made beyond wordplay. (that said - cant say as I'd have recognized him, or even knew he was dead, for that matter - media figures to me are by and large not worth my attention.)

**sumbich** · 12-14-2015

french government comes together....against the people, yet again...

Keep in mind: Front national was only defeated today because Socialists withdrew candidates qualified for run-off and let conservatives win.

— Mathieu von Rohr (@mathieuvonrohr) December 13, 2015

------
funny how nobody mentions present co2 ppm is actually historically low.

I Love CO2: CO2 & Climate Facts
but I was finding stuff like this in 2004
Global Warming Bombshell | MIT Technology Review

and

IPCC Conflict of Interest

By its constitution, the IPCC has a hopeless conflict of interest. Its mandate is to consider only the human causes of global warming, not the many natural causes changing the climate for billions of years. We don’t understand the natural causes of climate change any more than we know if humans are part of the cause at present. If the IPCC did not find humans were the cause of warming, or if it found warming would be more positive than negative, there would be no need for the IPCC under its present mandate. To survive, it must find on the side of the apocalypse.

The IPCC should either have its mandate expanded to include all causes of climate change, or it should be dismantled.

User Tag List

Thread: Butthurt Street

Thread Tools

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Similar Threads

Spiderman butthurt by the name Spiderpig, boosted me whole game

yeahhh street fighter

Members who have read this thread : 162

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions