Interesting Stuff Thread

dmw07

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Legal hair-splitting at it's finest.

I agree!!

My point being though, we don't have a great deal of freedom of speech in this country. We do, if your part of certain groups though

Bannasidhe

dmw07 wrote: »

I agree!!

My point being though, we don't have a great deal of freedom of speech in this country. We do, if your part of certain groups though

I think what is sticking in the craw of the Fundies is that people in Ireland are beginning to exercise freedom of speech when it comes to religion and no-one is making the critics shut up. Time was a cleric would frown and the critic would be ostracised by the community - now more and more members of the community, including some clerics, are not only nodding in agreement - some of them are leading the charge.

Dades

Well, if you compare two religions side by side - at *least* one of them has to be "bollocks".

Hotblack Desiato

With all this talk of bollocks it reminded me of an interesting court case

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollocks#Obscenity_court_ruling

Testimony in a resulting prosecution over the term demonstrated that in Old English, the word referred to a priest

So next time you meet a priest, be sure to use this friendly traditional greeting

Pompey Magnus

ninja900 wrote: »

"Testimony in a resulting prosecution over the term demonstrated that in Old English, the word referred to a priest

And to bring this around full circle the word testimony itself is derived from the Latin word testiculi as it is thought that in Ancient Rome a man would cup his testicles as he swore an oath.

Hotblack Desiato

No wonder the feminists are angry, the whole world revolves around bollocks

Hotblack Desiato

Christian1: What on earth do they talk about in the A&A forum?

Christian2: No idea, they probably just talk bollocks all day long!

:pac:

Hotblack Desiato

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

And to bring this around full circle the word testimony itself is derived from the Latin word testiculi as it is thought that in Ancient Rome a man would cup his testicles as he swore an oath.

that's a circular definition if I ever heard of one....

Bannasidhe

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

And to bring this around full circle the word testimony itself is derived from the Latin word testiculi as it is thought that in Ancient Rome a man would cup his testicles as he swore an oath.

and now we know the real reason why women can't be priests - no bollocks to grasp and due to design incapable of grasping their ovaries while swearing an oath. It all makes perfect sense now.

Hotblack Desiato

Can't they grab the altar boy's instead? The male priests seem ok with that.

Turtwig

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

Where is Sam anyway?

He's still on boards, religious crazies just eroded all his mettle for this part of the board.

Delirium

Psychiatrist who championed 'gay cure' admits he was wrong

One of the most influential figures in modern psychiatry has apologised to America's gays for a scientific study which supported attempts to "cure" people of their homosexuality.

The survey, published in 2001, looked at "reparative therapy" and was hailed by religious and social conservatives in America as proof that gay people could successfully become straight if they were motivated to do so.

But Dr Robert Spitzer has now apologised in the same academic journal that published his original study, calling it "fatally flawed". "I believe I owe the gay community an apology," his letter said. "I also apologise to any gay person who wasted time and energy undergoing some form of reparative therapy because they believed that I had proven that reparative therapy works."

Sarky

http://vimeo.com/27337356

Beautiful slow motion film I find oddly hilarious, and best of all, it's got Alan F*cking Rickman in it!

Fortyniner

An excellent article in today's IT.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0519/1224316354988.html

sponsoredwalk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ssq-S5M8wsY

Turtwig

I can't believe it took me up until a few months back to realise that that Atkins fellow was one of the authors of that Chemistry book textbook which described terraforming Mars at the end of it.

Should I watch this debate though, I don't really like Craig all that much and I seriously doubt he's going to say anything new ever.

Turtwig

Abstract. wrote:

Since the sinking of the Titanic, there has been a widespread belief that the social norm of ‘women and children first’ gives women a survival advantage over men in maritime disasters, and that captains and crew give priority to passengers. We analyze a database of 18 maritime disasters spanning three centuries, covering the fate of over 15,000 individuals of more than 30 nationalities. Our results provide a new picture of maritime disasters. Women have a distinct survival disadvantage compared to men. Captains and crew survive at a significantly higher rate than passengers. We also find that the captain has the power to enforce normative behavior, that the gender gap in survival rates has declined, that women have a larger disadvantage in British shipwrecks, and that there seems to be no association between duration of a disaster and the impact of social norms. Taken together, our findings show that behavior in life-and-death situation is best captured by the expression ‘Every man for himself’.

Source.

sponsoredwalk

Jernal wrote: »

I can't believe it took me up until a few months back to realise that that Atkins fellow was one of the authors of that Chemistry book textbook which described terraforming Mars at the end of it.

Should I watch this debate though, I don't really like Craig all that much and I seriously doubt he's going to say anything new ever.

∞ - ∞ = 3, Guth & Vilenkin etc... Atkins is there, in his own words, making things harder for himself if you're interested.

Turtwig

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

∞ - ∞ = 3, Guth & Vilenkin etc... Atkins is there, in his own words, making things harder for himself if you're interested.

Atkins never struck me as the debating type and if he really tried all that Cosmology stuff then I've no interest in watching this. And, there's no way I could tolerate Craig's butchering of Cosmology. I suppose, now would be the time to point out I have no clue of Cosmology. . . yet.

Delirium

A picture of the eclipse 2012 from nasa

shizz

koth wrote: »

A picture of the eclipse 2012 from nasa

hmmmmm Is this legit? Usually Andre Kuiper is the guy taking them but he hasn't got any up. Not to mention it just doesn't look right?

karenjlwalker

Sorry if its been posted before but I looked through the previous 10 pages prior to this one and didn't see it.

Kivaro

shizz wrote: »

hmmmmm Is this legit? Usually Andre Kuiper is the guy taking them but he hasn't got any up. Not to mention it just doesn't look right?

Yes, it's legit. It happened.
I saw it at sunset yesterday evening, and it was soooo coooool.


P.S. I know you're talking about the photo.

Calibos

Doubt its legit. It was an annular eclipse was it not. ie Eclipse at the moons apogee which means the moon wasn't big enough to completly block out the sun. Don't think taking a photo from 300 miles up makes a difference. Thats the corona you can see in the photo, not the unobstructed actual disc of the sun. A photo of yesterdays annular eclipse from space would not have the Central bulge of the Milky Way visible in the same shot. ie Camera could not capture both at the same time. In fact a camera in space couldn't capture the daylight side of the earth and the galactic bulge in the same shot due to the brightness of the earth never mind the eclipse. Composite shot with 3 elements. Earth, Galactic bulge, Total eclipse as opposed to annular. Photoshopped Moon shadow.

sephir0th

8-bit computer fully emulated within the Minecraft world, along with custom OS and programming language (Forth).

Brain explode. Play Minecraft within Minecraft? Inception...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vb0Q9htsbBI

Turtwig

Calibos wrote: »

Doubt its legit. It was an annular eclipse was it not. ie Eclipse at the moons apogee which means the moon wasn't big enough to completly block out the sun. Don't think taking a photo from 300 miles up makes a difference. Thats the corona you can see in the photo, not the unobstructed actual disc of the sun. A photo of yesterdays annular eclipse from space would not have the Central bulge of the Milky Way visible in the same shot. ie Camera could not capture both at the same time. In fact a camera in space couldn't capture the daylight side of the earth and the galactic bulge in the same shot due to the brightness of the earth never mind the eclipse. Composite shot with 3 elements. Earth, Galactic bulge, Total eclipse as opposed to annular. Photoshopped Moon shadow.

Yeah, I don't think it's legit either. This however is, look at the majesty of Oppy's shadow as it gazes out over the expanses of the crater.

Kivaro

This picture ain't so cool, but it was the best I could do with my phone as the sun was setting.

eclipse.JPG

ShooterSF

karenjlwalker wrote: »

Sorry if its been posted before but I looked through the previous 10 pages prior to this one and didn't see it.

Ah why didn't I see that ending coming. Sob.

Edit _ While perusing IMDB and looking up the Hitch's credits it strangely disgusted me to see in his biography his "star sign". Of all things to list about the man, something he would have made a mockery of seems unsettling.

MagicMarker

koth wrote: »

A picture of the eclipse 2012 from nasa

Don't suppose there's a 1280x1024 version floating about anywhere?

Delirium

MagicMarker wrote: »

Don't suppose there's a 1280x1024 version floating about anywhere?

Can't find one with those exact dimensions. Link to the images I could find via Google.