Teens Beat To Death 81-Year-Old Man Attending Granddaughter’s Wedding

This is one of the saddest stories of the year. George Leroy Baker III, 81, left Tempe, Arizona to celebrate his granddaughter’s wedding in Lynchburg, Virginia. Walking across the street to a diner from his hotel, some teens allegedly beat him to death for fun.

The three teenagers were walking down the street when one allegedly said he would beat the first person he met — to impress a girl. Baker walked right into the dare and died for it.

The teens included two 16-year-olds and a thirteen-year-old. They have been charged with murder but their names have been withheld.

Baker appears to have been a wonderful father and his family must now deal with this tragedy at what should have been one of the happiest times for the family.

Source: AZ Family

Jonathan Turley

600 thoughts on “Teens Beat To Death 81-Year-Old Man Attending Granddaughter’s Wedding

  1. I have worked on cases with kids like that. They have no regard for life, no empathy, and appear to be unable to look into the future to assess what the ultimate outcome might be of their actions. At 16 and 13 they are too young to be formally diagnosed as having an antisocial personality disorder according to the DSM-IV-TR, but the handwriting is on the wall.

  2. Buddha,

    Not in training anymore. Unfortunately the Act has stated that youthful offenders cannot receive the death penalty had not seen or heard about these asswipes.

  3. AY,

    I was speaking for diagnostic purpose only. You are correct that their actions absent the age criteria are sociopathic by definition.

  4. So the kid just turned 16 and, before the murder of the 81 year old man, watered some plants at church … what is that supposed to tell us about the way his mind works?

  5. This just shows the depth of disregard for life,property etc amongst a lot of todays young people.

    And it is scarey to think that there is a generation growing up among us that have no direction in life.

  6. Fortunately, the poor teens be treated well by our justice system:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/opinion/28tue1.html?scp=1&sq=12%20and%20in%20prison&st=cse

    Maybe one day they’ll be released so that they’ll have the freedom to murder random old people on the street again. It would be a shame to deny youths the opportunity of ever doing that again. The stupid tea-baggers would probably want to give these poor teens life in prison or something barbaric like–possibly even the death penalty.

  7. I’m sure when this comes to trail the do gooders will be out in force and a bargain will be made to devalue further the life of Mr Baker.

    A small room, a member of the victims family and an array of sharp or heavy blunt objects and I’m sure justice would not only be done, but would be seen to be done to the satisfaction of many

  8. spamheed:

    “A small room, a member of the victims family and an array of sharp or heavy blunt objects and I’m sure justice would not only be done, but would be seen to be done to the satisfaction of many.”

    *************

    Well, maybe to your Neatherthal sensibilities, “justice” might be done. Pray tell then would we do the same for relatives of the juveniles when they voice their outrage? Maybe we could just handle it in the streets and have a perpetual feud. It amazes me how little history, psychology, or even common sense you have to suggest an “eye for an eye.” That slogan is the likeliest candidate for mankind’s epitaph.

  9. Having thought about this, I have a couple questions:

    Is it possible the alleged killer saw the old man coming and issued his statement secure in the knowledge an old man would be the first to cross his path? (rather than, let’s say, a strapping 6’3″, 26 year old male weighing 200 lbs)

    Was the female impressed?

  10. Generally as a rule minors convictions are sealed upon reaching majority. If they are designated as adults they may still be treated as juveniles for sentencing.

    The long held rule has been that minors absent exigent circumstances names will not be revealed.

    It is kind of funny the first Designation hearing that I did the Prosecutor was clueless about how it worked. I explained the act in detail and what the nuances were. Why it is so funny, is he was the elected one and relied on a measly assed defense attorney. Ah, but he knew his shit and knew it well. It helps when you have worked in the legislature and you get a heads up from the committee chair about what the intended purpose of the bill was designed to do.

  11. Blouise: You ask; “And what is the benefit to society in keeping their names private?” The answer is is in the post below yours from Spamheed- “A small room, a member of the victim’s family and an array of sharp or heavy blunt objects and I’m sure justice would not only be done, but would be seen to be done to the satisfaction of many.” Spamheed- The Bill of Rights is for everyone in America, not just for the one’s who don’t piss us off. This was a horrible crime, but additional murders are not justice, they are just additional crimes

  12. Spamheed 1, September 9, 2010 at 1:56 pm

    I’m sure when this comes to trail the do gooders will be out in force and a bargain will be made to devalue further the life of Mr Baker.

    A small room, a member of the victims family and an array of sharp or heavy blunt objects and I’m sure justice would not only be done, but would be seen to be done to the satisfaction of many

    ———————————-

    Hooray! One step closer to turning America into Afghanistan!

  13. eniobob,

    “And it is scarey to think that there is a generation growing up among us that have no direction in life.”

    It’s just as scary to think there is an older generation raising these kinds of children. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

  14. Blouise: You ask; “And what is the benefit to society in keeping their names private?” The answer is is in the post below yours from Spamheed- “A small room, a member of the victim’s family and an array of sharp or heavy blunt objects and I’m sure justice would not only be done, but would be seen to be done to the satisfaction of many.” Spamheed- The Bill of Rights is for everyone in America, not just for the one’s who don’t piss us off. This was a horrible crime, but additional murders are not justice, they are just additional crimes

    Kenneth Davis- happy hunting!

  15. HenMan
    1, September 9, 2010 at 5:19 pm
    The post by “lady liberty” is not mine in spite of the plagiarism. Frankly, I don’t get it.

    ======================================================

    That’s okay, Hen … I read your original post and understood your point … I know you’re right …. I wasn’t really thinking “revenge” but avoidance … however, even the worst must be protected by the law if the law is to stand for anything … sometimes it’s hard to swallow.

  16. I have served as a volunteer guardian ad litem advocating for abused and neglected children in the juvenile court system here in Florida for over 25 years. There are a few things I have learned from that experience:
    1. Children who are severely neglected by their parents and essentially left to fend for themselves from infancy (and there are many) are unable to form human bonds. They are fearful, defensive, distrustful and desperate for attention of any kind, even if it is negative. Even if they become able to lead relatively normal lives as adults, they remain emotionally scarred forever and carry that baggage into all of their relationships, even relationships with their own children.
    2. Children who are also physically abused (and there are many), learn from a very early age to accept violence from those who are stronger as a means to survive and to inflict violence on those who are weaker as a means to get what they want.
    3. By the time a child is 10 or 11 years old, fear and anger have become ingrained in their personalities because they have so long had to endure behavior which their young minds are unable to rationally process. Based upon the ages of my clients when they come into the system, I can almost predict which of them has been lost forever.
    4. As a society, we rant and rave about the rights of the unborn, but as soon as infants leave the hospital we tell them they are on their own and the hell with them. We balance our budgets on the backs of their abused bodies without so much as a second thought.

  17. Blouise 1, September 9, 2010 at 2:58 pm

    Having thought about this, I have a couple questions:

    Is it possible the alleged killer saw the old man coming and issued his statement secure in the knowledge an old man would be the first to cross his path? (rather than, let’s say, a strapping 6’3″, 26 year old male weighing 200 lbs)

    Was the female impressed?

    ———————————–
    Blouise those kind of predations don’t generally occur by establishing a ‘fair fight’. This was a ‘pack mentality’ event at the least. And I would bet that this gentleman was picked from a distance because he was elderly and less likely to fight back or inflict damage.
    Jackals…

  18. Blouise- No criticism intended- I’m a great fan of your wisdom and insight. Our local paper recently printed a useful biography of all the September Primary candidates for state office, but included their complete home addresses. I think this is a dangerous practice in these days of angry, self-appointed, well-armed guardians of their own version of justice.

  19. W C

    This sounds to me, also, like a “pack” incident.

    We’ve read several times about people (“In Cold Blood”, Columbine, “Helter Skelter”) who individually may not be particularly dangerous, but when paired with just the right person become horrendously vicious.

    The pathology is fascinating, if disheartening, to contemplate.

  20. HenMan
    1, September 9, 2010 at 7:05 pm
    Blouise- No criticism intended- I’m a great fan of your wisdom and insight.

    ============================================================

    Ha … you just want to be unbeheaded!

    It was a good criticism … it is difficult to read of something like this and not flip a little bit … one should be reminded of the right way to consider the picture as a whole. I like constructive criticism … it’s good for me.

  21. Blouise,
    I do want to see how the “unbeheading” process works!
    Mike A., Well said. It always astounds me when a minor is charged with a horrible crime, you always hear the “charge him/her as an adult” chanting from the so-called law and order crowd without any sense as to how that will help or hurt the minor. In this kind of senseless murder, I find myself leaning towards the law and order crowd, but hopefully cooler heads will control.

  22. I agree 100 percent with spamheed on this one, if we had an eye for an eye justice system, there would certainly be a lot less crime in this country.

  23. those kids seriously make me sick:[ how do kids in this world think things like that are cool :/ it disguists me so much. it even makes me cry i cant help all those sick people who think those crazy things in there head so that i can save others from getting hurt by people like that.

  24. rafflaw,
    Thanks for the comment, but see the thoughts of jags 2483.

    jags 2483,
    I beg to differ with you. If our justice system were based on “an eye for an eye,” the result would not be more justice, merely more blind people. Then again, sharia law is popular in some circles.

  25. rafflaw
    1, September 9, 2010 at 10:44 pm
    Blouise,
    I do want to see how the “unbeheading” process works!

    ===========================================================

    To tell you the truth, I have no idea … but the guillotine salesman told me that any head removed in error could be easily reattached. I just have to find the User Manual.

  26. The reason that I believe an “eye for an eye” justice system works better, is because people would think more than twice before committing horrible crimes, and if they knew that if caught that the punishment handed to them was the same horror that they displaced to their victims, they more than likely would not commit the crime in the first place. It just seems to me that people too often forget about the victims of murder and rape crimes, and focus on how they can lessen the punishment on the perpetrator, which makes our justice system so weak. People forget the horror that victims had to endure before their life was taken, like the innocent old man in this case.

  27. Blouise–“Ha…you just wanted to be unbeheaded!”- Here I am, a former Court Jester, now headless and with a broken slapstick too. Sometimes life just sucks. P.S.- Shouldn’t that be “disbeheaded”?

  28. jags2483,

    I don’t believe in going soft on violent criminals. I agree that some people may forget the horror that some crime victims had to endure. That said, I agree with what Mike A. wrote in the comment he made on September 9th at 6:13 pm. People are rarely born from “bad seeds.” Teens who commit violent or sexual crimes have usually been physically, sexually, emotionally abused or neglected in their formative years (or they may be mentally ill.) I don’t know if having an “eye for an eye” justice system would work better…would deter young people who have grown up under such conditions from committing violent crimes.

    My daughter is a social worker. She has seen the tragic home lives of many of her young clients. Some of our kids grow up in virtual war zones.

  29. Justice cannot be had without equity. An “eye for an eye” is not equity, but parity. Parity is required to sate the very human need for revenge. Equity can meet the needs of parity but parity alone creates inequity in the form of additional burdens passed on to society to pay.

    Which is more just:

    A) An eye for an eye, which leave two blind people that will require some form of social assistance and/or accommodation?

    B) A suitable punishment that maximizes the inconvenience to the perpetrator by passing the maximum costs to them directly without creating an additional burden on society such as prison time and/or economic damages paid as restitution that leaves the perpetrator physically whole but chained to their bad act socially and economically, possibly in perpetuity?

    If your goal is simple revenge, the answer is A.
    If your goal is justice, the answer is B.

  30. HenMan
    1, September 10, 2010 at 1:28 am
    Blouise–”Ha…you just wanted to be unbeheaded!”- Here I am, a former Court Jester, now headless and with a broken slapstick too. Sometimes life just sucks. P.S.- Shouldn’t that be “disbeheaded”?

    ===================================================================

    disbeheaded does sound a bit more sophisticated …

  31. But if you attach the heads back would they then become Zombies as this is undisbeheaded? You know how people get after a certain amount of lack of oxygen to the brain…yes present company too…but just look at DuBya……had to be without air for at least 19 minutes…

  32. Buddha,

    “A) An eye for an eye, which leave two blind people that will require some form of social assistance and/or accommodation?

    B) A suitable punishment that maximizes the inconvenience to the perpetrator by passing the maximum costs to them directly without creating an additional burden on society such as prison time and/or economic damages paid as restitution that leaves the perpetrator physically whole but chained to their bad act socially and economically, possibly in perpetuity?

    If your goal is simple revenge, the answer is A.
    If your goal is justice, the answer is B.”

    ============================================================

    Nice … very, very nice. Tell the truth … were you ever a teacher, professor, or instructor … or if not, perhaps an author? I’m not trying to be intrusive but you have such a way with words and the ability to succinctly instruct … I’m just curious.

  33. AY: “undisbeheaded”—You are the new “Sultan of Swat”. I must leave now and take my slapstick to the repair shop- it’s all I have left. How the mighty have fallen!

  34. What an ugly story, and what an ugly bunch of comments. It honestly seems some of you don’t have much more value for human life or dignity than the kids who beat this man to death. But their brains haven’t fully developed yet, what’s your excuse?

    Also, Enlightened Progressive, two things about your name are lies.

    Maybe someone here can jog my memory as to his name, but there was a former US Senator, who’s career was a rather impressive example of the good one can do when they devote their life to public service. He had also been convicted of a senseless murder in his early teens, not unlike the one in this story, but because he was tried and convicted as a juvenile, he was able to lead an exemplary life as an adult. Would the world been richer or poor if he’d been tried as an adult or even executed?

    I also have to wonder if the view pervading these comments, in which people who are physiological and psychologically unable to make decisions with the rationality of an adult (to say nothing of any added psychological issues they may have had) are treated as disposable subhumans perhaps enables this sort of violence.

    Given the viciousness and callousness shown by supposedly well-adjusted adults, it seems like it becomes pretty easy for some maladjusted children to feel that life has no value.

    Now, if you excuse me, I’m going to spend the rest of today feeling hopelessly depressed about humanity.

  35. “Also, Enlightened Progressive, two things about your name are lies.”

    Logical fallacy of begging the question.

    Although many who would accept the label Enlightened Progressives post here, not all who post here are Enlightened Progressives. Such a logical error is obtained by the initial application of the Fallacy of Composition, the “from one to many” error.

    Other than that, good post Sam, with some valid points. An excellent conclusion too by the way. The humane response to acts like this is to feel hopelessly depressed about humanity. There are no winners in this situation and indeed we are all lessened by this senseless act of violence. To extrapolate on the thoughts of Alan Watts that “Everything in nature depends on everything else. So it’s interconnected”, when we harm others, we also harm ourselves. These boys did not just kill one man, they killed parts of themselves, parts of this man’s family, parts of their respective families and parts of society as a whole.

    But the conclusion comes full circle.

    If these kinds of events depress you about the nature of humanity, you have three options: surrender to the darkness we as a species are capable of, do nothing, or do something constructive to help people and society realize the errors of their ways and thinking that led to this kind of tragedy in the first place.

  36. Sam D. I have just one question for you, what about the person that the U.S senator you speak of murdered? It seems your devaluing his/her life, and that is the point of my posts, people FORGET about the victim far too often, and focus on how to some how rehabilitate the criminal that committed the horrible crime. Sure in the very rare case that you pointed out, the accused murderer went on to lead a successful life, but that still does not take away from the fact that he murdered another person and stole their opportunity to have a life.

  37. Before this gets out of hand about Ted Kennedy (and I’m no fan), I would like to point out the difference between negligent vehicular homicide and what these boys did which is likely to be charges as manslaughter.

    In short, that difference is the state of mind of the perpetrator.

    The crime negligent vehicular homicide that Kennedy should have been charged with – and would have been charged with had he not been a Kennedy (the main reason I didn’t like him because I am an egalitarian) – instead of pleading guilty to leaving the scene of an accident for which he received a suspended a sentence of two months in jail carries a lesser penalty than premeditated murder and for good reason. He was drunk and stupid, not a killer on the prowl. He lacked the mens rea – the guilty mind – of a premeditated murderer.

    These two young men and a boy decided to beat the next person they saw. This gives the prosecutor some leeway in deciding to charge them with manslaughter or felony murder (murder during the commission of felony battery). They had specific intent, mens rea, to go out and harm someone. In fact, anyone.

    Kennedy, while a lying reprobate and a drunk who got off light because of his family’s connections, hadn’t intended to kill anyone. Indeed, if he was following the pattern, his intent was to get drunk and get laid. I’d bet my last dollar Kennedy wished to his last breath that was how the evening had actually ended. But Ted Kennedy didn’t murder anyone. He acted with negligence that resulted in the death of Mary Jo Kopechne. People who kill under these circumstances rarely kill again as it was an accident. Hence a difference in charge and punishment.

    These three boys acted with in a willful manner that showed a depraved indifference to human life. Given their ages, a psych evaluation is in order to determine how well they understood the potential consequences of their actions before setting the charges. At 16, unless they’re mentally handicapped, they should have understood clearly the potential consequences of their willful actions. The youngest? I’d wait to hear what the docs said before I’d speculate on his state of mind. There’s a huge maturity gap in males between 16 and 13.

    When it comes to violent crime or crimes where death results, intent is an important component of not just formulating the appropriate charge at bar, but in formulating the appropriate punishment as well.

    There’s a reason there is a technical distinction in the law between premeditated murder (often called murder in the first degree), manslaughter (often called murder in the second degree, differing only in intent to kill from the more serious charge) and negligent homicide.

    That reason is justice.

    Punishing a cold blooded killer should merit a more serious term than killing someone in the heat of the moment or killing someone by accident.

    I’m no fan of Kennedy. I’d go so far as to say he was a privileged rich-boy shitbag who got away with a crime that should have gotten him out of office forever no matter what good he went on to do. But comparing him to these three is truly apples and oranges.

  38. Wow so much support for these “injured” young people.

    An eye for an eye as a measure of punishment worked well enough for a long long time, even the most civilised of societies have throughout history used this as a basis for their justice systems.

    whereas countries and peoples who decry such a system and go for the softer approaches towards their perpretrators tend to have a much higher rate of repeat offending. My preference would always be to get it right the first time.

    Or maybe I’m completely wrong and we should just buy those silly little chaps another ice cream while we teach them the error of their ways?

    I’m sure the Browns of this world will manage just fine

  39. Spamheed,

    Since the distinction between justice and revenge was lost on you the first time . . .

    Justice cannot be had without equity. An “eye for an eye” is not equity, but parity. Parity is required to sate the very human need for revenge. Equity can meet the needs of parity but parity alone creates inequity in the form of additional burdens passed on to society to pay.

    Which is more just:

    A) An eye for an eye, which leave two blind people that will require some form of social assistance and/or accommodation?

    B) A suitable punishment that maximizes the inconvenience to the perpetrator by passing the maximum costs to them directly without creating an additional burden on society such as prison time and/or economic damages paid as restitution that leaves the perpetrator physically whole but chained to their bad act socially and economically, possibly in perpetuity?

    If your goal is simple revenge, the answer is A.
    If your goal is justice, the answer is B.

    You seem more interested in revenge than justice.

    The Chinese have an old saying that runs along the lines of “He who seeks revenge should start by digging two graves: one for his target and one for himself.” Justice cannot be solely for the purposes of revenge otherwise the cost of justice becomes burdensome to society. Parity is revenge, not justice, and while a component of justice, it no more makes a cake by itself than do eggs alone.

    parity \ˈper-ə-tē, ˈpa-rə-\, n.,

    1: the quality or state of being equal or equivalent

    There is a reason the Blind Lady holds both a scale and a sword and not just a sword.

  40. Wow patroinisation on such a subject from someone on the other side of the pond (as it were), how quaint. You have examples of the death penalty throughout your country yet seem to fight against it to defend the rights of the guilty, Whilst we don’t have the death penalty but work to have it reintroduced.

    This is akin to the bible studies classes of times long past, An “old saying” to fit every size. How about a non Chinese one? “And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast [it] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not [that] thy whole body should be cast into hell.”

    It is quite ironic that you use a Chinese proverb to emphasise your point. Would the “Chinese” you refer to be the same “Chinese” who have a mandatory death sentence for drug related crimes? or the same “Chinese” who inform the parents of the victims of child murderers and abusers of their release dates and locations in order to facilitate their zero reoffending statistic.

    Of course it could be the same “Chinese” who have the lowest rate of reoffendingg when it comes to drug or child harming incidents.

    Simply rehashing or restating your earlier post does not in any way increase its validity, nor does it reduce its pointlessness when covering an area which is obviously subject to completely opposing and equally valid and deeply embedded viewpoints It’s akin to an elderly person repeatedly stating the same words gradually getting louder and louder each time in order to get the only point they can see over to someone who doesn’t agree with them, it really isn’t necessary, my failure to accept your opinion is in no way down to a failure to understand it, nor a misintepretation of any kind.

    I don’t and cannot agree that criminal behaviour is an illness, nor in most case can it be justified at any level. Nor do I believe that they can be treated in all circumstances. I do however believe that a life for a life is a fair and even handed way of dealing with certain crimes, for example premeditated murder.

    Since you offer up a choice of actions in your post, I would happily choose “Answer A” and fry the little darlings, if that makes me a bad person then I’ll just have to live with it.

  41. Spamheed: What is a “patroinisation”?? Why don’t you just go to Lynchburg,VA, kill the three teenagers, and live happily ever after? But keep looking over your shoulder because the avengers of the three teenagers may be coming for you. And the cycle continues…..

  42. talis
    1, September 13, 2010 at 6:53 pm
    Teens frontal lobes are not fully developed at the age of these perps.

    ========================================================

    Oh … well … that explains it

  43. Wow, such insipid behavior from someone who comes from a country with the most CCTV cameras per capita in the world. As to “criminal behavior” being an illness? I’d suggest not putting words in my mouth as you insert your feet into your own.

    As to repetition, it’s common practice to repeat a lesson if a dullard misses the point the first time, but since you’ve made it clear that cranial density isn’t your primary problem, carry on Spam.

    You’re free to be as clueless a jackass as you wish to the difference between justice and revenge.

  44. So when all else fails you revert to personal attacks?

    Really have to love the yanks, predictable to the end.

    Let us hope you get there very soon.

    I don’t believe that I stated that you said that criminal behaviour was an illness, I did. I was making my own point, not criticising yours. I Really have no interest in putting words into anyones mouth and probably wouldn’t have a broad enough vocabulary to fill such a chasm in this case, I simply don’t agree with you.

    I don’t believe my feet would reach my mouth either physically nor by reaon of metaphor, I stated my own opinion, valid or not.

    If you don’t like it, then feel free do what you would normally do

    I think the little beggars should be executed for murdering an innocent old man.

    I don’t believe in excuses or justice which fails the victim in any way.

    Whichever you identify as justice or revenge is fine and dandy by me and I’m sure you’re happy within yourself with whatever you choose to spout, however this is completely immaterial to me as I don’t agree with you.

    Henman – erm yeah whatever, it’s called a typographical error, or if you like, a typo. Not worth invading another oil rich country over is it?

  45. Spamhead,

    “So when all else fails you revert to personal attacks?”

    No. Only when people demonstrate that’s what they either deserve or are capable of understanding. Which in your case would be about the time you reverted to being racist Bible quoting barbarian in reference to citing a Chinese proverb in passing. You lack even the basic understanding of definitions in “your” own language so you instead rely on a theological pinning to justify your blood lust. Thus disproving that you have a vocabulary of any accuracy. Self-serving, certainly, but not accurate in the least. As to you filling any gaps? Start with your own.

    As to predictable? Going to use the Bible as justification for whatever injustice you wish to commit? That’s about as typical an English Colonialist retrograde attitude as it gets. Arrogant to the end. Going to bring some good ol’ English religion and justice to the savages, eh? See, I have both logic and linguistics in my corner and you have nothing but opinion – an opinion that is simple minded revenge. Well that may be how you think your courts should work, but our courts are supposed to work toward justice, not revenge.

    Much like Andrew Jackson proved at the Battle of New Orleans, the English are very often incapable of thinking outside the box. And that’s why you now live in a box – a CCTV prison state – because of your inbred unquestioning genuflection to authority figures instead of, oh, I don’t know, applying critical thought to a problem to dissect the true nature and scope of the issues at hand.

    No wonder your kind never conquered the Irish.

    You feel free to be as wrong as you wish.

    But a fool who expects to be suffered quietly is a fool two times.

  46. Spamheed:–“Not worth invading another oil rich country over is it?” The only country I ever invaded was the Bahamas, and finding no oil there, I left three days later. I think the British invaded it once- everyone drives on the wrong side of the road there. Damn furiners!

  47. Buddha and HenMan,

    I’m laughing on the sidelines ever mindful that Spam’s Head Of State who is also, beyond any doubt, the world’s worst mother-in-law, just might get ticked off at the disrespect being visited upon her dear subject and cross the pond simply to beat both of you over the head with her purse.

    Of course I will rush to your defense.

  48. Such a tirade, one might almost imagine that it is you who should be in the pulpit, banging the ol’ leather to the wood, trying to intimidate and pacify those cowed individuals before you with your unique brand of fiery rhetoric.

    It would appear to Buddha that there are only two opinions allowed here? they would be yours and the incorrect one.

    I drew an ironic comparison between your use of an inappropriate “old chinese saying” to an equally inappropriate biblical one, but methinks despite the massive size of your arrogance and bluster filled “cranial mass”, the irony sailed untroubled over the top of it. I won’t grace your accusations of racism with anything other than the contempt that they and you deserve.

    Your analysis of me whilst quite flattering is as wide of the mark as your psuedo intellectual rambling that English has somehow become “my” language.

    That I am somehow responsible for, or have ownership of the “CCTV prison state” that apparently is Scotland.

    That I have any religion of any kind, or have an involvement in the “bashing” of any religious tome, let alone “good ol’ English religion” (whatever that may be, perhaps you could enlighten me?)

    As for the English thinking outside the box I really wouldn’t know anything about that, as I wasn’t involved in the American Revolution in any capacity. Also and as a reference to your obvious historical inaccuracies, I believe the Scottish were allied to the Irish for long periods throughout history but hey what would I know, you’re the expert on this and could probably explain much better than I about my countries past. (all 14000 years of it)

    We have a word in the North to cover situations such as this, when encountering someone of your ilk and that word is GOBSHITE and you sir are certainly the biggest of this kind I have come across in quite some time

    Also as equally relevant or irrelevant (as the case may be)is the misplaced assumptuion of your fellow yanks that I somehow have my own “head of state” and it reflects badly on me that she has problems with her unelected and parasitical family.

    Henman, I hope you enjoyed the holiday despite the brevity of it

    There is a non religious saying that to ASSUME makes an ASS out of U and ME? it has never been truer than here and now

    and my final word? I’ll quote the great linguistic himself.

    “But a fool who expects to be suffered quietly is a fool two times.” The word you’re searching for in your massive vocabulary is “twice”

    “two times” is far too “George Bush” to be taken seriously these days, even when used by someone with as narrow a mind as yourself

    (I’m being incredibly generous when I give you a C- for your crudely worded attempt, which falls short on so many levels as to appear at first sight insulting, but is clearly nothing more than a big mouth, a simple mind, a dictionary and a thesaurus)

  49. What’s that Spam? I can’t hear you over your condescending Imperialist blather.

    You can find me contemptible all you like. You’ll find my reaction to be a consistently vast amount of indifference. Call me names all you like. They are as water to a duck’s back.

    But as far as racism goes? You act like a racist and I’ll call you one, sport. Belittling the traditional wisdom of a people based on their current government reflects nothing short of a racist mindset that devalues all a culture has to offer because of said culture’s flaws. And you have the balls to accuse others of being closed minded. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

    “It would appear to Buddha that there are only two opinions allowed here? they would be yours and the incorrect one.” No. There are incorrect views expressed here all the time that are deconstructed by others. You failed on logic by operation of basic definitions. When proven wrong, I admit it with far more grace than you’ve exhibited. It’s not my fault I’m rarely proven wrong. Well. I suppose it is in reality, but you’ll just have to struggle with the colloquial usage of the phrase.

    As to historical inaccuracies? That would be you talking out of your ass. Bring some proof or that accusation is, like the rest of argument, pure rubbish. As to the Scottish? Why drag them into this? Unless of course you’re trying to imply that the Irish as Scottish allies are somehow responsible for the English annexing Scotland by mutual agreement in 1707 (although the Scots had been in the Monarchists pockets arguably since 1603) or that the Scots capitulating to the Crown somehow reflects on the unconquered Irish? In which case, you would simply be (in your vernacular) a loon.

    As to assumptions, your assumption that I’m ethically opposed to capital punishment was the first assumption made. It is well established that I am not ethically opposed to capital punishment but rather economically opposed to it. If you want to play the “ass from assume” game, you scored the first point, ol’ Spammy.

    If your false equivalence to Bush was meant to be insulting? I’ve had far worse from far better as insults go. Really. Even the resident troll bdaman gives better insult than that weak attempt . . . and he sucks.

    As to my choice in wording? That’s called a stylistic difference. I don’t speak the Queen’s English. I speak American English . . . unlike George Bush who speaks fluent gibberish. Too bad for you that both forms of English use so many words of common definition as to show you as an angry, revenge obsessed nitwit even when presented with a breakdown of why there are separate terms for the concepts of “revenge” and “justice”. Your pedantic quibbling aside, there is nothing grammatically improper with that construction – other than it was used in a post handing you your ass on a plate for your own definitional and logical inadequacies. I’d say learn the difference between style choices and correct grammar, but since you can’t distinguish between the basic definitions of “revenge” and “justice” I’ll just mark you down as learning impaired when it comes to both languages and raw logic.

    As I said before, be as wrong as you want. I won’t try to censor you. I won’t try to stop you. I enjoy destroying bad logic. That you provided the bad logic in this instance is of no consequence. I’d have challenged the Prof if he’d displayed such a failure to grasp basic definitions. Or mespo. Or Slartibartfast. Or Vince Treacy. Or any other poster. In a free speech zone, no one is immune from challenge.

    Your expectations are twisted. Don’t expect your own special breed of wrong headed and illogical thinking to go unchallenged and free from mockery. If that’s what you expect, you chose the wrong forum. I don’t rule this place. Logic and reason do. If you had some, maybe you’d understand. However, your blood lust has blinded you to the simple truth that revenge and justice are not equivalent words. And now for that pesky dictionary again . . .

    revenge \ri-ˈvenj\, v.t.,

    1: to avenge (as oneself) usually by retaliating in kind or degree

    2: to inflict injury in return for
    ____

    justice \ˈjəs-təs\, n.,

    1a : the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments b : judge c : the administration of law; especially : the establishment or determination of rights according to the rules of law or equity

    2a : the quality of being just, impartial, or fair b (1) : the principle or ideal of just dealing or right action (2) : conformity to this principle or ideal : righteousness c : the quality of conforming to law

    3: conformity to truth, fact, or reason

    ____

    parity \ˈper-ə-tē, ˈpa-rə-\, n.,

    1: the quality or state of being equal or equivalent

    ____

    As is plain to see, parity as it relates to equity and revenge are but components of justice. Like eggs are components of a cake, but not a cake in and of themselves.

    I won’t bother with assigning a letter grade. Your efforts don’t merit that degree of recognition. They do merit a fair amount of mockery though.

    So there it is.

  50. Spamhead:

    is Buddha is Laughing regaling you with definitions? A favorite pastime of his/hers. I think he/she posts them for some sort of personal growth, you know a word a day. Wow 3, he/she must really fear you.

    I bet you are staggering from that Oxford blow.

  51. Sorry, Creepy.

    You’re feelings of inadequacies are showing again.

    Call back when you have something to offer but sniping trollery.

    Because no matter what you say?

    Definitions are key foundations to logic.

    You know. Logic. That thing of which you are bereft.

    Run along.

    This is the fully formed frontal lobe’s end of the pool.

  52. You are unbvelievably dense for someone who publicly claims to be bright.

    The phrase you use so incorrectly should read “as water off a ducks back”

    I never claimed that my opinion carried logic, was founded on logic, nor was logical in any way, So we agree on that point. My opinion is illogical and based on life experiences and observations, I’m happy enough with that one.

    You continue to hurl words like imperialist and racist without any regard for relevance at all, demanding that I bring proof that your claims of my English history are incorrect when they carry no relevance at all and yet somehow your insults over my supposed “Englishness” trumps whatever reply I may give.

    “As to the Scottish? Why drag them into this?”

    You arrogant and insular dolt, the reason I mention Scotland is simple – I am Scottish, the rather large clue is in my name. Funnily enough I have been Scottish all of my life, I was never involved in the American Revolution, Nor the Reformation, nor even the clearances, I don’t own a Kilt, I don’t live in a castle, but Scottish I am.

    Want to fling some more anti English remarks at me? or since you are (mostly) never proven wrong, perhaps you could clarify where and when Scotland or the Scottish as a people ever demonstrated any imperialist tendencies? or am I the only imperialist in Scotland?

    Or perhaps you see some advantage that I’m unaware of in pointing out historical English failings to a Scotsman in the hope of some rise or reaction?

    I really don’t think either that you fully understand the word “loon” Or perhaps you really think of me as a bird?

    I think perhaps you meant to use the word “loony” I would suggest that you look up both in a proper English dictionary rather than the one you’re using tonight.

    “As to assumptions, your assumption that I’m ethically opposed to capital punishment was the first assumption made. ”

    I assumed nor stated nothing of the kind, I could not care less what you belief is or is not. I have never stated either way what your belief is or is not, I stated my own opinion and nothing more, you went off on your own direction accusing this and that making your own wild assumptions of my nationality and then attempting to insult and cause offence through that incorreect assumption and are doing so once again. You have shown yourself up as a fool.

    As it is my equivalence between you and George Bush then it really isn’t your place to be stating that anything about it is true or false.

    I shall be the one to decide whether it is a falsehood or not, and on this point I feel that I am obliged to overrule you and state for the record that the equivalence is a true equivalence and despite your vehement denial you appear more George Bush-like than Bush himself to me.

    You have made an ASS of yourself with your inane and pointless meanderings, postulating behind the longest words in your notebook in the hope that someone somewhere may believe your intelligence matches your spelling. But nothing has changed, you are simply just another GOBSHITE with your misdirected references to English failures on the assumption that I am English and childish demonstrations of a vocabulary.

    Or even that your own opinion is supported by nothing more than dictionary definitions of “Justice” “Parity” and/or “Revenge” copying and pasting the same rubbish repeatedly from the dictionary as if it somehow proves your words hold value when they do not. You believe in one thing and I believe in something else, it really is a simple concept,completely lawful and acceptable in most countries with no need for insults or poor attempts at gaining points or assuming superiority.

    I will not read anything into your failure to grade my work as I have no regard for your acceptance and nor do I hold you in any regard, however I’m afraid your effort didn’t even deserve an F this time, you would have gotten an E if you hadn’t conceded that you just make up your own variances on language to suit yourself – really not good form at all

    I shall waste no further time on one so devoid of sense as to see the stupidity of their own words, or the senselessness of their misdirected insults. but then when you think about it, it’s plain to see they simply haven’t reached the letter “S” in your dictionary yet have they.

    As for “there it is” I doubt very much if you could see “it” looking through the lenses with the caps still on as you do.

  53. “I will not read anything into your failure to grade my work as I have no regard for your acceptance and nor do I hold you in any regard . . .”

    Right back at ya’, Scotty. Except I didn’t conceded anything. I used logic based on standard definitions of words as supplied by Merriam-Webster. As to loon versus loony, I refer you to the earlier discussion about style versus grammar. As to claims that I’m bright? I’ll defer to the judgment of the numbers of arguments lost and the opinions of regulars who – unlike you – have demonstrated intelligence and the ability to apply logic.

    Unlike you who admitted your view is bereft of logic. “I never claimed that my opinion carried logic, was founded on logic, nor was logical in any way, So we agree on that point. My opinion is illogical and based on life experiences and observations, I’m happy enough with that one.” I’m glad you’re happy operating on something other than logic. I also sincerely hope you are not in a position of any kind of authority given your disposition to act based on a belief instead of facts. Facts like basic definitions of terms.

    Get angrier. It’s funny, Spamhead. Especially after you’ve stipulated you’re not standing on a foundation of logic. That’s what children throwing a hissy fit do. “I don’t wanna!” Maybe you should go opine at Nickelodeon if that’s your best strategy.

    “As it is my equivalence between you and George Bush then it really isn’t your place to be stating that anything about it is true or false.” But it is your place, isn’t it? To decide what is right or wrong, true or false, based on no logic and an ignorance of facts like basic definitions?

    My but you have a high opinion of your opinion. Sorry! I’ll defend your right to your opinion, but it’s not sacrosanct fact simply because you believe it.

    And last time I checked, Scotland is still not independent of England, so “nothing has changed, you are simply just another GOBSHITE with your misdirected references to English failures on the assumption that I am English and childish demonstrations of a vocabulary” does indeed demonstrate the importance of vocabulary, English Subject. By the way, the all caps is a nice touch. Call me when Scotland gains independence.

    And might I say you don’t lose like any Scotsman I’ve ever known.

    “You believe in one thing and I believe in something else, it really is a simple concept,completely lawful and acceptable in most countries with no need for insults or poor attempts at gaining points or assuming superiority.”
    This part “You believe in one thing and I believe in something else, it really is a simple concept,completely lawful and acceptable in most countries” is good. The rest is simply you being a piss poor loser.

    As I said multiple times now, you have the right to be wrong, but you don’t have the right to be wrong without challenge. If you don’t like that?

    Too bad.

    Logic is king.

    And you just abdicated, English Subject.

    Now call me an ass again in all caps, Scotty.

    It makes me giggle.

  54. Spamheed:

    marvelous, bloody marvelous.

    But you have wasted your time, he/she is too dense to understand. Logic is “king” with him/her. Knowledge apparently doesn’t count for diddly.

  55. Again with the basic misunderstanding of basic definitions.

    Knowledge is not fact. Knowledge is data without application, which may be based on illogic (as Spam admitted), colored by bias (which Spam tacitly admits) or false data (either in form or in collection).

    Logic is still king, especially in the application of knowledge to practice.

    Run along, ‘lil fish.

  56. Like your opine holds any more water than a sieve, Creep Jeep. Considering you’ve been the very model of illogic. You, like Spam, are free to believe what you like.

    I’ll stick with logic as an operational foundation over belief.

  57. Sorry I’m late to the party. I had to go vote for some Milwaukee Sewer Socialists, Bull Moose Progressives, and a Bolshevik or two. I see the Limey is back masquerading as a Scotsman. It won’t work, Teddy Boy, your accent gives you away. Well, Buddha, we learned one thing from Sir Stifford Crapps today- Professor Moriarty apparently lived long enough to sire a great-great-grandson.

  58. GOBSHITE, you use a very coarse filter on your search for logic, picking up only the snippets you understand? I shall use a finer one and pick up all the pieces you decided to leave out.

    You concede that your logic comes from Merriam-Webster, then so shall I

    I used logic based on standard definitions of words as supplied by Merriam-Webster.”

    does your opinion also come from the same book?

    Loon

    :any of several large birds (genus Gavia of the family Gaviidae) of Holarctic regions that feed on fish by diving and have their legs placed far back under the body for optimal locomotion underwater

    You seem a little confused over the meaning of the words “loon” and “loonie” and then put it down to “style versus grammar”

    Does that mean if you can’t find a word to suit your purpose you deliberately use the wrong one in the hope that everyone thinks the same way as you? or are you saying that you think I’m a bird?

    You repeat the word logic like some kind of mantra, yet when it comes to it your logic is as useless as your dictionary

    since when has building an argument on logic been a matter of compulsion, I agree with the death penalty and you do not.

    Arguments with yourself or one of your alter egos don’t count GOBSHITE

    Were all of the death penalties throughout the good o’l U.S of A carried out in the name of logic? or is everyone else wrong and only you are right?.

    As you seem to have a huge pedantic streak if you check your Merriam Webster you will find

    Eng-lish

    : of, relating to, or characteristic of England, the English people, or the English language

    then in with the rest of the letter “S” you will find this:

    Scot-tish

    : of, relating to, or characteristic of Scotland, Scots, or the Scots

    You state that England and Scotland are the same thing yet your own reference of choice states that you wre wrong, perhaps you can clarify is the book wrong, or are you wrong?

    While you’re looking in your other books please tell me neither your history book nor your atlas are so wrong as to demonstrate this skewed opinion regarding England and Scotland were true, if this is the case I really do suggest that you get a more up to date library.

    Or are you somehow able and capable of waving away 14000 years of Scottish history to suit your own peculiar brand of “logic”

    You make direct reference to “English” and the period of the American Revolution, strictly in the name of logic you’ll understand, please clarify where the Scottish army fought in circus that was Charlestown.

    Yes I do have a high opinion of my opinion, because it wasn’t plucked from a book and I feel eminently qualified to measure my own words

    You mention that I am an “English Subject” see the above dictionary definitions taken from Merriam Webster

    Whilst you may hide behind your words and indeed you might even have a point with your phrase “logic is king” on this occasion your own logic is warped and entirely incorrect

    While you are nose deep in the letter “S” trying to unserstand all of these new words, flip back and look up the word “devolution” then check out the current political status in Scotland.

    You spout rubbish, total repeated dross and hurl insults then hide behind your multiple personlaities like a child throwing conkers at people trying to hide behind as many syllables as possible, I was even going to use the old joke about Suilly bulls, but you really wouldn’ty get it, it’s completely illogical and written in real English

    Henman: born in Edinburgh quite some time ago, as for my “accent” i think you refer to my writing style or lack thereof – it’s called an education, you should try one sometime.

    So we have a newly established fact do we? is it the case that anyone who shows you up as the fraud you are has to be a troll?

    LOL I love the multiple personalities on here, it’s just a shame the IP addresses don’t add up to the arguments.

  59. Go get em limey or mebbe dat shud be scotchie

    deres way too many blowhards here

    Buddha yo a funnee man

    yo done talkin trash all da time at others like yo a big shot an den fallin at the first fence. yo really don like it when dey beats yo at yo own kiddie gamez do yo

  60. The mo yo take da time to read dis stuff da more off centre it gits

    sumone sez 2+2 iz 4
    Bud sez 2+2 iz 5
    sumeone else sez ur wrong its 4
    Bud sez 2+2 iz 5 and you smell funny
    sumeone else sez ur wrong its 4 and ur rude
    Bud sez 2+2 iz 5 u smell funny an ur moms real fat yo sister is a crack ho and yo dad never passd 4th grade

    real hi brau stuff

  61. “You concede that your logic comes from Merriam-Webster, then so shall I”

    No, Spamhead.

    I concede my DEFINITIONS come from Merriam-Webster.

    The logic I supplied myself.

    Learn to read.

    As to your logic? You already admitted you weren’t using any.

    You can’t win a gun fight if you show up with a dull stick.

    The rest of what you say is self-rationalizing gibberish.

    The only fraud I see is you trying to dig yourself out of the nice hole you put yourself in instead of just learning when to walk away from an argument you cannot win. I know several Scotsmen and, seriously, you’re giving them a bad name by being such a sore loser.

    But learning isn’t your strong suit. Is it? (rhetorical)

    As to multiple personalities? Sorry. Just the one. If you don’t like it, that would be your problem.

    As to you being a subject of the Empire, when Scotland starts issuing their own passports, you get back to me. If you wish to quibble over the use of the term English instead of British? Then you’re just way too stupid to realize when I’m pushing your buttons, ‘lil angry dancing monkey.

    So please do keep seeking revenge upon me for making you look stupider than you make yourself look.

    See how far that “eye for an eye” mentality gets you.

    Get angrier.

    The madder you get?

    The crazier you look.

    Right now you look crazy enough to be someone who doesn’t understand the difference between “revenge” and “justice”.

    And that’s pretty crazy.

    Now dance for our entertainment some more, ‘lil monkey.

  62. ROFL man jus like I sez it wuz

    real hi brau

    sumeone else sez ur wrong its 4
    Bud sez 2+2 iz 5 u smell funny an ur moms real fat yo sister is a crack ho and yo dad never passd 4th grade

    Spam if bud sez ur an english man den dats da way it iz

    u get ur learnin and smart mouth frm a book bud that int no sin but yo lost bud now take it like a man all dat twistin and turnin int gonna make it any diffrent.

  63. real class act you are bud real class

    yo call da man English when he int you call da man racist when he int yo tell him yo use a book den u say u dont yo call da man names den call him for callin yo back. yo bin provin wrong ova an ova by da man now liv wiv it

    yo lost bud

  64. Sorry.

    I don’t directly respond to blatantly illiterate ramblings.

    However, the quality of one’s thought processes is reflected by the quality of the minds it attracts.

    Attracting such low quality bereft of logical content and gibbering support is a real selling point for your cause of revenge as a paramount principle, Scotty.

    But at least we know the answer to one mystery. What George Bush is doing with his retirement: playing golf and trolling.

  65. AY,

    Anything worth doing is worth overdoing. :D

    I never (well, rarely) cease to find amusement in the self-immolation of trolls and/or the illogical.

  66. Buudha,

    That can’t be….him play golf…..is like…well…..uh…staring at the 19th hole and finishing at the 19th hole….

    Do you really think he knows how to turn a computer on or even use one after all they do have mice…..

  67. Dats cool

    I don speak gud englis and type it wurs but i don bad mouth no1 and don call no1 who don agree with me

    u call anothe man a racist den call me illiterate coz i don type well ok u a better man coz u have wurds r u

    u scratchin in da durt man spam wiped u out an u no it

  68. u laffin coz u better dan me he
    I read dis site a lot and am sad for the man who got killd i wud kill da kids hoo hurt my pops so am i racist and fool also for wantin to kill sumone who kill my pops

    den u a fool wid big words an a bad mouth

  69. Spamheed seems perfectly rational to me.

    Pushing buttons? It’s always easier to say you did something after the fact, how would anyone know otherwise.

  70. lol

    That’s some interesting moves you got there: you can’t beat the logic so you attack me instead.

    And by “interesting”, I mean “weak and pathetic”.

  71. But please! Keep drawing attention to your multiple failures in logic as if they were somehow a victory.

    It’s like three chihuahuas trying to dogpile a gorilla.

    Funnier than Hell.

  72. A gorilla? maybe in your own mind. Why is it that people think they can sing on American Idol when in reality they cant? And they are devasted when Simon says they cannot.

    Someone told you you could sing and apparently you have believed them to your own detriment.

  73. Justice cannot be had without equity. An “eye for an eye” is not equity, but parity. Parity is required to sate the very human need for revenge. Equity can meet the needs of parity but parity alone creates inequity in the form of additional burdens passed on to society to pay.

    Which is more just:

    A) An eye for an eye, which leave two blind people that will require some form of social assistance and/or accommodation?

    B) A suitable punishment that maximizes the inconvenience to the perpetrator by passing the maximum costs to them directly without creating an additional burden on society such as prison time and/or economic damages paid as restitution that leaves the perpetrator physically whole but chained to their bad act socially and economically, possibly in perpetuity?

    If your goal is simple revenge, the answer is A.
    If your goal is justice, the answer is B.
    _____

    I’ll keep repeating it because it’s true and logically consistent with the basic terms of the argument.

    You can be for revenge all you like. It shows simply how intellectually and philosophically stunted your development is as a human being. Seneca the Younger said, “Revenge is an inhuman word.” However, it was probably Roman poet Decimus Junius Juvenal who summed it up best: “Revenge is always the weak pleasure of a little and narrow mind.”

    Why would these ancients think revenge is petty and hurtful to those who indulge in it? Perhaps a modern example is in order. The African state of Rwanda comes to mind. Revenge motivated the Hutu and the Tutsi into a civil war and the genocide of 1994 that resulted in the murder of 800,000 to 1,000,000 people (roughly 20% of their population). All because of a tit for tat revenge motive based on past abuses by both sides. “He that studieth revenge keepeth his own wounds green, which otherwise would heal and do well.” – John Milton. Seeking revenge is like tearing at a scab. It doesn’t promote healing or healthy regrowth. Revenge didn’t bring justice to Rwanda. It brought death and misery on a massive scale to many people who wanted nothing more than to live their lives unmolested let alone murdered over an old grievance.

    Marcus Aurelius, widely regarded as the wisest and best of the Roman emperors thought “The best revenge is to be unlike him who performed the injury.” Words later echoed by Sir Francis Bacon when he said, “In taking revenge, a man is but even with his enemy; but in passing it over, he is superior.” Revenge is an inferior motive that produces an inferior product.

    Justice is not revenge. That’s why our Founding Fathers made the courts to seek out Lady Justice, not Lady Revenge. In speaking of crimes against the nation, Thomas Jefferson said, “Such is the moral construction of the world that no national crime passes unpunished in the long run… Were present oppressors to reflect on the same truth, they would spare to their own countries the penalties on their present wrongs which will be inflicted on them in future times. The seeds of hatred and revenge which they sow with a large hand will not fail to produce their fruits in time. Like their brother robbers on the highway, they suppose the escape of the moment a final escape and deem infamy and future risk countervailed by present gain.

    Justice is not revenge. Justice is superior to revenge, both personally and for society.

    If a man’s positions are like unto himself and thus known by the company he keeps? I am quite happy with the company of my arguments in favor of that position.

    Your arguments and support are more like The Three Stooges.

    Too dumb to realize the joke is on you.

  74. Buddha,

    Your dedication to the ongoing education of trolls is admirable. Who knows what small gem he/she might pick up and actually think about …

  75. Blouise,

    In martial arts training, the sensei needs an uke to demonstrate to the class the lesson they seek to teach. To teach the uke is good, but to teach the whole class is better.

    One lives to be of service.

  76. Once again you copy and paste the same diatrobe in the hope that it will magically transform itself into something relevant, however you have a real habit of picking three legged horses for examples when looking to enhance your standing as a clever clogs.

    Seneca the Younger committed suicide rather than face trail for his part in the planned assassination of Nero in the Pisonian Conspiricy circa AD 65 – look it up in a real history book instead of just trawling the clever quotation websites. You hold up the words of a wannabe murderer in support of your justice over revenge standpoint. more foolishness from the king of fools himself

    Empty quotations lifted from a website demonstrate nothing other than you know how to copy and paste

    You are also somehow able to inform your audience of the actual thoughts of a Roman Emperor who died almost 2000 years ago, were you there? did he tell you this himself? or are you just copy/pasting from yet another website?

    Yet another comically stretched argument that you have bounced from articles on ancient Roman history to tales of Rwandan refugees and mass slaughter. all as pertinent as each other when talking about the murder of an 81 year old gentleman in Virginia, that’s to say not at all.

    Since we’re in the mood for quotations, In the words of the great Alison Krauss – “You say it best, when you say nothing at all”

  77. You say that about Seneca like it was a bad thing he wanted the tyrant Nero dead and chose to go out on his own terms instead. If suicide is your criteria, look to Nero’s own egoistic suicide (“What an artist dies in me!”) to contrast with Seneca’s principled death of a hero who stood against him.

    As to the rest of your blather, your inability to learn is irrelevant. Empty is in the head of the reader. As to “quote sites”, the only one I had to look up was Jefferson’s and that’s because I wanted to make sure I got it right.

    So you can counter my citations of learned peoples past in support of my position with a quote from a contemporary musician that’s the equivalent of telling me to shut up.

    Good luck with that, Scotty.

  78. Spamheed:

    good show. the blighter is too ignorant to understand. A regular cut and paster of pomposity, if there were no Internet he would be incapable of thought.

  79. So revenge is now acceptable in one context but not in another?

    according to your previous reponse murdering someone can be regarded as something other than “a bad thing” so it’s justice when their death is justified but revenge when it isn’t?

    And there lies dead at your feet your entire argument.

    I think the only point to clear up on this one is who would get to decide which deaths are justified and which ones are not

    That’s as hypocritical a response as I’d have expected and at least as hypocritical as the words of Seneca, but to be honest no less than I’d expect from you

  80. I would never try to repaint history, Im not that egotistical. nero was an all round sour chap and probably deserved what he got, but then I am in favour of the death penalty.

    Justice for all, except where it suits seems to be the cry!!

  81. There is a huge distinction between desiring the death an 81 year old man minding his own business and a brutal evil tyrant like Nero.

    As to your assertion that my argument is somehow destroyed only underscores your inability to differentiate revenge as justice from revenge as a component of justice. I’ve said all along revenge is a component of justice. It’s just not justice in and of itself.

    To kill a tyrant is no injustice. Unless of course you think wanting to kill a Hitler or a Stalin a bad thing for the common good.

    You wish to kill common murderers solely for revenge, which has been demonstrated is not justice proper. It’s simple revenge. A simple motive from simple minds. Call for their deaths all you wish, but don’t call it a cry for justice. Call it what it is – revenge.

    Because that’s the whole thrust of the argument. Revenge is not the equivalent of justice. Our courts are designed to seek justice, not its component simple revenge.

  82. jeepy creepy
    1, September 15, 2010 at 10:24 am
    Spamheed:

    good show. the blighter is too ignorant to understand. A regular cut and paster of pomposity, if there were no Internet he would be incapable of thought.

    ============================================================

    self-admiration leads to ego masturbation … feels good but lacks natural lubrication …

  83. Come on.

    Flail about some more.

    Rationalize your personal desire for revenge over a desire for justice.

    It only helps my position.

  84. Blouise,

    Buddha,

    “Your dedication to the ongoing education of trolls is admirable. Who knows what small gem he/she might pick up and actually think about …”

    *****

    Do you mean to tell me trolls can think? Who knew?

  85. At this point you should realize you are only proving my point. Your desires for revenge at being logically bested have made you lash out against the box I have you in. Revenge is making you act in a way harmful to your position.

    But please. Continue to try to create a false equivalence between revenge and justice. It’s still a false equivalence, which is both a logical fallacy and an outright lie by definition of the terms “revenge” and “justice”.

  86. Spoken like a true pedant

    So now it’s no longer a case of simple Justice vs Simple Revenge as it was earlier, as you have now had your ass handed to you on that one you now attempt to introduce a whole new concept of revenge as justice and revenge as a component of justice

    Whether the victim of revenge is a king or a pauper is irrelavent, you lambasted someone on the basis that revenge is wrong period and justice is right. period simply because you choose an opposite opinion. period

    You have now been shown up as a hypocrite, and have conceded entirely that revenge is not always wrong and that it can be justified you are also an extremely bad loser and I bet the kids won’t even play Monopoly with you, you’d be haggling over every single throw of the dice

    “I’ve said all along revenge is a component of justice.”

    Where did you say this? please show me

    certainly not on this thread

  87. “Justice cannot be solely for the purposes of revenge otherwise the cost of justice becomes burdensome to society. Parity is revenge, not justice, and while a component of justice, it no more makes a cake by itself than do eggs alone.”

    Your failure to grasp the obvious analogy is your failure.

  88. I said it more than once I might add.

    Once again proving that you can repeat a lesson and a dullard still misses the point.

    It’s that whole “water/horse” conundrum.

  89. The only ass on a plate is yours, by the way. And I never said justice was simple. It is, in fact, quite complicated.

  90. Since you are too ignorant and arrogant to concede the point like a gentleman even when comprehensively bested then I shall gratefully withdraw from your childish bickering.

  91. Honest discussions – even and perhaps especially on topics about which we disagree – can help us resist hypocrisy and arrogance. They can also help us live up to the basic ideals, such as liberty and justice for all, on which our country was founded.

    David E. Price

  92. That’s good too, Scotty Rove. The failure to concede to logic and argument from ignorance here is entirely yours – right from your failure to understand the basic definitions of revenge and justice. Argument from ignorance is a logical fallacy you’ve demonstrated in abundance, but you go right on and try to attribute that failing to me if makes your bruised ego feel better. My arguments stand unharmed.

    That just makes me laugh harder at your simplistic “reasoning”, such as it is.

    But run along you should.

    The harder you fight, the worse you will continue lose. Your argument has a foundation made of sand. When I’m bested? I’ll concede. Not before.

    You didn’t earn that prize, so you won’t get it even if you try to award it to yourself.

    As to arrogance? Your opine of my person might mean something if you had logic to back up your confessed illogical argument. As it is, call me what you like. I always consider the source when it comes to criticism. That I am arrogant is your opinion – that of a demonstrated sore loser. Your opinions, like your “reasoning”, are based in illogic.

    I will, however, accept your retreat as tacit admission you cannot defeat the logic of my position.

  93. ROFL

    Your position is clear for everyone to see, beaten and bested yet too stupid to see or admit it.

    and you really believe the rubbish you come out with

  94. I’ll let the argument speak for itself rather than declare myself victor.

    You clowns can crow about your “victory” all you like though.

    It’s funny.

  95. “Justice cannot be solely for the purposes of revenge otherwise the cost of justice becomes burdensome to society. Parity is revenge, not justice, and while a component of justice, it no more makes a cake by itself than do eggs alone.”

    This is most excellent Buddha, most excellent! Author you?

  96. “Buddha’s creativity grows and is sustained by worm vitamins”

    so you are implying he is a worm?

    and you corrected my spelling?

    wouldn’t it have been more appropriate to say:

    he uses worms as vitamins to grow and sustain his creativity.

  97. Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t buddha is laughing say that revenge is wrong and then also contradict himself by saying that it’s okay to kill someone as long its justified

    I’m sure he did

    you say that about Seneca like it was a bad thing he wanted the tyrant Nero dead

    and then again:

    to kill a tyrant is no injustice.

    see, he did say that I told you he did

    but didn’t he also say that revenge was a bad thing and that justice was the best thing and then I sort of fell asleep because he droned on and on saying the same thing over and over

    yes he did also say that several times copying and pasting the following passage repeatedly

    Justice cannot be had without equity. An “eye for an eye” is not equity, but parity. Parity is required to sate the very human need for revenge. Equity can meet the needs of parity but parity alone creates inequity in the form of additional burdens passed on to society to pay.

    well I never did – see he said that also I told you he did.

    Hmmmm, I’m confused aren’t these two passages both posted by buddha is laughing sort of contradicting each other.

    im sure they are and isnt a person who rides both sides of an argument just a little bit hypicritical

    I’m sure its not buddha is laughing is really clever he told me so, lets ask buddha is laughing coz he has all of the best books and he can look it up for us

    *snicker*

  98. buddha is laughing

    I found a great quote

    Whatever words we utter should be chosen with care for people will hear them and be influenced by them for good or ill.

    funnily enough this one was written by someone called Buddha as well although I think he was an awful lot cleverer than you and probably has more friends than you as well.

    I bet he’s even better at playing solitaire on his PC than you as well and doesn’t use the undo button at all

  99. Buddha’s creativity grows and is sustained by worm vitamins

    he eats worms?????? eurghhh I stopped doing that in 12th grade

  100. Call me a hypocrite all you like. There is nothing contradictory or hypocritical about the stance that revenge is a component of justice but not justice itself. You and Scotty advocate revenge over justice or revenge as justice either explicitly or implicitly. You do so based on “knowledge”, code for opinion not based in logic or fact.

    I proved you wrong by proving the logic that a simple concept like revenge is not the equivalent of a complex concept like justice. You have you not disproved that simple revenge leads to social burdens that justice operates to avoid. I know it’s complicated that something like justice won’t always slake your thirst for blood, but simple thoughts for and from simple minds I suppose.

    But on the plus side, it’s good you can laugh at your own ineptness in argument.

    Please continue to flail about uselessly. You lost this argument from the premise that revenge is justice.

  101. I dont think so – the argument was won by your ready acceptance and approval of a murder as a direct act of vengeance, after happily laying into someone who argued the very same point.

    There is everything hypocritical in your saying that there is no place in any society for killing a person as an act of revenge, then in the next moment you do a complete 180 and condone a murder brought about by an act of revenge because you alone feel it was justified.

    that is deeply hypocritical using any measure you care to use.

    I personally have no thirst for blood, no desire for justice nor revenge, no deficit of emotional, social, nor material needs, nor do I yearn for power nor the appearance thereof. I’m quite happy with myself and my position in this world and feel no need to belittle others or inflate myself at the expense of others in order to compensate for my own shortcomings, but if you feel like laughing about something, feel free to let it out

    as a certain David Hume was kind enough to write

    When men are most sure and arrogant they are commonly most mistaken, giving views to passion without that proper deliberation which alone can secure them from the grossest absurdities.

    I reckon that one is most fitting

    To coin a phrase

    good luck with that

  102. ps

    love the racist use of the word “Scotty” to dig at Spamheeds nationality, really increasing your stock with that one.

  103. There’s a problem with that.

    Seneca was acting as a citizen rebelling against a tyrant, not for the state to kill teenagers in revenge for killing an old man.

    Weasel all you want.

    Revenge is not justice.

  104. But please, regale us with tales of how citizens put upon by a murderous brutal tyrant who killed thousands is the equivalent of teenagers killing under the mistaken impression it would get them laid and encouraging the state to kill them as some form of justice when it’s simple revenge based on sympathy for the victim.

  105. Would you want them to get the death penalty if they had killed another teen?

    A woman?

    A dog?

    A middle-aged man?

    Where in your dichotomy of an eye for eye is justice met instead of simple revenge?

    Remember – revenge is a component of justice, not justice proper.

  106. Quite simple, it isn’t.

    Revenge is revenge. Justice is justice. Sometimes justice calls for revenge, sometimes it doesn’t. Is it parity to take the life of a teenager to compensate for the life of an old man? No. It’s blood lust. Justice would entail a long prison sentence followed by a long term payment of damages to the family upon release. Because killing to payback killing in this instance is a disproportionate burden on society given the costs of capital cases from sentence to execution.

  107. You have proven nothing other than revenge is a component of justice, which is stipulated by the terms of my argument. You are making my point for me, not countering me.

    So please.

    Regale us with your tenuous analogy to Seneca some more.

  108. You are clearly not in the majority of thought in re the efficacy of the death penalty as far as Virginians go. Most Virginia death penalty expansion bills are rejected.

    So tell us how justice is served by spending millions on killing two teens instead of spending far less incarcerating them for a very long time – which not only takes their lives away, but effectively ruins what will be left when and if they are ever freed?

    How is anything but costly blood lust serviced by the death penalty here to satisfy your crude sense of revenge as justice?

    Again, revenge is a component of justice, but it is no more justice proper than eggs are a cake.

  109. Which is more just? Killing two teens for murdering an old man? Or making them pay for it by living miserable lives?

    The dead feel nothing. A dead person is dead. Inert.

    A live person suffers.

    You want revenge?

    Which is the greater revenge?

    Death is a release. A costly burden upon society. But prison and restitution? The costs are deferred to the criminal in part and substantially lower on the parts that must be shouldered by society. The suffering last their entire lives.

    You want to talk fair? You want to talk parity? They don’t lose their lives. They lose something far worse: the quality of their lives.

    But please, tell us how justice is served by your simple minded myopic misunderstanding of murder as revenge for murder as being justice proper.

  110. Buddha,

    I say this and I hope you know I am joking, but a simple bullet is cheaper in the long run for pedophiles…..economically speaking as the victims sometimes never get over it and these pervs usually get paroled….

  111. AY,

    I know you are joking and appreciate the necessity of the capital appeals process.

    As you must surely know I agree with you in theory. If there is a Hell? There’s a special room for child molesters.

  112. Buddha,

    Unfortunately these pervs may only get some time….the victims get the rest of their lives….unless the perv kills someone they rarely get the capitol offense such as death…not that I am advocating that they kill anyone…I am just sayin’ that in some offenses a trip and fall with a gun seems appropriate or ….something…..

  113. I am sure that this has happened exactly the way that you just described…..just make sure that when they fall or should I say found that they have powder residue on there fingers, palm and clothing….like they were actually holding the gun…..just sayin’ otherwise, somebody might just test the palm for residue….I am only kiddin….

  114. Come on.

    Enlighten us. We’re still waiting.

    The ball is in your court.

    Oh, that’s right.

    You have no arguments of substance or you’d bring them.

    Just a desire for revenge instead of justice.

    So attack me instead.

    Which I’ve already said is fine with me.

    It makes me giggle.

  115. the derivative of justice is not parity, parity plays no part in justice. Parity can never be achieved in most cases having to do with the law. Man may think he has achieved parity but it is not the opinion of the court that matters when speaking of parity, it is the opinion of the victim that matters. Much like in a trade, are all parties satisfied and are all accounts at least equal in the minds of the parties involved?

    If they are not there is no parity and the concept of judicial parity is ridiculous because it is being foist upon the victim without their approval in most cases. Parity is not justice, it is the law of the jungle applied to men. Who determines the equivalency? A judge, a jury a committee? Where does the victim enter into that equation?

    It is a ridiculous concept and disregards the rights of the victim(s). How will that family have parity? You diminish the old man and seem willing to say a young life is worth more, is it? The only mind to which some life is more worthy than others is the same sort of mind that concocted the concept of “life worthy of life”.

    I suppose euthanasia for the elderly and infirm is on your agenda as well.

  116. A) An eye for an eye, which leave two blind people that will require some form of social assistance and/or accommodation?

    B) A suitable punishment that maximizes the inconvenience to the perpetrator by passing the maximum costs to them directly without creating an additional burden on society such as prison time and/or economic damages paid as restitution that leaves the perpetrator physically whole but chained to their bad act socially and economically, possibly in perpetuity?

    If your goal is simple revenge, the answer is A.
    If your goal is justice, the answer is B.

    The raw truth of the assertion still stands.

    Spamhead admitted his choice was A and his motive was irrational.

    Attempts at falsely equating this situation to Seneca’s is ridiculous on its face.

    As to Creep Jeep? Your assertion that parity is not part of justice is also ridiculous. Part of the goal of justice is equity. Equity requires that you seek a solution that is as close to parity as possible without creating an undue burden on society. You are partially right though, JC. Raw parity, as opposed to balanced parity which is what justice seeks, is an eye for an eye and that is the law of the jungle. But that is exactly what seeking a death for a death without reason is: raw parity. The victim enters into the equation by having a representative to plead their case to an impartial adjudicator – because justice isn’t just want the injured wants. Their judgment is impaired by the very nature that they are the injured party. That’s why judges rule in cases before the bar, not the plaintiff and not the defendant. Justice is what society can bear in attempting to make the injured whole again. That is how parity fits with the concept of justice.

    As to Creepy Jeep’s assertion about euthanasia? Patently ridiculous. But the remaining value of to society of a 90 year old is a much smaller portion than that of a 16 year old. The older man has contributed and done most of what he was going to do and capable of doing. That doesn’t mean he should simply be done away with as a matter of policy. Now if you were to posit that I’m for assisted suicide in quality of life situations? Then you’d be on the mark. But if you think I’m for euthanasia, you’ve also failed as a psychic, Jeep.

    Your last post, however, does come dangerously close to recognizing what’s wrong with substituting raw parity for justice proper. You’re so close to understanding the distinction, you can probably taste it.

  117. It has nothing to do with not having an argument, it has more to do with dozing off in front of the TV and then popping up to bed, knowing I have left this alleged super being dangling.

    Hypocrite

    *Snicker*

    because it does feel good

  118. Once again you simply restate your original paragraph to a completely different disection.

    I have noticed a few things about this thread.

    Spamheed made a comment about letting the family have a hand in the youths punishment, you flame him/her with solely your assertation that parity and revenge are no substitute for justice. I don’t particularly agree with spamheeds opinion, there are too many hints at sharia for me but I certainly disagree with yours.

    You continue to flame and lambast him/her on your understanding that your opinion is so much better than his/hers

    Your opinion is then extended to include that your country is so much better than his/hers and that somehow he/her is responsibkle for all of the failings of his/her states monarch/justice system and history – specifically the battle of Charlestown in the WOI even to the point that you are misdirecting your racist slurs

    Your opinion is then stretched that you are far more intelligent than him/her and that you are (mostly) never proven wrong. even though you revert to more racist slurs in your attempt to gain some unidentified “upper hand”

    I fail to see any aspect of your opinion which is valid. the point at which you reverse your opinion on the argument is clear to see and has been highlighted, yet still you refuse to accept that you have changed tack.

    I would suggest that rather than as you state you are (mostly) never being proven wrong – your epitaph should read that you (mostly) never accept when you were wrong.

    I note others seem to believe that you are somehow linked to an educational establishment in some capacity, however I would strongly disagree with their suggestions that you are somehow linked to any administrative or teaching position.

    Your actions appear to be more appropriate to the schoolchild who just learning of the existence of dictionaries suddenly begins to use new and bigger words at every opportunity in an attempt to demonstrate a vast intelligence and huge vocabluary just like those people on TV.

    Move on a year or two and there you are.

    Good Luck with that

    *snicker*

    Yo sure is a funnee mann bud

  119. Since your opinion is based on the Definition of words found here, this is the definition of JUSTICE as found in Buddhas favourite book Merriam-Webster

    1a : the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments
    b : judge
    c : the administration of law; especially : the establishment or determination of rights according to the rules of law or equity

    2a : the quality of being just, impartial, or fair
    b (1) : the principle or ideal of just dealing or right action
    (2) : conformity to this principle or ideal : righteousness
    c : the quality of conforming to law

    3: conformity to truth, fact, or reason : correctness

    No mention of parity or equality there I’m afraid

    The purpose of justice is to deal with the peoples in accordance with the laws of the land.

  120. So anyhoo, being a fair minded and I believe a fairly well balanced individual and open to new ideas and since I was unable to find the use of Parity or equity in an actual real definition of the word Justice I would take a logical approach and look a little farther afield:

    The Online Duhaim Legal Dictionary states:

    Justice: A state of affairs in which conduct or action is both fair and right, given the circumstances.

    it then elaborates a little:

    In law, it more specifically refers to the paramount obligation to ensure that all persons are treated fairly.

    Litigants “seek justice” by asking for compensation for wrongs committed against them; to right the inequity such that, with the compensation, a wrong has been righted and the balance of “good” or “virtue” over “wrong” or “evil” has been corrected.

    No mention of the words parity nor equity, but that might be because its not a very good site.

    so next I tried John Bouvier’s Law Dictionary

    and it states

    JUSTICE. The constant and perpetual disposition to render every man his due. Just. Inst. B. 1, tit. 1. Toullier defines it to be the conformity of our actions and our will to the law. Dr. Civ. Fr. tit. prel. n. 5. In the most extensive sense of the word, it differs little from virtue, for it includes within itself the whole circle of virtues. Yet the common distinction between them is that that which considered positively and in itself, is called virtue, when considered relatively and with respect to others, has the name of justice. But justice being in itself a part of virtue, is confined to things simply good or evil, and consists in a man’s taking such a proportion of them as he ought.

    Now it does make reference to virtue and the parts thereof, so I thought to myself, maybe Buddha believes that equity is a part of virtue and therefore by association also a part of Justice????

    so I looked it up in Buddhas favourite, the one on whose definitions he builds his opinions, the ne and only Merriam Webster

    and guess what…..Not to be found anywhere is a use of the word equity in respect of a definition of the word Justice

    so my search continued far and wide and I looked in:

    The latin legal terms dictionary
    law dictionary look up
    Law.com dictionary
    Lectric Laws legal dictionary
    Legal Dictionary by the free dictionary
    Blacks Law Dictionary

    So it seems to appear and based on the evidence available that Justice is by common definition

    The administration of the laws of the land

    Unless you have those special Janet and John Law books books that Buddha appears to possess.

    Can I just check…..that particular bit about equity wasn’t just written in biro in the margin was it?

    *Snicker*

    Eggs and cakes buddha, eggs and cakes

  121. hey “Pud”:

    Looks like Bakersfield has your number. And oh by the way I should have written “life unworthy of life”.

    Man, Bakersfield tore you a brand new big red one. “Snicker”

    Now go slink away Bud and lick your wounds or tell him how he is wrong and you are right. Mr. I am the light of logic, maybe in your own mind.

  122. Bakerfield,

    You’re pretty good at making assumptions and not knowing the definitions of terms.

    “You continue to flame and lambast him/her on your understanding that your opinion is so much better than his/hers”

    “Your opinion is then extended to include that your country is so much better than his/hers and that somehow he/her is responsibkle for all of the failings of his/her states monarch/justice system and history – specifically the battle of Charlestown in the WOI even to the point that you are misdirecting your racist slurs”

    Did I say America is better than Scotland? No. I said our courts strive for justice. If you want to know my opinion? America sucks. And it has since about 1980. And the sucking noise keeps getting louder over time as the fascists erode the parts of the law that did make this country special before you could buy a Congressman wholesale with corporate cash. The way our government has behaved since the time of Reagan? On an ethical level, I wonder why we have any allies at all. All of our politicians (with a very few exceptions) now have the ethics of a street whore screwing and stealing her way to her next crack/corporate campaign contribution fix.

    But the fact is I don’t discredit the English or the Scottish cultures. Much of our legal systems (and other countries formerly colonies) are based on the parts of English jurisprudence that actually work. I despise the current government of the U.K., true, but the people of the Isle did a lot of good during their colonial period – bring formalized education, spread the idea of Parliamentary systems, built roads and infrastructure. They also did a lot of damage too. No one needs to look further than Africa to see the damage colonialism can do. True, the English weren’t the only colonial power to screw up Africa, but they were most certainly in the game.

    This however has nothing to do with calling Spamhead “Scotty” nor is that racist. The Scottish aren’t a race. They are a nationality. Since I’ve already stipulated I think my own nation sucks, I’ll complete the picture for you, dimwit – it is my opinion that all nations suck. They are an artificial construct used to divide and control the one true race: the human race. If aliens ever do arrive here, explaining that we as a species still rely on nationalism is going to be as embarrassing as explaining to your partner you have a venereal disease. Because they didn’t become a sophisticated space-faring species by warring over borders and fighting over flags. They would have done so in spite of it if at all.

    “Your opinion is then stretched that you are far more intelligent than him/her and that you are (mostly) never proven wrong.”

    I said “rarely”, not “never”. But you can’t do it as you’re about to see.

    “even though you revert to more racist slurs in your attempt to gain some unidentified ‘upper hand'” – point addressed and dismissed.

    “I fail to see any aspect of your opinion which is valid.”

    Thanks for pointing out that you don’t understand.

    “the point at which you reverse your opinion on the argument is clear to see and has been highlighted, yet still you refuse to accept that you have changed tack.”

    No. I never reversed my stance. I maintained all along that revenge was a component of justice. I’ve pointed that out already and I’ll do so again.

    “Buddha Is Laughing 1, September 13, 2010 at 4:24 pm

    “Justice cannot be solely for the purposes of revenge otherwise the cost of justice becomes burdensome to society. Parity is revenge, not justice, and while a component of justice, it no more makes a cake by itself than do eggs alone.”

    Got that? Or is argument by analogy too sophisticated a tool for your brain to utilize?

    “I would suggest that rather than as you state you are (mostly) never being proven wrong – your epitaph should read that you (mostly) never accept when you were wrong.”

    And I would suggest you are projecting in the classical psychological sense, Mr. Too Dense To Learn When to Walk Away.

    “I note others seem to believe that you are somehow linked to an educational establishment in some capacity, however I would strongly disagree with their suggestions that you are somehow linked to any administrative or teaching position.”

    Supposition and assumption. Incorrect supposition and assumption, but supposition and assumption nonetheless.

    “Your actions appear to be more appropriate to the schoolchild who just learning of the existence of dictionaries suddenly begins to use new and bigger words at every opportunity in an attempt to demonstrate a vast intelligence and huge vocabluary just like those people on TV.”

    That’s just plain funny.

    “Since your opinion is based on the Definition of words found here, this is the definition of JUSTICE as found in Buddhas favourite book Merriam-Webster

    1a : the maintenance or administration of what is just especially by the impartial adjustment of conflicting claims or the assignment of merited rewards or punishments
    b : judge
    c : the administration of law; especially : the establishment or determination of rights according to the rules of law or equity

    2a : the quality of being just, impartial, or fair
    b (1) : the principle or ideal of just dealing or right action (2) : conformity to this principle or ideal : righteousness c : the quality of conforming to law

    3: conformity to truth, fact, or reason : correctness

    No mention of parity or equality there I’m afraid”

    Really? Look at the bold faced word I emphasized above, genius. It’s at the source too: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/justice

    Do you not understand the meaning of the word “equity” too? Let me help with that:

    equity \ˈe-kwə-tē\, n.,

    1a : justice according to natural law or right; specifically : freedom from bias or favoritism b : something that is equitable

    2a : a system of law originating in the English chancery and comprising a settled and formal body of legal and procedural rules and doctrines that supplement, aid, or override common and statute law and are designed to protect rights and enforce duties fixed by substantive law b : trial or remedial justice under or by the rules and doctrines of equity c : a body of legal doctrines and rules developed to enlarge, supplement, or override a narrow rigid system of law

    Did ya catch that, sport? Equity is a part of justice, but it is not justice in toto.

    “So anyhoo, being a fair minded and I believe a fairly well balanced individual and open to new ideas and since I was unable to find the use of Parity or equity in an actual real definition of the word Justice I would take a logical approach and look a little farther afield:”

    We’ll pause here for a moment. This assumes that you are well balanced . . . and able to understand what you read and properly extrapolate logical relationships.

    parity \ˈper-ə-tē, ˈpa-rə-\, n.,

    1: the quality or state of being equal or equivalent

    Notice that parity is a state of equality, which makes is an integral component of the word equity.

    As pointed out above, equity is a component of justice despite your reading and comprehension difficulties.

    As to your perusal of dictionaries in a lame attempt to forum shop? Your assumptions hangs you again.

    I say our courts are courts in equity based on the U.S. Constitution, as that is the document that defines our courts, not a dictionary. You see, definitions are important, but so are their sources.

    Specifically I’m referring to the United States Constitution, Art. III, sec. 2 as modified by the 11th Amendment.

    Art. III, sec. 2 states “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.” [emphasis added]

    The 11th Amendment provides a limitation on this judicial power. “The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.” [emphasis added]

    Did you catch that? Because I just gave you what you want. And as the Chinese proverb says, “Careful what you wish for, you just might get it.”

    “Unless you have those special Janet and John Law books books that Buddha appears to possess.

    Can I just check…..that particular bit about equity wasn’t just written in biro in the margin was it?”

    Here, in case you have difficulty finding the Constitution or think I’m making up what it says?

    http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

    My logic is not based solely on definition, but on having studied justice and the social mechanics of justice. Which means I’ve read and used more “Janet and John Law” books than you’ve ever seen. That would include your undereducated troll brethren as well.

    You better step up your game, sport.

    You’re not even a challenge, let alone capable of proving me wrong.

  123. I wont have any more of your circular convolutions as they are not conducive to a satisfactory resolution of any kind, like fishing for hours only to find that the catch is all black inside,

    The sport was pleasant enough but the heart of the opponent is all but ruined

    This one is dead and you’be been gutted and thrown back as too much of a tiddler

    Hypocrite

    Pedant

    Ignorant

    *Snicker*

    good luck with that

  124. Nice to see you’re still delusional.

    Call me some names if it makes your bruised and battered ego feel better.

    Really.

    I don’t mind.

    I think it’s funnier than Hell.

  125. Just so you don’t think saying you’re delusional is anything but an accurate definition?

    delusion\di-ˈlü-zhən, dē-\, n.,

    1 : the act of deluding : the state of being deluded

    2a : something that is falsely or delusively believed or propagated b : a persistent false psychotic belief regarding the self or persons or objects outside the self that is maintained despite indisputable evidence to the contrary; also : the abnormal state marked by such beliefs

    Your arguments (such as they were) have been proven false.

    But feel free to believe it them all you wish.

    It just further proves the accuracy of the description.

  126. Why ever would I wish to call you names?

    Keep on laughing, it’s good for the heart

    I’m not you and grateful for it, I have no0thing to prove and no ego to massage and certainly wouldn’t wish to gain kudos if it meant relying on the use of racist slurs and childish tactics to do so.

    I’ve had my say, you’ve had yours and yours and yours over again, the result remains unchanged and our position is completely untenable so I shall put away my rod and instead of cooking my catch, I shall rely on something pre-prepared this evening

    As was once said – You have been weighed and measured and found wanting

    good luck with that

    *snicker*

  127. Bakersfield can you answer me some questions please

    whats a hypocrite?

    whats a pedant?

    what does ignorant mean?

    what did you mean about the fish being rotten inside and untenable position?

  128. Ah just a minute I found my dictionary

    A hypocrite – someone who is two faced or puts on a false appearance of virtue or who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings so like saying that revenge is a bad thing and then later going on to condone a murder as an act of revenge?

    A pendant – one who makes a show of knowledge or who is unimaginative or who unduly emphasizes minutiae in the presentation or use of knowledge

    ignorant – destitute of knowledge or education or lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified or showing a lack of knowledge or intelligence

    And the fish thing is one of them Metaphor – a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy between them (as in the inside of the fish implied his bitterness and the badness of his character

    I think I got it, this copying stuff out of the dictionary is real easy isnt it

    you were talking about bud werent you?

    *snicker*

  129. You lot really seem to like wallowing in your inadequacies. So pardon me if your weights and measures don’t amount to anything other than the same hot air of logical and linguistic insufficiency you started with.

    The argument still stands on its own merits (not what you opine of my character). The logic is linear and correct in terms of definition. Revenge is parity, parity is related to equity, equity is a component of justice. Appropriate law and reference cites were provided.

    Come back if you’ve got something substantive to offer. Or you can display some more logically lacking verbal diarrhea. Either one is fine with me.

    And that word you keep using, untenable? I do not think it means what you think it means.

    See ya around, Vizzini.

  130. substantive \ˈsəb-stən-tiv; 2c & 3 also səb-ˈstan-tiv\, adj.

    1: being a totally independent entity

    2a : real rather than apparent : firm (need substantive evidence to prove her guilt); also : permanent, enduring b : belonging to the substance of a thing : essential c : expressing existence (the substantive verb is the verb to be) d : requiring or involving no mordant (a substantive dyeing process)

    3a : having the nature or function of a grammatical substantive (a substantive phrase) b : relating to or having the character of a noun or pronominal term in logic

    4: considerable in amount or numbers : substantial (made substantive progress)

    5: creating and defining rights and duties (substantive law — compare procedural

    6: having substance : involving matters of major or practical importance to all concerned (substantive discussions among world leaders)

    antonym(s): inconsequential, inconsiderable, insignificant, insubstantial, negligible, nominal
    ___

    Substantive refutation of the argument as presented.

    Get some.

    Because what you’ve got is insubstantial opinion based on admitted illogic and demonstrated lack of understanding to the basic definitions upon which the substantive argument is based. To defeat the substantive arguments logic would require that you provide a substantive counter argument based in logic, not your opinion which falls far short of positive knowledge (which requires both logic and proof).

    What you have is . . .

    ___

    insubstantial \ˌin(t)-səb-ˈstan(t)-shəl\, adj.

    : not substantial: as a : lacking substance or material nature b : lacking firmness or solidity : flimsy
    ___

    You’ve still got plenty of that.

    Argument from ignorance is an attractive logical fallacy. It looks good on you.

  131. By the way, you keep assuming my goal is to convince you.

    That would be another assumption on your part.

    You are not my audience.

  132. No but I am and Bakersfield has shown you the door. Do the right thing and go to a smaller pond where the larger fish wont have you for supper.

    It plays well with the local yokels and the under-educated but overall your “audience” finds you amusing at best.

    Your audience, my that is amusing.

    Run along little cut and paster/dictionary boy/girl.

  133. Learn to change the e-mail address before you try to build false consensus again. Gravatar tracks icons to addresses, you computer sub-literate.

    It’ll make you look less stupid.

    Not that trying to flood false consensus isn’t at troll tactic we haven’t all seen here before.

  134. Bakersfield, et al.,

    Just wanted you to know that there are some undereducated idiots out here that think that Buddha is being the logical one and that his opponent(s) in this thread are being schooled (don’t worry, though, there’s no indication that any of you are actually learning anything…).

  135. Rhubarb,

    Do you have any idea what a substantive comment is? If you’re curious, then Buddha has left many fine examples on this thread.

    p.s. I hate Rhubarb (nothing to do with you personally – I just think that the vegetable is vile).

    [Note: I am a completely different person from the previous poster.]

  136. Underwhelmed,

    Bakersfield must have pointed out the door to Buddha by being thrown through it. I don’t know what thread you’re reading but, to me at least, you gain victory by attacking an argument’s logic and reason rather than by creating a straw man and tearing it apart.

  137. Turdwilligar,

    Since you so enthusiastically agree with Underwhelmed (except about how to spell their name – I can’t decide if it’s funnier if it was unintentional or if you thought that it would add verisimilitude…) you must agree with his opinion of Buddha’s audience as undereducated. Since I’ve identified myself as a member of his audience I was wondering exactly what additional education you would recommend for someone with a B.S., an M.A., an M.S., and a Ph.D.?

  138. As far as revenge goes, I have to say I think that killing someone is poor revenge – it is much worse to make their life such an affliction that they regret their offense every second for the rest of their lives. And I think that the state should never be given the right to kill people – I think that state-sactioned murder is a violation of the social contract in theory and has been shown to be ineffective, racist, and occasionally (irreversibly) erroneous in practice.

  139. This blawg never ceases to be an amazing source of information and mirth for me. Thanks guys.

  140. And thank you . . . all of you. Er, yeah, all of you.

    As ever, one lives to be of service. :D

    While I appreciate your views on state sanctioned murder, I must say you are killing me right now, Dr. K!

    lol

  141. ^..^ = many,

    Are you accusing me of sockpuppetry? All 4 of those other comments came from completely different people – the use of a fractal gravatar produced in my dissertation research is merely coincidental…

  142. Blouise,

    Sorry, but I’m a night owl – I’ve got several good working hours ahead of me…

    [Now, if you’ll excuse me I have to put on this disgui… (cough) …um…

    NOTHING TO SEE HERE.

    Move along.

  143. And a fine bit of sockpuppetry it was. If it was you. Which I’m not saying it was. BTY, I love the word ‘sockpuppetry’. That would give you extra points if it was you, which of course I’m not alleging it was. Fractals were a governing theme in my computer art for a couple of years. I used a shareware program to generate and transform them but the program stopped being updated regarding graphic interface choices about 8 years ago. I haven’t been able to use it for years (barely Windows compatible and limited in that mode) and it breaks my heart even now. I would dream about fractals so your gavatar is cool IMO. :-)

    I also agree with your position on the death penalty for the same reasons.

  144. Obviously psychotic breaks are catching

    I started reading the posts and honest to god Slarti … you made my night … I love a creative mind … work on brother … Clouseau would be proud

  145. Buddhas got a fan club but then so has Mickey Mouse and he cant argue for sheee-it neither

    yum yum please bring me more

    *snicker

    Good luck with that

  146. Buddha is one for rebukes
    and he just gets it all from his books
    he shouts really loud
    to his own little crowd
    and is funny but thats just a fluke

  147. Buddha he went off to war
    and marvelled at all that he saw
    he sat in his ditch
    shakin like a b!tch
    till bakersfield showed him the door

  148. Bakersfield,

    What a great post!

    “weighed, measured and found wanting”

    You sure told Buddha, didn’t you – no need to refute his argument or attack his premises when you can just quote a movie! And there isn’t any of that illogical reasoning for Buddha to attack, either… how clever!

    “every button pressed in a logical order”

    Wow! Clearly you’re so confident that everyone will find your argument compelling that you feel no need for your comments to make sense.

    “*snicker*

    *snicker*

    *snicker*”

    Three ‘*snicker*s’ I’m sure that Buddha is curled up in fetal position in the dark right now, his spirit broken by your devastating rejoinder. Wont you please favor us with more of your inimitable wisdom…

  149. Buddha is a man of great wit
    and revels in every small bit
    he uses big words
    and call people turds
    but we all know he just a big twit

  150. Buddha lays low when hes cruisin
    coz of all the logic hes provin
    way inside his head
    sit all the books that hes read
    but he still cannot see when hes losin

  151. While I appreciate your views on state sanctioned murder, I must say you are killing me right now, Dr. K!

    it would seem that your racist slurs, personal attacks and lambasts are saved for people who aren’t members of your Saturday morning clubhouse

  152. I’m starting to believe my sycophant that you are less than sincere and that your short passage was somehow meant to ridcule someone.

    Weighed, measured and found wanting = metaphor a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy between them (as in the inside of the fish implied his bitterness and the badness of his character

    I have copied this from Rhubarbs post but Im sure he wont mind

    As I am the one who is writing poems in praise of the great one can you please be a little clearer. as the king of logic, maybe he’ll loan you his dictionary

    *snicker*

    good luck with that

  153. ^..^ * (The answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything) / (the first perfect number),

    I think of the fractals generated from the characteristic equation of my model of two coupled nephrons as ‘my’ fractals – they come from math that means something to me (in addition to being pretty ;-)). I’ve been interested in fractals since reading ‘Chaos’ by James Glick in high school (I actually studied non-linear dynamics and ergodic theory from a student of Stephen Smale for two years – bonus points if you know who Stephen Smale is). The best program for generating all types of fractals I’ve ever found is called fractint – I haven’t used it for years, but I found that website so I’ll have to see if I can get it working on my computer (which is approximately infinitely faster than the computer on which I wrote my first program to generate the Mandelbrot set).

  154. Bakersfield, You would have done better to jump into the thread using your penchant for verse to make a biting comment about the story at hand rather that trying to bite someone fully competent to bite back. Just say’n.

  155. Blouise,

    Thank you. Remember that catching a psychotic break is better than a psychotic break catching you… %-}> (or something like that…)

  156. ROFLOL

    “Obviously psychotic breaks are catching

    I started reading the posts and honest to god Slarti … you made my night…”

    +++++

    2nd on that- it was brilliant.

    Glad to hear you had a good dinner and discussion, a good night out is a thing of joy. You and your friends have good reason to be concerned but with luck the good food and a glass of wine distracted you from the concern, at least briefly.

  157. Bakersfield,

    Buddha is one for rebukes
    and he just gets it all from his books
    he shouts really loud
    to his own little crowd
    and is funny but thats just a fluke
    *****

    Buddha he went off to war
    and marvelled at all that he saw
    he sat in his ditch
    shakin like a b!tch
    till bakersfield showed him the door
    *****

    Buddha lays low when hes cruisin
    coz of all the logic hes provin
    way inside his head
    sit all the books that hes read
    but he still cannot see when hes losin

    **********

    One can easily see that you are not a master of the limerick. I would suggest working on your rhyming skills. Lines 1, 2, and 5 should all rhyme with each other in a limerick.

    Here are a couple of limericks (authors unknown) I’ll provide as examples:

    There was a young farmer from Leeds
    Who swallowed six packets of seeds.
    It soon came to pass
    He was covered with grass
    And he couldn’t sit down for the weeds.

    There was an old man of Peru
    Who dreamed he was eating his shoe.
    He woke in the night
    In a terrible fright,
    And found it was perfectly true.

    :)

  158. Elaine is a lady of class
    who habitually speaks out of her ass
    her argument weak
    yet she continues to speak
    but her point is as fragile as glass

    Thanks for the masterclass *snicker*

    good luck with that

  159. Elaine,

    I always liked the Hausdorff metric.

    (Math joke. Sorry.)

    Bakersfield,

    Here’s a little free editing:

    Elaine is a lovely young lass
    writing poetry laden with class
    she tried to declaim
    that your verses were lame
    and that you are in fact a dumbass

    and a bonus verse:

    Bakersfield wrote down some limericks
    implying his critics had been dicks
    but his meter and rhymes
    were considered as crimes
    and his verse looked just like some dumb hick’s

  160. Psycophant, what is the point of repeatedly blowing buddhas argument away when he simply states “no its not, I’m right and you smell” his opinion isn’t worth the breath wasted on it because it is founded on the assumption that he is right and against this benchmark all else should be measured.

    But rather than just repeatedly pointing out that Buddha criticised Spamheed for supporting the death penalty and lambasted him over the revenge vs justice argument, then himself supported an act of murder as justified even though that act was in itself an act of revenge…. and in doing so became the hypocrite we now recognise him to be

    In one last attempt to clear these muddied waters, here is a completely different argument covering the rediculous notion that for an opion to be valid it must somehow be based on logic,

    This is a case of a group of twelve year olds blowing Buddhas position apart without even knowing who Buddha is.

    As an exercise Buddhas opinion that opinions are somehow only valid when founded on logic was put before to a bunch of twelve year olds yesterday afternoon and they came up with the following within the first fifteen minutes or so.

    My mom is scared of snakes – she’s never been bitten by a snake, she’s never been in contact with a snake, would run away if she saw one and she switches off her TV set whenever a snake appears on it.

    Yet it is her opinion that all snakes are nasty slimy creepy things and she hates them. how is her opinion wrong, she chooses to dislike snakes and believes them to be horrible, even the cute ones that dont bite. The child i hasten to add has no such beliefs and thinks that whilst some are dangerous, most snakes are just “gettin along in their own way”

    I have to agree the little chap has a valid point, his mothers opinion is completely illogical to one who has no problem with snakes but to her, the opinion is completely valid, had the mother have had a previous incident with a sbnake this would also make it logical, but on the little fallas insistence there had been no such incident to cause such an irrational fear

    then the other little darlins pointed out that her mom was scared of spiders and another didn’t like chicken and another thought that all cats should be drowned because they were nasty. several of the children believed in god yet others didn’t, some follow a religion because of parental choice whilst others follow none. some had strong opinions on drugs and drink and prostitution or religion, on both sides I hasten to add, not all in favour of religion and strangely enough not all anti drug and so without labouring the point I have to assume that you will appreciate the way the rest of that particular session went on.

    The argument that their opinions are invalid because of their youth or some other such twaddle wont stand because they are mostly talking about the opinions and beliefs of their parents

    such strong opinions and beliefs that were identified by these youngsters were all baseless in logical terms, yet all were valid because of the way this country is, the individual is free to hold whatever opinion they choose on the basis of nothing other than their own whim, their own experiences

    There is no basis at all which is required in the formation of an opinion in order to make it a valid opinion or even to make it invalid, nor is any opinion superior to any other. It really is a personal choice.

    I have never argued that the death penalty is right or wrong, only against the fact that Buddha would have it that any opinion not built on logic or similar to his own is invalid and should have scorn poured on it, the individiual should be racially slurred and subjected to childish abuse on the basis of nothing more than his opinion

    perhaps I should start shouting and screaming at my mom because she doesn’t like chocolate and thinks its a nsty substance everyone knows that such an opinion is completely illogical.

    There was a young woman from Norway
    who said she’d discovered one more way
    she said to her man
    get off that divan
    and hung upside down in the doorway

    look ma, lines 1,2 and 5 all rhyme, this must be one of them limmyrick thingies.

    *snicker*

    just say’n

    an good luck with that

  161. He he he look at da funny rhymes

    Roses are red
    violets are blue
    most peoms rhyme
    but this one doesn’t

    Roses are red
    violets are blue
    most people talk sense
    what happened to you

    If ah had the wings of a sparrow
    and the the dirty black ass of a crow
    I’d fly over you lot tomorrow
    and shit on poor buddha belooooow

    Ah beleeeeve I can Fly
    Ah beleeeeve I can touch da sky
    Ah fink ahbout it evry nite an day
    Ah spread my wings and ah fly away

    *snicker*

    go figure

  162. Bakersfield posted:

    Buddhas got a fan club but then so has Mickey Mouse and he cant argue for sheee-it neither

    Buddha doesn’t need anyone’s help (certainly not to debate you) but as far as logical argumentation goes, I doubt if you could provide much of a challenge to me or any of the other regulars here. Don’t believe it? Try me. But if you want to engage in rational debate then you’ve actually got to make, you know, logical arguments as to why your positions are correct – all you seem interested in doing is picking a fight with Buddha and writing really bad poetry (are you a Vogon?)

    yum yum please bring me more

    Do you really think that this is clever banter?

    *snicker

    This has got to be the most pathetic villain laugh ever. And your insults have all the bite of someone who’s forgotten their dentures… Let me show you how it’s done:

    “Are you worried that the vacuum between your ears will cause your head to implode? Bwa-HA-ha-ha-ha!!

    Good luck with that

    As a sarcastic tag line, this is pretty pathetic (at least when it’s used over and over again…).

    [Buddha] “While I appreciate your views on state sanctioned murder, I must say you are killing me right now, Dr. K!”

    it would seem that your racist slurs, personal attacks and lambasts are saved for people who aren’t members of your Saturday morning clubhouse

    If you’re going to accuse someone of racist slurs, you should have evidence to back it up and if you can’t take the occasional personal attack you should probably stay off of the internet…

    I’m starting to believe my sycophant that you are less than sincere and that your short passage was somehow meant to ridcule someone.

    Believe whatever you want, I don’t think that I was ridiculing someone, I know that I was. ;-)

    Weighed, measured and found wanting = metaphor a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy between them (as in the inside of the fish implied his bitterness and the badness of his character

    Do you think that your judgement of Buddha has any credibility here? One of the neat things about blogs is that you are judged solely on what you say. The only way to get respect in an online community is to earn it. What exactly is it about what you’ve written here that makes you think anyone would take anything you’ve said seriously? And by the way, your fish metaphor sucked (it was like a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing).

    I have copied this from Rhubarbs post but Im sure he wont mind

    As I am the one who is writing poems in praise of the great one can you please be a little clearer. as the king of logic, maybe he’ll loan you his dictionary

    Again with the non-sequitors… is this some kind of inane stream of consciousness?

    *snicker*

    Sad. Just sad.

    good luck with that

    You go girl.

  163. OMG Slarti, Fractint was it! Man, I was a power user and LOVED that program. You could get things out of that program that just aren’t replicable with the other programs I’ve used. Wow, I spent literally thousands of hours with Fractint. I can’t get a vid card setting that works and unless it’s been updated in the last 9 months (i keep loading it, finding it unworkable and deleting it at least once or twice a year.) everything is grainy and unpleasant looking. The basic images are ok but I was really into the transforms, the landscape modeling functions and how far they could be pushed. And I pushed them for all the were worth including the cross-eye and analygraph 3D functions for long, soaring canyons from a 0 or 10 degree perspective point, landscapes, planets, petri dish forms, alien eggs, weird, dense inverts shaped like Klingon fighting blades and shields etc. etc. blather, blather…. (foaming at the mouth now…)

    I WANT MY FRACTINT BACK!!!!!! Srsly, my quality of life decreased GREATLY when I couldn’t use Fractint like I wanted to anymore. Given time I’ll get over it, I still have discs of the stuff I did, but obviously I’m still a pining for my old program :-)

    Uh, went kind of nuts there for a bit, sorry. WoW, you approached fractals from the ‘honest’ direction. I tried to get into it in the proper intellectual manner but math is not my forte’. I bought a book, one, and it was the most simple of the selection at a local bookstore but the math was beyond me.

    I understand the general underlying principle and it’s groundbreaking nature but I just jumped in and embraced it because it was beautiful. Fractal geometry/science and the magnitude of it’s usefulness in explaining natural systems, most systems, natural and man made is not lost on me. I read an article that stated that fractal geometry underlies and permeates the very construction of the universe and everything in it. Sounds good to me if an endorsement from pure ignorance is worthy of weight. I doubt that it is thugh; I’m just in it for the visuals.

    Unfortunately I can’t claim the extra credit. The names are familiar, I know I knew who they were many years ago but just can’t dredge up the details. I will cheat and look up Stephen Smale because I know the name is familiar to me.

    Right, renegade and massive intellect. The better half would regale me with tales of the Great Men of Math. It was always interesting but not something that got filed n long-term memory. If his students ended up half as smart as he as a benefit of his tutelage you were fortunate to have one as your teacher.

    The better half has a math degree and he introduced to to fractals with a ‘hey, you won’t believe the shareware I found, you’re gonna’ love this’ and I was hooked.

    Fractint still works great for basic image generation but transforms look ‘off’. You’ll end up with a resolution of 800×600 unless your graphics card is compatible with one of the settings listed at a hight resolution. My last few computers have not been and while I can get images with some of the higher resolution settings the transform functions all look like c***. I hope you have better luck.

  164. Damn it shorty but you’re just too damn sharp for me, picking up on my words like that and…..oh but hold on, they’re not my words at all are they……

    *snicker*

    This has got to be the most pathetic villain laugh ever.

    As much as i hate to have to do so, I have to give credit to buddha, he used this first and I was so impressed that I felt compelled to copy. so any accusations of “pathetic” must stand squarly on the shoulders of the original source

    Good luck with that

    As a sarcastic tag line, this is pretty pathetic

    once again I must give credit where it’s due and divert your comment on to Buddha

    You seem to have something of a low opinion of buddha, using the word pathetic not once but twice to define his phrases, that’s just damn hurtful – and I thought you two were friends – with friends like you buddha doesn’t need enemies

    some more of your incisive cutting and hurtful remarks (the tears are streaming down my face as I type….honest…..I’ll stop laughing in a mo’)

    Buddha doesn’t need anyone’s help – erm except yours obviously

    I doubt if you could provide much of a challenge to me or any of the other regulars here. Don’t believe it? Try me. – tried, tested and thrown in the defects bin

    What exactly is it about what you’ve written here that makes you think anyone would take anything you’ve said seriously? – who are you replying to exactly?

    If you’re going to accuse someone of racist slurs, you should have evidence to back it up – perhaps Buddha was calling Spamheed a breed of terrier when he was using the slur “scotty”

    Believe whatever you want, – that’s my point exactly, so glad to have you on board old chap, we illogical sorts need to stick together lest we fall under the yoke of Buddha and his pro logic supporters.

    And by the way, your fish metaphor sucked – yup they suck in the water through their gills and via a system of small cogwheels and microscopic scientists they filter out all of the logic and thus become the illogical fish, or haven’t you read that book yet? you really should, it has a much better storyline that buddhas dictionary

    is this some kind of inane stream of consciousness? have you been watching the Matrix again? it’s just a movie, not real at all

    As the big man once said before that final decisive moment “is that all you got George….is that all you got”

  165. Once there was a battle there
    In Zaire, in Zaire
    Hundred Thousand People there
    In Zaire in zaire
    All those people gathered therer
    In zaire in zaire
    To see the rumble in the jungle i-i-i-in…
    In Zaire

    Came a man called Elijah
    In Zaire, in Zaire
    With him came the superstar
    In Zaire, in Zaire
    All those people came from far
    In Zaire, in Zaire
    To see the rumble in the jungle i-i-i-in…
    In Zaire

    And who was the victor of the night?
    Elijah Mohammed’s bog, Ali won the fi-i-i-ight
    In Zaire

    All those people chanted there
    In Zaire, in Zaire
    Seven rounds of torture there
    In Zaire, in Zaire
    One more round and Ali’s there
    In Zaire, in Zaire
    There was a great excitement everywhe-e-e-er…
    In Zaire

    The lightning struck twice in the night
    First in the ring and then after the fi-i-i-ight
    In Zaire

    Bakersfield hits sloppy dig dog with the ole rope a dope and down sloppy goes

  166. Oh my, Bakersfield writing a poorly metered verse as rebuke to ElaineM… the irony, the irony (said in he voice of Col. Kurtz)

    It is telling that Ms. Elaine didn’t think it enough of a contest (IMO) to write anything original by way of comment/illustration. If Bakersfield were a regular he would recognize just how evil and meaningful that rebuke-by-omission is. There’s a line from ‘Pitch Black’ that covers that lack of insight… :-)

  167. Bakersfield said:

    “Psycophant, what is the point of repeatedly blowing buddhas argument away when he simply states “no its not, I’m right and you smell” his opinion isn’t worth the breath wasted on it because it is founded on the assumption that he is right and against this benchmark all else should be measured.”

    If you truly could destroy Buddha’s argument (and I’ve only seen evidence of you attacking straw men), then you could continually point out his irrationality and convince everyone else here that you are correct. As of yet, I doubt you have convinced anyone that Buddha is an illogical hypocrite. I (and most of the other regulars here, I would guess) have seen that Buddha’s arguments and positions are generally based on solid principles and logical reasoning – it’s going to take more than a straw man argument to change anyone’s mind. I suggest that you review this thread, and specifically cite what Buddha said that proves him a hypocrite, because I seem to have missed it. Everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion, but those opinions aren’t sacrosanct – and, in my opinion, expressing an opinion based on faulty reasoning is an invitation to have that reasoning questioned (as is expressing an opinion based on sound reasoning, but that doesn’t seem to be something you need to concern yourself with).

    As for my denigration of the phrases you copied from Buddha, maybe it’s just their repetitive overuse in inappropriate context that seems pathetic to me.

  168. Sloppy Dig Dog *snicker* I love the purile nature of it, but it’s so damn appropriate, unlike anything you have said, as was said once, “There’s none so blind as those who will not see”

    I repeatedly read in your posts how great everyone is on here, such a great mutual appreciation thing going on, how intelligent and worthy all “the regulars” are, yet I see no evidence to support such claims, merely empty, worthless and misplaced arrogance and childish attempts to intimidate those you or “the regulars” deem to be unworthy or contradictory in their opinion.

    Buddha changed his tack from one of anti revenge to one in support of a murder via an act of vengeance = hypocritical bwehaviour = hypocrite. case proven – drinks all round. If you cannot read the whole thread, just read the previous couple of dozen threads, it’s clearly identified.

    A group of twelve year olds completely destroyed his “an opinion is only valid if based on logic” argument. Only in real life and away from his Spock mentality, people form opinions for a multitude of reasons, not all of them logical but all of them relevant, and they don’t need the say so of Buddha to do so.

    You mention that Buddha doesn’t need anyone’s help then go to great lengths to provide it, good luck with that, but to continue with the “fishy theme” you’re floundering .

    Your arguments are as empty and as meaningless as buddhas and are taken in as high a regard as they deserve to be

    Lottacatz
    It is telling that Ms. Elaine didn’t think it enough of a contest (IMO) to write anything original by way of comment/illustration.

    so there is victory in the fact that another alter ego fails to respond and somehow fortu0nate am I that this is the case…….wait a minute….what is that I smell? …..is it cat…..no….is it sheep……no… It’s bullshit isn’t it *snicker*

    you need a loan of a shovel?

    good luck with that

    From the same great man just at the point of the decisive moment
    “you’re going down George, you’re going down

  169. Imagine there’s no heaven its easy if you try
    no hell below us
    above us only sky
    imagine all the people
    living for today-u-hoo-ooo

    you may say I’m a dreamer
    but i’m not the only one
    I hope someday you’ll join us
    and take your head from up your ass

  170. you are wasting your time Bakersfield, their name should be legion for the one is made up of many. all with the same voice methinks

    but please continue with the entertainment

    I really love the poetries.

    sloppy dig dog: brilliant

  171. Since the original posts are there to be read, I shall not encourage laziness right!! but for the record:

    Buddha in a number of posts criticised Spamheed for supporting the death penalty in view of buddhas own opinion that supporting the death penalty was contrary to justice and fell into the catagory of revenge and then buddha repeatedly lambasted (love that word) Spamheed him over the revenge vs justice argument, .

    this is quite clear from Buddhas first post in response to Spamheeds posts,

    these posts by buddha quickly deteriorated into the condemnation of the English, England, their monarchy and once Spamheed had informed buddha that he wasn’t English and was in fact Scottish buddhas posts culminated in buddha using racist slurs such as Scotty to denegrate Spamheeds Scottish nationality, that is what I believe would constitute racism in most countries. or am I wrong and shortening other nationalities to describe their nationals is acceptable and in no way racist neither, ie Pakistan perhaps

    then the hypocritical bit came in a later post buddha commented how the planned assassination was not a bad thing to quote “you say that like its a bad thing” thereby voicing his support for an act of murder even though that act was in itself an act of revenge….

    so he lambasts Spamheed for supporting revenge but then supports it himself in a later post – that would make hime a hypocrite

    pick the bones out of that one sloppy

    *snicker*

  172. I do appreciate the lengths that some are going with regards to this disagreement but I really do believe that you are wasting your time and energy and are to a point effectively banging your heads againt the wall

    Buddhas words speak for themselves, he did say that revenge was a bad thing and set about my crucifiction for my opinion to the contrary with great vigour and he did write that the murder of a tyrant was no injustice, one cannot sit on both sides of any argument yet Buddha tries to do this and his supporters hold onto his legs to help him balance (metaphor)

    Buddha did resort to personal name calling and so did I, so I wouldn’t read too much into that. as the tit for tat, eye for an eye argument is frowned at on here unless one of the regulars is a participant.

    Buddha did refer to me as “Scotty” as a deliberate slur directed as a reference to my heritage and race/origin or would he like to state anything to the contrary?

    Buddhas belief that an opinion must somehow be built on logic is complete bow larks and has even been disproved by bakersfields very simple involvement of a group of children

    the defense of the indefensible is futile and completely pointless.

    I thank you for your humour and support and I really do love the poetry and the imaginitive Rhubarb and his Sloppy Dig Dog is priceless – I shall once again withdraw as I really am enjoying the free entertainment

  173. Sloppy i just read your last but one post again and i notice a wierd similarity to buds convoluted habit of missing a point

    you say “As of yet, I doubt you have convinced anyone that Buddha is an illogical hypocrite.”

    Nobody has said that bud is illogical just a hypocrite,

    You say “Everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion, but those opinions aren’t sacrosanct” I completely agree with this and applaud you for stating the obvious yet I dont see you at any time defending anyone when they are the subject of abuse from one of “your friends”.

    Then again its always better to be on the inside watching someone else getting bullied than to stand up and be counted on the basis of whats right rather than who’s right.

    you say “and, in my opinion, expressing an opinion based on faulty reasoning is an invitation to have that reasoning questioned” and that includes repeatedly name calling someone and using racist comments on someone does it? there’s one hell of a difference between questioning someone and resorting to racism don’t you think.

    you say “(as is expressing an opinion based on sound reasoning, but that doesn’t seem to be something you need to concern yourself with)” I thought that was the whole point of this, buds reasoning is completely flawed because he refuses to accept that any opinion not based on logic is somehow inferior or secondary to one that is, simply on the basis that his chosen method of forming an opinion is logic and a Merriam Webster dictionary

    Bakersfield has clearly demonstrated examples where with very good reason (personal choice) logic can be excluded from the formation of an opinion and be comepletely credible because as you so succinctly say above “Everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinion”

  174. Psychotic Break,

    I don’t know Hausdorff. In recent years, a writer named Gregory Pincus invented a new poetic form called the Fib–based on the Fibonacci series. It’s a poem of six lines that contains twenty syllables:

    1
    1
    2
    3
    5
    8

    P.S. Didn’t know you dabbled in writing verse.

    :)

    **********

    Lottakatz,

    I suppose I could have responded to Bakersfield with poetry–but it was the wee hours o’ the morning and I needed to get some sleep. Besides, when it comes to trolls, I prefer not to exert any creative effort.

    **********

    Rhubarb,

    I wouldn’t say that most poems rhyme–at least not most contemporary poems. In fact, the majority of contemporary poetry is written in free verse.

  175. Wry-Barb:

    you and Bakersfield are great, I am laughing my hind end off.

    These people are all the “best” and “brightest” minds of the left. Be careful they are really “sticking” it to you.

    “snicker”

  176. Wry-Bard:

    “Sloppy i just read your last but one post again and i notice a wierd similarity to buds convoluted habit of missing a point”

    I think you are right.

  177. “I wouldn’t say that most poems rhyme–at least not most contemporary poems. In fact, the majority of contemporary poetry is written in free verse.”

    I’ve never subscribed to the majority as they tend to analyse where it’s not necessary and read into that in which there is nothing readable and if the majority includes this lot then I have to be overjoyed by my initial assessment.

    Down the stream the swans all glide;
    It’s quite the cheapest way to ride.
    Their legs get wet,
    Their tummies wetter:
    I think after all
    The bus is better.

    *snicker*

  178. A norrible tale I’m going to tell
    Of the woeful tragedy which befell
    A family that once resided
    In the very same thoroughfare as I did;

    Indeed it is a norrible tale,
    ‘Twill make your faces all turn pale,
    And your cheeks with tears will be overcome,
    Tweedle twaddle, tweedle twaddle twum.

  179. The father in the garden went to walk,
    And he cut his throat with a piece of chalk;
    The mother, at this was so cut-up
    She drowned herself in the water-butt.

    The eldest sister, on bended knees
    Strangled herself with toasted cheese;
    The eldest brother, a charming fella,
    Blew out his brains with a gingham umbrella.

  180. The innocent infant lying in the cradle,
    Shot itself dead with a silver ladle;
    And the maid-servant, not knowing what she did,
    Strangled herself with the saucepan lid.

    The cat sitting down by the kitchen fire,
    Chewed up the fender and did expire;
    And a fly on the ceiling – the case is the worst ‘un –
    Blew itself up with spontaneous combustion.

    Now this here family of which I’ve sung,
    If they had not dies should have all been hung;
    For had they ne’er done themselves any wrong
    Why, they might have been here to have heard this song.

  181. I think I’ll get the rest of my creative English class to start posting on here.

    being tutored to such a high level as this for is amazing and so invaluable in the nurturement of my as yet unlocated talents.

    Elaine,

    I and the rest of my colleagues have long read with such admiration and for so many years the collected works of…..erm

    someone else.

    so excuse me if I give your comments something of a wide berth

    Our Elaines a funny ‘un
    she’s got a face like a pickled onion
    her eyes like two tomatoes
    and a nose like a pear

    so as well as the free masterclass she’s also part of our five a day

    *snicker*

  182. Rhubarb,

    “I’ve never subscribed to the majority as they tend to analyse where it’s not necessary and read into that in which there is nothing readable and if the majority includes this lot then I have to be overjoyed by my initial assessment.”

    **********

    Are you attempting to tell me that you feel more comfortable with doggerel than with poetry that might require some thought when reading it?

  183. How interesting.

    The trolls, unable to win by logic, resort to goading and when that fails, to simply abusing the English language.

    ROFLMAO

    Refute the logic or remain defeated, trolls.

    However, since you can’t refute the logic, you choose to scream and shout at a group of people who are clearly mocking your inadequate position and skills.

    That’s a cute tactic. One usually utilized by three year olds, but cute nonetheless.

    As to rumors of my retreat?

    It’s called “sleep”.

    You should get some. It serves to refresh the mind. And you’ve done little but demonstrate yours are minds in need of much refreshing.

    Since you’ve also demonstrated a lack of understanding of basic definitions, here’s another lesson:

    Quantity is not the same as quality.

    And while I’m a great admiring of his comic skills, W.C. Fields advice “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull” really only applies to people capable of generating adequate bull.

    Bad news, sports. Your bullshitting skills are just as bad as your logical and argument skills.

    But please, carry on embarrassing yourselves instead of trying to substantively refute the argument.

    It’s quite amusing.

    In the same way a three year old is amusing.

    And here’s a gift: a limerick for trolls.

    There once were some trolls from Nantucket
    With heads as empty as buckets,
    When confounded with reason,
    They fought through the season,
    But in the end they could only suck it.

    But back to the argument:

    A) An eye for an eye, which leave two blind people that will require some form of social assistance and/or accommodation?

    B) A suitable punishment that maximizes the inconvenience to the perpetrator by passing the maximum costs to them directly without creating an additional burden on society such as prison time and/or economic damages paid as restitution that leaves the perpetrator physically whole but chained to their bad act socially and economically, possibly in perpetuity?

    If your goal is simple revenge, the answer is A.
    If your goal is justice, the answer is B.

    The raw truth of the assertion still stands.

    Spamhead admitted his choice was A and his motive was irrational.

    None of his troll brethren have been able to refute this in any rational way, ergo, your thinking is also irrational.

    The argument still stands on its own merits. The logic is still linear and correct in terms of definition. Revenge is still a form of seeking parity (by definition), parity is related to equity (by definition), equity is a component of justice (by definition and the laws in question). Appropriate law and reference cites were provided.

    You lot? Have provided nothing in refutation of logical substance other than proving that you are indeed probably twelve years old . . . and most certainly not in the gifted and talented section. You’ve presented the argumentative equivalent of being presented with “Grass is green because it contains a pigment called chlorophyll. Chlorophyll, chemically required for photosynthesis, absorbs all the colors of the visible spectrum except for green, ergo grass is green because it reflects back only the green portion of the spectrum received in normal sunlight” and responding with the counter-argument “Grass is magenta because I said so.”

    That’s pure fucking genius. I’m sure you have the Ghost of René Descartes shaking in his boots. Aristotle and Lewis Carroll are agape at your intellect and reasoning ability.

    Here’s where the rubber meets the road: Unless you can logically refute the argument as presented (which you can’t or else you would have by now), you’ll always be on the losing side of petulant, unfounded and illogical thought.

    I suspect you’re used to that though.

  184. Rhubarb,

    “Our Elaines a funny ‘un
    she’s got a face like a pickled onion”

    It would have been more humorous to have written the following:

    Our Elaine’s a funny ‘un.
    She’s got a face like a pickled unneeyun.

    ;)

  185. No, if that is what I was attempting to tell you then I would have specifically stated as much. A failure in arrivals should not necessarilly be assumed to be a failure in dispatches.

    I do however tip my hat at your initial inclination to use a rather desparaging term for what is and has been for a very long time, a very popular form of verse and to a great extent confirms to me that “the regulars” on here, of which I believe you are one, are more interested in one upmanship and appearing superior to others than they are in actually discussing anything of real value.

    my chosen style of rhyme on this occasion was more or less dictated to me as I felt that In my opinion they would register more effectively with the level of the proposed audience. similarly my own choice of music would differ quite significantly from that which I would play for public consumption.

    what I was actually telling you in my last post, rather than attempting anything to the contrary was that I occupy my mind with independent thought rather than blindly following the herd along the path most worn and perfer to take in each idea or theme on its own merit and then I would formulate a taste or opinion based on my own feelings, emotions and indeed my own enjoyment of that idea or theme.

    In some circles this can very easilly be labelled in many different ways especially by those with a more pompous or simplistic disposition, However, I would simply call it the “making it up as i go along” movement or of the “being my own person” style.

    almost remiiscent of the late great E Morecambe with his timeless “all the right notes but not necessarilly in the right order”

  186. Failure and “making it up as i go along”.

    Finally two subjects which you know something about, albeit just not in the way that you may think.

  187. ROFLOL

    Sorry, I’m still laughing at “making it up as i go along” being conflated to some form of individualism.

    Sometimes the best funny is the most obvious funny.

  188. Buddha

    you’ve lost it, rage against the machine, howl at the moon, bark at the postman if you like, but you are a hypocrite, whilst you maintain that your use of logic is impeccable, your own logic is dead in the water

    You are a hypocrite and opinions formed out of personal choice are now and have always been as valid as any opinion formed in any other manner.

    Even your little rhyme is an edit of an existing one, there is nothing original about you bud because your opinions come out of a book

    good luck with that

    *snicker*

    Elaine

    “It would have been more humorous to have written the following:

    Our Elaine’s a funny ‘un.
    She’s got a face like a pickled unneeyun.”

    sorry but thats just pedantic dross, it could just as easily read “she’s got a face like a pickled union” what exactly is a “pickled union?” I’m afraid it’s a fail, you’re attempting to pick fault where there is none.

    at least Rhubarbs use of onion and funny ‘un go together to form a rhyme, common sense and a basic grasp of the english language should tell you this. I do not regard myself as a creative person but even I can see that Rhubarbs verse smacks your criticisms flat and his message is clear.

    Yet sloppy was bigging you up to the enth as a super power in the prose department.

    looks like youve Failed again

    and to think that Rhyming was something you picked up on earlier as an important aspect of a limerick.

    Good luck with that

  189. you say

    Failure and “making it up as i go along”.

    Finally two subjects which you know something about, albeit just not in the way that you may think.

    You don’t get irony or sarcasm at all do you bud

    you didn’t even look up as they went over your empty head did you?

    ROFL

    *snicker*

    good luck with that

  190. bud you’re dribbling and talking rubbish, please try to control yourself, you’re on a public forum

    Hypocrite

    *snicker*

  191. Come on, fail some more.

    It’s funny.

    Almost as funny as someone with a demonstrated lack of skills and knowledge thinking their opinion of my character amounts to anything other than the bluster of a loser.

  192. Seriously, I’m willing to let you clowns make fools of yourself as long as you’re willing to attack me instead of the argument.

  193. And the attack on books?

    Well that’s really funny.

    Books have been the method of preserving and passing along knowledge and skills for thousands of years. That’s why they are traditionally used in education. You know, so people don’t have to go through life “making it up as [they] go along”.

    Well. Obviously you don’t know, except for the “making it up” part. You’re real good at that.

    Hey, next time you’re in need of a doctor? Why not just pick someone off the street and tell them to “make it up as they go along” to treat that pain inside your head.

    See how well that works out for you.

    Good luck with that.

  194. quick bud, find a science book, dazzle someone with a fact before they get bored with you.

    did you know when the Texan Red underwater golfing beetle gets annoyed it turns purple?

    tell me bud, are you related in any way to the Texan Red underwater golfing beetle?

    Bud was a little red bug
    who lived underneath the blue rug
    he’d shout and attack
    til someone barked back
    and then hide in his rug – nice and snug – poor bug

    *snicker*

    Good luck with that

  195. Another dazzling display of “ignorant and proud of it”.

    FAIL(2): Doesn’t substantively refute the argument as presented.

  196. Bakersfield,

    Elaine

    “It would have been more humorous to have written the following:

    Our Elaine’s a funny ‘un.
    She’s got a face like a pickled unneeyun.”

    sorry but thats just pedantic dross, it could just as easily read “she’s got a face like a pickled union” what exactly is a “pickled union?” I’m afraid it’s a fail, you’re attempting to pick fault where there is none.

    at least Rhubarbs use of onion and funny ‘un go together to form a rhyme, common sense and a basic grasp of the english language should tell you this. I do not regard myself as a creative person but even I can see that Rhubarbs verse smacks your criticisms flat and his message is clear.

    **********

    Are you really THAT dense?

    I was spelling phonetically! Funny ‘un and unneeyun rhyme; funny’ un and onion do not. I was just trying to be helpful. In addition, I would not characterize my earlier comment as pedantic. As for dross: I’d say that is your field of expertise–not mine.

    ;)

  197. Almost as funny as someone with a demonstrated lack of skills and knowledge thinking their opinion of my character amounts to anything other than the bluster of a loser.

    you seem confused bud, the kids proved you wrong, Spamheed proved your a hypocrite and a racist you have nothing to complain about

    And the attack on books?

    what an idiot, who is attacking books? how convoluted do you intend to get with this? nobody has attacked books, what has attacked is your use of books and then attempting to pass yourself off as a learned person, when in reality you are a racist bigmouth with a dictionary (a really good one no doubt) and a thesaurus.

    Books have been the method of preserving and passing along knowledge and skills for thousands of years. That’s why they are traditionally used in education. You know, so people don’t have to go through life “making it up as [they] go along”.

    whilst your opening line started with promise, the passage quickly went down hill as your statements not entirely true, people often buy books on a whim, or out of the freedom of choice, unless they are studying or need a book on a specific subject.

    They often read books equally on a whim, millions of people making up their choices as they go along and if the sole purpose of books was to stop people from “making it up as we go along” then people wouldn’t still be writing so many books every year now would they?

    Books are also an important form of expression and entertainment, so the people who write all of those original books every year, aren’t they effectively “making it up as they go along?” so sorry but you’re entirely wrong again. both the writers of the books and the people who read them, along with a bit of freedom of choice and a desire to lear and entertain, actively encourage the movement of “making it up as you go along”

    Well. Obviously you don’t know, except for the “making it up” part. You’re real good at that.

    I take it this is aimed at Rhubarb, but as he clearly states that his idea of having independent thought is to in effect “make it up as he goes along” when it comes to his prose, so no doubt he’ll take that as flattery. although he did also say that he was taking the mickey, a point lost on you entirely

    Hey, next time you’re in need of a doctor? Why not just pick someone off the street and tell them to “make it up as they go along” to treat that pain inside your head.

    Isn’t that a bit too much like that old joke about the boy going off to war and his mom saying “well if you get your legs blown off don’t come running to me” I only mention the joke because that short paragraph sums up the quality of your entire purile rant

    you have no solid ground left to stand on

    You are a hypocrite (proven)
    you are a racist (proven)
    A group of schoolchildren have successfully argued against your “opinions formed on logic” argument
    Your definition of the purpose of books beggars belief in its crassness

    if ever they made it an international sport you could pointelessly convolute for your country

    Your comments about books and “making it up as you go along” are just nonsense and go more to confirm my belief that you are a teenage wannabe trying his hand at self grandeur than anything you have written before.

    *snicker*

    Good luck with whatever career you choose when you grow up

  198. You really do believe that quantity of words is a substitute for quality though.

    Your end product is nearly gibberish.

    That’s what happens when you operate off of belief instead of logic.

  199. As to my accurate description of the utility of books?

    You can use them to prop up the leaning corner of your travel trailer if you wish, but they really do work better of you both read and are capable of understanding the words.

    Also –

    Again, it’s your opinion I’m a hypocrite, not a fact. That you are incapable of understanding argument by analogy is your failing. I’ve shown several times where I’ve said revenge is a component of justice, not justice proper. Your inability to comprehend doesn’t mean I’m a hypocrite. It means you have a learning disability.

    Again, the Scottish are not a race. They are a nationality. I know that’s pretty basic, but if you can’t understand that deriding a nation isn’t deriding a race? That’d be your problem. So me being a racist is not a fact, again by definition.

    A group of school children have done nothing but demonstrate the that they have pitiful teachers and a substandard education as evidenced by your lack of skills and misunderstanding of what goes for common knowledge in most of the educated world.

    But you keep telling yourself you’re a winner.

    FAIL(4): Doesn’t substantively refute the argument as presented.

    You’re doing your teachers proud, boy.

    Keep it up.

    It’s funny.

  200. Elaine

    I did consider creating a new word to suit my purpose,

    I even looked at the Phonetic method you used but had to disgarded it as a pointless waste of time when the purpose of the rhyme was that to include as many fruit and vegetable names in the rhyme

    Lets examine this a little more carefully

    Our Elaines a funny ‘un

    this sets the scene nicely as it not only identifies the subject matter but it also gives the reader an expectation of something a little unusual (this fits into the ethos of the whole “make it up as you go along” movement)

    she’s got a face like a pickled onion

    this was quite simple, find a vegetable that is a. well known and b. rhymes with funny ‘un

    her eyes like two tomatoes
    and a nose like a pear

    the third and forth lines simply needed to continue the fruit and vegetable theme and by default would continue with the premise of someone being a “funny ‘un”

    whilst the word onion fits the criteria on four counts in that it is easily recognisable word, that it rhymes and that it is a real vegetable and also that it is a real word

    the word that you suggested has three minor negatives, one being that the word doesn’t actually exist and the second being it isn’t actually a vegetable or fruit and the third and I mention this because I think it is an important point – it isn’t a real word.

    to be honest I think Bakersfield hit the nail on the head, although I wouldn’t use the words pedantic or dross.

    in the vein of “making it up as i go along”

    Dont be so bloody stupid woman, youre just making crap up now to make it seem like you have a clue what youre talking about,

    You really should slap sloppy for building you up like this when the reality is you don’t know your arse from your elbow.

    I have posted your comments on our internal website and will feedback to you any positive feedback, up to now it’s had 83 views, there have been 27 comments and none of them are complimentary.

    So it’s not just me then

    *snicker*

  201. Internal websites?

    Oh my.

    The opines of more imaginary people.

    Ooooo. Scary. (to be read in the voice of Count Floyd)

  202. So according to bud books are there to stop people making it up as you go along

    according to bud taking both sides of an argument is not hypocracy and is entirely acceptable

    according to bud using slurs based on a persons nationality or birthplace is not racism even if the target of such abuse feels that it is?

    and finally according to bud, a persons opinion is not at all valid unless it is based on logic

    so any belief unless it is formed out of seamless logic is invalid…..do you really believe that rubbish

    *snicker*

    good luck with that

  203. Buddha,

    Some folks are not educable. Most young children can identify rhyming words before they enter kindergarten. Not so with alter egos Bakersfield and Rhubarb. They both still believe that funny ‘un and onion rhyme. Do you suppose Bakersfield thinks that the “u” in Buddha (Hello Mudda, Hello buddha) should be pronounced with the “short u” sound? It may be that trolls have auditory discrimination problems.

  204. “according to bud taking both sides of an argument is not hypocracy and is entirely acceptable”

    That you are incapable of understanding nuance is your problem, not mine. But please feel free to try to frame it as a false dichotomy – another logical fallacy. Capital punishment as it relates to justice is not a topic capable of being framed in a binary fashion. To frame a complicated topic like justice versus a simple concept like revenge as a yes or no proposition is a logical fallacy. If you can’t find a definition for false dichotomy, try looking up bifurcation fallacy. Not that you’d understand that any better than you seem to understand anything else.

    “according to bud using slurs based on a persons nationality or birthplace is not racism even if the target of such abuse feels that it is?”

    Their feelings based on ignorance of fact is not my problem, but such self-deluding behavior indicates they may need professional help.

    “and finally according to bud, a persons opinion is not at all valid unless it is based on logic”

    That’s right. Because logic is a verifiable system for testing the nature of the universe. Opinions not based on logic are based on belief. Beliefs require no proof or logic, only that the person hold them even if evidence to the contrary exists.

    Well bad news. Evidence contrary to your belief exists in this instance in the form of logic and proofs. You can believe grass is magenta all you like. The proof shows it is green. Look up confirmation bias. Operating on preconceived beliefs, but especially ones that are admittedly illogical, are a key cause of confirmation bias – another flaw in your logic. Disbelieve in gravity if you like. Tell the rocks at the bottom of the Cliffs of Dover “Howdy!” for me when you hit them at 32 ft. per second per second.

    You’ve been presented with facts and formally correct linear logic with citations. You’ve done nothing to refute these facts or logics with anything of substance. Factual arguments are not opinions. They are factual arguments. That I choose to base any opinions I have on factual arguments over wishful thinking is simply an indication I’m better at thinking than you are. Arguments based on belief are nothing but opinion as belief requires no proof. Which is good for you because you have no proof. But I wouldn’t expect you to be able to make that distinction. It flies in the face of your conformation bias. A bias based in illogic. A false belief.

    You can lie to yourself all you wish. Other people aren’t so gullible and require proof(s).

    So unless you’ve got a counter-argument that consists of logics and proofs?

    You’re simply talking out of your ass.

    You being a piss poor thinker is the only thing that’s been evidenced by your posts.

    Elaine,

    I concur. I’ve noted before it seems like they have a learning disability. It is manifest we are dealing with the brain damaged.

    The argument stands.

    The lunatics are now free to babble as they wish.

  205. I have got to give a call out to Slarti for his gang of Buddha lovers … I started laughing last night and chuckling again this morning while sitting on the veranda enjoying my first cup of coffee.

    What a marvelous way to handle trolls as they go after our little green guy … I won’t bother now but I have corralled my gang for the next new thread appearance.

    Hurrah, Hurrah, Hurrah, Slartibartfast and all those who reside within your mind!

  206. Slarti is a good one for sure, Blouise. Or several good ones as the case may be. :D

    He’s also an award winning designer of fjords.

  207. Our Limey friend is having a little trouble keeping the names of his fake sycophants straight: If you check the names of his cheering section, you will see Spamheed,spamheed,Rhubarb,rhubarb,and rhubarab.

  208. do you think Hnthing would undestand the concept of a network that doesn’t accept cookies?

    Somehow I think he/she/they want to gang up on me/you/us

  209. This is one of the best threads yet.

    The mighty Bakersfield and Rhbarb taking on the miniscule minds of Bpud, Slopy, Blousy, Elame, Lottacrap and Wispy’s a catatonic.

    Great fun and frolic. So far Rhubarb and Bakersfield have mopped up. The pigeon holed gang who couldnt write a cogent thought on the ropes of rhetoric.

    Where is Howard Cosell when you need him?

  210. when bud says that Justice and Revenge are not the same thing what he really means is

    Black is white:White is Black:Up is Down:Down is Up:East Is West:West Is East:North Is South:South Is North

    I am right and you are wrong:I am clever and you are real stupid: We are allowed to be racist because I say so: I can change my opinion at any time without being a hypocrite because I say so

    *chuckles*
    *cackles*
    *snicker*

    go get em tiger

    And when your body;s had enough of me
    and you’re layin flat out on the floor
    when you think I’ve laughed at you all I can
    I’m gonna laugh just a little bit more

  211. How come we don’t post at the same time and the posts are only a one minute gap apart?

    surely if we were the same person the gaps would be bigger

  212. HenMan and Elaine,

    You both need avatars so that you may indulge in the occasional Psychotic Break without losing track of yourself.

    AY knows how to set it up … so does FFLEO … they both helped me and being a complete computer idiot, I have forgotten how I was told to do it.

  213. Just trying to help … open several window at once … write your post in all windows … hit submit one right after the other .. bingo! … you appear to be several posters …

  214. So henman is wrong again is he in thinking that we are the same person

    oooooh my sides, thats

    Bud
    Sloppy
    That bint with the onion head
    and now Henman all found to be talking crap

    and when I first came on this site I had such expectations

  215. Well yes,

    I expected them to be a bunch of sanctimonious jumped up wannabes who were like totally up themselves dude

    and they absolutely were

  216. good call Spartacus.

    it’s a shame that bud was such a duchebag, we could have been like brothers if he hadn’t been such a dick

  217. Blouise, there would still be a delay between the typing DOH!!!!!

    so now we have bud
    sloppy
    that bint with the onion head
    Henthing
    and now Blue whotsit all talking like crap

  218. I have to let them know, this cannot continue

    Spamheed is carrying a lot of crap because of us

    we need to let them in on it

  219. yeah I know but let it slide, theres no need to take everything so personal.

    but before we do this thing

    you know I got your back right

  220. FAIL(6): Doesn’t substantively refute the argument as presented.

    You know, a current politician who operates off of belief instead of facts and logic considers masturbation a form of adultery. I wonder if she applies that to mental masturbation? (rhetorical)

    Come on.

    Declare yourselves victorious again and then wipe yourselves off with an old gym sock like a bunch of school boys.

    It’s just hysterical.

    On the plus side, you’re almost stupid enough to work for Andrew Breitbart. So you got that going for you. Which is nice.

  221. Buddha
    Sloppy
    You with the onion head
    Henthing
    and blousie

    we have something we need to tell you

    I always find this moment difficult, so please bear with me

  222. Keep in mind unless what you say is a substantive logical and proof driven refutation, you’re still going to look like a bunch of nitwits.

  223. ROFLOL

    ROFLMAO

    Well then.

    That explains FAUXNews.

    Cya, Vizzini!

    You guys pick up your soiled socks when you’re done.

  224. since the blooper genre has been overdone we are looking to move into the digital age by moving into the online environment

    The show will be a play on the prank call situation

  225. what we were looking for were contestants to take place in a show called

    who is the most hypocritical, racist, arrogant pratt on the internet at the moment

    and the good news is:

    you’ve all qualified for the final

    *snicker*

  226. Said said
    Said I remember when we used to sit
    In the government yard in Trenchtown
    Oba, ob-serving the hypocrites
    As they would mingle with the good people we meet
    Good friends we have had, oh good friends we’ve lost along the way
    In this bright future you can’t forget your past
    So dry your tears I say

    say Bud you ever been to Jamaica

  227. Bakersfield laughing at Rhubarb
    1, September 17, 2010 at 1:21 pm
    Well at least they lived up to my expectations

    Rhubarb
    1, September 17, 2010 at 1:21 pm
    You really had expectations?

    ========================================================

    Come on guy … you have to wait to answer yourself … the post has to appear, then you have to read it, then you respond … if the question and the response appear at the same time that means, aaagh … look, I’m trying to help you out here but you have to do a little strategic planning of your own

  228. Blousie you’re thinking too hard about this and from the wrong end of the theory. you claim to be clever, so at least try to get it right,

    we are not the same person, we are ………. the answer was even posted on this very thread recently
    for all of their claims of intelligence, this lot are too stupid to remember to breathe in and out on time

  229. Sorry Buddha … Elaine was right … impossible to educate … tonight I will make a burnt offering to the Troll God to please send us a more experienced one … I sense an IP nix fast approaching …

  230. To whom it may concern,

    After reading all of the pointless prattle in my inbox this morning, I thought that I would examine your allegations of hypocrisy against Buddha.

    When someone makes an accusation like that but refuses to cite specific statements by the accused in support of it, it raises red flags to me.

    As I see it, Buddha’s original point was that revenge is not the same thing as justice (or, more accurately, revenge is an element of justice rather than the whole of it) and he argued that people should aspire to justice rather than simply revenge.

    He then said: “You say that about Seneca like it was a bad thing he wanted the tyrant Nero dead and chose to go out on his own terms instead.”

    He never opined on the issue of whether or not such an assassination would be justice or revenge, but let’s assume that his implication that it would not have been a bad thing and his advocacy of justice over revenge adds up to an assertion that the assassination of Nero (by Seneca) would be justice rather than revenge. Therefore, in order for there to be any truth in your accusations of hypocrisy, you must show that assassinating a tyrant is ALWAYS merely revenge rather than justice (or at least that it would have been revenge in Seneca’s case). Have you done that? No.

    Given that you are making false (or at least unproven) accusations, the obvious conclusion is that you are either dishonest, ignorant, or stupid (most likely a combination). Which is it?

  231. sloppy you are just making things up to suit yourself….. it sounds incredibly familiar

    bud and sloppy never seen in the same place

    you don’t suppose that……

    no it couldn’t be coz rhubarb is Spiderman so you cant be

    waffle waffle waffle waffle you keep running up whatever coloured flags you wish

    Buddha is a hypocrite
    buddha is a racist
    buddha believes that onlyu logical opnions are allowed
    buddha believes that books are to stop people making it up as they go along

    the rest of you…….. welll you are all just others who talk

  232. It’s a shame that psychtropic drugs can’t cure people who have personality disorders. It must be difficult spending one’s days with one’s knickers perpetually in a twist.

    ;)

  233. As for us. we are allegedly one person who manages to hold down a job (or jobs) or an education or even just a life whilst still mainataining a presence on here for over 16 hours a day, day after day after day

    am I, or are we…….?

    let’s look at the evidence……..

    Multiple usernames

    multiple spellings of the same usernames (a fairly large hint about cookies and networks was made as a gift but this lot just thought it was supper time)

    widely varied writing styles

    completely different styles of humour

    topics ranging from poetry to logic to childcare to education, all of which have been used successfully against you without you even questioning the slightest part of it

    who lives in a single personality like this? – I wouldn’t imagine too may people

    lets look at the protagonists

    Blousies convinced that it’s one person and is timing the posts to work out if it can be done

    Elains trying to work out how someone can destroy her alleged literary credentials with a single five line rhym

    sloppy built her up and is wondering how he got it so wrong

    woosy through gas is trying to get the brown stains off his chinos

    Spam is wondering what he did to start all of this

    Jeepers is just enjoying the ride

    turdwilliger – god knows where he comes in but he seems to be enjoying himself

    and then there’s buddha, the king of logic and the queen of denial (thanks whitney) who cant even outwit a class of 12 year olds and uses racist attacks in support of his supposed impeccably logical arguments

    he’s probably dribbling into his hankie wishing he was someone else, telling everyone that he’s above all this and then posting about how he’s won this and won that in the next breath

    ROFLMA

    Some people pay a fortune for a game like this and you lot haven’t even realised you’re playing a game and just knee jerk yourselves into mindless and purile arguments

    A half a dozen self proclaimed clever dicks and yet not a single one of them has even come close to working out dick, all but the obvious dimwit bud kept predictably quiet during the “wait for it” thing and yet have still to work out clue number one

    I can tell you all if you wish but you really will kick yourselves, or I can tell Spamheed or jeepers creepers and i’m sure they’ll happily do the kicking for you

  234. Spelling correction: “psychtropic” should have been spelled psychotropic.

    “unneeyun” – should have been spelt “onion”

    How do I know?

    coz it was my rhyme and my choice of words

    Ooooooh the arrogance of Rhubarb, and refusing criticism from one of the proles

    *snicker*

  235. You know, I can say, I have not seen may threads out of control with pure Bull Shit….but this is one of them…

  236. Guess who just got back today?
    Them wild-eyed boys that had been away
    Haven’t changed, have much to say
    But man, I still think them cats are crazy

    They were asking if you were around
    How you was, where you could be found
    Told them you were living downtown
    Driving all the old men crazy

  237. You know, I can say, I have not seen may threads out of control with pure Bull Shit….but this is one of them…

    so stop posting it

  238. “Blousies convinced that it’s one person and is timing the posts to work out if it can be done”

    Sigh … all I was trying to do was extend a hand across the pond and offer assistance to a fellow blogger in need … a token of forgiveness for raping the Gulf of Mexico and turning loose a mad bomber in order to save the pensions so vital to the inhabitants of the UK.

    American are so misunderstood and our attempts at generosity and kindness are spat upon … it is a cross …

  239. and besides…..you lot started it with the whole black is white and you smell attempt at superiority

    You aren’t superior to me, you never have been and never will

    You haven’t done what i have done

    you haven’t been where I have been

    You cannot do what I can do

    you are the smallest of the small and your words make you smaller still

    *snicker*

  240. FAIL(7): Doesn’t substantively refute the argument as presented.

    Ooooo. English lessons. lol

    That’s really funny coming from a group who doesn’t understand English has distinct terms with different meanings like “revenge” and “justice” for a reason. Namely that they are distinct and different terms with distinct and different meanings. Wayne always has had problems making distinctions. Like the distinction between the fantasy land of belief (the foundation of religion) and the reality of logics and proofs (the foundation of science). But he was demonstrably insane. A word which can mean either mentally disordered or absurd.

    My . . . isn’t that a coincidence? You boys scored a double Wayne.

  241. Sigh … all I was trying to do was extend a hand across the pond and offer assistance to a fellow blogger in need etc etc etc

    Totally wasted here Blousie, you might want to wait until you have an Enmglishman dangling on your line before you come out with that stuff, and you could maybe call him racist names like your alter ego?

    Besides wasn’t BP majority owned by American companies? yes it was
    http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/just-how-british-is-bp/

    Even you couldn’t be dumb enough to believe that sacking the English CEO changed the ownership of the entire company.

    ROFLMAO what a stupid person you are

  242. FAIL(8): Doesn’t substantively refute the argument as presented.

    It’s also obvious by your use of black and white that you still don’t understand the bifurcation fallacy – you know, that thing you created when you insisted revenge was the equivalent of justice.

  243. FAIL(9): Doesn’t substantively refute the argument as presented.

    Repetitive bullshit merits a repeated grade.

  244. Blouise actually believes the national enquirer and thinks the Brits cause the Gulf Of Mexico spill

    ROFLMA

    Buddha *snicker*

    FAIL (in caps) wont accept when he’s wrong
    hypocrite
    racist

    all the buttens in every combination over and over again

    *snicker*

  245. AY,

    Oh, I don’t know … it’s a bit of sport … but then I’m suffering from Impeachment Trial withdrawal so it may just be a slight psychotic break …

  246. FAIL(10): Doesn’t substantively refute the argument as presented.

    Again – Prove the hypocrisy or you’re simply not doing anything but name calling. It should be readily apparent at this point I don’t care about that. I only care about proofs and logic.

    Again – The Scottish are not a race, they are a nationality. If calling a Scotsman “Scotty” hurt someone’s feelings? Too bad. It doesn’t make me a racist unless you can prove the Scottish have a distinct genomic sub-grouping.

    You’re accomplishing nothing but making yourself look like an idiot without a logical counter-argument or any proof of anything you say.

    (AY,

    Like Blouise, I am tormenting them primarily out of boredom from withdrawal. These guy(s) are clearly cut from the same cloth as Wayne.)

  247. Elaine said:

    Psychotic Break,

    I don’t know Hausdorff.

    Felix Hausdorff was a German mathematician who was one of the founders of modern topology. Among the many mathematical objects bearing his name is the Hausdorff metric – a measure of the distance between two compact non-empty subsets of a metric space.

    In recent years, a writer named Gregory Pincus invented a new poetic form called the Fib–based on the Fibonacci series. It’s a poem of six lines that contains twenty syllables:

    1
    1
    2
    3
    5
    8

    Sort of like a mathematical haiku…

    P.S. Didn’t know you dabbled in writing verse.

    Only rarely and not very well (I tend to get too caught up in the rhyme and meter to the detriment of the poetry), but here’s a Fib for you:

    Doc
    Felix
    Hausdorff
    math giant
    topology’s sire
    a master of measure theory

    ^..^*(many) said,

    OMG Slarti, Fractint was it! Man, I was a power user and LOVED that program. You could get things out of that program that just aren’t replicable with the other programs I’ve used. Wow, I spent literally thousands of hours with Fractint. I can’t get a vid card setting that works and unless it’s been updated in the last 9 months (i keep loading it, finding it unworkable and deleting it at least once or twice a year.) everything is grainy and unpleasant looking. The basic images are ok but I was really into the transforms, the landscape modeling functions and how far they could be pushed. And I pushed them for all the were worth including the cross-eye and analygraph 3D functions for long, soaring canyons from a 0 or 10 degree perspective point, landscapes, planets, petri dish forms, alien eggs, weird, dense inverts shaped like Klingon fighting blades and shields etc. etc. blather, blather…. (foaming at the mouth now…)

    I WANT MY FRACTINT BACK!!!!!! Srsly, my quality of life decreased GREATLY when I couldn’t use Fractint like I wanted to anymore. Given time I’ll get over it, I still have discs of the stuff I did, but obviously I’m still a pining for my old program

    I haven’t seen anything else that compares (or compared) to the power and flexibility of Fractint. I’ll have to take a look around and see if there is a worthy successor out there…

    Uh, went kind of nuts there for a bit, sorry. WoW, you approached fractals from the ‘honest’ direction. I tried to get into it in the proper intellectual manner but math is not my forte’. I bought a book, one, and it was the most simple of the selection at a local bookstore but the math was beyond me.

    Actually, I approached fractals from the ‘cool pictures’ direction, too – I just went from there to the ‘cool pictures made with math’ and then started learning about the math… fractals were the bait that hooked me on non-linear dynamics.

    I understand the general underlying principle and it’s groundbreaking nature but I just jumped in and embraced it because it was beautiful. Fractal geometry/science and the magnitude of it’s usefulness in explaining natural systems, most systems, natural and man made is not lost on me. I read an article that stated that fractal geometry underlies and permeates the very construction of the universe and everything in it. Sounds good to me if an endorsement from pure ignorance is worthy of weight. I doubt that it is thugh; I’m just in it for the visuals.

    I know some people who felt that way about LSD. The visuals were my first introduction to the idea that mathematics can generate beauty, but since then I’ve come to see that the underlining mathematics has a beauty of its own. I think people like Poincare, Fatou, and Julia who were able to see the beauty of the mathematics before there were computers to generate the images were amazing visionaries.

    Unfortunately I can’t claim the extra credit. The names are familiar, I know I knew who they were many years ago but just can’t dredge up the details. I will cheat and look up Stephen Smale because I know the name is familiar to me.

    Smale is best known for ‘the Smale Horseshoe’ a map of the square onto itself via stretching and folding. This is a fundamental example in dynamical systems – it is an intuitively simple map that produces extremely rich dynamics.

    Right, renegade and massive intellect. The better half would regale me with tales of the Great Men of Math. It was always interesting but not something that got filed n long-term memory. If his students ended up half as smart as he as a benefit of his tutelage you were fortunate to have one as your teacher.

    I was doing a project for an engineering class on non-linear dynamics and I ran across a passage in a book describing something called ‘Newhouse sinks’. As the professor that I was referring to is Sheldon Newhouse, I asked him about Newhouse sinks – after telling me that he didn’t call them that he gave me a detailed explanation. Definitely a worthy student of Smale…

    The better half has a math degree and he introduced to to fractals with a ‘hey, you won’t believe the shareware I found, you’re gonna’ love this’ and I was hooked.

    I like your husband already…

    Fractint still works great for basic image generation but transforms look ‘off’. You’ll end up with a resolution of 800×600 unless your graphics card is compatible with one of the settings listed at a hight resolution. My last few computers have not been and while I can get images with some of the higher resolution settings the transform functions all look like c***. I hope you have better luck.

    I’ll try it out and let you know.

  248. Buddha,

    “You’re accomplishing nothing but making yourself look like an idiot without a logical counter-argument or any proof of anything you say.”

    May I suggest a modifier for the word “idiot?” How about blithering?

  249. Slarti,

    There are several forms of “mathematical” poetry that require specific numbers of lines as well a specific number of syllables in each line–including Haiku (5-7-5), Tanka (5-7-5-7-7), and the Cinquain (2-4-6-8-2).

  250. Buddha,

    I know you will find this rather silly but, never the less, I will proceed. I am 100% descended from Scots which is quite a nifty thing to have happened given that the first of my familial predecessors arrived in this country in the mid 1700’s. (Excuse it to a “clan” thing)

    Never was I allowed to refer to either myself or any of my relatives as Scottish. We were Scots. Why? Alright, here’s the silly thing. England produced the English, Ireland the Irish, and Britain the British but Scotland produced Scots (Whales was always left out of the explanation) … thank you very much! My Clan still refused to recognize the 1603 Union of Crowns when James VI of Scotland became James I of England and no “ish” was the outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual meaning for my Clan was also very anti Church of England. The word Scottish was used only by those loyal to the “Throne” and thus not true Scotsmen. I kid you not!

  251. Blouise,

    Truth be known? I’m not pure Irish. Just mostly. We’ve got a Scot (3 generations out, a Payne) and a Blackfoot (4 generations out and have I got some stories about her! A real larger than life character) in the woodpile. There may even be an English in there, but I’ve never been able to confirm that. Scotland has produced many amazing things as a culture including some of my favorite authors (Sir A.C. Doyle, J.M. Barrie and the surprisingly good J.K. Rowling [she’s the only juvenile fiction author I’ve really enjoy other than Robert Heinlein’s pieces, I consider Barrie a children’s author although I’ve read a couple of his plays]). Personally, given the raw number of NASA engineers who grew up to take their careers after watching a certain Irish-Canadian actor play “Scotty” on Star Trek, I’d consider it a proud badge. I would, however, be quite embarrassed by the Scots contingent we’ve seen on display here.

  252. Buddha,

    “Rowling [she’s the only juvenile fiction author I’ve really enjoy other than Robert Heinlein’s pieces, I consider Barrie a children’s author although I’ve read a couple of his plays]).”

    There are plenty of juvenile/young adult authors who write outstanding fiction–including Jane Yolen (I loved her book “Girl in a Cage,” a work of historical fiction about Marjorie Bruce that Yolen wrote with co-author Robert Harris. Yolen lives in the Massachusetts and Scotland.), Susan Cooper, M. T. Anderson, Lois Lowry, Natalie Babbitt, Katherine Paterson, Avi, Christopher Paul Curtis, Jacqueline Woodson, and Joseph Bruchac, a Native American author. You HAVE to read Sherman Alexie’s “The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian,” winner of a National Book Award. Alexie is another Native American author. He’s written fiction, short stories, poetry, and wrote/co-wrote the screenplay for the movie “Smoke Signals.”

  253. ” … embarrassed by the Scots contingent we’ve seen on display here.”

    My Clan would consider them “lowland” or “border” Scots and lackeys of the Crown … and would probably run a raid in an attempt to clean out the nest of vipers for :

    ‘Scots, wha hae wi’ Wallace bled,
    Scots, wham Bruce has aften led,
    Welcome tæ yer gory bed,
    Or tæ Victory.

    ‘Now’s the day, and now’s the hour:
    See the front o’ battle lour,
    See approach proud Edward’s power –
    Chains and Slavery.

    ‘Wha will be a traitor knave?
    Wha will fill a coward’s grave?
    Wha sæ base as be a slave?
    Let him turn and flee.

    ‘Wha, for Scotland’s king and law,
    Freedom’s sword will strongly draw,
    Freeman stand, or Freeman fa’,
    Let him on wi me.

    ‘By Oppression’s woes and pains,
    By your sons in servile chains!
    We will drain our dearest veins,
    But they shall be free.

    ‘Lay the proud usurpers low,
    Tyrants fall in every foe,
    Liberty’s in every blow! –
    Let us do or dee. (Burns)

    My ancestors were a blood thirsty bunch …

  254. Buddha,

    You’re accomplishing nothing but making yourself look like an idiot without a logical counter-argument or any proof of anything you say.

    I would say that’s a rather damning indictment of someone who is allegedly your friend…….keep it coming baby you making me laugh

    adding the word “blithering is just further adding to the insult, I would leave it there sweetheart……but welcome on board, anyone who shafts the bud is a friend of mine

    Blueish, its spelled Wales, as in the country, it’s readily available in most dictionaries, including the revered Merriam Webster

    Whales are those big fishy things in the sea that swallow men with peg legs an shit

    “stupid is as stupid does” obviously written by someone brighter than thou, or at least someone who didn’t claim to be a clever shite but knew the difference between “whales” and “wales”

    Bud, so as well as being a hypocrite, a racist and a down dog liar, you’re a part mick cross as well? the English bit is by mutual denial and to be fair, I wouldn’t put a claim on such a low down gobshite as you neither.

    fuck me son, you got nothing going for you at all have you, cant fight and cant argue for shit, gettin beaten up by the fuckin post boy for fucks sake

    You is so low you could parascend out of the ass of a snake and still manage a free fall.

    fuckin lowest of the low and before you git all penickety, you use the F word long before we did.

    why you keeping count of your failures son, it’s not like we need remindin, you lost, done an dead. hypocrite, racist and dog done liar

    you a hypocrite
    a racist and you got beat up by a bunch of 12 year olds an I bet those were mostly girls

    shit I reckon my 10 year old could roll you over and make you squeal like a lil pig

    your all mouth, dictionary and thesaurus and fuck all else, if you wanna come an play please do tell otherwise shut the fuck up and stop behavin like a bitch who lost her dinner money

    welcome to the war peace loving mother

  255. Blowfish

    I reckoin the only bit of scottish you understand is the bit about the scabby dirk, or do you not undersatnd such a reference?

    100% descendant from Scotttish isn’t the same as being scottish and your “clan” as you put it are US, the same as mine so don’t mix up your histories by watching Mel in Braveheart. we both know he and you are full of bull.

    according to bud in earlier posts, your “clan” members were beaten by his “English” ancestors in an american battle

    amazing that he is the only person who remembers Scottish involvement in the WoI but hey, this is your friend

  256. Blowfish

    I reckon the only bit of scottish you understand is the bit about the scabby dirk, or do you not undersatnd such a reference?

    100% descendant from Scotttish isn’t the same as being scottish and your “clan” as you put it are all USA, the same as mine

    So don’t mix up your histories by watching too much of Mel in Braveheart. we both know he and you are full of bull.

    according to bud in earlier posts, your “clan” members were beaten by his “English” ancestors in an american battle

    amazing that he is the only person who remembers Scottish involvement in the WoI but hey, this is your friend

  257. are we having a burns night Blouise?

    since you’re kind enough to quote him, perhaps you’d also like to explain the inspiration for “wallace’ march to Bannockburn”

    or maybe you’ll accept you’re just anothwer lastic Jock

    What is it about Americans, not one of them is a Yank, they’re all too busy being Irish on Paddies day and Scottish on Burns Night etc and so forth

    But hey, America is so generous and yet so maligned lol

  258. Blueish
    sloppy
    onion head
    and the rest

    so now you know, so fucking stupid you disdn’t have the sense to ask, there are over 40 of us and have been as many from the start

  259. we even give you clever people clues to help you

    our name is legion?
    the constant references to we, more than one

    but the arrogance is just to ingrained isn’t it.

    Bluieish, whilst it might be conceded that you have a tartan skirt you are as much Scottish as Bush was and about as smart

    Bud, you are a fucking liar, you are a hypocrite, a racist and a fucking liar and I defy you to say otherwise, you and your fucking FAIL(7) shit – i might acce[pt you are Irish on account you are as thick as fuck but on no other terms

    *laugh my fucking balls off*

  260. we are better than you and always have been

    we can do what you cannot
    we go where you do not
    we have been where you have not

    we do not rely on books or second hand opinions, we learn first hand and at cost to ourselves

    bud, just for the record
    logic will get you killed in this world son, the Scots boy has you dead and done.

    Logic coubnts for nothing compared to experience and that gut feeling that you cant quite put your finger on

    so when the little guy tells you that the snake is a bad MoFo, you don’task for logic, you just step aside and move on

    *snicker*

  261. Rhubarb (and the rest),

    Since I showed that Buddha is not a hypocrite (or at least that you haven’t given us any evidence of his being a hypocrite) and you don’t seem to be able to make any sort of logical case to the contrary you are clearly either a liar or an idiot (my money is on both…).

    Bakersfield,

    I don’t really care if there are four of you, forty of you, or if all of you are just some pathetic loser living in his parent’s basement – in this venue the only thing that matters are your words and your words have shown that you are a liar or an idiot that makes accusations that he/she/they can’t defend. But if you guys truly are Marines, then remember that you still can’t tell until the law is repealed…

  262. Sloppy

    you have nothing to say

    the evidence has been made clear, BUddha steted both sides of an argument after slating someone for takign one of the sides, this makes him a hypocrite, the fact that you support his position makes it no less untenable

    A group of 12 year olds very quickly rubbish his opinion on logic and his rediculous [point on books being designed to somehow prevent people from having a free say or “making it up as they go along” is not worth delving into

    he is a racist and your supporting his position can mean one of two things, either you are stupid as he is, or you are him and therefore your opniion is as futile and pointless as his/yours

  263. USMC? Oh really? So which is the lie? Researchers for TV, 12 years old or Marines?

    As someone who had an uncle die in Vietnam working Marine artillery, you’re doing a perfectly disrespectful job representing the Corps. Either you’re a filthy liar appealing to patriotism or they certainly have lowered their admissions standards if you’re a Marine.

    FAIL(11): Doesn’t substantively refute the argument as presented.

    If you are a Marine, which I sincerely doubt, I hope you can fight better than you can reason and argue. Then again, there is always a need for cannon fodder.

    As to “welcome to the war peace loving mother”? Do these ring a bell? (I really doubt it.)

    “Together we must learn how to compose difference, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose.”

    Or this one:

    “There is no glory in battle worth the blood it costs.”

    Maybe this one (aw, who am I kidding):

    “I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.”

    Still stupefied?

    All these are statements of Dwight D. Eisenhower. A greater warrior than you’ll ever be, sport.

    If you’re a Marine? You’re a disgrace to the uniform. As it is you’re simply a shit talking blow hard without the brains to poor piss out of a boot with instructions on the bottom.

    Or you could intimate violence again and wave the flag some more.

    I really find that hilarious.

    The Corps wouldn’t have a moron like you.

  264. I’m quite happy to put my money where my mouth is, how about you sloppy.

    I stand by every word and rhyme I have made on this forum

    you somehow find that Bud is not a hypocrite even though he states that murder out of revenge is okay but revenge is not okay

    an opinion forget out of anything but logic is invalid
    what about a rape victim having an opinion that all men are rapists
    is that illogical? I fucking well think not as far as she is concerned, no logic in that opinion, just personal experience and pure emotion.

    what about the book argument: people write thousands of books every year demonstrating their free thought and their attitude to making it up as they go along – to prevent themselves from writing books about “making it up as they go along” – how stupid do you need to be to believe this?

  265. I’m always happy to put my money where my mouth is, how about you sloppy.

    I stand by every word and rhyme I have made on this forum

    you somehow find that Bud is not a hypocrite even though he states that murder out of revenge is okay but revenge is not okay

    an opinion forget out of anything but logic is invalid
    what about a rape victim having an opinion that all men are rapists
    is that illogical? I fucking well think not as far as she is concerned, no logic in that opinion, just personal experience and pure emotion.

    what about the book argument: people write thousands of books every year demonstrating their free thought and their attitude to making it up as they go along – to prevent themselves from writing books about “making it up as they go along” – how stupid do you need to be to believe this?

  266. Are you honestly claiming the Semper Fi … half my relatives were in the Corp and none of ’em would claim you … based on your posts at any rate …

    We always spelled it “durk” but I will acknowledge your preference for the scabby dirk …

    Carry on … I’m off to the local football game ….

  267. Free thought buddha, free thought, perhaps this is still a concept that is alien to you. despite our predicament we still have free thought

    asked a simple question and a simple answer is given to the person asking.

    for all your blowing on about how clever you are, it takes a foreigner to have the sense to ask such a simple question.

    If you doubt then that is you perogative, and you are welcome to it, but it doesn’t lessen the fact that you are a hypocrite, a liar, a racist and a pendant.

    your opinion is worthless your curses and slights woth less again.

    you are just a dictionary, a thesaurus and an online presence, nothing else, when they are gone, so are you

  268. Blouise

    if they knew of our position, all of them would and do claim us,

    boredom is a terrible enemy, but mobility is a blessing

    the word is Dirk in its original form and thank you for the departure

  269. Buddha and Slarti,

    This is getting so good, I almost don’t want to leave … this dude thinks he’s on a site of liberals who naturally hate the military … I mean this is too damn good!

    Please dig into the Marine reference … I’d do it but I gotta go … one of the guys we’re meeting is a retired Marine … did his duty and then some …

    High School football calls!

  270. we are what we are and need no fucking recognition from a bunch of wannabe lawyers

    you are not me and cannot do what I can do
    have neot been where i have been

    blowhards the fuckin lot of you

  271. I’ve had idiots threaten me here before so pardon me if I’m not just quaking in fear. IRL, I’m so able to screw you over worse than anything you can possibly threaten me with so threaten away.

    But back to your illogic.

    “you somehow find that Bud is not a hypocrite even though he states that murder out of revenge is okay but revenge is not okay”

    You’re putting words in my mouth. I said no such thing. Prove it. Find the quote. Be specific. Or you can rant and rave and lie some more. I bet the Corps is proud of you!

    “what about a rape victim having an opinion that all men are rapists is that illogical?”

    Yes. As a matter of fact, all men are not rapists. That’s a person in need of psychological help to overcome her irrational fear.

    “I fucking well think not as far as she is concerned, no logic in that opinion, just personal experience and pure emotion.”

    Then you’re implying she’s little more than an animal acting on instinct instead of a human being. Shame on you for denigrating a rape victim like that. Some animal like yourself was the kind of guy who dehumanized her into a sex object and raped her in the first place.

    “what about the book argument: people write thousands of books every year demonstrating their free thought and their attitude to making it up as they go along – to prevent themselves from writing books about “making it up as they go along” – how stupid do you need to be to believe this?”

    Been reading the self-help section, sparky? I was referring to real books. Science. Philosophy. History. Law. Not psycho-babble designed for the weak minded incapable of making their way through the world without a Dr. Phil holding their hand.

    You’re starting to sound less like a Marine than someone with Borderline Personality Disorder.

    But you keep it up, sport. The way you’ve been making threats will get you banned. Why? Well, because there are laws against such things and this is a legal blog.

  272. Just don’t let him claim to be one of the Marines who helped straighten out the mess in Iraq … you know the one idea that really worked and that Protreaus is always trying to take credit for …

  273. Spamheed 1, September 17, 2010 at 7:04 pm

    Bakersfield + Rhubarb what is it you do?

    what is the big secret you allude to?

    403 Bakersfield 1, September 17, 2010 at 7:05 pm

    USMC

    Spamheed 1, September 17, 2010 at 7:05 pm

    why didn’t you just say so?

    405 Rhubarb 1, September 17, 2010 at 7:06 pm

    no one asked
    _____

    Tsk, tsk, tsk. Caught lying again.

    Enjoy your evening, trolls. I’m gone for the night so feel free to lie and look as idiotic as you wish.

  274. petrie dishes and snails all over the place, it got a damn sight worse when that twinkie guy got involved, sponge cake dripping from the security windows, cameras and everything, fucking brutal, almost like being back at Qala-i-Jangi

    but on the positive side at least the cleaners were well fed

  275. I’m sure you’ll lose a lot of sleep over that

    This lots a fucking waste of space, talks bullshit and expects the world to believe them, everyones a fuckin marine these days, should’ve joined the green

    Man I am so gone, I have no idea what the fuck they’re doin to me

  276. Stow that

    there is no such thing as a wannabe lawyer on the internet, but then there is no such thing as an ugly fuck neither

    then there is no such thing as a hypocrite
    no such thing as a racist
    no such thing as a lying sumbitch

    all big an tough in front of their monitors

  277. Slarti, “I haven’t seen anything else that compares (or compared) to the power and flexibility of Fractint. I’ll have to take a look around and see if there is a worthy successor out there…”
    —–
    Thank you. I had actually begun to question the soundness of my faculties over this matter; was I becoming inflexible in learning new things, was my ability to appreciate a change diminishing, did I no longer have the ability to understand new ‘stuff’, was I caught up in a false appreciation of a past experience for various (probably unhealthy) reasons? I look for clues that I’m becoming ‘calcified’ in my thinking or mental acuity so rejecting new programs that I should be able to master or enjoy gives me pause. That you feel Fractint had more versatility than you found elsewhere is reassuring.

    I sure wish a fractal lover would write the code to make Frctint compatible with current video cards or a fully functional Windows version.

    Have you seen this? I just saw it a couple of days ago. (I want to live there!) I want THIS program:

  278. damn….someone lost an argument and went plumb off thier rocker….into nastyland!

    I miss the Turley touch….hope this trial is over soon….

  279. It’s actually available, I just went to UTube and saw the link for a download so I downloaded it, I hope it works on a Mac ’cause that’s what I use primarily since my PC died. I partitioned the drive and have Windows on that other partition but it’s a tiny partition. I live to follow links and download freeware :-) I’m hoping this will be the 1 in 234 d/l’s that was worth the d/l effort.

    It’s Mandelbulber:

    http://sourceforge.net/projects/mandelbulber/

  280. W=^. .^

    Fractint is one of the oldest Fractal generating program around. It is a DOS program and (I just checked) is still being updated. There is a Windows version that the developers came up with (Winfract) but it left a lot to be desired, it kept crashing my ‘puter. The major flaw with it became (for me) that the video card selection menu became obsolete and the resolution was low. The selections given for higher resolutions than 800×600 worked only intermittently or not at all for the DOS version. Winfract also had low default resolution and was way too buggy.

    This is the homepage for Fractint and it has the latest release of Fractint (DOS). There are a lot of commands to use so downloading the tutorial may be helpful. Lists of commands are in the ‘Help’ file of the program; use F1 to get there. I printed them out and referred to them in hardcopy because that’s easier than going back and forth to a new screen when I started using it.

    http://www.Nahee.com/spanky/www/fractint/getting.html
    ——-

    There is a new Beta version of Fractint for Windows, I found this through Google and will have to give it a try:

    http://www.fractalforums.com/announcements-and-news/fractint-under-windows-(beta-5)/

    The Gallery section of this site is lovely. Use the tab to get there, you will not be disappointed. It looks like a lot of the fractals were generated with Mandelbulber or a similar program (if there are more than one) as they are images of Mandelbub’s. That program link is in the above posting. The above video is of a Mandelbub so obviously if the program linked in the above posting produces images like that vid or the examples in the Gallery of FractalForums that’s a gem of a program to have.

  281. ^..^ * (many)said,

    “Have you seen this? I just saw it a couple of days ago. (I want to live there!) I want THIS program:”

    Very cool. I want the computer, not the software (well, both actually…). This may be the coolest fractal I’ve seen since a guy in a chaos class that I was taking used a lab with a dozen or so workstations to compute a Julia set over the quaternions (like the complex numbers, but with j and k in addition to i (the square root of -1), suppress the 4th dimension and project the remaining 3 dimensions into 2. It was sort of like a fractal doughnut. He also had a 30 second animation of 900 Julia sets associated with points along a diagonal line through the Mandelbrot set. I just realized that I could probably do that with my computer and software that I have and can write pretty easily – back in the late 80s it took over a month of CPU time on a lab full of computers…. Anyway, I just finished downloading ‘Mandelbulber’ right now (I’m a Mac person, too) – time to play.

  282. Rhubarb said:

    I’m always happy to put my money where my mouth is, how about you sloppy.

    I stand by every word and rhyme I have made on this forum

    So do I. My name is Kevin Kesseler and I’m a mathematical biologist – you can look up my publication history (scant as it is – although a paper on which I am the first author was submitted this week ;-)) if you’d like. I hold a Ph.D. in mathematics from Duke University and have absolutely no desire to be a lawyer. Would you like to establish any bona fides?

    you somehow find that Bud is not a hypocrite even though he states that murder out of revenge is okay but revenge is not okay

    Since Buddha’s already dealt with this straw man, I’ll just point out that he favors justice (which includes an aspect of revenge) over revenge alone and implicitly believes that assassination can be justice rather than just revenge. I doubt you’ll get very far with most of the readers here if you keep lying about things that they can check out for themselves by merely scrolling up…

    an opinion forge[d] out of anything but logic is invalid
    what about a rape victim having an opinion that all men are rapists
    is that illogical? I fucking well think not as far as she is concerned, no logic in that opinion, just personal experience and pure emotion.

    Yes, that is an illogical opinion. An understandable opinion in the circumstances, but illogical nonetheless. Dictionary.com says:

    il·log·i·cal [ih-loj-i-kuhl] –adjective
    not logical; contrary to or disregardful of the rules of logic; unreasoning: an illogical reply.

    So for this to be a logical opinion, the statement ‘all men are rapists’ would have to be true according to the rules of logic. Those of us living in the reality-based world recognize that this is not the case. Therefore it is, in fact, an illogical opinion. Now, it would certainly be reasonable hypothesis that a person in this situation might come to hold this opinion, but the opinion itself is patently illogical.

    what about the book argument: people write thousands of books every year demonstrating their free thought and their attitude to making it up as they go along – to prevent themselves from writing books about “making it up as they go along” – how stupid do you need to be to believe this?

    I have better things to do than to address an incoherent argument based on a straw man this stupid with a known liar like you.

  283. I wish I understood what you all are doin’ and talkin’ about ’cause it sounds like a lot of fun! I don’t have any room on my hard drive anyway, so I’ll just stand in the corner and watch the big kids play. Please keep the exhibits coming … they are mesmerizing.

  284. W=^. .^, I went to the Fractint site to d/l their latest version of Fractint DOS and many of the links are dead- I d/l’d it from a mirror site though:

    http://spanky.triumf.ca/www/fractint/getting.html

    One of these 3 programs- Frain200 (FractintDOS), Winfract or Mandelbulber -should provide a bit of diversion.

    Slarti, yes, I want the computer too, LOL. The Mandelbulber has a Windows install extension so I’m going to take it to my Windows partition and see if I can install it, my Mac partition won’t cooperate with it and I’m a Mac novice, I don’t know how to ‘trick’ it into doing what I want :-) I too am going to just play for awhile.

  285. Blouise, the explanation of what a fractal is in this video is in great part word for word from Wikipedia so I thought this would be a good vid to post by way of example:

  286. Blouise, The basis of fractal art is the Mandelbrot Set (Google for the definition- it’s serious math) but the important part of the description is this: “When computed and graphed on the complex plane the Mandelbrot set is seen to have an elaborate boundary which, being a fractal, DOES NOT SIMPLIFY at any given magnification.” (Emphasis mine)

    Various programs let you zoom into any point of the Mandelbrot Set and manipulate the image using color and various rendering options. Other programs and options in some programs allow you to transform the image into 3D shapes and landscapes. Save the image and viola’, trippy math art.

    The programs aren’t large but the computation of the image can use a lot of computing power since the image is a graphic representation of an iteration of a mathematical equation, the ‘deeper’ you zoom the higher the iteration of the equation generating that point, literally millions/billions of iterations:

    “Iteration in mathematics may refer to the process of iterating a function i.e. applying a function repeatedly, using the output from one iteration as the input to the next. Iteration of apparently simple functions can produce complex behaviours and difficult problems – for examples,…” Wikipedia

    Contemporary computers make generating images pretty fast. Google “Fractal” and go to any site and check out the ‘gallery’ for examples of what is being done.

    AND there are a lot of different basic equations (‘sets’ I believe they’re called) for generating fractals and one can tinker with those basic equations, one is not limited to the Mandelbrot set. Yu can see the potential to spend much of ones (life) time ensconced in the basement, generating images :-)

    I hope this brief explanation was helpful. Once it get beyond this explanation I start getting confused. :-)

    Not sure if this will load- its HD. A deep zoom from the Mandelbrot Set.

  287. Lottakatz,

    WOW!! I’m glad I checked in before going to bed. That is absolutely fantastic … I even started to experience a bit of motion sickness but never mind that … I’ve been hearing about Fractal Music for a long time but never really grasped the concept of “Pink Noise” … the younger kids know all about it and create some unbelievable things … I’ve been to “concerts” which are really more like exhibits but never really been able to grab anyone and sit them down and say, “Explain how you created this to me.”

    Imagine learning about Fractal Art and Music on a legal blog!

    Okay, I did some cut and paste so I can study this off the blog site. Thank you so much. I can’t wait for tomorrow to get started!

    I bet I’m going to have to get a Mac before all this is done … I’ll just tell my husband it’s your fault.

    Seriously, thank you!

  288. Blouise,

    The video is a reasonable layman’s explanation of fractals – if you can install a version of fractint on your computer (it’s a pretty small program) it’s fun to play with.

    ^..^ * (many),

    Thanks for bringing this up – after downloading a bunch of fractal generators I got to thinking about fractal dimension and how I can use it and realized that by computing the dimension of the orbits of my model in phase space I might be able to come up with a synchronization metric – something very helpful for a paper I’m working on…

    Unfortunately, I have to nitpick a bit on your comment to Blouise:

    ^..^ * (many) said:

    Blouise, The basis of fractal art is the Mandelbrot Set (Google for the definition- it’s serious math) but the important part of the description is this: “When computed and graphed on the complex plane the Mandelbrot set is seen to have an elaborate boundary which, being a fractal, DOES NOT SIMPLIFY at any given magnification.” (Emphasis mine)

    What’s more, the Mandelbrot set is ‘self-similar’ which means that approximate copies of the whole thing can be found inside the original at any scale, no matter how small. The boundary of the set (the border of the black area in the middle), while being a closed curve, is infinitely long. The easiest way that I know of to think of this is to imagine measuring a coastline. If you use a ruler that is a kilometer long you will get one number, but if you use a shorter and shorter ruler the length you measure will increase. For the Mandelbrot set, if you measure its boundary with an infinitesimally small ruler, you will get a length of infinity.

    Various programs let you zoom into any point of the Mandelbrot Set and manipulate the image using color and various rendering options. Other programs and options in some programs allow you to transform the image into 3D shapes and landscapes. Save the image and viola’, trippy math art.

    I would just add that the Mandelbrot set is just the beginning of trippy math art…

    The programs aren’t large but the computation of the image can use a lot of computing power since the image is a graphic representation of an iteration of a mathematical equation, the ‘deeper’ you zoom the higher the iteration of the equation generating that point, literally millions/billions of iterations:

    No. Generally, as you zoom in you don’t change the maximum number of iterations. The problem is that as you zoom in, you need to be able to do more and more accurate calculations leaving you with a tradeoff – accuracy of calculation and hence the level of detail vs. computational time. Just for an example, one of the programs I downloaded today reached it’s limit around 140x magnification. Another one allows for setting the number of digits of accuracy in the computations so you can explicitly make the choice.

    “Iteration in mathematics may refer to the process of iterating a function i.e. applying a function repeatedly, using the output from one iteration as the input to the next. Iteration of apparently simple functions can produce complex behaviours and difficult problems [If I felt like editing Wikipedia, I would remove ‘and difficult problems’ here – the key point is that simple functions produce complex behaviors.]– for examples,…” Wikipedia

    Contemporary computers make generating images pretty fast. Google “Fractal” and go to any site and check out the ‘gallery’ for examples of what is being done.

    On my old Apple II+ it took a program I wrote on the order of an hour to produce an image of the Mandelbrot set – my current computer can produce a much higher resolution image in less than a second.

    AND there are a lot of different basic equations (‘sets’ I believe they’re called [‘Equations’ is the correct term.]) for generating fractals and one can tinker with those basic equations, one is not limited to the Mandelbrot set. Yu can see the potential to spend much of ones (life) time ensconced in the basement, generating images :-)

    The two basic types of sets are the Mandelbrot set and Julia sets (given an equation, there is one Mandelbrot set and infinitely many Julia sets). Mandelbrot set is like a map to the Julia sets – there is a different Julia set associated with each point in the plane and where that point lies in relation to the Mandelbrot set determines characteristics of the Julia set. For instance the Julia sets associated with points inside the Mandelbrot set are connected (all one piece) while those associated with points outside the Mandelbrot set are made up of an infinite number of pieces. The standard Mandelbrot and Julia sets you see are based on the equation z -> z^2 + c. Using another equation in its place will get you a different Mandelbrot set and infinitely many more Julia sets.

    I hope this brief explanation was helpful. Once it get beyond this explanation I start getting confused. :-)

    I hope that my elaborations and corrections were helpful as well – and if there’s anything you’d like me to try to explain, just ask… this is one of my favorite areas of mathematics.

    I should mention that the fractal in my gravatar is neither a Julia Set or a Mandelbrot set, but a different kind of fractal that comes from using Newton’s method to find the roots of an equation (in this case the characteristic equation of my model of two coupled nephrons). Well, I’ve got to go and write code to compute fractal dimension…

  289. Blouise, Thanks for whatever I could accurately provide, Slarti’s corrections to my postings are the real deal though. I looked for vids that would provide a proper introduction, UTube has dozens of fractal vids but I wanted something pretty that would provide a context. I’m really happy you like the ones I chose.

    One of the neat things about the result of zooming is you find many tiny areas that posses symmetry and if you pick a nice color scheme and cycle the colors (outward or inward) it acts like a geometric mandala. Really, really nice and restful effect. There are some UTube vids showing that function also.

    I wasted a lot of time wasted, listening to Pink Floyd or other trance-like music, mesmerized by my newly generated mandala. It was a nice way to prepare for going to sleep and kind of meditative. Good times. :-)

  290. Slarti, Correct away, by all means. Thank you. I have more questions. They are probably more trouble to answer than your time is worth. I’m asking some basic stuff here – boooring. If it’s a drag to answer just say ‘it’s a needless complication to even think about it, just strive for the visual beauty’. LOL.

    The infinite coastline aspect I’m familiar with. The use of fractal images to fill in areas of maps for which data did not exist (mountainous regions, coastlines) was something being explored by a previous employer of mine. I stuck my head into a presentation being given to a group of cartographers on the subject of this ‘revolutionary, new tool’ but left after a short period. The presentation was so dry and uninteresting that even a hard core, motivated fan of both fractal geometry and mapping couldn’t take it. I couldn’t do the math but I could follow the theory and explanation of how/why it worked. The Gummint could make even a seminar on sex boring.

    ————-

    Iterations. OK. I had first written something to indicate a ‘positions behind the decimal point’ explanation but rummaged deep into my old musty mental data storage unit and said,’no, you have it exactly backwards’. I understand from your correction that I may have been on the right track originally … or not.

    Sooooo, I’m still struggling here, are we talking about accuracy = iterations = detail = places behind the decimal point (number of numbers behind the decimal point). I always set my program at 1000 iterations for a final image on some classes of images I did (more computation = more detail being my governing assumption) when a choice became available. (Previews around 100-150.)

    I also assumed that zooming was the same process, more iterations were being done as a function of dealing with increasingly smaller bits of detail to begin with. That the recursive nature of the equation required more iteration farther out the equation was carried. “Farther out” = deeper on was zooming.

    With Fractint iteration did equal detail, you could fill in ‘holes’ in the image with a higher iteration designation. Selection of iteration level was a serious concern based on what level of detail was needed (or desired for a specific effect) for the final image. I used as little as 35 and as high as 2500+ depending on what I wanted and needed.

    You know, my background is originally photography so I used iteration like I would use an F/stop or some other tool for producing detail or lessening detail. That may be where I’m off track, thinking of iterations as ‘like’ something, when they are not.

    ————-

    If there are 2 sets (both of which I used regularly), what were the other 34 equations available in Fractint? Just other equations that can be visually modeled and share a fractal ‘nature’? Is that what you meant by the Mandelbrot set being the starting point or trippy fractal art.

    All cacti are succulents but not all succulents are cacti. That’s a rule. Cacti are a FAMILY with many TRIBES (columnar, etc.) What is the essence of a fractal? Must all fractals have equations that are recursive? Are fractals a separate tribe of equation within a branch of mathematics. or a shared trait occurring in many tribes of equations within or across many branches of mathematics?
    ————

    I know generally about the relationship of the Julia and Mandelbrot sets but I didn’t know why there were whole Julia’s v. fragmented ones. I had noticed in Fractint that some of the “Mand-other name” types would not produce Julia’s and there were limits to how much I could change the parameters (I think I recall) even on the Mandelbrot set and still get Julia’s. I used other manipulation functions pretty routinely like the inversion function so I never managed to puzzle out why Julia’s didn’t always work. I see now that some of the “Mand-xxxxx” probably were not actually the Mandelbrot set, or shared enough characteristics of the original equation to produce Julia’s. That’s a guess.

  291. Cant believe I missed this one, but in fairness by then my stuff was starting to kick in and I was way off base.

    you say

    So do I. My name is Kevin Kesseler and I’m a mathematical biologist – you can look up my publication history (scant as it is – although a paper on which I am the first author was submitted this week ;-) ) if you’d like. I hold a Ph.D. in mathematics from Duke University and have absolutely no desire to be a lawyer. Would you like to establish any bona fides?

    I say
    Yup, My name is ….. damn, I can’t do that, whether you believe or not is immaterial, you still believe ol’ bud to be a genuine smart ass with a heart of gold

    Therefore I am obliged to remain anonymous, for reasons I am not permitted to explain but if you search under my pseudonym “Rhubarb” you will find lots and lots of stuff written about me, alternatively you can search on Bakersfield, he is more important than me because they named some lil place after him

    I did consider a career as a urologist, so that I could git paid for doin what I’m doing to you.

    I did a number of searches for you, but couldn’t find you on anything other than Guyslink, not too surprised about that really, just another freak in a white coat I reckon, like the ones that come along and needle me all day.

    If you want, I can get you another genuine Phd from the school of your choice for only £35 dollars, I hope you didn’t pay more than that for yours, coz if you did, then they must have seen you comin from a looooong way away.

    you say

    Since Buddha’s already dealt with this straw man, I’ll just point out that he favors justice (which includes an aspect of revenge) over revenge alone and implicitly believes that assassination can be justice rather than just revenge. I doubt you’ll get very far with most of the readers here if you keep lying about things that they can check out for themselves by merely scrolling up…

    I say
    yeah yeah yeah yeah yeah, heard it all before and whether it’s him bein him sayin it, or him bein you sayin it, its still just bull

    you say

    Yes, that is an illogical opinion. An understandable opinion in the circumstances, but illogical nonetheless. Dictionary.com says:

    il·log·i·cal [ih-loj-i-kuhl] –adjective
    not logical; contrary to or disregardful of the rules of logic; unreasoning: an illogical reply.

    I say
    I aint even gonna bother with the rest of this real opinion vs your made up shit – it’s just stupid, so another dictionary nut crawls out of the woodwork? or mebbe just the same one, you are givin too much away here bud

    you say

    I have better things to do than to address an incoherent argument based on a straw man this stupid with a known liar like you.

    i say
    I would say that the logical argument here would be that you don’t have anything better to do coz you just keep on addressin my incoherant whatchamacallits.

    Funny thing that logic stuff

    You go right on and have a nice day now

    *snicker*

  292. I got a fee copy of Maneldbrot in my draw, they gave me it to help pass the time

    So I use it to squash flies on the window, so that they make pretty pictures

  293. I really don’t like your point of view
    I know you’ll never change
    Stingin’ me with your attitude
    I’ve got the mind to walk away

    I really don’t like your arrogance
    Or your policies
    You’re ninety-nine percent an embarrassment
    With just one quality

  294. I get tired, and upset
    And I’m trying to care a little less
    And on Google I only get depressed
    I was taught to dodge those issues,
    I was told:
    Don’t worry, there’s no doubt
    There’s always something to cry about
    When you’re stuck in an angry crowd
    They don’t think what they say before they open their mouth,

    Hot topic,
    Maybe I should drop it,
    It’s a touchy subject,
    And I like to tiptoe ’round the shit going down,
    You got penny, but no pound
    So if your business is running out
    It’s not my business to talk about
    They don’t think what they say before they open their mouth,

    Gotta love that girl

  295. Lotta and Slarti,

    I read everything you both wrote and took in the corrections/modifications and I’m now off into Google land … I have a bunch of questions but I think I should do more reading before taking up your time as I might find answers, gain a bit more knowledge and understanding, and then be able to ask intelligent questions that hold your interest and don’t waste your time.

    Do some of my own work instead of asking you to do it for me … pink noise … etc.

    My weekend is free and I’m experiencing the same kind of anticipation I feel about a free weekend and a brand new book …

  296. “Why? Alright, here’s the silly thing. England produced the English, Ireland the Irish, and Britain the British but Scotland produced Scots (Whales was always left out of the explanation) …”
    ————————
    Blouise, it’s Wales, and I’ve a bit of all of the
    Celto-Germanic blood in me. To fill the above gap…you can call us ‘Welts’….owing to the ever more agressive tendencies of our many brethren… ;)

    I love the fractal thread…I’m trying to use Chaospro now tho it is not so much fun…the fractals are already there and all you can do is ‘doctor’ them up….I think. Mandlebulber downloaded but didn’t install well and I’m not such a ‘techie’ so my new toys will take some getting use to.

  297. Welts? Perhaps they’ll fit into my new Fractal Country … I’m not going to try and download anything yet … reading, reading, reading …

    A Fractal Ode to the Welts … I might make that my first design attempt ;)

  298. Bakersfield 1, September 17, 2010 at 7:05 pm

    USMC
    ———————-

    I think not.
    I know a few Marines and they would be disgusted by your gutter mouths and cowardly gangsta approach.

    [ok, I know it’s late but I’m just catching up….I got caught in the fractals…:) ]

  299. Buddha,

    Last time you mentioned a dinner date (and pool)you ended up with a recluse bite … trust things went better …

    Our team won the game and both bands marched up and down the field with real artistry. There was bonfire smoke in the air and hot-dogs sizzling on the grill at the Concession Stand … a jacket sufficed to ward off the chill and all in all it was a perfect Friday night High School football game.

    And … you were right … well it was either you or AY who told me that when the Prof is appearing on TV or publicly being quoted on a specific subject in the news, the trolls come out in force … now I’ve seen it for myself. It’s an interesting phenomena and appears to be a coordinated effort …

    Enough, for my withdrawal is under control and I’m on to Fractal Country … I’m fickle …

  300. “A Fractal Ode to the Welts … I might make that my first design attempt ;)”

    hahaha!….that’s cool beans….:)

  301. Blouise,

    I stated yesterday that this thread had turned into BS, I stand corrected. It has turned into a real Blubber site…..No animals that I am aware of were hurt ……

  302. Bud:

    “All these are statements of Dwight D. Eisenhower. A greater warrior than you’ll ever be, sport.”

    he almost got shit canned by MacArthur, I dont think Dwight was much of a real warrior, more a political warrior.

    ” Eisenhower graduated in 1915. He served with the infantry until 1918 at various camps in Texas and Georgia. During World War I, Eisenhower became the #3 leader of the new tank corps and rose to temporary (Bvt.) Lieutenant Colonel in the National Army. During the war he trained tank crews at “Camp Colt”–his first command–on the grounds of “Pickett’s Charge” on the Gettysburg, Pennsylvania Civil War battle site. Ike and his tank crews never saw combat. After the war, Eisenhower reverted to his regular rank of captain (and was promoted to major a few days later) before assuming duties at Camp Meade, Maryland, where he remained until 1922. His interest in tank warfare was strengthened by many conversations with George S. Patton and other senior tank leaders; however their ideas on tank warfare were strongly discouraged by superiors.[23]

    Eisenhower became executive officer to General Fox Conner in the Panama Canal Zone, where he served until 1924. Under Conner’s tutelage, he studied military history and theory (including Karl von Clausewitz’s On War), and later cited Conner’s enormous influence on his military thinking. In 1925–26, he attended the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.[24] There he graduated first in a class of 245 officers.[25] He then served as a battalion commander at Fort Benning, Georgia until 1927.”

    Bud, he’s about had as much action as you have logic. Yep ole blood and guts Ike, a tin man soldier. Good call Bud.

  303. “Been reading the self-help section, sparky? I was referring to real books. Science. Philosophy. History. Law. Not psycho-babble designed for the weak minded incapable of making their way through the world without a Dr. Phil holding their hand.”

    Bud, a good deal of that is opinion as well until it is proved. Stepehn Hawking could be the Dr. Phil of the Universe, Carl Sagan certainly was.

    Bud, how often do you have to be wrong to start understanding those guys are right about you?

  304. Turdboy,

    If you ever say anything of value, being a demonstrated liar, I’d be quite surprised.

    As to what a bunch of foul mouthed juvenile illogical lying trolls think of me, Dr. Hawking or the late Dr. Sagan?

    I’m as worried about that as I am about what a stripped bass thinks of quantum mechanics. Which is to say not at all.

    But please, keep trying to act like you clowns have a leg to stand on.

    It’s really proving you have zero credibility, no logic skills, no argument skills and are demonstrated liars. Once again, you and your brethren earn a . . .

    FAIL(12): Doesn’t substantively refute the argument as presented.

  305. Bud:

    Keep flailing (∞), [that’s an infinity symbol since most things fly over your head I thought I would let you know].

  306. Oh, I’m not the one flailing here, sport. But since you mentioned infinity (another concept I’m well versed in) . . .

    FAIL(∞): Doesn’t substantively refute the argument as presented.

  307. Buddha,

    Remember that while their fails seem to go on for ever, they are only approximating infinity – there does seem to be a certain self-similarity, though…

    ^..^ * (many),

    Working on a reply to your post.

    Blouise,

    Enjoy your weekend of exploration and feel free to ask anything.

    Troll Corps,

    Sorry, you’ve been upstaged by something I find much more interesting…

  308. bud

    you say

    Oh, I’m not the one flailing here, sport. But since you mentioned infinity (another concept I’m well versed in) . . .

    is that coz you talk shite for evre and ever and ever and ever

    Woolly

    you say

    I think not.
    I know a few Marines and they would be disgusted by your gutter mouths and cowardly gangsta approach.

    Once again with the assumption that yo right, simply sayin something don’t make is to prof, even a logical sumbitch like yoself can see that

    But because ur not one urself ar u? that’s why you arent capable of “making it up as you go along” are you, or deviatin from the mainstream. ur too busy readin yo dictionary son, if yo going to try to pile your self indulgent standards on the heads of me an mine, ur gonna need a loooooong ladder son

    You take care now an make sure you don’t give yoself any dangerous paper cuts

    good luck with that

    *snicker*

  309. True, Slarti, true.

    13 is just as far from infinity as 1,000,000 is. Time may fly when you’re having fun, but surely it creeps when filled with troll bleating, ergo the infinity approximation effect.

    And fractals are so much more interesting than trolls.

  310. sloppy

    the contemplation of ur navel?

    good luck with that

    *snicker*

    Henwife,

    you a funny lil man, knowing ole super dwight as well as you do, he managed to save europe all on his lonesome?

    you not figure he had a little help from our forces, not to mention a little input from the:

    British
    French
    Dutch
    Belgians
    Norwegians
    Danish
    Canadians
    Indians
    Nepalese
    Egyptians
    Czechs
    Greeks
    Hungarians
    Pakistanis

    and so on and so forth
    no it was all down to that one man according to big brain, you might want to get yourself another history book, the one you have is a bit wrong

    what a moron

    good luck with that

    *snicker*

  311. Slarti,

    Of that I have no doubt.

    Bob,

    Thanks for the Zappa clip. I’d never seen that particular performance of “Muffin Man”, but Adrian Belew is one of my all-time favorite guitarists. I’ll have to say Frank was in particularly good form that night too (not that he wasn’t a fantastic guitarist in his own right).

    And the lyrics are so appropriate. :D

  312. Rhubarb- Hungary was an Axis Power in WWII. Pakistan was founded in 1947. Several other nations you mention were occupied during the war and unable to give substantial help to the Allies. None of which negates the fact that you would be posting your crap in German if not for Dwight D. Eisenhower.

  313. Rhubarb- I should also mention that if it hadn’t been for General Eisenhower as postwar NATO Commander in Europe and President of the United States (1952-1960), you might be posting your crap in Russian.

  314. Henman:

    He probably ment the Hungarian partisans and the people who now comprise the nation of Pakistan. He said Pakistanis because he figured your small mind would not be able to understand the finer points of geo-politics. And would certainly not understand partisan without a dictionary, he therefore took the easier route to your chicken sized intellect.

    “snicker”

  315. Wry-Bard: [also known as Rhubarb with a silent Q]

    I see Bud selectively responds to comments, especially ones that Bud is proved wrong about.

    It sure is easy to have a large knowledge base when in front of a computer. Man that “logic” stuff sure is fun.

  316. It is true that I chose to selectively ignore bullshit.

    Bullshit like people who can’t refute arguments with logic and proof, Oh He Of Many Names.

  317. Like I’d take definitions what constitutes logic from someone with selective comprehension, demonstrated logical flaws and a failure to understand even the most basic of definitions like “revenge” versus “justice” or “race” versus “nationality”. Someone who is a demonstrated liar on top of not being able to make their case. People are welcome to scroll back up to see where you’ve made material misrepresentations and provided no valid counter-argument with logic and proof.

    Attack me all you want. It seems to bring some joy to your visibly miserable life and I could care less about the opinion of liars. Knock yourself out.

    Your argument still fails.

    My argument still stands.

  318. your argument doesn’t stand for Shi’ite, Rhubarb and Bakersfield are right and logically so, contrary to your “logical” protestations.

    Your logic is Shi’ite. Change it up and wurl it around, probably a typical MO with you.

  319. “Tautology”- I see Rhubarb has a new mythical sycophant/apologist. Trying to pretend your mistakes are an effort to dumb down your comments for my benefit won’t wash. I know the difference between Allies and Axis, and I know the difference between 1945 and 1947. You are very good at dumbing down your comments on your own, without resorting to a mythical admirer to explain your errors.

  320. Oooo. Now that’s clever. Shi’ite instead of shit.

    You’re a real linguistic genius there, sparky.

    If you’re trying to imply either I’m a Muslim or for Sharia somehow?

    Well bad news. I’m not a Muslim and Sharia is as bad an idea as any theocracy. Theocracy is one of the worst form of governance possible, topping even fascism. The only thing worse than a theocracy would be a fascist theocracy.

    Hey! Look at those tea baggers!

    “When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.” – Sinclair Lewis,It Can’t Happen Here

  321. Henmouth

    Rhubarb- Hungary was an Axis Power in WWII. Pakistan was founded in 1947. Several other nations you mention were occupied during the war and unable to give substantial help to the Allies. None of which negates the fact that you would be posting your crap in German if not for Dwight D. Eisenhower.

    Weyhey, on of the brains got one, that’s one to you Henmook

    The Germans never invaded NYC, except for mebbe Rolfs on 3rd Ave
    so sorry but the mighty European deeds of super Dwight had no effect on my current spoken language, what’s your excuse for the crap you spout.

  322. bUD:

    glad to see you reading some books instead of eating the covers. Well probably not, you just read the dust jacket and the title.

  323. Henmidget

    And if captain Kirk hadn’t beaten the fat man with the bue face you’d be talkin out of ur ass…… oh he didn’t beat the fat man with the blue face, well that explains a lot

    Ah I get it, you assume that because one of ur friends sez that I am British then it’s true, sorry, but thats a total Fail, simply sayin something don’t make it so lil man.

    you got a blue face as well Henmook?

    good luck with that

    *snicker*

  324. yup bud, those newspapers wont deliver themselves, watch out for those supplements, they’ll make you burst a vein.

    *snicker*

  325. too much gratuitous violence Rhube,

    they fail to comprehend that there could be more than one person who thinks theyre a bunch of dicks, so they invenmt this bogey man on which to focus their insecurities

    Look into my eyes,
    look into my eyes,
    the eyes,
    the eyes,
    not around the eyes,
    don’t look around my eyes,
    look into my eyes,
    you’re under

    You are not unpopular and you do not smell of amonia, when you wake all of the bad people will have turned into a small baby who thinks you’re adorable

    and you will find that your paper route is so much easier from now on

    one
    two
    three

    youre back

    Good luck with that

    *snicker

  326. Well, I boogey with a dog, I boogie with a cat
    Boogey with a bird, boogey with a rat
    Boogey with a horse, boogie with a cow
    I love to boogie let me show you how!
    Booooo….!

    I’m a boogie man

    Well I boogey at night, boogey in the day
    Boogey at work, boogey at play
    There’s boogey in my toes, boogie in my head
    And I ’ll probably still boogey, when I ’m dead
    Booo…..!

    I’m a boogie man

  327. When they find my toes Rhub, they’ll be tappin to that one

    I like the Harry Belafonte one better

    My girl’s name is Senora
    I tell you friends, I adore her
    And when she dances, oh brother!
    She’s a hurricane in all kinds of weather

  328. Marty from the 1st MSOB had his meeting today to decide on his settlement

    The doc told him that due to the nature of his injuries they were tryin to come up with a logical basis to pay him. marty suggested as a compromise that they use the distance from his ballsack to the tip of his dick

    so the doc seeing a smaller payout sgrees and is quickly out with the tape and places it on the end of old john and as he starts to unroll the tape his eyes widen and he looks up at Marty

    “son” he said, “I can’t find your ballsack.”

    So Marty tells the doc, “oh I left it on a hill in Paktia, how’s that settlement comin”

  329. I have often walked down this street before;
    But the pavement always stayed beneath my feet before.
    All at once am I Several stories high.

  330. Bakersfield & Rhubarb:

    out of curiosity why are you poking fun at these people? Is it because you are tired of their general blather and bullshit or something else?

  331. Elaine M.,

    I hear that they have almost perfected the perfect robot….Its only problem is it has no concept of gravity….that lady on NPR with the gravely voice was talking about it the other day…..scary stuff….

  332. Its only problem is it has no concept of gravity….

    Theres nothing worse than a robot who wont take things seriously

  333. Taut

    because its fun,
    because theyre a bunch of dicks,
    because they postulate and big themselves up

    but when confronted they hide behind juvenile antics and racist slurs,
    but mostly because they bite like big bad bitey things in a biting competition and then tell us that they’re really ignoring us and that our words don’t bother them.

    Hypocrites
    Ignorants
    Liars
    pedants

    They don’t like us playing their game, so we play our own

  334. Not if the robot doesn’t understand the gravity of the situation.

    see what i did, its a childish play on words gravity and gravity

  335. bud said

    Theocracy is one of the worst form of governance possible, topping even fascism. The only thing worse than a theocracy would be a fascist theocracy.

    The only problem with a Theocracy is that everyone wants to be Theo

  336. a most enjoyable thread, I hope you 2 stay around and post on other threads, why limit your talents to this one alone?

    There is so much bullshit here, you can make merry for years.

  337. ^..^ = (many) said,

    Slarti, Correct away, by all means. Thank you. I have more questions. They are probably more trouble to answer than your time is worth. I’m asking some basic stuff here – boooring. If it’s a drag to answer just say ‘it’s a needless complication to even think about it, just strive for the visual beauty’. LOL.

    But I think it’s a wonderful and fascinating complication to think about – the visual beauty is just icing on the cake – Fatou and Julia knew that…

    The infinite coastline aspect I’m familiar with. The use of fractal images to fill in areas of maps for which data did not exist (mountainous regions, coastlines) was something being explored by a previous employer of mine. I stuck my head into a presentation being given to a group of cartographers on the subject of this ‘revolutionary, new tool’ but left after a short period. The presentation was so dry and uninteresting that even a hard core, motivated fan of both fractal geometry and mapping couldn’t take it. I couldn’t do the math but I could follow the theory and explanation of how/why it worked. The Gummint could make even a seminar on sex boring.

    As with many things, doing is more interesting that talking…

    ————-

    Iterations. OK. I had first written something to indicate a ‘positions behind the decimal point’ explanation but rummaged deep into my old musty mental data storage unit and said,’no, you have it exactly backwards’. I understand from your correction that I may have been on the right track originally … or not.

    You were on the right track. The reason that Fractint was is so fast compared to other solvers is that it uses integer arithmetic (much faster than floating point) – you convert the real (or complex) decimals into large integers, do the arithmetic and then convert them back. It saves time until the integers get too large for the computer. It’s also how the program got its name.

    Sooooo, I’m still struggling here, are we talking about accuracy = iterations = detail = places behind the decimal point (number of numbers behind the decimal point). I always set my program at 1000 iterations for a final image on some classes of images I did (more computation = more detail being my governing assumption) when a choice became available. (Previews around 100-150.)

    Okay, let’s look at how the process works – we’re trying to determine how to color the pixels on a grid in the complex plane. The grid points are of the form (x+n*l, y+m*l) where l is the spacing of the grid (I’m assuming the same horizontal and vertical spacing for convenience – they can be different), and m and n range from zero to the number of vertical and horizontal pixels respectively. We iterate the function and when the result gets big enough, we decide that it will eventually escape to infinity and therefore it isn’t in the M-set and we give it a color according to the number of iterations it took to reach our escape criteria. However, there are points near (but not in) the M-set that take an arbitrarily high number of iterations to escape, thus if the maximum number of iterations is too low, we will be labeling many points incorrectly as members of the M-set. For abstruse reasons owing to numerical accuracy, we don’t see many points escape after a couple hundred iterations, but if you set the number of iterations very low (like 10) and increase it, you will see that the calculated M-set shrinks (fewer pixels mislabeled as members). On the other hand, when we zoom the image (decrease l), we are doing this calculation on points that are closer and closer together. Eventually, the numerical accuracy of our calculations isn’t good enough to distinguish between neighboring points and we lose detail in the image.

    I also assumed that zooming was the same process, more iterations were being done as a function of dealing with increasingly smaller bits of detail to begin with. That the recursive nature of the equation required more iteration farther out the equation was carried. “Farther out” = deeper on was zooming.

    Hopefully the explanation above was understandable – to summarize:

    More iterations = less M-set (and more pretty colored pixels)

    More accuracy = more detail (and hence the ability to zoom deeper).

    With Fractint iteration did equal detail, you could fill in ‘holes’ in the image with a higher iteration designation. Selection of iteration level was a serious concern based on what level of detail was needed (or desired for a specific effect) for the final image. I used as little as 35 and as high as 2500+ depending on what I wanted and needed.

    You know, my background is originally photography so I used iteration like I would use an F/stop or some other tool for producing detail or lessening detail. That may be where I’m off track, thinking of iterations as ‘like’ something, when they are not.

    It is a tool for increasing or decreasing the size of the M-set (which has a side effect of more apparent detail), but thinking about it as a parameter that can be adjusted with certain effects is exactly right.

    ————-

    If there are 2 sets (both of which I used regularly), what were the other 34 equations available in Fractint?

    The ‘standard’ M-sets and J-sets come from iterating the function:

    f(z) = z^2 + c

    but the mathematical definition for M-sets and J-sets can be applied to any function (family of functions, really since there’s a constant in it). If you refer to the M-set you are referring to the one associated with the equation above, but if you refer to a M-set you may be referring to the set associated with any map of the complex plane to itself.

    A little digression here about how you get the M-set and J-Sets. To get the M-set you iterate the point z=0 in the equation f(z)=z^2+(pixel), to get the J-set associated with the complex value ‘c’ you iterate the point z=(pixel) in the equation f(z)=z^2+c.

    There were other equations built into Fractint and in addition you could enter your own equations (my favorite was the Julia set of a complex sin function). However, while all M-sets and J-sets are fractals (not quite true, but I’m glossing over an unimportant technical point here), all fractals are not M-Sets or J-Sets and Fractint had a bunch of other types.

    Just other equations that can be visually modeled and share a fractal ‘nature’?

    Saying something is ‘fractal’ means that it has a fractional dimension (more or less) i.e. it has a non-integer dimension. Fractals can be strange attractors of dynamical systems (orbits of systems of ordinary differential equations like the Lorenz Butterfly or, my personal favorite, the Rössler attractor), curves specified by recursive algorithms (like the Koch snowflake where you start with a triangle and replace every ‘___’ with ‘_A_’ (without the crossbar on the ‘A’, of course) and then repeat ad infinitum or similarly, the Serpinski gasket where you take a solid triangle and remove the upside-down inscribed triangle from its center and repeat the process with the three smaller triangles that are formed), sets that are the fixed points of iterated function systems (you can make these look like anything you want them to, but the classical example are sets that look like ferns), Dendrites resulting from diffusion limited aggregation (pixels diffuse freely around the screen until they they hit a edge (or some other ‘seed’) or another pixel in which case they ‘stick’ resulting in irregular branching filaments – when I was an undergrad working in a physics lab, I made DLA slides (a microscope slide with sliver dendrites, not a figure for a presentation) for another lab to experiment on), plasma fractals (I don’t remember how they’re generated), and others that I can’t think of right now. Fractint could generate all of the types that I mentioned and more besides. In addition, there are things in nature that exhibit self-similarity over a range of scales (but not the infinite range of scales that mathematical fractals do) like clouds and plants and coastlines.

    Is that what you meant by the Mandelbrot set being the starting point for trippy fractal art.

    Yes – the Mandelbrot set is a versatile instrument, but there’s a whole orchestra out there…

    All cacti are succulents but not all succulents are cacti. That’s a rule. Cacti are a FAMILY with many TRIBES (columnar, etc.)

    That’s right. You can think of a taxonomy of fractals showing relationship of the different types of fractals to each other. Each fractal could be identified as belonging to a particular species, genus, etc.

    What is the essence of a fractal?

    A non-integer dimension.

    Must all fractals have equations that are recursive?

    No, but many do (I might say ‘most’ here, but there are issues with using that term in regard to infinite collections).

    Are fractals a separate tribe of equation within a branch of mathematics. or a shared trait occurring in many tribes of equations within or across many branches of mathematics?

    Mathematically speaking, a fractal is, in general, a set of points in a metric space* (the equations generate the points, but the sets of points are the actual fractals – I can’t go much farther than this without getting into hardcore measure theory).

    *R^n is the typical metric space that fractals live in.
    ————

    I know generally about the relationship of the Julia and Mandelbrot sets but I didn’t know why there were whole Julia’s v. fragmented ones.

    The J-sets associated with points outside the M-set are not just fragmented, but what’s known as ‘totally disconnected’. This means that if you look at any piece of the J-set it is made up of infinitely many sub-pieces. Also, there is a general resemblance between the J-set and the region of the M-set its constant comes from.

    I had noticed in Fractint that some of the “Mand-other name” types would not produce Julia’s and there were limits to how much I could change the parameters (I think I recall) even on the Mandelbrot set and still get Julia’s.

    Yes – probably due to either technical limitations or the fact that the associated Julia sets were not very interesting. I really like the feature where you could switch from the M-set to the J-set associated with the center of your image at the press of a button.

    I used other manipulation functions pretty routinely like the inversion function so I never managed to puzzle out why Julia’s didn’t always work. I see now that some of the “Mand-xxxxx” probably were not actually the Mandelbrot set, or shared enough characteristics of the original equation to produce Julia’s. That’s a guess.

    They were M-sets for different equations – they had associated J-sets, but they most likely either didn’t have the code to generate them in place or they were much less interesting than the J-sets from f(z)=z^2+c.

    Hope this was helpful – I’m going to work on my program to estimate fractal dimension of phase space orbits now. Technically it works, but I’ve got computation cost issues with my brute force method – if my more elegant solution doesn’t solve them then my calculations will take longer than it takes to make a baby…

  338. Hope this was helpful – I’m going to work on my program to estimate fractal dimension of phase space orbits now. Technically it works, but I’ve got computation cost issues with my brute force method – if my more elegant solution doesn’t solve them then my calculations will take longer than it takes to make a baby

    This translates to read that his gerbil has a nosebleed and can’t power his treadmill any more

    Oh and he only knows about the gestation of a baby because he read about it in a book and he proudly tells his mom that his genitals are as yet untouched by human hand.

  339. I have heard that has a helper monkey to hold it for him when he needs to pee,

    Although I have also heard that the right arm of his monkey is significantly more developed than its left arm, I would have to conclude that the monkeys activities include more than three shakes

    and we all know what more than three shakes become

    maybe that’s why he likes the pretty patterns, because his eyesight is so shot he can only make out shapes

  340. Buddha Is Laughing 1, September 18, 2010 at 1:56 pm

    Oh, I’m not the one flailing here, sport. But since you mentioned infinity (another concept I’m well versed in) . . .

    FAIL(∞): Doesn’t substantively refute the argument as presented.
    ————————-

    ROFLOLCOMN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    this cracked me up, still laughing……..hahahahahaha

    [I am becoming tranfixed by this nonsense….]

  341. HenMan
    1, September 18, 2010 at 2:26 pm
    turdwilligar- If it weren’t for Dwight D. Eisenhower, you Limeys would be posting your crap in German.

    =========================================================
    Shame on you, HenMan … this dude is our ally in the war on terror … show him some respect … he wasn’t alive when Ike saved his daddy’s hide … he’s not responsible for his parents’ failures … IT IS NOT HIS FAULT!!!

    He is trying very hard to be a good Marine waanabe … let him be … give him space to grow … anyway, it’s time for meds and he has trouble after meds so give him/her a break (he may still go green) … gosh, your expectations are too high, HenMan … go to your room and Buddha will bring you milk and cookies later.

    Look dude, I’m sorry for HenMan’s attack … some times he’s just too much of a patriot … you know what I mean? You’ve been there, right? I know it’s a lot to ask but give him the benefit of the doubt he didn’t grant you … deep down, he’s a bird watcher, you know … he walked into this biker bar and got carried away by all the machismo … what can I tell ya?

  342. Rhubarb
    1, September 18, 2010 at 6:23 pm
    Chesty is a 24 carat, genuine legend

    not many come close

    ===========================================================

    Bet you were never tasked to the SITE ….

  343. “But because ur not one urself ar u? that’s why you arent capable of “making it up as you go along” are you, or deviatin from the mainstream. ur too busy readin yo dictionary son, if yo going to try to pile your self indulgent standards on the heads of me an mine, ur gonna need a loooooong ladder son”
    ——————————————-
    ok, this makes me angry…

    …these nasty little teen troll turds think that logic=guy.

    nasty buttscootin turdmuffins crawl back into your cells where you belong

    [and as far as the self indulgent nonsense goes…you keep on eatin the nasties you dish out won’t you….I’ll be checkin the Enquirer for pictures of the first certifiable turd with human appendages…]

  344. Buddha,

    Okay … I served my 5 minutes … I’m moving on … is it possible this and other outbreaks are at the behest of a certain banned player who I never met? Just a question … I have to go make a peace offering to HenMan … he’s in his room … I told him you’d bring him milk and cookies.

  345. Woosty’s still a Cat,

    Teen trolls … oh god … that’s no fun at all … yuke! Get ’em a box of Kleenex and a magazine … I am sooo gone!!

  346. Blouise
    “Sorry about the “Whales ” thing … no real excuse for that blooper”

    I thought it was a great pun, calling people who come from Wales “Whales” is totally intuitive and less cumbersome than ‘Welshmen’ or sticking them with ‘Welts’. Welt’s is what a whipping with a hickory stick left you with when I was a kid.

    AND you have a blushing smiley. If I knew how to make a green smiley I would do it to indicate the magnitude of envy your blushing smiley evokes in me. :-)

  347. Blouise,

    “is it possible this and other outbreaks are at the behest of a certain banned player who I never met?”

    It is possible. Supposition as to attack by proxy is just to tenuous to address, but I’ll look at repeat offenders I’ve considered (plus new players).

    I don’t think Wayne has been around in your time although he may have poked his head above water. He’s truly crazy, but I don’t think this is his style of trolling. He’s more of an RCC fanatical papist of the Opus Dei sort with violence and other personality issues. He prefers religiously themed threads. He’d have escalated the physical threats when invited. It would be easier to diagnose a Wayne attack if mespo and/or Gyges were around as he has serious issues with them as well, but again: not his style. He won’t even engage Gyges directly anymore but he usually attacks me or mespo. Plus he usually goes psycho nuts when I (or the others) call him Wayne and then promptly retreats or assumes another non- or semi-threatening guise to lie low for awhile.

    The other banned person that comes to mind? No. Most certainly not her style although most of her arguments amounted to “you’re fat, stupid and I wouldn’t hire you” or “you’re a bad parent”. Still, she could think better than these clowns when her psychotic hatreds didn’t interfere. Plus she spoke English with far greater facility than displayed here and was capable of making lucid arguments. (A trivial aside, Wayne has tried to play himself off as her in the past.)

    A third possibility is the Breitbart crew, but again, not their style. Two reasons: Target and method. Other than weakly defending O’Donnell by ol’ Turdbucket the Tautology there, they’ve stayed here and not strayed into other threads (of which there are several) that would be more to their Neocon agenda. Ol’ TB is stupid enough to be a Breitbart employee (evidenced by the lame “false consensus” attack that failed so hysterically), but I’d say in all fairness, they displayed better game than him. Not much, but still better. Plus I don’t think they got banned, but rather reassigned. They haven’t been back since the media spotlight went off their scumbag of a boss.

    Although my favored theory is it’s one of the recurring paid or unpaid trolls of the bdaman variety (we have a couple of floaters although I tend to think this is not him per se – even he has some limits as to appropriateness and knows which regulars bite back too hard for these kinds of ploys, i.e. he’s been burned enough times to know better than to try this weak crap) plus one – maybe more – teen friends or family of an interested party or possibly teen enemies of the perpetrators. The majority of their attacks are quite unsophisticated compared to past troll invasions. A synergy of stupidity from a confluence of sources. But then again, that’s a teenager for you – all sore balls and no brains.

  348. BIL, I haven’t visited DeviantArt in months, I forgot about them, thanks for the reminder. I’m glad to hear that this last outing left you no worse for the wear and you’re back safe and sound.

  349. “just too tenuous”

    Pardon. Shepard’s Pie for dinner. That finger was too full to double strike the “o”. :D

  350. You’re welcome, LK. DA is a great source for wallpapers and just general interesting art.

    And thanks. I could go the rest of my life without another one of those damned spider bites and it would be just fine with me!

  351. Slartibartfast
    “Buddha,

    Thought of in another way, 1 is halfway from zero to infinity (and I can prove it).”

    And I know just enough to know that if you approach 0 by half’s you are correct, though I couldn’t prove it mathematically.

    ——–

    BIL, The infinity approximation effect as a direct corollary to the magnitude of troll infestation… LOL, it’s a thesis that deserves further study but the research would be torture. :-)

  352. LK,

    Torture may be a mild term. :D

    Blouise,

    Since you were so hard on HenMan, I’m sending him some of the special cookies.

  353. Blouise
    “Sorry about the “Whales ” thing … no real excuse for that blooper”
    ——————–
    I thought ‘Whales’ was a typo, if not it went right over me…are you still fractalizing?

    ” Welt’s is what a whipping with a hickory stick left you with when I was a kid.”

    ~ that was exactly my point, Lottakatz, and I completely second the blushing smiley remark…;)

  354. ^..^ * (many) posted:

    Slartibartfast
    “Buddha,

    Thought of in another way, 1 is halfway from zero to infinity (and I can prove it).”

    And I know just enough to know that if you approach 0 by half’s you are correct, though I couldn’t prove it mathematically.

    Once again, you’ve got the right idea. The real numbers between 0 and 1 can be put into a 1-to-1 correspondence with the real numbers between 1 and infinity via the function f(x) = 1/x. This proves that the two sets are the same size – i.e. 1 is halfway between 0 and infinity.

  355. Honest to god, I never thought teenagers but once the Woost mentioned it … wham … of course … but to keep the conspiracy thing going … they could be paid teenagers … all sitting in the main dork’s basement working off wyfi … after all they all went to dinner at the same time and one of ’em was seriously trashed last night

    The “Whale” thing was intentional but I was trying to hook a troll … then I was afraid I might have insulted Woost, so apologized … the apology was sincere … oh what tangled webs etc.

    HenMan’s probably going to curse me … sending him to his room over a bunch of pimple-heads … the only thing going for me is milk and cookies … but I had a good time with the sarcasm … he’ll probably demand that for the next few days I post “HenMan is the most intelligent blogger on this blog” on every thread I visit

    blushing smiley is : then the letters oops followed by another : make certain there are no spaces between them and also make certain there is a space between your last letter and the first : … so if you do:oops: it won’t work but if you do :oops: it will … same for the green guy which I always send Buddha first : followed by mrgreen then a : … same rules

    no space won’t work:mrgreen: but will :mrgreen: work

    So I usually give Buddha a hug and a kiss — :oops: xo :mrgreen:

    I’m returning to my Fractals :idea: (idea inside the colons)

  356. Slarti,

    I thank you greatly for the answers to my questions. I would have to disrespect you and lie to say ‘yes, that explained everything, I understand’ so I won’t :-) I have put your answers/explanation posts into a text file to go back to because I need to study them more. What I do see, or begin to see, is relationships between certain functions and the underlying explanation of what is actually gong on mathematically.

    For instance: More iterations = less M-set (and more pretty colored pixels)

    More accuracy = more detail (and hence the ability to zoom deeper).”

    This summation coupled with the (immediately) previous explanation about iterations not necessarily keeping you in the m-set does (i believe) clear up one of my ‘problems’ with the Julia sets: I would zoom very deep (even into the ‘black holes where I thought there might be something interesting revealed revealed eventually,or, out in the hinterlands surrounding the outer edge of the image), kick up the iteration level beyond all reason, and attempt to toggle a Julia from it. It seldom worked. I gather now that I was possibly moving out of the M-set. As well as the other possibilities you listed I (believe) can see that my technique was flawed and why.

    I need to give these things more though in conjunction with your explanation.

    Your discussion of fractals being strange attractors, curves specified by recursive algorithms etc. was fun. I remember those types well though many of them were not ‘solid’ but generated in a line mode. They were fun to play with and could be lovely. I really enjoyed cultivating my fern and tree specimens. :-)

    Thank you so much for taking the time to answer my questions
    Yes, I too enjoyed the ‘toggle’ function but it would play me false. Often when I would toggle one of the deep zoom, high iteration fractals I mentioned above my computer would freeze up as well as not generating a Julia. LOL.

  357. W = ^. .^

    “I love the fractal thread…I’m trying to use Chaospro now tho it is not so much fun…the fractals are already there and all you can do is ‘doctor’ them up….I think. Mandlebulber downloaded but didn’t install well and I’m not such a ‘techie’ so my new toys will take some getting use to.”


    Mandlebulber didn’t seem to install properly for me at first either but it actually did. It presents three windows, a log window, an image window, a tabbed control window. I thought there was only supposed to be one window on the screen so I closed the log screen and it shut the program down. All three windows should be left open. Tabbed controls in one window, view in another and a log for the immediate commands in another- a function I imagine is very useful if put into a text file after each command and used to trace your steps over a long, complex generation. That function may be, or able to be, automated.

    I’m still exploring the tabs, one for choice of fractal, one for zoom and pan, one for formula modification; I’ve got a lot of work to do to figure it out but it does some really nice images. I’m still exploring the various types of fractal on the opening ‘type’ screen.

  358. I haven’t generated any fractals in some time. Since I natively run Linux, I may have to download Mandlebulber and give it a spin.

  359. Buddha,

    It fits! Poor babies … pretend men tryin’ on daddy’s gear … well, the world will catch up with ’em soon enough … out of dad’s basement and tryin’ to make it on their own … doubtful that any one of them have the stuff to be a real Marine … hope they make it through the druggie stage …

    Good night, Buddha :oops: xo :mrgreen:

  360. Blouise

    Bet you were never tasked to the SITE ….

    Blousies bin readin up some

    If you appreciated what u were sayin instead of just repeating crap you read somewhere like some animated horse, then I’d take you seruiously, but you don’t and you do and I don’t

    you keep on readin and I’ll jus keep on makin it up as I go along

    Sweet dreams are made of this
    and who am I to disagree
    I’ve travelled the world
    and the seven seas
    Everybodies lookin for sumthin

    Good luck with that

  361. Woolly saya

    ok, this makes me angry…

    …these nasty little teen troll turds think that logic=guy.

    nasty buttscootin turdmuffins crawl back into your cells where you belong

    [and as far as the self indulgent nonsense goes…you keep on eatin the nasties you dish out won’t you….I’ll be checkin the Enquirer for pictures of the first certifiable turd with human appendages…]

    Look in the mirror son, job done, I always knew they could pile shit high, but how do they get you to speak? is it all done with wires or what?

    *snicker*

  362. Lottalaffs

    Blouise
    “Sorry about the “Whales ” thing … no real excuse for that blooper”

    You should be apologising as well

    Yes there is an excuse , it’s being a psuedo intellectual who don’t know the difference tween a big ol fish with a blowhole an a country

  363. Blousie says

    The “Whale” thing was intentional but I was trying to hook a troll

    ROFLMAO, what a dish of crap, theres only one person comin on here leavin crumbs for the purile to pick up and it aint you

    Hungary *snicker*

  364. bud says

    Vogons. Teen-aged Vogons.

    (just in case you haven’t read the book)

    and then predictably goes on to post a link for what is reckoned to be one of the best works of comedic writing of the 20th century and like the true pimple head he is, arrogantly assumes because he has just discovered it, that no-one else has neither

    git ur nose out of that dictionary son and read some real books

    queue: long list of books that bud has read, carefully listed from one site or another

    Im amazed that you have read it bud, Adams was another Brit wasn’t he

    For a moment, deep in Buddhas head, nothing happened. Then, after a second or so, nothing continued to happen.

  365. ROFLMAO

    so bud takes his references from Wikipedia?

    Laff my ass off

    Merriam Webster and Wikipedia doth not an intellectaul make

  366. Blouise

    you say

    … after all they all went to dinner at the same time and one of ‘em was seriously trashed last night

    how could you tell? did I have gravy on my writing? what a dumb ass – just because you say something, don’t make it so

    You are of course and as usual so far off base as to be on another continent (presumably somewhere near Wales)

    you keep takin the medication an I’ll keep takin mine.

    “It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes” – or even onions

    good luck with that

    *snicker*

  367. this is the biggest thread on the whole site

    for a a bunch of supposed intellectuals who don’t like trolls,
    They are pretty laden down with troll food

    hey, since this lot now tell me that im a teenager, does this mean I get to date Suzie Taylor again and nuke Badlands FM?

    Man I enjoyed that shit

  368. The funniest thing all told about this thread is their constant use of the word logic and their play on it’s meaning and their strange belief that it is an all cleansing and all powerful word and/or system.

    Far be it for me to act as a pendant when in the presence of many who are far more qualified than I in that area, however, I shall elablorate on my findings

    Blousie, bud, slop et al appear to be a group of people who operate under the belief that they freely may pretend to be whoever and whatever they say they are but even that they get to decide who and what everyone else is (I thought that was down to god – but never mind)

    Now this group of logical internet based deities believe that we, but more specifically that Bakers and Rhube are schoolchildren, teenagers or to use as a cover-all phrase popular with the older generations “youngsters” this is stated quite clearly in the postings above.

    these self accepted “bright bods” are now conducting their little tet a tets on the basis that this is now an accepted fact and the group of “trolls” as they now label them are in fact proven to be youngsters, although they did initially believe that we were all British and called Spamheed *go figure*

    Is this belief, or opinion founded on clear logic or brought about by the use of one of their legendary logical processes? since this is their clearly their eweapon of choice and it would be logical to assume that they would use their preferred system to analyse and measure the information as delivered and come up with an answer based on that.

    well no, the theory that we were Spamheed was formed out of assumption (guesswork) and supposition (more guesswork), some might say that they were educated guesses, born out of what little information there was present at the time, I wouldn’t be so generous

    the latest opine (cheers bud *snicker*) is the “youngster” one, founded on the “fact” that blousie can see that we all allegedly went to dinner at the same time and that we all post on matters and in manners that you just dont get and see this as being the behaviour as that of a young person and somehow “beneath you” if that’s the case then so be it.

    when it comes to all going to lunch together, or appearing to do so, so do prison inmates, so do priests, so do teachers, so do hospital patients, so do firemen(shift patterns), policemen(shift patterns), soldiers, nurses (shift patterns) so do astronauts and sailors and fishermen and construction workers,

    my oh my there is a huge tear in the logic used here, bud will no doubt explain why their logic is different to my logic and somehow stronger and more magical than mine. perhaps they’re using MkV Logic with the self powering nuclear core and the go faster stripes on the tail fins, but he would be just being wrong again

    I obviously believe to the contrary that there is no Mk5 Logic and that they just aren’t very good when they have to act on the fly, based on the facts contained in this thread and to plagiarise Rhube and bakers for just a minute

    hypocrites
    ignorants
    liars
    pendants

    an overblown ego, a big mouth, a dictionary and a thesaurus – oh and not forgettin the immortal search facility on Wikipedia,

    This is the sum total of your knowledge and experience.

    good luck with that Task to the SITE thing Rhube

    *snicker*

  369. “Blowhards” in every sense of the word then.

    As is highlighted on so many of the threads on this site the higher a person inflates themselves and denegrates others in their pursuit of that “higher ground” it only leaves them with farther to fall when they are eventually found out as the drug abusin lowlifes they are.

  370. Blouise 1, September 18, 2010 at 10:42 pm

    Honest to god, I never thought teenagers but once the Woost mentioned it … wham … of course … but to keep the conspiracy thing going … they could be paid teenagers … all sitting in the main dork’s basement working off wyfi … after all they all went to dinner at the same time and one of ‘em was seriously trashed last night

    The “Whale” thing was intentional but I was trying to hook a troll … then I was afraid I might have insulted Woost, so apologized … the apology was sincere … oh what tangled webs etc.
    ———————————————
    no offense taken in the least….

    and even growing up with brothers of the beevis and butthead variety…it still took me the longest time to figure out why their socks were always ‘crusty’….

  371. an ode to Buddha

    Isn’t it awfully nice to have a penis?
    Isn’t it frightfully good to have a dong?
    It’s swell to have a stiffy.
    It’s divine to own a dick,
    From the tiniest little tadger
    To the world’s biggest prick.
    So, three cheers for your Willy or John Thomas.
    Hooray for your one-eyed trouser snake,
    Your piece of pork, your wife’s best friend,
    Your Percy, or your cock.
    You can wrap it up in ribbons.
    You can slip it in your sock,
    But don’t take it out in public,
    Or they will stick you in the dock,
    And you won’t come back.

    Hypocrites
    Liars
    Pedants
    drug users

    *chuckle*

  372. Rhubarb:

    Bravo, Bravo as one who is also something of a poet, I applaud your efforts.

    But what does Buddha do with his John Thomas? He doesn’t have any balls.

  373. Excellent pieces. Keep posting such kind of info on your site.
    Im really impressed by your blog.
    Hello there, You’ve performed an incredible job. I will definitely digg it and for my part recommend to my friends. I’m confident they’ll be benefited from this web site.

  374. A few years ago, one of our local residents, Mac Vorce, who is also a bicycle enthusiast petitioned
    for the development of bicycle paths and trails.

    No matter what your field, it helps to know what you’re good at, but it also helps to recognize what others are good at.
    He represented his homeland in four Olympics and is a three-time indoor world champ in
    the 1500 meters.

Comments are closed.