Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm surprised the moon landing conspiracy only gets 7%.


This is a generator site that was launched a while back.


http://www.verifiedfacts.org/


Obv shortly after launch the creators of the site received threats from people accusing them of working for the govt spreading disinformation

ha ha, ever the way.


I enjoyed aaronovich's voodo histories, which in writing he obviosuly found himself similarly accused.

It's the ultimate get out clause that allows CT types to wallow in their own circular logic.


This was fun, how Jimmy Page destroyed Eddie and the Hot Rod

http://greatwen.com/2013/03/27/jimmy-page-aleister-crowley-and-the-curse-of-eddie-and-the-hot-rods/

Fantastic (if slightly tongue-in-cheek) article on the current state of GBSSR.

http://potlatch.typepad.com/weblog/2013/04/brezhnev-capitalism.html


also linked to because it's the sort of thing that's guaranteed to wind Huguenot up ;)


Though he does commit the cardianl sin of using trope=motif rather than trope=metaphor, but that's probably one for the irrational hatreds thread.....

The fascinating and disturbing world of FOOF (or dioxygen diflouride to give it its scientific name).


http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2010/02/23/things_i_wont_work_with_dioxygen_difluoride.php


Highlight: "Being a high energy oxidizer, dioxygen difluoride reacted vigorously with organic compounds, even at temperatures close to its melting point. It reacted instantaneously with solid ethyl alcohol, producing a blue flame and an explosion. When a drop of liquid 02F2 was added to liquid methane, cooled at 90?K., a white flame was produced instantaneously, which turned green upon further burning. When 0.2 (mL) of liquid 02F2 was added to 0.5 (mL) of liquid CH4 at 90?K., a violent explosion occurred."


This stuff can, literally, set ice on fire. Mental.

A fellow XKCD reader, obvs.


Have you read any more from that chap's series of "Things I Won't Work With"? I don't know one end of a test tube from another but even I know that some of this stuff sounds utterly horrific.


When discussing the rather smelly selenophenol he notes its smell is "...the biggest stinker I have run across. . .imagine 6 skunks wrapped in rubber innertubes and the whole thing is set ablaze. That might approach the metaphysical stench of this material."


Marvellous. [insert curry/pooh joke here]

interesting stuff, investment manager Lelsie GRantham on bubbles and climate change.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2013/apr/15/jeremy-grantham-population-china-climate


[climate change sceptics] are in the "screaming loudly" rather than the "fact based" part of the exercise, because they don't have the facts. They are masters at manufacturing doubt. What I have noticed on the blogs and in the comments section under articles is that over several years, as the scientific evidence for climate change gets stronger, the tone of the sceptics is getting shriller and more vicious and nastier all the time. The equivalent on the other side is a weary resignation, sorrow and frustration and amazement that people on the other side can't look at the facts. The sceptics are getting angrier and more vicious every year despite the more storms we have, and the more mad crazy weather we have?



One of the problems is that typically you are not dealing with the facts. Putting in more facts makes the sceptics more angry. They have profound beliefs ? as opposed to knowledge ? that they are willing to protect by all manner of psychological tricks. So you have people who are very smart - even great analysts and hedge fund managers - who on paper know that their argument is wrong, but who promote it fiercely because they are libertarians. Libertarians believe that any government interference is bad. Anyone with a brain knows that climate change needs governmental leadership and they can smell this is bad news for their philosophy.

The barking mad worlds of conspiracy theorists and jihadists collide

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/04/16/what_extremists_are_saying_about_the_boston_massacre?page=full


I noticed an even barkinger mad film shared on facebook which had already decided it was a 'false flag' operation, without even bothering for an official narrative to refute, and, bizarrely enough, placed the blame squarely at the feet of Steve Jackson who did those 'Choose Your Own Adventure' books I enjoyed as a boy.


The world would definitely be a duller place without them!!


*keenly awaits New Nexus' first linky on the matter*

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • You keep insisting that you're "just stating facts", but so far, most of what you've shared isn't fact - it's just your personal opinion, framed with hostility.  Foxes aren't classified as "vermin" in the UK. They're wild animals protected under the Animal Welfare Act & the Wildlife & Countryside Act . & Yes, they do play a vital role in controlling rodent population. The more you double down on insults & misinformation, the more you discredit your own argument. It's possible to be fed up & still informed. Take the information provided to you & do something about it. BTW culling doesn't even work.
    • It’s hardly likely you know that for a fact Sue
    • I know an instance where the foxes quickly learned how to avoid such devices. 
    • I did read the comments above It's not moaning, it's stating facts. Tell you what,  you can come and clear up the near daily fox crap and see how you like dealing with it, no didn't think that would appeal to you.  Do they control rodents?  Foxes are vermin.  It's an emotive topic for some, I realise that, however the facts are foxes are a pest.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...