Toadfish Monastery

If you have any concerns relating to the Never Ending Toadfish Interview Cycle, or simply want to continue a particular theme, just ring this helpline. Someone will be here to talk to you. Don't suffer alone.

For example, worried that Joe Bloggs is off his head. Tell us and we can re-assure you.

To kick things off we'll start with a couple of easy ones.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Was R.D.Laing a good thing?

QuoteMy ability to comment intelligently on this issue is best demonstrated by the fact I thought R.D.Laing was an American singer. What's the correct answer?

This guy had a radically different approach (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._D._Laing) to psychiatry than his peers. Many people consider him brilliant but others sneer. Usual divisive stuff in any profession. However, the BBC appear to be trying to hang the whole post-war decay of society on him (and John Nash) in their program The Trap – What Happened To Our Dream Of Freedom? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk11/unplaced.shtml) - see "radical psychiatrists" - linked with the apparently shocking effects of Game Theory on our mindset.


3. What do you consider your greatest contribution to humanity?

QuoteA C++ memory manager written about 1995. Its day will come.

I believe several of our oldies could do with this. Could you liaise with a neurosurgeon?

I thought we'd established post war decay is entirely due to unmarried mothers (Tories), Hedge Funds (Labour), or lack of proportional representation and free pot (Lib Dems).
I'd be impressed if I thought John Prescott was keeping us in our place by means of Game Theory.

I have always liked Laing's approach.

Especially when my college psychology course was taught by a Skinnerian.

Think about it. The Skinner Box. He even tried to raise his children in one! I would MUCH rather have to live in a Laing Box!

Then again, my concept of pretty good psychology that of Fritz Perls's student, Barry Stevens.

Quote from: Sibling Chatty on March 16, 2007, 05:09:34 AM
The Skinner Box. He even tried to raise his children in one! I would MUCH rather have to live in a Laing Box!

That touches on precisely why I value Laing. He is inclusive. No boxes. All mental health (including what others call mental ill health) is merely a point on a continuum. When I first read Laing, many years ago, it was the first time I saw that which others call madness as entirely normal. For all that society tries to control, an approach that has the property of removing the fear of mental states has the promise of being beneficial. 

200 years ago, if you believed that long metal tubes could move people from one side of the ocean to the other, you were obviously mentally ill.

Now, if you do NOT believe that air travel is available, and desirable, you're mentally ill.

The continuum is not only there, but flexible, and changeable. And the fact that at any point, one may be considered 'sane' if he behaves according to generally expected standards SHOULD be a problem. (To wit: Bush, Cheney.)

I'd like to see mental health care work more on functionality and ability to not cause harm than some arbitrarily set standards that supposedly equal 'mentally healthy'.

I'm functional, and I am not harmful. I am not presumptuous enough to think that I'm a paragon of mental health.

Too many people don't have the needed resources to burn playing "relive all your hurts and discouragements" and I am not sure that THAT approach is really beneficial anyway. There are those that cherish those hurts and slights, and actually revel in dragging them up again and again, picking off the scabs and relishing the same hurt all over again. They are the Martyrs. (See also: Kellie, My Mother.)

Of all the crazy people that make me crazy, it's The Martyrs. (GWB's a Martyr. He wasn't good enough. Wasn't smart enough, wasn't going to amount to anything because he wasn't able to control his 'demons'--drink, drugs, etc. Jeb was the fair-haired son. Look at what it's cost this entire planet to pretend that he's on the functional end of the spectrum.)

Quote from: Beagle
3   Why does Tony Blair let bad things happen?

Because when he wrote to Isiah Berlin, Berlin was on his death bed and never replied?

Having implicated Nash and R.D.Laing as the cause of all modern world woes in his BBC2 programme The Trap, this week Adam Curtis decided it was Isiah Berlin's turn.

Having made out what seemed a confused and unconvincing case for Isiah Berlin's theories having caused all the mayhem since the 50's, he then ended by saying Isiah Berlin was wrong, not all attempts to free the world end in tyranny. No idea where that gem sprang from. All there was to back it up was a women jogging under a blue sky.

Poor misguided TBliar came lately to the table, persuading the Americans to do all sorts of odd things. Er? Pardon? What?

This series of three programmes was most peculiar.

Anyone else see it?

No, I wimped out having read the Torygraph preview. Rather than blaming Isaiah Berlin that implied the programme was going to pin the blame on Sartre, in that he encouraged Pol Pot to wipe out the entire Cambodian middle class in an attempt to free society from the bourgeoisie (thus leaving more black coffee, rain coats and Gauloises for everyone else).

I refuse to believe Berlin was one of the bad guys. Apart from his work there's that wonderful Churchill anecdote. Churchill thought he was having lunch with Isaiah Berlin (whom he hadn't met) but in fact it was Irving Berlin. Churchill was surprised when the answer to "what do you consider to be your most important work" was "White Christmas".

Yeh and Irving Berlin had a much better voice too  ;D

It did blame Sartre for Pol Pot, but that was a mere three minutes worth of blame. It also blamed a few others for a few others (all monsters of history seem to have been very highly educated..... and unable to act alone without a major work under their beds). But they were all in cahoots with Berlin anyway. So they said.

There's already a wiki on The Trap. What it fails to show is the number of times Nash and Berlin were flashed on the screen and linked with each part of the "storyline".

I was getting cynical about any program offering a "radical new view" or "exciting new disclosals" anyway, but after "The History Boys" my immediate reaction now is to wonder what's on the other channel.
As with a lot of modern art the word "controversial" has become synonymous in my mind with the phrase "crass marketing attempt".

Mind you even that play is a little disingenuous, in my opinion, putting the blame for this technique and marketing spin on the Thatcher years whereas I'd give Blair/Campbell the credit for that one. I remember the 80s as a time of blunt politicians and public life (stand up Mrs T and Norman), not spin. Maybe it was already there in the History departments, just waiting to unleash itself on the world at large. ;)

Quote from: beagle on March 27, 2007, 07:52:55 AM
Mind you even that play is a little disingenuous, in my opinion, putting the blame for this technique and marketing spin on the Thatcher years whereas I'd give Blair/Campbell the credit for that one. I remember the 80s as a time of blunt politicians and public life (stand up Mrs T and Norman), not spin. Maybe it was already there in the History departments, just waiting to unleash itself on the world at large. ;)

I agree with you there. Thatcher just told big whoppers without spinning them. The voice work ensured it all sounded over-ernest but everyone knew it was just voice work. Presumably TBliar learnt from this that spin was required.

(The Trap mererly blamed Thatcher for three minutes. TBlair got the full works.)

Had a brief look at the web site. At least it had a soundtrack from "New Order" (not unlike Wayne's World 2).

Was wondering which website you looked at and stumbled on:

http://richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10542&sid=aa455bc11450b535961964bec9b2dd2f

Martha sounds familiar.  (Bluenose - Marginal Mutterings)

You'll be in trouble, invoking the spirit of R.D. in these hallowed cloisters.
It was the Wikipedia site I looked at.

I'm still on the side (unsurprisingly) of the negative libertarians, for two reasons. First, because when the state imposes it's will "in a good cause" it has far more capability of doing great harm, and secondly because I have more faith than the producer seems to have that individuals will use their negative liberty in an altruistic way in the right circumstances; i.e. when they are convinced. If you're trying to convince people of something that is fundamentally opposed to human nature to prop up your government or good ideals then you're doomed anyway.

Also (after Berlin) I'm inclined to think that if you have to force people to act in a certain way then you are both building up dangerous societal pressures, and are more likely to slip into the "end justifying the means" mindset.

Why did they have TB down as a negative Libertarian? His proposed policy on detention without trial was enough to scare any one with a suntan and a rucksack; he doesn't strike me as a natural heir to Isaiah Berlin. Much more along the lines of "we are the good guys making everything better, and everything possible, so anything we do is justified".

I didn't think they did. I merely watched the programme (hadn't read the wiki) and I could swear they had TB down as a positive Libertarian ;)

When will they make a program about neutral libertarianism, infinite libertarianism, etc?

Quote from: Griffin NoName The Watson of Sherlock on March 27, 2007, 06:29:41 PM
Was wondering which website you looked at and stumbled on:

http://richarddawkins.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10542&sid=aa455bc11450b535961964bec9b2dd2f

Martha sounds familiar.  (Bluenose - Marginal Mutterings)

Not this little black duck.  I would not have put things the way that they have been in that discussion thread.  I guess some of the concepts are similar, but as I said in Marginal Mutterings the whole issue of what we can or indeed should do about the raising of our children and the "conditioning" that religion provides is very probematic to say the least.

I think that maintining the quality of our education system and not allowing sectional interests, especially fundamental religious groups of all suasions, to insert misinformation into the school curriculum is probably the best way to go.  It may take a long time for change to occur but there will not be problems of one group forcing their ideas on the rest.  After all, my atheistic outlook can be considered to be the product of the Australian Catholic education system - I went to Catholic primary and secondary schools.  One thing I will say for the brothers was that they did not try to infiltrate the science curriculum at all, religion was taught, but in a class explicitly called "Religion".  In science there was no confusion about the geological record and indeed we had an excellent collection of fossils at the school.  (I later donated to the school a 280 Million year old inner and outer cast fossil of a brachiopod shell I had found, which fit right in with the collection.)  The thing is religion and science and indeed all other areas of the curriculum were kept separate.  I wonder whether this is true in so-called "Christian Schools" especially since they seem to produce so many of their graduates believing in young Earth creationism as a scientific fact.

Sibling Bluenose.

Quote from: Bluenose on March 28, 2007, 04:18:28 AM

Quote from: Griffin NoName The Watson of Sherlock on March 27, 2007, 06:29:41 PMMartha sounds familiar.  (Bluenose - Marginal Mutterings)

Not this little black duck. 

Sorry, bad sign-posting. I meant (Bluenose - Marginal Mutterings) in terms of the particular topic you raised there, not anything you said.

The familiarity, of Martha, was in my mind to a certain flavour of argument which we have left behind us. Nor was I recommending the discussion there.

As Beagle wisely noted above, invoking the name of RD - bad move  :mrgreen:

Quote from: Griffin NoName The Watson of Sherlock on March 27, 2007, 11:38:58 PM
When will they make a program about neutral libertarianism, infinite libertarianism, etc?

This philosophy of liberty is ruddy heavy stuff. No wonder parents and other dictators generally fall back on "Because I said so".

Quote from: Sibling Lambicus the Toluous on March 29, 2007, 02:43:19 PM3. What is your favourite sort of home made soup?
Anything made by my wife (except for her pumpkin soup - my wife's an amazing chef, but even she can't make pumpkin not awful for me.  I'm not a fan of pumpkin)

Just curious - does she use PUMPKIN pumpkin?  Just asking because what's given as pumpkin in recipes from outside of NA generally means winter squash.  Jack-o-lanterns won't cut it for soup, generally.

Quote2. What languages do you know other than English?

passable french and I made some laughable attempts to speak german in Berlin recently. I also know how to say "I am a hedgehog" in Spanish which is a surprisingly effective chat up line.

Funny, you don't look like the Hedgehog....  but perhaps his reputation is better known internationally than his visage.  ;D

I may not look like a hedgehog but the moment of confusion can break the ice and make one terribly endearing!  ;)

Heh, I know purposely crude translations for "My hand is the pervert" in at least two languages.  ;D
Don't use them as icebreakers, though. ;)

My father used to be an international airline pilot with B.O.A.C.  Apparently the customs officers in Rome were notoriously officious and troublesome.  He had learned the Italian for "my grandfather's ear trumpet has been struck by lightening".  He said that, when uttered in a serious manner as if that would somehow clear things up, the effect was amazing.  All the problems would somehow immediately dissappear.  He always wondered what they thought he was trying to say.

Quote from: Agujjim on April 03, 2007, 04:55:53 PM

Quote2. What languages do you know other than English?

passable french and I made some laughable attempts to speak german in Berlin recently. I also know how to say "I am a hedgehog" in Spanish which is a surprisingly effective chat up line.

Funny, you don't look like the Hedgehog....  but perhaps his reputation is better known internationally than his visage.  ;D

That would be a handy phrase to know in prison, as long as everybody knows the song.

Huh.  I was referrin' to Ron Jeremy..... ;D

Quote from: Bluenose on April 04, 2007, 02:48:23 AM
He had learned the Italian for "my grandfather's ear trumpet has been struck by lightening". 

In my family it was always claimed we had a an old English-Italian pocket phrase book including a translation for "my postilion has been struck by lightening".

Seeing your post I wondered whether one could trace this back to a genuine source.

Many references on the internet, including your ear trumpet version.

Quote from: http://www1c.btwebworld.com/quote-unquote/p0000046.htmhttp://www1c.btwebworld.com/quote-unquote/p0000046.htm
Q729 An actual source for the famous phrasebook line, 'My postillion has been struck by lightning'.  In Karl Baedeker's The Traveller's Manual of Conversation in Four Languages (1836 ed.) is: 'Postilion, stop; we wish to get down; a spoke of one of the wheels is broken.'  In an 1886 edition I have found: 'Are the postilions insolent?; the lightning has struck; the coachman is drunk.'  From these examples it is quite clear that the preposterous phrase could quite likely have appeared in Baedeker or similar, but where?  In 1935, the phrase was said to come from a Dutch phrasebook.

Dirk Bogarde also wrote a book "A postillion struck by lightning".

I've just dug out the phrase book I always thought had this phrase in but have never actually looked at in detail. It's a "What you want to say and how to say it" in French. , W.J.Hernan. War Edition. cost 6d. 1915, London, W.J. Hernan & Co.

It doesn't have the postilion phrase but it is a hoot.

"Put the irons on my moustache"  !!

Quote from: Kiyoodle the Gambrinous on April 27, 2007, 12:20:09 AM
2. Favorite sitting-on-a-patio-in-the-sunshine beverage?

Beer

The brand man, the brand!  BEER is assumed for you - best patio beer though?

Not sure...

Some Czech beer, the brand is not that important. I'll start with a Budweiser (the Czech one), Staropramen, Starobrno... They're way too many to decide...

Heh, I guess I should have realized that most Czech beers are good patio beers.

I've really got to czech into what brands are available here.  Offhand, I know that Budweiser and Pilsner Urquell are everywhere, but I'm not sure what else is....


Hmm...  Kensington Wine Market has Demon...  any good?
(http://www.kensingtonwinemarket.com/image/details/label/721367.jpg)

Quote from: Swatopluk on April 27, 2007, 09:02:38 AM
1. Would you consider yourself a pervert?
Yes, but I won't give details apart from that it is mainly theory so far.

I hope it doesn't involve squidlings.

You still remember me posting that picture, don't you ;) ;D?

Quote from: Agujjim on April 27, 2007, 03:53:03 PM
Hmm...  Kensington Wine Market has Demon...  any good?
(http://www.kensingtonwinemarket.com/image/details/label/721367.jpg)

Never tried that one.

But it appears to have good ratings on the internet:
http://beeradvocate.com/beer/profile/167/14426

Here's the site of the importer for the US and Canada, but I'm not really familiar with the two breweries they import from:
www.czechbeer.com

Btw, maybe some good Czech beers could be available in some restaurants of the Czech/Slovak community:
http://www.csplanet.com/index.php?page=10


EDIT: Btw, if you ever end up in a Czech restaurant and want to try a real Czech speciality, you should try this:
Czech Style Pork Roast  with sauerkraut and bread dumplings
"Vepřo knedlo zelo"
Using only the finest of pork, this roast is one of the greatest traditional dishes. Roasted to perfection, the pork is very tender and delicate. Bread dumplings are a real treat. They are made of a light white bread dough, and are fluffy enough to eat like a cake. The sauerkraut cooked according to ages old recipe adds a nice tang. One of those unforgettable meals—this one is the winner. The Pilsner Urquell beer is a highly recommended beverage to go with this dish.
[from the menu of the Canadian Prague Restaurant: http://www.praguerestaurant.com]

Quote from: Kiyoodle the Gambrinous on April 28, 2007, 12:08:05 AM
Btw, maybe some good Czech beers could be available in some restaurants of the Czech/Slovak community:
http://www.csplanet.com/index.php?page=10

Nach, there's nothing in Alberta.  :P
The closest is Vancouver (about a 12 hour drive).  The ones in the US could be closer.


EDIT: Lambi, otoh, may be quite close.

Well, that's up to you to see. :)

Anyway, all this talk about beer and food made me hungry and thirsty. Why isn't there ever something to eat and drink around my house when that happens? :mrgreen:

Quote from: Kiyoodle the Gambrinous on April 28, 2007, 12:15:09 AM
Anyway, all this talk about beer and food made me hungry and thirsty. Why isn't there ever something to eat and drink around my house when that happens? :mrgreen:

Because you already ate and drank it.  ;)

I should get going to a buddy's place for BBQ and beer in the sun, and then maybe some rum...  even better, it's close enough to bike up there and ride the LRT back.  Environmentally friendly carousing (the train runs on wind-generated electricity), and no driving!

I'm jealous... :)

I guess, I'll just have to go to sleep...

Quote from: Griffin NoName The Watson of Sherlock on April 27, 2007, 08:21:16 PM

Quote from: Swatopluk on April 27, 2007, 09:02:38 AM
1. Would you consider yourself a pervert?
Yes, but I won't give details apart from that it is mainly theory so far.

I hope it doesn't involve squidlings.

Quote from: Swatopluk on April 27, 2007, 11:17:28 PM
You still remember me posting that picture, don't you ;) ;D?

Just remember this is a Helpline. We are here to help.

You have bravely taken the First Step. :mrgreen:

Quote from: SwatoBonus question: Sex or violence?

Can I answer just this question? I don't like the political questions you asked...


;D



(the answer is always sex... or violent sex)

;)

Then wait for better questions by someone who answers those :quest:

Have still to try sex in reality, so violence would be the known evil ;).

How can you separate sex, violence and politics?

At the party conference, book the MP's mistress into a separate hotel from him and his wife?

Wasn't it Harold MacMillan who said, apropos the Major/Currie affair, "Astonishing, he kept his mistress at Downing Street; I kept mine at St John's Wood."

(May have been attributed).

Quote from: beagle on May 22, 2007, 07:24:36 AM
Wasn't it Harold MacMillan who said, apropos the Major/Currie affair, "Astonishing, he kept his mistress at Downing Street; I kept mine at St John's Wood."

(May have been attributed).

Against: MacMillan died in 1986 and the Major/Currie affair was made public in 2002, dated as beginning in 1984. For: MacMillan was a sharp cookie.

MacMillan managed to insert himself into my entire childhood by having his photograph on the front page of a newspaper held prominently to the camera by my grandfather in a photograph of my grandfather placed where no one could avoid seeing him many times a day. I cannot remember the headline or which newspaper but I suspect it was The Daily Telegraph.

Help for Goat.

Quote from: goat starer on May 23, 2007, 05:04:52 PM

1. What question have you always asked about science?

what on earth is this quantum stuff about?

Try playing with marbles (http://light.physics.auth.gr/history/two_slits/two_slits_en.html) then go steal Shroedinger's cat and see if it will play marbles with you.

Did I kill the NETIC? Hopefully not, I can change the questions...  :oops:

I almost did just before you did.  I know that personally I will only answer when I feel I can give a relevant answer, and also only when I feel like thinking up new questions. ::)

Me too. I mean only answer when.... not the killing bit. (although what I think is a relevant answer may not be).

Quote from: Agujjim on June 18, 2007, 09:10:53 PM
I almost did just before you did.  I know that personally I will only answer when I feel I can give a relevant answer, and also only when I feel like thinking up new questions. ::)

Ditto

Why is there air?

Because some compounds are too ornery to hang out in groups, and would rather slamdance.  ::)

Bah, chemistry, schmemistry;  it's all Physics  ;)

A combination of  Nucleosynthesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis) and the fact we haven't been hit by anything big enough to tear the atmosphere away. Yet.

They did think the Hydrogen bomb might trigger atmospheric ignition but Edward Teller did a few calculations which suggested it wouldn't.  Time well spent one feels...

Quote from: beagle on June 27, 2007, 05:52:21 PM
Bah, chemistry, schmemistry;  it's all Physics  ;)

Well, perhaps physics most accurately describes why we have air; I was explaining gas I think.
Then again, it's usually biology (and microbi, at that) which most accurately describes why I have gas.  :mrgreen:

But, aren't physicists fond of saying that chemistry is a subset of physics?

yes....  as biology is a rather specialized subset of chemistry, and the entire scope of the Arts are very specialized subset of biology.  ;)

It's all just applied mathematics if you zoom out far enough, anyways.  But the calculations involved in theoretically determining the absolute best recipe for a particular dish take much longer to perform than simply getting a feel for the taste and adding a dash of this, pinch of that... 

That goes back to the 'Universe as a computer simulation' scenario. Let's hope they have good power protection for the mainframe doing the calculations...
:-X

Bill Gates as the Creator?

NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!

*ties knot in trunk in desperate attempt to escape this being even remotely possible*

Not remotely. Have you noticed what happen to most of MS systems running for a while? (even servers need to be rebooted periodically). We would start to do everything slowly until suddenly all goes blue.
:mrgreen:

The question is what kind of OS should you use on a quantum computer (the most likely platform for that kind of calculation, no? Then again D. Adams may have been onto something with the idea of a planet as a supercomputer...)

Quote3. If archeologists were to on cover your home a thousand years from now, what do you think they'd think you were?

A filthy pig.  Gotta clean up this weekend.  :D

Quote from: Sibling Zono (anon1mat0) on July 11, 2007, 07:19:27 PM
Not remotely. Have you noticed what happen to most of MS systems running for a while? (even servers need to be rebooted periodically). We would start to do everything slowly until suddenly all goes blue.
:mrgreen:

But from where I sit, most of my field of view is filled with a blue sky and a big blue lake... Ack!  It's already started!  Quick, call Doctor Watson!   ;D

Beware of a plane in a sunny day writing in the sky:

Fatal exception in address block FF0A62B:03......
:mrgreen:

Quote from: Chatty3. What is in your opinion the best place to buy real state now?

Investment or use? Future investment or something income producing NOW?

Housing prices are plummeting daily in most markets. There will be a residential glut that will rebound horribly on the US economy as the repossessions rise. NOW is not the time, you should wait and plan for the bottom of the market for residential purchases, either  for investment or for a residence.

Long term, you look for an undervalued area that has growth potential. (Someone you know bought a classic Craftman cottage on 2/3 of an acre, needs cosmetic work, has original stained glass in the front windows...outbuildings, big trees--about 3 years ago, for under $30K. It's already worth about twice what it cost, with no improvements.)

In my area, the "escape from Houston's rat race" people are having to pay huge premiums for the closer in areas. The extra 13 miles from Brenham to Somerville cut prices precipitously, and as the pricier areas are starting to suffer, our prices in 'town' here are rising.
-------------
Investment property to be income producing? if you're planning on putting some money into the investment, look for older multi-family housing with 3 and 4 BR units. As houses are repo'd, there will be family groups that will need multiple bedrooms (kids) and can meet a fairly large monthly, but not keep up payments on a growing ARM. Buy older units, refurb and rent them. A friend in Atlanta took a complex of older 2BR/2BA rental units and took the basic floorplan apart and refurb'ed it all into three and four BR units (2 with 5 BRs) with larger kitchens, etc. and some of the baths made into laundry rooms. He bought it with the idea of catering to displaced ARM families, but he's actually got applications for more units than he'll have based on the fact that it's 3 or more bedrooms within a reasonable distance of the 'main part' of the city, instead of a 45 minute to 2 hour commute.
-----------

Across the board, housing in Texas has always been less expensive that most places.

What kind of real estate ya want? (Don't get me started on commercial...)

Actually I wouldn't consider buying real state here in the states for a while. On one side the market hasn't touched bottom yet, on the other getting credit is becoming much harder, so it becomes inviable right now.

But we have been considering the idea outside the US. In Colombia real state is in a good appreciating trend and unless there is a very serious internal* market crash there is a good chance for the trend to remain. I wonder if there is any other market in which real state may be viable.

In any case thank you for your response, it makes a lot of sense.

* The Colombian market is somewhat unique, the economy has been able to survive the inherent instability of the conflict plus the fact that the disturbance rarely touches the large urban areas, makes it very resilient. The price of doing business hasn't changed much in this past years (in fact the probability of things getting better is higher when the perception is on the bottom ;) ). The economy would need a very bad global crash to feel an immediate dip, in fact the market has managed to remain stable even after the crazy stunts of our 2nd biggest export partner, Venezuela (the 1st is the US) which has closed the border a couple times, raised tariffs when treaties had removed them etc, etc.

 :offtopic:

we're interviewing victims officer candidates today

:mrgreen: - I love to torture them, I get to be the one that has them fill out their fingerprint cards and then run them through ACIC, I like to make funny faces and snigger and it makes them squirm "What did she find?" sort of thing.
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :devil2:

wait do we really stay on topic somewhere- like 100% of the time and all?

TOPIC??

We don't need no stinkin' topic!!

Quote from: anthrobabe on September 14, 2007, 02:07:02 PM
:offtopic:

we're interviewing victims officer candidates today

:mrgreen: - I love to torture them, I get to be the one that has them fill out their fingerprint cards and then run them through ACIC, I like to make funny faces and snigger and it makes them squirm "What did she find?" sort of thing.
:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :devil2:

wait do we really stay on topic somewhere- like 100% of the time and all?

:devil2: :devil2: :devil2: :devil2:
Bingo!
one of our candidates decided to ummmm - update his F-4 after being poked at by me--- turns out he had failed to list a previous issue that would be relevant- but didn't list because surely they can't find out about that.....all from lil old me giving him they 'eye'

so evil
Oh I'm so evil.

Quote from: anthrobabe on September 14, 2007, 02:07:02 PM
wait do we really stay on topic somewhere- like 100% of the time and all?

I think the best we've managed is a few pages back when Mr. Eugenics was floating around.

should have been eugene eugenics and not......


Oh- math is driving me insane and it is something that I should get - I feel it - someone is going to say ok here is how and I'm going to say

_______ I knew that

What's all this talk of Christmas? Do you constantly talk about the end of August in mid-July? No, I thought not.

Heck, I was talking about mid-September/October constantly since the PREVIOUS October.  Bad habit....

:ROFL:

OK, I'll revive this one because...

3. Are you afraid of fire or water? Which one would you choose, if you had to, for an unpleasant experience
Provided I would survive, I would choose water (very unpleasant experiences with fire leave major scars).  Provided I wouldn't survive.... I would choose water.  Drowning sounds less painful.   I have an affinity for and a high comfort level with both, but have been in more scary situations with water and am confident of my abilities to get out of most situations (I'm still here). I'm a strong swimmer and can travel at least 50 m underwater (linear, not depth) without surfacing for breath.

Regardless of how hard is to be rational about it (and that that may have been the intention), I want to try:
Questions:
What form of asphyxia is quicker, smoke or water? And, how are those numbers affected by you fighting to avoid dying asphyxiated?

With some training I can spend about 2+ minutes under water, but those 2' will be of sheer terror trying to find air or worse, knowing there is no air around. Then (with the pleasure of water in your lungs) comes sweet sweet asphyxia.

Now the alternative is smoke and possible burns...

Choices, choices...

Wouldn't fire be quicker but perhaps more painful?

Smoke inhalation sounds nasty....  and might not be that quick.  I suspect that water is more quickly fatal because the first lungful would do it, whereas smoke inhalation is death by toxic gases. The burns are the decider for me....  in water you're basically going to be comfortable except for that air situation.  And you DO have the option to end it any time by taking a lungful.  I suspect I'd probably go into a shallow water blackout before taking that lungful, though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shallow_water_blackout
(after I read this I quit hyperventilating before doing underwater-distance swims)

Personally, being trapped underwater would be panic (urgency of getting to air, but being basically 'safe' otherwise) whereas being trapped in an inferno would be terror (horror at the situation, plus the urgency of getting out, plus probable heat-related pain even if you're not actually burning).

I suppose to really consider the fire option, you've got to take it in the context of immolation, not just being trapped in an inferno.  That has to be PAIN (I cannot fathom how one would make the choice to use self-immolation as a form of protest / suicide).

I think this question can be answered by studying the forms of punishment used over the centuries for various crimes. Burning martyrs v. dunking witches for example. Also Saxon ones: carrying burning metal was a lesser punishment than plunging arm into boiling water......

People often die in fires from smoke poisoning while asleep. It is said that death on the stake depended on the wind and the humidity of the wood. From what I read this was seen as another indicator of guilt or innocence. If the smoke was blown away from the victim (leading to agonizing death by roasting), it was seen as divine approval of guilt. If on the other hand the smoke was drawn towards the victim (leading to a quick death or at least unconsciousness through smoke and lack of oxygen), it was seen as an indicator of possible innocence. That's the same perverse logic as the water test*: drowned=innocent.
I hear that the least painful death is being immersed in an atmosphere with no oxygen but just inert gases (nitrogen, noble gases, Freon** etc.)***.

*This test was already known in ancient Mesopotamia but there it was drowned=guilty, survival=innocence.
**This is usually combined with shock freezing
***sitting on an exploding nuke may qualify too but we have unsufficient data on that ;)

Quote from: Swatopluk on June 14, 2008, 05:57:44 PM
People often die in fires from smoke poisoning while asleep. It is said that death on the stake depended on the wind and the humidity of the wood. From what I read this was seen as another indicator of guilt or innocence. If the smoke was blown away from the victim (leading to agonizing death by roasting), it was seen as divine approval of guilt. If on the other hand the smoke was drawn towards the victim (leading to a quick death or at least unconsciousness through smoke and lack of oxygen), it was seen as an indicator of possible innocence. That's the same perverse logic as the water test*: drowned=innocent.
I hear that the least painful death is being immersed in an atmosphere with no oxygen but just inert gases (nitrogen, noble gases, Freon** etc.)***.

*This test was already known in ancient Mesopotamia but there it was drowned=guilty, survival=innocence.
**This is usually combined with shock freezing
***sitting on an exploding nuke may qualify too but we have unsufficient data on that ;)

Massive exposure to hard radiation works, too.  But it must be huge-- a little radiation will kill you slowly and painfully over time. 

Natural gas is also inert to humans, and causes suffocation.  As does CO2.   Unfortunately (or fortunately) in the US, Natural Gas is contaminated with mercaptain which makes it smell terrible.   And occasionally, there are trace elements of sulfurous compounds, too, which also stink.   But, the stink itself is harmless-- just uncomfortable.

Flammable fumes can be suffocating, too.  Too high a concentration of gasoline or paint thinner fumes can lead to suffocation--but usually before that happens, the person has passed out from the toxic effects of the chemicals in the bloodstream.   Death is swift in that case.

I recall reading about a pair of painters, who had enclosed the room in plastic sheeting. They were working with oil-based paints, and didn't want to disturb the finish with a ventilation device.... dust specks, y'know.   

Anyway, they had covered the windows (to protect the finish on the trim) and the doorways (same reason) and the floors.  What they inadvertently did was create a giant plastic bag.... and worked inside it.  They were found unconscious.   One died on the way to the ER, the other one died later, never waking up from a deep coma. 

They appeared to not have suffered.   Who knows?  They certainly didn't say anything...

Quote from: Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith on June 14, 2008, 09:34:16 PMAnd occasionally, there are trace elements of sulfurous compounds, too, which also stink.   But, the stink itself is harmless-- just uncomfortable.

!!!  Harmless?  Not if it's direct outta the ground....  H₂S isn't exactly harmless, even in trace amounts.  You're correct in one way - if you stop smelling the stink, THAT'S when it's dangerous (H₂S in dangerous concentration deadens the smell receptors, so when you stop smelling it you're in trouble).

Not relevant if we're discussing sales gas out of your household pipes, but 'round oil country it's not unusual to run into sour pipelines throughout the countryside.

Quote from: Agujjim on June 15, 2008, 12:10:13 AM

Quote from: Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith on June 14, 2008, 09:34:16 PMAnd occasionally, there are trace elements of sulfurous compounds, too, which also stink.   But, the stink itself is harmless-- just uncomfortable.

!!!  Harmless?  Not if it's direct outta the ground....  H₂S isn't exactly harmless, even in trace amounts.  You're correct in one way - if you stop smelling the stink, THAT'S when it's dangerous (H₂S in dangerous concentration deadens the smell receptors, so when you stop smelling it you're in trouble).

Not relevant if we're discussing sales gas out of your household pipes, but 'round oil country it's not unusual to run into sour pipelines throughout the countryside.

In the concentrations most often found in natural gas as delivered....harmless.   ;D I suppose I should have been more specific.

And, you're correct-- "sour gas" can be found here in Oklahoma.  Back in the day, they used to just burn that off.... (incidentally adding to acid rain, but that's another thing...)

Nowadays?  I imagine they chemically process it to reduce the sulfur compounds.  What with the cost of gas an'all. 

Oil and gas are actually the main sources for sulphur today. Roast gases and natural sulphur deposits have only limited market shares.
Some sulphur compounds are smellable at concentration in the ppt range.
Btw, coffee aroma consists of hundreds of compounds, many of them sulphuric and many of them highly toxic (but diluted enough to be of negligible risk). My chem teacher at school told us that during his university time they produced a small amount of one especially smelly sulphur compound. Despite the flue filters it stank at least a mile around the building.

Quote from: Swatopluk on June 15, 2008, 09:54:01 AM
Oil and gas are actually the main sources for sulphur today. Roast gases and natural sulphur deposits have only limited market shares.
Some sulphur compounds are smellable at concentration in the ppt range.
Btw, coffee aroma consists of hundreds of compounds, many of them sulphuric and many of them highly toxic (but diluted enough to be of negligible risk). My chem teacher at school told us that during his university time they produced a small amount of one especially smelly sulphur compound. Despite the flue filters it stank at least a mile around the building.

Back when I was in HS, my chem teacher told us of a tale about mercaptan (sp?) the ingredient that gives natural gas it's stink.

It seems this stuff is so odoriferous, that a tiny quantity is more than enough.   A local facility was transshipping used metal oil drums-- the sort that chemicals are shipped in.

Anyway, one's lid was not firmly attached, and the empty barrel had had mercaptan in it.  It had been superficially washed.  But enough chemical remained, that the surrounding neighborhood for about a 1/2 mile, could easily smell it.

The calls to the natural gas company for gas leaks continued until someone finally traced it to the offending barrel-- which had it's lid firmly re-attached.   Problem solved.

A quick google reveals that there are several chemicals under the name "mercaptan" and I'm not certain which variety is used by natural gas companies.

What's interesting, though, is that their sites all state 'non-toxic' for the chemicals they use.  Yet other sites exclaim the toxic nature of these classes of chemicals.

I suppose it's the concentration that makes the difference....  ::) ;D


This is interesting reading:  What is the smelliest molecule (http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistryfaqs/f/blsmell.htm)

Over here they use tetrahydrothiophene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrahydrothiophene).
Smellable at 10 ppb. That's a thioether (or sulfide), not a thioalcohol (mercaptane).

Quote from: Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith on June 15, 2008, 04:36:52 PM
  What is the smelliest molecule (http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistryfaqs/f/blsmell.htm)

The article seems to have missed the most common one: Teenaged athlete's sock stench.

Has incapacitated Moms (and laundry-doing older sisters) at 200 yards.

Quote from: Sibling Chatty on June 15, 2008, 11:23:54 PM

Quote from: Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith on June 15, 2008, 04:36:52 PM
  What is the smelliest molecule (http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistryfaqs/f/blsmell.htm)

The article seems to have missed the most common one: Teenaged athlete's sock stench.

Has incapacitated Moms (and laundry-doing older sisters) at 200 yards.

All those fermented pheromones, no doubt....  ::)

The water-death argument certainly appeals to me, but I think in the end I'd choose the burning. There would be a certain release, I think, in physically feeling the inevitability of death and in being able to scream and thrash and do every other reflexive, natural thing to fruitlessly try to prevent it. In drowning there would be an agonizingly long period of perfect consciousness and peace with only a growing discomfort before I either breathed water or passed out (I'd pass out before I worked up the determination to breathe), and I think the sense of entrapment coupled with the placidity of the situation would be a far greater torture than a blaze (ha!) of physical pain.

This thread has taken a strange turn hasn's it? :mrgreen:
Now what about quartering?

Executions -medieval or not- tend to be violent and/or with a good amount of risk for mistakes/problems (like wrong dosages on the lethal injection cocktail, ability to survive electrocution, partial decapitation, or spinal cord remaining intact in a hanging).

I much rather think on the least painful ways to go.

I guess quartering with ICBMs as pullers would be quicker and less painful than oxes.
The 15 ton weight of Monty Python fame should do the job, if dropped from sufficient a height.
The guillotine, if properly used*, is likely the least inhumane** (except for the executioners and those that have to clean up the mess***).

*e.g. no waiting in line for your turn, mocking etc. by the masses or executioners or things like that.
**provided conscious-while-being-killed is mandatory. Otherwise a tasteless sleeping drug in the meal (unannounced) followed by the actual execution would be preferred.
***that's one of the standard reasons for not beheading people anymore, the sensitivity of the staff ::)

Placed in a room with plenty of "air" but insufficient oxygen makes you light-headed a bit, then sleepy.

Or in a room with reduced air pressure-- enough so that there is insufficient oxygen-- makes you, again, light-headed-- a bit "dopey".  Then you simply, painlessly black out.

This we know from experience of high-flying pilots.

Quite painless-- you just don't wake up after blacking out.

Carbon monoxide works well, too-- if pure (and not tainted with unburned hydrocarbons).  If you get enough dosage, you don't even realize you're oxygen starved at all. 

It's the slight dosage of CO that gives one a splitting headache.  If you've enough, you simply and painlessly pass out.

See the book Coma.   Keep the gas going for 15 minutes-- permanent brain death.   If no machines are used, the body will soon follow. 

I'd take freezing as an option too (particularly with moderate ethanol intoxication thrown into the mix), assuming sufficient protective clothing so that one got hypothermia before serious frostbite set into one's extremities.

Supposedly it's rather painless, although it takes a damnably long time and would be cruel and unusual in the context of execution.

I've seen a drunk co-partier lay down in a snowbank wearing nothing but wet swim trunks because his (bare) "feet were cold".  Well, that's why you don't run off from the party in bare feet and wet swim trunks. He would definitely have been IQF by morning if I hadn't followed him (he was in a residential area, so someone may have found him anyways, but this way he still has his toes). ::)

Speaking of alcohol.

Getting totally, stinking drunk would work quite well, as executions go.

Allow the slob you're executing to get stinking, roaring drunk on the liquor of his choice.

Wait until he drinks enough to pass out completely-- check to see if you can wake him up.  If you can-- more booze.

Then..... inject his veins directly with pure ethanol.  Not much needed, really.

Result:  coma, followed quickly by death.

Painless.

Would start a new tradition:  the Last Drinking Binge.

And why not?   You're killing the guy, why NOT let him have one last drinking binge? 

But that's the trick about executions: vengeance. There is a desire for a certain amount of suffering/pain.

In the eyes of those seeking vengeance a painless execution would defeat the purpose.  ::)

That's been my argument against the death penalty since middle school - much more vengeful to make someone sit alone, uncomfortable, bored, depressed in a cell for life than to painlessly execute them.

Quote from: Alpaca on June 19, 2008, 12:04:36 AM
That's been my argument against the death penalty since middle school - much more vengeful to make someone sit alone, uncomfortable, bored, depressed in a cell for life than to painlessly execute them.

Yes, and there's always the risk that they want to die :mrgreen:

Quote from: Sibling Zono (anon1mat0) on June 18, 2008, 11:03:56 PM
But that's the trick about executions: vengeance. There is a desire for a certain amount of suffering/pain.

In the eyes of those seeking vengeance a painless execution would defeat the purpose.  ::)

Which puts the person doing the vengeance on the exact same level as any common murderer....


.... which is one of many reasons why I'm agin' it, myself.

In ancient times it was the normal way to make the executees drunk. This practice was abandoned for two reasons:
1. The drunks misbehaved and disturbed the dignity of the occasion
2. The opinion became dominant that the executee should be fully conscious of what was happening at least up to the moment the execution starts (that is also the reasoning about not executing retards and the even more perverse notion that it is OK to forcefeed mentally ill delinquents with psycho drugs to lift their consciousness to a level that fulfills the minimum condition of awareness to allow the execution).

I have already stated on other occasions that the current WH cabal makes dropping the "cruel and unusual" limitations quite appealing but I realize the base motives behind that (make it reaaaaaaallllllllllly slow to serve a s a warning to others!) and know that the negative effects would outweigh by far the advantages.
Another very old idea would serve well: Let them dig a hole and give them food and drink only in exchange for earth. The deeper they dig, the longer they live :devil2:

Quote from: Swatopluk on June 19, 2008, 10:47:27 AM
I have already stated on other occasions that the current WH cabal makes dropping the "cruel and unusual" limitations quite appealing...Let them dig a hole and give them food and drink only in exchange for earth. The deeper they dig, the longer they live :devil2:

Cheney would just have some of his friends down there send up an elevator from his home.

Quote from: Swatopluk on June 19, 2008, 10:47:27 AM
Another very old idea would serve well: Let them dig a hole and give them food and drink only in exchange for earth. The deeper they dig, the longer they live :devil2:

Wouldn't that encourage making tunnels to escape? Up to certain depth the guard would hear but not see the prisoner, he would then make his tunnel and be given for dead upon his/her successful escape.

Nope... the crew at the top would still have to lower a bucket down; if the length of rope needed didn't increase, they'd know something was up.  Also, they could monitor the volume of soil removed.  The only reasonable way around it would be to start with a broad shaft at the top and then narrow it (to allow depth and reduce displacement volume); and once one was deep enough it'd be a long slog out.

All this presumes no water table to speak of.

Quote from: Agujjim on June 19, 2008, 06:39:05 PM
All this presumes no water table to speak of.

That might be a new twist - for a certain length of time, the guards give you water. You have until then to reach the water table, because then your drink stops. Still have to keep delivering soil to get food, though!

So who pumps the water? 

And can me make Busheney do this in Texas?  Chatty sez the water table is only inches deep there.

Quote from: Agujjim on June 19, 2008, 09:04:59 PM
So who pumps the water? 

And can me make Busheney do this in Texas?  Chatty sez the water table is only inches deep there.

Wouldn't matter-- vampires don't breathe anyway....

Quote from: Agujjim on June 19, 2008, 09:04:59 PM
So who pumps the water? 

And can me make Busheney do this in Texas?  Chatty sez the water table is only inches deep there.

On the coast, yes.

Get out as far as San Antonio, about Fort Sam Houston, it's a little over 90 feet.

Go towards San Angelo, and you get to dig some 140-180 feet, until you hit the Edwards plateau and the Lipan Aquifer, where it rises again.

There are places in Williamson County, just north of Austin, where the lower Trinity Aquifer lost 250 feet, plus between 1985 and 1995, and it hasn't rebuilt.

This is all before you get to the deserts in West Texas.
-----------

Remember that Texas is big. Put a hinge on the eastern border, flip the state over, and El Paso would be in the Atlantic Ocean, I forget how far. Hinge and flip the other way, and East Texas would be 60 miles out into the Pacific. Hinge at the top? Brownsville would be 40 miles from Canada.

We have tropical and subtropical areas, we have woods, forests, grasslands, deserts hills and Honest-to-Ganesha desert areas.  Pick a place, drive for a day, and you may just STILL be in Texas. (Beaumont to El Paso, 2 days, driving 9 hours each day, NOT counting the gas, food and potty breaks. That was in 1967, and my Mom STILL hasn't forgiven Daddy, and he's been dead for YEARS. Yes, freeways most of the way.)

About 900 miles across in any direction...and starting a a good first 25-40 miles of it inches above sea level.

I say take 'em to some of that coastal area around the edge of the King Ranch. Ain't nothin' for miles and miles except miles and miles...

Quote from: Sibling Chatty on June 19, 2008, 11:33:02 PM

Quote from: Agujjim on June 19, 2008, 09:04:59 PM
So who pumps the water? 

And can me make Busheney do this in Texas?  Chatty sez the water table is only inches deep there.

On the coast, yes.

Get out as far as San Antonio, about Fort Sam Houston, it's a little over 90 feet.

Go towards San Angelo, and you get to dig some 140-180 feet, until you hit the Edwards plateau and the Lipan Aquifer, where it rises again.

There are places in Williamson County, just north of Austin, where the lower Trinity Aquifer lost 250 feet, plus between 1985 and 1995, and it hasn't rebuilt.

This is all before you get to the deserts in West Texas.
-----------

Remember that Texas is big. Put a hinge on the eastern border, flip the state over, and El Paso would be in the Atlantic Ocean, I forget how far. Hinge and flip the other way, and East Texas would be 60 miles out into the Pacific. Hinge at the top? Brownsville would be 40 miles from Canada.

We have tropical and subtropical areas, we have woods, forests, grasslands, deserts hills and Honest-to-Ganesha desert areas.  Pick a place, drive for a day, and you may just STILL be in Texas. (Beaumont to El Paso, 2 days, driving 9 hours each day, NOT counting the gas, food and potty breaks. That was in 1967, and my Mom STILL hasn't forgiven Daddy, and he's been dead for YEARS. Yes, freeways most of the way.)

About 900 miles across in any direction...and starting a a good first 25-40 miles of it inches above sea level.

I say take 'em to some of that coastal area around the edge of the King Ranch. Ain't nothin' for miles and miles except miles and miles...

One thing I really liked about driving in Texas, is that if you get bored of the interstates, the state roads are excellent.  Not as fast, but the scenery is more interesting.

We did that on a trip back from San Antone (to Tulsa).  Took the scenic route most of the way through Texas.  Excellent state and county roads.... 

....then we hit Oklahoma, and nearly lost an axle on the county "road".  HAD to return to the interstate, for the sake of the car and sanity if nothing else.

That's OK for you-- corrupt county commissioners and crappy roads.

To avoid the water table problem, I propose the digging of the hole on the slopes of a mountain. Mount McKinley and Mount Saint Helens would be prime locations :mrgreen:

Quote from: Swatopluk on June 20, 2008, 10:34:59 AM
To avoid the water table problem, I propose the digging of the hole on the slopes of a mountain. Mount McKinley and Mount Saint Helens would be prime locations :mrgreen:

Swato, at least have them do something useful - check out old volcanoes to see if they're really inactive.

I thought old Helen was still rumbling :mrgreen:
It has to be in the US of course.
Of course they could start digging the transatlantic tunnel.

Or dig in one of those pacific islands that are disappearing under the tide.

Hm, maybe they could be used to prevent the islands from sinking by letting them built levees to avoid their own drowning :whip: :mua:

Quote from: Swatopluk on June 21, 2008, 11:08:56 AM
Of course they could start digging the transatlantic tunnel.

Somwhere in North West London there is a tunnel to Australia that my cousin and I dug in the mid 1950's. Exact location classified.

Quote from: Griffin NoName on June 21, 2008, 11:59:00 PM

Quote from: Swatopluk on June 21, 2008, 11:08:56 AM
Of course they could start digging the transatlantic tunnel.

Somwhere in North West London there is a tunnel to Australia that my cousin and I dug in the mid 1950's. Exact location classified.

Does it connect with the tunnel that was started in Well's War Of The Worlds*?


_______

_{* in the written novel, not any of the movies by the same name.}

Bonus: Seal clubbing or shark finning?


Seal clubbing, provided it's done right. Hakapiks wielded properly are IMHO equal or better to the bolt guns used to kill livestock, and preferable to death by rifle unless the shooter is an ace sniper - granted, I've never personally observed a seal hunt.  Hunts (here) are also subject to government control (management of seal stocks) and open to observers - which I encourage, provided they DO understand the difference between a clean kill and a cruel one so that they can help eliminate the latter.

Shark finning OTOH is cruel, illegal, destroying our oceans, and nearly impossible to control as it's performed on the high seas.

The fact that seal hunting receives more media attention and celebrity protest than shark finning, and that it's (IMO) purely due to the 'cute factor' makes me wanna
  :2guns: :stick: :barf::explode:
HELLO?!  We haven't clubbed a whitecoat up here in over 20 years, so quit waving around the:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/Blanchon-idlm2006.jpg/205px-Blanchon-idlm2006.jpg) pictures.   

Ragged-jackets aren't so cute.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/63/Raggedy_jacket.jpg)

Just to avoid that question to be mistaken as serious: I could as well have posted puppy smashing or baby roasting?

Baby roasting. There are too many, so as long it is done humanely... besides babies are delicious!  :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Quote from: Swatopluk
Just to avoid that question to be mistaken as serious: I could as well have posted puppy smashing or baby roasting?

I think that, as long as you post as a modest proposal, it is acceptable.

Quote from: Sibling Zono (anon1mat0) on August 07, 2008, 04:38:28 PM
Baby roasting. There are too many, so as long it is done humanely... besides babies are delicious!  :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

Tender, too!!

:mua:

I've never understood how to smash a puppy anyway. Can't find a good instruction manual. Apart from this Helpline.

Quote from: Opsanus tau on March 25, 2009, 05:06:42 PM
1. Is a black sheep still a sheep?

Yes. All sheep are black when the lights are out.

Oh, you mean the kind of black sheep that is not a follower? That's an interesting question. When thinking in this regard we tend to use the term "sheep" to imply the willingness to be herded. Is the black sheep not a sheep because it won't be herded? Or is it not following the herd because it has all ready been shunned by the rest of the matching white sheep? What about a white sheep from a grey herd?

Yes, a black sheep is still a sheep, but it is one that stands apart.

How about in the Wolf vs Sheep paradigm? Is it the dumb sheep that stood out to it's own peril? The one that doesn't want to be a sheep but rejects the idea of becoming a wolf? Or simply the one born different?

To take a page from Heinlein's character Laz Long, and paraphrase a bit, I'd much prefer to be a wolf in wolf's clothing.

Sheep are for....well eating and fleecing.   Black sheep?  You just get more colorful wool that way, and these are apt to be fleeced more often as result.

No, I'll take wolf every time-- sure, the wolf often gets "offed" by the shepherd, but at least the wolf is honest in his pursuits, and gets to sleep where he likes.

Not to mention, he gets to dine on sheep.....black #and# white...

Ooh, but the Wolf vs Sheep paradigm is the one espoused by those who lack empathy, is the argument to justify deception, abuse or worse because they "let themselves", they suggest you must choose between sheep (the regular populace) and the wolf (those in power) and are pretty adept at cannibalizing themselves to become the alpha.

I personally don't want to be a wolf nor a sheep, because I reject the paradigm (that those are the only two options).

In the wild it may be better to be a wolf, as long as there are no humans. With humans around the concept is even more akin to the psychopaths: sheep are cattle to be exploited as long as it is profitable or discarded when it isn't profitable anymore.

Quote from: Sibling Zono (anon1mat0) on March 26, 2009, 09:23:12 PM
Ooh, but the Wolf vs Sheep paradigm is the one espoused by those who lack empathy, is the argument to justify deception, abuse or worse because they "let themselves", they suggest you must choose between sheep (the regular populace) and the wolf (those in power) and are pretty adept at cannibalizing themselves to become the alpha.

I personally don't want to be a wolf nor a sheep, because I reject the paradigm (that those are the only two options).

In the wild it may be better to be a wolf, as long as there are no humans. With humans around the concept is even more akin to the psychopaths: sheep are cattle to be exploited as long as it is profitable or discarded when it isn't profitable anymore.

I never saw the wolf as being in charge-- I always considered the Shepherd had that role, and there was only one (in keeping with monotheism).

I always saw the wolf as a bit outside of the sheep-think thing.   The wolf did not follow the directions of the shepherd, but was wary of the power he had over the sheep.  Indeed, the wolf could easily find food beyond mere sheep-- in the wild, but sheep are so.....easy.  Especially when the shepherd is not watching (which is mostly).

So, the sheep representing general society, the shepherd representing leader(s)/government/god/etc.  Black sheep representing the occasional sheep who, while still being a sheep, did not fit in in an entirely sheep-like way.  Then the complete outsider, the wolf, who could masquerade as a sheep on occasion, but was never really a sheep-- not even a black one.

That is, the wolf went his own way, but #could# pretend to fit in sheep-society if he chose to, but did not have to.

Quote from: Darlica on March 30, 2009, 04:59:37 PM
(except pigeons :taz: )
o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0o0
C) Do you like eggs (the real ones not the candy variety)?

Finally gave in and let the sky-rats keep their nest on the balcony this year. ::)

Apparently I do like eggs, 'cause I didn't kick 'em over the edge. I'm getting soft...


I did move the nest into a newspaper-lined cardboard box to keep the mess contained; mother pigeon seems to like the new digs just fine.

Quote from: Agujjim on April 01, 2009, 04:48:10 AM
I did move the nest into a newspaper-lined cardboard box to keep the mess contained; mother pigeon seems to like the new digs just fine.

If she really likes it she will bring her own newspaper lined box next year ;)

OOOO Aggie-- you've done it now-- the U-Haul will arrive shortly with their family from Brooklyn, NY- USA

Actually, I think they deserted....   saw mom on the nest for a few days, but it looks abandoned lately.

Perhaps it isn't warm enough and they found a more suitable place to ride the cold wave.

They may be back on the summer, though.  ;)

Quote from: Swatopluk on May 25, 2009, 06:28:23 PM
Warning: Fish farms consume caught wild fish. 1 ton of farmed fish requires 4-5 tons of wild fish as input.

Swato, could you give some reference to that claim? I know some fresh water fish farms that I would've thought to be more or less self sustaining back home.

Should have said that I mean saltwater fish farms. Most fish bred there are predatory and are indeed fed with wild fish (and not just the offal left from fish factories). Once I get back to work (Thursday probably), I'll look for the link to the presentation given at the UBA (rough German equivalent of the EPA) a few weeks ago on the topic. Can't find it by simply googling and don't have access to the internal pages from home.
It does not mean that fish farming by itself is evil but that the way they are typically run these days makes them not necessarily a better alternative (and should not be the sole base for a good conscience).

Quote from: Sibling Zono (anon1mat0) on May 25, 2009, 07:12:10 PM

Quote from: Swatopluk on May 25, 2009, 06:28:23 PM
Warning: Fish farms consume caught wild fish. 1 ton of farmed fish requires 4-5 tons of wild fish as input.

Swato, could you give some reference to that claim? I know some fresh water fish farms that I would've thought to be more or less self sustaining back home.

Based on what type of feed?  Trophic levels tend to be around 10% efficient (rough rule of thumb; at 4-5 lbs of wild fish for 1 lb of farmed, the efficiency seems extraordinarily good, but using oily feeder fish such as anchovies it may work out on a caloric basis), so presumably there's a net input somewhere.  I expect for the self-sustaining freshwater farms there is still a source of food (i.e. algae/phytoplankton, detritus carried in by river, etc).  Not being critical, mind, just curious. ;)

I used the term self sustaining incorrectly, the farms I knew used tanks and fish feed (what content of wild fish is on it I don't know; from what I read soy is the main ingredient in the one used with trout  ???) apparently some species don't required a high proteic diet or can be fed with shrimp based feed but I have to admit my ignorance on the subject (hence the question to Swato).

All this is making me nervous. I am sure my feeding efficiency is less than 10% and I am far less useful than a fish farm.  ::)

I'll bet you crap a lot less than a fish farm, too.  And undoubtedly harbour less parasites.  ;)

Me?  It's a toss-up. ;D
But I feed both on wild fish and soy, although I try to emphasize fish lower down on the food chain.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_saury

I can provide the ppt presentation on the problems of fishery as pdf now.
It's (partially) in German and 3MB big though (too big for a post attachment).
It's original web location is probably access restricted, so a link would not help.
If someone wants it mailed, send me a message (with email address, if not visible on the member list page).
Caution: for personal use only.

OK, this is actually TSBM Helpline, but the rabies bit got me wondering if anyone else here has read Rant (Chuck Palahniuk)?

Pretty good book...  he's been hit and miss lately but I liked that one; it's about a human rabies epidemic with quite a bit of dystopian sci-fi thrown in.