Leaderboard

Hi Big, I agree with your comments on ranking; except that I think we all know * that Trump has already gone down as the worst POTUS ever. Jerry Baumchen * Well, most of us.

Investing federal dollars in an approach that doesn't work is still an investment -- remember that not all "good" ideas work, and they have to be tested. The problem is that taxpayers are even worse than managers about not wanting to let all that "investment go to waste." And conventional wisdom about why to send people instead of only robots (which really can get a huge amount done) is two-fold: You can get the public far more excited about manned missions, particularly if they get to know the people, than you can about robots People can come up with more ideas and solutions on the fly still. That may (and probably will) within the forseeable future, but still within the limits of what we can see until we really, really, trust self-modifying AI to expand itself beyond where we tell it to. Maybe in far space we'll do that, but if there really are inhabited planets out there, that's kind of a scary thought, too. Maybe Asimov's laws of robotics are a good thing, but with "what's there" replacing "humans." Wendy P.

How many people on here have tried to start a conversation with you about the fact that your definition of 'woke' is extreme at best and doesn't fit with the rest of the world? Instead of having any kind of conversation, you just keep trotting out random links to articles that you believe prove your point...it's just getting downright masturbatory at this point!

I think we need to contact the CIA. it appears some people are capable of reverse remote viewing. there recall could help solve cases in there area. it's a gift..

Don't forget the highly detailed memory they all have..a few moments in a room giving no reason to recall the encounter in perfect detail almost 50 years later. pointing out a extremely small tie clip worn 50 years ago. truly amazing..

Kenny Christiansen was put forth as a DB Cooper suspect at least 4 or 5 years prior to the airing of Decoded. It was covered in local papers. But yet we are supposed to believe that none of these supposed friends of his - not a single one - had any idea of this until Mr. Blevins came knocking on their door? These "witnesses" that were so tuned in to their surroundings that they could not only remember that Kenny didn't make it to Turkey Day dinner 39 years prior, they could also remember that he had a sun tan when he wasn't there. They could also remember that he never wore his toupee again after that. But yet, while being so sharp and remembering all of those fine details, they had no idea that their old friend was being mentioned as a DB Cooper suspect in the present day? They didn't read the paper? They didn't pick up on any of the gossip? You can't tell me that word didn't get around. I live in a small town and I know how that works. "We just saw Kenny on the previews and thought it was because he worked for Northwest!!". My ass. Anyone that believes that shit has to be 100% eat up with dumbass.

All laudable reasons. But wouldn't proof that beings on other planets not only existed but worshiped Jesus be more valuable?

I saw this somewhere recently: "I don't have kids, but I support my tax dollars going to schools, because I don't want to live among stupid people."

I agree completely. We've proven beyond any doubt that using even vastly better than existing technology we won't be going anywhere soon and certainly not fast. When I suggest faking it I'm being serious. We should focus on exploring our environs virtually. Well, at least until Zuckerberg tell us where he's from and how he got here.

To say that Woke people use the same calendar and are thus are in agreement is disingenuous. The objection to Woke nonsense is where they jump the shark and seek universal conformity to their standards (and yes, there are 'conservatives' that are no better in that regard). Requiring the long skirts while barefoot and pregnant is very much a reality in some communities. To note that there are 'conservatives' that do not adhere to such standards makes that norm no better. If you have a group that sets up an independent society to show the rest of the world how it's done as in "Atlas Shrugged," great. If you have a group that imposes their world view on the rest of society by (mostly peaceful) force and intimidation, burning books and toppling statues, as in Berlin in the '30s or Berkeley now, not so good. My bookshelf is lined with books with whose contents I disagree strongly. It has been stated that I fail to 'study' much of that with which I disagree, but prefer to peruse the original source where possible. Much of 'rebuttal' on this site constitutes an attack on the source, rather than a refutation of content. One need not be a Catholic to cite a Bishop, understanding their position but considering their argument. Much though I loathe Donald Trump, he would occasionally say something that made a lot of sense - though picking out the odd gem was too much like seeking objects of value in a manure pile. The bottom line is that those the embrace 'Woke' are universally in support of a massively flawed ideology, and that is a deal breaker. BSBD, Winsor

The Right Wing source I could be accused of parroting is Irving M. Copi, author of "An Introduction to Logic" - a rather good read. Many of the pertinent concepts may be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies#Formal_fallacies Anyone who espouses Marxism I hold suspect, mainly because I have seen "The Dictatorship of the Proletariat" in action, up close and in person, and I am unimpressed to say the least. BSBD, Winsor

Could you provide source material? If so, please do. Your version is greatly downplayed from what the supposed founders of CRT have said on interviews. You also seem knowledgeable of what does or does not show up on Fox - please fill me in, I don't watch it. What I pick up is from such alt-right sources as CBS, NBC and Googling the interwebs. The definitions I have found for 'Inclusivity, Equity and Diversity' are all pretty much the same, regardless of the source. If you are right and they are wrong, you should not worry about me but set millions of other misled people straight. BSBD, Winsor

One of the keys to project management is scope - define at the outset the parameters by which the project is deemed complete. Thus I am curious what are the criteria we must meet in order to declare Mission Accomplished! and move on? Like the pandemic, it will be nice if and when we can just get over it. BSBD, Winsor

Gee, you don't think I might read accounts of history from various sources, do you? Some years back a group of amateur historians at the office mentioned within earshot of me that "you'll never see a history of the Second World War in German!" The next day I brought in a copy of "Zweiter Weltkrieg im Bildern." Of course the Laendser were the good guys, and the war in the Pacific lasted two pages. Barbara Tuchman, a nice Jewish girl, did a marvelous job of background on a variety of key epochs, going with the treasury's records instead of the accounts provided to the King. She exemplifies the Historian as skeptic. Thomas Sowell is male and white haired, but not white, and his treatment of the nonwhite experience in the Americas, as well as his history of slavery, is brilliant. It has been said that Progressives vigorously defend people's right to different opinions - and are horrified by the fact that people hold different opinions. When the fundamental tenet of an investigation is "everything is, first and foremost, all about race," it is hardly surprising that everything that results is, first and foremost, all about race (kind of a coincidence there). My Rabbi in Texas was a degreed Historian before his Rabbinical studies. Torah study was great, since he would go through the Hebrew account, then point out that Egyptian accounts of the same event had been translated, and that (strangely enough) they took a slightly different position on what happened, who won and so forth. If I read something that is dripping with racism, I try to filter it out to get to the heart of the matter, which can be difficult when the source is so biased. Mein Kampf is a dreadful read. No apologies, but I don't give anyone a pass. I don't buy the concept of 'good racism,' and CRT, while they don't go for burning crosses and whatnot, is every bit as racist as the Klan (you'll forgive me if I greatly dislike the KKK, not simply because they killed Jews with as much enthusiasm as Blacks). BSBD, Winsor

I look at sources such as: https://criticalrace.org/what-is-critical-race-theory/ and am simply appalled. CRT is 100% racist. Period. I doubt if the KKK is as blatant about their stance that it is ALL about race. 'Equality' is a worthwhile goal but 'equity' is discrimination in practice. Similarly 'diversity' is a racial metric, and entirely racist in practice. When the Wall fell, East Germans concept of 'Capitalism' was what they had 'learned' from their teachers (academics?), and some of them moved West to cash in on the gold mine that was now open to them. Having limited useful skills and a Socialist work ethic ('"we pretend to work and they pretend to pay us"), success was elusive for many. Finding out that simply being German wasn't the key to instant wealth, and seeing that even Turks were doing better - driving new BMWs and dressing well - many called foul and formed the core of the 'skinhead' movement. The point that largely escaped them about why (some) Turkish Gastarbeiter were successful and they were not is that the successful Turks were hard working, reliable, honest and did a great job at menial tasks the West Germans were happy to hand off. The unsuccessful Ossies, OTOH, were unreliable drunken louts who seemed to think there was a 'trick' to success. The idea that 'it is all about race' overlooks the influence of culture - among other things. There has been great pushback amongst CRT adherents about including pretty much any group of Asians (Asia's a pretty big place, and all Asians are not the same as I recall) as a minority, since it blows out of the water the principle that being subject to discrimination guarantees mediocrity of outcome. Harvard has been taken to task for their limit on Asian admissions. I caught an interview with Ibram X. Kendi, and when asked to define 'racism' his response used the term 'racist' three times. Thus, when people refer to CRT as 'academic' I am underwhelmed. There are Professors at Big Name Institutions of my acquaintance who are not where they are because of their intellect - they can blather endlessly without a coherent thought to slow them down. I find racism offensive and always have. I can see no reason why I should have any more respect for CRT than for KKK ideology; I see them as flip sides of the same coin. My standpoint does not come from 'following' much of anyone. I listen to as much Rush Limbaugh now as I did when he was alive (okay, so I caught maybe half an hour of his 'entertainment' over the years), and made it through only a couple of pages of some book by Ann Coulter that somebody gave me. I needed earplugs to read her stuff, and am not sure if I agree or disagree with her since I couldn't get past her screaming on paper. It concerns me that people are fine with CRT. If racism is okay then it's okay, if racism is evil it's evil. I kind of stick with the latter view. A quick search for a definition of 'racism' yields the following: Racism noun a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others. Since this flies in the face of my preference for equal rights, equal responsibilities, no more, no less I am not okay with it in any guise, whether the version espoused by CRT or the KKK. BSBD, Winsor

Please point to the section of the article that recommends anything like censorship. I've gone through it a few times and can't quite spot the recommendation you reference. What 'lies' are these? Calling something a lie does not make it untrue. Who in particular is the Alt-Right? Anyone who calls bullshit on notions the Left calls dear? If you have a coherent stance, by all means submit it. If all you have is abuse, I suppose that will have to do in the meantime. BSBD, Winsor

I know such authorities as Kimberle Crenshaw, Kendall Thomas and Patricia Williams dispute my observations, claiming what I have witnessed is all a big misunderstanding. I have heard their 'logic,' and find it terminally flawed. I have endured all too many hours of 'training' regarding 'diversity,' equity' and 'inclusion,' and I'm sick to death of it. Like any religious instruction, its accuracy is largely an abstraction. Treating differing opinions as heresy is an approach I do not condone. I am fine with the realities of these principles in a sense, but I recoil against it forced down my throat as dogma. The road to hell being paved with good intentions, Social Justice Warriors blithely espouse all too much of what led to the worst form of totalitarianism. I don't give a rat's ass whether someone is straight or gay, male, female or unsure, or quite where their forebears were from. It's none of my business, and it is not my job to care about it one way or another. The very people who feel that it is okay to offend me are the ones who insist that I avoid offending them. Gee, I guess that's fair. It is the Woke crowd that is most insistent that everyone adhere to their idea of what is or is not acceptable, and I find that repellent. Where I differ from the Woke ideologies is that I can like someone and note that they are wrong, or despise someone even if they say something accurate. The Woke would take anything said by Trump, for example, and dispute it simply because he said it. I agree that he is and always was a scumbag, and still can't stand the sound of his voice, but if he said something accurate (usually phrased in a manner that an 8th grader should find embarrassing), I had to note the he screwed up and got it right. CRT is like Climate Change, where there is ONE factor of consideration when all is said and done. If someone claims a SISO solution to a system analysis, there is an overwhelming likelihood that it is terminally flawed. Thus, while I am strongly in favor of equal rights ad equal responsibilities for all, I have yet to any indication that the Woke are anything but humorless assholes. The more exceptions to that observation there might be, the better I like it. BSBD, Winsor

Again, nice try. Commonality between CRT and BLM? Let's see, shall we? Seeing everything through a racist lens? Check. Being sacrosanct by dint of espousing 'good racism?' Check. Relying on 'logic' that wouldn't pass muster with Monty Python (and thus falling under the title of the thread)? Check. Being spawned by self-proclaimed Marxists? Check. I could go on, but you get the drift. Given your credentials from a Highly Esteemed Educational Institution (vs. my never having finished High School, or obtained a B license for that matter), I would expect a more nuanced understanding of the subject. When Michael Brown was killed, was it all about race? I dunno, I suppose a guy of Czech extraction, built like a linebacker, who had just committed a strongarm robbery and was walking down the middle of the street, would get a pass when he physically attacked an armed cop who stopped him to discuss the issue. Or maybe it would be ignored as 'suicide by cop' if he wound up dead for his efforts. CRT having its roots in Academia does not make its tenets any more valid. A casual perusal of history will demonstrate a real dog's breakfast of nonsensical 'theories' that have been in and out of favor over the years. A professor whose specialty is CRT is about as impressive as one whose dissertation was on Theoretical Phrenology. As far as suffocation by blocking the pores of the skin, may I point out that murder by coating all of the skin with an impermeable material has been described in the literature by a source educated at Eton, Sandhurst and the Universities of Munich and Geneva no less (Goldfinger - LTCDR Ian Fleming). That pretty much settles that. I get the impression that you got at least the undergrad exposure to Probability and Statistics/Stochastic Processes, but I have been surprised by the extent to which you do not apply these fundamentals to issues you appear to hold dear (I suppose you could be playing Devil's Advocate just for amusement, which would be a relief). Penn and Teller did a great job of demonstrating how the pet 'theories' of Woke ideology tend to get things pretty much backward; since they tend to be funny as hell, that supports the basis of this thread. Anyone that supports 'Diversity, Equity and Inclusion' (tm) with a straight face may be dismissed as a humorless twit. BSBD, Winsor

Until people who have flown both and are experienced in acro this is a pretty pointless poll. People will fall on the suit they have picked or any brand allegiance they already have hence my point that this poll is pointless. From the footage I have seen they both look like very capable suits. Knowing that virtually no one has both suits I do wonder why anyone would post one of these polls ? Dont just talk about it, Do it!