Discussion:
Atheists are coldhearted calculating assholes
(too old to reply)
m***@gmail.com
2017-04-12 01:38:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.

Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.

With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.

According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.

All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
Kevrob
2017-04-12 01:47:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
***@versatel.net abuse (at) versatel.net

Troll named after a murderous, hallucinating, child-molesting
tyrant, who I am very happy is dead, and does not exist in any
form whatsoever,

Kevin R
Joe Bruno
2017-04-13 05:05:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
Troll named after a murderous, hallucinating, child-molesting
tyrant, who I am very happy is dead, and does not exist in any
form whatsoever,
Kevin R
The man did not name himself, genius. His parents did.
Robert Carnegie
2017-04-14 01:30:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Kevrob
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
Troll named after a murderous, hallucinating, child-molesting
tyrant, who I am very happy is dead, and does not exist in any
form whatsoever,
Kevin R
The man did not name himself, genius.
His parents did.
That's not true of everyone. Is it, Joe?

When you join the X-Men you have to choose a
superhero name if you don't already have one.
So that's one example.
Kevrob
2017-04-14 02:23:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Kevrob
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
Troll named after a murderous, hallucinating, child-molesting
tyrant, who I am very happy is dead, and does not exist in any
form whatsoever,
Kevin R
The man did not name himself, genius.
His parents did.
That's not true of everyone. Is it, Joe?
When you join the X-Men you have to choose a
superhero name if you don't already have one.
So that's one example.
My parents named after a famously celibate Irish monk.
(It's as if they were trying too curse a guy....)

Any celibacy enforced on me has been of the non-
type, usually through the exercise of good taste by the womenfolk :)

I didn't mind my name as much when I read Kreigh Collins'
comic strip, "Prince Valiant" competitor called....
"Kevin the Bold!"

Examples here:

http://mydelineatedlife.blogspot.com/2009/02/kevin-bold_02.html

Kevin R
hypatiab7
2017-04-14 04:06:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Kevrob
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
Troll named after a murderous, hallucinating, child-molesting
tyrant, who I am very happy is dead, and does not exist in any
form whatsoever,
Kevin R
The man did not name himself, genius. His parents did.
He was a bandit at some point. How do you know that he didn't change his name somewhere along the way?
%
2017-04-14 04:09:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Joe Bruno
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 9:38:48 PM UTC-4,
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful,
requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to
the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are
validated, not opinion. To say the paintining is beautiful,
according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love
for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way
the
painting looks is a matter of opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never
validate opinion.
Troll named after a murderous, hallucinating, child-molesting
tyrant, who I am very happy is dead, and does not exist in any
form whatsoever,
Kevin R
The man did not name himself, genius. His parents did.
He was a bandit at some point. How do you know that he didn't change
his name somewhere along the way?
how do you know he did
Joe Bruno
2017-04-16 12:07:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by %
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Joe Bruno
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 9:38:48 PM UTC-4,
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful,
requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to
the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are
validated, not opinion. To say the paintining is beautiful,
according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love
for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way
the
painting looks is a matter of opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
Troll named after a murderous, hallucinating, child-molesting
tyrant, who I am very happy is dead, and does not exist in any
form whatsoever,
Kevin R
The man did not name himself, genius. His parents did.
He was a bandit at some point. How do you know that he didn't change
his name somewhere along the way?
how do you know he did
She gets her info from a very reliable source-she pulls it out of her ass.
Marvin Sebourn
2017-04-15 04:57:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Kevrob
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
Troll named after a murderous, hallucinating, child-molesting
tyrant, who I am very happy is dead, and does not exist in any
form whatsoever,
Kevin R
The man did not name himself, genius. His parents did.
Father Troll and Mother Troll, and their baby troll Mohammad.

Marvin Sebourn
***@aol.com
Robert Carnegie
2017-04-12 01:58:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
Aren't paintings considered sinful in several
mainstream religions? e.g. when the Protestant
Christians took over in England, they whitewashed
everything.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-04-12 02:31:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
Because opinions are personal and 100 people could see the same painting and have 1q00 different opinions about it. Opinions are useless when it comes to sorting out any other facts aside from any similarities there might be.

Facts are what you get when you have 100 people look at a picture, then give you their opinions and then you compute any similarities.

Facts don't give a shit if you like them or agree with them, they just are.
If you are going to call materialism "one domain" I think you should be aware just how big that domain is. It is as big as the universe because everything in the universe is in that domain.

Part of the job of science is to eliminate opinion where possible. If you are testing something you don't want an opinion, you want to know what happened exactly during the test. Facts are what help us understand reality, it doesn't take long to realize that people can have different opinions on the same thing, but facts are not open to interpretation. Unless you are a theist, then all bets are off and the impossible becomes the possible, imagination becomes reality, fiction becomes fact and nothing is certain because God doesn't have to follow the same rules and there is no way to know why. This leaves anybody trying to discover more about reality, out in the cold. It is the reason why science took off like a shot when religion stopped being the dominant force in the world. The scientific method is designed to remove anything that is not a fact from our understanding because only facts give us information that explains reality. What can you prove?
m***@gmail.com
2017-04-12 02:37:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.

Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
raven1
2017-04-12 12:22:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.
Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
"Spontaneous expression of emotion" or "choosing": pick one. They are
mutually contradictory.
m***@gmail.com
2017-04-13 02:16:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
No asshole spontaneity is a form of free will, and all free will involves choosing.
Davej
2017-04-13 02:36:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole spontaneity is a form of free will, and all free
will involves choosing.
Who gives a shit? Go away mentally-ill moron. Go take your meds.
raven1
2017-04-13 13:02:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole spontaneity is a form of free will, and all free will involves choosing.
I see you're using your own personal definitions of words again (this
time "spontaneity"). That makes it impossible to discuss anything with
you, so why do you bother to post?
hypatiab7
2017-04-14 04:26:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by raven1
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole spontaneity is a form of free will, and all free will involves choosing.
I see you're using your own personal definitions of words again (this
time "spontaneity"). That makes it impossible to discuss anything with
you, so why do you bother to post?
You'd think that spring would be a good business time for Canadian photographers. The cold must be dragging where Wassim is.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-04-12 20:33:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.
That's possible also, but a bit less likely IMO.
Post by m***@gmail.com
Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
And it is your position that somehow atheists don't have a sense of beauty or of the wonder of the universe? That would be what most people would call bullshit.
Implying that people who refuse to be irrational and who choose not to believe in mythical beings are somehow less human than those who do is nonsense.
m***@gmail.com
2017-04-13 02:23:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Come on, it's the truth. Atheists always, always, talk bullshit about
the facts, they do not comprehend opinion. Be honest you can easily
know that is the truth by the evidence available to you.

Atheists take subjectivity for granted, intellectually they provide
no room for it, intellectually they only deal with facts.

Why do you not object to that asshole Raven who denies spontaneity
goes together with choosing? You are living a lie. You will be dead
like everyone and you will have been a liar.

What damage do you think is being caused by ignoring subjectivity
intellectually? Ignoring people's real emotions. Go search the truth.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-04-13 05:50:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Come on, it's the truth. Atheists always, always, talk bullshit about
the facts, they do not comprehend opinion.
You are just plain wrong. Atheists talk about facts because facts are what help determine truth and if somebody expects us to believe in something there needs to be facts so it is possible to determine if there is any reason to believe.

We also understand opinion just fine. If someone says Vanilla ice Cream is the best, we know that is an opinion because people like different things. It seems more like theists can't deal with opinion very well. They are the ones who constantly tell us we are going to hell because of our opinion about god.


Be honest you can easily
Post by m***@gmail.com
know that is the truth by the evidence available to you.
Has anyone here said differently?
Post by m***@gmail.com
Atheists take subjectivity for granted, intellectually they provide
no room for it, intellectually they only deal with facts.
An opinion you get to have. No evidence of that I can see.
Nobody can ONLY deal with facts because EVERYBODY has feelings and emotions.
Emotions and feelings are not tools of cognition.
Post by m***@gmail.com
Why do you not object to that asshole Raven who denies spontaneity
goes together with choosing? You are living a lie.
I have not read anything by Raven that said that.

You will be dead
Post by m***@gmail.com
like everyone and you will have been a liar.
What damage do you think is being caused by ignoring subjectivity
intellectually? Ignoring people's real emotions. Go search the truth.
Subjectivity is the opposite of objectivity. Objectivity can help us to see the truth, subjectivity can only show us how things make people feel and while that may be nice information to have, it doesn't do much.
Mike Duffy
2017-04-13 14:28:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Atheists [...] intellectually they only deal with facts.
That comes across as a *compliment* to atheists. I'm not sure if that was
your intent, though.

You would be a lot easier to talk with if you used the same definitions for
basic concepts as everyone else. I have been reading your posts for years,
and it seems to me that you have a genuine point you want to make about
free will and subjectivity vs. objectivity. By this, I mean that you are
not being deliberately misleading (lying or trolling), rather you have
trouble making fine points of distinction because you are using words out
of context.

You have never been able to explain yourself in a manner that does not seem
delusional to someone who assigns semantics based upon commonly-accepted
definitions of the words you use. Perhaps this is because English is not
your first language, or because people you commonly speak to have a
different set of meanings attached to common words.

In any case, I am willing to help you. First, I will present your core
arguments as I understand them. Please confirm / deny / elaborate:


1) Emotion is a key factor in the distinction between an objective and a
subjective decision. For example, a computer cannot decide if an Olympic
skater is skating in a 'beautiful' manner or not. It requires a human who
just tries to gauge the level of 'gut feeling' he has about how beautiful
the skater is regardless of if the judge is feeling a bit nauseous because
the coffee he just drank was bitter, or if if he feels a bit uncomfortable
because he forgot to take a bathroom break during the previous commercial
advertisement.

If I were in charge of judging figure skaters, I would attach reflectors to
major body joints (knees, elbows, head, shoulders, wrists, ankles, pelvis),
and then use laser scanners to measure their positions accurately as a
function of time. Then, calculations would be made for speed, acceleration,
and jerkiness. (this last calculation is the time derivative of
acceleration)

Then, an objective dimensional-reduction correlation tensor would need to
be constructed which would be applied equally in a time-continuous manner
to all skaters during their performance. This is essentially a set of
values that assign how much we value raw speed or accelation, and how much
of an increase in jerkiness we will allow to be traded off for increases in
speed or acceleration.

To come up with such a tensor, we would simply run a battery of tests of
various skating performances where human judges assign a score (i.e. 0 to
10) for each performance. The more samples which are incorporated into the
scoring, the more accurate the tensor will become. During any one
competition, the same tensor will be applied to all skating performances.

During the judged performance, there would therefore be no bias based upon
how the judge is feeling at that time, how sexually attractive the skater's
legs are, or as seems to happen, if the skater is from the same country of
origin as the judge. The computer will come up with a completely objective
(non-emotional) score despite that fact that nowhere in its algorithm are
any calculations done on how 'beautiful' the skating is. This is because,
in a mathematical sense, the tensor itselve embodies the subjective
assessment of an entire group of judges over the entire battery of
performances used to construct the tensor.


2) Humans have free will, or at the very least, we have a perception that
we have free will. We continuously affect behaviour in order to achieve
desired future outcomes. Such actions are based not only on probability
estimates for the occurences of intermediate future events, but on
probability estimates of the accuracy of past perceptions.

We all recognize that we have constraints which bias our memories, current
perceptions, and future desires. But we all feel that we can assess the
strengths of such biases in a manner sufficient to compensate for them.

Some people admit to themselves that they pay a lot of attention as to how
decisions make them feel, while others 'rationalize' extensively, and focus
on how a particular perception or memory relates to a future goal. Then
they convince themselves that they have made a rational unemotional choice,
despite the fact that the reason they considered the most important to the
decision was chosen because of a strong emotional response while the idea
was being considered.
Kit
2017-04-13 16:22:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Duffy
Atheists [...] intellectually they only deal with facts.
That comes across as a *compliment* to atheists. I'm not sure if that was
your intent, though.
You would be a lot easier to talk with if you used the same definitions for
basic concepts as everyone else. I have been reading your posts for years,
and it seems to me that you have a genuine point you want to make about
free will and subjectivity vs. objectivity. By this, I mean that you are
not being deliberately misleading (lying or trolling), rather you have
trouble making fine points of distinction because you are using words out
of context.
You have never been able to explain yourself in a manner that does not seem
delusional to someone who assigns semantics based upon commonly-accepted
definitions of the words you use. Perhaps this is because English is not
your first language, or because people you commonly speak to have a
different set of meanings attached to common words.
In any case, I am willing to help you. First, I will present your core
1) Emotion is a key factor in the distinction between an objective and a
subjective decision. For example, a computer cannot decide if an Olympic
skater is skating in a 'beautiful' manner or not. It requires a human who
just tries to gauge the level of 'gut feeling' he has about how beautiful
the skater is regardless of if the judge is feeling a bit nauseous because
the coffee he just drank was bitter, or if if he feels a bit uncomfortable
because he forgot to take a bathroom break during the previous commercial
advertisement.
If I were in charge of judging figure skaters, I would attach reflectors to
major body joints (knees, elbows, head, shoulders, wrists, ankles, pelvis),
and then use laser scanners to measure their positions accurately as a
function of time. Then, calculations would be made for speed, acceleration,
and jerkiness. (this last calculation is the time derivative of
acceleration)
Then, an objective dimensional-reduction correlation tensor would need to
be constructed which would be applied equally in a time-continuous manner
to all skaters during their performance. This is essentially a set of
values that assign how much we value raw speed or accelation, and how much
of an increase in jerkiness we will allow to be traded off for increases in
speed or acceleration.
To come up with such a tensor, we would simply run a battery of tests of
various skating performances where human judges assign a score (i.e. 0 to
10) for each performance. The more samples which are incorporated into the
scoring, the more accurate the tensor will become. During any one
competition, the same tensor will be applied to all skating performances.
During the judged performance, there would therefore be no bias based upon
how the judge is feeling at that time, how sexually attractive the skater's
legs are, or as seems to happen, if the skater is from the same country of
origin as the judge. The computer will come up with a completely objective
(non-emotional) score despite that fact that nowhere in its algorithm are
any calculations done on how 'beautiful' the skating is. This is because,
in a mathematical sense, the tensor itselve embodies the subjective
assessment of an entire group of judges over the entire battery of
performances used to construct the tensor.
2) Humans have free will, or at the very least, we have a perception that
we have free will. We continuously affect behaviour in order to achieve
desired future outcomes. Such actions are based not only on probability
estimates for the occurences of intermediate future events, but on
probability estimates of the accuracy of past perceptions.
We all recognize that we have constraints which bias our memories, current
perceptions, and future desires. But we all feel that we can assess the
strengths of such biases in a manner sufficient to compensate for them.
Some people admit to themselves that they pay a lot of attention as to how
decisions make them feel, while others 'rationalize' extensively, and focus
on how a particular perception or memory relates to a future goal. Then
they convince themselves that they have made a rational unemotional choice,
despite the fact that the reason they considered the most important to the
decision was chosen because of a strong emotional response while the idea
was being considered.
I commend you Mike Duffy for your keen observations. I'm afraid though, they won't be appreciated. Too many people in this newsgroup are content continuously babbling nonsense, making noise without any coherent meaning.
raven1
2017-04-13 22:34:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Mike Duffy
Atheists [...] intellectually they only deal with facts.
That comes across as a *compliment* to atheists. I'm not sure if that was
your intent, though.
You would be a lot easier to talk with if you used the same definitions for
basic concepts as everyone else. I have been reading your posts for years,
and it seems to me that you have a genuine point you want to make about
free will and subjectivity vs. objectivity. By this, I mean that you are
not being deliberately misleading (lying or trolling), rather you have
trouble making fine points of distinction because you are using words out
of context.
You have never been able to explain yourself in a manner that does not seem
delusional to someone who assigns semantics based upon commonly-accepted
definitions of the words you use. Perhaps this is because English is not
your first language, or because people you commonly speak to have a
different set of meanings attached to common words.
In any case, I am willing to help you. First, I will present your core
1) Emotion is a key factor in the distinction between an objective and a
subjective decision. For example, a computer cannot decide if an Olympic
skater is skating in a 'beautiful' manner or not. It requires a human who
just tries to gauge the level of 'gut feeling' he has about how beautiful
the skater is regardless of if the judge is feeling a bit nauseous because
the coffee he just drank was bitter, or if if he feels a bit uncomfortable
because he forgot to take a bathroom break during the previous commercial
advertisement.
If I were in charge of judging figure skaters, I would attach reflectors to
major body joints (knees, elbows, head, shoulders, wrists, ankles, pelvis),
and then use laser scanners to measure their positions accurately as a
function of time. Then, calculations would be made for speed, acceleration,
and jerkiness. (this last calculation is the time derivative of
acceleration)
Then, an objective dimensional-reduction correlation tensor would need to
be constructed which would be applied equally in a time-continuous manner
to all skaters during their performance. This is essentially a set of
values that assign how much we value raw speed or accelation, and how much
of an increase in jerkiness we will allow to be traded off for increases in
speed or acceleration.
To come up with such a tensor, we would simply run a battery of tests of
various skating performances where human judges assign a score (i.e. 0 to
10) for each performance. The more samples which are incorporated into the
scoring, the more accurate the tensor will become. During any one
competition, the same tensor will be applied to all skating performances.
During the judged performance, there would therefore be no bias based upon
how the judge is feeling at that time, how sexually attractive the skater's
legs are, or as seems to happen, if the skater is from the same country of
origin as the judge. The computer will come up with a completely objective
(non-emotional) score despite that fact that nowhere in its algorithm are
any calculations done on how 'beautiful' the skating is. This is because,
in a mathematical sense, the tensor itselve embodies the subjective
assessment of an entire group of judges over the entire battery of
performances used to construct the tensor.
2) Humans have free will, or at the very least, we have a perception that
we have free will. We continuously affect behaviour in order to achieve
desired future outcomes. Such actions are based not only on probability
estimates for the occurences of intermediate future events, but on
probability estimates of the accuracy of past perceptions.
We all recognize that we have constraints which bias our memories, current
perceptions, and future desires. But we all feel that we can assess the
strengths of such biases in a manner sufficient to compensate for them.
Some people admit to themselves that they pay a lot of attention as to how
decisions make them feel, while others 'rationalize' extensively, and focus
on how a particular perception or memory relates to a future goal. Then
they convince themselves that they have made a rational unemotional choice,
despite the fact that the reason they considered the most important to the
decision was chosen because of a strong emotional response while the idea
was being considered.
Mike, while your post is very well-written and insightful, the chances
of Nando understanding a word of it are slim to none, and slim just
left town.
m***@gmail.com
2017-04-14 02:52:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
You talk bullshit about facts all your life, killing all room for subjectivity
on the intellectual level, and then you die.

And what is more you talk bullshit about facts all your life, but you don't
even accept the fact that you choose. The plain self evident readily available
fact of it, you have got big problems accepting it.

And then you complain about other people not accepting evolution as fact, while
you yourself just make problems of plain self evident facts.

Thats a lot of shit. Be the fuck normal and just accept the logic of subjectivity
as it is in common discourse. And in common discourse subjectivity has the logic of
free will. An opinion is chosen and identifies the agency of a choice.

Saying that the painting is beautiful equals identifying the existence of a love
for the way the painting looks as agency of decisions.

The existence of love is a matter of opinion, saying it doesn't exist is a
valid opinion, and saying it does exist is just as logically valid. The
validity just depends on that the opinion must be chosen, in spontaneous
expression of emotion with free will.
raven1
2017-04-14 12:23:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
You talk bullshit about facts all your life, killing all room for subjectivity
on the intellectual level, and then you die.
And what is more you talk bullshit about facts all your life, but you don't
even accept the fact that you choose. The plain self evident readily available
fact of it, you have got big problems accepting it.
And then you complain about other people not accepting evolution as fact, while
you yourself just make problems of plain self evident facts.
Thats a lot of shit. Be the fuck normal and just accept the logic of subjectivity
as it is in common discourse. And in common discourse subjectivity has the logic of
free will. An opinion is chosen and identifies the agency of a choice.
Saying that the painting is beautiful equals identifying the existence of a love
for the way the painting looks as agency of decisions.
The existence of love is a matter of opinion, saying it doesn't exist is a
valid opinion, and saying it does exist is just as logically valid. The
validity just depends on that the opinion must be chosen, in spontaneous
expression of emotion with free will.
What dressing would monsieur like for his word salad?
Christopher A. Lee
2017-04-14 13:38:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 08:23:26 -0400, raven1
Post by raven1
Post by m***@gmail.com
You talk bullshit about facts all your life, killing all room for subjectivity
on the intellectual level, and then you die.
And what is more you talk bullshit about facts all your life, but you don't
even accept the fact that you choose. The plain self evident readily available
fact of it, you have got big problems accepting it.
And then you complain about other people not accepting evolution as fact, while
you yourself just make problems of plain self evident facts.
Thats a lot of shit. Be the fuck normal and just accept the logic of subjectivity
as it is in common discourse. And in common discourse subjectivity has the logic of
free will. An opinion is chosen and identifies the agency of a choice.
Saying that the painting is beautiful equals identifying the existence of a love
for the way the painting looks as agency of decisions.
The existence of love is a matter of opinion, saying it doesn't exist is a
valid opinion, and saying it does exist is just as logically valid. The
validity just depends on that the opinion must be chosen, in spontaneous
expression of emotion with free will.
What dressing would monsieur like for his word salad?
How would this mentally ill individual like it if we kept posting
"Christians/Muslims.Jews/whatever are heartless assholes" to his
favourite religious group?

We don't do that sort of thing. Why can't he show us the same
courtesy?

Religious harassment of others is a psychopathic game for far too many
theists. Religion brings this out when it destroys empathy and
consideration for others as a side effect of blocking out
understanding the world beyond it.
raven1
2017-04-14 14:06:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 08:38:50 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 08:23:26 -0400, raven1
Post by raven1
Post by m***@gmail.com
You talk bullshit about facts all your life, killing all room for subjectivity
on the intellectual level, and then you die.
And what is more you talk bullshit about facts all your life, but you don't
even accept the fact that you choose. The plain self evident readily available
fact of it, you have got big problems accepting it.
And then you complain about other people not accepting evolution as fact, while
you yourself just make problems of plain self evident facts.
Thats a lot of shit. Be the fuck normal and just accept the logic of subjectivity
as it is in common discourse. And in common discourse subjectivity has the logic of
free will. An opinion is chosen and identifies the agency of a choice.
Saying that the painting is beautiful equals identifying the existence of a love
for the way the painting looks as agency of decisions.
The existence of love is a matter of opinion, saying it doesn't exist is a
valid opinion, and saying it does exist is just as logically valid. The
validity just depends on that the opinion must be chosen, in spontaneous
expression of emotion with free will.
What dressing would monsieur like for his word salad?
How would this mentally ill individual like it if we kept posting
"Christians/Muslims.Jews/whatever are heartless assholes" to his
favourite religious group?
We don't do that sort of thing. Why can't he show us the same
courtesy?
Because he's nucking futs. If he didn't have a computer, he'd likely
be ranting on a soapbox in a park until the nice young men in their
clean white coats come to take him away, ha ha.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Religious harassment of others is a psychopathic game for far too many
theists. Religion brings this out when it destroys empathy and
consideration for others as a side effect of blocking out
understanding the world beyond it.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-04-14 14:44:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 10:06:40 -0400, raven1
Post by raven1
On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 08:38:50 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 08:23:26 -0400, raven1
Post by raven1
Post by m***@gmail.com
You talk bullshit about facts all your life, killing all room for subjectivity
on the intellectual level, and then you die.
And what is more you talk bullshit about facts all your life, but you don't
even accept the fact that you choose. The plain self evident readily available
fact of it, you have got big problems accepting it.
And then you complain about other people not accepting evolution as fact, while
you yourself just make problems of plain self evident facts.
Thats a lot of shit. Be the fuck normal and just accept the logic of subjectivity
as it is in common discourse. And in common discourse subjectivity has the logic of
free will. An opinion is chosen and identifies the agency of a choice.
Saying that the painting is beautiful equals identifying the existence of a love
for the way the painting looks as agency of decisions.
The existence of love is a matter of opinion, saying it doesn't exist is a
valid opinion, and saying it does exist is just as logically valid. The
validity just depends on that the opinion must be chosen, in spontaneous
expression of emotion with free will.
What dressing would monsieur like for his word salad?
How would this mentally ill individual like it if we kept posting
"Christians/Muslims.Jews/whatever are heartless assholes" to his
favourite religious group?
We don't do that sort of thing. Why can't he show us the same
courtesy?
Because he's nucking futs. If he didn't have a computer, he'd likely
be ranting on a soapbox in a park until the nice young men in their
clean white coats come to take him away, ha ha.
Have you ever been to London's Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park?

People go there to listen to the loonies and heckle them, but you
also get serious speakers.

Whatever you may think of them, these have included Karl Marx,
Vladimir Lenin, George Orwell and Kwame Nkrumah.
Post by raven1
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Religious harassment of others is a psychopathic game for far too many
theists. Religion brings this out when it destroys empathy and
consideration for others as a side effect of blocking out
understanding the world beyond it.
m***@gmail.com
2017-04-14 16:19:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
More of that smart alecky nonsense. The truth folks, the truth. You all don't accept
the validity of subjectivity intellectually, that is the truth of what atheism is about.

One cannot say as fact who is loving or hateful person, because the existence of love and
hate is a matter of opinion.

You are all hatefilled assholes, and the opinion applies to who you are as making the
decisions that you do.
Davej
2017-04-14 16:41:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
[...]
One cannot say as fact who is loving or hateful person, because
the existence of love and hate is a matter of opinion.
Like most mentally-ill people you are often angry and confused
and consider your own opinion to be the only correct opinion.

Apparently you took a philosophy class and now you think you
know everything. I bet you got a "D" or flunked the class.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-04-14 16:46:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Davej
Post by m***@gmail.com
[...]
One cannot say as fact who is loving or hateful person, because
the existence of love and hate is a matter of opinion.
We see this psycho's irrational hatred for us here, everyday. Normal
people don't behave that way towards others.
Post by Davej
Like most mentally-ill people you are often angry and confused
and consider your own opinion to be the only correct opinion.
Apparently you took a philosophy class and now you think you
know everything. I bet you got a "D" or flunked the class.
He should be getting psychiatric care.
Joe Bruno
2017-04-16 12:13:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Friday, April 14, 2017 at 9:46:13 AM UTC-7, Christopher A. Lee wrote:



THE USUAL PSYCHOBABBLE:

https://tinyurl.com/l952nsn
Joe Bruno
2017-04-16 12:12:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Davej
Post by m***@gmail.com
[...]
One cannot say as fact who is loving or hateful person, because
the existence of love and hate is a matter of opinion.
Like most mentally-ill people you are often angry and confused
and consider your own opinion to be the only correct opinion.
Like most arrogant fools on AA, you fancy yourself to be a Psychiatrist.
hypatiab7
2017-04-16 19:43:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Davej
Post by m***@gmail.com
[...]
One cannot say as fact who is loving or hateful person, because
the existence of love and hate is a matter of opinion.
Like most mentally-ill people you are often angry and confused
and consider your own opinion to be the only correct opinion.
Like most arrogant fools on AA, you fancy yourself to be a Psychiatrist.
We know you hate hearing the truth about yourself, Arthur.
Bob Officer
2017-04-16 19:59:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Davej
Post by m***@gmail.com
[...]
One cannot say as fact who is loving or hateful person, because
the existence of love and hate is a matter of opinion.
Like most mentally-ill people you are often angry and confused
and consider your own opinion to be the only correct opinion.
Like most arrogant fools on AA, you fancy yourself to be a Psychiatrist.
Like you consider yourself a lawyer?
--
Dunning's work explained in clear, concise and simple terms.
John Cleese on Stupidity

Christopher A. Lee
2017-04-16 21:17:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 19:59:07 +0000 (UTC), Bob Officer
Post by Bob Officer
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Davej
Post by m***@gmail.com
[...]
One cannot say as fact who is loving or hateful person, because
the existence of love and hate is a matter of opinion.
Like most mentally-ill people you are often angry and confused
and consider your own opinion to be the only correct opinion.
Like most arrogant fools on AA, you fancy yourself to be a Psychiatrist.
Like you consider yourself a lawyer?
You don't need to be a psychiatrist, especially when you are on the
receiving end of his arrogance, obsession, stupidity and hatred -
because normal people simply aren't like that.
Bob Officer
2017-04-17 16:57:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 19:59:07 +0000 (UTC), Bob Officer
Post by Bob Officer
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Davej
Post by m***@gmail.com
[...]
One cannot say as fact who is loving or hateful person, because
the existence of love and hate is a matter of opinion.
Like most mentally-ill people you are often angry and confused
and consider your own opinion to be the only correct opinion.
Like most arrogant fools on AA, you fancy yourself to be a Psychiatrist.
Like you consider yourself a lawyer?
You don't need to be a psychiatrist, especially when you are on the
receiving end of his arrogance, obsession, stupidity and hatred -
because normal people simply aren't like that.
I read his statement per being in the navy. They do not ring true to me and
I was in asic in the same time frame and place as he was.
--
Dunning's work explained in clear, concise and simple terms.
John Cleese on Stupidity
http://youtu.be/wvVPdyYeaQU
Christopher A. Lee
2017-04-17 17:52:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 17 Apr 2017 16:57:03 +0000 (UTC), Bob Officer
Post by Bob Officer
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 19:59:07 +0000 (UTC), Bob Officer
Post by Bob Officer
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Davej
Post by m***@gmail.com
[...]
One cannot say as fact who is loving or hateful person, because
the existence of love and hate is a matter of opinion.
Like most mentally-ill people you are often angry and confused
and consider your own opinion to be the only correct opinion.
Like most arrogant fools on AA, you fancy yourself to be a Psychiatrist.
Like you consider yourself a lawyer?
You don't need to be a psychiatrist, especially when you are on the
receiving end of his arrogance, obsession, stupidity and hatred -
because normal people simply aren't like that.
I read his statement per being in the navy. They do not ring true to me and
I was in asic in the same time frame and place as he was.
He's claimed to have been so many things in the navy, which were
mutually impossible in the time frame, especially given the training
required.

Many of us know more than he does, in the areas he claims expertise -
and he treats us as the ignorant ones. Eg his questions about boilers
showed he only knew marine-type water tube boilers (which he might
have operated) but none of the other types with which he should have
had at least passing knowledge.
raven1
2017-04-14 17:35:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
More of that smart alecky nonsense. The truth folks, the truth. You all don't accept
the validity of subjectivity intellectually,
What does "You all don't accept the validity of subjectivity
intellectually" even mean? You're certainly very vehement about
whatever it is you're trying to say. The problem is that it makes no
sense as phrased.
Post by m***@gmail.com
that is the truth of what atheism is about.
One cannot say as fact who is loving or hateful person, because the existence of love and
hate is a matter of opinion.
No, it is not. That emotions called "love" and "hate" are experienced
by humans is a matter of fact, not a matter of opinion.
Post by m***@gmail.com
You are all hatefilled assholes, and the opinion applies to who you are as making the
decisions that you do.
And you're back to making no sense: "and the opinion applies to who
you are as making the decisions that you do" is word salad. It has no
semantic content.
m***@gmail.com
2017-04-15 01:24:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
So then when love and hate are fact, you could certainly tell as scientific fact
who are the most loving people in the world.

You cannot, you talk shit, but the truth is you simply do not accept the Validity of
subjectivity and that is why you objectify love and hate as pseudoscience.
raven1
2017-04-15 16:05:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
So then when love and hate are fact, you could certainly tell as scientific fact
who are the most loving people in the world.
No, there's no metric by which to measure that.
Post by m***@gmail.com
You cannot, you talk shit, but the truth is you simply do not accept the Validity of
subjectivity
I do not understand what you mean by "the validity of subjectivity".
As applied to what, exactly?
Post by m***@gmail.com
and that is why you objectify love and hate as pseudoscience.
Nando, it is an objective fact that humans experience emotions. Among
those are two that are labeled "love" and "hate".
Davej
2017-04-16 12:15:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
You cannot, you talk shit, but the truth is you simply do not
accept the Validity of subjectivity and that is why you objectify
love and hate as pseudoscience.
You should stop using words that you obviously don't understand.

You probably need some electro-shock therapy.
Kevrob
2017-04-14 16:30:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 10:06:40 -0400, raven1
Post by raven1
On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 08:38:50 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 08:23:26 -0400, raven1
Post by raven1
Post by m***@gmail.com
You talk bullshit about facts all your life, killing all room for subjectivity
on the intellectual level, and then you die.
And what is more you talk bullshit about facts all your life, but you don't
even accept the fact that you choose. The plain self evident readily available
fact of it, you have got big problems accepting it.
And then you complain about other people not accepting evolution as fact, while
you yourself just make problems of plain self evident facts.
Thats a lot of shit. Be the fuck normal and just accept the logic of subjectivity
as it is in common discourse. And in common discourse subjectivity has the logic of
free will. An opinion is chosen and identifies the agency of a choice.
Saying that the painting is beautiful equals identifying the existence of a love
for the way the painting looks as agency of decisions.
The existence of love is a matter of opinion, saying it doesn't exist is a
valid opinion, and saying it does exist is just as logically valid. The
validity just depends on that the opinion must be chosen, in spontaneous
expression of emotion with free will.
What dressing would monsieur like for his word salad?
How would this mentally ill individual like it if we kept posting
"Christians/Muslims.Jews/whatever are heartless assholes" to his
favourite religious group?
We don't do that sort of thing. Why can't he show us the same
courtesy?
Because he's nucking futs. If he didn't have a computer, he'd likely
be ranting on a soapbox in a park until the nice young men in their
clean white coats come to take him away, ha ha.
Have you ever been to London's Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park?
People go there to listen to the loonies and heckle them, but you
also get serious speakers.
Whatever you may think of them, these have included Karl Marx,
Vladimir Lenin, George Orwell and Kwame Nkrumah.
So, the criminal element and one sorta-in-favor-of-civil-liberties
fellow traveler. I think Orwell was a great writer, but his politics,
especially before the Cold War set in, were aful, just not as
abominable as the pinoes and reds who actually took power. :)
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by raven1
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Religious harassment of others is a psychopathic game for far too many
theists. Religion brings this out when it destroys empathy and
consideration for others as a side effect of blocking out
understanding the world beyond it.
They have the excuse, at least in the case of Christians and Muslims,
of believing their universal dictator gave them a command to spread
the word, and this such command trumps all rules of social propriety.
"Jerks fo' da Lawd" as it were.

Kevin R
hypatiab7
2017-04-14 04:16:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.
Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
You don't choose what you like, Wassim. You either like it or you don't. And, your
opinion can change after awhile for various reasons. Opinions are like tastebuds. You never know when they're going to change.
Jeanne Douglas
2017-04-16 03:04:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.
Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
You don't choose what you like, Wassim. You either like it or you don't. And, your
opinion can change after awhile for various reasons. Opinions are like tastebuds. You never know when they're going to change.
Yep.

For instance, as a child I hated strawberries. Then when I was 16, I fell in love with them.
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
default
2017-04-16 10:48:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 22:04:56 -0500, "Jeanne Douglas"
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by hypatiab7
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.
Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
You don't choose what you like, Wassim. You either like it or you don't. And, your
opinion can change after awhile for various reasons. Opinions are like tastebuds. You never know when they're going to change.
Yep.
For instance, as a child I hated strawberries. Then when I was 16, I fell in love with them.
I think all people go through that. (shift in food preferences) Some
theoretical types attribute it to our bodies needs with age, like
needing higher energy foods when younger, more sodium in summer or
with pregnancy, things of that sort. Our taste buds may wear out over
time so old people may respond to more highly seasoned food. (if they
haven't ulcers or acid reflux etc.)

I had a mother and relatives that didn't have the first clue how to
cook. To them, green vegetables had to be boiled down to a slightly
fibrous, olive drab mass, and starches had to be a runny pasty
substance. It wasn't until I got a job at a hospital kitchen in high
school with a real chef that I learned what food should/could taste
like. I lucked out again when he went to a restaurant where he could
be more creative and took me along.

My wife (different ethnicity and cultural mix), lived 600 miles away
from where I grew up and experienced the same thing - over cooked
food.

When I lived in San Diego a girl friend lived in Oxnard or Hollywood
depending on where she worked, but it meant a longish drive for me
near some strawberry farms. A whole "flat" of strawberries (like 12
baskets you see in a supermarket) was $1-2! Some were the size of
small apples and were at the peak of ripeness. Californians eat
better than anywhere else IMO.
Don Martin
2017-04-16 14:24:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by default
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 22:04:56 -0500, "Jeanne Douglas"
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by hypatiab7
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.
Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
You don't choose what you like, Wassim. You either like it or you don't. And, your
opinion can change after awhile for various reasons. Opinions are like tastebuds. You never know when they're going to change.
Yep.
For instance, as a child I hated strawberries. Then when I was 16, I fell in love with them.
I think all people go through that. (shift in food preferences) Some
theoretical types attribute it to our bodies needs with age, like
needing higher energy foods when younger, more sodium in summer or
with pregnancy, things of that sort. Our taste buds may wear out over
time so old people may respond to more highly seasoned food. (if they
haven't ulcers or acid reflux etc.)
I had a mother and relatives that didn't have the first clue how to
cook. To them, green vegetables had to be boiled down to a slightly
fibrous, olive drab mass, and starches had to be a runny pasty
substance. It wasn't until I got a job at a hospital kitchen in high
school with a real chef that I learned what food should/could taste
like. I lucked out again when he went to a restaurant where he could
be more creative and took me along.
My wife (different ethnicity and cultural mix), lived 600 miles away
from where I grew up and experienced the same thing - over cooked
food.
Amen to that. When I was a kid, I thought my mom was a good cook
(probably, we all think that). She was good at cakes, but I have
learned since that she ruined both vegetables and meats by overcooking
them. I am far from being the best cook I know, but at least I do not
ruin food.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
default
2017-04-16 18:15:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 10:24:55 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Post by default
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 22:04:56 -0500, "Jeanne Douglas"
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by hypatiab7
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.
Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
You don't choose what you like, Wassim. You either like it or you don't. And, your
opinion can change after awhile for various reasons. Opinions are like tastebuds. You never know when they're going to change.
Yep.
For instance, as a child I hated strawberries. Then when I was 16, I fell in love with them.
I think all people go through that. (shift in food preferences) Some
theoretical types attribute it to our bodies needs with age, like
needing higher energy foods when younger, more sodium in summer or
with pregnancy, things of that sort. Our taste buds may wear out over
time so old people may respond to more highly seasoned food. (if they
haven't ulcers or acid reflux etc.)
I had a mother and relatives that didn't have the first clue how to
cook. To them, green vegetables had to be boiled down to a slightly
fibrous, olive drab mass, and starches had to be a runny pasty
substance. It wasn't until I got a job at a hospital kitchen in high
school with a real chef that I learned what food should/could taste
like. I lucked out again when he went to a restaurant where he could
be more creative and took me along.
My wife (different ethnicity and cultural mix), lived 600 miles away
from where I grew up and experienced the same thing - over cooked
food.
Amen to that. When I was a kid, I thought my mom was a good cook
(probably, we all think that). She was good at cakes, but I have
learned since that she ruined both vegetables and meats by overcooking
them. I am far from being the best cook I know, but at least I do not
ruin food.
I know where you're coming from.

Who knew vegetables could taste so good ..

My wife once asked me if she could have the pasta (spaghetti) that was
all, glommed together. My response: "Sweetie Pie, if I'm doing this
right, ALL the pasta will be al-dente."

Or how about that sickly semi-sweet mess of sulfurous pastel green (or
white) stuff that used to be cabbage?

Cooking takes understanding, experience and art. Like Chris told me:
"you want to learn how to cook? all you gotta do is eat your
mistakes."

These days I'm experimenting with roasted potatoes (I think I have
that nailed - my cat likes them) and fermented Thai "fish sauce."
(which is only a stone's throw away from the pickled herring I've been
making for years) (the cat is not on-board yet, but it sure smells
better than something a cat might eat)

I watched a PBS show with Jacques Pépin and Itzhak Perlman (yeah, the
violinist) and they ABSOLUTLEY GET IT! You do your best and sometimes
the gods smile and sometimes they laugh, sometimes the food transcends
what you hoped for, sometimes it just magical.
Don Martin
2017-04-16 19:32:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by default
Post by Don Martin
Amen to that. When I was a kid, I thought my mom was a good cook
(probably, we all think that). She was good at cakes, but I have
learned since that she ruined both vegetables and meats by overcooking
them. I am far from being the best cook I know, but at least I do not
ruin food.
I know where you're coming from.
Who knew vegetables could taste so good ..
My wife once asked me if she could have the pasta (spaghetti) that was
all, glommed together. My response: "Sweetie Pie, if I'm doing this
right, ALL the pasta will be al-dente."
Now that you mention it, one of my favorite foods is cooked to a fare
thee well: pork neck and sauerkraut, a dish my late wife could not
stand the very thought of. When our boy was about 9, she came down
with walking pneumonia and was put on antibiotics and bed rest at
home. I said to Pete, "OK, tonight we're going to have something your
mom doesn't like, but we're giving her soup, anyway," and I started
building a stockpot of the stuff. Brown the pork neck, reserve, saute
onion and celery with whatever herbs catch your fancy along with salt
to taste, add the kraut mix, and lay in the meat, mixing as you go.
When everything is together, pour in apple cider until it just touches
the surface, the simmer. I usually make dumplings for the top.

Once the simmer had begun, a weak voice came from upstairs, "What are
you cooking?" it asked.

"Erm, pork neck and sauerkraut, hon," I responded, "since you don't
like it, Pete and I are having it and you'll have something you like
better."

"Could I try some of yours," the weak voice pleaded.

She did, and ever after loved it. It does take some getting used to,
though. Do you find that some people have aversions to food that is
too anatomical They have no problem with meat, but include
recognizable portions of skeleton, like ribs or vertebrae, and they
are put off. This dish needs the bones, though: they neutralize the
acidity of the kraut. And for those of us who don't mind the anatomy
(the animal had to die just as much to give us filets), neck bones are
fun. I once knew a West Virginian who referred to them as "puzzle
bones," which is pretty apt.
Post by default
Or how about that sickly semi-sweet mess of sulfurous pastel green (or
white) stuff that used to be cabbage?
"you want to learn how to cook? all you gotta do is eat your
mistakes."
Homemade bread is good for learning. Straight from the oven, even a
bad batch is at least edible. Keep it up, and the bad batches stop
coming.
Post by default
These days I'm experimenting with roasted potatoes (I think I have
that nailed - my cat likes them) and fermented Thai "fish sauce."
(which is only a stone's throw away from the pickled herring I've been
making for years) (the cat is not on-board yet, but it sure smells
better than something a cat might eat)
I experiment, too, lately with marinades. While some are better than
others, I have yet to find a combination that is not at least
interesting.
Post by default
I watched a PBS show with Jacques Pépin and Itzhak Perlman (yeah, the
violinist) and they ABSOLUTLEY GET IT! You do your best and sometimes
the gods smile and sometimes they laugh, sometimes the food transcends
what you hoped for, sometimes it just magical.
I have PBS on Roku--I'll look for it.
--
aa #2278 Never mind "proof." Where is your evidence?
BAAWA Chief Assistant to the Assistant Chief Heckler
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
Je pense, donc je suis Charlie.
Alex W.
2017-04-17 01:27:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Don Martin
Post by default
Post by Don Martin
Amen to that. When I was a kid, I thought my mom was a good cook
(probably, we all think that). She was good at cakes, but I have
learned since that she ruined both vegetables and meats by overcooking
them. I am far from being the best cook I know, but at least I do not
ruin food.
I know where you're coming from.
Who knew vegetables could taste so good ..
My wife once asked me if she could have the pasta (spaghetti) that was
all, glommed together. My response: "Sweetie Pie, if I'm doing this
right, ALL the pasta will be al-dente."
Now that you mention it, one of my favorite foods is cooked to a fare
thee well: pork neck and sauerkraut, a dish my late wife could not
stand the very thought of. When our boy was about 9, she came down
with walking pneumonia and was put on antibiotics and bed rest at
home. I said to Pete, "OK, tonight we're going to have something your
mom doesn't like, but we're giving her soup, anyway," and I started
building a stockpot of the stuff. Brown the pork neck, reserve, saute
onion and celery with whatever herbs catch your fancy along with salt
to taste, add the kraut mix, and lay in the meat, mixing as you go.
When everything is together, pour in apple cider until it just touches
the surface, the simmer. I usually make dumplings for the top.
Sounds most delicious! Pork and sauerkraut is a combination made in
heaven. I adore one version that is quite widespread in Europe:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choucroute_garnie

The trouble is the sauerkraut: yes, it can be made at home, but this is
one of those things that really do taste better when made in big
batches. Farmers traditionally make it by the barrel and then sell it
right out of said barrel at the market -- and it is gorgeous.
Post by Don Martin
Once the simmer had begun, a weak voice came from upstairs, "What are
you cooking?" it asked.
"Erm, pork neck and sauerkraut, hon," I responded, "since you don't
like it, Pete and I are having it and you'll have something you like
better."
"Could I try some of yours," the weak voice pleaded.
She did, and ever after loved it. It does take some getting used to,
though. Do you find that some people have aversions to food that is
too anatomical They have no problem with meat, but include
recognizable portions of skeleton, like ribs or vertebrae, and they
are put off. This dish needs the bones, though: they neutralize the
acidity of the kraut. And for those of us who don't mind the anatomy
(the animal had to die just as much to give us filets), neck bones are
fun. I once knew a West Virginian who referred to them as "puzzle
bones," which is pretty apt.
IMHO, this is due to several generations of indoctrination. After the
last war, when people began to have much more money to spend, they would
of course buy the better cuts of meat and disdain the "poor man's
meats". They passed this on to their children and grandchildren, and
now we have whole generations who have never even tasted kidney or
tripe. Well, they have ... in processed foods such as hot dogs, but
just don't even try to tell them! My SO, for all her qualities and
foodie inclinations, will happily scarf down foie gras, as long as I
refrain from pointing out that this is raw goose liver. When we hit
Europe and I start ordering tripa in Italy, liver with onions and apple
sauce in Germany or haggis in Scotland, she shudders. Go figure...
Post by Don Martin
Post by default
Or how about that sickly semi-sweet mess of sulfurous pastel green (or
white) stuff that used to be cabbage?
"you want to learn how to cook? all you gotta do is eat your
mistakes."
Homemade bread is good for learning. Straight from the oven, even a
bad batch is at least edible. Keep it up, and the bad batches stop
coming.
Plus, there are recipes that are dead simple and don't even require
learning how to deal with yeast. The cause and tasty effect process is
a very straight one...
default
2017-04-17 03:04:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 15:32:20 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Post by default
Post by Don Martin
Amen to that. When I was a kid, I thought my mom was a good cook
(probably, we all think that). She was good at cakes, but I have
learned since that she ruined both vegetables and meats by overcooking
them. I am far from being the best cook I know, but at least I do not
ruin food.
I know where you're coming from.
Who knew vegetables could taste so good ..
My wife once asked me if she could have the pasta (spaghetti) that was
all, glommed together. My response: "Sweetie Pie, if I'm doing this
right, ALL the pasta will be al-dente."
Now that you mention it, one of my favorite foods is cooked to a fare
thee well: pork neck and sauerkraut, a dish my late wife could not
stand the very thought of. When our boy was about 9, she came down
with walking pneumonia and was put on antibiotics and bed rest at
home. I said to Pete, "OK, tonight we're going to have something your
mom doesn't like, but we're giving her soup, anyway," and I started
building a stockpot of the stuff. Brown the pork neck, reserve, saute
onion and celery with whatever herbs catch your fancy along with salt
to taste, add the kraut mix, and lay in the meat, mixing as you go.
When everything is together, pour in apple cider until it just touches
the surface, the simmer. I usually make dumplings for the top.
Once the simmer had begun, a weak voice came from upstairs, "What are
you cooking?" it asked.
"Erm, pork neck and sauerkraut, hon," I responded, "since you don't
like it, Pete and I are having it and you'll have something you like
better."
"Could I try some of yours," the weak voice pleaded.
She did, and ever after loved it. It does take some getting used to,
though. Do you find that some people have aversions to food that is
too anatomical They have no problem with meat, but include
recognizable portions of skeleton, like ribs or vertebrae, and they
are put off. This dish needs the bones, though: they neutralize the
acidity of the kraut. And for those of us who don't mind the anatomy
(the animal had to die just as much to give us filets), neck bones are
fun. I once knew a West Virginian who referred to them as "puzzle
bones," which is pretty apt.
My wife was down on sauerkraut, but came around when I made some
homemade and now will eat the canned stuff too.
Post by Don Martin
Post by default
Or how about that sickly semi-sweet mess of sulfurous pastel green (or
white) stuff that used to be cabbage?
"you want to learn how to cook? all you gotta do is eat your
mistakes."
Homemade bread is good for learning. Straight from the oven, even a
bad batch is at least edible. Keep it up, and the bad batches stop
coming.
True. It took me a awhile to master. Now (thanks to a Kitchen Aid
mixer) I make bread at least twice a week in winter. I took up beer
brewing some years back and hated throwing out the spent grains and
started recycling them into my bread to good effect. Eaten as a
cereal it's very high fiber and tastes like Grape Nuts breakfast
cereal.

In bread it adds character, as well as a good flavor. Now I keep some
milled malted barley on hand just for bread making.

I usually buy two 30 pound sacks of bread flour at Sam's club and keep
it in 3X, 3-1/2 gallon pails (same design as the 5 gallon plastic
buckets you see around). The yeast is freeze dried and by the pound
(Sam's club)
Post by Don Martin
Post by default
These days I'm experimenting with roasted potatoes (I think I have
that nailed - my cat likes them) and fermented Thai "fish sauce."
(which is only a stone's throw away from the pickled herring I've been
making for years) (the cat is not on-board yet, but it sure smells
better than something a cat might eat)
I experiment, too, lately with marinades. While some are better than
others, I have yet to find a combination that is not at least
interesting.
Me too. What I found is handy for a marinade is Spicy V8 juice. I
get it in 12 Oz cans which is about perfect for a whole chicken. Add
salt, vinegar, brown sugar or molasses, food processed onion, garlic
and parsley (or cilantro, or basil, or whatever is in the garden).

If you haven't caught on yet, an excellent marinade technique is to
use a zip-lock style freezer bag, to marinade meats. It keeps the
liquid in contact with all the surface of the meat and reduces the
amount of marinade liquid necessary. A gallon bag is about right for
a cut up "fryer" chicken. I squeeze the excess air out of the bag
when I seal it then manipulate it a bit to make sure it is well
distributed, and put the whole bag in a bowl in case it leaks or
ruptures.

Another good marinade is just plain or seasoned sauerkraut.
Post by Don Martin
Post by default
I watched a PBS show with Jacques Pépin and Itzhak Perlman (yeah, the
violinist) and they ABSOLUTLEY GET IT! You do your best and sometimes
the gods smile and sometimes they laugh, sometimes the food transcends
what you hoped for, sometimes it just magical.
I have PBS on Roku--I'll look for it.
Kevrob
2017-04-17 19:37:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by default
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 15:32:20 -0400, Don Martin
True. It took me a awhile to master. Now (thanks to a Kitchen Aid
mixer) I make bread at least twice a week in winter. I took up beer
brewing some years back and hated throwing out the spent grains and
started recycling them into my bread to good effect. Eaten as a
cereal it's very high fiber and tastes like Grape Nuts breakfast
cereal.
In bread it adds character, as well as a good flavor. Now I keep some
milled malted barley on hand just for bread making.
I usually buy two 30 pound sacks of bread flour at Sam's club and keep
it in 3X, 3-1/2 gallon pails (same design as the 5 gallon plastic
buckets you see around). The yeast is freeze dried and by the pound
(Sam's club)
I'm not a home brewer, but that is a point in its favor.
Post by default
Post by Don Martin
These days I'm experimenting with roasted potatoes ......
I experiment, too, lately with marinades. While some are better than
others, I have yet to find a combination that is not at least
interesting.
Me too. What I found is handy for a marinade is Spicy V8 juice. I
get it in 12 Oz cans which is about perfect for a whole chicken. Add
salt, vinegar, brown sugar or molasses, food processed onion, garlic
and parsley (or cilantro, or basil, or whatever is in the garden).
If you haven't caught on yet, an excellent marinade technique is to
use a zip-lock style freezer bag, to marinade meats. It keeps the
liquid in contact with all the surface of the meat and reduces the
amount of marinade liquid necessary. A gallon bag is about right for
a cut up "fryer" chicken. I squeeze the excess air out of the bag
when I seal it then manipulate it a bit to make sure it is well
distributed, and put the whole bag in a bowl in case it leaks or
ruptures.
Another good marinade is just plain or seasoned sauerkraut.
My go-to is a combination of soy sauce, lemon juice and olive
oil. I use the same plastic-bag-in-a-bowl method. It works a treat.

Butterfly (spatchcock) your whole chicken, marinate it, rub some kosher
salt on it under the skin and add any other spices you like and let the
drippings fall to the pan when you roast it. You can line the pan with
root vegetables - potato, carrot, etc - which absorb the chicken flavor.
This is a winner. Ladies at work who can really cook ask me "where
did you get that chicken" when I warm it in the microwave. My sister,
who is a wonderful amateur cook, taught me this.

Save enough of the drippings to make gravy.* Butterflying and elevating
the chicken gets the skin crisp all around, and the white meat doesn't
dry out while you wait for the dark meat to finish. I sometimes use fresh
ground sea salt instead of kosher. Whats important is that it be coarse.
"Koshering" a chicken, even one that hasn't been approved by a rabbi,
is using coarse salt to leach out blood remaining in the bird.

Atheists gotta eat, too

Kevin R

*The recipe on the side of the Argo cornstarch container works
for me. More advanced cooks make a flour-based roux.

Alex W.
2017-04-17 01:36:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by default
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 10:24:55 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Post by default
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 22:04:56 -0500, "Jeanne Douglas"
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by hypatiab7
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.
Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
You don't choose what you like, Wassim. You either like it or you don't. And, your
opinion can change after awhile for various reasons. Opinions are like tastebuds. You never know when they're going to change.
Yep.
For instance, as a child I hated strawberries. Then when I was 16, I fell in love with them.
I think all people go through that. (shift in food preferences) Some
theoretical types attribute it to our bodies needs with age, like
needing higher energy foods when younger, more sodium in summer or
with pregnancy, things of that sort. Our taste buds may wear out over
time so old people may respond to more highly seasoned food. (if they
haven't ulcers or acid reflux etc.)
I had a mother and relatives that didn't have the first clue how to
cook. To them, green vegetables had to be boiled down to a slightly
fibrous, olive drab mass, and starches had to be a runny pasty
substance. It wasn't until I got a job at a hospital kitchen in high
school with a real chef that I learned what food should/could taste
like. I lucked out again when he went to a restaurant where he could
be more creative and took me along.
My wife (different ethnicity and cultural mix), lived 600 miles away
from where I grew up and experienced the same thing - over cooked
food.
Amen to that. When I was a kid, I thought my mom was a good cook
(probably, we all think that). She was good at cakes, but I have
learned since that she ruined both vegetables and meats by overcooking
them. I am far from being the best cook I know, but at least I do not
ruin food.
I know where you're coming from.
Who knew vegetables could taste so good ..
My wife once asked me if she could have the pasta (spaghetti) that was
all, glommed together. My response: "Sweetie Pie, if I'm doing this
right, ALL the pasta will be al-dente."
To make her happy, you can always make a pasta pie ... good for leftover
meat, good to eat hot or cold, excellent winter comfort food, and it
should be gluggy and glommy enough for her tastes. I love making this
Maltese version:

http://www.sbs.com.au/food/recipes/timpana
Post by default
Or how about that sickly semi-sweet mess of sulfurous pastel green (or
white) stuff that used to be cabbage?
That's how it was traditionally cooked (I use the term loosely) and
served in England, and it is a crime against nature!

Cabbage can be baked, stewed, boiled, pickled or even eaten raw. One of
our favourite dishes is raw shredded cabbage with scallops and pork
belly. Why ruin it by boiling it into glue????
Post by default
"you want to learn how to cook? all you gotta do is eat your
mistakes."
These days I'm experimenting with roasted potatoes (I think I have
that nailed - my cat likes them) and fermented Thai "fish sauce."
(which is only a stone's throw away from the pickled herring I've been
making for years) (the cat is not on-board yet, but it sure smells
better than something a cat might eat)
Have you tried roasting them with goose fat? It gives them a most
lovely flavour, and the goose fat is in itself far less unhealty than
anything else you might use.
default
2017-04-17 03:48:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alex W.
Post by default
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 10:24:55 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Post by default
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 22:04:56 -0500, "Jeanne Douglas"
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by hypatiab7
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.
Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
You don't choose what you like, Wassim. You either like it or you don't. And, your
opinion can change after awhile for various reasons. Opinions are like tastebuds. You never know when they're going to change.
Yep.
For instance, as a child I hated strawberries. Then when I was 16, I fell in love with them.
I think all people go through that. (shift in food preferences) Some
theoretical types attribute it to our bodies needs with age, like
needing higher energy foods when younger, more sodium in summer or
with pregnancy, things of that sort. Our taste buds may wear out over
time so old people may respond to more highly seasoned food. (if they
haven't ulcers or acid reflux etc.)
I had a mother and relatives that didn't have the first clue how to
cook. To them, green vegetables had to be boiled down to a slightly
fibrous, olive drab mass, and starches had to be a runny pasty
substance. It wasn't until I got a job at a hospital kitchen in high
school with a real chef that I learned what food should/could taste
like. I lucked out again when he went to a restaurant where he could
be more creative and took me along.
My wife (different ethnicity and cultural mix), lived 600 miles away
from where I grew up and experienced the same thing - over cooked
food.
Amen to that. When I was a kid, I thought my mom was a good cook
(probably, we all think that). She was good at cakes, but I have
learned since that she ruined both vegetables and meats by overcooking
them. I am far from being the best cook I know, but at least I do not
ruin food.
I know where you're coming from.
Who knew vegetables could taste so good ..
My wife once asked me if she could have the pasta (spaghetti) that was
all, glommed together. My response: "Sweetie Pie, if I'm doing this
right, ALL the pasta will be al-dente."
To make her happy, you can always make a pasta pie ... good for leftover
meat, good to eat hot or cold, excellent winter comfort food, and it
should be gluggy and glommy enough for her tastes. I love making this
http://www.sbs.com.au/food/recipes/timpana
What kind of prep time does that take? Oh, frozen puff pastry... I
was thinking prep time about 3-5 hours.

That does look like something that might appeal to my wife.
Post by Alex W.
Post by default
Or how about that sickly semi-sweet mess of sulfurous pastel green (or
white) stuff that used to be cabbage?
That's how it was traditionally cooked (I use the term loosely) and
served in England, and it is a crime against nature!
Cabbage can be baked, stewed, boiled, pickled or even eaten raw. One of
our favourite dishes is raw shredded cabbage with scallops and pork
belly. Why ruin it by boiling it into glue????
Post by default
"you want to learn how to cook? all you gotta do is eat your
mistakes."
These days I'm experimenting with roasted potatoes (I think I have
that nailed - my cat likes them) and fermented Thai "fish sauce."
(which is only a stone's throw away from the pickled herring I've been
making for years) (the cat is not on-board yet, but it sure smells
better than something a cat might eat)
Have you tried roasting them with goose fat? It gives them a most
lovely flavour, and the goose fat is in itself far less unhealty than
anything else you might use.
Some years ago I watched a movie called "Oil Wars." I got it with the
expectation that I'd learn something about petroleum politics, but no,
it was all about how Americans have been hoodwinked into thinking that
it is healthier to use vegetable oils instead of animal fats.

I don't think I've seen goose for sale around here. Lucky if I can
find duck (and that's always frozen). California, on the other hand,
had mutton, rabbit, buffalo, as well as some fairly exotic birds in
supermarket meat counters and a lot of farmer's markets for produce.

Around here (NC) it is more common to see shopping carts filled with
boxes, cans, packages of food. It looks like no one cooks real food
anymore. I feel like an endangered species in checkout lines.
Alex W.
2017-04-17 06:34:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by default
Post by Alex W.
Post by default
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 10:24:55 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Post by default
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 22:04:56 -0500, "Jeanne Douglas"
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by hypatiab7
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.
Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
You don't choose what you like, Wassim. You either like it or you don't. And, your
opinion can change after awhile for various reasons. Opinions are like tastebuds. You never know when they're going to change.
Yep.
For instance, as a child I hated strawberries. Then when I was 16, I fell in love with them.
I think all people go through that. (shift in food preferences) Some
theoretical types attribute it to our bodies needs with age, like
needing higher energy foods when younger, more sodium in summer or
with pregnancy, things of that sort. Our taste buds may wear out over
time so old people may respond to more highly seasoned food. (if they
haven't ulcers or acid reflux etc.)
I had a mother and relatives that didn't have the first clue how to
cook. To them, green vegetables had to be boiled down to a slightly
fibrous, olive drab mass, and starches had to be a runny pasty
substance. It wasn't until I got a job at a hospital kitchen in high
school with a real chef that I learned what food should/could taste
like. I lucked out again when he went to a restaurant where he could
be more creative and took me along.
My wife (different ethnicity and cultural mix), lived 600 miles away
from where I grew up and experienced the same thing - over cooked
food.
Amen to that. When I was a kid, I thought my mom was a good cook
(probably, we all think that). She was good at cakes, but I have
learned since that she ruined both vegetables and meats by overcooking
them. I am far from being the best cook I know, but at least I do not
ruin food.
I know where you're coming from.
Who knew vegetables could taste so good ..
My wife once asked me if she could have the pasta (spaghetti) that was
all, glommed together. My response: "Sweetie Pie, if I'm doing this
right, ALL the pasta will be al-dente."
To make her happy, you can always make a pasta pie ... good for leftover
meat, good to eat hot or cold, excellent winter comfort food, and it
should be gluggy and glommy enough for her tastes. I love making this
http://www.sbs.com.au/food/recipes/timpana
What kind of prep time does that take? Oh, frozen puff pastry... I
was thinking prep time about 3-5 hours.
That does look like something that might appeal to my wife.
Aside from anything else, I have found that it is also rather nice as a
cold lunch they day after....
Post by default
Post by Alex W.
Post by default
Or how about that sickly semi-sweet mess of sulfurous pastel green (or
white) stuff that used to be cabbage?
That's how it was traditionally cooked (I use the term loosely) and
served in England, and it is a crime against nature!
Cabbage can be baked, stewed, boiled, pickled or even eaten raw. One of
our favourite dishes is raw shredded cabbage with scallops and pork
belly. Why ruin it by boiling it into glue????
Post by default
"you want to learn how to cook? all you gotta do is eat your
mistakes."
These days I'm experimenting with roasted potatoes (I think I have
that nailed - my cat likes them) and fermented Thai "fish sauce."
(which is only a stone's throw away from the pickled herring I've been
making for years) (the cat is not on-board yet, but it sure smells
better than something a cat might eat)
Have you tried roasting them with goose fat? It gives them a most
lovely flavour, and the goose fat is in itself far less unhealty than
anything else you might use.
Some years ago I watched a movie called "Oil Wars." I got it with the
expectation that I'd learn something about petroleum politics, but no,
it was all about how Americans have been hoodwinked into thinking that
it is healthier to use vegetable oils instead of animal fats.
They may well have a point when it comes to proper olive oil versus
stuff like beef dripping or lard, but I have always proceeded on the
basis that a little of this and that won't hurt me. Of course, if I
were to eat food fried in lard every day, I would probably drop dead
before I have a chance to cash in my pension, but the odd fried slice or
potatoes roasted in fat are highly unlikely to harm me.
Post by default
I don't think I've seen goose for sale around here. Lucky if I can
find duck (and that's always frozen). California, on the other hand,
had mutton, rabbit, buffalo, as well as some fairly exotic birds in
supermarket meat counters and a lot of farmer's markets for produce.
Crap, you really seem to be living in a food desert.

We always roast a goose for Christmas -- better flavour and not nearly
as dry as turkey -- and the fat that collects at the bottom of the pan
adds up to a quarter pint or so once purified. Lasts for a few months
at least...

If you have a halfway decent butcher, it may be worth having a little
chat with him to see if he can get you duck or goose (or anything else)
as a special order. My BIL was having a chat with his local butcher one
day, and as a result he now has half a cow hanging in the butcher's
aging room ... result!
Post by default
Around here (NC) it is more common to see shopping carts filled with
boxes, cans, packages of food. It looks like no one cooks real food
anymore. I feel like an endangered species in checkout lines.
People love to watch cookery shows. Sadly, that does not really
translate into actual home cookery. And at the top end of the market,
people tend to have the funds but waste it on food fads and fripperies
such as "gluten free" stuff or "organic" vittles....
default
2017-04-17 15:52:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alex W.
Post by default
Post by Alex W.
Post by default
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 10:24:55 -0400, Don Martin
Post by Don Martin
Post by default
On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 22:04:56 -0500, "Jeanne Douglas"
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by hypatiab7
Post by m***@gmail.com
No asshole 1 person sees 1 painting and could form 100 different opinions about it.
Opinions are formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, so by choosing.
You don't choose what you like, Wassim. You either like it or you don't. And, your
opinion can change after awhile for various reasons. Opinions are like tastebuds. You never know when they're going to change.
Yep.
For instance, as a child I hated strawberries. Then when I was 16, I fell in love with them.
I think all people go through that. (shift in food preferences) Some
theoretical types attribute it to our bodies needs with age, like
needing higher energy foods when younger, more sodium in summer or
with pregnancy, things of that sort. Our taste buds may wear out over
time so old people may respond to more highly seasoned food. (if they
haven't ulcers or acid reflux etc.)
I had a mother and relatives that didn't have the first clue how to
cook. To them, green vegetables had to be boiled down to a slightly
fibrous, olive drab mass, and starches had to be a runny pasty
substance. It wasn't until I got a job at a hospital kitchen in high
school with a real chef that I learned what food should/could taste
like. I lucked out again when he went to a restaurant where he could
be more creative and took me along.
My wife (different ethnicity and cultural mix), lived 600 miles away
from where I grew up and experienced the same thing - over cooked
food.
Amen to that. When I was a kid, I thought my mom was a good cook
(probably, we all think that). She was good at cakes, but I have
learned since that she ruined both vegetables and meats by overcooking
them. I am far from being the best cook I know, but at least I do not
ruin food.
I know where you're coming from.
Who knew vegetables could taste so good ..
My wife once asked me if she could have the pasta (spaghetti) that was
all, glommed together. My response: "Sweetie Pie, if I'm doing this
right, ALL the pasta will be al-dente."
To make her happy, you can always make a pasta pie ... good for leftover
meat, good to eat hot or cold, excellent winter comfort food, and it
should be gluggy and glommy enough for her tastes. I love making this
http://www.sbs.com.au/food/recipes/timpana
What kind of prep time does that take? Oh, frozen puff pastry... I
was thinking prep time about 3-5 hours.
That does look like something that might appeal to my wife.
Aside from anything else, I have found that it is also rather nice as a
cold lunch they day after....
Post by default
Post by Alex W.
Post by default
Or how about that sickly semi-sweet mess of sulfurous pastel green (or
white) stuff that used to be cabbage?
That's how it was traditionally cooked (I use the term loosely) and
served in England, and it is a crime against nature!
Cabbage can be baked, stewed, boiled, pickled or even eaten raw. One of
our favourite dishes is raw shredded cabbage with scallops and pork
belly. Why ruin it by boiling it into glue????
Post by default
"you want to learn how to cook? all you gotta do is eat your
mistakes."
These days I'm experimenting with roasted potatoes (I think I have
that nailed - my cat likes them) and fermented Thai "fish sauce."
(which is only a stone's throw away from the pickled herring I've been
making for years) (the cat is not on-board yet, but it sure smells
better than something a cat might eat)
Have you tried roasting them with goose fat? It gives them a most
lovely flavour, and the goose fat is in itself far less unhealty than
anything else you might use.
Some years ago I watched a movie called "Oil Wars." I got it with the
expectation that I'd learn something about petroleum politics, but no,
it was all about how Americans have been hoodwinked into thinking that
it is healthier to use vegetable oils instead of animal fats.
They may well have a point when it comes to proper olive oil versus
stuff like beef dripping or lard, but I have always proceeded on the
basis that a little of this and that won't hurt me. Of course, if I
were to eat food fried in lard every day, I would probably drop dead
before I have a chance to cash in my pension, but the odd fried slice or
potatoes roasted in fat are highly unlikely to harm me.
Post by default
I don't think I've seen goose for sale around here. Lucky if I can
find duck (and that's always frozen). California, on the other hand,
had mutton, rabbit, buffalo, as well as some fairly exotic birds in
supermarket meat counters and a lot of farmer's markets for produce.
Crap, you really seem to be living in a food desert.
We always roast a goose for Christmas -- better flavour and not nearly
as dry as turkey -- and the fat that collects at the bottom of the pan
adds up to a quarter pint or so once purified. Lasts for a few months
at least...
If you have a halfway decent butcher, it may be worth having a little
chat with him to see if he can get you duck or goose (or anything else)
as a special order. My BIL was having a chat with his local butcher one
day, and as a result he now has half a cow hanging in the butcher's
aging room ... result!
A butcher? Half the stuff is already vacuum packed in plastic before
it gets to the supermarket. These are chains and they don't really
cater to individuals. I can buy a case of say, pork shoulders, if I
want to make sausage but that's about all they'll do individually.

This is hog country and there are a few butcher shops that will
deliver pork to order, but that's only handy if you want a whole or
half pig, large order of ribs or something along those lines.

NY still has butchers willing to work with the customers. I was there
about a year ago...
Post by Alex W.
Post by default
Around here (NC) it is more common to see shopping carts filled with
boxes, cans, packages of food. It looks like no one cooks real food
anymore. I feel like an endangered species in checkout lines.
People love to watch cookery shows. Sadly, that does not really
translate into actual home cookery. And at the top end of the market,
people tend to have the funds but waste it on food fads and fripperies
such as "gluten free" stuff or "organic" vittles....
Yap Honghor
2017-04-12 02:40:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
You are a fucking theist moron who is disappointed by the no show of your stupid deity??????

We have already told you that there is no deity/god/pixie in this world, so you cannot vent your frustration on atheists.
m***@gmail.com
2017-04-12 03:36:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.

Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The personality of people in atheistic countries is going down.

Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
Kevrob
2017-04-12 04:10:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The personality of people in atheistic countries is going down.
Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
You are posting though a Netherlands IP. Assuming you live there,
why not leave?

[quote]

From a December 2014 survey by the VU University Amsterdam it
was concluded that for the first time there are more atheists (25%)
than theists (17%) in the Netherlands. The majority of the population
being agnostic (31%) or ietsistic (27%).*

[/quote]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Netherlands

Perhaps you would find life better in Ignoranistan?

Kevin R
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ietsism
m***@gmail.com
2017-04-12 04:30:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Good idea. But actually Islamic countries have forbidden immigration.
Saint Else Ware
2017-04-13 05:11:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
You are posting though a Netherlands IP.
So?
hypatiab7
2017-04-14 04:38:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Kevrob
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The personality of people in atheistic countries is going down.
Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
You are posting though a Netherlands IP. Assuming you live there,
why not leave?
Either he's moved to the Netherlands, is sending his messages through
there or it's someone using his nym. It does sound like him.
Post by Kevrob
[quote]
From a December 2014 survey by the VU University Amsterdam it
was concluded that for the first time there are more atheists (25%)
than theists (17%) in the Netherlands. The majority of the population
being agnostic (31%) or ietsistic (27%).*
[/quote]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Netherlands
Perhaps you would find life better in Ignoranistan?
Kevin R
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ietsism
Smiler
2017-04-15 01:28:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Kevrob
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you
that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The personality of
people in atheistic countries is going down.
Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
You are posting though a Netherlands IP. Assuming you live there,
why not leave?
Either he's moved to the Netherlands, is sending his messages through
there or it's someone using his nym. It does sound like him.
He's possibly using TOR.
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Kevrob
[quote]
From a December 2014 survey by the VU University Amsterdam it was
concluded that for the first time there are more atheists (25%)
than theists (17%) in the Netherlands. The majority of the population
being agnostic (31%) or ietsistic (27%).*
[/quote]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Netherlands
Perhaps you would find life better in Ignoranistan?
Kevin R * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ietsism
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
hypatiab7
2017-04-16 20:12:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Kevrob
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you
that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The personality of
people in atheistic countries is going down.
Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
You are posting though a Netherlands IP. Assuming you live there,
why not leave?
Either he's moved to the Netherlands, is sending his messages through
there or it's someone using his nym. It does sound like him.
He's possibly using TOR.
If TOR went out of business, our trolls would have a group conniption fit.
They'd have to find a new hidey-hole.
Post by Smiler
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Kevrob
[quote]
From a December 2014 survey by the VU University Amsterdam it was
concluded that for the first time there are more atheists (25%)
than theists (17%) in the Netherlands. The majority of the population
being agnostic (31%) or ietsistic (27%).*
[/quote]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Netherlands
Perhaps you would find life better in Ignoranistan?
Cloud Hobbit
2017-04-12 20:34:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The personality of people in atheistic countries is going down.
Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
So, you're an atheist then?
hypatiab7
2017-04-14 04:40:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Cloud Hobbit
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The personality of people in atheistic countries is going down.
Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
So, you're an atheist then?
Nope. He a whacko Muslim.
Robert Carnegie
2017-04-12 20:52:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
For instance, they've calculated how to be
one of the happiest societies on this planet.
Ranked tenth in the latest report.
Apparently a drop from previous scores.

They have made lots of paintings, too.
They appreciate art.
Jeanne Douglas
2017-04-14 09:50:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The personality of people in atheistic countries is going down.
Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
Have you always been this stupid?

JD
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
Smiler
2017-04-15 01:29:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you
that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The personality of
people in atheistic countries is going down.
Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
Have you always been this stupid?
No. He had to train hard to this level of stupidity.
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-04-15 01:34:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you
that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The personality of
people in atheistic countries is going down.
Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
Have you always been this stupid?
No. He had to train hard to this level of stupidity.
With a lot of help from his religion.
hypatiab7
2017-04-16 20:31:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Smiler
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you
that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The personality of
people in atheistic countries is going down.
Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
Have you always been this stupid?
No. He had to train hard to this level of stupidity.
You have to have some smarts to be trainable. Maybe that explains why
he's out of work so often. And why he keeps returning to alt.atheism
with the same nonsense. And, he still, after all these years, can't
even give a clear explanation of whatever he's blathering about.
%
2017-04-16 20:44:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Smiler
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by m***@gmail.com
Sweden is very atheistic. By their own account Swedes will tell you
that Swedes are very coldhearted and calculating.
Anybody can see atheism provides nothing but shit. The
personality
of people in atheistic countries is going down.
Atheists have developed the asshole persona.
Have you always been this stupid?
No. He had to train hard to this level of stupidity.
You have to have some smarts to be trainable. Maybe that explains why
he's out of work so often. And why he keeps returning to alt.atheism
with the same nonsense. And, he still, after all these years, can't
even give a clear explanation of whatever he's blathering about.
and you have a great job
hypatiab7
2017-04-14 04:34:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
You are a fucking theist moron who is disappointed by the no show of your stupid deity??????
We have already told you that there is no deity/god/pixie in this world, so you cannot vent your frustration on atheists.
Wassim, Nando, mohammad is an insane Muslim Canadian photographer who shows up here occasionally blatting the same nonsense. He never says anything new.
There's never any point in responding to him.
raven1
2017-04-12 12:20:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
Will you PLEASE take your fucking meds already, Nando? No atheists
here deny the existence of opinions, or that they are valid. The
problem is that you think opinions apply to matters of fact, a
category error so basic that even you should understand why it's
nonsensical.
Malcolm McMahon
2017-04-12 14:10:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
And, in the case of aesthetic reaction, rather than belief about facts, is entirely subjective. It requires validation only if you lack self-confidence. The balanced observer says only "I find this painting beautiful" and cares no a fig if his opinion is "validated" by being shared by others.
viva padrepio
2017-04-12 14:29:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate...
Tim: "Everyone knows Mike Hunt is an asshole." :-D
default
2017-04-12 15:16:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
And he runs to the edge of the spring-board, brings his legs together
and launches in perfect form, right into the bozo bin....
Davej
2017-04-12 15:16:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
[...] To say the paintining is beautiful, according to
materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
The animal brain is a form of organic computer. You can pretend
otherwise but the obvious fact remains. Atheism merely
provides a realistic, validated view of the world around you. If
all you see around you is "shit" then maybe you are an asshole.

If you need religion and want to dabble in religion, or completely
immerse yourself in religion, YOU ARE COMPLETELY FREE TO DO SO, YOU
STUPID ARROGANT ASSHOLE. Go away! Stay in your mosque.
Joe Bruno
2017-04-13 05:03:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
I agree with you that most of them are very manipulative.
viva padrepio
2017-04-13 14:02:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
I agree with you that most of them are very manipulative.
Lenin, Stalin and Marx are good examples. Over 30 million people murdered because of them.
Yap Honghor
2017-04-14 01:53:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by viva padrepio
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
I agree with you that most of them are very manipulative.
Lenin, Stalin and Marx are good examples. Over 30 million people murdered because of them.
While religion or religious wars killed/murdered more than 80 million???
%
2017-04-14 01:59:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yap Honghor
Post by viva padrepio
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 6:38:48 PM UTC-7,
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful,
requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to
the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are
validated, not opinion. To say the paintining is beautiful,
according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love
for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way
the
painting looks is a matter of opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never
validate opinion.
I agree with you that most of them are very manipulative.
Lenin, Stalin and Marx are good examples. Over 30 million people
murdered because of them.
While religion or religious wars killed/murdered more than 80
million???
so did the asians
hypatiab7
2017-04-16 20:42:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by viva padrepio
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
I agree with you that most of them are very manipulative.
Lenin, Stalin and Marx are good examples. Over 30 million people murdered because of them.
Hitler was a Catholic who was responsible for the deaths of over 13 million people all over Europe. Yet, he was never excommunicated by the Roman Catholic
Church. To this day, the RCC is afraid to throw the half-balled monster out.
%
2017-04-16 21:14:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by viva padrepio
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 at 6:38:48 PM UTC-7,
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful,
requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to
the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are
validated, not opinion. To say the paintining is beautiful,
according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love
for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way
the
painting looks is a matter of opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never
validate opinion.
I agree with you that most of them are very manipulative.
Lenin, Stalin and Marx are good examples. Over 30 million people
murdered because of them.
Hitler was a Catholic who was responsible for the deaths of over 13
million people all over Europe. Yet, he was never excommunicated by
the Roman Catholic Church. To this day, the RCC is afraid to throw
the half-balled monster out.
death happens in a war
b***@m.nu
2017-04-13 11:39:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 18:38:45 -0700 (PDT), ***@gmail.com
wrote:


Concerning your topic, because that is all I read, If calling you a
prejudiced retarded fairy believing idiot makes me coldhearted then
yes I am that, although it also makes me honest.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-04-13 12:51:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@m.nu
Concerning your topic, because that is all I read, If calling you a
prejudiced retarded fairy believing idiot makes me coldhearted then
yes I am that, although it also makes me honest.
Push us and we push back - but these narcissists imagine any negative
reaction to their appalling behaviour towards us, is unjustified
Joe Bruno
2017-04-13 13:19:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
Concerning your topic, because that is all I read, If calling you a
prejudiced retarded fairy believing idiot makes me coldhearted then
yes I am that, although it also makes me honest.
Push us and we push back - but these narcissists imagine any negative
reaction to their appalling behaviour towards us, is unjustified
You consider the slightest hint of dissent from your views to be "appalling", you fucking nutbag. Move to North Korea. People there are afraid to speak out.
b***@m.nu
2017-04-13 17:30:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 06:19:15 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
Concerning your topic, because that is all I read, If calling you a
prejudiced retarded fairy believing idiot makes me coldhearted then
yes I am that, although it also makes me honest.
Push us and we push back - but these narcissists imagine any negative
reaction to their appalling behaviour towards us, is unjustified
You consider the slightest hint of dissent from your views to be "appalling", you fucking nutbag. Move to North Korea. People there are afraid to speak out.
because your kind has committed mass murder all in the name of a
fairy... and you support it.
Christopher A. Lee
2017-04-13 19:07:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by b***@m.nu
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 06:19:15 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
Concerning your topic, because that is all I read, If calling you a
prejudiced retarded fairy believing idiot makes me coldhearted then
yes I am that, although it also makes me honest.
Push us and we push back - but these narcissists imagine any negative
reaction to their appalling behaviour towards us, is unjustified
You consider the slightest hint of dissent from your views to be "appalling",
you fucking nutbag. Move to North Korea. People there are afraid to speak out.
Once again, the deliberately nasty, senile psychopath lies through his
teeth.

Neither Mad Joe not Nando have any business being here, let alone so
deliberately and unprovokedly nasty, Their unsolicited "opinions"
about us, to us, are vicious slander and libel designed to provoke a
negative reaction - which they escalate by lying about that.

And this is apart from his arrogant stupidity in demanding we answer
quizzes that would insult a high-schooler , where he gets both the
questions and answers wrong, like his attempted put down which
8insisted that quadratic equations only have one solution, like his
silly question which assumed Russia only has three saltwater ports,
etc.

All this achieved was to shoot himself in the foot.

Not to mention his transparent, self-aggrandising lies about himself
in an attempt to grant himself bogus authority for things which were
obviously incorrect - like his claim to have been a criminal
prosecutor in the navy,
Post by b***@m.nu
because your kind has committed mass murder all in the name of a
fairy... and you support it.
John Locke
2017-04-14 04:58:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 14:07:51 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 06:19:15 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
Concerning your topic, because that is all I read, If calling you a
prejudiced retarded fairy believing idiot makes me coldhearted then
yes I am that, although it also makes me honest.
Push us and we push back - but these narcissists imagine any negative
reaction to their appalling behaviour towards us, is unjustified
You consider the slightest hint of dissent from your views to be "appalling",
you fucking nutbag. Move to North Korea. People there are afraid to speak out.
Once again, the deliberately nasty, senile psychopath lies through his
teeth.
Neither Mad Joe not Nando have any business being here, let alone so
deliberately and unprovokedly nasty, Their unsolicited "opinions"
about us, to us, are vicious slander and libel designed to provoke a
negative reaction - which they escalate by lying about that.
And this is apart from his arrogant stupidity in demanding we answer
quizzes that would insult a high-schooler , where he gets both the
questions and answers wrong, like his attempted put down which
8insisted that quadratic equations only have one solution, like his
silly question which assumed Russia only has three saltwater ports,
etc.
All this achieved was to shoot himself in the foot.
Not to mention his transparent, self-aggrandising lies about himself
in an attempt to grant himself bogus authority for things which were
obviously incorrect - like his claim to have been a criminal
prosecutor in the navy,
...Mad Arty is giving bonafide imposters, such as Ferdinand Demara, a
bad name.
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
because your kind has committed mass murder all in the name of a
fairy... and you support it.
Cloud Hobbit
2017-04-13 23:20:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
Concerning your topic, because that is all I read, If calling you a
prejudiced retarded fairy believing idiot makes me coldhearted then
yes I am that, although it also makes me honest.
Push us and we push back - but these narcissists imagine any negative
reaction to their appalling behaviour towards us, is unjustified
You consider the slightest hint of dissent from your views to be "appalling", you fucking nutbag. Move to North Korea. People there are afraid to speak out.
Your offenses are hardly slight, they are frequently appalling.
Rejecting evolution.
Rejecting any science that contradicts your book of myths.
Lying about the atheists here.
Calling people liars who simply disagree with you.
You are a scummy little dweeb who can't stand to be proven wrong, but also seems to have a streak of masochism.
hypatiab7
2017-04-16 21:01:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
Concerning your topic, because that is all I read, If calling you a
prejudiced retarded fairy believing idiot makes me coldhearted then
yes I am that, although it also makes me honest.
Push us and we push back - but these narcissists imagine any negative
reaction to their appalling behaviour towards us, is unjustified
You consider the slightest hint of dissent from your views to be "appalling", you fucking nutbag. Move to North Korea. People there are afraid to speak out.
We don't care what you believe. Just keep it to your self. And, as you very well
know, we will not put up with your troll invasive lies and nonsense. This isn't
your newsgroup, ArtieJoe, whatever you narcissistically believe. What you say
isn't law. You are nothing but an unwelcome hate-filled troll who ignores our newsgroup FAQ/Charter simply because you need a scapegoat to make little,
powerless you feel like a big man. Too bad you've failed in all your hateful
goals.
%
2017-04-16 21:15:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
On Tue, 11 Apr 2017 18:38:45 -0700 (PDT),
Concerning your topic, because that is all I read, If calling you a
prejudiced retarded fairy believing idiot makes me coldhearted then
yes I am that, although it also makes me honest.
Push us and we push back - but these narcissists imagine any
negative reaction to their appalling behaviour towards us, is
unjustified
You consider the slightest hint of dissent from your views to be
"appalling", you fucking nutbag. Move to North Korea. People there
are afraid to speak out.
We don't care what you believe. Just keep it to your self. And, as you very well
know, we will not put up with your troll invasive lies and nonsense. This isn't
your newsgroup, ArtieJoe, whatever you narcissistically believe.
What
you say
isn't law. You are nothing but an unwelcome hate-filled troll who
ignores our newsgroup FAQ/Charter simply because you need a
scapegoat
to make little, powerless you feel like a big man. Too bad you've
failed in all your hateful
goals.
there are so many FAQ's for this group ,
it's left it nothing more than a free for all
Christopher A. Lee
2017-04-16 21:16:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 14:01:47 -0700 (PDT), hypatiab7
Post by hypatiab7
Post by Joe Bruno
Post by Christopher A. Lee
Post by b***@m.nu
Concerning your topic, because that is all I read, If calling you a
prejudiced retarded fairy believing idiot makes me coldhearted then
yes I am that, although it also makes me honest.
Push us and we push back - but these narcissists imagine any negative
reaction to their appalling behaviour towards us, is unjustified
You consider the slightest hint of dissent from your views to be "appalling",
you fucking nutbag. Move to North Korea. People there are afraid to speak out.
He's insane. His in-your-face, stupidity bigoted nastiness about and
to us, are what is appalling. Not to mention the sheer, arrogant
stupidity of his ridiculous quizzes. Etc.

And as usual, a dishonest theist lies about mere opinions.
Post by hypatiab7
We don't care what you believe. Just keep it to your self. And, as you very well
know, we will not put up with your troll invasive lies and nonsense. This isn't
your newsgroup, ArtieJoe, whatever you narcissistically believe. What you say
isn't law. You are nothing but an unwelcome hate-filled troll who ignores our
newsgroup FAQ/Charter simply because you need a scapegoat to make little,
powerless you feel like a big man. Too bad you've failed in all your hateful
goals.
What about his unnatural ones?
!! Atheist ------------------------------
2017-04-17 03:01:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by hypatiab7
You are nothing but an unwelcome hate-filled troll
Joe, I welcome you and thank you for proving that atheists are correct, that
there is no verifiable evidence of any god(s), none whatsoever.

Prove atheists correct again, Joe, put your verifiable evidence in this box: []
Davej
2017-04-13 15:35:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful,
requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
That is your *opinion*. You pretend to understand what an "opinion"
is, however you seem to think that everyone else needs to accept
your opinion, which is absurd. You have no supporting evidence --
merely your unsubstantiated opinion. Then you seem to get angry
about it. Somehow it's our fault that you have mental issues. No,
go blame your mother and father -- they produced you.
hypatiab7
2017-04-14 03:53:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Opinion is relevant to the creator domain, facts are relevant to the domain of creation.
With only 1 domain, like in materialism, then only facts are validated, not opinion. To say the
paintining is beautiful, according to materialism this is a statement of fact about a love for
the way the painting looks existing in the brainchemistry.
According to creationism the existence of the love for the way the painting looks is a matter of
opinion.
All the time atheists talk bullshit about facts, they never validate opinion.
Every time you invade alt.atheism, Wassim Noujeim, you tell us how much
you love us. Why else would you keep returning. Isn't lying against your
religion or is it like Christianity where lying is accepted, as long as
it's used to trick someone into converting.

No, Earl, I won't respond to you on this matter again. That has been done
several times already and you always say the same nonsense. The same to
Johnboi and Andyroo. The NT says that it is all right to lie to people in
order to convert them. You're all Christians. Look it up yourself. The
location for the quote has been given to you repeatedly.
Jeanne Douglas
2017-04-14 04:40:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Sez who?

JD
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
Olrik
2017-04-14 04:50:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful, requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Sez who?
It's very knowledgeable tapeworm.
Post by Jeanne Douglas
JD
--
Olrik
aa #1981
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
RichA
2017-04-14 13:29:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by m***@gmail.com
To validate opinion, like opinion about what is beautiful,
requires 2 domains, creator and creation.
Pure logic dictates that The Bible was written by middle
eastern savages who wiped their butts with their hands after a
dump.

In the beginning there was only Chaos. Then out of the void
appeared Erebus, the unknowable place where death dwells, and
Night. All else was empty, silent, endless, dark. Then, Love
was born bringing along the beginning of order. From Love
emerged Light, followed by Gaea, the earth.

Erebus slept with Night, eventually giving birth to Ether, the
heavenly light, and to Day, the earthly light. Then, Night
alone created Doom, Fate, Death, Sleep, Dreams, Nemesis, and
all things that dwell in the darkness haunting mankind.

Meanwhile, Gaea alone gave birth to Uranus, the sky. Uranus
became Gaea's husband, surrounding her on all sides. Together,
they produced the three Cyclopes, the three Hecatoncheires, and
twelve Titans.

However, Uranus was a cruel father and husband. He hated the
Hecatoncheires and imprisoned them by pushing them into the
hidden places of the earth, Gaea's womb. This angered Gaea and
she plotted against Uranus. She made a flint sickle and tried
to get her children to attack Uranus. All were too afraid,
except the youngest Titan, Cronus.

Gaea and Cronus set up an ambush of Uranus as he lay with Gaea
at night. Cronus grabbed his father and castrated him with the
sickle, throwing the severed genitals into the ocean. It is
unclear as to what happened to Uranus afterwards; he either
died, withdrew from the earth, or exiled himself to Italy. As
he departed, he promised that Cronus and the Titans would be
punished. From the blood that was spilled on the earth due to
his castration, emerged the Giants, the Ash Tree Nymphs, and
the Erinnyes. From the sea foam that was produced when his
genitals fell in the ocean, emerged Aphrodite.

Cronus became the next ruler. He imprisoned the Cyclopes and
the Hecatoncheires in Tartarus. He married his sister Rhea, and
had many children. He ruled for many ages; however, Gaea and
Uranus both had prophesied that Cronus would be eventually
overthrown by a son. To avoid this, Cronus swallowed all of his
children as they were born. Rhea was angry at the treatment of
the children and plotted against Cronus. When it was time to
give birth to her sixth child, Rhea hid herself, then she left
the child to be raised by nymphs. To conceal her act she
wrapped a stone in swaddling cloths and passed it off as the
baby to Cronus, who swallowed it.

This child was Zeus. He grew into a handsome youth at the
island of Crete. He consulted Metis on how to defeat Cronus.
She prepared a drink for Cronus designed to make him vomit the
other children. Rhea convinced Cronus to accept his son and
Zeus was allowed to return to Mount Olympus as Cronus's
cupbearer, giving him the opportunity to serve Metis' potion to
Cronus. The plan work perfectly and the other five children
emerged out of Cronus. As gods, they were unharmed and thankful
to their youngest brother, they made him their leader.

Cronus was yet to be defeated though. He and the Titans, except
Prometheus, Epimetheus, and Oceanus, fought to retain their
power; this led to the War between the Titans and the Olympians
called Titanomachy. Atlas became their leader in battle and it
looked for some time as though they would win and put the young
gods down. However, Zeus was cunning; he went to Tartarus and
freed the Cyclopes and the Hecatoncheires. Prometheus joined
Zeus as well. He returned to battle with his new allies; the
Cyclopes provided Zeus with lightning bolts for weapons; the
Hecatoncheires were armed with boulders, waiting in an ambush.
At the right time, Zeus retreated drawing the Titans into the
Hecatoncheires's ambush, who rained down hundreds of boulders
with such a fury that the Titans thought the mountains were
falling on them. They ran away, leaving Zeus victorious.

Zeus exiled the Titans who had fought against him into
Tartarus, with the exception of Atlas, who being the leader of
the opposing force, was punished to hold the universe on his
shoulders.

However, even after this victory, Zeus was not safe. Gaea,
angry that her children had been imprisoned, gave birth to her
last child, Typhon. Typhon was the deadliest monster in Greek
mythology and was known as the "Father of All Monsters". He was
so fearsome that most of the gods fled; however, Zeus faced the
monster and flinging his lighting bolts was able to kill it.
Typhon was buried under Mount Etna in Sicily.

Much later, Zeus faced a final challenge set by the Giants.
They went so far as to attempt to invade Mount Olympus, piling
mountain upon mountain in an effort to reach the top.
Nevertheless, the gods had already grown strong, and with the
help of Heracles, the Giants were subdued and killed.
Loading...