KurtGodel77 Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 You have a gift for ignoring what people say. 744905[/snapback] Perhaps. But you'll recollect that I said I would have paid his point more attention had it been presented more respectfully. In his response, he called himself credible, and me stupid. Why should I dignify that with a lengthy response? He's not listening anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Hey, maybe your natural instinct when confronted by a bully is to run away. I can forgive you for assuming everyone else is the same way. My instinctive response to bullying is to punch the bully in the jaw. 744908[/snapback] You do realize that what you described is the flight or fight response, which your body activates when you feel threatened right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Why should I dignify that with a lengthy response? He's not listening anyway. 744917[/snapback] Irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 CTM is a bully? You feel threatened by him? 744828[/snapback] I enjoy his post, he is informative and intelligent and IMO levelheaded, although he has not ripped me to shreds yet, one day he will and it will be funny and I will need to learn more, to try to make up for my lack of knowledge and hurl cromagnum splat piles mixed with corns of knowledge right back at him from my cave. I still believe that the teaching process overcomes any lack of intelligence derived from genetics...The ability to learn is only limited by the student refusing to learn and a teacher refusing to adapt to the students who need a slightly different aplication in the teaching process...Adapt, overcome, prevail and conquer problems that humans face is the basic philosophy of survival.. Thats what I think, although I am a stoner loser burnout highschool flunkie who likes youtubes and Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 You do realize that what you described is the flight or fight response, which your body activates when you feel threatened right? You'd make a good lawyer, because you have the gift of making something out of nothing. The urge to punch someone in the jaw is activated by many circumstances. For instance, if I saw a man that was smaller and weaker than me trying to rape a woman, I'd want to knock him down. Not because I feel physically intimidated by him, but because I want to punish his disgusting behavior. I'm not trying to compare Monkeyface to a rapist, because there are clearly differing degrees to their disgusting behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Thats what I think, although I am a stoner loser burnout highschool flunkie who likes youtubes and 744926[/snapback] Just be sure to keep the nuptials within your species and everyone wins. I don't want to see any judicial activism advocating cromagnums and homo erectus living together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 You'd make a good lawyer, because you have the gift of making something out of nothing. The urge to punch someone in the jaw is activated by many circumstances. For instance, if I saw a man that was smaller and weaker than me trying to rape a woman, I'd want to knock him down. Not because I feel physically intimidated by him, but because I want to punish his disgusting behavior. I'm not trying to compare Monkeyface to a rapist, because there are clearly differing degrees to their disgusting behavior. 744927[/snapback] How, exactly, does this analogy work for "ideological" bullies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 How, exactly, does this analogy work for "ideological" bullies? 744934[/snapback] It means I call him on the junk he tries to pull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 It means I call him on the junk he tries to pull. 744942[/snapback] Mmmk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Just be sure to keep the nuptials within your species and everyone wins. I don't want to see any judicial activism advocating cromagnums and homo erectus living together. 744929[/snapback] Quest for fire was a bang fest, little primitive and little early kama sutra and produced our diverse cultures and whacked out turn ons that is what america is and is about To quote Ari fliesher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Quest for fire was a bang fest, little primitive and little early kama sutra 744947[/snapback] I liked the version with Ringo Star better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Quest for fire was a bang fest, little primitive and little early kama sutra and produced our diverse cultures and whacked out turn ons that is what america is and is about To quote Ari fliesher 744947[/snapback] Tis why I am named "Bluefire". Bang fests ftw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 You have a gift for combining pseudo-intellectualism with trying to be macho. 744902[/snapback] You're arguing physics with a physicist by quoting a theologian drama trustee...and I'm the pseudo-intellectual? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 It means I call him on the junk he tries to pull. 744942[/snapback] Yeah. Explain to me again how Ilya Ehrenberg was Stalin's propaganda minister... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 I still believe that the teaching process overcomes any lack of intelligence derived from genetics...The ability to learn is only limited by the student refusing to learn and a teacher refusing to adapt to the students who need a slightly different aplication in the teaching process...Adapt, overcome, prevail and conquer problems that humans face is the basic philosophy of survival.. I agree with the spirit of this post, which is to press on until we overcome all our difficulties. The same spirit applies to athletics. At the same time, if you're born skinny and slow, you're never going to become the next Bruce Smith. It doesn't matter how well you eat, or how hard you work in the weight room, or how badly you want to taste the NFL. Unless you have the right genetics, NFL dreams will never become reality. By the same token, unless you have the right genes, you're never going to be the next vos Savant. As the subject matter becomes harder, fewer and fewer people will find themselves with the genetic potential to truly learn it. People may think of themselves as lazy or losers if they find they can't master, say, calculus. But these self-accusations are unfair--they may be just as determined and just as hard-working as those who have mastered the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 16, 2006 Author Share Posted August 16, 2006 I think the more important question is: how is a Nazi like yourself so easily taken in by a Jewish theologist. The answer, I think, is clear: you're a dumbass. 744884[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Yeah. Explain to me again how Ilya Ehrenberg was Stalin's propaganda minister... This is actually an example of what I'm talking about. I'd written a number of informative posts about WWII, using information put together from a number of sources. In these posts, I described how FDR's pro-Soviet foreign policy led to mass murder in Central Europe. To support the point, I mentioned a quote from Ilya Ehrenberg, published in the Soviet army's official newspaper, in which he demanded Soviet soldiers rape and kill German women, children, even unborn babies. The larger issue is that the Soviet invasion of Germany led to mass murder. You completely ignored this issue to dwell on the fact Ilya Ehrenberg didn't have the title "propaganda minister." So what? Soviet soldiers still read his articles, and many were inspired by his hate. It seemed as though you were trying to distract attention from Soviet crimes--as well as from the Western governments whose policies enabled these crimes--by calling me out on a trivial error. It would be sort of like me saying you know nothing about statistics because you used the phrase "deviation toward the mean" instead of "regression toward the mean." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cromagnum Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 I agree with the spirit of this post, which is to press on until we overcome all our difficulties. The same spirit applies to athletics. At the same time, if you're born skinny and slow, you're never going to become the next Bruce Smith. It doesn't matter how well you eat, or how hard you work in the weight room, or how badly you want to taste the NFL. Unless you have the right genetics, NFL dreams will never become reality. By the same token, unless you have the right genes, you're never going to be the next vos Savant. As the subject matter becomes harder, fewer and fewer people will find themselves with the genetic potential to truly learn it. People may think of themselves as lazy or losers if they find they can't master, say, calculus. But these self-accusations are unfair--they may be just as determined and just as hard-working as those who have mastered the subject. 744996[/snapback] A lack of intelligence inherited by genetics, can be challenging to the individual in his desire to learn, but with hard work and a teaching and learning approach that is more acceptable for that individual to understand, will and does work on this planet, he might not master it but he may understand the fundamentals.. Bruce smith is an exceptional athlete in the nfl because of genetics and a desire to excell and the ability to be taught by coaches who understand the process to teach those skills to athletes who learn at varying degress of understanding, and I'm quessing that some coaches change their coaching and teaching tactics to athletes who are physically gifted but mentally challenged and need a slightly different method to understand the subject being taught.. I worked with college kids in the flooring trade in the summer that were extremely intelligent...Some were easy to teach the trade to, and others needed more and a different method of teaching for them to grasp the concept...If they were determined they got it, if they were frustrated they didn't... I am able to understand subjects through desire and the willingness to learn those subjects if it takes another approach than the standard I will learn no matter what. The level of understaning and mastering is limited to the persons mental and physical capabilities derived from genetics, but can be attained to an acceptable level of understanding and partial degree of mastering those subjects overtime.. Just IMO, thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 To support the point, I mentioned a quote from Ilya Ehrenberg, published in the Soviet army's official newspaper, in which he demanded Soviet soldiers rape and kill German women, children, even unborn babies. 745004[/snapback] Could you perhaps, then provide evidence (from non-bald headed white men's sites) supporting the theory that Ehrenberg was, in fact the author of those leaflets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 This is actually an example of what I'm talking about. I'd written a number of informative posts about WWII, using information put together from a number of sources. In these posts, I described how FDR's pro-Soviet foreign policy led to mass murder in Central Europe. To support the point, I mentioned a quote from Ilya Ehrenberg, published in the Soviet army's official newspaper, in which he demanded Soviet soldiers rape and kill German women, children, even unborn babies. No, actually you called Ehrenberg the Soviet Minister of Propaganda: "Kill! There is nothing innocent that is German. Neither in the living nor in the unborn. Follow the directive of Comrade Stalin and trample into the ground for ever the Fascist beast in his cave. Break by force the racial haughtiness of German women. Take them as your lawful prey! Kill you brave advancing Red soldiers!" Ilya Ehrenburg, Soviet propaganda minister, addressing the Soviet army as it began its invasion of Germany. 214835[/snapback] The larger issue is that the Soviet invasion of Germany led to mass murder. You completely ignored this issue to dwell on the fact Ilya Ehrenberg didn't have the title "propaganda minister." So what? Soviet soldiers still read his articles, and many were inspired by his hate. It seemed as though you were trying to distract attention from Soviet crimes--as well as from the Western governments whose policies enabled these crimes--by calling me out on a trivial error. It would be sort of like me saying you know nothing about statistics because you used the phrase "deviation toward the mean" instead of "regression toward the mean." 745004[/snapback] No, the larger issue is that, while you think you're informed, you're actually pretty much a total idiot who can't even keep his facts straight, much less hang them on a coherent framework. If you think Ehrenberg was the Minister of Propaganda setting the policy of genocide for the Red Army...it rather calls into question your entire interpretation of Soviet policy, seeing how you can't even get that rather basic fact correct. One also has to wonder, if Ehrenberg was calling for a genocide campaign against Germans, why he didn't just exhort Red Army soldiers to marry them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts