PC Principal thread

[Guitarman]

3 minute mile seems reasonable, mobility scooters can pack some serious horsepower these days.

Not when the wheels are compressed into ovals it isn't.

[Marootsoobutsu]

I got through 40 seconds before i realized im not on wifi.

Holy cow, how much of your data plan did you have to go through to transmit just a single frame of her?

[Xno Kappa]

Didn't watch that video, but Astylla used to belong to a body positive group that would actually delete your posts if you mentioned anything about dropping a few pounds or going to the gym and exercising because they didn't want anyone having their little feelings hurt by someone doing something to better their health and life.

When we lived in TN, my wife used to go to a Planet Fitness there that had all the weigh-in scales removed. This was the same Planet Fitness that had all the squat racks removed because the sight of people squatting free weights was intimidating some of the members lol.

[thetruepandagod]

When we lived in TN, my wife used to go to a Planet Fitness there that had all the weigh-in scales removed. This was the same Planet Fitness that had all the squat racks removed because the sight of people squatting free weights was intimidating some of the members lol.

Don't forget they all come equipped with judgement free zones where 'fit' people aren't allowed and lunk alarms.

[thetruepandagod]

Cops make a mistake by not beating the shit out of children.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/225917...king-two-cops/

[dasva]

wait wut, I thought 6-7min miles were expected. But then again highschool is a blur but even my asthmatic self was hittin 6.5-7ish back then.

6-7 might be a bit much for someone older just getting back into being fit who never really ran. But 10 minutes is pretty bad. Like fit people can walk that bad.

[NynJa]

Holy cow, how much of your data plan did you have to go through to transmit just a single frame of her?

Rogers sent me a warning that I was exceeding all individual bandwidth for that 40 seconds.

[Niiro]

Cops make a mistake by not beating the shit out of children.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/225917...king-two-cops/

A BAYING mob of 30 children attack two cops after school, in a picture to shock even lawless Britain.

Pfft, the UK thinks they bad?

If this were the US there would be a candlelight vigil by now.

[thetruepandagod]

Posting for Day's ghost.



Actually a great video, wish someone other than day would watch a video longer than 2 minutes.

[Thunder]

I hate when people post a video w/o any context as to what it's about, especially if it isn't only like 40 seconds long. And you just posted one that's three hours.


good video though, started listening just to get context not long after you posted and an hour went by before realizing this would fuck my sleep schedule up. Gonna finish it up now and it's very good

Some context, this is (~1 hour in) basically a discussion about the 'left' and it's ideologies in the context of history and 'good' science. Atm the science bit is admittedly a small part of it but I thought it was the most important - no scientist in the world actually goes through the scientific method checklist (afaik) but the most important bit of it is the analysis of data before drawing conclusions. And a lot of these 'studies' that get quoted do an experiment and if the data CAN support their hypothesis then they simply conclude their hypothesis was correct, not exploring (at all, it seems) that the data can support other hypotheses as well and that their hypothesis can still be wrong

the example that I've got in mind after waking up having watched an hour is the one that's like, "show a white man 50 pictures of black people and white people and have him say one good thing and one bad thing about them - observe that it's easier (time-wise) for him to say good things about whites and bad things about blacks, which means racism". And the guy, jordan peterson, says that it could just be a novelty factor in that of course it's easier to ascribe good things with someone who looks like us and bad things to someone who doesn't. He doesn't say this, but that "phenomenon" is very well understood in evolutionary biology. There is a great purpose to naturally be averse towards things that aren't like you, and extra keen towards things that are like you.

Anyway, the guy is a professor at a university in toronto(?), canada, and he and rogan go on complaining about the left's unreasonable popularity/power growth. As I understood, the people that select judges in canada will have to go through mandatory anti-discrimination courses before they select judges, some humanities staff at uni's in canada do it, and the legislation that's in NY (can't misgender someone under penalty of law, basically) are gaining ground

oh, and apparently there are professors at universities right now who have, live on air, and very recently said "there are no biological differences between a man and a woman"

[thetruepandagod]

He also taught at harvard from 93-98. Basically he talks about the problem with these ideologies that are taking hold in certain places and how one might be driven to marxist thought given the horrors that they lead to. I really enjoyed when he talked about safe spaces in college and how it is deleterious to a students growth and only serves to do the opposite of what we would want for them. Was impressed about the program(self/future authoring) he has helped to work on as well that when used by colleges reduced drop out rates by 50% among students as well as bringing foreign students up to par with native born in regards to academic performance.

People should just watch the video though, it's good, and has little to no rogan in it whatsoever.

[Greatguardian]

Reading through Thunder's description of the video, I started out hopeful. It's not often people get very far discussing the left's abusive relationship with science. Then he started saying things like "racism" and "evolutionary biology" and my heart sank. How anyone can find themselves personally invested in the ontological gerrymandering that is social science is beyond me. Hard science problems.

[Thunder]

yeah rogan does a good job of letting this guy go, I got worried a few times because I know his dumb rants all too well and at least twice he picks up steam but this peterson guy interjects and goes wild with it for the next couple minutes

Edit: ?

what's wrong with what I said

[BerenTebogo]

I hate when people post a video w/o any context as to what it's about, especially if it isn't only like 40 seconds long. And you just posted one that's three hours.


good video though, started listening just to get context not long after you posted and an hour went by before realizing this would fuck my sleep schedule up. Gonna finish it up now and it's very good

Some context, this is (~1 hour in) basically a discussion about the 'left' and it's ideologies in the context of history and 'good' science. Atm the science bit is admittedly a small part of it but I thought it was the most important - no scientist in the world actually goes through the scientific method checklist (afaik) but the most important bit of it is the analysis of data before drawing conclusions. And a lot of these 'studies' that get quoted do an experiment and if the data CAN support their hypothesis then they simply conclude their hypothesis was correct, not exploring (at all, it seems) that the data can support other hypotheses as well and that their hypothesis can still be wrong

the example that I've got in mind after waking up having watched an hour is the one that's like, "show a white man 50 pictures of black people and white people and have him say one good thing and one bad thing about them - observe that it's easier (time-wise) for him to say good things about whites and bad things about blacks, which means racism". And the guy, jordan peterson, says that it could just be a novelty factor in that of course it's easier to ascribe good things with someone who looks like us and bad things to someone who doesn't. He doesn't say this, but that "phenomenon" is very well understood in evolutionary biology. There is a great purpose to naturally be averse towards things that aren't like you, and extra keen towards things that are like you.

Anyway, the guy is a professor at a university in toronto(?), canada, and he and rogan go on complaining about the left's unreasonable popularity/power growth. As I understood, the people that select judges in canada will have to go through mandatory anti-discrimination courses before they select judges, some humanities staff at uni's in canada do it, and the legislation that's in NY (can't misgender someone under penalty of law, basically) are gaining ground

oh, and apparently there are professors at universities right now who have, live on air, and very recently said "there are no biological differences between a man and a woman"

[Zetanio]

Yeah, you lost me there.

[Thunder]

...like, nobody (afaik) actually takes a checklist out to go through it - they just do it. It makes sense in the context of the video because the science he was describing being done by social scientists was missing steps to the scientific method but they don't realize it because they don't actually go through a checklist, because nobody does that, they've just learned the steps properly and respected them enough not to meander away from intellectually honest and unbiased science

how intellectually retarded someone has to believe me to be + how dickish they themselves have to be to have read what I said and then attack me (instead of clarifying) for thinking that the scientific method itself is not used at all is beyond me. Of course all science is conducted in roughly the same way, hypothesis, experiment, analyze data, likely loads of reiterations before conclusions that are to be shared have been made

[Greatguardian]

Any asshat can call themselves a social scientist conducting a social experiment. It wasn't long ago that we had some random punk-ass grad student in the developmental psychology department at Stanford "publish" a "paper" demonstrating "evidence" of election fraud in the Democratic primary. What does a grad student in developmental psychology know about electoral forensics? Jack shit. That doesn't stop whatever he types up and posts on the internet from becoming a "study from scientists at Stanford."

Ultimately, picking on low hanging fruit like mediocre social scientists is boring. They're a dime a dozen and attacking their credibility only weakens the public's relationship with well conducted science. Suddenly, "science" can't sufficiently demonstrate a tangible human impact on the global environment because "science" also thinks it can demonstrate that white people are stupid, racist poopoo heads and that's clearly biased.

[BerenTebogo]

...like, nobody (afaik) actually takes a checklist out to go through it - they just do it. It makes sense in the context of the video because the science he was describing being done by social scientists was missing steps to the scientific method but they don't realize it because they don't actually go through a checklist, because nobody does that, they've just learned the steps properly and respected them enough not to meander away from intellectually honest and unbiased science

how intellectually retarded someone has to believe me to be + how dickish they themselves have to be to have read what I said and then attack me (instead of clarifying) for thinking that the scientific method itself is not used at all is beyond me. Of course all science is conducted in roughly the same way, hypothesis, experiment, analyze data, likely loads of reiterations before conclusions that are to be shared have been made

I mean, I reread it like 5x. You said no scientist uses the scientific method checklist.

Just say you were wrong and misspoke and move on. You've got no argument here.

Edit: Added bonus! Admitting you were wrong is one of the most important parts of being a good scientist / human being.

[Andalusian girls]

leave the social sciences alone you hard science bullies

[Thunder]

no scientist goes through the scientific method checklist =/= no scientist goes through the scientific method.
I understand how someone could, without the context of the video and/or being inside of my head knowing I meant a literal checklist, interpret it as something else and that's my fault 10000% for not rereading the post after having just woken up to realize how out of place that sentence is

I mean, I get it, you swoop in and shit on anyone as effortlessly as you can for any bit of (perceived) misinformation you can rationalize. Cool dude, good on you, really doing your part as a good scientist / human being

Any asshat can call themselves a social scientist conducting a social experiment. It wasn't long ago that we had some random punk-ass grad student in the developmental psychology department at Stanford "publish" a "paper" demonstrating "evidence" of election fraud in the Democratic primary. What does a grad student in developmental psychology know about electoral forensics? Jack shit. That doesn't stop whatever he types up and posts on the internet from becoming a "study from scientists at Stanford."

Ultimately, picking on low hanging fruit like mediocre social scientists is boring. They're a dime a dozen and attacking their credibility only weakens the public's relationship with well conducted science. Suddenly, "science" can't sufficiently demonstrate a tangible human impact on the global environment because "science" also thinks it can demonstrate that white people are stupid, racist poopoo heads and that's clearly biased.

I see. Yeah, you picked up on that correctly then. I'm not finished the thing yet but it's basically all rebuttles to low hanging fruit, as you call it