Maker Pro
Maker Pro

OT: Cartoon

R

Rich The Philosophizer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Only for increased bandwidth. But I betcha a single slap wont make it
flip out :)

Hopefully, it's not running windows CE. (or whatever the version they
use for - I just coined this - "Car Windows" <rimshot>)

Cheers!
Rich
 
R

Robert Monsen

Jan 1, 1970
0
Rich said:
Nope. I'm dead serious.

I coded documents in two, count'em, two, tobacco litigations. I have
seen the documents that refute the so-called "scientific studies" that
"proved" that smoking "causes" cancer. And I have seen the documents
that _show_ that the antis' reports are bogus. But they got buried,
because the antis had an agenda to push. These documtents used to be on
the internet, but they've apparently taken those pages down. They were
on the tobacco companies' websites, so they were probably forced to
take them down.

And that's still notwithstanding that smoking does not cause cancer.

One of the studied that got buried, which was published in the Lancet
or maybe the British Medical Journal, showed a correlation between
personality type and cancer that was so strong, that in the same
data set, the distribution of smokers/nonsmokers was below the noise
level. And it wasn't the only study that showed that correlation.

And the personality type that gives itself cancer is characterized
by rigidity of thinking and lack of emotional outlet, which is perfectly
logical, when you really look at the big picture.




Tell me about it!

Cheers!
Rich

Why do you think that everybody seems to believe these studies?

Also, do you smoke? Is it possible that you are attempting to
rationalize your habit?

--
Regards,
Robert Monsen

"Your Highness, I have no need of this hypothesis."
- Pierre Laplace (1749-1827), to Napoleon,
on why his works on celestial mechanics make no mention of God.
 
R

Rich The Philosophizer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Why do you think that everybody seems to believe these studies?

For the same reason so many people seem to think George W. Bush is
the best thing since Abe Lincoln.
Also, do you smoke? Is it possible that you are attempting to
rationalize your habit?

Of course not.

The blamers miss one very important fact:

If smoking _caused_ cancer, not only would there be no smoker
who ever escaped, but there would be no non-smoker who ever
got cancer.

And that simply is not true.

But they've never let the truth get in the way of their agenda.

Good Luck!
Rich
 
B

Bob Stephens

Jan 1, 1970
0
If smoking _caused_ cancer, not only would there be no smoker
who ever escaped, but there would be no non-smoker who ever
got cancer.

Talk about fuzzy logic...
 
D

Dennis M. O'Connor

Jan 1, 1970
0
Bob Stephens said:
Talk about fuzzy logic...

No, I'm familiar with fuzzy logic (a legitimate form of logic
that uses continuous, rather than Boolean, truth values),
and what "Rich The Philosophizer" is using isn't that.
It's illogic: anyone with even a modest familiarity with logic
knows that "A causes B" doesn't imply "only A causes B",
yet "Rich" thinks it does.

"Rich" strikes me as being either a 12-year old, an idiot,
a lunatic or a troll. Or some combination of the above.
 
T

Terry Given

Jan 1, 1970
0
Rich said:
For the same reason so many people seem to think George W. Bush is
the best thing since Abe Lincoln.




Of course not.

The blamers miss one very important fact:

If smoking _caused_ cancer, not only would there be no smoker
who ever escaped, but there would be no non-smoker who ever
got cancer.

There is a small problem with set theory here Rich; also your choice of
words leaves something to be desired - for your assertion to hold,
smoking would need to be the ONLY cause for cancer. Best not to think
about Benzene (hey, isnt that in cigarette smoke?), xylene, toluene etc.
And that simply is not true.

congratulations. One feeble straw man thoroughly demolished.
But they've never let the truth get in the way of their agenda.

that however is true, of all lobbyists.
Good Luck!
Rich

Sounds like a bit of rationalisation.....

The head of GlaxoSmithKline gave a speech earlier this year (cant be
arsed googling for it) in which he proudly announced that GSK products
DO NOT WORK FOR 2/3 OF THE PEOPLE WHO TAKE THEM. The reason? Individual
genetic makeup varies widely, and is incredibly important. Why did he
say such a thing? He's a pharmaco-geneticist, and was launching the
platform for pharmaco-genetics - the idea being you get a DNA test, and
that is used to determine what drugs will work on you (rather than, say,
the doctor prescribing the stuff sold by the company that took him to
Barbados for free)

The likelihood is extremely high that prolific smokers who dont get
cancer (I know some really old bastards who smoke like chimneys yet are
still quite fit; my grandfather died at 53 of lung cancer) have some
genetic advantages that reduce the susceptibility to carcinogens (or,
conversely, lack the genetic disadvantages which increase the
susceptibility)

The teratogenic nature of many compounds within tobacco smoke is well
known and relatively easy to demonstrate. Alas as someone else pointed
out in a different thread, double-blind trials in this area dont get
past ethics committees. Funnily enough many of the nasties in ciggy
smoke are due to the shit put in prefabricated ciggies by the
manufacturers - who btw will eventually be getting a hiding from the
fire department, as the accelerants they use to ensure cigarettes burn
rapidly are what makes them such a cause of house fires; roll-your-owns
simply do not do this (and are cheaper and a lot less toxic).

Mind you, when did american tampon manufacturers quit using asbestos?
not very long ago IIRC.

Cheers
Terry
 
R

Robert Monsen

Jan 1, 1970
0
Rich said:
For the same reason so many people seem to think George W. Bush is
the best thing since Abe Lincoln.

The folks who advocate these studies don't really have much of an axe to
grind. In fact, I'd say they are working against one of the richest,
most powerful lobbying organizations in the world. It took *years* for
the word to get through their smoke screen (so to speak).
Of course not.

The blamers miss one very important fact:

If smoking _caused_ cancer, not only would there be no smoker
who ever escaped, but there would be no non-smoker who ever
got cancer.

And that simply is not true.

I guess what you are trying to say is that it doesn't cause, but simply
affects the chances of getting cancer. I'll buy that. That would be
consistent with the statistical studies that suggest there is a
correlation between smoking and getting cancer.
But they've never let the truth get in the way of their agenda.

Whose agenda is this? Seems like the big tobacco companies have more of
a motive to lie than the CDC.

--
Regards,
Robert Monsen

"Your Highness, I have no need of this hypothesis."
- Pierre Laplace (1749-1827), to Napoleon,
on why his works on celestial mechanics make no mention of God.
 
R

R. Steve Walz

Jan 1, 1970
0
Terry said:
R. Steve Walz wrote:

[snip]


Having read your posts on this thread, I am inclined to agree with

your

own character assessment - you are dangerously unstable.

Welcome to the club.


I didn't reply because it got too personal.
There was the arrogance of my stepfather
facing me with the same line, "I have the right"

Understandable. RSW seems to fly right off the handle at the slightest
provocation.
----------------------
Really. So you imagine you know all from my carefully crafted textual
responses, eh? How ignorant.


? Didja see his assertion that one slap from his father would
have turned him into a homicidal maniac? ROTFLMAO!
-------------------------------
It is my belief. We are determined by our experiences.

I learned a few nasty tricks from a decade or two of martial arts. So
far it has been incredibly useful, in that I am quietly confident
(learning to keep my mouth shut when someone pisses me off has been a
factor too). Nobody has ever picked on me in a social setting (6'2" 90kg
helps), and I have only been "mugged" twice - once in Westwood MA, on
christmas eve, when the pair of muggers (armed with 2x4's) just left
after I asked them nicely (I was smiling, quite a bit bigger than either
of them, and obviously more than willing to take them both on. I think
it showed), and once in Palmerston North when a guy demanded my wallet
as I walked down an alley. A single blow to the chin took care of him
(he was leaning against a concrete block wall), without breaking stride.
His 3-4 mates decided against having a go :) (I think the kiai helped a
great deal).

one of my favourite phrases is "walk softly and carry a big stick"

Cheers
Terry
---------------
Blowhards fail to impress. Nothing sounds more like you don't know
your ass from a hole in the ground than discussions of supposed
martial arts prowess.

It disgusts those those with actual training.
-Steve
 
R

R. Steve Walz

Jan 1, 1970
0
Rich said:
And I must admit, it's not inconceivable that the people waging
the "war" are trying to minimize collateral damage.

Are they evil, or just participating in somebody's karma?

;^j
Rich
------------
Those two things are the same. We have languished in every war that
we did not finally become grimly mercilous in prosecuting. Dresden,
Hiroshima/Nagasaki, those were turning points, we stoppped apologizing
for collateral damage and INTENDED to kill civilians, which is where
a nation's power resides. We feel shamefaced later, perhaps, but it
takes that to win decisively, or a mere cessation results, and not
a victory. The army that controls all news and kills barbarically
always wins. Anything less wastes our soldiers' lives on half-hearted
efforts taking and re-taking the same ground. The army that obliterates
any resistive city, faction or region to make a horrific example of
them, is the one who has no more such trouble after they have made
their "will to win" QUITE clear to their enemy, even if they must kill
EVERY ENEMY CIVILIAN! An enemy will resist until they are certain they
will be killed to the last baby if they do not surrender!

-Steve
 
R

R. Steve Walz

Jan 1, 1970
0
Rich said:
So nobody has the right to do anything,
------------------
Liar. I've told you what you have a right to do, to own a home,
now, this instant, to be paid absolutely equally per hour for
any and all democratically sanctioned work, to work more to
earn more, to build your castle as you please, to receive free
medical and vacation and retirement.
 
R

Rich The Philosophizer

Jan 1, 1970
0
Talk about fuzzy logic...

Well, isn't that how "cause and effect" works? If A causes B,
then if A, then B.

But religions don't see things that way. They bend logic to whatever
suits their faith.

Thanks,
Rich
 
R

R. Steve Walz

Jan 1, 1970
0
Rich said:
Well, you sure do prescribe a lot of death for someone who espouses
non-violence.
-------------------
Me, non-violent? No, I merely aim it at appropriate targets only,
namely EvilDoers!

If two kids on the high-school playgroung get into a fistfight and
one of them turned 18 yesterday, do you have him executed?

Thanks,
Rich
-----------------------
Whoever started it gets imprisoned at labor indefinitely.

Kids are apprised of this, and that they should only fight
BACK to escape the harshness of the law!

-Steve
 
R

Rich The Philosophizer

Jan 1, 1970
0
The folks who advocate these studies don't really have much of an axe to
grind. In fact, I'd say they are working against one of the richest,
most powerful lobbying organizations in the world. It took *years* for
the word to get through their smoke screen (so to speak).


I guess what you are trying to say is that it doesn't cause, but simply
affects the chances of getting cancer. I'll buy that. That would be
consistent with the statistical studies that suggest there is a
correlation between smoking and getting cancer.


Whose agenda is this? Seems like the big tobacco companies have more of
a motive to lie than the CDC.

Well, I could track down and dig out all the documents that got buried in
the crusade, and I could track down and dig out all the documents that
expose the fudged data, bad methodology, and outright fraud in the crusade,
but they are all a matter of public record, and I'm no more going to
change anybody's mind than the man in the moon.

Blame whatever you want.

But it's a pretty powerful feeling knowing that I'm in charge of
my life.

(OOh! he's gonna get cancer! he's gonna get killed by a drunk
driver! he's gonna piss off a cop and get shot! he's gonna get
raped by a homo! maybe he is a homo!)

I'll be thanking the peanut gallery in advance for their insight and
wisdom on the matter. ;-)

;^j
Rich
 
R

R. Steve Walz

Jan 1, 1970
0
Rich said:
{Re:Smoking]
Why do you think that everybody seems to believe these studies?

For the same reason so many people seem to think George W. Bush is
the best thing since Abe Lincoln.
---------------------------
No, all THAT proves is that the ignorant can, for a time, outnumber the
educated.

Of course not.

The blamers miss one very important fact:

If smoking _caused_ cancer, not only would there be no smoker
who ever escaped, but there would be no non-smoker who ever
got cancer.
 
T

Terry Given

Jan 1, 1970
0
R. Steve Walz said:
Terry said:
Clarence wrote:

message



R. Steve Walz wrote:

[snip]



Having read your posts on this thread, I am inclined to agree with

your


own character assessment - you are dangerously unstable.

Welcome to the club.



I didn't reply because it got too personal.
There was the arrogance of my stepfather
facing me with the same line, "I have the right"

Understandable. RSW seems to fly right off the handle at the slightest
provocation.

guess ya missed the words "seems to"
? Didja see his assertion that one slap from his father would

and genes, and environment (diet, chemical exposure etc. especially
in-utero)

taken from an early 1990s ad for GSXR1100
---------------
Blowhards fail to impress. Nothing sounds more like you don't know
your ass from a hole in the ground than discussions of supposed
martial arts prowess.

It disgusts those those with actual training.
-Steve

If I was gonna "blowhard" it would have been 6 guys with knives :)
rather than one fuckwit with a sore head. Other than that guy I have
never needed to hit anyone (not for the last 20 years anyway).

I guess I better not mention the time I leaped into a partially flooded
ditch and rescued a woman trapped in her upside down car (she flipped it
into the ditch as I was coming the other way), lest that disgust you too.

And I imagine the time I stopped at a gas station and ended up repairing
a girls alternator (an hour in the dark and pissing rain) because she
had broken down would likewise offend you.

What flavour training have you had Steve?

Cheers
Terry
 
R

R. Steve Walz

Jan 1, 1970
0
Terry said:
R. Steve Walz said:
Terry said:
Clarence wrote:


message



R. Steve Walz wrote:

[snip]



Having read your posts on this thread, I am inclined to agree with

your


own character assessment - you are dangerously unstable.

Welcome to the club.



I didn't reply because it got too personal.
There was the arrogance of my stepfather
facing me with the same line, "I have the right"

Understandable. RSW seems to fly right off the handle at the slightest
provocation.

guess ya missed the words "seems to"
? Didja see his assertion that one slap from his father would

and genes, and environment (diet, chemical exposure etc. especially
in-utero)

taken from an early 1990s ad for GSXR1100
---------------
Blowhards fail to impress. Nothing sounds more like you don't know
your ass from a hole in the ground than discussions of supposed
martial arts prowess.

It disgusts those those with actual training.
-Steve

If I was gonna "blowhard" it would have been 6 guys with knives :)
rather than one fuckwit with a sore head. Other than that guy I have
never needed to hit anyone (not for the last 20 years anyway).

I guess I better not mention the time I leaped into a partially flooded
ditch and rescued a woman trapped in her upside down car (she flipped it
into the ditch as I was coming the other way), lest that disgust you too.

And I imagine the time I stopped at a gas station and ended up repairing
a girls alternator (an hour in the dark and pissing rain) because she
had broken down would likewise offend you.

What flavour training have you had Steve?

Cheers
Terry
 
C

ChrisGibboGibson

Jan 1, 1970
0
It may be sheer coincidence (in fact it probably is) but in the UK Raleigh
(sp?) used to sell a range of products called the RSW range. It was a girl's
bike.

Gibbo
 
C

ChrisGibboGibson

Jan 1, 1970
0
With small wheels and a shopping basket on the front.

Gibbo
 
R

R. Steve Walz

Jan 1, 1970
0
Tom said:
Aren't you in that category? I probably am at present, and income is
not nearly as skewed in Canada as it is in the US..

Tom
 
Top