On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:35:54 EST, "bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>
>Sorry! It's only respect not to talk directly to a Saint. :)

Now I know what foot you kick with. Not that I care :)

>Does he also take some milk? <- really not respectless dear Sir Saint Stephen,
>I hope, he won't get angry... ;)

You wouldn't know but that is a phrase used to show the invisibility of the
disabled.
Instead of asking the person in a wheelchair if he takes sugar. The carer is
asked if he (the disabled person) takes sugar.
And no I don't take milk, but I take sugar in my first cup of coffee and all of
my cups of tea if it is Indian tea not Green tea which I take with neither sugar
nor milk. I will put an ice cube into my tea or coffee to cool it down as I
don't take milk, unless it is espresso or Greek type coffee then I sometimes add
lots of sugar. It is probably better to ask someone else. :)

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

In article <web.479b10cbe1d0580ad77696980@news.povray.org>, 
nam### [at] gmailcom says...
> Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> > Darren New wrote:
> > > Then the answer would be "no", not "yes". :-) If the place doesn't
> > > exist, then asking whether there's something at that place would be
> > > answered "no". Do the taxi drivers on the moon accept tips? No.
> >
> > According to my philosophy 101 teacher at university, you can validly
> > say anything about nonexistent things.  All unicorns are chartreuse, no
> > harbl which has a frobotz is virpo, that kind of thing.  So the taxi
> > drivers on the moon both do and do not accept tips.
> 
> indeed.  Wu/Mu is the correct answer to such questions.
> 

Actually, this reminds me of a blog entry I read today which talked 
about the difference between lies, bullshit and spin.

Basically:

Lies - Require you know the truth, so you can try to convince people 
that something else is true instead. This is easily refuted, since all 
someone has to do it prove that the truth is something else.

Bullshit - Making things up, out of thin air, with no basis in truth at 
all, other than needed to convince someone that it *might* be somehow 
connected to the real world. This is damn hard to refute, since how do 
you prove that there *is* truth, as related to something that doesn't 
exist? How do you even prove that it didn't happen, didn't exist, etc.?

Spin - Something between the two above. Its purpose is to lie where 
needed to imply that black is white, up is down, right is left, good is 
bad, etc., but with a large dribble of bullshit added in, which can't be 
easily refuted, disproven or tested. Thus, the lies get support from the 
stuff you can't examine, while the stuff you can't examine is made more 
probable by the suggestion that "if it exists/happened/etc.", the lies 
must be true. As a result, the nuts that believe the bullshit will 
believe both, and the people that fall for the lies are more easily led 
into also accepting the bullshit.

-- 
void main () {
  If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

In article <479c72c5$1@news.povray.org>, Sabrina Kilian <"ykgp at 
vtSPAM.edu"> says...
> Tim Cook wrote:
> > So the taxi drivers on the moon both do and do not accept tips.
> > 
> 
> Schrödinger's Taxi Company. Where you aren't sure if you will survive
> the trip, or even if you ever arrived.
> 
lol Got to remember that one.

-- 
void main () {
  If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

In article <op.t5m1okjkc3xi7v@news.povray.org>, 
phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk says...
> And lo on Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:22:57 -0000, bluetree <nomail@nomail> did 
 
> spake, saying:
> 
> > "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> >> It's got those harps and clouds and the fullsome sense of smugness  
> >> caused
> >> by being there.
> >>
> >> Okay in all seriousness if everyone thinks the same way in Heaven then
> >> it's possible that the only way in is to display those same traits on
> >> Earth. Therefore you have no free will nor free will to lose you are
> >> simply repeating your Earthly actions in Heaven. If you were the type 
of
> >> person to become disatisfied with that then you wouldn't have been  
> >> allowed
> >> in. Satan/Lucifer/Adversary doesn't count as he was always in Heaven.
> >
> > Not to sound blasphemous.
> 
> Blasphemer! Stone them, stone them!
> 
> > But who says that there are individuals. If there might be no free will
,  
> > it could also be, that there are no individuals... (invalid logic, but 
 
> > doesn't matter)
> > I can't imagine a lot of individuals playing all time similar or same 
 
> > songs with harp. ;)
> 
> No you're right they could all Become One With The Mind Of God... ooooo! 
 
> Or separate from God in a shiny silvery gestalt from which multiple forms
  
> can be made and rule over a race of warriors who... oh wait sorry that's 
 
> Deep Space Nine.
> 
> > "the fullsome sense of smugness caused by being there" sounds like ther
e  
> > might be something, which changes the way you are. -> So no individual 
 
> > anymore? ;)
> 
> Hmm think about the types of people who you'd expect to get into Heaven, 
 
> would you want to spend eternity with them in any form? So the person  
> who's there either a) wants to be there b) has to be there, or is c)  
> stoned.
> 
> Back to the serious bit. I think the gestalt or 'one with the mind of God
'  
> is a possibiity if you think of each individual joining as a voice in the
  
> choir, similar to that voice in your head telling you that you shouldn't 
 
> eat that gooey cream pie or take a machine-gun to your co-workers...um...
  

This would differ from our understanding of modern neuroscience in what 
way, I mean other than the fact that, with rare exceptions, most of the 
other people in our heads don't get the final vote on what to do, but 
just chime in a lot? And what would the point of that be "for" God? 
Having billions of chattering voices chiming in about all the stuff they 
want him to do next all the time, where his sole gain from that is 
that... he gets to *pick* which ones to listen to, but without all the 
complex neurological filters "we" have that are supposed to make the 
crazier people in our own heads stay quiet. People without those filters 
(or rather with broken ones) tend to be what we call bipolar, and other 
similar disorders. One minute they are listening to the devil on the 
shoulder, the next the angel, and they *personally* can't tell the 
difference. Always thought God had to be completely nuts, by the crazy 
definitions given for his behavior, but gluing billions of people, each 
with their own collection of crazy people in them, into a mess that 
hasn't got the filters we do, would **make** any such entity nuts, if it 
wasn't to start with.

-- 
void main () {
  If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Spin - Something between the two above. 

Actually, I've always understood "spin" to be picking which part of the 
story to tell. Like foods that proclaim "fat free!" when they're loaded 
with sugar.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:35:54 EST, "bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> >
> >Sorry! It's only respect not to talk directly to a Saint. :)
>
> Now I know what foot you kick with. Not that I care :)

NO! I'm not kicking anybody. Not even a fly. In that way I'm a kind of Buddhist.
I would also turn the other cheek for the fly... ;)

> >Does he also take some milk? <- really not respectless dear Sir Saint Stephen,
> >I hope, he won't get angry... ;)
>
> You wouldn't know but that is a phrase used to show the invisibility of the
> disabled.
> Instead of asking the person in a wheelchair if he takes sugar. The carer is
> asked if he (the disabled person) takes sugar.

^^
I knew it. :P
(I googled the phrase.) :)

> And no I don't take milk, but I take sugar in my first cup of coffee and all of
> my cups of tea if it is Indian tea not Green tea which I take with neither sugar
> nor milk. I will put an ice cube into my tea or coffee to cool it down as I
> don't take milk, unless it is espresso or Greek type coffee then I sometimes add
> lots of sugar. It is probably better to ask someone else. :)
>
> Regards
>  Stephen


What's about white coffee?
BTW have you also tried green tea with gold? :)

Regards
               bluetree

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:58:33 -0000, Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom>  
did spake, saying:

> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:53:00 -0000, "Phil Cook"
> <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>
>> And lo on Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:43:33 -0000, Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom>
>> did spake, saying:
>>
>>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:16:16 -0000, "Phil Cook"
>>> <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Unless you're a zombie, or a ghost, or a vampire, or a werewolf... oh
>>>> wait
>>>> that last one's just stupid; werewolves aren't dead.
>>>
>>> Are you some sort of ist? What do you have against Duppies?
>>
>> Nothing, I think they're great for an aquarium.
>>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duppy

Oh *D*uppy I read *G*uppy, well actually I didn't I just thought it would  
be funny.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:11:35 -0000, Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom>  
did spake, saying:

> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:20:48 -0000, "Phil Cook"
> <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>
>> And lo on Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:04:34 -0000, bluetree <nomail@nomail> did
>> spake, saying:
>>
>>> "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>>>> > They don't call me Saint Stephen for nothing.
>>>> >
>>>> > Actually they don't call me Saint Stephen at all, at all :)
>>>>
>>>> Ah St. St. so good they named him twice:-P
>>>
>>> It's the same as with other titles. The more Saints he get the more
>>> miracles he
>>> can do, am I right? ;)
>>
>> So miraculous they named a road after him - St. St. St.
>>
>> --
>> Phil Cook
>
> I'm still here you know. I do take sugar.

You know if you keep acting like that they'll rename the road and you'll  
be back to plain old Sir Saint Stephen :-P

Heh Saint Stephen Street Apartments - St.St.St.Apts.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:54:30 -0000, bluetree <nomail@nomail> did  
spake, saying:

> "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>> > Whew. Strange diaglogue.
>>
>> Except in the case of Heaven they thought they wanted to be there; a bit
>> like Fawlty Towers I suppose.
>
> Then I don't want to check in please.

Ah but that presupposes the knowledge that you know what it's like before  
you get there :-)

>> > At least I found the reason: Your showel was too hard.
>> > No, no, don't flail again. :)
>>
>> That's okay John's flown off with and I don't have another Shovel +2
>> Against Reason as blessed by L Ron Hubbard lying around. I could just  
>> wrap
>> some wires around the handle of a different shovel say it detects  
>> "Thetan
>> Radiation" and try that if you like?
>
> Hihi, won't work, because I have an atheistic shield +20. :P

Heh it was an Attack of opportunity which negates shields, you belong to  
Hubbard now :-P

>> >> Yup you can only get into Heaven via your free will at which point  
>> you
>> >> lose it.
>> >> Hold on I'll get a shovel it'll all make sense in a minute.
>> >
>> > Heaven-one-way ticket. ;)
>
> Annual season ticket for one way, that's not fair!!

Only covers Earth to Purgatory with a stop in Heaven availible on  
alternate Blue Moons

>> Bloody GWR and you'd paid for an annual season ticket too.
>>
>> > Is there a point, where you are able to choose between different
>> > stations?
>>
>> Sort of makes you wonder what happens if you get on the wrong train. Ah
>> Rowan Atkinson as the Devil guiding people to Hell.
>>
>> "Christians? Christians this way please; yes the Jews were right"
>
> ^^
> And at last it leads to the question: Is there free will in hell? ;)

Perhaps in the same way there is in prison.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Tue, 29 Jan 2008 00:00:59 -0000, Patrick Elliott  
<sel### [at] rraznet> did spake, saying:

> In article <op.t5m1okjkc3xi7v@news.povray.org>,
> phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk says...
>> And lo on Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:22:57 -0000, bluetree <nomail@nomail> did
>> spake, saying:
>>
>> > "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>>
>> Back to the serious bit. I think the gestalt or 'one with the mind of  
>> God'
>> is a possibiity if you think of each individual joining as a voice in  
>> the
>> choir, similar to that voice in your head telling you that you shouldn't
>> eat that gooey cream pie or take a machine-gun to your  
>> co-workers...um...
>
> This would differ from our understanding of modern neuroscience in what
> way, I mean other than the fact that, with rare exceptions, most of the
> other people in our heads don't get the final vote on what to do, but
> just chime in a lot? And what would the point of that be "for" God?
> Having billions of chattering voices chiming in about all the stuff they
> want him to do next all the time, where his sole gain from that is
> that... he gets to *pick* which ones to listen to, but without all the
> complex neurological filters "we" have that are supposed to make the
> crazier people in our own heads stay quiet. People without those filters
> (or rather with broken ones) tend to be what we call bipolar, and other
> similar disorders. One minute they are listening to the devil on the
> shoulder, the next the angel, and they *personally* can't tell the
> difference. Always thought God had to be completely nuts, by the crazy
> definitions given for his behavior, but gluing billions of people, each
> with their own collection of crazy people in them, into a mess that
> hasn't got the filters we do, would **make** any such entity nuts, if it
> wasn't to start with.

And yet explains so much if true.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:48:05 -0000, Patrick Elliott  
<sel### [at] rraznet> did spake, saying:

> In article <web.479b10cbe1d0580ad77696980@news.povray.org>,
> nam### [at] gmailcom says...
>> Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> > Darren New wrote:
>> > > Then the answer would be "no", not "yes". :-) If the place doesn't
>> > > exist, then asking whether there's something at that place would be
>> > > answered "no". Do the taxi drivers on the moon accept tips? No.
>> >
>> > According to my philosophy 101 teacher at university, you can validly
>> > say anything about nonexistent things.  All unicorns are chartreuse,  
>> no
>> > harbl which has a frobotz is virpo, that kind of thing.  So the taxi
>> > drivers on the moon both do and do not accept tips.
>>
>> indeed.  Wu/Mu is the correct answer to such questions.
>>
>
> Actually, this reminds me of a blog entry I read today which talked
> about the difference between lies, bullshit and spin.
>
> Basically:
>
> Lies - Require you know the truth, so you can try to convince people
> that something else is true instead. This is easily refuted, since all
> someone has to do it prove that the truth is something else.

No, lying requires you to think you know the truth then claim something  
else. If I 'knew' the Moon was made of cheese then *I'd* be lying if I  
told you was it was just a lump of rock.

> Bullshit - Making things up, out of thin air, with no basis in truth at
> all, other than needed to convince someone that it *might* be somehow
> connected to the real world. This is damn hard to refute, since how do
> you prove that there *is* truth, as related to something that doesn't
> exist? How do you even prove that it didn't happen, didn't exist, etc.?

Again not quite. Bullshit is indeed fabrication from thin air, but like  
lying doesn't necessarily preclude the person hitting upon the truth; just  
that they wouldn't know it.

> Spin - Something between the two above. Its purpose is to lie where
> needed to imply that black is white, up is down, right is left, good is
> bad, etc., but with a large dribble of bullshit added in, which can't be
> easily refuted, disproven or tested. Thus, the lies get support from the
> stuff you can't examine, while the stuff you can't examine is made more
> probable by the suggestion that "if it exists/happened/etc.", the lies
> must be true. As a result, the nuts that believe the bullshit will
> believe both, and the people that fall for the lies are more easily led
> into also accepting the bullshit.

Like Darren I'd suggest spin is more the rearrangement of facts to point  
to the conclusion you want it to. No lies and no bullshit.

Robin Hood wasn't an outlaw he was fighting for the common man against a  
tyrannical system.
Robin Hood was an outlaw who robbed people of their hard-earned goods and  
killed men acting in their sworn duty to protect the country.

It would be amusing if they'd had both the Sun and the Daily Mail around  
in those days.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:15:28 EST, "bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>
>What's about white coffee?

Yes I take my white coffee without milk or sugar.

>BTW have you also tried green tea with gold? :)

I should be so rich :)

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 08:59:54 -0000, "Phil Cook"
<phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:

>
>You know if you keep acting like that they'll rename the road and you'll  
>be back to plain old Sir Saint Stephen :-P

Should that not be Saint Sir Stephen? But with my attitude to the "knobility"
(the K is silent) I think that I would refuse the honour. I'll keep the Saint
bit, I think it suits me. What do you think? Does my ego look big in this?

>Heh Saint Stephen Street Apartments - St.St.St.Apts.
>

LOL
http://stephenstreetcondos.com/index.htm

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 08:57:39 -0000, "Phil Cook"
<phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:

>
>Oh *D*uppy I read *G*uppy, well actually I didn't I just thought it would  
>be funny.

Keep trying :)

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

In article <op.t5opm6cgc3xi7v@news.povray.org>, 
phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk says...
> And lo on Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:48:05 -0000, Patrick Elliott  
> <sel### [at] rraznet> did spake, saying:
> 
> > In article <web.479b10cbe1d0580ad77696980@news.povray.org>,
> > nam### [at] gmailcom says...
> >> Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> >> > Darren New wrote:
> >> > > Then the answer would be "no", not "yes". :-) If the place doesn't
> >> > > exist, then asking whether there's something at that place would b
e
> >> > > answered "no". Do the taxi drivers on the moon accept tips? No.
> >> >
> >> > According to my philosophy 101 teacher at university, you can validl
y
> >> > say anything about nonexistent things.  All unicorns are chartreuse,
  
> >> no
> >> > harbl which has a frobotz is virpo, that kind of thing.  So the taxi
> >> > drivers on the moon both do and do not accept tips.
> >>
> >> indeed.  Wu/Mu is the correct answer to such questions.
> >>
> >
> > Actually, this reminds me of a blog entry I read today which talked
> > about the difference between lies, bullshit and spin.
> >
> > Basically:
> >
> > Lies - Require you know the truth, so you can try to convince people
> > that something else is true instead. This is easily refuted, since all
> > someone has to do it prove that the truth is something else.
> 
> No, lying requires you to think you know the truth then claim something 
 
> else. If I 'knew' the Moon was made of cheese then *I'd* be lying if I 
 
> told you was it was just a lump of rock.
> 
> > Bullshit - Making things up, out of thin air, with no basis in truth at
> > all, other than needed to convince someone that it *might* be somehow
> > connected to the real world. This is damn hard to refute, since how do
> > you prove that there *is* truth, as related to something that doesn't
> > exist? How do you even prove that it didn't happen, didn't exist, etc.?
> 
> Again not quite. Bullshit is indeed fabrication from thin air, but like 
 
> lying doesn't necessarily preclude the person hitting upon the truth; jus
t  
> that they wouldn't know it.
> 
> > Spin - Something between the two above. Its purpose is to lie where
> > needed to imply that black is white, up is down, right is left, good is
> > bad, etc., but with a large dribble of bullshit added in, which can't b
e
> > easily refuted, disproven or tested. Thus, the lies get support from th
e
> > stuff you can't examine, while the stuff you can't examine is made more
> > probable by the suggestion that "if it exists/happened/etc.", the lies
> > must be true. As a result, the nuts that believe the bullshit will
> > believe both, and the people that fall for the lies are more easily led
> > into also accepting the bullshit.
> 
> Like Darren I'd suggest spin is more the rearrangement of facts to point 
 
> to the conclusion you want it to. No lies and no bullshit.
> 
> Robin Hood wasn't an outlaw he was fighting for the common man against a 
 
> tyrannical system.
> Robin Hood was an outlaw who robbed people of their hard-earned goods and
  
> killed men acting in their sworn duty to protect the country.
> 
> It would be amusing if they'd had both the Sun and the Daily Mail around 
 
> in those days.
> 
Ok, then tell me how most of what gets called "spin" in politics isn't 
exactly what is described. A mix of people making up stuff to explain 
what they don't comprehend, while lying about the stuff they know, or 
think they know, is true. lol

Seriously though, you have some good points. The presumption though is 
that the liar *knows* the truth and opts to say something else, not that 
they only *think* they know. While that may not always be true, from the 
perspective of those presenting the "facts" to refute the lie, its still 
presumed to be a lie, even if they got it right *by* lying. Same with 
BS. Yes, its possible to make something up and "accidentally" stumble on 
the truth, but its rather improbable.

As for spin.. Lets put it this way instead: "To spin something you have 
to know not only how you *want* people to perceive things, but also how 
your opponent *does* perceive them. To get the right effect, you have to 
distort his view, make things up to fill in gaps you can't explain 
yourself, and, if your goal is to win, regardless of the accuracy of 
your position, lie about what is really going on." Its not really 
"spin" unless you are at least two out of three of those.

-- 
void main () {
  If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Ok, then tell me how most of what gets called "spin" in politics isn't 
> exactly what is described.

"Spin" in politics is actually lying. But politicians call it "spin" 
because lying doesn't sound good.

It's like the difference between bribes and grease.

"Spin" is what the trial lawyer does. Defense calls it "the alleged 
footprint", and prosecution calls it "the incriminating glove", but 
they're both the same thing. Prosecution asks their own expert witness 
how many years of experience he has (many, but no formal education), and 
asks the defense's experts whether they have college degrees in the 
subject (none, but lots of experience).

The one currently amusing me is how many people use the expression "UFO" 
to mean "alien spaceship".    "See? The government admits there are UFOs!"

> Seriously though, you have some good points. The presumption though is 
> that the liar *knows* the truth and opts to say something else, not that 
> they only *think* they know.

Hard to say. That would imply someone *does* know the truth.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Thu, 31 Jan 2008 05:36:50 -0000, Patrick Elliott  
<sel### [at] rraznet> did spake, saying:

> In article <op.t5opm6cgc3xi7v@news.povray.org>,
> phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk says...
>
> Ok, then tell me how most of what gets called "spin" in politics isn't
> exactly what is described. A mix of people making up stuff to explain
> what they don't comprehend, while lying about the stuff they know, or
> think they know, is true. lol

It's like statistics, spin is presenting the data in a different way.

Try this

"It's often said that you can't lie; is this true?"
"Yes"

Now the interpreted vebose version

"Is it true that it's often said you can't lie?"
"Yes it is true that it's often said I can't lie, however the statement  
that everyone makes is incorrect and I can and do lie all the time"

Yeah weaselly with a capital W.

> Seriously though, you have some good points. The presumption though is
> that the liar *knows* the truth and opts to say something else, not that
> they only *think* they know. While that may not always be true, from the
> perspective of those presenting the "facts" to refute the lie, its still
> presumed to be a lie, even if they got it right *by* lying. Same with
> BS. Yes, its possible to make something up and "accidentally" stumble on
> the truth, but its rather improbable.

I do love that presumption though, again try this

"The floor of the main hall in Christchurch is paved with marble"

Every form of lie detection device you may have will tell you I'm lying,  
at this point you pump me full of pentathol and attach electrodes to  
tender areas of my body in order to discover what the main hall floor is  
paved with. Except I don't know, I don't even know if Christcurch has a  
main hall. I'm bullshitting, but the fact that the devices tell you I'm  
lying implies I know the truth, which I don't.

> As for spin.. Lets put it this way instead: "To spin something you have
> to know not only how you *want* people to perceive things, but also how
> your opponent *does* perceive them. To get the right effect, you have to
> distort his view, make things up to fill in gaps you can't explain
> yourself, and, if your goal is to win, regardless of the accuracy of
> your position, lie about what is really going on." Its not really
> "spin" unless you are at least two out of three of those.

Apart from the "make thing up" bit yep. If you have to make something up  
to fill the gaps then you can be accused of lying; much more satisfactory  
to be misinterpreted instead.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

"Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> >> > At least I found the reason: Your showel was too hard.
> >> > No, no, don't flail again. :)
> >>
> >> That's okay John's flown off with and I don't have another Shovel +2
> >> Against Reason as blessed by L Ron Hubbard lying around. I could just
> >> wrap
> >> some wires around the handle of a different shovel say it detects
> >> "Thetan
> >> Radiation" and try that if you like?
> >
> > Hihi, won't work, because I have an atheistic shield +20. :P
>
> Heh it was an Attack of opportunity which negates shields, you belong to
> Hubbard now :-P

No. :)
You forgot my avatar. A nice little pixie with defensive ability of
antiscientology of +3. :)
I needed time, but prepared a spell of destroying weapongs 75%. Your shovel
turns to dust.
And I've won. Yeah. :P

> > And at last it leads to the question: Is there free will in hell? ;)
>
> Perhaps in the same way there is in prison.

Or a hell like Fawlty Towers. How would the corresponding heaven look like? :)

Regards
            bluetree

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:15:28 EST, "bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>
> >
> >What's about white coffee?
>
> Yes I take my white coffee without milk or sugar.
>
> >BTW have you also tried green tea with gold? :)
>
> I should be so rich :)
>
> Regards
>  Stephen

Me too. :)
But when you are invited to try such a tea. Would you try it?

Regards
      bluetree

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:00:03 EST, "bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>Stephen <mcavoysATaolDOTcom@> wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 03:15:28 EST, "bluetree" <nomail@nomail> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >What's about white coffee?
>>
>> Yes I take my white coffee without milk or sugar.
>>
>> >BTW have you also tried green tea with gold? :)
>>
>> I should be so rich :)
>>
>> Regards
>>  Stephen
>
>Me too. :)
>But when you are invited to try such a tea. Would you try it?

Yes, I would be honoured.

Regards
	Stephen

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:57:40 -0000, bluetree <nomail@nomail> did  
spake, saying:

> "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>> >> > At least I found the reason: Your showel was too hard.
>> >> > No, no, don't flail again. :)
>> >>
>> >> That's okay John's flown off with and I don't have another Shovel +2
>> >> Against Reason as blessed by L Ron Hubbard lying around. I could just
>> >> wrap
>> >> some wires around the handle of a different shovel say it detects
>> >> "Thetan
>> >> Radiation" and try that if you like?
>> >
>> > Hihi, won't work, because I have an atheistic shield +20. :P
>>
>> Heh it was an Attack of opportunity which negates shields, you belong to
>> Hubbard now :-P
>
> No. :)
> You forgot my avatar. A nice little pixie with defensive ability of
> antiscientology of +3. :)
> I needed time, but prepared a spell of destroying weapongs 75%. Your  
> shovel
> turns to dust.
> And I've won. Yeah. :P

Damn those avatars. You can't resist forever; I'll be back and next time  
I'll bring the hunting pack of Lawyers of Suing +3.

>> > And at last it leads to the question: Is there free will in hell? ;)
>>
>> Perhaps in the same way there is in prison.
>
> Or a hell like Fawlty Towers. How would the corresponding heaven look  
> like? :)

Fawlty Towers :-P

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:53:24 +0000, Phil Cook wrote:

>> Or a hell like Fawlty Towers. How would the corresponding heaven look
>> like?
> 
> Fawlty Towers :-P

LOL!  I'm sure Basil would agree....

Jim

Post a reply to this message

What a choice.
Be a good person and you'll visit Fawlty Towers.
Be a bad person and you'll have to visit Fawlty Towers.
I would choose to stay in that transportation vehicle in between.
A neverending passenger. Perhaps I could play the deamon in a box. ;)

Regards
         bluetree

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:21:10 -0500, bluetree wrote:

> What a choice.
> Be a good person and you'll visit Fawlty Towers. Be a bad person and
> you'll have to visit Fawlty Towers. I would choose to stay in that
> transportation vehicle in between. A neverending passenger. Perhaps I
> could play the deamon in a box. ;)
> 
> Regards
>          bluetree

Maybe the difference is being Sybil vs. one of the guests. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

In article <op.t5snsscwc3xi7v@news.povray.org>, 
phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk says...
> Apart from the "make thing up" bit yep. If you have to make something up 
 
> to fill the gaps then you can be accused of lying; much more satisfactory
  
> to be misinterpreted instead.
> 
Ah, but only by people that *know* what actually exists in the gaps. The 
trick is to find some legitimate gap that they can't fill either, then 
stuff a purple pokadot unicorn into it, or what ever the equivalent is 
in the subject you are trying to spin your way. If it "sounds" like you 
have an answer, while the other side honestly says they don't, but at 
looking, a lot of people that don't know any better will fall for 
"your" version of it. Well, most people, especially when political 
decisions are involved, don't have a clue what is in the gaps, where 
they are, how big they are, or even if they exist at all, but they got 
one clown up there spinning like a top and insisting they do know that 
gaps exist, and they personally, or their team, or what ever, *knows* 
exactly what fits in the hole.

To be clear, the origin of the descriptions I gave are from a book 
written by one of those people that run satire on Comedy Central, so it 
*is* politics that they describe.

-- 
void main () {
  If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message

Phil Cook wrote:
> Yeah weaselly with a capital W.

Mainly capitalized because it's his middle initial.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     On what day did God create the body thetans?

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:21:10 -0500, bluetree wrote:
>
> > What a choice.
> > Be a good person and you'll visit Fawlty Towers. Be a bad person and
> > you'll have to visit Fawlty Towers. I would choose to stay in that
> > transportation vehicle in between. A neverending passenger. Perhaps I
> > could play the deamon in a box. ;)
> >
> > Regards
> >          bluetree
>
> Maybe the difference is being Sybil vs. one of the guests. ;-)
>
> Jim

And which way around? ^^
Being Sybil is heaven or hell? ;)

Regards
           bluetree

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:21:10 -0000, bluetree <nomail@nomail> did  
spake, saying:

> What a choice.
> Be a good person and you'll visit Fawlty Towers.
> Be a bad person and you'll have to visit Fawlty Towers.
> I would choose to stay in that transportation vehicle in between.

Oh you've played Half-Life then :-)

> A neverending passenger. Perhaps I could play the deamon in a box. ;)

Much more fun.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Fri, 01 Feb 2008 03:43:19 -0000, Patrick Elliott  
<sel### [at] rraznet> did spake, saying:

> In article <op.t5snsscwc3xi7v@news.povray.org>,
> phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk says...
>> Apart from the "make thing up" bit yep. If you have to make something up
>> to fill the gaps then you can be accused of lying; much more  
>> satisfactory
>> to be misinterpreted instead.
>>
> Ah, but only by people that *know* what actually exists in the gaps. The
> trick is to find some legitimate gap that they can't fill either, then
> stuff a purple pokadot unicorn into it, or what ever the equivalent is
> in the subject you are trying to spin your way. If it "sounds" like you
> have an answer, while the other side honestly says they don't, but at
> looking, a lot of people that don't know any better will fall for
> "your" version of it. Well, most people, especially when political
> decisions are involved, don't have a clue what is in the gaps, where
> they are, how big they are, or even if they exist at all, but they got
> one clown up there spinning like a top and insisting they do know that
> gaps exist, and they personally, or their team, or what ever, *knows*
> exactly what fits in the hole.

For a professional there are no gaps. You either ignore them as if they  
weren't there, or skip over them as if they were unimportant. If some  
busybody dares point one out you can 'not see it', 'not understand it', or  
'act confused that the questioner can't see the obvious connection'. At  
which point the busybody has to repeat it, explain it, or back-down; which  
offers an opportunity to spin whatever they said into your message or  
ignore it.

> To be clear, the origin of the descriptions I gave are from a book
> written by one of those people that run satire on Comedy Central, so it
> *is* politics that they describe.

Except European politics are, by defintion, more sophisticated with  
greater degrees of subtlety :-P

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

"Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> And lo on Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:21:10 -0000, bluetree <nomail@nomail> did
> spake, saying:
>
> > What a choice.
> > Be a good person and you'll visit Fawlty Towers.
> > Be a bad person and you'll have to visit Fawlty Towers.
> > I would choose to stay in that transportation vehicle in between.
>
> Oh you've played Half-Life then :-)

The game? ;-)

> > A neverending passenger. Perhaps I could play the deamon in a box. ;)
>
> Much more fun.

Yeeeees. I would give the other passengers a foretaste of what might come.
*evilsmile*

Regards
         bluetree

Post a reply to this message

And lo on Fri, 01 Feb 2008 11:39:13 -0000, bluetree <nomail@nomail> did  
spake, saying:

> "Phil Cook" <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
>> And lo on Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:21:10 -0000, bluetree <nomail@nomail> did
>> spake, saying:
>>
>> > What a choice.
>> > Be a good person and you'll visit Fawlty Towers.
>> > Be a bad person and you'll have to visit Fawlty Towers.
>> > I would choose to stay in that transportation vehicle in between.
>>
>> Oh you've played Half-Life then :-)
>
> The game? ;-)
>
>> > A neverending passenger. Perhaps I could play the deamon in a box. ;)
>>
>> Much more fun.
>
> Yeeeees. I would give the other passengers a foretaste of what might  
> come.
> *evilsmile*

Tell them they'll be cake.

-- 
Phil Cook

--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 01:33:49 -0500, bluetree wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:21:10 -0500, bluetree wrote:
>>
>> > What a choice.
>> > Be a good person and you'll visit Fawlty Towers. Be a bad person and
>> > you'll have to visit Fawlty Towers. I would choose to stay in that
>> > transportation vehicle in between. A neverending passenger. Perhaps I
>> > could play the deamon in a box. ;)
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >          bluetree
>>
>> Maybe the difference is being Sybil vs. one of the guests. ;-)
>>
>> Jim
> 
> And which way around? ^^
> Being Sybil is heaven or hell? ;)

LOL, good point.  I'm thinking it'd be heaven, but for Basil having to 
deal with her makes his position hell.  For the customers, it'd be the 
other way around.

Now I need to watch those again, particularly The Germans. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

> > Yeeeees. I would give the other passengers a foretaste of what might
> > come.
> > *evilsmile*
>
> Tell them they'll be cake.

And that some fellow deamons have to bake them? ;)
Ok. I'll do... (as far as I'll remember it and nobody will kick me out of the
vehicle first). ^^

Regards
           bluetree

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 01:33:49 -0500, bluetree wrote:
>
> > Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 16:21:10 -0500, bluetree wrote:
> >>
> >> > What a choice.
> >> > Be a good person and you'll visit Fawlty Towers. Be a bad person and
> >> > you'll have to visit Fawlty Towers. I would choose to stay in that
> >> > transportation vehicle in between. A neverending passenger. Perhaps I
> >> > could play the deamon in a box. ;)
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> >          bluetree
> >>
> >> Maybe the difference is being Sybil vs. one of the guests. ;-)
> >>
> >> Jim
> >
> > And which way around? ^^
> > Being Sybil is heaven or hell? ;)
>
> LOL, good point.  I'm thinking it'd be heaven, but for Basil having to
> deal with her makes his position hell.  For the customers, it'd be the
> other way around.
>
> Now I need to watch those again, particularly The Germans. :-)
>
> Jim


To tell the truth: I haven't seen all episodes of Fawlty Towers.
But there is a weak memory of this episode... (I watched it a very, very,
veeeery looooong time ago.) :-)
Reading "The Germans" in Wikipedia I think to remember the moose and the face of
the guests,
when Basil talks about war all time. ^^
Yeeees, I remember it. :-D

Regards
          blutree

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 13:30:55 -0500, bluetree wrote:

> To tell the truth: I haven't seen all episodes of Fawlty Towers. But
> there is a weak memory of this episode... (I watched it a very, very,
> veeeery looooong time ago.)

We've got the DVDs, which makes it easier to rewatch. :-)

> Reading "The Germans" in Wikipedia I think to remember the moose and the
> face of the guests,
> when Basil talks about war all time. ^^ Yeeees, I remember it. :-D

Yes, it is rather classic Cleese.  Especially the bit where he starts 
goosestepping.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

In article <op.t5ueprh4c3xi7v@news.povray.org>, 
phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk says...
> And lo on Fri, 01 Feb 2008 03:43:19 -0000, Patrick Elliott  
> <sel### [at] rraznet> did spake, saying:
> 
> > In article <op.t5snsscwc3xi7v@news.povray.org>,
> > phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk says...
> >> Apart from the "make thing up" bit yep. If you have to make something 
up
> >> to fill the gaps then you can be accused of lying; much more  
> >> satisfactory
> >> to be misinterpreted instead.
> >>
> > Ah, but only by people that *know* what actually exists in the gaps. Th
e
> > trick is to find some legitimate gap that they can't fill either, then
> > stuff a purple pokadot unicorn into it, or what ever the equivalent is
> > in the subject you are trying to spin your way. If it "sounds" like you
> > have an answer, while the other side honestly says they don't, but at
> > looking, a lot of people that don't know any better will fall for
> > "your" version of it. Well, most people, especially when political
> > decisions are involved, don't have a clue what is in the gaps, where
> > they are, how big they are, or even if they exist at all, but they got
> > one clown up there spinning like a top and insisting they do know that
> > gaps exist, and they personally, or their team, or what ever, *knows*
> > exactly what fits in the hole.
> 
> For a professional there are no gaps. You either ignore them as if they 
 
> weren't there, or skip over them as if they were unimportant. If some  
> busybody dares point one out you can 'not see it', 'not understand it', o
r  
> 'act confused that the questioner can't see the obvious connection'. At 
 
> which point the busybody has to repeat it, explain it, or back-down; whic
h  
> offers an opportunity to spin whatever they said into your message or  
> ignore it.
> 
Or pretend it never happened. Want a good example of that, try this 
article and the links to a) the radio show, and b) the *archived* 
version of the Uncommon(ly) D(umb)escent's inexplicably missing thread 
on it:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/thats_some_memory_hole.php

Having lost, Dembski and the rest basically just deleted all the 
evidence on their own site, and are desperately trying to pretend it 
never happened. lol I suspect any day know they will try to sue the 
people that archived it on grounds of copyright, the same way they 
recently tried to prevent access to videos about some of their previous 
stupidities (on the grounds they contain images they copyright. 
Specifically a photo of the nimrod they had mangle science for them in 
the original speech being lambasted). Or, in the second case, they 
supposedly object because *they* claim to own the video, which 
*actually* contains version *they* stoled from a major university, then 
redubbed to make it sound like it defended Intelligent Design, instead 
of saying stuff, in the full version with voice overs, that is 
*completely* contradictory to it. Its really getting damn bizarre in the 
US with these ID-iots. Claim they have proof, steal other people's 
stuff, quietly hide it, then threaten to sue anyone that remembers, 
while steal something from someone else, rinse and repeat. And that is 
when they try to use other people's work without permission. The rest of 
the time they just find some wacko nut, like this doctor, who will 
babble a lot of stuff, then insist his *entire* reason for thinking he 
knows anything is reading "one" article in a third hand science paper, 
which is written to help even lay people understand science (and which 
this moron fails to manage, despite this fact). lol

Frankly, this has *got* to be the most stupid thing I have seen them do 
though. Its literally like they can't learn anything, from each other, 
or even from the dozens of other fools that have tried to revise history 
or hide facts on the internet, by either suing it out of existence, 
deleting it from their own sites, or demanding its removal. One wonders 
how long it took any of them to be potty trained, let alone figure out 
something as complicated as tying shoe laces. ;)

-- 
void main () {
  If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
    if version = "Vista" {
      call slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message