Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: The Sunday Capers

129 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last

  • ScottY,

    to p forrester jarvie (if that is your actual name): Please reread what you posted and then tell us why we shouldn't call you a pretentious ass.

    West • Since Feb 2009 • 794 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Thank y'all, but I'm more mystified than anything by pfj.

    At any rate, I would rather strongly debate that religion enjoys "exceedingly complex relations to the theory of biological evolution in its now myriad forms" if that is meant to say that religion explains biology. It doesn't.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Mark Harris,

    Thank y'all, but I'm more mystified than anything by pfj.

    I smell a fundy invasion in the near future, as we "pre-shrunk" godless ones must be brought to the light of Jeebus. Bugger.

    Though I am of a mind to see "pfj" as "pimply faced jugend" - too much BOFH in my past...

    Waikanae • Since Jul 2008 • 1343 posts Report Reply

  • ScottY,

    At any rate, I would rather strongly debate that religion enjoys "exceedingly complex relations to the theory of biological evolution in its now myriad forms" if that is meant to say that religion explains biology. It doesn't.

    So is that what s/he was trying to say...

    a learned, dedicated ignorance

    How do I get me some?

    West • Since Feb 2009 • 794 posts Report Reply

  • Sam F,

    It's learned ignorance, bro.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1611 posts Report Reply

  • Rich Lock,

    "pre-shrunk" godless ones

    Have to say, I rather prefer being preshrunk. I would make showering or bathing a bit difficult otherwise.\

    Perhaps I could have chosen 'hand-wash only'? ( oo-err, missus! nurse! the screens! etc etc etc).

    back in the mother countr… • Since Feb 2007 • 2728 posts Report Reply

  • p forrester jarvie,

    the image (pre-shrunk) derives from Leiibniz, describing the immanently constrained, minimally adhesive because minimally contrastive, advantages of relations in a post-sacrificial marketplace; he spoke of throwing many stones into the water at once, and how the many ripples manage to cross without ever destroying each other; a new situation in which pre-shrunkenness seems to let everybody succeed all at once at not causing spiritual interference with the other; on the other hand in so many hours we have seen how the mere hint of 'pretentiousness' and/or the ever-anticipated and basically longed-for 'invasion by the fundies' has aroused the 'blog police' to dreary - but we must presume also passionate - states of abuse just like that, as if indeed and in every way they were being somehow interfered with; and that surprises me greatly for i thought the religion of civility and deference you know, like, 'prevailed here'.. to RB himself i apologise for hastily & clumsily written sentence regarding the very-much flogged dead horse of Darwin's theory, but i will re-word that in an imminent post..

    Since Feb 2009 • 84 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    to RB himself i apologise for hastily & clumsily written sentence regarding the very-much flogged dead horse of Darwin's theory, but i will re-word that in an imminent post

    One with carriage returns and conventional sentence case? That'd be cool.

    Apology not necessary, but always nice.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22850 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    I like how you got the words imminent and immanent into the same post.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • ScottY,

    the very-much flogged dead horse of Darwin's theory

    When did this horse die? Did I miss something?

    You know, pfj, it's okay to use full stops on this site. We promise not to judge you (for that, anyway).

    West • Since Feb 2009 • 794 posts Report Reply

  • Islander,

    Darwin proposed a theory (actually more than one.) An enormous amount of evidence - carefully looked at, sieved if you will, certainly checked by many many trained minds - supports the major theory.

    Little p - what are you offering in contradiction to Charles Darwin's extraordinary well-backed-up (from his own work- from a thousand thousand (just a guess here!) researchers' work) printed scientific papers?

    Big O, Mahitahi, Te Wahi … • Since Feb 2007 • 5643 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    i thought the religion of civility and deference you know, like, 'prevailed here'..

    Dude, I don't know if you know anything about blog comment etiquette. I'm really hoping you don't, because you've basically wandered in and crapped all over it. You're off topic, you're starting an argument with yourself, and you're being abusive of your host while putting your feet up on his coffee table. You want to be treated with deference, try showing some. You know, like in any other form of social interaction. You behave like a tosser, you get treated like one.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report Reply

  • Joe Wylie,

    I like how you got the words imminent and immanent into the same post.

    Yeah, but off-one's meds cute has its limitations.

    flat earth • Since Jan 2007 • 4593 posts Report Reply

  • Danielle,

    There's a wealth of good material in this thread at the moment (the More Pernicious Still! Pre-shrunk! Do not tumble dry!), but let's face it: I'm just bummed I somehow missed Sam's Carly Simon joke for two days. I feel like I could have worked an apricot scarf into the conversation if I'd caught it in time. 'Regrets, I've had a few.'

    Charo World. Cuchi-cuchi!… • Since Nov 2006 • 3828 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    Yeah, but off-one's meds cute has its limitations.

    At the cost of coming across as a little self-important (yeah, I know, what else is new), could you not use that particular expression? I find it quite offensive. It's up there with "spastic" in my book.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • Joe Wylie,

    Sure Gio. Now take your pills, and if the authoritarian streak's still there in the morning, go pick on someone else.

    flat earth • Since Jan 2007 • 4593 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    And I raise you "retarded"

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    Now take your pills, and if the authoritarian streak's still there in the morning, go pick on someone else.

    Well played, sir. Classy.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • Mark Harris,

    PC gone mad, I tell you!

    Waikanae • Since Jul 2008 • 1343 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Peter Cresswell? Goes without saying.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19745 posts Report Reply

  • ScottY,

    Getting slightly more on-topic, the Michael Laws article in the SST had this to say about SIDS:

    It's like medical authorities trying to scare parents not to share beds with their children. Yes, some drunk, drugged insensate mums do roll over and asphyxiate their kids, but most of us don't. This natural bonding process between breast-feeding mum and infant is portrayed as akin to child abuse.

    I wonder if he will bother to read this in today's paper.

    West • Since Feb 2009 • 794 posts Report Reply

  • Sam F,

    There's a wealth of good material in this thread at the moment (the More Pernicious Still! Pre-shrunk! Do not tumble dry!), but let's face it: I'm just bummed I somehow missed Sam's Carly Simon joke for two days. I feel like I could have worked an apricot scarf into the conversation if I'd caught it in time. 'Regrets, I've had a few.'

    I wondered whether it was just a bit too obtuse to be spotted.

    But hey, it's never too late to make something of it. Apricot scarf leads us to wool which 'shrinks' and thus to us the sheeple worshiping at the pagan throne of almighty Darwin. After all, if p insists on making this thread about ludicrous nonsense and overdrawn bows, why not just go hogwild?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1611 posts Report Reply

  • Stephen Judd,

    ScottY: it won't matter a jot to Laws whether he reads it or not. In the Laws-o-verse, studying a matter deeply automatically invalidates your opinion on it, for Common Sense provides all we need to know.

    See, in the Laws-o-verse, if you study something, and you confirm the common wisdom on it, then you have wasted the taxpayer's money because Laws could have told you that for free. And if what you learn contradicts the common wisdom, it's also a waste, because a well-honed anecdote from Laws which demonstrates Common Sense is proof that you're merely an ivory-tower academic who's out of touch/greedy for research money/feminist/marxist (strike out that which does not apply).

    If necessary, you can use one prejudice to buttress another -- eg, defend bed-sharing by pointing out that only intoxicated Maoris smother their infants. Well-bred Pakeha, who may have a drink or two but can handle their liquor and in any case are never at fault, would never do such a thing. Because that's Common Sense.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 3122 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    well-honed anecdote from Laws which demonstrates Common Sense is proof that you're merely an ivory-tower academic

    Coming from the guy who got an MA in creative writing at the institute of modern letters.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • Sam F,

    Coming from the guy who got an MA in creative writing at the institute of modern letters.

    I'd say it's cognitive dissonance that supercharges Laws' attacks on anyone who publicly displays evidence of higher learning.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1611 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.