Jump to content

The Leopards Eating Faces and Unlubed Dildo of Consequences Thread


Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

"Overseas" workers?  I doubt she's bringing in Japanese cherry pickers.  Besides, I see six people in that picture.  Get to pickin', assholes.

You see six Big-Boned people in that picture. They ain't pickin shit!

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
12 hours ago, Nivek said:

One thing I picked up during my education was that while obtaining an undergraduate degree, memorization was an important component to build the foundation upon, so one could get caught up with the generally accepted knowledge at the time.  However, there were tidbits of information spread in there that helped a person see the limitations.  As one progresses in graduate school, some of those foundational facts lose what was previously considered ironclad status and are replaced by "this is the best information we currently have" and this goes for a lot of things.   For example, if you looked at a diamond under cathode ray lumination, you would see amorphous zones indicating this crystal developed in a plasma like environment and many of those zones were truncated picking up inclusions of other materials (e.g. garnet) before it solidified and was brought to the surface.   Yet, if you read the literature, there are some who base the dating of rocks/diamonds on the radiometric decay of the garnet inclusions.   When it is often observed that the dating of the inclusions will be wildly different amongst and individual diamond discovered (with multiple inclusions).   But both are correct in their assessment.  This is a weak form of evidence but sometimes is all that is available.  Critics may argues, just shitcan it, because it is so wholly unreliable it shouldn't be included at all.   Other's not aware of diamond dating issues, may defer to the data without fully appreciating the challenge and debate amongst the mineralogists, because their background expertise is in a different speciality (structural geology).   

Outside of STEM, this stuff is present as well.  When calculating the value of an organization, there is a formula for where the weighted average cost of capital (percentage) is then subtracted by the growth rate of the firm.  The problem is that this is in the denominator.  But this equation is not provided with a boundary condition beyond WACC cannot equal growth rate.   However, if you play with the math a little it is easy to see how this become silly as it can exponentially increase the value of the firm as WACC approaches growth rate.   

 

Yeah, I mean, Newton's laws aren't universally true, and that's acknowledged, but they form the basis of much of the study of physical science and engineering.

STEM people are fully capable of critical thinking in most cases, but for a variety of reasons, some related to education, they're susceptible to not critically analyzing certain things.

One thing that may be at work there is that they get so used to quantifying everything that politics, policy, and government seem impossibly squishy and impossible to quantify and analyze, so they dismiss.

  • Like 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, Zepol87 said:

Jesus Christ those are fucking huge people

The photo op to pretend they do any actual work is hilarious. Most of those farms are just owned by some dummy corp and the people that actually work it are tenants while fat fucks like those people sit around and collect.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted (edited)
On 4/22/2025 at 6:26 AM, Hank Kingsley said:

From my experience, doctors really know how to doctor and not much else. 

 

Ur mom says I’m good at other stuff 👉👈 uwu

Edited by Hank_Hill
  • Haha 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
38 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

Sounds like Mr Gabriel needs to quit watching Fox so he understands that his King placed tariffs on the world and not just China.  He should also learn how to google HTS codes.  Fucking idiot….cry more 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 5
Posted
22 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

🎵Freedom isn't free. No, there's a hefty fuckin' fee. 🎵

 

The tax man comes for me because I'm just a worker bee.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

As someone posted, small business owners are the petit bourgeouisie and make up the bulk of Trump supporters.  And the ones least able to withstand the tariffs.

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
  • Drool 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 4
Posted
As someone posted, small business owners are the petit bourgeouisie and make up the bulk of Trump supporters.  And the ones least able to withstand the tariffs.
 

giphy.gif
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 2
Posted
9 hours ago, GenXer said:

At long last, a charismatic spokesman emerges for that historically marginalized and oppressed group: cigar aficionado douches

Guess he’s at the groveling stage now, but on his knees, so almost in his crawl position. We may need somebody to break some glass. I don’t want to miss his crawl to dotard. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Posted

We can explain for days that a tariff is a tax on consumers and they won't believe us even when the fucking tax comes due.

I know they are a cult, but it is still disheartening and depressing to see it play out.

Posted
8 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

What if I don’t remember things being better under Trump?

I remember the Capitol being cleaned up, the economy in the trash, Trump attempting to remain in office after he lost, and his second impeachment trial as he was on his way out the door. By January 2021 it was a fucking hellscape. The good times are back!

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

Yeah Trump supporters on this site were trying to convince us all the first Trump term was a huge success despite it being a near catastrophe.

I guess they can be happy that this term he has achieved his goal of having a full on catastrophe.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
46 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

If things get really bad, they can live off each other's fat for months. 

IMG_4467.thumb.jpeg.e660ad132494ebfd6a91856f6c72f5ca.jpeg

i’m not really sure what she’s resisting, but I’m almost positive it’s not Little Debbie.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
22 hours ago, BrickHorn said:

The hard sciences and especially engineering (which treats the hard sciences as axiomatic) are objective. There is always a right answer. This can foster a bias for among engineers for black and white thinking.

Legal education emphasizes litigation. Students are trained to argue both sides of an issue. The goal is to identify the best points in favor of your (arbitrarily chosen) side, and to marshal them as persuasively as possible. This can foster cynicism among lawyers. Truth doesn’t exist as an objective reality so there is no point seeking the truth. Any one of many answers may be true, depending on how well you craft the argument for it. This is why I describe people like Ted Cruz as “lawyer smart.” He’s wicked smart and can advocate for any proposition, no matter how ludicrous or false. But if your goal is to understand the nature of reality, he’s a worthless resource despite his raw intelligence. 

 

Interesting. I'm not sure how the ability to argue both sides of an issue leads one to conclude there's no objective reality or truth. I don't think you can blame legal education or debate ability for people like Ted. At least not solely; it takes a village to create as big of a piece of shit as Ted. 

There are craven, nihilistic and opportunistic assholes in every profession - it's just more likely to be a beneficial trait for certain kinds of lawyers, including and especially ones who are US Senators. 

Posted
4 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

Lolz at thinking Trump gives a single solitary fuck about you or veterans. lt's crazy how much this guy has missed by obviously never consuming information outside of his propaganda bubble.
 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
49 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

IMG_4467.thumb.jpeg.e660ad132494ebfd6a91856f6c72f5ca.jpeg

i’m not really sure what she’s resisting, but I’m almost positive it’s not Little Debbie.

Insulin

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 6
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Bodhi said:

Insulin

If she resisted insulin, it would be a weight loss program albeit an unhealthy one.

type1diabeticproblems

I submit that she resists fasting

Edited by GenXer
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Gatorubet said:

IMG_4467.thumb.jpeg.e660ad132494ebfd6a91856f6c72f5ca.jpeg

i’m not really sure what she’s resisting, but I’m almost positive it’s not Little Debbie.

She's fighting for her life out here you insensitive sumbitch!

Screen-Shot-2020-08-02-at-12_51.32-AM.8444b7fc.webp.1909612ee1fd61c1d150f344350e82c6.webp

 

eta- wonder what size bro he wears?

Edited by The Royal We
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Valmy77 said:

We can explain for days that a tariff is a tax on consumers and they won't believe us even when the fucking tax comes due.

I know they are a cult, but it is still disheartening and depressing to see it play out.

 

bill-lumbergh-office-space.webp

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 6
Posted
On 4/23/2025 at 10:46 AM, BrickHorn said:

The hard sciences and especially engineering (which treats the hard sciences as axiomatic) are objective. There is always a right answer. This can foster a bias for among engineers for black and white thinking.

Legal education emphasizes litigation. Students are trained to argue both sides of an issue. The goal is to identify the best points in favor of your (arbitrarily chosen) side, and to marshal them as persuasively as possible. This can foster cynicism among lawyers. Truth doesn’t exist as an objective reality so there is no point seeking the truth. Any one of many answers may be true, depending on how well you craft the argument for it. This is why I describe people like Ted Cruz as “lawyer smart.” He’s wicked smart and can advocate for any proposition, no matter how ludicrous or false. But if your goal is to understand the nature of reality, he’s a worthless resource despite his raw intelligence. 

 

Excellent points.  Sometimes I think of legal education as the "ultimate liberal arts," but as you note, it can slide into deconstructivism.

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, The Royal We said:

She's fighting for her life out here you insensitive sumbbitch!

wonder what size bro he wears?

manzier

Edited by TexasEd
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 2


×
×
  • Create New...