Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Travis Retriever

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15
No, seriously:
Basically, he uses the argument that "criminals don't obey the law!" that we've been using against gun control for decades now, only this time taking it against the "trans people in bathrooms" nonsense.  Something that could easily be applied to support the position of gender neutral multi-occupancy bathrooms. :)  I was legit surprised to see a voice of reason in the same guy made infamous for his "LEAVE BRITTNEY ALONE!" video about 10 years ago.


>Is a registered Dietician.
>Going on about GMOs and clean eating.
And people wonder why I don't take paper credentials seriously!
>Goes on about "good/bad fats."

By the way, if the slides don't advance for you, refresh the page then hit the button to advance them.  For me, I had to do it with every slide.  No, I don't know why the site is being a jerk like that.

Gonna have to link to this again, I see:

General Discussion / Instant Lose Arguments
« on: September 18, 2015, 03:46:33 AM »
I've been meaning to make this thread for a while now.  Basically, it's the thread where, if the person uses these arguments/phrases/fallacies, they can be said to have lost the debate, posted with the exceptions (if any exist;  Quoting them, or using them sarcastically/ironically/to be silly/in jest being sort of a given).

I'll start with the most obvious one:  Godwin's Law.  Whenever someone is compared to Hitler/the Nazis.  It's a cheap/weak cop out. And beyond cliche'ed.
The exception:  When the person who this is used against actually *is* a Nazi or is doing something that they were (e.g. being a nationalist + a socialist...hey, if the glove fits, eh?)

Though, nowadays it seems ISIS is the one used instead of the Nazis or Hitler...same idea.

Appeal to Slavery.  Explained here: including exceptions, so I won't go into detail here.

Any reference to "privilege" or "mansplaining" (in the SJW/feminist sense).  As soon as these terms are brought up, the person using them has admitted to losing.

Any kind of post-modernist bullshit.  An example: The later comments left by Barry here.
Because in addition to being a self detonating argument, it's also special pleading.  If "our perceptions of reality are subjective" or whatever, and language is arbitrary, then why is THAT assertion of reality/language not arbitrary and wrong?  Hell, I could just link to Stefan Molyneux's videos on Nihilism (and why it's bullshit) and knock off for lunch.  I would link to his videos on the "Salvation of Philosophy" where he made the case rather well on self detonating statements...but he made them private for some reason. >.<*

And related to that, any attempt to redefine words in this fashion.  Anarcho-Communists/Socialist/Syndicalists I find to be the worst with this.  I bring up that this or that is force and they say, "Well force is subjective/it varies per individual/libertarianism doesn't mean the same thing to each person (often while making an exception for THEIR meaning of it, natch.)
In fact, this is one of the few arguments where I just drop it.  This person is too far gone to have a productive conversation with.  I might be a confrontational dickhead, but even I have to draw the line somewhere.

"Free Market/Libertarian Fundie" "Free Market/Libertarian religion"
Translated to English: "I can't be bothered to take 10 minutes out of my miserable life to see what is actually being proposed and so I'll just whip out these terms in a weak attempt to sound smart."

"Common Sense!"
Is a fallacy for a damn good reason.  Also, just what does that even mean?  Like, seriously?  I wasn't aware we had a borg collective consciousness.  Now, if you want to be more specific and say something like.  Unless you're talking about a common language (e.g. English, Spanish, etc); or something of which the denial of which is a self detonating statement (see above).  Or something that, to deny it indicates belief in belief, I really don't see this as anything but a cop-out.  Of course, you'd just call it what it is in that case, so...point still stands. :3

I'm also half tempted to give any kind of "you're pathetic" kind of ad hominems as well.   You know, "LOL YOU'RE JUST A LOSER BASEMENT DWELLER MRA FAT VIRGIN LOSER RAPIST PEDOPHILE WITH A SMALL PENIS! YOUR MALE TEARS ARE DELICIOUS LAWL!"  and yes, this applies in the opposite direction too.  e.g. "mentally disabled landwhale, bossy, welfare queen, etc" yeah, you get the idea.  Just because it's so cliched.  Folks, if you're THAT lacking in original thought, I have no reason to even communicate with you.

And last but not least:  "YOU NEED TO BE OPEN MINDED!" when used as a fallacy:
Translation:  "The skeptic is closed minded for not unconditionally accepting what I vapidly assert as absolute truth, but I'm not a closed minded pillock for considering the possibility that I'm wrong."

Wow! That wasn't as...succinct as I thought it would be.  Oh well.

So what kind of instant lose arguments can you think of?


At the most basic level, even if we can get government out of the business of issuing marriage licenses, it still has to register these partnerships (and/or authorize the entities that perform them) before these unions can have any legal validity, just as it registers property and issues titles and deeds. Therefore, government would need to set rules and regulations as to what counts as a legitimate marriage "deed."'
'Furthermore, true privatization would require more than just getting the government out of the marriage licensing and registration business. It would mean giving communities the authority to write their own marriage rules and enforce them on couples.'

General Discussion / Something I've learned about the liberal mindset
« on: January 17, 2015, 01:45:24 PM »
You ever notice how they take attempts to keep them accountable as a personal attack?  Also, I find they use it as a personal attack too.  I've been told when I put two furry (and liberal natch) friends of mine in a tight/scary (I guess?) spot that, "well this is your fault/whose fault is that?"  It gives me a lot of insight into how these people think.  To them, accountability/fault isn't something real or objective.  It's just an attack phrase, no different than an exhausted parent saying to their teen rightly questioning their bogus beliefs, "So you just think you know everything!?"  It's like when the SJWs try to blame men for everything with the double standards (e.g. Woman is drunk? She was raped! Man was drunk? He was not raped!).  To them, being in control/having responsibility is just something they use against you because you're such a privileged shitlord and because they lack integrity themselves.  No wonder so many of them suck even worse than conservatives.  And as a guy who long hated conservatives even more than liberals, that's saying something.

It's no secret that I'm a furry at this point.  And, as I shared with Hawkeye, Professor Fennec and another furry friend (who shall remain nameless) earlier, it's about as libertarian friendly as the SJWs without even having the consistency, coherency & well adjustment (and that's saying something).  Now that I'm almost 27, my mind turns towards greener pastures.  So much so, while I would like to participate more in the fandom (going to fur cons, getting a fursuit, meeting with friends I have known online for almost 10 years in the fandom, etc), I wonder that is really optimal for my social & emotional development and maturity.  I'm going to be blunt:  while it is true that many furs aren't into it for the sexual aspect, for me, it's the only thing that has kept me in it for this long.  Beyond that, I find I don't have anything in common or anything to really gain (and I'm not talking money either) from something like 99.99% of furs.  I've always had a phobia of mascot costumes (including fursuits) irl even though that has subsided somewhat.  I don't draw.  I think animal rights/wildlife/exotic pet stuff can go fuck itself. I find furs in general are even worse than people in general when it comes to helping friends through a crisis (despite all the big talk about being a family, supportive, yada yada yada).  To the point where I can still recall having an even shittier internet and being on Second Life and it always seemed like all the fun stuff with furs happened when I wasn't around.  Every sodding time.  I could go on.  I'm looking for more, libertarian friendly communities, fandoms, etc.  And yes, the irony of the fact that most furs are socialists and also much richer/luckier and, dare I say, "privileged" than me, has not escaped me.  And again, not naming names because this is going into my furry feed as well and I do not feel like starting a pointless flame war with clueless twats.

I've got my eyes on two communities at this point I'm considering trying to get more into.  The bodybuilding/strength community and the programming/tech community.  I've been at least tangentially involved in the former, and am considering getting more into the latter (as in, like, at least getting my feet wet).  But I do have concerns.  For the bodybuilding/strength community there's a fair amount of organic/anti-GMO/all natural dogma.  Though I find some of the bigger figures in it like Alan Aragon, Armi Legge, etc tend to reject that crap and rightly so. :)  And as for the programming community?  Well, I've already explained the issue of loss of perspective for rank beginners in both fitness and computers, but there was another concern I shared with Shane via Skype:

"So I recall you saying programming is a meritocracy.  If so, then I have questions about the community of it.
What's this talk I hear about people who are too old being turned down?  I had an engineering professor who was turned down from a job at Google because he was past his teens and 20s.  I've seen articles talking about 'Well I've never seen a good programmer who has been at it for more than 30 years/was in his 50s and beyond.'  What's the story/deal with that?

Also, maybe it's just my own experience with the few programmers I know from the furry fandom, but I find because of so many people confusing 'open source' with 'communism' and 'Microsoft' with 'free market' that a few too many of them are also socialists as well. :\

A very libertarian friendly community I've found is, interestingly enough, the bodybuilding and strength communities.  Even among the furry fandom's bodybuilders, it seems most of them are, if not libertarian, at least libertarian friendly.  Which, for a group with as many socialists, leftists and SJWs as the furry fandom, makes it all the more impressive. O.o"

General Discussion / Gender gap?
« on: November 21, 2014, 06:45:09 PM »

General Discussion / I'm back! :D
« on: September 23, 2014, 12:55:57 PM »
Thanks to Shane for resetting my password.  Glad to have this account back. :)
For those who don't know what's going on or where I've been, these two journals explain everything in deep detail.

General Discussion / Guess who has a Facebook?
« on: September 17, 2014, 07:40:08 PM »

For trying to paint GamerGate as a conspiracy theory.
And for giving Zoe Quinn a platform to write her bullshit.

Needless to say I removed them from my bookmarks for this.

General Discussion / Cooking Adventures
« on: August 24, 2014, 04:42:40 PM »
More chicken! This time chicken thigh, instead of breast.  Now, obviously what I posted here would be met with a shrug if the hippies would just let us irradiate food.  But alas, good things are antithetical to the religion of statism--especially the sect of liberalism.

So I make some frozen chicken thighs.  They can be cooked frozen, so I cook them frozen in a pre-heated oven for 45 minutes on 325 degrees (F).  The chicken looks decent, though when I took a bite of one of them, I noticed a lot of red fluid.  Not sure if blood or myoglobin. Oh well, eat that bastard anyways.  I inform my mom, she notes it said it can be prepared frozen, but it said, "allow 10-15 minutes additional cook time." Derp.  Still, that is in the range, as it said to cook it for 30-40 minutes on 325 degrees.  Oh well.  I doubt It'll "make me sick."  Anyways, I figured I didn't want to put the others back in the oven, so I just shrugged and put them in the microwave for 2.5 minutes and 2 minutes (larger piece and smaller respectively).  And said if I feel sick later I can take a spoonful of baking soda to calm my stomach and get me to throw it up.

So any of you have any cooking tips, recipes, and experiments you want to share?

General Discussion / False DMCAs
« on: August 19, 2014, 05:04:18 PM »
Okay, so because I'm planning on mirroring a few videos (the one from Mundane Matt, and the other from InternetAristocrat) on the issue of Quinn and them.  Because chances are they will be targeted for bogus copyright claim via the DMCA, I want to ask how's the best way to deal with that if it happens (other than not having a DMCA law, natch).

General Discussion / Happy 4/20!
« on: April 20, 2014, 10:41:40 AM »
And happy Easter too. hahahahaha!

General Discussion / Twin Studies & Genetics & Habits Questions
« on: March 27, 2014, 02:40:17 PM »
So I heard Shane say they were bogus (or something?) but I also heard long ago that it was twin studies that debunked the "bad mothers cause autism!" melarky that lead to many parents hiding/institutionalizing their disabled children instead of seeking treatment for them.  So what's going on?

And related the fail quote here:  So does genetics cause autism?  Specifically the kind of genes that are environmentally activated (like how being obese reduces adiponectin gene expression)?  Or is it more...innate ones (e.g. X and Y chromosomes--last I checked, your biological sex is for life)?

What's more, I recall reading in Psychology Today way way WAY back when that they found that if a man smokes, it can effect their sperm--especially if they are older--to the point of increasing the chances of their child having autism.  Is there any truth to this?  Of course, the wagged their fingers in response to the findings (if they're even true) rather than pointing out that it would actually *increase* men's innate sexual value.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 15