Stop Changing the Argument.

[Dru]

?

[Off_White]

According to Hoyle, big housecat always trumps snaffle.

 

[Dru]

 

Where is assmonkey in this discussion - huh?

[ashw_justin]

 

yeah, but have you ever seen THIS before?

[iain]

[lancegranite]

 

[cracked]

[Dru]

A: Follow the pattern by letting the Pac-Man go to the left from the start, take the turns as indicated up to point A. Depending on how well you executed your cornering at point A, taking the sharp left towards the tunnel you will brush very closely with the ghosts which will come down from the top. Don't let this scare you off. Even slightly off the timing you will still race past untouched and head down towards point B

 

B: By this time the ghost will be hot on your tail but no close enough to bite yet. Good thing there's a power pill nearby. Keep going to the bottom of the lane and up towards the power pill. Eat it on the fly towards point C

 

C: When reaching C you will see that after having eaten the power pill the ghosts changed direction and are coming back up the lane from point B, right into your path. A bit of freestyling here, not indicated in the pattern and you can eat at least 3 of them, plus clean up the 2 remaining dots on the right of point C. The way you clean this may vary slightly depending on your timing and ghost positions at the time of eating the power pill. Usually there are at least 2, normally 3 ghosts coming back up the lane right into your path and you gobble them up one by one. A third one will be approaching from point D on the right. This usually means gobbling up the ones directly in your path, then heading towards the one on coming from the right, giving it what it deserves, heading back to clean up the two dots and resuming the path as indicated towards point D. This sounds complicated and is explained in many words but it's actually only a couple of jerks on the joystick and executed within 2 seconds.

 

D: When reaching point D and turning right the ghost which you had eaten previously are already back in the maze hot on your pursuit. The red ghost will be millimetres away from you, might even touch you slightly. Don't let it put you off, continue the pattern to the second power pill on the bottom right eat it and then either go an eat some blue ghosts or continue the pattern as indicated towards point E. In this level the ghosts are so slow that you can quite leisurely spend some time chasing 2 or 3 of them down before resuming the pattern.

[lancegranite]

[Alpinfox]

How to win an arguement

 

Simply follow these rules:

 

* Drink Liquor. (JD)

 

Suppose you're at a party and some hotshot intellectual is expounding on

the economy of Peru, a subject you know nothing about. If you're drinking

some health-fanatic drink like grapefruit juice, you'll hang back, afraid

to display your ignorance, while the hotshot enthralls your date. But if

you drink several large shots of Jack Daniels, you'll discover you have

STRONG VIEWS about the Peruvian economy. You'll be a WEALTH of information.

You'll argue forcefully, offering searing insights and possibly upsetting

furniture. People will be impressed. Some may leave the room.

 

* Make things up.

 

Suppose, in the Peruvian economy argument, you are trying to prove Peruvians

are underpaid, a position you base solely on the fact that YOU are

underpaid, and you're damned if you're going to let a bunch of Peruvians be

better off. DON'T say: "I think Peruvians are underpaid." Say: "The

average Peruvian's salary in 1981 dollars adjusted for the revised tax base

is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before the mean gross poverty

level."

 

NOTE: Always make up exact figures.

 

If an opponent asks you where you got your information, make THAT up, too.

Say: "This information comes from Dr. Hovel T. Moon's study for the Buford

Commission published May 9, 1982. Didn't you read it?" Say this in the same

tone of voice you would use to say "You left your soiled underwear in my

bath house."

 

* Use meaningless but weightly-sounding words and phrases.

 

Memorize this list:

 

Let me put it this way

In terms of

Vis-a-vis

Per se

As it were

Qua

So to speak

well, any-who

 

You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as "Q.E.D.,"

"e.g.," and "i.e." These are all short for "I speak Latin, and you

do not."

 

Here's how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say:

 

"Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don't

have enough money."

 

You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you say:

"Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis Peruvians qua

Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to speak, but they

do not have enough money per se, as it were. Q.E.D."

 

Only a fool would challenge that statement.

 

* Use snappy and irrelevant comebacks.

 

You need an arsenal of all-purpose irrelevent phrases to fire back at your

opponents when they make valid points. The best are:

 

You're begging the question.

You're being defensive.

Don't compare apples and oranges.

What are your parameters?

 

This last one is especially valuable. Nobody, other than mathematicians,

has the vaguest idea what "parameters" means.

 

Here's how to use your comebacks:

 

You say As Abraham Lincoln said in 1873...

Your opponents says Lincoln died in 1865.

You say You're begging the question.

 

OR

 

You say Liberians, like most Asians...

Your opponents says Liberia is in Africa.

You say You're being defensive.

 

 

* Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler.

 

This is your heavy artillery, for when your opponent is obviously right and

you are spectacularly wrong. Bring Hitler up subtly. Say: "That sounds

suspiciously like something Adolf Hitler might say" or "You certainly do

remind me of Adolf Hitler."

 

You now know how to out-argue anybody. Do not try to pull any of this on

people who generally carry weapons.

[Dru]

Avoid lying to people who know your "baseline behavior"

 

Many years of research have proven one thing: it's incredibly difficult to know if someone is lying unless you have prior exposure to his or her baseline behavior. What is a baseline? It's the back of the box on a tennis court. What is baseline behavior? It is how you act when you're not lying. You know, the way you normally act, the way you talk and behave when you're having a casual conversation in which no attempt at deception is taking place.

 

The greater the number of interactions that the target of the lie (we'll use a "he" in this example) has had with you, the more familiar he will be with your baseline behavior. Because he knows how you usually act, he'll press you on the veracity of your statements, and be more likely ultimately to figure out that you lied. This is why the old maxim: "a liar never looks you straight in the eye" is bull. If the person doesn't usually look people in the eye as part of his normal non-lying behavior, he very may well look you in the eye when he IS lying. (This would be a change from his baseline behavior.) Lots of other little clues that all of the fogies down at Shady Pines have provided (e.g., liars talk fast, their eyes dart around, or clear their throats a lot) are also pretty much useless for this reason; if the old folks really knew how to spot a liar, they wouldn't get ripped off in those crazy phone scams all the time. It doesn't matter what someone does when (s)he lies, it only matters if such behavior is different from how she or he normally acts.

 

It's easier to lie to people you don't care about

 

There is another important justification for having as little contact with the target as possible: it is easier to lie to people about whom you don't give a damn. To understand why, consider this: many studies have shown that it's relatively easy to lie to someone over the phone because the sense of personal connection is very small. You can't see them; they can't see you. As a result, you are less likely to feel guilty and, therefore, give visual clues that you may be deviating from your baseline behavior. If you were closer to the person physically, you would have a greater personal connection. Consequently, you would be more likely to "leak" (reveal in some way that you are engaging in deceptive behavior).

 

The same reasoning applies to being close to a person psychologically. Think about it. If you try to lie to your girlfriend or boyfriend, there are numerous psychological pressures (you'll think about what happens if you get caught, feel guilty about lying to someone you care about, etc.), and it will be more difficult to focus on mimicking your baseline behavior. Trust us; you'll probably leak all over the place (in all senses of the word). This phenomenon is often called "liar's remorse," and it's usually what people are talking about when they say a liar "wanted to get caught."

 

So how does knowing this aid your ability to lie well? The answer is this: if you're going to lie, try to lie to someone who doesn't know you very well. They will be less familiar with your baseline behavior, and you will be less like to care about them. In the event that you need to lie to a close friend, family member, or other loved one, try this trick: lie to someone who doesn't know you as well, and have them pass the message along. If that's not possible, you must truly master everything we tell you from here on in.

[snoboy]

A man walks into an office.

 

 

Man: Good morning, I'd like to have an argument, please.

Receptionist: Certainly, sir. Have you been here before?

Man: No, this is my first time.

Receptionist: I see, well we'll see who's free at the moment.

Mr. Bakely's free, but he's a little bit concilliatory. No.

Try Mr. Barnhart, room 12.

Man: Thank you.

 

 

He enters room 12.

 

 

Angry man: WHADDAYOU WANT?

Man: Well, Well, I was told outside that...

Angry man: DON'T GIVE ME THAT, YOU SNOTTY-FACED EVIL PAN OF DROPPING!

Man: What?

A: SHUT YOUR FESTERING GOB, YOU TIT! YOUR TYPE MAKES ME PUKE! YOU VACUOUS

STUFFY-NOSED MALODOROUS PERVERT!!!

M: Yes, but I came here for an argument!!

A: OH! Oh! I'm sorry! This is abuse!

M: Oh! Oh I see!

A: Aha! No, you want room 12A, next door.

M: Oh...Sorry...

A: Not at all!

A: (under his breath) stupid git.

 

 

The man goes into room 12A. Another man is sitting behind a desk.

 

 

Man: Is this the right room for an argument?

Other Man:(pause) I've told you once.

Man: No you haven't!

Other Man: Yes I have.

M: When?

O: Just now.

M: No you didn't!

O: Yes I did!

M: You didn't!

O: I did!

M: You didn't!

O: I'm telling you, I did!

M: You didn't!

O: Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?

M: Ah! (taking out his wallet and paying) Just the five minutes.

O: Just the five minutes. Thank you.

O: Anyway, I did.

M: You most certainly did not!

O: Now let's get one thing perfectly clear: I most definitely told you!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh no you didn't!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: No you DIDN'T!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: No you DIDN'T!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: No you DIDN'T!

O: Oh yes I did!

M: Oh look, this isn't an argument!

 

 

(pause)

 

 

O: Yes it is!

M: No it isn't!

 

 

(pause)

 

 

M: It's just contradiction!

O: No it isn't!

M: It IS!

O: It is NOT!

M: You just contradicted me!

O: No I didn't!

M: You DID!

O: No no no!

M: You did just then!

O: Nonsense!

M: (exasperated) Oh, this is futile!!

(pause)

O: No it isn't!

M: Yes it is!

(pause)

M: I came here for a good argument!

O: AH, no you didn't, you came here for an argument!

M: An argument isn't just contradiction.

O: Well! it CAN be!

M: No it can't!

M: An argument is a connected series of statement intended to establish a

proposition.

O: No it isn't!

M: Yes it is! 'tisn't just contradiction.

O: Look, if I *argue* with you, I must take up a contrary position!

M: Yes but it isn't just saying "no it isn't".

O: Yes it is!

M: No it isn't!

O: Yes it is!

M: No it isn't!

O: Yes it is!

M: No it ISN'T! Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just

the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.

O: It is NOT!

M: It is!

O: Not at all!

M: It is!

 

 

The Arguer hits a bell on his desk and stops.

 

 

O: Thank you, that's it.

M: (stunned) What?

 

 

O: That's it. Good morning.

M: But I was just getting interested!

O: I'm sorry, the five minutes is up.

M: That was never five minutes!!

O: I'm afraid it was.

M: (leading on) No it wasn't.....

 

 

O: I'm sorry, I'm not allowed to argue any more.

M: WHAT??

O: If you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five

minutes.

M: But that was never five minutes just now!

Oh Come on!

Oh this is...

This is ridiculous!

O: I told you...

I told you, I'm not allowed to argue unless you PAY!

M: Oh all right. (takes out his wallet and pays again.) There you are.

O: Thank you.

M: (clears throat) Well...

O: Well WHAT?

M: That was never five minutes just now.

O: I told you, I'm not allowed to argue unless you've paid!

M: Well I just paid!

O: No you didn't!

M: I DID!!!

O: YOU didn't!

M: I DID!!!

O: YOU didn't!

M: I DID!!!

O: YOU didn't!

M: I DID!!!

O: YOU didn't!

M: I-dbct-fd-tq! I don't want to argue about it!

O: Well I'm very sorry but you didn't pay!

M: Ah hah! Well if I didn't pay, why are you arguing??? Ah HAAAAAAHHH!

Gotcha!

O: No you haven't!

M: Yes I have!

If you're arguing, I must have paid.

O: Not necessarily.

I *could* be arguing in my spare time.

[Alpinfox]

Snoboy, you must have swastikas on your underoos, because vis-a-vis your last comment, that sounds like something ADOLF HITLER might say within the parameters of the paradigm of the arguement, so to speak.

[Dru]

Bud: Hey kid! (Honk) Hey! Hey kid! Hey! Hey! Are you hard of hearing?

 

Otto: What do you want?

 

Bud: You want to make ten bucks?

 

Otto: Fuck you, queer.(Shove off, pervert)

 

Bud: Now waita minute wait a minute kid you got the wrong idea. Look my old lady is real sick and I got to get her to the hospital, okay?

 

Otto: So what? Take her there.

 

Bud: I can't. I can't leave her car in this bad area. Look I need some helpful soul to drive it for me, okay? She's pregnant. She's with twins. She could drop at any time. All right?

 

Otto: Well, uh, how much are you going to give me?

 

Bud: Fifteen bucks.

 

Otto: No. Won't do it for less than twenty.

 

Bud: Twenty-five. Follow me in my old lady's car. It’s right here. okay?

 

Otto: All right... Where's, uh, where's your old lady at?

 

Bud: Never mind about that. Right now we need to get both of my cars out of this bad area, allright? Come on.

 

Otto gets in the car, a white 4 door Cutlass sedan.

 

from the apartment: (baby crying) Papa! (?) aqui. un gringo (en la calle con su coche)

 

[Looking through the window of the apartment, the sedan becomes a 2 door coupe.]

 

Bud: Let's go.

 

Car owner, grabbing Otto: (Vete la chingada!) (followed by several more exclamations in Spanish)

 

Bud and Otto drive down freeway, Chevy Malibu swerves in front of them. It is moving right across the lanes but has the left blinker on.

[pope]

Do you think that the Cadillac "Escalade" says "bad motherfucker" enough to keep those Canadian backwoods hooligans from breaking in?

 

Was that from the Department of Redundancy Department?

[glacier]

My favorite bumpersticker is 'I <heart> Schnauzers.

[tomtom]

Windows XP Upgrade is an oxymoron.

[fenderfour]

Thou hast been owned

[whirlwind]

is it considered drinking 'n' driveing if the engine is off and your pushing your truck with a beer in ur hand and 4 empties in the bed of the truck?

i hope not but if it is i think i can out run em...

i guess we'll see

[Dru]

Infant rat heads grafted onto adults' thighs

 

 

17:10 03 December 02

 

NewScientist.com news service

 

Infant rats are being decapitated and their heads grafted onto the thighs of adults by researchers in Japan.

 

If kept cool while the blood flow is stopped, a transplanted brain can develop as normal for at least three weeks, and the mouth of the head will move, as if it is trying to drink milk, the team reports.

 

The grafted heads could be "excellent models" for investigating brain function in human babies after periods of no blood flow, known as ischemia, they claim.

 

"Our main purpose is to investigate how the transplanted brain can develop and maintain function after prolonged total brain ischemia," researcher Nobufumi Kawai, at the Jichi Medical School in Tochigi, told New Scientist. "And we tried to investigate the effect of lowering the temperature of the brain during the grafting."

 

But other researchers are far from convinced by the grisly technique. Denis Azzopardi of Imperial College London, UK, who investigates brain injury in newborn babies, says many well-characterised animal models of studying brain ischemia already exist.

 

 

Public concern

 

 

"These are well established models for testing different degrees of ischemia and potential treatments. And there are plenty of studies showing experimentally that cooling during ischemia can be neuroprotective," Azzopardi says. "So I'm not sure that this complicated technique offers an advantage in any way - I can't see it being widely used."

 

Vivisection that provides no obvious research benefit and involves clear animal suffering will only cause public concern, adds a spokeswoman for the UK's Research Defence Society, which advocates responsible animal experimentation.

 

"Regulations in the UK are much stricter than in Japan. If expert opinion says there are better or other ways of doing an experiment that would cause less animal suffering, it wouldn't be licensed," she told New Scientist.

 

 

Temperature sensitive

 

 

The Japanese team removed heads from 12-day-old rats and waited 90 minutes before connecting them to the blood supply in the thigh of an adult rat recipient. "The grafted brain appeared to develop normally provided the operation was done at the low temperature of 19°C," says Kawai. But in operations conducted at 29°C, still well below body temperature, the brain was severely damaged.

[catbirdseat]

[Dru]

Whomsoever gets the last post wins.

[chirp]

No pain...no gain.

[Dru]

Just like a girl.

[chirp]

.