|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Feb 18, 2020 16:54:04 GMT
I don’t see why not. In Burslem, they’ve been practicing reverse eugenics for generations. I can count the number of times I've been to Burslem on one hand. Six. |
|
|
|
Post by thequietman on Feb 18, 2020 16:57:05 GMT
There has been a sort of experiment been carried out here, on the Oatie, for the last few years. Certain characters seem to get bred who start off appearing to be ‘normal’ (although there has been a sub-branch in the direction of religion recently). They often expose themselves by becoming increasingly intolerant of other posters and their views as the months roll by until they can only find solace in talking among themselves. They usually end their existence by having some extremely insulting or abusive rants at other Oatcake posters, ultimately needing to be put out of their misery by Admin. Certain traits have been selectively ‘bred’ out of them however. An example is that there used to be an overuse of italic typefaces by them, but that trait has not been as noticeable in recent years. The ‘insulting, abusive rant’ characteristic does regularly resurface though, so there is clearly still work to be done in that area. Not so sure about Eugenics, yeokel, but perhaps a regular cull is in order to keep the population down.
The problem is in finding the little blighters. They have capabilities varying somewhere between neutrinos and odd socks. They'll surface for a brief while, disappear whilst others pop up unexpectedly, and in a puff of probablity theory they're suddenly back on the scene again. Do they hibernate? Or teleport?
If you could pin one of them down, maybe a series of constructive scientific tests would be in order to determine their nature/abilities.
Perhaps go so far as to breed out the "insulting, abusive rant" then they could even become fairly useful members of the community. Some of them are at least slightly amusing on occasions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Beloved Monkfish on Feb 18, 2020 18:14:41 GMT
I have nothing of value to add to this conversation, other than "Richard Dawkins is history's biggest wanker". Why do you say that? I've always found him to be the complete opposite. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2020 18:18:00 GMT
I have nothing of value to add to this conversation, other than "Richard Dawkins is history's biggest wanker". Why do you say that? I've always found him to be the complete opposite. Similar to Musk, feels he is far smarter than he is and pretends that science and ethics are completely separate. Says things that are unacceptable just to get reads/clicks/money. An awful human that tries to mask his vile views with fancy words and big scientific reports. |
|
|
|
Post by Beloved Monkfish on Feb 18, 2020 18:58:34 GMT
Why do you say that? I've always found him to be the complete opposite. Similar to Musk, feels he is far smarter than he is and pretends that science and ethics are completely separate. Says things that are unacceptable just to get reads/clicks/money. An awful human that tries to mask his vile views with fancy words and big scientific reports. I don't think much, if anything, he says is unacceptable. He's actually very liberal in his views. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2020 19:02:10 GMT
Similar to Musk, feels he is far smarter than he is and pretends that science and ethics are completely separate. Says things that are unacceptable just to get reads/clicks/money. An awful human that tries to mask his vile views with fancy words and big scientific reports. I don't think much, if anything, he says is unacceptable. He's actually very liberal in his views. The first post in this thread where he pretends he's being scientific about his eugenics fantasy is one. As are his assertions about religion. |
|
|
|
Post by Beloved Monkfish on Feb 18, 2020 19:17:46 GMT
I don't think much, if anything, he says is unacceptable. He's actually very liberal in his views. The first post in this thread where he pretends he's being scientific about his eugenics fantasy is one. As are his assertions about religion. But his very next tweet says that he finds it 'deplorable'. Surely he's just being quoted out of context here? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2020 19:32:48 GMT
The first post in this thread where he pretends he's being scientific about his eugenics fantasy is one. As are his assertions about religion. But his very next tweet says that he finds it 'deplorable'. Surely he's just being quoted out of context here? I'd see it more like his next tweet is trying to make what he's said seem okay. It's also scientifically false. |
|
|
|
Post by bathstoke on Feb 18, 2020 19:55:03 GMT
He does seem a bit of an opportunist self publicist...
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2020 23:46:50 GMT
It is now completely clear to me that he, as is proved by his cranial formation and his hair, descends from the Negroes who had joined Moses’ exodus from Egypt, assuming that his mother or grandmother on the paternal side had not interbred with a n—–. Now this union of Judaism and Germanism with a basic Negro substance must produce a peculiar product.
Karl Marx in a letter to Engels
|
|
