OT: Sens Lounge - Golf season edition

[5ive4Fighting]

I had to look up what the joke was. Personally I felt it was pretty mild.

it wasn’t just *a* joke though. Wikipedia describes it thusly:

”Between 2010 and 2013, Ward performed a comedy routine about Jérémy Gabriel, a young disabled singer with Treacher Collins syndrome. Ward mocked Gabriel's appearance, his illness and his abilities as a singer and joked about trying to kill him by drowning him. Gabriel was repeatedly bullied at school and became suicidal.”

 

[Qward]

Wasnt the joke that he was a make a wish kid that never died?

 

[5ive4Fighting]

Wasnt the joke that he was a make a wish kid that never died?

That was part of the routine, yes, but not all of it.

 

[Qward]

I hate remote work.

Sure its handy to roll out of bed then hop online, but I cant get anything done because no one is at their computer. If we were all at the office i could turn around and say "Hey, need your help with this."

 

[AchtzehnBaby]

I hate remote work.

Sure its handy to roll out of bed then hop online, but I cant get anything done because no one is at their computer. If we were all at the office i could turn around and say "Hey, need your help with this."

100%

I tihnk being in the office is more productive for me to get my shit done, as well as quick coordination.

Ban Teams meetings!

 

[Micklebot]

I hate remote work.

Sure its handy to roll out of bed then hop online, but I cant get anything done because no one is at their computer. If we were all at the office i could turn around and say "Hey, need your help with this."

My directorate had their most productive year in a long time when everyone was working from home before they started having mandatory office days, I actually like the hybrid model of going in a couple days and working from home the rest, imo it allows for the best of both worlds, at least in my line of work.

 

[Qward]

My directorate had their most productive year in a long time when everyone was working from home before they started having mandatory office days, I actually like the hybrid model of going in a couple days and working from home the rest, imo it allows for the best of both worlds, at least in my line of work.

I understand that every business will be different, but when we are a front facing service, it doesnt help when no one is in.

"Can someone come talk to this prospective student about courses?"

"sorry, no one is on campus today, can they email us?"

No wonder we need to rely on international students to keep the schools in the black.

 

[Beech]

I guess we already met the quota then ...

we did. The extraordinary series of events that led to life on earth, may mathematically exceed the number of planets. And so mathematically, humanoid development may be limited to us.

Other bodies do have life forms, they may be in different shapes and make up.. The carbon, oxygen, Nitrogen, etc. world we live in is unique to us.

Their individual evolution may or may not be ahead of us. And so, we may be way ahead of them.

All bodies around us (less the immediate planets) are light years away. We cannot travel at light speed. So, we will never see them, they will never see us.

WORM HOLES ARE MATHIMATICAL THEOREY, The SIZE OF A PIN HOLE and NEED EXOTIC MATTER AS FUEL. Forbidden by classical chemistry and exist only in theory.. NaCL is real. NaCL7 is not

ALL we have is each other folks.. be okay with it.

This planet is beautiful. It has everything we need. Humanity is beautiful. It is all we need. We are sentient, we feel, we sense, we care.

Love your neighbor (the un-married ones and try and do so one at a time). Love your world (stop poluting it). Love your existance (stop shortening your life)..

And if you want Aliens.. go down to any Canada/USA crossing. A few hundred a month come over.. If you head down to Texas, it is 80,000 a month.

Why do you need aliens from outer space? Those Aliens are not going to like hockey as much the ones at the Cornwall Bridge.

 

[Beech]

I mean, it has to be impossible that there is no other life out there.

you don't watch enough Sci-Fi horror movies!! Do you want some Alien to come by and eat you?

And unlike the 50 and 60's B movies, these Aliens are not some good looking blonde.. you know!!!

We are better off being alone in the Universe. We won't have to worry about anyone eating us. Except our own kind and that kind of eating is okay.

 

[Qward]

you don't watch enough Sci-Fi horror movies!! Do you want some Alien to come by and eat you?

And unlike the 50 and 60's B movies, these Aliens are not some good looking blonde.. you know!!!

We are better off being alone in the Universe. We won't have to worry about anyone eating us. Except our own kind and that kind of eating is okay.

What if they are benevolent and bring us technology that allows us to travel the stars? Fix our planet and Terraform Venus and Mars? Cure all diseases and stop aging?


I have asked this question to a couple people and its funny how the age determines the answer, but lets say two alien species appear on earth. One can cure your body so that it never ages, never fails and you are never sick again. Think Captain America in his prime forever. The other species offers cybernetics that can alter your body to do whatever you want. An eye that can zoom in 30 miles away, whatever you want.

Which do you choose?

 

[Beech]

What if they are benevolent and bring us technology that allows us to travel the stars? Fix our planet and Terraform Venus and Mars? Cure all diseases and stop aging?


I have asked this question to a couple people and its funny how the age determines the answer, but lets say two alien species appear on earth. One can cure your body so that it never ages, never fails and you are never sick again. Think Captain America in his prime forever. The other species offers cybernetics that can alter your body to do whatever you want. An eye that can zoom in 30 miles away, whatever you want.

Which do you choose?

Qward,

please watch an old episode of Star Trek "The Mark Of Gideon". In it is a very profound message.

On a planet where they had cured many over their ails and extended human life dramatically, overpopulation was a huge issue. They captured Kirk so that he may introduce human viruses to them and start killing them off.

in 1974 the earths population was 4 billion
It is 8 billion today 50 years

can you imagine 16 billion in 2083?

We loose 1/2-1% of plantable land, 1/2-1% of drinkable water a year. When will, the growth of population and decline in resources cross?

I am going to go religious on you Qward.. God help us. We will not need the Aliens to save us, but to kill us!!!!

The Utopia you describe will clash with the reality of life.

When we are 16 billion, we better find a way to make your average tomato be the size of a watremellon. It will need ot be that big to feed us.. Now you better hope that pharmaceuticals are equally advanced, so that we may be cured of teh cancer that that tomato will cause!!!

Lets leave the Aliens on their planet(s) and preoccupy ourselves with ours and see if we can reverse the population growth and the erosion of resources. they SHOULD EB MOVING IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS.

 

[Qward]

If we know for a fact that higher education, healthcare and quality of life leads to a decline in birthrates, what makes you think that if humanity discovered immortality or aliens gave it to us, that there would be a population growth?

I am a firm believer that if aliens did come to earth to help us, there would be a group of people that would never trust them and try to keep them off the planet. You sir would be in their ranks.

 

[2CHAINZ]

you don't watch enough Sci-Fi horror movies!! Do you want some Alien to come by and eat you?

And unlike the 50 and 60's B movies, these Aliens are not some good looking blonde.. you know!!!

We are better off being alone in the Universe. We won't have to worry about anyone eating us. Except our own kind and that kind of eating is okay.

On my list of irrational fears, being eaten by aliens doesn't even make the top 500

If we know for a fact that higher education, healthcare and quality of life leads to a decline in birthrates, what makes you think that if humanity discovered immortality or aliens gave it to us, that there would be a population growth?

I am a firm believer that if aliens did come to earth to help us, there would be a group of people that would never trust them and try to keep them off the planet. You sir would be in their ranks.

If Aliens have the technology to come here, they are already better than us and will instantly become my supreme leader and the only people I want to learn from, and I will sell out the whole human race to join them.

 

[Qward]

On my list of irrational fears, being eaten by aliens doesn't even make the top 500

If Aliens have the technology to come here, they are already better than us and will instantly become my supreme leader and the only people I want to learn from, and I will sell out the whole human race to join them.

We can have matching uniforms!

 

[Flamingo]

On my list of irrational fears, being eaten by aliens doesn't even make the top 500

If Aliens have the technology to come here, they are already better than us and will instantly become my supreme leader and the only people I want to learn from, and I will sell out the whole human race to join them.

You can't trust an alien to backcheck or block a shot. They probably have long, spindly legs and flamingo when the defenseman winds up for a slapper. Goalie's nightmare.

 

[Micklebot]

You can't trust an alien to backcheck or block a shot. They probably have long, spindly legs and flamingo when the defenseman winds up for a slapper. Goalie's nightmare.

This guy would make a good goalie I think

 

[Beech]

Hey @Flamingo,

you and a few others engaged in 10 pages of LGB "T" fights the weekend and I spent it working on my bike (It was like an episode of the Brady bunch.. what is Beech doing? He's working on his bike!!!! I kept expecting Marsha and Greig to pop up!).

I have several questions. And you and a few others may help..

1) I read a great deal and when an issue arises, I like to read up.. research done since about 2000, indicates;
The Silent generation (~1930-1945 births) are 2.5% LGBT associated
Baby boomer (1946-1963) are 5%
Gen X (1964-1979) are 10%
Gen Y or Millennials (1980-1995) are 20%
Gen Z (1995-2010) are 40%

How is this possible.. a doubling with every generation. Now if you had asked someone in 1950, they would have denied their sexuality.. Back then, not a good time to come out.. But since 2000????

Why would some 70 year old, in 2010. So, born in 1940 and is a silent generation give a f*** about coming out and not admit to being Gay? Why would a 70 year old today, born in 1953, so a mid table Baby boomer.. again, not give a f*** an not come out? why the sharp increase? Doubling every 15-16 years..

2) you and a few others argued about conditions driving Transition or a desire of people to transition from one gender to another (or is it one sex to another??) Conditions, syndrome are chemical changes in us. These are physical. We counter them by medication.. More chemicals.

so question
2 a) When Kennedy claimed that chemicals in the environment is making people gay.. why was he dismissed as a Kook?
2 b) if LGBT identification is doubling with each generation, does this not validate Kennedy's theory/claim?
2 c) since antibiotics can cure infections. Can chemicals not reverse LGBT association? Thus conversion therapy, which is outlawed , should in fact be permitted?

if LGBT, if transgenderism is a natural human phenomena, why the change in numbers? Why isn't the % fixed.. why change in time. It makes no sense.

If a person is born gay, then why the identified syndromes and why are these increasing?

If a person born in 1930 is 2.5% LGBT and a near 0% likely to transition. Why are these numbers today 20-30 times higher? The LGBT community has for decades argued "we are who we are. We are born this way". Okay, so why the increase, why the syndrome?

Black people are born as they are. Their numbers increase only when they mate.. We cannot add.. No baby born to non black parents can be black. Unless the mother has a lot of explaining to do.

If Kennedy is a Kook, then explanations are needed. If syndromes are real, then Kennedy is not a Kook.

 

[Flamingo]

Hey @Flamingo,

you and a few others engaged in 10 pages of LGB "T" fights the weekend and I spent it working on my bike (It was like an episode of the Brady bunch.. what is Beech doing? He's working on his bike!!!! I kept expecting Marsha and Greig to pop up!).

I have several questions. And you and a few others may help..

1) I read a great deal and when an issue arises, I like to read up.. research done since about 2000, indicates;
The Silent generation (~1930-1945 births) are 2.5% LGBT associated
Baby boomer (1946-1963) are 5%
Gen X (1964-1979) are 10%
Gen Y or Millennials (1980-1995) are 20%
Gen Z (1995-2010) are 40%

How is this possible.. a doubling with every generation. Now if you had asked someone in 1950, they would have denied their sexuality.. Back then, not a good time to come out.. But since 2000????

Why would some 70 year old, in 2010. So, born in 1940 and is a silent generation give a f*** about coming out and not admit to being Gay? Why would a 70 year old today, born in 1953, so a mid table Baby boomer.. again, not give a f*** an not come out? why the sharp increase? Doubling every 15-16 years..

2) you and a few others argued about conditions driving Transition or a desire of people to transition from one gender to another (or is it one sex to another??) Conditions, syndrome are chemical changes in us. These are physical. We counter them by medication.. More chemicals.

so question
2 a) When Kennedy claimed that chemicals in the environment is making people gay.. why was he dismissed as a Kook?
2 b) if LGBT identification is doubling with each generation, does this not validate Kennedy's theory/claim?
2 c) since antibiotics can cure infections. Can chemicals not reverse LGBT association? Thus conversion therapy, which is outlawed , should in fact be permitted?

if LGBT, if transgenderism is a natural human phenomena, why the change in numbers? Why isn't the % fixed.. why change in time. It makes no sense.

If a person is born gay, then why the identified syndromes and why are these increasing?

If a person born in 1930 is 2.5% LGBT and a near 0% likely to transition. Why are these numbers today 20-30 times higher? The LGBT community has for decades argued "we are who we are. We are born this way". Okay, so why the increase, why the syndrome?

Black people are born as they are. Their numbers increase only when they mate.. We cannot add.. No baby born to non black parents can be black. Unless the mother has a lot of explaining to do.

If Kennedy is a Kook, then explanations are needed. If syndromes are real, then Kennedy is not a Kook.

Hey, Beech. Sorry you're not featured in every episode, have your agent talk to the writers if you're not featured enough.

Very thoughtful questions, for which I don't have all the answers. (I'm skeptical of the quoted stats, will have to look into those out of personal interest.) Kennedy, btw, has proven to be a kook on subject matters that I can vet his proclamations on, so I'm highly skeptical of anything that comes out of his mouth.

In lieu of a protracted response, the quick analogy that can help explain rising rates of LGBTQ-identification has to do with the history of left-handedness. If you look at a histogram of the number of people that are left-handed, you'll see it start to rise just before the mid-20th century, when it started to become less demonized. (My mother-in-law would use her left hand in school, and the nuns tied her left hand down to force her to use her right.) It rose over a few decades to a relatively stable 10% or so in the late 20th century. A large portion of the increase in all LGBTQ people can be attributed to the same effect.

I'm off to fix a "bike". Chat later.

 

[Flamingo]

This guy would make a good goalie I think

We'll need to shrink the trapezoid.

 

[Here I Pageau Again]

I don't know too much about it, but my partner has several trans friends. I don't think its as simple as going to the doctor and asking for something to be cut off or sewn on. There is a process and a lengthy, costly one to make it all happen.

I think the vast majority of people who go through the procedure have spent years or decades deciding that it was the right move for them. And I think the vast majority of trans people never get cut. I'm not even sure what percentage go on hormone drugs. Id some male sexed person wants to wear makeup and wear pretty clothes . . . power to them. Doesn't impact me at all. I like pants personally, but I saw some dude wearing a sick kilt the other week and I might wanna give that a shot sometime.

Parents and institutions will always indoctrinate children with their own beliefs and ideals. Rightly or wrongly. It's up to the individual to overcome that and make up their own mind when it comes to whatever philosophical or political ideology they want to adopt.

I have a trans cousin. And she had to do years of therapy and consultations before even being allowed to go through the process of hormones.

I also have a child in school, and honestly, I don't find any pull for them to "choose". But they do teach acceptance.

 

[Micklebot]

Hey @Flamingo,

you and a few others engaged in 10 pages of LGB "T" fights the weekend and I spent it working on my bike (It was like an episode of the Brady bunch.. what is Beech doing? He's working on his bike!!!! I kept expecting Marsha and Greig to pop up!).

I have several questions. And you and a few others may help..

1) I read a great deal and when an issue arises, I like to read up.. research done since about 2000, indicates;
The Silent generation (~1930-1945 births) are 2.5% LGBT associated
Baby boomer (1946-1963) are 5%
Gen X (1964-1979) are 10%
Gen Y or Millennials (1980-1995) are 20%
Gen Z (1995-2010) are 40%

How is this possible.. a doubling with every generation. Now if you had asked someone in 1950, they would have denied their sexuality.. Back then, not a good time to come out.. But since 2000????

Why would some 70 year old, in 2010. So, born in 1940 and is a silent generation give a f*** about coming out and not admit to being Gay? Why would a 70 year old today, born in 1953, so a mid table Baby boomer.. again, not give a f*** an not come out? why the sharp increase? Doubling every 15-16 years..

2) you and a few others argued about conditions driving Transition or a desire of people to transition from one gender to another (or is it one sex to another??) Conditions, syndrome are chemical changes in us. These are physical. We counter them by medication.. More chemicals.

so question
2 a) When Kennedy claimed that chemicals in the environment is making people gay.. why was he dismissed as a Kook?
2 b) if LGBT identification is doubling with each generation, does this not validate Kennedy's theory/claim?
2 c) since antibiotics can cure infections. Can chemicals not reverse LGBT association? Thus conversion therapy, which is outlawed , should in fact be permitted?

if LGBT, if transgenderism is a natural human phenomena, why the change in numbers? Why isn't the % fixed.. why change in time. It makes no sense.

If a person is born gay, then why the identified syndromes and why are these increasing?

If a person born in 1930 is 2.5% LGBT and a near 0% likely to transition. Why are these numbers today 20-30 times higher? The LGBT community has for decades argued "we are who we are. We are born this way". Okay, so why the increase, why the syndrome?

Black people are born as they are. Their numbers increase only when they mate.. We cannot add.. No baby born to non black parents can be black. Unless the mother has a lot of explaining to do.

If Kennedy is a Kook, then explanations are needed. If syndromes are real, then Kennedy is not a Kook.

A pretty obvious variable is that society has over time become more accepting of the LGBT+ community and culture and as a result people are exposed to it more, see it as an option available to them open to coming out. Homesexuality was illegal in much of Canada until 1969. same sex marriage only became legal in 2005, there was far more stigma associated with being part of that community so ya, people were obviously going to be less likely to self identify, and more likely to repress any feelings they have.

I also have no idea where you're getting stats that say 40% of Gen Z are LGBT associated... that seems suspiciously high. I suspect the methodology might be a little off given recent ipsos study seems to suggest about half that for Gen z.

Kennedy was called a kook because there was no, and still isn't, any evidence of his claim,

 

[Masked]

In lieu of a protracted response, the quick analogy that can help explain rising rates of LGBTQ-identification has to do with the history of left-handedness. If you look at a histogram of the number of people that are left-handed, you'll see it start to rise just before the mid-20th century, when it started to become less demonized. (My mother-in-law would use her left hand in school, and the nuns tied her left hand down to force her to use her right.) It rose over a few decades to a relatively stable 10% or so in the late 20th century. A large portion of the increase in all LGBTQ people can be attributed to the same effect.

The left-handed analogy is a rather poor one. The rate of increase is not close to the same.

But lumping together the T with the LGB is rather silly when trying to explain trends because they're not close to being the same things. One is an innate preference that can easily be determined while the other is some nebulous thing that there's no proof for.

Assen na yo!

 

[Flamingo]

The left-handed analogy is a rather poor one. The rate of increase is not close to the same.

But lumping together the T with the LGB is rather silly when trying to explain trends because they're not close to being the same things. One is an innate preference that can easily be determined while the other is some nebulous thing that there's no proof for.

Assen na yo!

Speaking of things there's no proof for...

 

[Micklebot]

The left-handed analogy is a rather poor one. The rate of increase is not close to the same.

But lumping together the T with the LGB is rather silly when trying to explain trends because they're not close to being the same things. One is an innate preference that can easily be determined while the other is some nebulous thing that there's no proof for.

Assen na yo!

The left handed analogy is just to show that there are factors that repressed the occurrence which when removed, resulted in the number rising. The rate of increase isn't the relevant point.

 

[Micklebot]

Speaking of things there's no proof for...

in fact, there's some evidence to the contrary

Transgender brains are more like their desired gender from an early age

Brain activity and structure in transgender adolescents more closely resembles the typical activation patterns of their desired gender, according to new research. The findings suggest that differences in brain function may occur early in development and that brain imaging may be a useful tool...

www.sciencedaily.com