i'm essentially certain at this point that i will be overdosing on aspirin at the windsor city health centre on the afternoon of february 17th. i do not expect the doctor i am going to see to take me seriously, and, as such, i expect this to be a necessary step. in order to pre-empt any malpractice by the staff there, and ensure they are held liable for criminal negligence should it occur, i would like to clarify a few facts about what is going to happen before it happens.

1) i will not be armed with any sort of weapon, and do not plan on harming anybody except for myself. should reports surface that i was armed, these reports should be understood as false.
2) i will not consume any aspirin before i enter the center.
3) i will inform medical professionals that i am about to consume the aspirin before i consume it.

2&3 together will provide ample time for an ambulance to arrive. should the ambulance not arrive, or should it arrive too late, the only conclusion will be criminal negligence, and i will expect that the relevant staff be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

4) my goals tomorrow are not to kill myself, but merely to draw attention to the high level of incompetency in the psychiatrists that i'm dealing with. i've spoken to several, and they all believe i am bluffing when i claim i am suicidal. but, i am not bluffing. the fact that i am not bluffing is the key point i need to get across. if there are professional consequences for gross incompetence in misdiagnosis, i believe they are appropriately enforced, in context. but the important point is that i'm able to get to a doctor that understands that i am not bluffing.

abstractly, i am reversing the work or die ultimatum that the market places on all of us and directing it at the doctors. they have the choice to diagnose or be held liable for the consequences. and, i'm a smart, and creative person - i can ensure that there are dramatic consequences.

the severity of these stunts will increase until the papers are filled out. i will broadcast certain aspects of the stunt before they occur, but not so much as would prevent them.

the one thing i want to make clear is that i have no intention of harming anybody else directly, through physical means.

however, the threat to myself will increase with each stunt as the necessity of diagnosis becomes increasingly clear and the liability for the doctors becomes increasingly dramatic.

i want to be clear that the only acceptable outcomes from my perspective are getting the papers signed or committing suicide; there is no third option.

so, this is all entirely preventable, if the right choice is made to fill out the papers.

the title is indeed some kind of weird civil war era troll baiting.

"yankees try confederate food"

who the fuck talks like that...

i can't believe he's still doing this skit...

triumph may very well be the most successful sock puppet comedian in american history.

i think you need to be careful with this animal.

he was obviously expecting you to throw him meat, and turned his back on you when you didn't. intentional or not, that's teasing it, and teasing a tiger isn't a good idea. it demonstrated it's displeasure.

the big area may seem like a good idea, but you kind of can't have it both ways with a "pet" tiger. you either need to leave it in your house and treat it like a dog, or you need to leave it in an enclosure and treat it like a wild animal. the reason is that the tiger is spending it's "alone time" being a tiger, rather than being a dog or a pet, which enforces various instinctual tiger habits. like eating humans, for example, which happen to be a part of a tiger's natural diet. there's an evolutionary relationship, there; a predator-prey relationship. don't forget that. but it's not really a consequence of a tiger being "wild" - the same thing happens when you leave a dog outside all of the time.

it's easy to think "a tiger should have a big area". and maybe that's true. but, a tiger in a big area stops being a pet and starts being a tiger. what's important is that that shift in mindset is not just understood abstractly but enforced concretely.

it seems like you want to put a lot of effort into this thing. and it's easy to anthropomorphize. but i see a lot of warning signs in this video, and need to request extreme caution.

as i grew older, i'm consistently amazed at how far-reaching the satire on the simpsons truly was.

that's dr. hibbert, right there. clear as day.

it's easy to ridicule them as backwards savages or whatever, but they've got somewhat of a point. they've been eating this stuff for centuries, but it just appears now? see, there's an answer to that or there isn't; i know records in the region are likely to be scant, but there must be a way to demonstrate that transmitting disease from "bush meat" is not new.

further, there's a history of industry acting like that. example: when the auto industry shut down public transit in detroit and toronto so that people would have to buy cars. and oil. you'd have to expect industry to try and demonize the black market any way it can. waving your hands at it doesn't negate the fundamental truth.

worse, we bloody well know that whites have done some pretty terrible things regarding vaccines and viruses, much of it aimed at blacks. every once in a while, you continue to hear stories about how involuntary sterilization still happens throughout the united states and also in western canada. that's just a surface observation on a global eugenics system that can get - and has gotten - downright gruesome.

so, it's one thing to point out that they're jumping to conclusions - and it's completely correct to point it out. but, you can't write their suspicions off. every single thing i heard in this video is an entirely plausible hypothesis. and, in the end, we may very well learn that there's a level of truth in some of it.

tigers can't pass the mirror test, which means that if you raise a young tiger with dogs then it will grow up thinking that it's a dog. worse, the dogs can't pass the mirror test either, so they think the tiger is just another dog. what you're seeing is hierarchical pack behaviour; none of the animals understand the danger they're in. which means there isn't really a danger.

it's interesting to note the practice of treeing cougars, who are thought to be the cheetah's closest relative. the logic in the video seems reasonable, and it would likely hold if you're talking about a wild cheetah vs. your cute golden retriever. but, you don't have to get as big and violent as a pit bull to instill a legitimate level of fear in most species of wild cats.

i think that variation is consequently the important factor. if 100 controlled experiments were carried out, i'd guess the cheetah would win something like 70 of them. but, i think there are some pit bulls that could pull it off.

i would expect that this dog will eventually maul it's owner for the purposes of eating it. that's like owning a pet tiger, basically.

it's horrific police state violence and everything, but you have to admit the guy deserves a darwin award.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-0uqFTBclo

we don't understand the causes and consequently can't make predictions; you can't take this seriously. however, the exceedingly weak maximum we're falling from right now does suggest that we can expect another five or six years of cold weather in the northern hemisphere. that's a long way from predicting an ice age. but it's absolutely an annoyance that the mainstream models need to come to terms with, and this is consequently worth listening to - even with that caveat. it's not as simple as to say more sun = more hot (otherwise mercury would be hotter than venus, right...), even though it comes off that way if you're standing in eastern north america, but the reality is that the strength of the sun seems to have a historical effect on the path the jetstream takes over the great lakes, and that that is and will continue to be a far more dominant weather occurrence than any kind of radiative process.......

if the sun rebounds in the next cycle, the result could be massive and almost sudden warning in a way that could be flat out catastrophic. and, while it didn't happen, i was hoping that the little bump at the maximum was going to be enough to save us from the worst of it for at least this winter.

but, for now, it seems like the medium term forecast in eastern north america is going to be very cold for the next several years. as the rest of the world warms...

as others have pointed out, the elamites had nothing to do with the kurds. there's almost two thousand years of history separating the decline of the elamites (and rise of the persians) and the first mention of the kurds in the arab invasions.

the kurds were probably merely displaced persians, fleeing the arab invasion. they have no history before that point in time.

the elamites would have been the westward extent of the indus valley civilization, rather than a euphrates-tigris one. the elamites are also your "black persians", but they would have been of indian rather than african background.

Murşil Manavis
İranians are Elamite origin.Kurds are Assyrian origin.Stop lying!

Murşil Manavis
+Pedram Mir What is real?Actually situation more complicated.Answers to your questions is perhaps in this! 

bznn
+Murşil Manavis kurds are not assyrian in origin. you stop lying .

Murşil Manavis
+bznn oh please! Kurds are Ancient Assyrian and Aramaic may be a hybrid. http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=19564#.U9Nn8vl_uT8

deathtokoals
+Murşil Manavis kurds are definitely not assyrians. there's actually a very sad history here, in kurdish responsibility for the assyrian genocide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assyrian_genocide

the kurds are not an ancient people. the name translates to something like "wanderers" and only first appears in the arab invasions. they were probably persian refugees from that period, who were kicked out of iraq by colonizing arabs.

bznn
+deathtokoalas kurds dosen't have a history. historian are trying to find but. I will gurantee you its useless. you cannot trace back their ancestors. they might of been here before anyone. point is you wil never. and I say NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER find their linage. PERIOD. Stop looking !!

"they were probably persian refugees from that period, who were kicked out of iraq by colonizing arabs."

"Proabably" is not enough. I tell you this as facts...you have better chance finding aliens, than find where they come from.

they have no relation dna to elam, medes or persian empire.

Murşil Manavis
Please read carefully my link!

bznn
+Murşil Manavis you have no real proof like many historians. just  thoeries. I have better argument. I'm gonna say kurds are gentically enginered by aliens. you can prove me wrong? NO. becuase you don't know where kurds come from. its just thoeries you have found. someone who has no history and have no forfathers meaning no direct dna. meaning my argument will stand for 1000 years or more. becasue you will never find their linage lol.

they are untraceable like the perfect murder !

Murşil Manavis
+bznn dude this is science.

deathtokoalas
well, it's more than probably. it's extremely likely. arabs move in, kick the persian-speaking people out, leaving them as "tent dwellers" to their north.

what is absolutely clear is that they are a product of the islamic invasion of sassanid persia. there isn't really another way to make sense of that fact.

the dna has to be interpreted very carefully, given that their ethnogenesis appears to be around the year 800 CE. with a date that late, in that area of the world, it's more or less useless in coming to much of any kind of conclusion other than that they're from that area of the world. there are exceptions like jews and assyrians, based on religion, but kurds don't fit the exclusionary exception. so, it's not going to help much.

i mean, what your link says is that there exists a genetic substratum under the iranian invasion. that doesn't say anything of origins. it just points out that when the iranians got there, they had sex with the people who already lived there.

bznn
+deathtokoalas they have no relation to persians from culture to language.  medes, elam and the perisan empire is as far as it goes for iranic and perisans.

Murşil Manavis
In addition, the Iranians are not the true Aryan. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707641081

deathtokoalas
+bznn well, they rather clearly do. and the elamites were not persians..

bznn
the oldest cave in the kurdish area is 60000 BC.

deathtokoalas 
+Murşil Manavis i don't know what "true aryan" means, but i stopped reading that article when i noticed it cited the charlatan colin renfrew.

well, ok, i read it...

i'd be hesitant to connect the movement of dravidian into india via farming. i'm sure there were population movements with the spread of farming, and that looks like the right direction. but that seems too late for dravidian. renfrew's influence here has not been positive.

when you said "true aryan", and i saw renfrew, i was expecting the usual noah's ark nonsense, but, thankfully, this article actually reads sforza correctly and upholds gimbutas on the matter, creating the proper invasion route around the caspian.

so, i don't know what you're talking about, what "true aryan" means or why you cited the article in support of that. the article upholds the standard kurgan dispersal theory, while being a little less informed about the age of dravidian.

bznn
+deathtokoalas it means pure race. by that meaning langauge and culture. not not skinn color. by that defination, they had to be green or purple. cuz black,yellow, brown and white is taken lol.

deathtokoalas
+bznn i think most experts would agree that the closest thing to a pure "indo-european" culture were the balts, pre-christianization. latvians, lithuanians.

the article says nothing about anything of the sort. it just speaks of the well understood indo-iranian invasions from the caspian, presents genetic evidence of a movement of people from iran to india during the neolithic and entirely speciously connects that to a movement of dravidian languages.

bznn
+deathtokoalas the cloest they have got to their origin is the zagros mountain. this is the earliest foundings of kurds.

deathtokoalas
+bznn that is correct. but it's a little silly to notice that the kurds showed up exactly when the arabs invaded, note the large population displacements that occurred and then not draw conclusions.

bznn
just their luck ? :P

Elam and assyrians and came first . to interrupt their way of living.

invasions by the armies of every nation that ever acquired fame and name in the Eastern world’s history-Assyrian, Parthian, Greek, Roman, Persian, the Arabs under Muhammad, and the Mongols- the fine stability of the race stand out, for among all the people of these lands they, the Kurds, alone have withstood every army, and retained pure their language and blood, and claim with a pride of race to which none can grudge admiration, that they are the pure Aryan, the “holders of the hills and possessors of the tongue.”

they have been the first (indigious) in zagros and antollia. both were parts of mesopotamia.

deathtokoalas
the indigenous peoples of these regions are not iranian. the iranians are invaders from the north. in very ancient times, this area would have been a conflict zone between insular caucasus mountain peoples to the north and more warlike semites to the south.

bznn
+deathtokoalas Again kurds are not Iranian. Get that through your head lol!

Later, the out-of-Medes theory of the Kurds was made popular worldwide by the Russian Orientalist Vladimir Fedorovich Minorsky (1877-1966).

Kurds are traditionally regarded as Iranians and of Iranian origin, and therefore as Indo-Europeans, mainly, because they speak Iranian. This hypothesis is largely based on linguistic considerations and was predominantly developed by linguists. In contrast to such believes, newest DNA-research of advanced Human Anthropology indicates, that in earliest traceable origins, forefathers of Kurds were obviously descendants of indigenous (first) Neolithic Northern Fertile Crescent aborigines, geographically mainly from outside and northwest of what is Iran of today in Near East and Eurasia. Oldest ancestral forefathers of Kurds were millennia later linguistically Iranianized in several waves by militarily organized elites of (R1a1) immigrants from Central Asia. These new findings lead to the understanding, that neither were aborigine Northern Fertile Crescent Eurasian Kurds and ancient Old-Iranian speaker (R1a1) immigrants from Asia one and the same people, nor represent the later, R1a1 dominated migrating early Old-Iranian-speaker elites from Asia, oldest traceable ancestors of Kurds. Rather, constitute both historically completely different populations and layers of Kurdish forefathers, each with own distinct genetic, ethnical, linguistic and cultural backgrounds. These new insights indicate first inter-disciplinary findings in co-op- eration with two international leading experts in their disciplines, Iranologist Gernot L. Windfuhr, Ann Arbor, and DNA Genealogist Anatole A. Klyosov, Boston, USA.

http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperDownload.aspx?paperID=19564

deathtokoalas
+bznn and, as i've pointed out, the article is incoherent in terms of defining ethnicity.

the kurds speak an iranian language, follow iranian customs and identify as an iranian people. the iranian government views them as displaced persians. the genetic evidence indicates that there's been some mixing, but it doesn't say anything else. it's not correct to suggest that the people that lived in the zagros mountains before the islamic invasion were kurds, whether one can construct some kind of genetic continuity or not.

stated a second time: what that article states is that invading iranians had sex with the indigenous people of the region (semites) and the result is what we today call kurds.

but, putting aside the fact that you're not understanding the article, the genetic argument is simply weak in terms of defining culture.

genetically, palestinians are not arabs, but jews. that is, they are the arabized descendants of the indigenous jewish inhabitants of the region, who have intermixed with arab colonizers. but, nobody is going to look at their dna and say "you are not arabs".

one could also look at spain and france. genetically, the people of the region are mostly celts. but, they are the cultural descendants of romans. nobody is going to argue that they are celts, not romans.

bznn
+deathtokoalas Exactly, We have no prove what they were before. But they were Iraniazed. Thats why they are related now.

Here is the story that goes...

They were from southside of Mesopotamia and got invaded by the assyrians from north. They fleed to Zagros mountian. There they got invaded and mixed up with the Medes. There the Medes invaded Assyria and conquered them.

deathtokoalas
+bznn i don't think there's any evidence of such a thing. we can tell stories all day, but it's not worthwhile.

nor is there any evidence of a kurdish people through the lengthy roman-persian wars. if they existed in antiquity, we would expect them to exist in roman records. they simply don't.

the kurdish dialect is also relatively recent.

perhaps it's as simple as it appears: perhaps there were no kurds before the arabs created them through displacement.

bznn
+deathtokoalas have it ever occured to you that he kurds legacy got wiped out of history? like ISIS are doing right now with babel and assyrians?

deathtokoalas 
+bznn this is not a grounded argument.

but, i'm arguing that the kurds were probably the iranians (or iranized mesopotamians) that occupied the area now called iraq before they were driven out by arab settlers. that wasn't documented well; very little of the consequences of the population movements that accompanied the spread of islam were documented well, because the colonizers simply didn't care. they didn't do body counts...

so, sort of. but i don't want to get stuck in the conspiracy theory view of history, here.

bznn
+deathtokoalas Most of the kurdish legacy wiped out this is no consipracy. Or you could say the real iranians who lives in Iran today are not the real persians. The ones who lived in Iran and Turkey are Imposters. The owner of that land belonged to Kurds. Just like the real Europeans were black not white like you.  You are an imposter and cave dweller lol.

deathtokoalas
+bznn ...or maybe the history doesn't exist because the kurds are not an ancient people, but one arising from events in the historical period.

i think we've hit an impasse, here.

bznn
+deathtokoalas And what do you define as ancient?

deathtokoalas
+bznn do you recognize the foreign policy implications of the view that iran "belongs to the kurds"?

i'm a canadian of mixed ancestry, part of it localized to the middle east and almost none of it from western europe (my winter whiteness is actually mostly finnish/uralic - north asian - and i get downright brown in the summer.). i wouldn't know what a real european is or identify with being one. but i do recognize that the inhabitants of much (not all) of europe before the kurgan invasions where likely mostly of olive complexion.

bznn
+deathtokoalas  Europeans are liars and thives. They have way of stealing history. Did you know bethoven was black. Thoven Bey was his real name. Socrates was black also. The Jews in the freaking Bible was black. The Americans and the Canadians are Europeans in origin. European also the reason why Kurds have no land. Read about world war 1. All you can do is steal history. Egyptian also black. Did you know you are subhuman?  you are a pale face devil, and you will pay for your ancestors did.  the fact is you have no history of your own.  you are a cave bitch commimg from the mount caucus. you are a Causcasian. A so called White.  an imposter of land. Your real home is back in the cave. Read your history. Canada was never the land of your caucus ancestors. So technically you have no right living there. you also didn't answer my question earlier . You said Kurds are not ancient people. So I am asking you again. WHAT DO YOU DEFINE AS ACIENT PEOPLE ?? And  I don't even know if you are a girl. And that person in the pic looks like a tranny lol !

deathtokoalas
+bznn *plonk*

horse dreamer
No the Elamites are Ahwaz nothing to do with Kurds or iranies

deathtokoalas
it's not clear, really, exactly where they came from or exactly what they looked like, but elam seems to have been some kind of meeting point between the pre-semite inhabitants of mesopotamia (sumerians) and the indigenous inhabitants of india (dravidians). it makes more sense to me to think that they probable expanded from the harappans, rather than the other way around, given the dates involved and the directions of influence; the sumerians seem to have come down from the caucasus mountains, whereas the elamites seem to have more in common with ancient india. but, barring some remarkable discovery, this is unlikely to ever really truly be settled..

horse dreamer
Maybe, but the Ahwaz I spoke to said they are, they also speak like iraqies, there accent, there just arabozied and yeah there Semitic, some of them are still sabian mandians and speak the old language, same thing in Iraq

deathtokoalas
one of the very few things we can be certain about the elamites is that they were neither semitic nor iranian, which is partly why they're so hard to place in any kind of system. we have elamite scripts, and they don't fit into any language group very well, but they seem to have enough similarity to tamil that some fringe theories have developed. the dravidian connection really seems almost inescapable, through a crude process of elimination.

but, to me, the stronger arguments have to do with the extensive trading networks that existed between elam and india, indicating that they seem to have seen themselves as culturally similar. we're talking about cultural trading - pottery, for example. when you see that, it usually indicates a cultural continuity. further, we're pretty sure that the elamites were probably mostly dark skinned (as in indian dark skinned), whereas we have enough evidence in the form of old statues to conclude that the sumerians looked vaguely like russians. they were white.

the agricultural theory i referenced above wants to argue that the spread of farming brought the movement of peoples in an eastward direction, but the ethnic and economic relationships i pointed out are not at all consistent with this idea. if the movement of farming spread any kind of language or ethnicity from west to east during the neolithic, that movement had clearly been undone by the rise of urbanization. renfrew is basically pushing a noah's ark story, and it simply doesn't add up with the facts.

if your friends look like arabized persians, they probably are. if they look more like balochis or pakistanis or tamils, they may have a deeper genetic history in the region.

horse dreamer
As u said we don't know that much, maybe Iran should let us go and study them in Ahwaz, they don't look Persians, they look like iraqies a lot , some blush call them selves Arabs lol

deathtokoalas
yeah. well, there was certainly a lot of arab immigration into persia after about the year 700 ce. but, these people would be as far removed (probably more removed...) from elam as english settlers in north america are from the indigenous population. we're talking at least a thousand years before present for the arab migration - and well over a thousand years before that since the fall of elam. and, of course, there's a very large iranian migration in between these things.

you're really simply not going to find elamites or descendants of elamites in today's world. the closest thing is probably the balochis, who today speak an iranian language.

Azari Parsian 
Todays persians in Iran are descendants of Elamites and Northern Mesopotamians. Barely any of them have Iranian ancestry.

deathtokoalas
there are plenty of ethnic iranians left in iran, which is seen mostly in their lighter coloured skin, which is very prevalent, but the most recent population movement into the region was turkic and mongolian. large parts of iran, today, historical and modern, are primarily turkic.

we can't really define what an elamite is, but they probably looked like modern baluchis and what is left of them is probably there.

there were never a significant amount of "mesopotamians" in iran, and there is virtually no trace of them there, today.

to get your head around the turkicization of historical iran (which includes most of central asia), you have to understand just how brutal the mongolian invasions truly were.

entire cities were razed to the ground. millions of people were slaughtered. there was mass depopulation. this was followed by mass rapes by the thousands, which repopulated the cities. it was a real ethnic replacement in just about the most brutal terms imaginable.

over time, the turks adopted the iranian language and customs. and, you'll see plenty of iranian markers in the modern population.

but, a broad genetic survey of iran identifies a very large percentage of the population as genetic descendants of turks - regardless of the language they speak.

Murşil Manavis 
+deathtokoalas this was done genetic studies. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707643523

Azari Parsian 
+Murşil Manavis I highly doubt the elamites were indian origin. You have evidence showing this?

Murşil Manavis 
+Azari Parsian http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707641081

Azari Parsian 
+Murşil Manavis Interesting i found this too http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/elamites.html

deathtokoalas 
+Murşil Manavis i still don't like the direction of dravidian suggested in both these articles (i think it had to come from the east to the west much later than the neolithic diffusion), but what i'm saying is consistent with that study. mtdna is female. so, it traces the flow of genetic information from mother to daughter, down many generations.

the turkicization of iran would be something that happened in the y-dna, on the male side.

the historical records tell us that modern iran was repopulated by turkish men raping iranian women. what you're seeing in this study is what you would expect to see if that history was accurate, at least on the female side.

Murşil Manavis 
reasonable but no references.

Azari Parsian 
+Murşil Manavis although, i do agree the Dravidian languages originated in the zagros mountains.

deathtokoalas
+Murşil Manavis i find the historical sources more convincing, and will tend to reject the dna studies when they don't conform to the history. it's easy to measure dna, but it's much harder to make sense of it.

i mean, i'm not suggesting that iran is entirely turkish (and turk, itself, is hard to define in terms of y dna, as it's a mix itself - you've got r, q and others in there, because central asia was a place where nomads met and intermingled, rather than a place where lineages settled and branched out. the best guess is probably that what we call turks were mostly the result of white men intermingling with asian women, creating white y dna attached to asian features). you're going to find substantial indigenous iranian (r - but not discernible from the turkish r) and arab (j) in there, too. and, it's all easy enough to understand. but, i hope i've gotten across that the diversity in iran really creates a hell of a problem in trying to disentangle it.

you can really work this out well enough using phenotypes. historical iranians and sumerians are pasty, european white. semitic people are darker skinned. we don't know for sure what elamites looked like, but we think they probably looked like indians. turkish people are light but not white and have vaguely asian features - likely as a result of them being a mix of white and asian peoples. because they tend to carry r, it was probably mostly male white intermixing with female asian that spawned turkic.

white iranians exist, but are a minority. most have light but not quite white skin and vaguely eastern features, indicating very strong turkish and arabic admixture. but you can't truly separate one r from the other. the asian features increase in numbers as one moves eastward and northwards from tehran and into central asia - where r (iranian/turkic) remains dominant and j (arab) begins to disappear.

Murşil Manavis 
+deathtokoalas but most of Anatolian Turks are indigenous people of Anatolia. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166218X08003661 and Iranians are hybrid. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0080673

Azari Parsian 
+Murşil Manavis also same with most persians of iran,

deathtokoalas 
+Murşil Manavis i agree that a good guess is that most anatolian turks are basically greeks and most iranians are hybrids, but what i'm saying is that it's very hard to correlate the genetic markers well.

to summarize what i said in the last post is this:

- there were plenty of arabs (j) in iran before the mongol invasions. but, the majority white iranians would have no doubt been r.

- when the turks invaded, they brought a bunch of stuff - c, q, n. but, they were also primarily r, because they were themselves a mix of iranians and mongolians.

so, there was an iranian r before the mongols. then, the mongols brought an iranian r. the dna cannot tell you who was there before the slaughter and who wasn't because it's the same y-dna haplotype.

you'd have to find some other marker, like a marker connected with "asian eyes". but, we don't do these studies because we like studies related to direct paternal (y-dna) or maternal (mtdna) descent, because we think this is more useful.

until we do these other studies, we're really better off relying on (1) the written history we have and (2) the phenotypes we can observe that uphold that history.

btw, that study on iran is again on mtdna. you really need to find one for y-dna to see what i'm saying.

the achaemenids would have actually been much lighter-skinned than most of the current iranian population, even keeping in mind that the current iranian population is actually much lighter-skinned than is presented in popular media.

 
darius would have looked sort of russian.

i was a civ player when i was young, and they were usually pretty good at this. there's a fringe group of people that want to argue that the persians were from east africa, but it's a ridiculous argument [and that's coming from somebody that readily accepts arguments of a black egypt, or at least a black egypt up until about 1000 bce]. ridiculous with a capital r. on the same level as lizard people. zero chance of accuracy. there were likely some coloured people of roughly "indian" descent in the areas under persian rule, and the persians were in control of pockets of both india and africa so there would have been coloured people in the empire in a variety of contexts. but the persians' closest living relatives would be the slavic groups of eastern europe. and their ruling elite would have been white. not arab olive. not turkic tanned. pasty fucking white.

so, you have to wonder if it's some kind of joke. black aryans. right...

are there any rap songs about successful rappers investing some of their profits into their communities?

if so, what are they?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AhXSoKa8xw

so, to get your head around canadian real estate, you have to understand that it's not a free market. canada did not go through the round of deregulation that the united states went through in the 80s and 90s. there's actually somewhat of a government regulatory monopoly at the top of things called the canada mortgage and housing corporation that can do things like eat debt.

so, you get people yelling "it's a bubble! it's going to burst!". well, sure - if you're using the rules of the american housing market, yeah. no other outcome is possible. but, it's not those set of rules that are in play.

the reality is that canada can let this bubble grow just about as big as it wants and let it sit there for just about as long as it wants it to sit there for.

there are some market pressures, related to an aging population trying to sell forty years of inflation to a generation that has seen forty years of decreases in real wages. that's going to force a correction, but it's not a consequence of bad lending.

so, there are some problems with the canadian real estate market. but, if you're going to react, it's necessary to make sure that your research is conducted by canadians that understand the canadian system rather than americans making assumptions that nothing changes when you cross the border.

to state what he's saying in one line, it's merely this:

housing inflation has risen faster than real wages (which have actually decreased). that's unsustainable, and must eventually correct itself. wages aren't going up, so, prices must come down.

solidarity!

get used to this, there's more of it coming. you can't build an economy on subsistence wages, and then blame people for not being astronauts when they revolt.

"Simon's there and he's putting the boot in, and not terribly hard, but he's going down and Simon can move on. Now Vivian's there. Vivian is there and waiting for a chance. Here he comes, oh a piledriver, a real piledriver"

i'm again astounded by how clueless these journalists are.

i think that people have to understand just how vulnerable an independent kurdistan would be, with or without us backing. it serves us interests to have this kind of wildcard it can throw around that doesn't have to abide by international law, or fit any kind of regional standards; the kurds have legitimate sovereignty issues, but they are essentially a western backed terrorist group, in the context of the politics of the region. an independent kurdistan would find itself in a war with both iran and turkey (as well as iraq and syria) and possibly actually manage to unite the four countries around the euphrates into a common goal of kurdish containment and dismantlement.

it consequently serves kurdish interests to be very cautious and careful about how it seeks autonomy, with a federal arrangement clearly being in it's best interests. likewise, washington cannot allow an independent kurdistan because it would create tremendous frictions amongst it's allies and unite them with it's enemies. nor do the saudis want a partition; it's clear they want the whole thing, and to stamp out the minorities they don't like in the process - not partition, but genocide. the only actor that would want a partition is russia, as it would catalyze the collapse of the existing alignment.

yet, these journalists continue to push the point. it's a non-starter. it's not happening.

untitled (slow mix)

the slow mix is up...

this is a slower, "ambient" version of the track. mix finalized on feb 10, 2015. 

https://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/untitled-slow-mix


the final mix is next, followed by the guitar concerto, which is starting to gain some more shape.

i was hoping to have this done by the end of december. it's currently seeming more like an end of february thing :/. but it takes how long it takes...

suggestions to save on heating

jessica
hi.

i want to be clear that these are ideas to save on heating, not requests for maintenance. i've been here long enough to draw some conclusions.

the way i see it is that the basement is designed in such a way that it doesn't really matter what the source of the heating is, it's going to be high. about 70% of the basement is unheated, and the insulation is incomplete. so, there's going to be tremendous heat loss unless the unit is better insulated. i'm not talking about the windows, i'm just talking about the walls bordering the unheated areas. if it's -10 outside the walls, and there's cracks under the walls, that's just going to leak and leak and leak, whether you put a furnace in here or not.

so, insulating the walls (and the place where the walls hit the floors) would be the first thing i'd do if i wanted to cut heating costs down here.

second, i might want to look at putting stops on the doors, as well. for the back door, it's just constant leakage. again: if it's -10 outside the door, and there's a 2 inch crack under the door, changing the source of the heating isn't really going to be the factor that makes the big difference in costs. it's blocking the drafts. with the front door, there's nothing to separate the cold coming in through the entrance, so it's going to suck the heat out as well. it's not realistic to put an extra door in, but putting a seal on the front door would probably also be huge.

third, it might be worth your while to run a vent from the furnace into the currently unheated part of the basement. that would both reduce costs fighting the draft into here and reduce costs fighting the draft into upstairs, and any stacking moving the air up [which i'm sure must exist].

i've had to turn the heat up a little, as the air in the unfinished part of the basement has plummeted. if the insulation through the walls was better, i'd be able to keep it at a lower level...

the landlord
Thanks, I am concerned as you are....I will considered your suggestions and will act on these as soon as I can with timing and financial recourses. Right now I am  not able to act on doors until spring. I want to put new doors. Just keep warm the best you can. I will talk to you when I come by.

jessica
as i'm sure you know, it's going to get freezing this week.

i've crammed some towels in the cracks around the doors. it's obviously not as good as a rubber seal (and that back door is especially, like, *not* meant to keep out drafts), but i think it's at least a good experiment to try to see if it really helps or not. logic suggests that if you can feel a draft through a 2 inch crack up two sides of the door then obstructing it any way at all should make at least some difference. that said, i don't think towels are exactly the best at trapping heat, either. but i'll let you know if it actually keeps the heat in a little better; if it makes no difference, that indicates it's really dominantly a wall issue.

basically, i think this place was constructed with the assumption that the basement would be heated. just consider the walk back to the fuse box. that's a perfect sink for cold air, right. the only way it makes any sense to put a half-insulated wall right there with a bedroom on the other side is if it's taken for granted that the heat is on in the whole complex. otherwise, it's just a structural nightmare: the unit is heating a cold air sink.

so, let's hope the towels make a noticeable difference and the doors can consequently provide a noticeable decrease in cost.

(pause)

hi.

i don't want to bug you about this too much, i just want to update on the effects after blocking the doors and turning the heat up a little.

it seems to hold the heat in pretty well just about everywhere except the second bedroom, so i think putting weather stripping around those doors is a very good idea.

the second room has ceramic baseboards, and the first room has wood baseboards. the walls are about the same temperature in both rooms, so i think the walls are probably ok but that the baseboards in the second room are leaking. now, i don't want to jump to conclusions about conductivity because i think the situation is complicated by various factors, i just want to point out three observations:

1) the wood baseboards are closer to the ground and forming a better seal. so, it seems like they're doing what they're supposed to, while the ceramic ones are not.
2) the ceramic baseboards in that room are much, much colder than they are around the foundation. that is, the ceramic baseboards in the second bedroom are very cold whereas the ceramic baseboards in the kitchen are not so cold. so, there's exposure, there.
3) if you look around the basement, you'll notice that most of the walls have these black, plastic stoppers around them that form a seal to the ground. that black plastic is missing on that wall. it's just paint.

i'd have to *guess* that the cold ceramic is a symptom rather than a cause, and that the causes of the draft are the missing plastic around the outside and the incomplete seal on the inside.

it's of course going to be a lot easier to run some plastic around the wall on the outside than to replace the baseboards, so i'm just pointing that out as a possible approach.

other than that, i think the weatherstripping on the doors is the key good idea, and that the walls themselves are actually not particularly drafty, excepting the cold air moving in under the walls on the far side.

concerned about lack of response

To: infocchc <infocchc@cmha-wecb.on.ca>

jessica
hello.

i need a way to get access to the windsor city health center to confirm an appointment on feb 17th. i do not have access to a phone. can you confirm that i can get access through this address, or deny it?

the only other way i could contact the center is to walk, but it is a lengthy walk and it is very cold out.

cmha
You had an appointment Fe b 2nd but it was a snow day centre was closed. No future appointment was made with the nurse. You have an appointment With the doctor on the 17th of Feb.

jessica
thank you, that's what i needed confirmed. i didn't know if the centre was closed (although guessed it was) and didn't want you to think that being unable to make it on the 2nd cancelled the appointment on the 17th.

i don't have a phone number, but i have a voice mail box. i just don't carry the number around with me and never remember it. contacting me can either be done via this email address or via this voice box, which sends a text message to this email address.

as astounded as i am (as a canadian) by the failure of boston's city services to plow the roads, there's actually an opportunity to organize, here. if the city doesn't want to do what the city is getting paid by taxes to do, perhaps the citizens ought to organize their own councils to do so, and then refuse to pay taxes to a council that is clearly not using them properly...

parking places on roads are obviously not personal property, and can't be treated as such without violence erupting. the source of this violence is the idea, and there's no end but violence should the idea not be abandoned.

however, a council of citizens could do things like purchase a small snowblower and decide to take turns in plowing the roads.

i don't get it. doesn't the city of chicago have a tax-funded snow removal service? up in canada, where it snows a lot every year, this isn't an issue because the city has plows that shovel the streets. if somebody tried to "save their spot" with a chair, they'd probably get fined for littering and thoroughly laughed at by all. and this hustler would probably get hit by a minivan....

"There is no dark side of the moon, really. Matter of fact it's all dark. The only thing that makes it look light is the sun."

i've really had enough of cherry and his totally left-wing remarks, too. he's just a front for those peta environmentalists. what a socialist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYXmg_CnaPQ

i've actually never heard this before...

....and, wow, is it bad. i mean, on the one hand, it's obviously aged terribly. but, it's not the problem. i don't have memories attached to it other than thinking it was boneheaded and noticing that the people that liked it were the kinds of douchey thugs that threatened to hurt me (and tried a few times) and repeated grades because they'd rather do drugs and flail aimlessly against an authority they couldn't define than do homework, so i can't say much about what it was like to be a 14 year-old dealing with puberty by projecting an exaggerated sense of douchey manliness or what it's like to look back and scratch your head about it. i can't talk about that. but the way it's aged really exposes it as remarkably simplistic and just....bad. i mean, it makes skrillex sound like a fucking musical genius in comparison. no wonder all the bullies loved it.

you're better off checking out tool, kids.

i specifically remember this one kid that used to try and throw me into the locker every day between classes. his tshirts included rage, slayer and megadeth - and his walkman (at volumes that people across the room could hear, while the teacher was lecturing) jumped back and forth pretty regularly between the "rap rock" and the "speed metal". i couldn't identify much of it. any of it, really. rumour had it that he was on his third try at grade ten.

so, he'd wait until i left the class, follow me around the hall, take a run at me and knock me into the locker. i was the kind of kid that had a knapsack full of textbooks and binders, so it kind of hurt.

i've long guessed that he probably had a crush on me....

now, i could take a hit or two, so long as it didn't become regular. but it did become regular. so, i waited around the corner for him to take a run at me, tripped him and pushed him head first down about 20 flights of stairs. result: broken arm. he got off easy, really.

now, here's the most remarkable part of the story: rather than explain what actually happened (and i was a punk kid myself, although i focused more on what could have been called 'direct action' - vandalizing mascots, that kind of thing), he told the principal he fell down the stairs. why? well, he came up to me in the quad a few days later and promised he'd leave me alone so long as i never told anybody that i pushed him down the stairs. apparently, the story of me - me, specifically, the skinny little faggy punk kid - managing to break his arm was too embarrassing for him to handle. his ego and ability to project himself as a dominant male was the most important thing.

so, that's what i remember about rage against the machine, going to high school in the 90s.

KGB Ill
rage againt the machine told those kids to bully you

deathtokoalas
of course, it's more that it was the other way around. but, i think the attitudes expressed were reinforcing.

Levi
As an avid Tool fan whom was also one of these generalized youth you seem to have some pent up hostility towards I can say your probably lucky they didn't listen to Tool during that period of their lives. They obviously didn't have the mental fortitude or cognitive grace to understand the messages in their music. Pairing that with Tool would be a deadly combination, considering the anger and sexual violence found throughout Opiate and Undertow.

We all grow up with a different kind of fire. Some of us get forged strong as steel while the rest get caught up in an ego they can't control and burn up into nothing. The thing that binds us together is the rage. We can feel it on the inside that something is wrong and we want to fight it, too correct it. We look inside and see it's us. We are the problem. In our short sighted youthful ignorance we disbelieved the nature of change and became the hate and authority we so passionately fought against. We lashed out at this and hurt people around us. But while we tore down others we were tearing down ourselves, silently screaming for a helping hand. All we ever wanted was to feel like we belonged. RATM showed a generation of youth to take these feelings and try to produce a positive change by giving us a target other than ourselves. We took the weapon of our rage and all together we let the angst rain down against an unjust, hypocritical system. In that glory we found our purpose, our oneness, ourselves.

I can't apologize for the things others have been done to you. But I will spend a lifetime paying penance for my own ignorance. People like you weren't the enemy. It was our own insidious insecurities. But connecting this music to the unbridled actions of teenagers is a bit short sighted. I can only guess to their motives, but I would have to say that probably more than one of those people that hurt you either had a crush on you, or maybe at least one was gay and stuck in the delicate ballet of self loathing and denial. This isn't a justification, merely an explanation. You don't have to forgive them. But it seems your harboring a feeling that is best let go, a feeling that restricts the way you view this music and tints ever so slightly the way you view the world.

deathtokoalas
i want to be clear that i'm not blaming the band, so much as i'm pointing out what i actually saw around me.

see, it's one thing to say what you're saying. but i think a moment's reflection - as adults - should make it clear that nobody is going to attract the kind of fan base they wanted to attract with the music rage was making. i think that refused experienced the same basic point of failure a few years later. i mean, in hindsight, it's not hard to extrapolate the kind of teenager that is going to be attracted to fuck you, i won't do what you tell me - which is a very different teenager than is going to be attracted to learn to swim. you don't get the smart kids with that kind of messaging. they're going to roll their eyes at it.

the tool fans were markedly different. they were a type of hippie, really.

i got into tool a little after aenima, undertow didn't really hook me, and enjoyed both aenima and lateralus but was never really a diehard fan. really, i just respected and enjoyed the songwriting and musicianship. a passive fan. the type of music i really related to and identified with was more along the lines of nine inch nails or the smashing pumpkins. but i had a friend that was a diehard tool fan and did connect to it on an identifying level; in fact, it was largely the basis of the friendship, as i was the only person around that he knew that was into tool, at least a little. the way he explained it to me was that tool was about abolishing aggression, which set it apart from stuff like rage or korn which was about releasing it. rage makes you want to break stuff. tool makes you want to break the cycle that makes you want to break stuff.

based on what i saw around me, i'd say he was on to something.

again: i don't want to finger rage as the cause of anything. but, i think they acted as a catalyst to a set of problems they didn't foresee, and that future political-minded rock bands ought to learn something from it.

Levi
I'm sorry if I indeed came off as shunning you for targeting the band, as this was not my intention. I just feel that your selling their message short due to your experiences with a small demographic of people. Saying RATM was a "lowbrow" instigator of nothing more than anti-authoritarian behavior is like saying Aenima is about the west coast and Hollywood, or Pushit is about an abusive relationship; it's a generalization that harms the inherent message these artists were trying to convey.

Where Tool succeeded and RATM failed was the ability to show growth beyond their original message. Tool started out exactly like RATM, railing against what they perceived as an unjust authority and an over compromising, slowly homogenizing world. But while Tool was tempered through their endeavors, showing personal growth as artists and moving from one experience to the next, RATM embraced the very passionate fire that eventually consumed them. I think its important to remember RATM was about personal strength, and the ability and responsibility to change what may seem like an impossibility. After all "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me..." isn't so different from "Think for yourself, question authority."

In the closing of this I would like to thank you for choosing to have an enlightened, civilized conversation in this bastion of childish name calling and music minded sycophant elitists. I hope you'll remember that you just had this with a RATM fan ;P

RR racer
I'm sorry you had to deal with pieces of shit like that when you were growing up. Those people are pathetic, especially since they would rather fail than succeed just because they have a warped idea of what it means to rage against the machine. It's all about EDUCATING oneself so as to NOT be taken advantage of by the powers that be, and of course... KNOW YOUR ENEMY! This music is especially powerful for those who understand the nuances of government corruption. Put those memories you have of douchebags from your past aside and give this music another chance. If you think that our government has gotten too big, too corrupt and too manipulative, then you will like it!

GANASHER
jesus never have i met someone who has talked down so hard on a band before XD

deathtokoalas
the point i'm trying to make is that this approach was unsuccessful, and people looking to raise awareness in the future should be aware of this and tweak their approach..

funny that embryonic isn't up in full...

i'm not exactly a flaming lips fan. i think the inconsistency of the discography is a pretty widely held view. even the records that are nearly universally acclaimed tend to hit me the wrong way; i'll acknowledge that most of the discs are well produced, even if the writing often veers into bad taste, but even the best of it just doesn't really push my "excite" buttons. embryonic, though, is a different story. i'd argue that it really towers above the rest of the discography, and even that it's one of the best records released so far this century.

i suppose that, musically, it's significantly darker than anything else they've done, which intersects with the often dire subject matter. it really hit me at exactly the right point, as i was coming to a set of conclusions regarding what i now refer to as "the futility of existence". i've more or less been an atheist since i was born, and have never really wavered in it. but it's a step in abstraction and maturity to actually come to terms with it, with the finiteness of existence and what the best way to approach it is.

unfortunately, the dominant philosophical approach to this over the last century or two has been to try and neutralize it. to make up stories in order to find ways to hold to a set of ideals that are more or less delusions. the left and right take different approaches, but they agree on this fundamental point: the masses cannot understand that existence is meaningless. they must be convinced otherwise, or society will collapse.

but, this is not sustainable. the truth cannot be unlearned. we need revolutionary politics that break through this line of abstraction and come out to a maturation point on the other side of it. the world we live in must fall; it's a question of understanding how to get beyond this. the longer we lie to ourselves in pretending that we can uphold the delusions, the more disastrous the fall will be in the end.

it took something like three months from the launch of the beta of this thing for the future of virtual reality to be reduced to porn.

and it was the most predictable thing possible.

what bugs me about this is how oversimplified it is. i don't like the focus on "accountability", as though it's some kind of virtue. but, that's secondary. it's the oversimplification that's annoying. why? because now people are going to start spreading it around and misapplying it. this happens all the time.

i mean: yeah, sure. sometimes.

...but sometimes somebody else is at fault and deserves to be called out on it. denying that leads to backwards philosophical positions, like objectivism.

you can't take complicated things and condense them into universal statements over the course of three minutes in a youtube video. i really wish people would stop pretending they can and stop doing it...

i think lindsey nailed it. people expect the market relationship to hold, for free to mean worthless and expensive to mean valuable. it's psychological, and bluntly wrong, but it's massively enforced. and it's connected more to the presentation than it is to the content. it's not really new, either - people used to have the same reaction to independent music and independent film (which youtube is in some weird way filling the void on, despite being one of the biggest companies in the world). one of the things that kind of reversed that was for indie labels to pick up major label marketing techniques.

is the content on youtube shit? largely. but, most films are shit, too. and the music industry is just beyond salvation. i don't think the good parts of youtube are proportionately of a lower quality than the good parts of the film industry or the music industry. if anything, youtube is pretty much the sole major tool to get around the idiotification of the entertainment industry, nowadays.

it sounds stupid - and it is - but i think if youtubers were to integrate something goofy like the 20th century fox logo at the front of their videos, just something to make it "seem expensive", it would have a big effect. on the other hand, i'm not sure that's really a goal worth working towards...

i think a more important question moving forwards is how much longer youtube is going to be free and open like it is. how much longer are they going to continue to host trillions of gigabytes of data with no significant advertising stream? how much longer before it is hollywood?

untitled (orchestral mix)

i wanted some orchestral textures in the final mix, so i started playing around with some midi files and decided to do a full blown orchestral version. mix finalized on feb 7, 2015.

--

i just finished this orchestral piece. but it's going to be an even longer wait for the next video, because i've decided i must work this into a zappa/keneally style guitar concerto. i'll then take those guitar parts and put them into the final mix. but it pushes it back at least another week.

http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com/track/untitled-orchestral-mix

i think this is the only coherent tv interview that i've ever seen on this topic.

the context he's missing has to do with the sofa that maliki wouldn't sign. america is now in the region on the invitation of the iraqi state. that's what all this is angling for, and what the long term strategy is: a permanent troop presence. they just need the iraqis to sign the right papers; papers maliki refused to sign.

honestly? i'd have a hard time giving them immunity after some of the reports coming out. i really think american soldiers ought to be accountable under iraqi law.

but, when you're the empire you get to break the rules.

missed the appointment today..

To: infocchc@cmha-wecb.on.ca

hi.

my legal name is jason parent, but i go by jessica parent or jessica murray. i refuse to pay extra for a phone on top of the internet; i consider this to be an unnecessary and frankly obsolete expense in the internet era.

i had an appointment today at 11:00 am with the nurse. i intended to make this appointment, but fell asleep around 8:00 am and have only just woken up now. my normal sleeping pattern is to fall asleep early in the morning; i was trying to pull an all-nighter to make the appointment at 11:00 and unfortunately failed to do so. so, i apologize for not informing you, but it wasn't intended.

now, i suspect that the nurse was unable to appear today due to the weather. that is, i suspect that my appointment was cancelled, anyways.

i have an appointment with a doctor on the 17th. i'd just like to reiterate that i have every intention to get to that appointment. further, if the nurse would like to reschedule the "check-up" that was scheduled for today, my schedule is truly wide open.

i'm not certain that this is going to reach the proper audience and would appreciate some acknowledgement that it has or can not.

jessica

nine of the ten most popular videos on youtube right now are advertisements, and the other one is the katy perry halftime show.

the corporatocracy/idiocracy is not science fiction. it is the existing reality.

rip edgar froese

a large and influential generation is entering it's twilight. the whole world will be different soon....

deion is a ridiculous person.

it was second down. he catches the ball, the game is over. he drops the ball, the clock stops. it didn't work out. but here's the thing, and deion knows it: that call wasn't spontaneous. they have a goal line offense. they've been practicing it for months. it was already set.

go track down videos of teams with the ball inside the five on first or second down. what you're going to see is that something like 80% of the teams throw the ball on first or second down. third, fourth? you're going to see that 90%+ run the ball on both downs.

it's easy to attack the call as stupid. but it's really pretty common.

Glachs 
+deathtokoalas nah if you have the top 5 RB and your on the 1yard line you run it in, they werent on the 5yrd line, they were on the 1, just had to give to Lynch or do a QB fake and take it in yourself, if you don't get it you can clock it or call a TO

deathtokoalas
+Glachs they were at about the five yard line on first down, which clicked in their goal line offense. they ran a running play on first down that got them a few yards. so, it's second down. the whole world expects you to push the line. that's not a lynch issue, it's a line issue. and, of course, a lynch can't get the yards he gets without being behind a strong line. but it's a different issue. it's not about lynch's talent level, it's about who has more muscle up front. you've got three chances at this, but if you get fucked on a strong blitz and lose yards then the whole calculus changes.

so, you're going to see a lot of teams run a little pass route in this circumstance, to try and catch the secondary on a blitz. the intended play was probably on the wide side, and meant to catch the safety out of position. but (and it might be because the passing play was actually so predictable), the defense didn't buy it. i'll agree with deion that the ball was questionably thrown, but you can't throw the ball into the crowd when you've got solid coverage anymore. the clock was ticking, he had to let the ball go.

if he catches the ball, the game is basically over. well, i guess the patriots can try and run it back. and, note that ticking a few seconds off the clock is a good reason to run the passing play on second down, too.

if he drops the ball, you ideally get two chances to push through the line.

it wasn't a bad call at all...it was mostly just good coverage.

i think, in that situation, you want to make sure you're throwing the ball deep into the end zone, so that an interception would create a safety.

yeah, but then you sent a bunch of nutcases and kooks to ransack the country side so you could boot the guy that wouldn't sign the sofa and send the forces in that you didn't want sent home in the first place. would you like to talk about that or would you prefer these "right-wing talking points"? yeah, that's what i thought. it's theatre, people...

i feel this is the best place to post this...

if i actually end up killing myself over the next few weeks, please note the following requests/instructions.

- NO RELIGIOUS CEREMONY. this is extremely important to me. no superstitions in disguise, either. the best way to ensure that you avoid all religion is to just not have a ceremony at all.

- so, no ceremony at all, please.

- i do not want a gravestone or any other physical memorial.

- i don't care what happens to my belongings.

- i would prefer to be composted. if this is not possible, or too expensive, then cremation is the second best option. if it's cheaper to just toss me on some logs, and cook some marshmellows on me then i'd prefer that option; there's no use in supporting the cemetary-industrial complex. no, seriously, just find a cheap way to burn me, i don't give a fuck as long as there's no markings...

- i don't want to be left in an urn or something. not because i particularly care about what happens to the ashes, but because i want all physical memory of me to be abolished.

- i would request that my internet presence not be disturbed. should it look like suicide is imminent, i will contact somebody regarding this.

============

these are all longterm goals, anyways. i suppose it's useful that they exist somewhere.

it's easy to understand why i don't really care about the details. the key points are:

(1) no religion
(2) no physical place of remembrance
(3) i would like to be recycled as effectively as is cost-efficient.
(4) my online presence must remain undisturbed.

it's true.

he's the most right-wing american president since jfk.

Lord Voldemort
Looks fake,there are no frozen fish,and also if sun is shining on that ice so hard that we can see stones under it,why didnt it melt ,and why is there no sound of mountain wind ?

deathtokoalas
the lack of fish can be explained by the fact that slovakia is directly in the dead zone caused by german (and russian) industrialization. clear lakes like this are a common result of acidification caused by acid rain.

Remo Drake
There are no fish in lakes that high.

deathtokoalas
as a broad statement, that's just simply not true, although i have to admit that i'm not aware of the exact level of biodiversity in the slovakian mountains. while you may see specific adaptations or localized populations in specific areas, it is broadly true to state that some type of fish or another can survive at just about any altitude.

Shekinah
The ice in the video is an example of congelation ice, which is also known as black ice because of an ability to see through to the color of the water underneath. The congelation ice forms underneath an existing layer of ice, building off of the bottom. When the top layer is melted, the crystal-clear layer is revealed. The incredible clarity of the ice is a result of freezing with no air bubbles, snow, and impurities present.  When impurities or air bubbles are trapped in ice, it causes the light to scatter as it travels through and results in a cloudy appearance.

deathtokoalas
i think you're half right - the explanation of the mechanism is correct, but i don't think these conditions can be observed nearly as dramatically in a normal, healthy lake.

Pink Guy
The water isn't tainted as well, and it looks like the water is completely frozen through, making it clear. You can tell because of the refraction of light, if there was water underneath, the light would change it's course through water, ice and oxygen.

(deleted response)

deathtokoalas
i think what i'm reacting to is the misperception that the world is "clean" unless humans touch it. that perception is going to create the idea that water in untainted sources is crystal clear. but, in fact the opposite is true - the natural world is a very dirty place, partially because it is full of life. it only becomes "clean" when we modify it.

water running through a stream is getting filtered, but "untainted" lake water is generally pretty dirty. sulfuric acid , however, is a pretty strong cleanser. that's why dead lakes are so clean looking.

MGK
What do u have got with that "healthy lake" "Czechoslovakia" and "acid rain" ?

That lake isn´t healthy because it's +-2000 meters above sea level then there aren´t fish, plants and who knows what else. Czechoslovakia doesn´t exist since 1993 (now is Czech republic or Slovakia/Slovak republic), and that acid rain....I don´t think so that we have got acid rain in High Tatras. and from SOUTH Germany and from Russia ???? WTF ??? Those countries are far away except Germany,that is closer, but not so much.

(Sorry for my english I´m still learning.)

deathtokoalas
yes, the tatras are one of the worst acid rain regions in the world, due to the effects of emissions from neighbouring regions. this is well understood. generally, acid rain falls a little bit away from it's emission source. the acid goes up, travels a bit through the air and then comes back down again.

it was a long time ago, but let me think back to what i remember learning about acid rain in the third grade.

1) acid rain is primarily caused by a reaction of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide inside of clouds, which falls as sulfuric acid and nitric acid.

2) the sources of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide are mostly factories.

3) canada's acid rain problem is largely caused by heavy pollution floating northwards from the area now known as the rust belt. pollution from heavy industrial areas like detroit and cleveland enters the atmosphere, moves north and falls in ontario, where it kills trees and creates dead lakes.
4) eastern europe also has a substantial acid rain problem, with the worst hit areas being poland, sweden and czechoslovakia (as it was then called, for a few more years). this is also caused by emissions moving into the region from neighbouring industrialized areas - primarily the heavily industrialized regions of germany. i distinctly recall learning about damaged statues in poland and dead lakes in sweden. this was presented as a test case, and a warning of what might happen in canada if emissions are not reduced.

as it turns out, the rust belt collapsed as a result of nafta, and emissions did decrease. europe took a more pro-active approach.

however, the effects of acid rain continue to linger in the region. again: if you don't believe me, look it up.

(deleted response)

deathtokoalas
ugh.

"Congelation ice is often referred to as black ice because it has a high optical depth that permits significant light transmission to the underlying water."

once again: you've explained why you can see through the ice. you haven't explained why you can see through the water.

somebody really ought to ddos the lot of these pop science sites. they post garbage.

black ice is black. or at least looks black. because of the water.

normally, you wouldn't be able to see through a body of water with a layer of black ice on it. rather, it would create a reflection of the surrounding area.

Nightmare Music
Wake up to what? What "truth"? You people already know the fucking truth. You're so worked up over NSA, even though Facebook has been doing same thing NSA has been doing for years and they do it a lot better. The truth is the rich look at you like cattle. No one is coming to get you, they are already there with Facebook and Google and EBay and Apple and whatever else on the internet. That's the "truth" and you know this but refuse to listen.

deathtokoalas
this is pretty much spot on.

i just want to add a comment about how badly bush' words have been abused by the conspiracy goofs. bush was articulating a vision of american dominance that largely operates by co-opting global governing bodies, and it's a vision that's turned out to be prophetic - but not in the way it's generally used. there was some commentary at the time that realized this, but it's mostly been buried.

"i'll buy the torture cos you pay for the rent".

al nailed it...

ganiniii
the NWO "plan" (don't want you to call me a delusional conspiracy theorist) - when I say plan I refer to the idea that the whole world should live together in peace and ruled with the same sort of freedom and juridical laws and cultural resemblence - exists at least since the 80's. It was developed by retarded geeks that have weird sex habbits and work for the UN.

deathtokoalas
see, this is what i'm pointing out is incorrect. this is literature that stems from the middle part of the 20th century, where you had a lot of crazy people on the right-wing fringe (organizing in groups like the john birch society, which was co-founded by the koch brothers' father) arguing that "nwo" was some kind of code for "communist world government".

but, that's not the way that bush used the term. bush was co-opting and redefining the term in an attempt to get out in front of the inevitable wilsonian reaction that would have come from the collapse of the soviet union. to bush, the new world order meant unopposed american imperialism - and a set of ridiculous neo-con and liberal interventionist arguments to uphold that american imperialism.

when you heard people argue in favour of invading iraq to "spread democracy", that's the new world order bush wanted put in motion. and it did get put in motion. it's the world we live in today.

of course, it's nonsense. but...

put another way, the collapse of the soviet union meant there was no longer anybody capable of reigning in american hegemony - if the soviets ever could, and they couldn't really. the new world order that bush spoke of was the process of taking advantage of that new reality.

the primary nwo document became the project for the new american century, where a set of neo-cons and liberal interventionists came together to devise a plan to reduce russia back down to the principality of moscow.

a lot of the conflicts we see today around the world are a consequence of this new world order working itself out.

of course, there's a lot of propaganda that obscures this. but, the idea that there's a secret clique running the world from the un doesn't square very well with the votes that you see there.

including the one that declared the war in iraq an illegal war.

the reality is that the power elite in the united states ritually curses the day that the institution was created and does just about everything that it legally (and illegally) can to avoid and subvert it.

ganiniii
wouldn't you say that what you just said is a bit conspiracionist?

deathtokoalas
no. in fact, it's very academic.

Egle Vilciauskaite
dude you should have lived in USSR to realy know how bad it was

deathtokoalas
i think it's an open question as to whether life in the "free world" is any better. that is, i'm not questioning whether things were bad in the soviet union - they clearly were. but, i'm wondering out loud whether things were really better in the west (for the average worker) in any kind of really meaningful way, or if it's really just a lot of propaganda. it wasn't that long ago that going on strike would get you shot. alas, i was personally eight years old when the berlin wall fell. i have no first hand experience and no way to get it.

regardless, that's not really the point. the cold war wasn't really a conflict over ideology. it's pretty established at this point that that was just propaganda. the conflict between washington and moscow carried on pretty naturally from the anglo-russian conflict that began in the napoleonic era, and it didn't end with the coup in moscow. it was a conflict between the two dominant imperial powers to decide who got to control resources for the benefit of their respective elites. once you get your head around that, the idea that the collapse of the soviet union simply provided washington with an opportunity to tighten the noose begins to make perfect sense.

again, it's not like i'm making this stuff up. the bastards have not been remotely shy about saying it themselves, either. i mean, when mitt romney said russia was america's greatest enemy he got laughed out of the room. but the reality is that what he said was pretty much accurate - it's just that you're not supposed to talk about it during elections.

heart of darkness
+ganiniii I don't talk about middle class Kids who have got everything middle class Kids dream of. I talk about a time when the middle class will be gone. The Kids of tomorrow will be poor. Some will be lethargic. Lethargic  trash. But some will turn into predators. It's these predators who count.

deathtokoalas
yeah, that's working out well in the middle east...

poor people are easily manipulated, because they lack access to education. if your scenario plays out (and i don't think it will; rather, i think the near future is dominated by mechanized production evening out wealth disparities a little, and the point of crisis lies in the ability to generate energy), you'll have an army of dipshits that will be easily converted into tools of imperialism. as the intelligence of the population falls, the tools needed to control them falls along with it. look at the way the saudis create groups like isis to carry out their geostrategic goals in the region. that can't fly here because our people aren't illiterate. but, you take that away and the christian right becomes dominant.

there's of course no such thing as "the illuminati", but if you take it as a code word for the capitalist elite then you need to resign yourself to their continued existence and try and work out ways to exist in freedom that more or less ignore them. i mean, at the end of the day do i care whether or not there's somebody in a yacht docked in miami eating caviar? i don't. what i care about is my life in front of me, whether these people exist or not.

ideas like the temporary autonomous zone develop out of this thinking. not a revolution, exactly; this is probably impossible. the people that financed hitler profited from his destruction.

heart of darkness
+deathtokoalas"i mean, at the end of the day do i care whether or not there's somebody in a yacht docked in miami eating caviar? i don't. what i care about is my life in front of me, whether these people exist or not."

You really mean this? Call the People on top Illuminati, call them top plutocrats, call them top super rich - it doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is that you and me are slaves to these top parasites (a few hundred families). They believe they OWN us. Suggest you read some stories about slavery in ancient Rome, Egypt or Arabia. That's what we'll end up if we don't fight them.  Better be dead than a slave.

deathtokoalas
+heart of darkness
whether they exist or do not exist doesn't really have a substantial effect on my life or the tasks i need to carry out to exist in a complex society. there is work that needs to be done, whether there's a plutocracy or not.

i think it's more important to be wary about these good v evil narratives. that's how the fuckers get us. you might find the odd psychopath that wants to blow up sand niggers, but the average us soldier thinks he's joining the good fight, not protecting a pipeline. it's only through experience that they realize they've been lied to - hence the high suicide rates.

i read a report a while back that suggested that there are entire divisions of "syrian rebels"  that were recruited to join the palestinian resistance, were shipped off to the battle lines in covered jeeps and spent weeks or months thinking they were shooting at israeli soldiers rather than the syrian army.

i'd rather focus on what's in front of me than get caught up in these collectivist struggles, struggles that are more often than not tied to some strategic objective by some equally evil bastard. i mean, surely you don't think the russians would topple the government and pull out...

again: the grassroots response in new orleans was actually quite inspiring, especially considering the inept and often downright criminal behaviour of law enforcement.

heart of darkness
So enjoy your robot life. Work, buy, consume, die.

The Russians won't topple the Illuminati (the "government" are just actors, accomplices and stooges as are the media). But the Russians could provide some AK 47s. Actually I think, the Chinese will topple the Illuminati.

deathtokoalas
+heart of darkness
there's no other way to exist in a complex society. the question is not whether we should work and consume, but how we should. and, by denying that, you're really demonstrating the kind of luddite extremism that needs to be eradicated. i mean, if you're going to make me choose between the status quo and some backwards thoreauvian primitivism, i'll pick the status quo, thanks - and have no problem supporting people that want to bomb you. freedom does not mean abolishing progress, it means taking control of it.

as soon as you "topple the illuminati", you become the illuminati. if you want to talk about learning things from history, that's the primary lesson.

it's actually a theme in al's music, going back to twitch. one of the more obvious discussions of this topic is in the track apathy.

heart of darkness
+deathtokoalas"you're really demonstrating the kind of luddite extremism that needs to be eradicated"
lol. "eradicated". stopped reading after that one. How do we call this when an extremist calls other people extremist? rofl

Hambone Jones
Now that's the truth if I ever heard it.  I always get a laugh out of the idea that the US government has a "secret" agenda that they operate under in a diabolical plot to dominate the world and its' people.  But the truth is there is no secret whatsoever, the US government basically works its' "evil" deeds right before our eyes and they're well aware nobody is gonna do a single fuckin' thing about any of it.  The reasoning being in order for the people to really, really revolt successfully, they'd have to sacrifice the comfort and convenience of their everyday lives.  Americans could never be bothered to do such a thing.  No government means no housing to live under, no oil and gas for your automobile, no food to eat, and no jobs to pay for any of the aforementioned necessities of our lives.  No nothing.  It's the hard, sad truth of human existence; we're stuck in a vicious circle where whatever the powers that be say, goes.  Liberating ourselves from that vicious circle only leads to the imminent demise of our species.  What else can we possibly do but be prisoners to our own lifestyles?  It disgusts me to say it, but we're better off being slaves to the system.  These current generations of people couldn't handle living in the anarchist caveman-like "utopia" that many of them assume they could live in.  It's one of those things that unfortunately looks better on paper than it actually is.  God, I really can't stand admitting that.  I really can't.  But like you said man, "truth".  It's inevitable.

If the people wanna fight that, I say all the best of luck to them, I mean that sincerely.  I just hope they can live with the end result which would be a charred, desolate wasteland run on a barter system, where everyday could be your last due to the extremely unsafe, lawless living conditions.

deathtokoalas
i rather think that no government means nobody to force me to pay rent, nobody to charge me for public transportation (when it's too far to bicycle), nobody to put me in jail for "stealing" food and nobody to force me to go to work to pay for any of that bullshit in the first place.

Hambone Jones
Yes you would get all those things, but don't you realize the cost of that freedom?  You'd live in an apocalyptic wasteland where day by day you fight tooth and nail to survive.  Roving packs of murdering, raping, starving monsters who formerly were good people would rule the land and take from you what you claim is yours because there's no longer a structure in place to force laws on them to protect you from anything as such.  There's a reason life isn't like that in Western culture because we're lucky enough to be given a right as human beings to live safely.  Far too many of us don't realize this.  You don't have anymore rights in this world I'm hypothetically speaking of.  Just face it, you wouldn't want to live in that world.  Or better yet, you couldn't.  You wouldn't have the energy to live that kind of life on a daily basis.  Hunting and gathering repeatedly, everyday, bartering for food and supplies with what little you have, and sometimes even going as far as to use your body to get what you want.  What about cleaning your own drinking water, which you'd probably only be lucky to have once it rains.  I guarantee you'd kill for those things as well.  You'd have to.  Could you live like that?  Look at everything you have, step away from the computer for a second and take a good look at however many, or few things you have.  I'm assuming you do appreciate those things, I'd hope.  If you don't, you would once they're gone.  You would once everything from heating/air conditioning to in-door plumbing and running water are a thing of the past.  Grocery stores and food outlet chains are extinct and now you truly, truly work for that food, if you're lucky enough to come across any.  Can you hunt or farm for yourself?  Could you construct a shelter good enough to protect you from harsh summers and winters once your current home is decimated by an unforgiving world where no more services exist to fix any and all housing issues?  There's a reason you pay to have these things.  If everything was free; it would've disappeared long ago because human beings would've used it all up like the selfish, greedy latent savages that they are.  You must not realize how dependent you are on this way of life.  Like I said before, I hate having to admit it, but there's a reason the government exists.  No matter what, you need the government to control people.  They're animals.  Their morals would disappear instantaneously if there were no social guidelines to govern them.  What we need is a government that doesn't abuse its' power, not a government that doesn't exist.  People take for granted the society and order we have put in place because they're so distracted by trivial bullshit like having to pay for public transportation.  You wouldn't even have transportation in the world you're possibly envisioning to be better than this one.  Wake up; this is it.  We don't live in a perfect world and we never will, but this is a close as it gets.

deathtokoalas
lol. no. i don't think anything like that would happen at all. that sounds like a hollywood film designed to uphold the status quo through a series of scare tactics. or maybe a hip-hop record, which is more or less the same thing.

but it doesn't matter what you or i think. if you look at the evidence of what happens during periods of collapse, it's clear that communities come together to collectivize basic services. the tyranny of property is only possible through state violence. once that violence is removed, people tend to revert to a communal instinct very quickly.

your hobbesian reality is a fairy tale, or a nightmare; either way, it doesn't actually exist. all evidence suggests the exact opposite.

Hambone Jones
Right whatever you say.  I think you're the one who believes in a fairy tale.  The idea that people will live in harmony without law is totally laughable.  If we already have a problem living civil in a state of law, what gives you the delusion that we would when there's no law whatsoever.  Where's this evidence you speak of?

deathtokoalas
government is not law, it's violence. it's a property rights relationship built on top of slavery. the only way to establish a system of actual law (which exists in our minds as a set of norms and is enforced through social relations, not in a book downtown and enforced by thugs with guns) is to get rid of the thugs with their guns and property rights. government does not enforce law, it upholds a state of lawlessness that enables one class to exploit the others.

one example of many is the reaction to hurricane sandy. look up occupy sandy. this is repeatably demonstrable human behaviour, as determined through observation - not worthless philosophy some monk shat out in pre-modern england.

Hambone Jones
No, the government is law, there's no other way around it.  I do agree that there is a certain social class of people who are above obeying those laws, but they still do exist and the reason they exceed their due justice is because the people are too lazy, uninformed, and unaware of the power they have to change that and bring about that said justice.  The evidence is in how people vote for our Presidents and if you ask the average voter why they vote for who they choose, their answers are usually appallingly basic.  Regardless, it sounds to me like you're in favor of a more communist system to be put in place of our way of life.  Maybe you should educate yourself on the great USSR and how far that got them.  Not to mention that the founder of the communist ideal was nothing but a spoiled rich kid who never even worked a day in his life.

And I see your Hurricane Sandy and I'll raise you a Hurricane Katrina: an event composed of extreme civil communication breakdown resulting in looting, raping, and murder.  What a harmonious example of human beings coming together to show just how far removed from the animal kingdom they are.

deathtokoalas
i'm not aware of any violent crime coming out of katrina that was a result of katrina (besides disproportionate violence by state agents), but i need to point out that an anarchist would be in favour of looting stores, as they uphold commercial relations. i wouldn't call that "violence", either, i'd call it "justice". the crime in such a situation would be to prevent the distribution of goods by insisting on a payment for it. the city just sunk into the ocean and you want me to pay for that apple? that's the crime, there, and people ought to work together to string that fucker up a tree. so, i think the overall response to katrina upholds my argument, rather than yours.

the question of whether the government upholds or suspends law is partly semantic. by definition, the state exists to uphold property rights. law, in our tradition, is basically exactly that. so, we define law as the process of the state upholding property rights. but, when you compare that to any concept of distributive justice, human rights or what could be called "natural law", the state is not able to do anything but interfere. as a result, we end up with these topsy-turvy concepts of law that put property relations over rights. it's "illegal" to take an apple when you're hungry, but it's not "illegal" to watch a man starve rather than feed him. what "rule of law" is this? it's the absence of law, the absence of rights, the absence of justice - in favour of a class-based system of feudalism, where the rich can (as the op stated) treat us as commodities to be exploited.

Hambone Jones
Oh God no, Katrina does not support your argument at all.  You need to read more about that entire situation.  There was much more widespread murder, rape, looting and overall violence perpetrated there by civilians than there were police and Blackwater operatives, whom I'm assuming you were referring to when you said "state agents".  Go ahead and read about it and leave La-La Land behind.

Also the next time you feel powerless over the "ruling class" I'd like you to read about recall elections and how the people are too stupid to realize time and time again that they can use them to their advantage but are too unorganized and uninformed to do so.  The illusion that we're given is that the people have no power.  However, we do have the numbers.  And power is in the numbers.  We're just too stupid and comfortable with our existence to compromise any of it.

deathtokoalas
i really think that you're the one that's misinformed. new orleans was a violent place before katrina, and a violent place after it. the vacuum allowed organized crime some space to develop, but that's criminals killing criminals over drugs and whatnot, not random violence due to social breakdown. the media had a very racist response that's been ironed into the narrative, but there was actually a very strong grassroots community movement in the region that had to improvise in response to the total lack of any response from fema.

i've been dancing around the point, but the reality is that the apocalyptic future you're describing is what we already have, because it's what the state is designed to do. madison was pretty clear on the point that the purpose of the byzantine structure of government in the united states is to make it virtually impossible for people to use the local state apparatus to actually organize. the existing circumstance is one where there is no law, no social services, no real actual "government" - just a police state that herds people around.

Hambone Jones
So you're telling me that a life-altering hurricane was a non-factor in how fucked up things are/were in New Orleans?  Unbelievable, so that only proves my point further that people are complete animals, even under the control of the government.  Again, whatever fantasy world you're living in where people are these loving, caring creatures who come together to help benefit each other as a species, rather than savages who violently fend for themselves by any means of survival, I'll never understand it.  You can live there if you want; everybody has the right to sleep comfortably at night.  Only time will tell which one of us has our thumb more firmly placed on the pulse of the people.

deathtokoalas
well, new orleans is very deeply divided along class lines, which are strongly racial in character. it has a high poverty rate and a high crime rate. one would expect that already existing gangs would take advantage of the situation, but that doesn't finger the hurricane as the cause of anything. the cause would be the factors that created the already existing crime and poverty problems.

this is a decent summary:

a k
Your heart is in the right place; but it is not the free markets fault. It is the fault of ex Nazi's like George soreos and totalitarians like Bloomberg who give money to people like Obama, Clinton, and bush to put regulations on the free market in order for the existing wealthy people will be the only wealthy people. Because of government regulations on the free market, it is impossible for the younger generation get into doing manual labor.

deathtokoalas
no. the "free market" is essentially an orwellian term for a specific type of statism. the only way to enforce the rules is with force. markets are inherently violent. the market cannot exist without the state to enforce the rules, and will collapse along with it. to even suggest it will collapse with it is confusing; they're identical, precisely the same thing.

i mean, i know that i, for one, would never accept the ideas underlying private property if it weren't for the the coercive threat of violence forcing me to.

Guy Pearson
What is the Hegelian dialectic and dialectics in general?

deathtokoalas
i wouldn't get too caught up in them. the scientific method is far superior to any system of dialectics.

put another way, dialectical reasoning is precisely what is wrong with marxism and precisely what needs to be rejected in order to move the left forward. it's easy enough to look up. but it's exactly wrong.