441 pts ยท January 30, 2015
This is my public profile. So I write SOMETHING ABOUT MYSELF
I like how the author of this apparently doesn't know anything about birds OR humans.
Wenches vacate the premises!
Or turning her coat when her popularity sinks (see: refugee crisis)?
Or how her strategy has always been "do nothing and right before it's too late do what everyone else would have done anyway"?
Or how that and the arrogance of the other parties was one reason for the far-right scum's rise in popularity?
Or how her company bootlicking made the rich richer and made things for the people on Hartz 4 worse?
So what of her achievements warrant that respect of yours? When she bailed out the banks because "there was no alternative"?
Mirin those glutes
Soo, you're saying "bathyscaphe", does that mean we'll get some crazy miles deep fishtanks?
Pretty cool. I bet that goes great with these sounds here: https://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/features/halloween_sounds.html
Ah yes, the VIKINGS, this homogeneous group of people I can use perfectly for my strawman!
I didn't want to start with my anecdotal evidence of my experiences with people in those fields bending statistics to their liking.
Read any published paper. Questionnaires are inherently flawed, statistical data is treated horribly, hypotheses presented as results,...
That wasn't sociology though. Sociology in general employs unsound methods and has HUGE researcher bias.
And that is what I originally said. "in their time".
No. Monarchists were reactionary and traditional. Communists, democrats and natsoc were those with new ideas, i.e. progressive.
That's fucking stupid though. I can't discuss e.g. the persecution of gay people by using "gay" and "queer" in their present meaning...
So yeah, NS was considered pretty progressive in its time and that's a fact, no matter how mad you get.
you will see that "liberal" and "progressive" don't necessarily mean what you think they do.
Protip: Try viewing things not through your 21st century liberal lens and 4/X
Democracy is older than the british crown, monotheism was pretty new and revolutionary when Zoroastrism came around 3/X
they were highly egalitarian, which, by your logic, would make that an extremely conservative, because old, idea. 2/X
By that logic, there are NO liberal or progressive ideas. If we go back to archaic human societies (e.g. Khoisan or other pre-farmers) 1/X
So NS wasn't a new or experimental method at its time? This comment chain is a mess, pm me if you want, maybe I can clarify what I mean.
I broke up with my first gf at 14 because I wanted to play Counter Strike (1.6).
And he was nominated for a Razzie for his Thing music. Fucking razzists, I swear...
But transport proteins would be more like an instadoor, or at least a cat flap.
And just because your ignorant american mind can't comprehend that doesn't mean you can insult other people.
That is the very definition of "progressive".
I like how the author of this apparently doesn't know anything about birds OR humans.
Wenches vacate the premises!
Or turning her coat when her popularity sinks (see: refugee crisis)?
Or how her strategy has always been "do nothing and right before it's too late do what everyone else would have done anyway"?
Or how that and the arrogance of the other parties was one reason for the far-right scum's rise in popularity?
Or how her company bootlicking made the rich richer and made things for the people on Hartz 4 worse?
So what of her achievements warrant that respect of yours? When she bailed out the banks because "there was no alternative"?
Mirin those glutes
Soo, you're saying "bathyscaphe", does that mean we'll get some crazy miles deep fishtanks?
Pretty cool. I bet that goes great with these sounds here: https://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/features/halloween_sounds.html
Ah yes, the VIKINGS, this homogeneous group of people I can use perfectly for my strawman!
I didn't want to start with my anecdotal evidence of my experiences with people in those fields bending statistics to their liking.
Read any published paper. Questionnaires are inherently flawed, statistical data is treated horribly, hypotheses presented as results,...
That wasn't sociology though. Sociology in general employs unsound methods and has HUGE researcher bias.
And that is what I originally said. "in their time".
No. Monarchists were reactionary and traditional. Communists, democrats and natsoc were those with new ideas, i.e. progressive.
That's fucking stupid though. I can't discuss e.g. the persecution of gay people by using "gay" and "queer" in their present meaning...
So yeah, NS was considered pretty progressive in its time and that's a fact, no matter how mad you get.
you will see that "liberal" and "progressive" don't necessarily mean what you think they do.
Protip: Try viewing things not through your 21st century liberal lens and 4/X
Democracy is older than the british crown, monotheism was pretty new and revolutionary when Zoroastrism came around 3/X
they were highly egalitarian, which, by your logic, would make that an extremely conservative, because old, idea. 2/X
By that logic, there are NO liberal or progressive ideas. If we go back to archaic human societies (e.g. Khoisan or other pre-farmers) 1/X
So NS wasn't a new or experimental method at its time? This comment chain is a mess, pm me if you want, maybe I can clarify what I mean.
I broke up with my first gf at 14 because I wanted to play Counter Strike (1.6).
And he was nominated for a Razzie for his Thing music. Fucking razzists, I swear...
But transport proteins would be more like an instadoor, or at least a cat flap.
And just because your ignorant american mind can't comprehend that doesn't mean you can insult other people.
That is the very definition of "progressive".