Domesticated, compartmentalized, ignorant, ninnies...
-
Oh go fuck yourself. Your show is a bunch of "uhs" and long pauses with no substance.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
Switch (responseToHorriblePost)Case youAlreadyPostedThis:
{
responsePost.CallThemNames();
responsePost.ArgueItEvenIfTrue();
}
Case pokingHolesInArgument:
{
if theyAlsoSitedStuffAndCallMeOnNotDoingItMyself
{
responsePost.insultTheirMom();
}
else
{
responsePost.UseStrawMan();
responsePost.CallThemNames();
}
}
Case theyReadTheSourceMaterialAndFiguredOutIDidnt:
{
responsePost.UseStrawMan();
responsePost.CallThemNames();
responsePost.GoogleSomeTermAndUseItWithoutUnderstandingIt();
}
Case theyAgreeWithMe:
{
responsePost.tellThemTheyAgreeWithEverythingGoodAndRight();
responsePost.CallThemNiceNames();
}
Default:
responsePost.rantPointlessly();I see someone modified the script and is just using responsePost.CallThemNames(); Grats on varying that up.
-
I don't know how many times I've been told that I'm CSS. I'm open. I don't make statements that I can't back up. Obviously I'm a programmer, I don't know how naive you have to be to think I'm anything but a programmer or developer or something to this effect. I talk differently than him. I have a damned TELEVISION SHOW. How pathetic do you people really have to be? Look, watch my show and see what you think. http://www.danverstv.org go to Video On Demand at the top. A popup comes up with a video player. Go to Danvers Access Shows, and then find The Currency of Democracy. My name is Josh Davis. I'm not hiding anything, as my "alter ego" does a lot. I don't call anyone names, I just present facts or my personal true opinion. Watch.
josda1000 wrote:
I don't know how many times I've been told that I'm CSS.
If you have been told it three times, it is true[^] (1st 2 verses).
josda1000 wrote:
I don't know how naive you have to be to think I'm anything but a programmer or developer or something to this effect.
Less naive than if I accepted that you were a programmer on your say so.
josda1000 wrote:
I talk differently than him. I have a damned TELEVISION SHOW. How pathetic do you people really have to be? Look, watch my show and see what you think. http://www.danverstv.org go to Video On Demand at the top. A popup comes up with a video player. Go to Danvers Access Shows, and then find The Currency of Democracy. My name is Josh Davis. I'm not hiding anything, as my "alter ego" does a lot. I don't call anyone names, I just present facts or my personal true opinion. Watch.
But none of this proves that you and Private Wee Parts are not the same person. If you are, then you are either: * Giggling at us arguing with your Ali G[^]-like creation, or * Severely deranged.
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
-
josda1000 wrote:
CaptainSeeSharp wrote: that doesn't mean that naked body scanners don't record your naked body Prove it. Back it up. Newspaper article? Scientific record? Citation necessary.
He can't Josh. In fact we pointed out that getting a color picture from something that is inherently not lit is impossible. Color requires light, clothes block light. The next thing shown is the fact that they used simulated pictures and were caught doing it. Heck I pointed out they are legally required to use a pat down if the person refuses to use the machines. At no point did he address this.
josda1000 wrote:
BACK IT UP! And NOT JUST WITH ONE SOURCE, which in almost all cases is infowars. YOU need to wake up. Open your mind to ALL sources, not just the one source that says that mass media is corrupt (which it is). Why do I have a show? To spread the word, and explore all ideas in my own way. I'm independent. I'm going to look at all logical arguments.
I may not agree with you, but I wore a uniform to protect your right to think and say these things. (And this statement I agree with anyway.) Keep doing what you are doing. If you truly do look at stuff from a bunch of views, research and get good data along with using logic, you are doing everyone a favor. I feel like it is unlikely CSS will listen, he never does. In fact when we do hit home with something he can't refute he tends to switch to name calling. His response to you shows this.
Yeah it's quite amazing really. I agree with him, but he's an asshole. He calls me names, says all I do is "uhhh"... well it's better than being a fearmonger. Being too excited about something makes you lose perspective. Cases in point: Jones, Beck, CNN... It's all ridiculous. I may be boring, but at least I have a point. lol So thanks for backing me up, even if you disagree.
-
josda1000 wrote:
I don't know how many times I've been told that I'm CSS.
If you have been told it three times, it is true[^] (1st 2 verses).
josda1000 wrote:
I don't know how naive you have to be to think I'm anything but a programmer or developer or something to this effect.
Less naive than if I accepted that you were a programmer on your say so.
josda1000 wrote:
I talk differently than him. I have a damned TELEVISION SHOW. How pathetic do you people really have to be? Look, watch my show and see what you think. http://www.danverstv.org go to Video On Demand at the top. A popup comes up with a video player. Go to Danvers Access Shows, and then find The Currency of Democracy. My name is Josh Davis. I'm not hiding anything, as my "alter ego" does a lot. I don't call anyone names, I just present facts or my personal true opinion. Watch.
But none of this proves that you and Private Wee Parts are not the same person. If you are, then you are either: * Giggling at us arguing with your Ali G[^]-like creation, or * Severely deranged.
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
OK now this is just ridiculous. How am I supposed to prove that I'm not him, except for the fact that I'M ARGUING WITH HIM ON THIS VERY THREAD! You've got to be kidding. I don't have time to play your silly games... I've got research to do for the show. I'm on in three hours.
-
Yeah it's quite amazing really. I agree with him, but he's an asshole. He calls me names, says all I do is "uhhh"... well it's better than being a fearmonger. Being too excited about something makes you lose perspective. Cases in point: Jones, Beck, CNN... It's all ridiculous. I may be boring, but at least I have a point. lol So thanks for backing me up, even if you disagree.
josda1000 wrote:
So thanks for backing me up, even if you disagree.
Just because I don't agree doesn't mean I won't take away something from a well reasoned argument. Problem with CSS is he debates like one of the jocks in my high school did, he resorts to pretty standard attack methods and practices, can't back up his attacks, nor can he handle losing when you shut him down. The guy actually ended a debate in much the same way as CSS. "Well at least I can get a date for the Prom, loser." Much like CSS the guy didn't know what the hell he was talking about.
-
That is what all of you are. You are not men, you are sheep to be herded and slaughtered.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
This from the guy who believes everything he is told by his preferred media, like the full body scanners, and the increase in gun crime in Australia. You are the meekest of sheep, blindly believing, blindly defending anything you are told, so long as the right people say it to you. No matter how utterly you are proven wrong, you continue to fight and argue. You believe that just because something comes from an alternative news source, it MUST be true, and that believing a different lie to most people, makes you an arbiter of hidden truth. In other words, you are insecure, sad and pathetic. That you get your validation from insulting a room full of people who talk to you because we find it funny that you are so pathetic, only proves this point.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
josda1000 wrote:
So thanks for backing me up, even if you disagree.
Just because I don't agree doesn't mean I won't take away something from a well reasoned argument. Problem with CSS is he debates like one of the jocks in my high school did, he resorts to pretty standard attack methods and practices, can't back up his attacks, nor can he handle losing when you shut him down. The guy actually ended a debate in much the same way as CSS. "Well at least I can get a date for the Prom, loser." Much like CSS the guy didn't know what the hell he was talking about.
-
OK now this is just ridiculous. How am I supposed to prove that I'm not him, except for the fact that I'M ARGUING WITH HIM ON THIS VERY THREAD! You've got to be kidding. I don't have time to play your silly games... I've got research to do for the show. I'm on in three hours.
'Spot the CSS' is a game on code project because he has posted as so many different people. I suspect he still does it at times. I'm happy to accept that you are probably not CSS, but if people accuse you of being him, it's because of how he has behaved in the past. Fool me once, etc.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Ian, you are one of the most closed minded people I've ever talked to. Just because infowars track record is only around 90% accurate that doesn't mean that naked body scanners don't record your naked body, it doesn't mean that the federal reserve system isn't inherently corrupt and illegal, that doesn't mean that the most honest politician we have, Ron Paul, is bad. You don't care that you are live under a totally utterly corrupt, ignorant, sadistic, out of control, power hungry government that completely disregards humans. They believe people are cannon fodder, they only care about wielding power and living like gods.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Just because infowars track record is only around 90% accurate that doesn't mean that naked body scanners don't record your naked body,
No, the fact that it's been established that they don't, means they don't. Can you explain the science used to take a body that's covered in clothing, and therefore not exposed to any light, and how one can take a full colour picture of that body under those circumstances ? Can you explain why the extra money would be spent to make that possible, as opposed to a photo that gives an outline and would show objects hidden under your clothing ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Just remember: it only took 3% of the population to fight the revolution. The minority may be exactly that, but the truth always reigns. It takes education, not more poor insults. You seriously can't stoop to the level that they're at. You must fight with logic, not inflammatory arguments. Ian and I had that long drawn out two-week argument... but it was clean and logical. If you can prove your point, you can show credibility. They won't write you off. What you did on Christmas was the most braindead and insanely written thing I'd ever seen by an engineer. If you have good intentions, learn the arguments. Learn how to back up your logic, not just write down 2 sentences on how everyone is stupid. I'm trying to continue reading your points, because I agree with your background. But the way you write what you write and the lack of elaboration seriously is a detriment to your cause. Fight the good fight... but fight with knowledge. Not ignorance.
I have honestly wondered, if anything CSS is true, then the most likely explanation for his posts is that the government pays someone to post like him, to cast any conspiracy theorist into disrepute. I've often told him that the net effect of his posts is to convince people that conspiracy nuts are illogical, abusive and unable to back up their claims.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Ian, you are one of the most closed minded people I've ever talked to. Just because infowars track record is only around 90% accurate that doesn't mean that naked body scanners don't record your naked body, it doesn't mean that the federal reserve system isn't inherently corrupt and illegal, that doesn't mean that the most honest politician we have, Ron Paul, is bad. You don't care that you are live under a totally utterly corrupt, ignorant, sadistic, out of control, power hungry government that completely disregards humans. They believe people are cannon fodder, they only care about wielding power and living like gods.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
doesn't mean that naked body scanners don't record your naked body
Who questioned that? You and Uncle Alex were called on the Digital Strip Search, high detail, living colour, images that could be produced by inversion. You still have not admitted to being suckered by InfoBores' disinformation. Disinformation because they new all along that the 'scanner' images were phoney. As for the rest, it's your country. Don't post here, do something effective.
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Just because infowars track record is only around 90% accurate that doesn't mean that naked body scanners don't record your naked body,
No, the fact that it's been established that they don't, means they don't. Can you explain the science used to take a body that's covered in clothing, and therefore not exposed to any light, and how one can take a full colour picture of that body under those circumstances ? Can you explain why the extra money would be spent to make that possible, as opposed to a photo that gives an outline and would show objects hidden under your clothing ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Its called millimeter wave, and if the developers of the scanners want a to simulate a full color image they could use the color and tones the face, arms, and hands of the body.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
-
-
fail
-
The guy in high school said I didn't have a date to the Prom. I had a girlfriend at the time and she explained things to him when she saw him.
-
Its called millimeter wave, and if the developers of the scanners want a to simulate a full color image they could use the color and tones the face, arms, and hands of the body.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
OK, so they'd have to detect the body areas ( probably not hard ) and then colorise them. So you admit that the scanners do NOT take a picture remotely like the one you posted. According to Wikipedia: In the United States, the Transportation Security Administration has claimed to have taken several steps to minimize privacy objections. Images captured by the machines are not to be stored anywhere; though the machine has the capability for storage of the images, the TSA has asked the manufacturer to disable this capability. Once the image leaves the screen, it is not to be retrieved. The screening officer at the machine with the subject does not get to see the image; rather his screen shows only whether or not the actual viewer has confirmed that the passenger has cleared. The officer who views the specific image is in an isolated room away from the security checkpoint, so as to not see the actual person being scanned by the device.[5] Now, the question remains - knowing that the image is not in color, knowing that these steps are being taken, why would anyone even CARE to try to keep naked photos off these scanners. Are you suggesting that photos of naked people are hard to come by in this day and age ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
OK, so they'd have to detect the body areas ( probably not hard ) and then colorise them. So you admit that the scanners do NOT take a picture remotely like the one you posted. According to Wikipedia: In the United States, the Transportation Security Administration has claimed to have taken several steps to minimize privacy objections. Images captured by the machines are not to be stored anywhere; though the machine has the capability for storage of the images, the TSA has asked the manufacturer to disable this capability. Once the image leaves the screen, it is not to be retrieved. The screening officer at the machine with the subject does not get to see the image; rather his screen shows only whether or not the actual viewer has confirmed that the passenger has cleared. The officer who views the specific image is in an isolated room away from the security checkpoint, so as to not see the actual person being scanned by the device.[5] Now, the question remains - knowing that the image is not in color, knowing that these steps are being taken, why would anyone even CARE to try to keep naked photos off these scanners. Are you suggesting that photos of naked people are hard to come by in this day and age ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
Are you suggesting that photos of naked people are hard to come by in this day and age ?
Dude, it took me 5 letters in Google image search with the filter set to none. That's hard!!! Though I guess 4 would have worked...
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Are you suggesting that photos of naked people are hard to come by in this day and age ?
Dude, it took me 5 letters in Google image search with the filter set to none. That's hard!!! Though I guess 4 would have worked...
Are you serious ? I just tested, and three is all you need ( I googled 'sex' ).
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
Its called millimeter wave, and if the developers of the scanners want a to simulate a full color image they could use the color and tones the face, arms, and hands of the body.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Its called millimeter wave
And the scanner operates between Infra-Red and Microwave (non-visible). The scanner forms an image of the temperature received from the scene. The temperature (and therefore the pixel intensity) is a function of the reflectivity, emissivity and transmissivity of the scene surfaces. Metallic objects are highly reflective and tend to appear bright, the human body is partially reflective and appears less bright and clothes are partially transparent.[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
if the developers of the scanners want a to simulate a full color image they could use the color and tones the face, arms, and hands of the body
And if they used, say, a concurrent photo scan, all they would get is a temperature image in the colour and tones of the body. Very stimulating. Now, an x-ray scan[^] is more intrusive. Again, no colour information. Again, a concurrent photo scan could provide the necessary colour. Do you think the result would be worth it?
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Its called millimeter wave
And the scanner operates between Infra-Red and Microwave (non-visible). The scanner forms an image of the temperature received from the scene. The temperature (and therefore the pixel intensity) is a function of the reflectivity, emissivity and transmissivity of the scene surfaces. Metallic objects are highly reflective and tend to appear bright, the human body is partially reflective and appears less bright and clothes are partially transparent.[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
if the developers of the scanners want a to simulate a full color image they could use the color and tones the face, arms, and hands of the body
And if they used, say, a concurrent photo scan, all they would get is a temperature image in the colour and tones of the body. Very stimulating. Now, an x-ray scan[^] is more intrusive. Again, no colour information. Again, a concurrent photo scan could provide the necessary colour. Do you think the result would be worth it?
Bob Emmett @ Ynys Thanatos
I suggest you do some very basic research before you spew out blatantly ignorant bullshit like that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millimeter_wave_scanner[^] These are millimeter wave scanners, not inferred scanners.
Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] Sons Of Liberty - Free Album (They sound very much like Metallica, great lyrics too)[^]
