Bot download link

[gnounc]

oh, not as intellectual but...nevertheless, funny GraphJam: Music and Pop Culture in Charts and Graphs. Let us explain them.

[gnounc]

sorry, the conversations pretty much taken its course... (well in my mind the graph was the beginning and the end and no more need be said)

so i thought, AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT!
..and sort of on topic.

[gnounc]

emmmanual kant was a real pissant!!!

[AEnoch]

If you look hard enough for something you'll eventually find it, even if it's not there.

[Radec]

Only the most stupidest thik fuck would actully believe that these two highly unrelated events had anything to do with each others rise.

baker's point here is that it's possible to see a correlation where there is obviously not a causal link, since temperature is obviously not affected by the postal service rates

I think i'm seeing double. But your right, I might have misunderstood part of it, like Baker said, your a smart person even if hes joking or not.

Also before any one thinks this, i'm not having a go at Baker for putting the graph up, i was having a go at the person who made the graph.

P.S

Played Quake Episode 1 today, fucking rules. Shambler owned me many times but I finally nailed em' with the Perforator (no pun intended).

[Baker]

radec i think you've misunderstood. the graph is made to discredit al gore's famous graph of the correlation between CO2 levels in the atmosphere and global temperature. he shows a very close correlation between the two. baker's point here is that it's possible to see a correlation where there is obviously not a causal link, since temperature is obviously not affected by the postal service rates

I just posted it because someone elsewhere in the online world made me aware of it and I thought it was LOL funny.

Whether or not global warming is true -- something I have never said couldn't be the case, but have always questioned the rush to judgment and acts by some in this world to terminate discussion -- wasn't a factor.

But yeah, correlation doesn't mean causation.

Spooker, you are a very intelligent young man despite what others have to say about you. /I'm joking

[spooker]

radec i think you've misunderstood. the graph is made to discredit al gore's famous graph of the correlation between CO2 levels in the atmosphere and global temperature. he shows a very close correlation between the two. baker's point here is that it's possible to see a correlation where there is obviously not a causal link, since temperature is obviously not affected by the postal service rates

[Radec]

looks like you're making a hume-ean point, that we don't see causes in the world.....we just see one event always followed by another. after we see this constant conjunction repeatedly, we start to imagine that there is a causal link between the two. however, this link exists in our heads and not in experience. kant tried to solve this by saying that the concept of causality is required for us to have experience, and that causality is not experienced but rather constructed necessarily by our brain; but that doesn't mean that causality doesn't exist in nature, just that we can't experience it. i never was able to decide how far kant really solved hume's problem, but he's the only one who was ever able to offer a decent solution, as far as i know

Thats what I said, abid in a less sciency way. Theres two kinds of people in the world (Baker thinks theres 3 but i think two of them fall into the same catagorie)

Smart people and Stupid people. Smart people realise that every event is different and that even the average bob's daily life, wake up, eat breakfast, drive to work, comtemplate suicide in your little cubicle, drive home to the wife who is pissed off with house work, eat dinner which was made by the wife, watch tv and go to bed. These events might seem to be created by the one before it and in a way yes, but they are completly seperate things.

Going onto the Postal/Global Temp shit which Baker I Have No Idea Where He Found It. Only the most stupidest thik fuck would actully believe that these two highly unrelated events had anything to do with each others rise. I even bet money that the data was changed by the Greenpeace Druggy Hippie to make it seem like there was an exact link between the two.

Anouther reason I can not understand the mind of a stupid person is what the hell was he hoping to gain out of making this graph? Barring of the Post Office? I've said it before, we need the postman more than he needs us, even hippies need the postman to deliver their piece of shit fliers demanding everyone trades in their cars for walking and spend £1000000000 on making our homes "Enviromently Friendly" *pukes*.

Sorry for going off topic. Quake ruless

[Baker]

kant tried to solve this by saying that the concept of causality is required for us to have experience, and that causality is not experienced but rather constructed necessarily by our brain; but that doesn't mean that causality doesn't exist in nature, just that we can't experience it. i never was able to decide how far kant really solved hume's problem, but he's the only one who was ever able to offer a decent solution, as far as i know

Either consciously or subconsciously you have picked up my Immanuel Kant theme!

Directive: Use your talent!

[spooker]

looks like you're making a hume-ean point, that we don't see causes in the world.....we just see one event always followed by another. after we see this constant conjunction repeatedly, we start to imagine that there is a causal link between the two. however, this link exists in our heads and not in experience. kant tried to solve this by saying that the concept of causality is required for us to have experience, and that causality is not experienced but rather constructed necessarily by our brain; but that doesn't mean that causality doesn't exist in nature, just that we can't experience it. i never was able to decide how far kant really solved hume's problem, but he's the only one who was ever able to offer a decent solution, as far as i know

[Baker]

Now what catagorie do you think Reality TV Show Contestants will fall into? Thats why they fit the 93% perfectly.

There's nothing wrong with being in the 93%. Most people are and they don't mess up the world that much for the most part.

Hard work = honest work.

[Radec]

No, it's worse than that.

Lets stick with the 93% 6% 1% idea.

Heres some examples, i think, of those pecentages.

Lets start with the number 1 contender for the 6%, Overlord Arse Client Gordon Brown. You Americans probably dont know who he is but he is the Prime Minister of Britain. He knows he has ruined this country but he will not step down because his head is so far up his own arse I cant understand what his plan is. He wont listen to anyone else.

For the 93% we have Reality TV Contestants (i do not watch any reality tv because its absolute tripe). What I know from reading the news is that reality tv contestants are throwing away their dignity for a spot of fame, I mean how stupid can you get, being famous falls into three catagories.

1) Being Globally Known but No One Really Gives a Shit
2) Being Respected for your Ideas and Contributions to Humanity.
3) All of the Above.

Now what catagorie do you think Reality TV Show Contestants will fall into? Thats why they fit the 93% perfectly.

And finally the 1%, the smarties. These are people who arnt smart because they are good at their job or can drive an air plane. These people are the ones with an ounce of common sence. Its a right shame theres only 1% because if there was more, then these people would be the ones leading the Planet. Jeremy Clarkson is my example because he speaks common sence when ever he opens his mouth. He is heavily critisied by the 93% because they are so stupid they dont realise the people in 1% are telling it how it is meant to be.

Everyone wants to think they are part of the 1%, but with 6 billion people on the planet and only 1% of smart people, that means 5,940,000,000 who think they are smart are actully part of the 93% and 6% dicks.

We cant fight them but we dont wanna join them, thats why this world is going down the shits.

[SUNSHINE]

Wherez da botz. Iz itz the samez onceyz i habs?

[Baker]

Here is an example 93% conversation with the 6%:

6% smart ultra-stupid guy: "Hey Joe"

93% stupid average joe: "Hey Stan"

6% smart ultra-stupid guy: "Hey, have you ever considered a an interest-only mortgage on your house?"

93% stupid average joe: "Um, that sounds dangerous."

6% smart ultra-stupid guy: "But all the value in your home price is due to the rising cost of real estate! And real estate prices ALWAYS go up!"

And then we get this wonderful recession with 11% unemployment even though the government tossed $700 billion in a hole in October 2008 (hey let's bailout jackasses that can't run a bank) and then we toss $1.84 trillion in another hole in 2009 with nothing to show for it.

THE END

[Phenom]

I like the idea that everyone's stupidity is only caused by everyone else's stupidity.

Stupidity is a contagious disease.

There's two sayings that go...

"Only s fool blames his tools"
AND
"If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?"