The fascist regime that made you a moron: Thanks dJonkey

[Brian d marge]

Pearls, not jewels.

Matthew 7:6:

"Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you in pieces."

no Matthew is a rehash , the original meanig is "family jewels"

So the original was : Dont cast your ( family ) jewels before swine, lest Rachel tramples them and in turn reduces you to tears
Stephen

[Brian d marge]

I'm not surprised you were being sarcastic - it is generally regarded as the lowest form of wit.

Depends , if it Juvenalian, or Horatian I prefer Juvenalian my self;

it was and still is a high form of wit , used to highlight social inequalities , Mark Twain? , Catch 22 ?

Usually those that regard it as a lower form of wit , lack the insight and flexibility of mind .

These people make excellent cannon fodder

Stephen

[scissorhands]

are you sure youre autistic? Not psychotic dissociative?

Have you been talking with Nurse Ratshit?

Shes a mean bitch
dont challenge her
she gets quite nasty about her god
her medical programming
and all her sacred bullshit

therapist=the rapist

[avgas]

only NZ and the USA has those new drug ads/news items on the TV news, plus certain drug ads during commercial breaks

So just to clarify your previous statement.
It is not illegal to advertise drugs in US? Or as you put it - it is illegal in all countries except NZ?

Does this mean $4B is spent on advertising in USA and NZ?

Facts are kind of important - it is was makes a point rather than an opinion.

Also are you counting "Drug Company Advertising" as "Drug Advertising"? As most drug companies make more than drugs.
I can easy see $4B being spent on advertising moisturiser, shampoo, medical devices, drugs, creams, make-up........ in fact I would think that figure to be much higher.

[avgas]

you can talk...
I love ted talks
inspiring commentary
'insight' is one of my favourite wurds

I once had an interesting discussion with a professor who was asked to do a TED talk, he said he is working on it but the concept concerned him. The thing that concerned him, was that people assumed that after seeing a TED talk - they knew the subject.
When he said he was preparing to do a TED talk, they would tell him "Oh yes, they are great aren't they - the one last week was about Psychology and how we have got it all wrong....." drifting of into a pile of unresearched dribble.
When he asked them if they had done any research on the topic to confirm what the speaker was talking about. The answer was always "No, just watched the TED talk is all".
This scared him a little and I have to agree.

I once read an article about Barry Sheene, but this does not make me wise to the world of motorbike racing. I also have seen TED talks about lots of different things - but I am wise enough to know I am a fool scratching the surface of the subject after watching them.
But I am now aware that people don't know as must as they think they do after watching one. Leaving a false sense of education.

Which is a shame as the purpose of a TED talk is to highlight the idea so people do their own research. But turns out people don't like homework.

Here is another take on it:
http://www.alternet.org/story/155527...atory_futurism
Which I have to agree - as the TEDx conference just gone was way out of my budget.

[scissorhands]

yes 4b in nz and usa

[Banditbandit]

So just to clarify your previous statement.
It is not illegal to advertise drugs in US? Or as you put it - it is illegal in all countries except NZ?

It used to be illegal to advertise presciption drugs in New Zeakabnd ... and it is still illegal in everywhere except 'Merika (These are ads that say "talk to your doctor about what is right for you" kind of statement ... Pharmacy drugs such as pain kilers, cold and flu meds etc have alwsy been allowed to be advertised) It's called Direct to Consumer Advertising ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct-...er_advertising

So ads like Avigra, Viagra, Cialis, ads for the various asthmas medications, some of the blood pressure meds, being advertised ... the4y are the ones I can remeeebr seeing.

As you will see from the wiki page there is still some controversy around this practice.

[mashman]

I once had an interesting discussion with a professor who was asked to do a TED talk, he said he is working on it but the concept concerned him. The thing that concerned him, was that people assumed that after seeing a TED talk - they knew the subject.
When he said he was preparing to do a TED talk, they would tell him "Oh yes, they are great aren't they - the one last week was about Psychology and how we have got it all wrong....." drifting of into a pile of unresearched dribble.
When he asked them if they had done any research on the topic to confirm what the speaker was talking about. The answer was always "No, just watched the TED talk is all".
This scared him a little and I have to agree.

I once read an article about Barry Sheene, but this does not make me wise to the world of motorbike racing. I also have seen TED talks about lots of different things - but I am wise enough to know I am a fool scratching the surface of the subject after watching them.
But I am now aware that people don't know as must as they think they do after watching one. Leaving a false sense of education.

Which is a shame as the purpose of a TED talk is to highlight the idea so people do their own research. But turns out people don't like homework.

Here is another take on it:
http://www.alternet.org/story/155527...atory_futurism
Which I have to agree - as the TEDx conference just gone was way out of my budget.

I guess you could compare a lot of that to the Milgram experiment you posted elsewhere. However saying that people are leaving with a false sense of education is a bit elitist in itself really innit. Dontcha reckon those leaving realise that they only have an overview of the subject? Given your psychology example, the guy hasn't stopped to think that an awful lot of conclusions pout forwards by "experts" has been debunked over the years as further understanding has come to light or that a subject like the human psyche can never have a 1 cap fits all solution. It sounds like an ill thought out statement to make.

If we only ever relied on people who did all of the research to produce the results that we come to know and love as fact, we'd be fucked... primarily because there are several other "experts" with opposing views having done just as much research that come up with different results. Essentially they're no better than the person that has the opinion of what suits them best as an explanation.

Meh... the popularist shit is right, because journals have been peer read. Have those peers done exactly the same research? If so, then why are they peer reviewing something that has already, likely, been documented as "achieved"?

Just sayin like.

[Oscar]

Depends , if it Juvenalian, or Horatian I prefer Juvenalian my self;

it was and still is a high form of wit , used to highlight social inequalities , Mark Twain? , Catch 22 ?

Usually those that regard it as a lower form of wit , lack the insight and flexibility of mind .

These people make excellent cannon fodder

Stephen

Being as how I was being sarcastic myself you seem to have wandered in range of the aforementioned cannons...

[Brian d marge]

Being as how I was being sarcastic myself you seem to have wandered in range of the aforementioned cannons...

"I'm not surprised you were being sarcastic - it is generally regarded as the lowest form of wit."

that there is a statement ,

Nice try, your better at providing facts than u are at sarcasm

Stephen

[Oscar]

"I'm not surprised you were being sarcastic - it is generally regarded as the lowest form of wit."

that there is a statement ,

Nice try, your better at providing facts than u are at sarcasm

Stephen

If you wish to be a pedantic troll, you should read all of the conversation:

That was a compliment.
Thus far you have appeared completely witless.

You should stick to making up Bible quotes.

[Brian d marge]

Some porn for the children

http://www.listener.co.nz/commentary...ek-at-the-bbc/

Handled it ok, knew his numbers , but completely devoid of reality. either he doesn’t give a shit ( I think) , or is so caught up in the party line , he cannot see the wood for the trees

Stephen

[Ocean1]

Some porn for the children

http://www.listener.co.nz/commentary...ek-at-the-bbc/

Handled it ok, knew his numbers , but completely devoid of reality. either he doesn’t give a shit ( I think) , or is so caught up in the party line , he cannot see the wood for the trees

Stephen

Newsflash: Numbers matter more than a reporters provocative brief. They matter more than his opinion and they matter more than yours.

[Oscar]

Some porn for the children

http://www.listener.co.nz/commentary...ek-at-the-bbc/

Handled it ok, knew his numbers , but completely devoid of reality. either he doesn’t give a shit ( I think) , or is so caught up in the party line , he cannot see the wood for the trees

Stephen

13th May 2011

You are scratching for material aren't you?

[scissorhands]

13th May 2011

You are scratching for material aren't you?

actually if you want to get started with Shonky....I googled 'john key smil' and autocomplete gave me 'smiling assassin' and 'smiling snake' as search options

there is an endless supply of material....
let get started and we can really party