Continued: (Ed) Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I don't see how your first link is related to your second.

Not that that should matter, as any halfway decent blogger, when commenting on something on any given website, will link to the relevant part(s) of that website so their readers can catch up. That this hasn't happened is, presumably, an artefact of the way that a small, known audience is presumed. I'd also say that a decent blogger would address a general audience, rather than someone they're having a bitch-fight with.

What I have gleaned is that Skepchick have a site dedicated to teenagers? And they're starting one dedicated to disabled people? What have teenagers and disabled people done to deserve that?
Click to expand...

The first link serves to illustrate that the idea of going over to a comments section enmass was a planned/discussed action amongst the Aplussers who will retreat to their "safe space" where they will happily delete/block/ban any input that dissents from their accepted dogma.

As that blog entry sits anyone unfamiliar with what happened will be left scratching their head or doing a lot of research on Skepchick in order to find just what Grimalkin is on a about. Big brouhaha over the disabled blog as well, something about autistic parents

I gather the teen Skepchick site is one where neophyte bloggers can cut their teeth before moving on to the big leagues.

Back in physics class, we actually did the math on the idea that you can burn calories by drinking ice water. It turned out that you'd die of water intoxication well before you burned off a Snickers bar. 100 calories/quart ? seems about right. Interesting cursory research ( on my part ) into the protein content of gummy bears vs spinach though.
 
Stout said:
The first link serves to illustrate that the idea of going over to a comments section enmass was a planned/discussed action amongst the Aplussers who will retreat to their "safe space" where they will happily delete/block/ban any input that dissents from their accepted dogma.
Click to expand...

Is that what happened, though? If so, why just Grimalkin who got banned? And isn't the idea, as expressed in that thread, to just post lots of positive comments?

The tone of the blog entry makes it sound more like it's a continuation of the Skepchick "stupid" kerfuffle.

As that blog entry sits anyone unfamiliar with what happened will be left scratching their head or doing a lot of research on Skepchick in order to find just what Grimalkin is on a about.
Click to expand...

Yup. As I said, it's not good blogging at all. It just assumes that the audience will have been following whatever has been going on.

Back in physics class, we actually did the math on the idea that you can burn calories by drinking ice water. It turned out that you'd die of water intoxication well before you burned off a Snickers bar. 100 calories/quart ? seems about right.
Click to expand...

I suppose you could hold it in your mouth until it warmed up, spit it out again, and later, rinse, and repeat.

Of course, you'd burn off more calories per unit-of-time and have a much more interesting/pleasant time by going for a brisk walk, but hey, nobody said being lazy was easy.
 
Grimalkin was actually writing for Teen Skepchick all the others simply appeared in the comments section of this article, as well as this one and here also

So it really is a continuation of the stupid kerfuffle.

What? You mean actually get out and exercise ? Ha! that's for chumps. All you need to do is get yourself one of those Ab Sonic ( tens machines ) belts, strap it on and by the time Jerry Springer is over, you'll have reaped the equivalent benefits of 3600 sit ups. ;)
 
Stout said:
Uh Oh

Grimalkin has been kicked off Teen Skepchick for leading that raid over the use of the word stupid and the phrase "remember to breathe"

See the butthurt here
Click to expand...

We did predict the Aplussers, etc., would turn on each other because without conflict they die.

I like Grimalkin's gem in the second link:

You [skepchicks] aren’t going to win this. You might be a relative Goliath against a bunch of little Davids, but ignoring that we already know how that story goes, you wouldn’t win anyway. The bad guys never win, not after a while. Primarily because the bad guys have a nasty habit of ignoring history. You’re having that nasty habit right now.
Click to expand...

Except after the bad guys win, they say they were the good guys and their opponents were the bad guys. Work on your critical thinking, Grim!
 
In the distance, they heard the sound of A+ heads exploding....

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10202482631281324&set=a.1116909877215.114672.1061027523&type=1&theater

Last year Dr. Karen Stollznow, a sometime colleague and former lover, accused me of, among other things, stalking and sexual harassment. At the time and for many months afterward I was prohibited from publicly responding to her claims. My lack of a response was widely taken as a tacit admission of guilt, but I am innocent of these accusations.

Karen has now acknowledged that her accusations were false and she has retracted her claims. Most of the public venom over this issue has come from people with no knowledge of our situation or relationship, and who uncritically repeated rumors and half-truths. Ironically this demonstrates exactly the sort of rush to judgment and lack of critical thinking that both Karen and I have spent years fighting. I have no further comment and we ask that this matter be laid to rest. Thank you.
Click to expand...

:dl:
 
Last edited:
I am taking a 'multiculturalism' class (SF Bay Area) in college which I think it being taught by an Aplusser.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Well, I had a quick look at Teen Skepchick. First article I click on: http://teenskepchick.org/2014/03/21/calorie-counting-yay-or-nay/



That's a myth. It actually takes 1/12th of the calories you ingest from eating celery to digest it. The rest is processed. It's a low calorie food, but the only negative calorie food is cold water because water contains no calories and it takes energy to warm it up inside your body. To burn off 100 calories by drinking water, ensure the water is ice cold and ingest a quart of it.

In other words - don't do that.

So, yeah, the very first article I look at has a myth masquerading as science. Good to see the journalistic standards of Skepchick being maintained. Chip off the old block. They must be proud.
Click to expand...



A final note about the efficacy of calorie restriction: severe calorie restriction is dangerous. The Minnesota Starvation Experiment showed that even semi-starvation (a diet of about 1500 calories per day) can have serious and lasting side effects including depression, self-mutilation, preoccupation with food, decrease in metabolism (with impacts on heart, body temperature, and respiration), and isolation. Many popular diets today recommend going as low as 800 calories per day (1200 per day is considered starvation). If calorie restriction is your chosen weight loss program, you need to be incredibly careful as it is easy to do damage to your body and your mind.
Click to expand...

It's a bit of derail perhaps but I am surprised by the figures quoted in the wiki link from the above to the Minnesota Starvation Experiment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment

According to most of the sources I find, the optimum daily calorie intake for the average man doing very little physical exercise is about 2000, for women about 1800.
The experiment subject apparently received 3200 calories before the restriction. This is a more than a third higher than today's recommended levels and 1500 is still approx 75% of today's basic requirement. By today's standards, calorie restriction, certainly but semi starvation?
I don't doubt the restriction had an effect but they seemed to have been tanked up before the restriction .
 
Last edited:
They seem to have eaten mostly carbohydrates while on that diet. I'm sure that was a factor in how they reacted to it.
 
Mr. Scott said:
We did predict the Aplussers, etc., would turn on each other because without conflict they die.
Click to expand...

Yup, it didn't take a prophet to see this coming. It was clear from the beginning at A+. This said, conflict does seem to be the life blood of message boards in general, and may explain why they are in decline. I mean, does anyone know of a board that has more active users today than a year ago?
 
I'd guess that message boards are in decline (if indeed they are) because of 2 factors, maybe 3:

1, the rise of social media sites. Twitter, Facebook and (for some) G+ are the way that people communicate these days. These are formats which are not suited to lengthy discussions or, indeed, lengthy posts. Brevity is the order of the day, as is shallowness. But what these sites are, for many people, is time-consuming. If you're spending all your time updating your profile and seeing what your friends did on a night out, who has time to spend discussing something at length and in depth?

2. People access the internet in a different way these days. By which I mean that many people access the internet on their phones, for the most part. And that, again, is not a format which is either conducive to reading a message board, or for making lengthy posts. Twitter and Facebook are far more suited to both reading and posting from your phone.

3. This is my maybe. I wonder whether it's also to do with the rise of blogs, YouTube, tumblr, etc. Posting on a message board is posting somewhere where the members of that message board are likely to be the only people to read what you have to say. Posting a video on YouTube, writing a blog, posting a gif on tumblr, means the whole world could potentially see it. It seems like there's a wider, global audience.

Plus, on the other side of the coin, rather than be part of a message board that you have to actually participate in, you can consume information disseminated by other people and then still feel part of it by posting in the comments section. Your comment may get lost in the noise, but that's okay because you've Had Your Say.

The first two seem likely to me, the third I'm not sure about but seems credible.
 
I'd agree all 3 you mention are contributing causes, especially number 1. But I have a feeling-not any proof mind you-that boards develop in and out groups over time and noobs are often not made to feel welcome. A decade or so back almost everyone was a noob so you didn't have this kind of division.
 
adamwho said:
I am taking a 'multiculturalism' class (SF Bay Area) in college which I think it being taught by an Aplusser.
Click to expand...

It's more likely the other way around. The Aplussers aren't introducing new ideas; they're just regurgitating a certain kind of multiculturalism curricula. Atheism-Plus is what you get when you filter Atheism through that curricula. As we've seen, you're left with no real Atheism to speak of, but a whole lot of "Plus". That curricula seem to have the same effect on every idea they come in contact with, so be careful: Earning a passing grade without losing your mind will be tricky.
 
My favorite part of that A+ blog is the post by the guy who gave a WOC an honest critique of her artwork--namely, he didn't think it could beat out the other people in the class, and since the class was a scam diploma mill thing where only the top few students would reap any benefits at all, it might be best for her to drop the class. But he says now he shouldn't have done that. Because clearly, the thing to do is to lie to women and/or POC in order to keep their spirits up. Hurrah!
 
qwints said:
Stollnow has now set up a legal defense fund so it's safe to say she's not retracting her original accusations.
Click to expand...

Woooooow... They appear to be on track to reach their $30k target within the first day. I think $50k is possible - potential supporters in the West Coast are still sitting in their offices working and a good portion won't look at Facebook for a few more hours.
 
blutoski said:
Woooooow... They appear to be on track to reach their $30k target within the first day. I think $50k is possible - potential supporters in the West Coast are still sitting in their offices working and a good portion won't look at Facebook for a few more hours.
Click to expand...

Is she going to give some to Greta Christina's shoe fund?

Sorry. I was channeling Scrut.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom