Posts by Abaddon

21

VISTA IS CRAP... MAKE XP LOOK LIKE VISTA WID DIS...

by What-A-Coincidence in

topdesk is a quick and easy way to switch between applications.

with a single key press, you can instantly view thumbnails of all open windows, display thumbnails of windows belonging to the current application, or hide all windows to quickly access the desktop.

.

Abaddon

I work managing out-sourced technical support for a variety of companies, from video editing software through to internet security.

Minimum system requirements are a result of a fight between maketing (who want the lowest hardware requirements possible to avoid dissuading people from buying it), engineering, who actually know what they'd use to run the software, and support, who are the poor bastards who get it the neck when half the features don't work on hardware more than two years old. When I was a phone agent I used to coach people with W98SE PII's shutting down all unused programs so they could sucessfully capture DV to disc. Computers were so shit most of the video-editing software came with hardware to allow video catures as the PC's couldn't do it alone. Now you just jack a Firewire in. To this day I have nightmares about Derick Collins, a retired gentleman who had a similar effect on computers to the Electro-Magnetic Pulse from a nuclear detonation. I used to beg him not to chnage any settings after I'd got things working, but within a week or two...

It's like a Smart ForTwo is a car. It has two doors, two seats, a roof, a radio and an "engine". Don't be surprised if it is a little slow on motorways.

Some people would think there was a fault in software with recommended requirements of XP, 1Ghz and 512Mb if it was agonisingly slow on their (Mini Req) W98 PIII 450Mhz 256Mb.

God I am such a nerd...

11

I used to have the best conversations with my Mom when I was a dub-not now

by themonster123 in

jw
friends

whenever me and my mom would have our weekly study, it seemed like we would have the best conversations.

that's when i felt closest to her and felt like both our minds and hearts were open and loving and receptive.

now....(she's still a jw-i'm not), whenever we talk, since it's never about spiritual stuff anymore (since i don't believe it), it's always about shallow stuff-i feel so shallow.

Abaddon

People who are into selling Amway can have the most amasing discussions about all the opportunities Amway offers, and feel like they are part of something special.

This does not mean Amway is anything special or offers great opportunities.

You are evamuating what you have lost using the old set of values you were programmed with.

What you have lost ('talking about the Kingdom' is maybe a good general term) WAS seen by you as the most important thing, of huge value.

Of course, it wasn't, not really, you had just been programmed to see it that way.

Now you don't 'talk about the Kingdom', rather than seeing it as no longer discussing an entirely fabricated and fanciful belief structure, you still attach the old values you've been trained to attach to 'talking about the Kingdom'.

Your programming makes you feel like you have lost something but the something you have lost does not have the value that you were trained it has so in fact you have not lost something.

Don't worry, this feeling will fade, you just have to try and build a normal mother-daughter relationship where one's performance as a seller of literature and repeater of doctrine is not used to guage your self-worth or value to others.

You have gained something.

Your life.

All the best

Gyles

21

VISTA IS CRAP... MAKE XP LOOK LIKE VISTA WID DIS...

by What-A-Coincidence in

topdesk is a quick and easy way to switch between applications.

with a single key press, you can instantly view thumbnails of all open windows, display thumbnails of windows belonging to the current application, or hide all windows to quickly access the desktop.

.

Abaddon

Ah apart from the worshippers of the Penguin (chosen as a logo because Linux users and Penguins have identical sex lives) we will all sup from the Devil's latest OS sooner-or-later.

I remember the Win 3.11 Luddites up in arms over Win 95. They all moved to Win 95 then 98. Then there were the Win 98 Luddites up in arms over XP. They now all use XP. Now XP, normally the whipping boy of frustrations and anger, becomes the fields of Ellysium in comparison to Vista, yet, guess what we will all be using in three years time? Vista.

Which part of 'you cannot beat Satan' don't we all get?

Of course, Steve Jesus, I mean Jobs, can save us. I think it would be a frightful wheeze if Mac released a version of their OS for non-Mac hardware. It would be very simple now both Win and Mac use Intel as it just requires removing a hardware check, and has already been done by hackers.

The people could install Mac OS X on their Windows boxes with 'Bootcamp' (a dual boot program allowing you to boot to Windows or Mac). With the right hardware (virtual machines) and software modficiations you could even have a Windows window open in Mac OS X or a Mac window open in Windows. It would give full compatability and choice.

Having used both OS's I think most people with such a set-up would end up using the Windows environment only when there was no possibility of using the software they needed in a Mac environment.

8

How help my JW-fiancée with her trouble with some JW-family-members?

by Zana in

i am 29 years old, not a jw (never been one, never ever gonna be one), but i am engaged to one (27 years old) and we have marriage-plans for the end of this year.

we are getting along more than great, no real troubles about this religious topic in our relationship (so no need to write me some of those run-and-hide-posts .

and we are talking about her family: two sisters are quite dedicated jws, the mother is studying with them, the father died a few years ago and her 4 brothers don't care at all about the jws.

Abaddon

To be honest, this sounds like a mess.

You have agreed never to try and get her (whom to you believes in something as real as the tooth fairy) to break her faith. The fact this is almost impossible is bourne out by the fact you're already finding it difficult not to.

She, a member of a belief system that has proselyzing as one of its central tenets has agreed never to try and convert you. So

You are currently involved in a sexual relationship outside of marriage which for her (if baptised) is an automatic disfellowship if you don't say sorry and never do it again. The only reason the local Elders passing judgement over her would say what they said is if she lied to them and said "sorry I'll never do it again until I am married", or if she is unbaptised. SHe is kidding herself regarding having sex now and m,aking it alright later as the JW's belief system does not work that way. If she really believes what she says she should believe if Armagedon came tomorrow she would die with you.

If she doesn't, and has lots of doubts, go into the garden and scream for joy.

If she is unbaptised go into the garden and scream for joy.

You say her sisters are studying with her mother; are they baptised?

If they aren't there is a clear warning sign; they're big enough moralisers to follow JW doctrine before they are. If she isn't, then her sisters could see her if they really wanted to as it is okay to keep contact with unbaptised unbelievers who are family.

This can only pan out a limited number of ways;

She gets sucked into the JW's due to familial pressure and dumps you
She (assuming she is baptised) gets disowned by her family at some point for some rule she breaks; Christmas, birthdays, blood transfusions, oral sex (yes, that's wrong too according to JW's), the list is huge and almost unavoidable for someone who is living with a non-believer.
She will lead a troubled existence never believing in it enough to leave you (as she would be told to by any real Witness), never not believing in it enough to get out, always feeling she is failing god or you.
She will "live a lie", only doing JW stuff when family or local JW's are around.
Alternately she is believing out of habit or fear of familial abadonment and leading a comparatively normal life with you, with little exposure to meetings or literature will destroy the habit and dull the fear, and she will get the courage to stand upto to her family regardless of concequences.

I think you need to watch carefully for a time when you can renegotiate your agreement not to talk about beliefs. Wait until her family really hurt her. Any xJW here can tell you that is simply a matter of time. You can then use the common-sense approach you showed here of wondering how any belief system based on love can be so unloving and cause so much hurt, and watch her try and answer your questions and in doing so hopefully open her eyes with your help.

Of course, all the above is just my opinion, I ain't neccesarily right.

60

has anybody seen the 300 yet?

by Crumpet in

has anyone seen this movie?

basically i know nothing about it except it might have some big war scenes in it and am going to see it on saturday night with ex mr c.

Abaddon

It's a pity it focused on the Spartans; hamsterbait is quite right about the Greek military in general. The most elite of the elite soldiers were gay couples, fighting alongside each other. Of course, 'gay' is a modern coinage and not neccesarily the same as pedastry, which was the common greek form of homosexuality. But the idea was that lovers would fight fiercely for each other and not dessert each other.

The Spartans, although quite relaxed about homosexuality in general, were the exception to this rule in the millitary. The very idea a Spartan soldier might show more courage or be less likely to desert because they were fighting with their lover was anathema to the Spartans, as a Spartan soldier should be brave no matter what and not dessert any he fought with.

The orignal unit that this idea was based on (a 300 strong group called the Scared Band) were all but wiped out in a battle which signalled the end of the City-State era in Greece and the rise of Macedonia. They basically stood their ground and fell there when the rest of their army ran. The actually found the graves which backed up an ancient description of how 254 were buried (the remaninder falling wounded and not dying on the battlefield).

I do think it rather amusing there's this debate about gays in the millitary... I mean, what do the antis really think? They'll be pink tanks and special marches ("At the left quick MINCE!")??

I can imagine the recruitment posters... a drippingly homoerotic pair of privates (LOL) with charmingly ripped and besmeered battle dress, with full on pecs and six-packs and under the banner headline "577th Special Gay Assault Squadron (motto; standing erect to defend our country) the strap line;

"You say gay like that's a bad thing. Piss us off and find out how right you can be."

or maybe;

"Hey, where have all the homophobes gone all of a sudden?"

or maybe;

"For real men only"

or maybe just;

"Friendly Fire"

I suppose "Lock and Lube" would be a bit too rude...

262

Global Warming Hysteria

by metatron in

jw
friends

http://cjunk.blogspot.com/2007/02/quacks-cranks-and-junk-science.html.

are global warming skeptics really just cranks?

i don't doubt that we are having some effect on .

Abaddon

Frank

The burden of proof is on you to support your position.

My main postions are;

1/ the evidence is that there is currently an unprecidented rise in average global temperatures

2/ that there are no natural forcings which can explain this

3/ that the vast majority of climatologists support AGW

I also feel there is loads of anti-AGW hysteria and fallacious argumentation (like "they were wrong the '70's about an ice age therefore they are wrong now") and that many of the most vocal anti-AGW scientists have qustionable track records, but I have already covered these in depth, and to be honest neither point addresses the question of whether AGW is real or not, so, like, whatever.

Looking at 3/ first, regarding Peisers, he is typically quoted by AGW skeptics to bolster one of their false arguments, viz.; "there is no overwhelming majority of climatologists supporting AGW", when Peisers now believes there IS an overwhelming majority. Present the facts in any order you like but this is the state of play today.

Secondly you quote in detail the results of a survey which I had already shown was based on unsound methodology.

Thus contention 3/ above stands, based on the evidence of the very person most used by AGW cynics to deny such a majority exists. If you deny "the vast majority of climatologists support AGW", please let me know and provide supporting evidence. If you can't do this my contention stands.

You have gone to a deal of effort in analysing claim 1/ and 2/, looking to see if the current trends are indeed unpresidented. However, you also seem to think that a temperature graph ALONE proves something other than temperatre. When I say unprecidented it means scale + timing + lack of natural forcings.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vostok-ice-core-petit.png

This shows delta degrees C, CO2 ppm and dust ppm

It clearly shows a coupling betwen CO2 and temperature, with dust peaks in cold dry periods. Note the fact there is a 'lag' between temperature rise and CO2 rise doesn't disprove AGW. These are showing cycles in the past where us monkeys were not burning billions of tons of fossil fuels, and the natural cycles observable in this do not apply when we increase CO2 levels 30% above anything seen in the past 400,000 years by fossil fuel burning in a 200 year long period.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Milankovitch_Variations.png

This shows Precession, Obliquity, Eccentricity, Solar Forcing and Stage of Glaciation

At the risk of repeating myself, current trends are unprecidented. If this is untrue, please indicate when we had the same delta of degrees C in such a compressed period with the Precession, Obliquity, Eccentricity, Solar Forcing we currently have. You can't, and it's not because of the scale of the graph either. It is because current trends are unprecidented.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Solar-cycle-data.png

This shows Solar Variation since 1975

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Satellite_Temperatures.png

Temperature in the same period

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mauna_Loa_Carbon_Dioxide.png

CO2 of slighly more than the above period

Looking at the three graphs together one can clearly see how Solar Varations effect on temperature can be seen, but how over and above this we see a steady trend in temperature rise corresponding to level of CO2.

In light of the above I think Contentions 2/ and 3/ stand too. If you can show another period where identical forcings to that we have now triggered a climate change like that we have now, please do. If you can show natural forcings that explain current trends, please do. Please note I have already mentioned the research that may explain >35% of current change, so you can't quote that as I am not disputing that possibility; you need to look at forcings to explain the remaining 65%. If you can't do this my contentions stand, as supported by the evidence supplied above.

By way of an aside, I note in your last post you are ignoring the calculations made about the overall contribution towards global warming by urban heat islands and the citing of weather stations I posted earlier. The quoted material doesn't change these calculations one iota, so the relevance of what you posted is questionable in the debate about global warmig.

85

What's the difference between humans and animals if there is no God

by JH in

jw
friends

if there is no god, does this make us the most intelligent animal?.

Abaddon

greendawn

Derek, it is self evident that humans have a spiritual dimension precisely because they seek to do and develop things that go way beyond securing physical survival something that animals and much more inanimate objects can not do.

Yeah, and humans also have a fairy dimension, a Yeti dimension, a Nessie dimension, a Beast-of-Dartmoor dimension, a Star Trek dimension, a mascara dimension, an interior designer dimension. Why do you think having a belief in something means something exists? Holy Tooth Fairy.

Humans learn, solve complicated problems, create, perfect, understand artistic beauty, in ways that are a world apart from animals and in ways that far exceed survival requirements.

Funny that a human can use its evolved abilities in way removed from the survival requirements that lead to the development of those abilities. Bit like a dog learning to shake hands or look for drugs. Oh, by the way, Bower Birds think modern human art is rubbish.

Of course that body also has its superior points, walking on two legs, speech organs, each person has a unique face (except in the rare identical twins) and even a unique voice that guarentees them their individuality, and thin hair cover.

For Pete's sake,. you're making really bad points man. Bipedal locomotion; means we have back problems as we were originally quadrupeds, and evolution does not make a target design that work perfectly and evolve towards it but refine an existing design to meet gross survival demands with sometimes negative secondary effects. Speech organs; most animals communicate - we have bigger brains and more to talk about. Unique face; sheep (and likely most social mammals) can identify each other very well thank you, even if we can't tell one from another; I know, I know, they all look the same. Sheep probably think that about us. Thin hair cover; and this makes us unanimalistic why? Does it make hairless mole rats human? It actually means we have to wear clothes most of the time... but I suppose clothes are a human attribute? LOL.

25

Is it normal to love a spouse more than your child(ren)?

by unbeliever in

jw
friends

i was watching this show in passing and they had a woman on there that said she loved her husband more than her children.

she said by putting her husband first it made her marriage stronger and happier and therefore it made her a better mother.. i did a double take when i heard that.

i don't think it is normal to love a spouse more than your child.

Abaddon

Interesting topic

You choose to take someone as a spouse or a partner, for what they are. It is all about them, and how they effect you (who they have also chosen). You should choose them for them, not them to enable you to breed.

You do not choose children, you get them. You love them because they are you're children.

The loves are very obviously different in nature. But that doesn't mean one cannot prioritise them in some way; you can like a V8 Chevy pick-up and a Mazda RX-7 for very different reasons and have no difficulty in saying which you like best.

My first wife made it very obvious that children came first and I came second as far as love went. We had argeuments because I went to give her a kiss when I got home from work before children. Her prioritisation of love meant the kids were potentially empowered to effect the relationship between their parents - if you love your kids more than your partner your kids can manipulate you and your partner, as they know they will win and still 'have' you.

If you love you partner more than your kids your kids will know where they come. They won't often try to manipulate things as there is no advantage to the manipultion; both parents will be upset rather than just one.

What kids need most is consistency. A stable parental relationship is the best way to establish this, and that is one where the relationship between the parents is what leads the family, not one where one parent is weak enough to create 'sides' within a family where their partner is on the 'other side'.

Of course, maybe the root of this discussion is that some people haven't found the right partner yet, and therefore rather than their relationship being founded about a strong pair-bond it is founded around breeding with an obvious impact on who comes first.

85

What's the difference between humans and animals if there is no God

by JH in

jw
friends

if there is no god, does this make us the most intelligent animal?.

Abaddon

kwintestal

Very good point. No matter what one's religious beliefs we are the most intelligent animal. The beliefs do not change the scientific fact that we are animals, unless you subscribe to 'magical thinking' or unprovable speculation.

onlycurious

The core of this thinking really de-values us as individuals.

To you maybe. To others it means one has sole responsibility to make your life worthwhile. That's exciting. To me the idea we can only have meaning in our life if there is a god devalues us as individuals.

If I am merely an animal, and am just a happenstance that came into being because of something called the evolutionary process, then:
I am not special, I am not created, I don't have a purpose, I am not intricately made, I am not unique, I hold NO value or worth, I am not an individual,
I could go on but I am sure you get the point.

Yes. You think that about 70-80kgs of mammal is far more important than it actually is. You ASSUME you should be important in the scheme of things.I don;t think you can actually validate that assumption.

I think the need to feel more important than one actually is is one of the chief motivating factors in religious thinking, at least as far as most Western traditions go.

I am a youth worker and it is amazing to see adults scratch their heads and wonder why there is more depression, more suicide, more cutting, more anorexia, more substance abuse, more more more......

More than what? More than when? I think you're asuming somethings never happened in the past when they did, and thus your conclusions are usafe. Have you considered the good side of things now? Better education, more equality, etter health and longer lifespans? The list is extensive...

Our children are a product of a few generations being told they were NOT created and intricately designed by a loving God who cares about them, knows every hair on their head, gave them a special personality of their own, breathed life into them and called it GOOD!
These kids have nothing to live for when they are told they are anothing more than an animal

In YOUR opinion. But your opinion fails to take into consideration any of the aspects that secular people actually do value or consider make life worthwhile.

Your religious beliefs give your life meaning even though they are incomprehensible to me. My secularity might be incomprehensible to you, but that doesn't stop it having meaning for me.

Animals act upon their instincts....and we wonder why these kids just can't seem to keep it in their pants? Why? Because they are being told they are nothing more than animal. Girls are selling themselves short when all the while they are sooooo special and so loved by a God who knows their deepest thoughts, desires, and hurts.

So YOU believe. Your beliefs are not held by everyone. That is why they're called YOUR beliefs.

142

This board is not for me.

by Wafe in

jw
friends

when i came to this board, i thought that it was for encouragement amoung people who had been treated badly by the wtbts, i did not understand that people were going to come here and bash god, his son and the bible.

i could understand some embitterment over religion but some of you people are down right insulting.

not to mention the fact that i have tried to contact others on the board and have had my messages ignored.. .

Abaddon

As a new feature I am allowing people to CHOOSE which of two replies to a thread they read;

1/ I like kittens.

2/ Oh, how dreadful! You've gone from a situation where everyone is meant to believe and act the same to one where you are expecting everyone to believe and act the same as you, but the people show every sign of having their own opinions! Life is so unfair! Don't people know it's all about YOU?!! I do hope you don't disfellowship us!