Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/jHbWi0e0cnk&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/jHbWi0e0cnk&fs=1</a>
12

Do you mean some hypothetical socialist country where people in power DON'T feather their own nests because they can? Some perfect world socialist country. Yeah, I'll take that. But it'll only happen when flocks of flying monkeys erupt from my ass.

LOL.  I never said such a country or Goobermint currently exists, or in fact has ever existed.  But then again, no truly "Capitalist" country ever existed either.

My main goal is to provide a roadmap to a Better Tomorrow.  That is the goal of the SUN project.  I know the current system in the FSoA is FUBAR and will collapse of it's own accord.  So I present ideas on how to improve on things as the spin down progresses in terms of equity in collapse.  It won't take monkeys flying out of your ass either.  It will just take empty shelves at Walmart.

If you don't like the new system, feel free to hop on a sailboat and go...somewhere else.

RE
13
This is all so incredibly fuckin' silly.

It's ALL gonna go. Capitalist, socialist, monarchy, whatever.

What's a socialist country anyway?  Are there any in existence? Where?

I see some "social democracies". These are capitalist countries, because it's the capitalists paying the taxes that create the wealth to redistribute.

Sweden is the poster child.

Yesterday I got in trouble with Palloy because I said Russia was socialist, and he corrected me. They have rich oligarchs.

China has all kinds of rich oligarchs.

Viet Nam?

N Korea?

Cuba?

Are those your idea of a successful way to run a  country. No thanks. I'll pass. The Repressed Citizens of America are way better off than the people in any of those places. Even smack shootin' rednecks in the trailer park are better off. People in NK are HUNGRY. The poor people here are obese.

Do you mean some hypothetical socialist country where people in power DON'T feather their own nests because they can? Some perfect world socialist country. Yeah, I'll take that. But it'll only happen when flocks of flying monkeys erupt from my ass.




14
The issue here is that "if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem".  As long as you maintain the position the "Capitalism has some good points, it was just corrupted by a few Evil Men at the top", you are part of the problem.  This is the group of people who now try to make a distinction between "capitalism" and "corporatism". Trying to throw whitewash over a really bad system which has impoverished billions for the profit of 1%.  It's not the "few bad apples" that make Capitalism bad, the system itself is rotten to the core.

Will Socialism fix all the ills of resource depletion and population overshoot we have now?  Of course not, but it would provide a more equitable distribution of wealth during the spin down.  All the wealth of the top 10% should be stripped and used to fund the rebuilding of public infrastructure.  All excess housing besides the dwelling a person actually lives in should be converted to housing for the Homeless.  All excess vehicles besides the one the person needs for daily tasks should be converted to a fleet for pbulicly available rental cars at affordable prices.  All wages should come within 1 Standard Deviation of the mean, in our current economy around $70K household income.  Essentially this means nobody over $150K, nobody under $35K.  Medical care should be public and supported by taxation on profits and excess income above the $150K threshhold.

Most industries should be converted to Worker Cooperatives, run by the workers.  The main conduits in particular, Energy, Food, Housing, Medicine, Communications and Transportation.  Managers should be selected by the workers, not by the share holders in a corporation.  Banking and Money Creation should be done by Goobermint, not by a private cartel of International Banksters.

Many other changes are necessary of course, but this would be a good start towards managing the spin down we have ahead here.  Capitalism and its Apologists are the Enemy, they gotta go.

RE
15
Oh, I'm ad hom now am I? 

What I am is tired of people putting words in my mouth. I don't suffer fools gladly. Your bullshit about my "erroneous" views is worse than ad hom. It's a deliberate attempt to misrepresent my POV, which you are never going to get away with.


Erroneous views....fuck you, asshole.

Now THAT is ad hom. Just so you know.
16
Surly Newz / Re: Things That Make Me Say, "Dafuq?"
« Last post by Eddie on Today at 12:05:51 PM »
They sure ignored what look like big spikes in the control that AREN'T present in the other sample. They cherry picked the ones  to consider. What about the five obvious spikes they didn't mention?

I guess it does prove the whiskeys end up with fairly obvious differences.

I'm not a bourbon drinker. Never found any I liked. I used to drink Scotch, years ago, but it's an acquired taste too. Nobody likes their first taste of any booze. That should tell you something.
17
Eddie, the reason I have engaged your erroneous view of Capitalism and americna Anti-Socilist skullduggery before 1947 is not to actually convine you of anything. I just wanted to make it clear to everyone reading here that, as you said, you do not care. I wish you did care. Nevertheless it is refreshing to hear you admit you do not.


Once again you are trying to twist my words. I leave it to any readers who might have a shred of intelligence to figure that out. I expect there are some, but they probably can see that you're a crank too, and won't waste time responding.

That my view is or was erroneous is your take. And I have taken the time to try to explain why I disagree, which is way more than I should have done.

What I don't care about is what silly old cranks think, you included. I do care about the subject material, which should be obvious to anyone who took the time to read what I wrote. It's not hard to follow unless you have real tunnel vision.


That's Ad hom.  :emthdown: :emthdown: I thought you weren't going  to "waste your time". Have a nice day.
18
Eddie, the reason I have engaged your erroneous view of Capitalism and americna Anti-Socilist skullduggery before 1947 is not to actually convine you of anything. I just wanted to make it clear to everyone reading here that, as you said, you do not care. I wish you did care. Nevertheless it is refreshing to hear you admit you do not.


Once again you are trying to twist my words. I leave it to any readers who might have a shred of intelligence to figure that out. I expect there are some, but they probably can see that you're a crank too, and won't waste time responding.

That my view is or was erroneous is your take. And I have taken the time to try to explain why I disagree, which is way more than I should have done.

What I don't care about is what silly old cranks think, you included. I do care about the subject material, which should be obvious to anyone who took the time to read what I wrote. It's not hard to follow unless you have real tunnel vision.





19
The gentlleman Eddie doth protest too much!

Eddie said, after a long post where in which he assumes my post is directed exclusively at him. That's rather arrogant of you, Eddie.

Quote
But this rant is over for me, and your follow-up, now doubt delivered in a tone even more shrill, must remain unanswered by me. I just don't care enough about what you believe to even waste my time.
Eddie, the reason I have engaged your erroneous view of Capitalism and American Anti-Socialist skullduggery before 1947 is not to actually convince you of anything. I just wanted to make it clear to everyone reading here that, as you said, you do not care. I wish you did care. Nevertheless it is refreshing to hear you admit you do not.

I had other reasons. Many here don't know the history and I  wanted to help them understand it. Capitalism is morally bankrupt. It really bends you out oof shape for me to say that and you take it personally while trying to frame me as the "touchy" hysteric. You shouldn't. You then ascribe all sorts of hatefilled hysteria to me. You shouldn't. I'm for peace, not hate. Capitalism is for hate, division, poverty and war for profit. If you don't believe that, you are wrong.
20
How about something more pleasant. This popped into my inbox this morning.

Bourbon Vs. Bourbon: Did Whiskey Really Taste Better in the 1800s?

Bourbon Vs. Bourbon: Did Whiskey Really Taste Better in the 1800s?

If you ship whiskey on a river, does it taste better? We wanted to know, so we ran an experiment.

bourbon whiskey bottles.
STUART TYSON

There’s an old story in the whiskey world: Before trucks and bottling lines, all American whiskey was aged and shipped in barrels, soaking up flavor as it sloshed down the Mississippi River. Eventually, people took a particular liking to the barrels marked “Bourbon County, Kentucky.” They started clamoring for “bourbon.” And that’s how that whole thing got started.

Trey Zoeller, the cofounder ofJefferson’s Bourbonand a man with an experimental streak as wide as a barn door, wondered if something had gotten lost in the decades of progress that followed. “In my mind, bourbon proliferated in Kentucky because of the route to market and not, as most people claim, the limestone water,” says Zoeller. To test that theory, two years ago he sent two barrels of Jefferson’s signature spirits along a traditional bourbon shipping route, down the Ohio River to the port of New Orleans and then into the Atlantic and up to New York City. The day he arrived in Manhattan to taste it, he brought the first sample, along with a control batch from Louisville, to Popular Mechanics. The whiskey that took the trip, which Zoeller calls Jefferson’s Journey, was mature beyond its age, richer, with new flavors of tobacco, vanilla, caramel, and honey. It was some of the best bourbon any of us had ever drunk.

map of bourbon travel down the Mississippi River
SINELAB

To see if something had changed, on a molecular level, in the Journey to make it taste better, we partnered with Good Housekeeping Institute chemical engineer Birnur Aral and scientists at Jordi Labs in Mansfield, Massachusetts.

The Results

Jordi Labs analyzed two samples—Jefferson’s Journey and an age-matched control from the same batch that remained in Louisville the whole time—and the researchers performed two tests: gas chromatography paired with mass spectrometry (GCMS) and liquid chromatography paired with mass spectrometry (LCMS). “The GCMS is really good at detecting things that you might smell, while LCMS sorts out molecules that you might taste, although there is definitely some overlap,” says James Woods, one of the scientists who worked on the study. In both tests, specific molecules tend to pop out at specific times. Far more differences were shown in the GCMS, so we chose to focus on that, below. The X axis shows the time as the test progresses. The Y axis is basically an abundance counter: the higher the peak, the more of a particular molecule there is in the sample.

SINELAB

First, look at the huge spikes in the age-matched sample that sat in Louisville. “There are a lot of these large aliphatic esters, such as(A) decanoic acid, ethyl ester,which has a waxy, fruity, sweet-apple smell,” says Leland Martin, an author of the report. Another spike is(B) phenylethyl alcohol,a common floral note in whiskey. The higher presence of these elements in the control could explain why it tastes younger than Jefferson’s Journey. While these tests can’t show exactly how the components of the bourbon broke down during its travels, Journey contains a more diverse range of aromatic compounds, any of which are potentially degradants of components in the control whiskey. The chemicals that appear in greater quantities in Journey include(C) whiskey lactone,which gives whiskey a creamy, coconut-wood flavor and is often used as a flavoring agent in things that are supposed to taste like whiskey, and(D) isovanillin,which smells like vanilla.

RELATED STORIES
The Rise of American Single-Malt Whiskey
Bad News: We're Facing a Whiskey Shortage

Jefferson’s Journey also contains a higher amount of(E) furfural,a chemical with a woody, nutty, burnt-caramel flavor that comes from freshly charred oak barrels and can be used to authenticate whiskeys that have not been adulterated with caramel flavoring. It has a higher amount of(F) 5-methyl furfural,which tastes like maple and grain and is formed during both the Maillard reaction (the browning of meat and baked goods) and the caramelization of sugar.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10