Derek McGowan

I would also be interested in any scientific, anthropological or sociological viewpoints Derek and anyone else might offer.

What would you like to know?

Derek's ending salutation is, "All I wanna do is BANG BANG BANG! And take your money"'

You have been warned. Still Derek sought this forum out and that speaks volumes, so I am not deliberately trying to be offensive or too personal. I will be interested if he elucidates some more about his culture . . . which is not mine. I would also be interested in any scientific, anthropological or sociological viewpoints Derek and anyone else might offer.

you are joking right?

Probably not. I can accept the fact that you didn't know that that tag line was a hook to a popular song called Paper Planes.

But I always took the meaning of the song to be a spoof (probably no the right word) of the culture/attitude, in fact if indeed you watch the video there is no violence depicted but instead it shows legitimate businesses- food trucks, pawn shops, etc- operating in the neighborhood.

Also if you read my post here

http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=14871&hl=

then you would see that I have virtually no run-ins with the law nor do I smoke or drink or hardly even curse. I've never run with any crowd that you would need to warn about. Even if I did believe in that sort of thing (my tagline) my question still remains the one that I asked Kyrel, which is...

How is violence perpetrated by blacks any different then violence perpetrated by whites?

Would the difference be that blacks put it into their songs? (The above mentioned Paper Planes was actually sung by a Indian chick) Because whites have chanted and wrote about violence toward others for centuries.

Not that I'm a huge fan of Eric Micheal Dyson but he pointed out on a show that whites look down on a black person who shoots another because they felt that they were disrespected as a thug, but they hold in high regard Alexander Hamilton's duel with Aaron Burr even though that too was simply a respect issue

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burr%E2%80%93Hamilton_duel

This, again, is the problem I have with Kyrel's above statement, and your implications in the above quote.

There is good and bad in all of us

We will reach to mountaintop

Derek,

I like you.

Michael

Wait a minute!

Allow me to be generous.

Derek. We like you.

--Caesar

...and to Brant

.

Derek, thanks for adding your remarks in #90. You are a bright ray

Thumbs up to you and MSK

Just read through the thread...

Ya know, the thing I'm always curious about when someone makes a statement like Kyrel's opener about how(paraphrasing from #26) blacks downgrade and deteriorate white society whenever they appear, I wonder how does that person view all of history where conquering whites have expanded into other races' (Africans, Austrialians, Mexico, Native Americans, Chinese, Japanese, even Scotland) territories and degraded, killed off, disrupted or enslaved the local populations?

On the other hand I was about to order his book until my wife said that that would be supporting such nonsense positions.

On the word nigger. I never agreed with the idea that only blacks can say it especially when we are talking about young generation friends. If people grow up in a mixed culture and they aren't saying it out of hatred but just the same as I would say it to another black guy, then it's all good to me. Black people do have an issue with ownership. They want to own certain words and culture and the want to own the struggle. No one else can complain about having hardships growing up because black people own that narrative. No one else can rap or dance a certain way without being authorized by a panel of African American gatekeepers. From some folk I get the distinct feeling that while on the outside they say that they want to have an honest and open discussion about race, really they don't want to hear a word of it unless that conversation goes exactly the way they want it too.

We will reach to mountaintop

Tangent time!

Semi-Militaristic as in StarTrek?

You would consider Star Trek to be semi Militaristic? Clarify

. We also have nuclear production of energy within our present ability, and in the case of all machinery that is operated by electricity that is centrally generated, nuclear power is a resource that can (in the US, Japan, et al.) and hopefully will be exploited alongside coal and natural gas. One pellet of enriched-uranium fuel, about the size of a small thimble, can produce the (steam, thence) electricity that can be produced by 100 box cars of coal.

This

The moral case for developing energy sources that are not fossil fuel based

and this is simple, though of course you may not agree

The interviewee said it himself around the 6:40 mark in the video, something about every cent add to the cost of diesel fuel increase the costs of food, etc.

So my moral argument goes like this, energy is important. Extremely important for sooo many facets of modern life and as more countries become industrial, the need for energy, in vast quantities grows.

With this increased demand and the very nature of the production of fossil fuels (ancient plants) you would have to agree that fossil fuels will run out. Maybe not in 50 years, maybe not in 100, hell maybe not in 300. But they will and if we are not prepared with something else to replace them, there will be riots, wars, and possible a regression in human society. Its fine to live in this day and age where I have no fear of fossil fuels running out but in the future, near or far, if the infrastructure isn't in place for the replacement then that generation will be in a world of hurt and THAT is a moral argument.

ps. the timeline. We cannot wait until estimates are we have 10 years left before we start on the replacement.

1. because they panic would have already started and that will disrupt the process.

2. because it will take a while to develop whatever emerging technologies to a level of efficiency that it isn't destroyed simply by the sheer worldly demand.

3. Because it will take a while to build the infrastructure needed to deliver this new energy source, such as the million electric/hydrogen/magic recharging stations needed to power that generation of cars

pps. Which am I for? Fission for now and if we could get our butts in drive for fusion, that would be my preferable solution. Fission, as Stephen stated, makes oil efficiency look 3rd world. My favorite example is nuclear air craft carriers which for such huge machines, moving through water, only have to get refueled every 20 years! One pound of uranium is equivalent to 1 million gallons of diesel.

Fusion is even better AND safer. Using the deuterium of the ocean, and at double Earth's current energy needs, we have a 75 BILLION year supply of fuel.....if and whenever we can crack the science......

I dont understand why anyone would blame capitalists? The eco-minded, such as myself, would first (upon hearing the headline and not reading any evidence) would first suspect hunters or disease. Suburban sprawl, which is the only connection I can think of to capitalism, would not be able to kill any one species in such a short period of time...... unless they were bull dozed

I actually heard an interesting side of gun control the other day. A pro gun guy (Ex military, don't remember exact name or rank) said that he would be for less restrictions except in place with high emotional levels such as sporting events.

I hadn't thought about that before. Often we hear about no guns on school grounds, etc. But It does somehow resonate with me that people DO get really hyped up and upset at football games. A chanting crowd making fun of you while your team loses on the field before you. You probably bet on the team and had 4-5 beers and out comes the gun!

I haven't heard of any stadium shootings. They're likely to be a pretty rare event compared to far more common the liberal mandated "gun free zone" shootings. Murderers go where the low hanging fruit pickings are easiest. Lots of weak helpless unarmed pacifist liberal victims in those clearly designated areas.

It could be a fatal mistake to try mass shooting in a testosterone designated area like a sports stadium.

Can you imagine the atrocities on the shooter after he has been been disarmed?

Greg

My point wasn't about the possibility of some one entering a packed stadium to go on a murder spree, instead when people, otherwise friendly, get overly hyped up and emotional after drinking and at a sporting event, getting into a trash talking argument with the other teams fans and guns getting pulled. No innocents would be hurt but lives might still be lost

Do you use a management company or have the time to manage it yourself?

Greg

Currently I do it all myself. Im sure I can handle maybe 10 more before I needed help (still young!)

p.s. 4th misconception tied to my above statement

There really isn't that much stress to being a landlord. Maybe you spend 3 months fixing stuff, but thats still 9 months of just kicking back and collecting. You take the good with the (little bit of ) bad

I actually heard an interesting side of gun control the other day. A pro gun guy (Ex military, don't remember exact name or rank) said that he would be for less restrictions except in place with high emotional levels such as sporting events.

I hadn't thought about that before. Often we hear about no guns on school grounds, etc. But It does somehow resonate with me that people DO get really hyped up and upset at football games. A chanting crowd making fun of you while your team loses on the field before you. You probably bet on the team and had 4-5 beers and out comes the gun!

Video response

The "Shoot" piece

I remember this from art school

In my Maryland County property values have gone way down lower than the assessed value even if some of my family's acreage is commercial.

Never worry about the value of a property (unless you took on too much debt and have to keep a close eye on selling just to save yourself) and instead only worry about what rents you can get from the place.

This is what I have learned..

1st

Too often people look at the neighborhood that they would choose to live in (nice and expensive) and when the idea of investment property comes up they can only think of how much it would cost to buy such property in a similar neighborhood.

"I need a loan for $450,000 to buy one investment property"

Uh, no. You need to realize that just because you wouldn't live in x neighborhood doesn't mean that others wouldn't. X neighborhood is normal for some folks. I mean think about it, someone accustomed to living in Beverly Hills wouldn't dream of living in your neighborhood either (including Montgomery County) So please think about buying in a lower class neighborhood. I'm finishing a deal on my fourth place now (final title work being drawn up) and it has 5 apartments in it and cost me 80,000. That means 20% 16,000 thousand down and my mortgage is for 64. That means my mortgage will be somewhere between 3-400 dollars. There is almost no risk!

2nd

"But..." you say "you can only charge 600 for an apartment LOL, where I'm from we pay 1200. If I can't get 1200 and apartment then there is no point in me getting in the game"

This is nonsense. If I get 3000 from the building and the mortgage is 400, I clear and easy 2600 (or more realistically 2300 when you take out Public Service electricity and the quarterly water bill) You can't do anything with an extra, no risk 2300 a month?

3rd

"but the value on the resale is so low" you say.

Do I look like I care to resell? I don't even have to save for retirement. Why? Because the 6,000 a month that I make off of real estate right now (not including future purchases) will be coming in from now on through my retirement, FOREVER! Who needs the stress of calculating a nest egg that slowly dwindles. Money comes in FOREVER! The only way you don't get it is if the place catches fire (that's why you have insurance) or you don't pay your property taxes (in which case you are dumb)

Does anyone know the origin of the stomp clap? Is their a recorded origin? When I see it in movies it is depicted in a older black church with the wooden floors and acoustics providing a very distinct and pleasurable sound. Is that where is started?

An example is in this video after the first chorus/bridge. You don't see them doing it but you just hear the sound.

this is a very good sound by the way in my opinion and almost perfect music video (as in one that doesn't become a feature film with special effects, action and drama) with the focus on the artists

A few points on the IQ thing (not on the book because I haven't read it)

I agree with Whynots's post #35 where he shows that IQ doesn't correlate directly with a person's success, moral position, or input into the community. In fact many people with really high IQs aren't doing much at all (according to American scales of success) with their lives such as Christopher Langdan or Daniel Tammet (who can learn a language in a week and calculate pi to 20,000 digits)

but....

Its important to frame success from the same vantage as evolution. There is no eternal best or worse. There are only attributes in the current environment. Paraphrasing- if you judge a fish by how well it climbs a tree you will find them to be very dull indeed. The IQ scale itself is based on attributes that its creators deemed important in our current environment. And I've known quite a few lawyers who are very good at their jobs but outside of that don't seem to have much smarts (my judgement) at all.

The same with the western view of success. Being known and making money is what earns you the title of success in our current world but even as I say that, readers are saying to themselves "that's not what I consider to be success" Unfortunately, while I agree with you, you are outvoted by the current environment (which is not just the physical place we find ourselves but also the culture and mental state of those who surround us)

Lastly, IQ score aside, I can't help but think that how smart someone is (as in how easily they remember and process the information that our current environment gives us) is tied to the educational system. Not a standard complaint about how schools are worse in poorer neighborhoods but taking a more directed issue with the one size fits all nature of today's education. I believe in learning styles and that different people need information presented to them in different ways for their innate mechanisms to better understand.

Such as the divide between math-people and non-math-people. I think that we can all learn math just as equally but the presentation has to be different. You can't expect the same "this class made perfect sense to me" teacher to have like impact on the full array of human brains that pass through their doors. And its not because the teacher is bad or that those students are dumb. Or even that some students have a passion for the thing and others don't. Anyone can learn to draw. They may not be as motivated as one with the passion but if you present the information in a way that corresponds to their learning style they will get it same as others.

Sorry to hear that

I've been watching most of their posts/videos but havent gotten to this one yet

http://gizmodo.com/want-to-help-the-drought-build-a-pool-says-the-pool-i-1708214400

Want to save water, buy a pool saves pool industry

I see, you simply want to see the delay, not to measure it. The processing time of the rods and cones of the eye to the brain is somewhere around 30mS. Light travels around 100Km in that time. That is a lot of reflections between two mirrors spaced 10 feet (3 meters) apart. The final image would be very very small. The mirrors would have to be perfect, 100% reflective with no losses. I don't think what you ask for is possible except as a thought experiment. I've been trying to do what you asked, think it out without clicking links.

Thanks Mikee, for seeing that the point is not to measure the speed, and thanks for your participation. The point about the mirrors being perfect is s good point as the camera would be examining a almost point like image that with any mirror distortion would be far from clear. I feel like today's camera could resolve such a small image though but the internal distortion could be a problem..... so you use liquid mercury, one on the ground and another suspended above.

Light moves 1 foot per nanosecond and we put the mirrors 100 feet apart (30 foot square mercury mirrors, up in the alps for less atmospheric interference) The in 1 second the light would reflect 10 million times which would be 5 million images on each mirror. I wish I had some quick software to show what that would look like-- maybe some time lapse video that takes us through the images showing just how small this final image would be....

But then the question is, would that 5 millionth image be distant enough away that the delay would be more then what we could see anyway based on your information about human perception time

di wrote, "RR makes an excellent point that as technology improves, the experts who rely on its validity must also improve. Faster."

I agree. Pixels can be manipulated but the experts should be one step ahead of that. As usual, the stranger the depiction the more stringent the examination should be. Imagine a special affects stunt in a modern movie, like the hero leaping from a bridge onto a moving flat bed truck. Examination of the data should show "created" vs motion capture photography, just as an expert could see the wires sending Mary Martin through the air as Peter Pan.

Dash cams and worn cams for police or reporters could be hacked but I have no doubt if an alien landing in Manhattan is shown it would be quickly disproved.

I'm thinking of Bill Cosby. He is already has a lot of public opinion against him so if one of the women created and posted a video of the event she claimed he was involved in they were be less inclination to do the examination unlike your example of a modern action movie.

Or what about a person breaking into a store. This is a everyday crime and if the store owner posted the likeness of some punk kid in the neighborhood that they simply didn't like .... thats where I see a problem

Second thought: Put the mirrors a long way apart. Perhaps one of them on the moon. The delay is easily measured on a single reflection proving the speed of light is finite.

Honestly I wasn't looking for the proof of the finite speed of light, more that I wanted to see if we can see such and effect using such a method. But yes I would have spaced the mirrors but not by that much (maybe 10 feet, using 10-20 foot square mirrors) because Im looking for that specific back and forth reflecting effect

Thanks for the link ....

when I specifically said to provide discussion before links!