fea3f8 No.134333
Looked around the catalog, saw no RationalWiki thread. The sheer amount of SJW sperging about pseudoscience and patriarchy is an article away.
db0ddc No.134337
Someone should tell them that rationality is a white male construct.
6aaf4f No.134345
I remember when i used to read this site way before i actually developed any dislike of feminism, and even back then it seemed like the quality of any page plummeted the moment the words "anti-woman" "anti-feminist" or "patriarchy" got involved. The pages with a feminist slant were always the most uninteresting ones.
830dff No.134359
>analyzing and refuting pseudoscience and anti-science
>criticism against fundamentalism and authoritarianism in the media
ayy
ba53af No.134361
>>134359
> but its ok when feminism does it.
4b0d9d No.134383
>>134333
Place is like an unfunny version of ED except less reliable and to top it off meant solely to attack other people that these cunts dont like
The only thing thats really annoying is how they payed for serious SEO service meaning that it comes up quite high in many search results
69d6eb No.134458
>>134383
gotta love how the wiki that was meant to be a sane antithesis to Conservapedia ended just being an antithesis.
dat horseshoe theory.
9cebb9 No.134488
>>134383
At least ED presents itself as comedy, whereas rationalwiki is basically a reaction to conservapedia (both of which present themselves as dead serious)
58133f No.135938
I remember reading a few dozen articles on this site years back, and, while I mostly agreed with what it was saying, it was so heavily slanted and biased that it was hard to take seriously. It's like it tries to take itself seriously as a source of credible information while at the same time being only a blatant soapbox for the authors' political views.
9cebb9 No.135964
>>135938
Again, it's basically a left leaning mirror of conservapedia. The only thing rationalwiki gets right is that it dismisses new-age woo like Deepak Chopra
1947c7 No.135976
They write hate articles about their own. That entire group is cannibalizing itself.
d9d8a9 No.136011
>>134345
It was once a direct response to the batshit insanity of Conservapedia. Basically it was just there to debunk pseudoscience like creationism and moon landing hoaxes. It had some pretty good line by line rebuttals.
Then the SJWs came and apparently they weren't strong willed enough to reject their pseudoscience as well. That's when it all starts falling apart. When you make exceptions to insanity because you want to feel good. Suddenly you can't put yourself above astrologers and anti-vaxxers because you're now just two people in the insane asylum throwing shit at each other.
271838 No.136081
I haven't been on RW for a couple of years now. After seeing this thread, I decided to check it out… Jesus, that place has gone downhill. I mean, the userbase has always been more left-leaning, but they used to keep most of their ideology out of their articles, and I personally couldn't care less about someone's ideology as long as they don't let it interfere with their portrayal of rationality and the truth. But now it looks like SJW autist central.
One thing I noticed, though – in the 'blogs' section, there were a lot of references to a site I hadn't heard of before: "We Hunted the Mammoth." It looks like some sperg's personal blog about feminism and some other crap. Anyone know of any potential cows there we could milk?
38f5ae No.136094
>>135938
So basically, a wiki version of NPR.
e33a4b No.136095
Meh. They're SA-tier cunts, but mostly contained. RW can be summed up as the world, according to secular progressive humanists.
35d2e8 No.137249
>>136081
>We Hunted the Mammoth.
Dude who runs it is a turkey that has been sucking the SPLC's dick on MUH SOGGY KNEES ever since it was called Manboobs or something similar.
Only thing lolcow worthy outside of that would be his apparent defense of a film being sold in a gay porn shop that included some "artistic" underage stuff in it. Don't remember details though.
675b91 No.137277
>>137249
A lot of people think highly of SPLC for no serious reason other than that they get referred to constantly since they just repeat any sort of neo-lib propaganda.
17281c No.137289
This thread is severly lacking in cocks. Here are a few pictures.
In Christopher Hitchens' article, part of which can be seen in the file "views".png they have two sections dealing with his opinions. The one about religion is
>Views on religion
whereas the one about other topics is
>"Views" on other topics
As illustrated by the file thunderf00t.png, they sometimes have a need to go through every argument and tell you what to think. They do this on their MRA article, but not their feminism article (in other words, they only do it when they disagree with the group).
The file "The absurdety of eugenics" is screencapped from their eugenics article. They spout of retarded arguments like they've never heard any arguments against their position (https://youtu.be/We7DyKWw61I?t=1m36s), which I'm sure they have not — if you're already correct, why should you listen to others and recognize that the world might not be black and white?
In "Liberalism.png" we learn that conservatives, unlike liberals, would not go against the status quo even if it could make things better.
They have separate sections on Dawkins article for "stupid criticism" and "legitimate critisism". The latter is attached.
80f69b No.137299
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>137289
Just watching that Thunderf00t vid now. Only about 12 minutes in, but I can see that whoever wrote the RW rebuttal is just doing the old 'cherry pick examples that I can attack to discredit the whole work' thing.
Which Thunderf00t is doing too. Because if Anita (Peace Be Upon Her) talked obvious bullshit all the time, no-one would listen to her and more people would think that she's stupid.
'Games cause sexism' studies. TBH, I wouldn't be suprised if there weren't roughly an equal number of papers that 'proved' that games don't cause sexism as ones that 'proved' that games do cause sexism - and that both are considered correct because peer review and published. Some of these social sciences seem like an art more than a science, in that if you can justify why it's art, then it's art.
(thinking about the troll scientist who managed to have a paper 'proving' that gravity was a social construct published - just talk enough plausible sounding bullshit and you can convince them of anything)
17281c No.137301
>>137299
Sexism isn't really a well defined concept. It means different things to different people, but roughly equatest to "thoughtcrime regarding sex".
I mainly thought it was funny that they couldn't let people make up their own minds, but had to have a section about what the objective truth of the matter was.
I don't care much that they don't try to refute all thunderf00ts points. If thunderf00t did the same to Anita his videos would be quite long. What I find funny, is that they try to pass of their idiotic criticism as objective.
8a6a32 No.137302
>>137299
> Because if Anita (Peace Be Upon Her) talked obvious bullshit all the time, no-one would listen to her and more people would think that she's stupid.
I know you're probably joking, but SJWs don't actually watch Anita's videos. She's revered amongst their tribe purely because she was 'harassed'.
db7116 No.137304
>>137299
>Which Thunderf00t is doing too. Because if Anita (Peace Be Upon Her) talked obvious bullshit all the time, no-one would listen to her and more people would think that she's stupid.
Wait a second, your reasoning is that she MUST not be talking bullshit because a lot of people listen to her…? You're admitting with this statement you personally haven't watched her videos.
The thing is, most of her supporters don't either. They like the *idea* of her regardless of how worthless her arguments are.
Before she was whining about video games she for example called Legos sexist for making a set to appeal to girls, and in producing it they asked girls which colors they'd want for the pieces, and which jobs they'd want. Sure enough, the girls chose pink and purple, and jobs like doctor, homemaker, chef and waitress.
They act like it's sexism that less women go into STEM fields, but you'll note the feminists making these accusations are all women who chose not to go into STEM fields. Virtually every woman I've ever met has wanted to go into one of the following fields: hairdresser, special effects, teaching, doctor, photography, artist, seamstress, veterinarian, or psychology
Her supporters ignore every piece of evidence that comes out proving she's a fraud. They ignore the video where she says she's not a fan of video games and finds them gross, they ignore that her argument on why they're sexist has changed three times into completely conflicting arguments, they ignore that Jonathan McInTosh is the one actually writing all the episodes and her tweets. They ignore her lying and claiming all mass shootings are attempted by males, they ignore her promoting gender and racial segregation in classrooms, and they ignore that she didn't actually play the games she reviewed, as made most evident in her video on Hitman where she claimed the player was rewarded for killing women and dragging their bodies around, when the very footage they used clearly showed score deductions for committing these actions.
80f69b No.137307
>>137304
>>Wait a second, your reasoning is that she MUST not be talking bullshit because a lot of people listen to her…?
No, the point I was making was that she must, on some level be persuasive in her arguments to certain people. There's a lot of stuff that people can say that will get other people nodding along in broad agreement - but then you can work with that to introduce more 'subversive' ideas to the audience.
I haven't watched *all* of her videos, but I think that I've seen enough to get an idea of what she's about.
80f69b No.137309
>>137307
(cont.)
…and part of critiquing someone's ideas is (I guess) determining whether they've made enough errors of reasoning to devalue their whole argument.
But if you turn off your Youtube comments, you prevent people from discussing that directly in a place where the most people will see it.
8a6a32 No.137310
>>137307
>>137309
Your belief is that Anita's Cult of Personality has developed purely because of her videos, it hasn't. She's been making videos for a while. Nobody gave a fuck. It wasn't until she started claiming that gamers harassed her that she started getting attention.
Nobody watches the shitty videos. Notice how she stopped making them, more-or-less? That's because her money making machine is pretty much self-sustaining now. Making shit videos filled with faulty arguments and reasoning would only compromise her position at this point.
Like >>137304 said, it's not Anita that people like but rather the idea of her. It's for this exact same reason that SJWs will throw in with absolute scum like Harper or Nyberg.
17281c No.137311
>>137307
She is presuasive because she can play the victim. Other than that her supporters either don't care about the argument (only about the conclusion) or they are so mired in feminist dogma that building your entire argument on SJW buzzwords seems extremely convincing.
80f69b No.137313
>>137310
>>137311
I must admit that I find it *very* telling that she refuses public debate and has never done an interview where the questions were not obvious softballs.
Was it Christina Hoff Sommers who offered to donate $5000 to a charity of Anita's choice if she would agree to participate in a debate with her, in front of an audience of the general public, who would then be permitted to ask unscreened questions of both?
(or maybe it was Milo Yiannopoulos, or maybe it was both at different times, I honestly can't remember now)
8a6a32 No.137316
>>137313
Both offered to debate Anita. She ignored both of them.
Anita's only been caught out twice. Once on MSNBC where a newscaster asked "What do you say to the people who tell you 'Don't feed the trolls?" to which her response was "Umm….". The other time was on Colbert where he asked her to name three games.
Of course, the delusion is so strong with the SJW crowd that they liken Anita's refusal to debate to Evolutionists not wanting to debate Creationists. They don't see the irony in that idea, because irony is problematic.
fea3f8 No.137324
Been reading some more articles on RW.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Free_will
All this shit just reminds me of the guy in the pic. I also notice that they tend to shit all over Western religions, yet anything Eastern (especially Islam) gets a free pass.
17281c No.137327
>>137326
Where is it from? Do they have user pages and talk pages? If so, that might be an untapped resource.
fea3f8 No.137330
17281c No.137331
Isn't this the guy who got banned from wikipedia for spending seven hours a day editing articles, trying to infuse his ideology into that place?
b17782 No.137333
8a6a32 No.137334
>>137331
He got banned for being a twat, but otherwise, yeah. Pretty much.
17281c No.137338
>>137330
What page is >>137326 from?
8a6a32 No.137339
>>137337
I think he got banned from Irrational Wiki too. He was too SJW even for them.
9cebb9 No.137350
>>136094
NPR is nowhere as bad as rationalwiki. Rationalwiki is probably more like TYT due to sheer snark
e18a66 No.137355
>>136081
>We Hunted the Mammoth
According to >>>/baphomet/, this is run by the same guy who ran @Cernowatch. He tweeted a lot of /baph/ posts to present the board as whatever his Twitter friends were pushing.
He also thought that /cow/ was the same as /baph/, so he made a bunch of tweets about us that were totally clueless. He made the account private after /baph/ owned him, but I saved two /cow/ tweets:
http://tweetsave.com/Cernowatch/status/561243653327556608
http://tweetsave.com/Cernowatch/status/570938767722328064
Come back David
Post last edited at
9b0673 No.137361
>Our purpose here at RationalWiki includes:
>Analyzing and refuting pseudoscience and the anti-science movement.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Category:Social_justice
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Category:Identity_politics
And here the RW users start rioting because some Hitler dared to write colored people can be racist, when my professor just told me only whiteys can be so, because they're born with the original sin (privilege): http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Prejudice_plus_power
197fdb No.137374
>>136081
We hunted the Mammoth, formerly known as Manboobz is a blog by some loser who got triggered by the Manosphere merely existing.
The only function it has is providing a anti-MRA shitposting platform for the owner. Whatever he sees as MRA project, no matter what it is, gets hated on there.
The over representation on Rational Wiki reeks.It implies that its owner and only writer has a lot of influence there. I got bad news about the Wiki format itself…
>>137355
Its not surprising that he tried to shoehorn in a deep connection between Manosphere and some imageboards that doesn't exists outside of NEET twitter.
8a6a32 No.137382
>>137355
Your links don't work for me
17281c No.137385
>>137382
www.tweetsave.com/cernowatch/status/561243653327556608
www.tweetsave.com/cernowatch/status/570938767722328064
Try this. http doesn't work (for some reason).
8a6a32 No.137386
>>137385
That's much better, thanks
9cebb9 No.137390
>>137361
>Analyzing and refuting pseudoscience and the anti-science movement.
>postmodernist retards refuting antiscience and pseudoscience
>implications
>mfw
fea3f8 No.137392
>>137390
Where the hell is that second pic from
9b0673 No.137394
>>137361
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Prejudice_plus_power/Archive1
It actually goes on for two pages. Aka postmodernists discussing pseduscience.
17281c No.137396
Read the file names if you want to know what I found amusing about them.
17281c No.137397
>>137396
>Read the file names if you want to know what I found amusing about them.
Appart from the Genderbread Person.
fea3f8 No.137400
>>137396
What's even funnier about the genderbread person shit is that they claim on their transgender article that trannies have the brains of their preferred/chosen gender. I'm thinking that's some pseudo-scientific nonsense they made up to justify it.
9b0673 No.137402
>>137400
What gender is the brain in case the person is trigender or genderpivot or totally insane term like that? See Made-up Bullshit: >>137361
4baf2a No.137422
>>137355
>after /baph/ owned him
Details.
9cebb9 No.137429
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>137390
I know Dawkins is pretty fedora-tier, but this video will give you some context
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luce_Irigaray
fea3f8 No.137431
>>137429
Dawkins is pretty fedora-tier, but he's always got some good points. He's just as baffled over all these buzzwords as anyone else.
9cebb9 No.137435
>>137429
Oops meant to respond to this >>137392 goy
Anyway, go look up the "science wars." There was a period in the late 80s and early 90s where SJW professors in humanities departments were writing tons of papers about how science is too white male, and were trying to teach their students that science itself is just white male bigotry.
Eventually a physicist called Adam Sokal (the smug dude in the first pic) wrote a fake article full of buzzword nonsense and submitted it to an SJW academic journal, and later that day sent a letter to the editor explaining the article was a joke. The great part is that a lot of the SJW professors submitted serious responses to journals before they got wind that they'd been trolled, so now they have papers attached to their names where they're basically praising the cocks of the nonsense hoax
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_wars
e18a66 No.137441
>>137422
>>137424
See the picture. He billed himself as "undoxable" /baph/ provocateur, /baph/ doxed him, and he went dark.
fea3f8 No.137621
File: 1436679136341.png (32.23 KB, 1009x207, 1009:207, it's racism but not racism.png)
17281c No.137653
>>137621
Perhaps the result of an edit war between "New Atheists" and A+?
b141c3 No.137655
As a skeptic, RationalWiki is pretty much my go to place for debunking some obscure conspiracy theories like Project Blue Beam:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Project_Blue_Beam
As a libertarian, though, I wish some otherwise fine articles didn't get derailed by leftist political slants. Not that I want my own political stance reflected on the site, I just wish it was completely objective.
70c164 No.137667
>>137655
Shermer used to do debunkings on his website, but I'm not sure if it's up to date anymore. Debunking has a long tradition in English, at least since Sir Thomas Browne's Pseudodoxia Epidemica (which is still a nice read). It's too bad that the tradition's fallen into such disrepair that "Rational"-Wiki's ship of fools is seen as its online continuation.
9cebb9 No.137735
4abb62 No.137748
>>137655
Funfact; PBB predicted that the NSA collected American's metadata en masse 10 years before the snowden leak.
4abb62 No.137751
Even reddit has better rationality than rationalwiki.
51f7b2 No.188700
I love how Kiwi Farms calls this place a whiny hugbox for spergs when they act no better.
916538 No.188712
>>137289
>that whole thing about the strip club in Absolution
Goddamn that game has a load of problems but "strippers appear in a strip club level" is not one of them.
I'm not seeing any issues with the definition of "Liberal," though. Liberals champion individual liberty, in theory.
>>134333
What's wrong with the patriarchy and transsexualism articles here?
The patriarchy article is basically just the definition of the word with a slight feminist slant.
The transsexualism article is arguably incorrect for asserting that a neurological disorder can't also be a "mental disorder," but isn't wrong to say that evidence points to gender dysphoria being neurological and not psychological.
>>137400
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20032-transsexual-differences-caught-on-brain-scan/
I've mentioned this before on this board and said it was gray matter. It's white matter. Oops. I admit that I don't actually know the difference.
Basically gender dysphoria isn't a choice, it's a neurological disorder.
I went to this site a while back and had a good laugh at some of the crazies they tear apart. Then I somehow stumbled on their Sarkeesian article and saw that the talk page was full of people insisting that they don't have to catalog any criticism of her because none of it could possibly be valid since only a misogynist would criticize her. Haven't been back since.
All of these screencaps look really dry compared to what I saw in the non-SJ articles. I remember in the Sarkeesian talk page they said they had a "snark POV" and it certainly seemed that in way in articles about "cranks," but all of this SJ shit just looks like a liberal Conservapedia: completely serious and totally boring.
0a059b No.188718
>>137331
Ryulong a good boy he dindu nuffin #freeryulong
40aefa No.188724
> Ctrl-F
> WikiInAction
> not found
RationalWiki's coop page is bickering about banning discussion of a topic and removing rights from users - for Zionism.
https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/3mk8y8/rationalwikis_coop_page_is_bickering_about/
https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/3mmlng/rationalwiki_blanks_their_coop_page_after_failing/
Edit warring and personal attacks going on with RationalWiki's page on CAIR
https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/3nf6ie/edit_warring_and_personal_attacks_going_on_with/
What's on mission for RationalWiki? My Little downy. Including edit wars that ended up stripping an admin of rights and protecting the page!
https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/3pupde/whats_on_mission_for_rationalwiki_my_little_downy/
RationalWiki admin decides that the community needs to patrol a user's edits because the truth can't be posted on the wiki.
https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/3twk21/rationalwiki_admin_decides_that_the_community/
RationalWiki tries hard to construct the recent string of "No Platforming" as a matter of choice, not of censorship
https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/3ulol8/rationalwiki_tries_hard_to_construct_the_recent/
Ryulong bites the dust, RationalWiki asks /r/GGDiscussion to fix GamerGate article
https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/3we7ki/ryulong_bites_the_dust_rationalwiki_asks/
Pool's closed at RationalWiki's Gamergate experiment. Ryulong himself is back, having been unblocked days prior because 'he really is gone this time'
https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/3wxf1s/pools_closed_at_rationalwikis_gamergate/
I seem to have been stealthbanned from RationalWiki. Cannot confirm this 100%, but the circumstances resemble an earlier stealthbanning from another wiki. (Two other GGers affected. RW denies everything.)
https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/3xe9e3/i_seem_to_have_been_stealthbanned_from/
Tired of people pointing out flaws in their Gamergate pages and watching his good friend go mental, David Gerard protects the Talk pages to sysops only
https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/3xet7j/rationalwiki_tired_of_people_pointing_out_flaws/
Ryulong has more articles on WiA than the rest of RW combined. He's the level of cow that the Jews turned away from Moses and God to pray to.
https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Ryulong
https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/search?q=ryulong&restrict_sr=on&sort=relevance&t=all
7061f3 No.188845
Why do communities that brand themselves as "rational" always turn out to be some of the least rational people on the planet?
916538 No.188852
>>188845
Nutters never think of themselves as crazy. One of the key symptoms of disorders like schizophrenia is a belief that it's everyone else who's wrong, always.
You can find the same shit on Conservapedia, where they admit that it's all biased towards their personal opinions but assert that their opinions are the truth.
a09439 No.188882
>>188852
To be fair, Conservapedia has been infested with trolls for ages, to the point of likely outnumbering its serious editors by a wide margin.
b256ee No.188906
>transexualism is a biological phenomenon
I thought gender was a social construct?
2fbbc2 No.188967
>>188906
It is. Sex isn't. Transsexuals experience dysphoria in their bodies, not their genders. Although you will see them putting on lipstick / growing manly beards in order to increase the likelihood that they will be recognized as the sex they feel they are.
I'm really curious why / when the term transsexual went out of favor and the term transgender took its place. Because you can say that cross-dressers and drag queens are definitely trans-gender. That is, crossing gender barriers. Even though they aren't "transgender."
4baf2a No.188975
>>188845
These two articles from Scott Locklin might be illuminating
>You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to be skeptical of such claims. You do, however, need to be a vertebrate and actually skeptical. As far as I can tell, everyone in the current “skeptical movement” is a gullible jellyfish.
http://takimag.com/article/twilight_of_the_skeptics/print
http://takimag.com/article/when_atheists_are_aholes_scott_locklin/print
An aside, the Church's contribution to science written by non-religious Scott:
http://takimag.com/article/when_man_invented_science/print
9de395 No.188977
>>188967
Furries put on costumes to make themselves look like cartoon animals. Are they transdimensional transspecies?
I use "transgender" to refer to the fake, tumblr trannies. I use "transsexual" to refer to the ones who at least had the conviction to get the surgery and shave once a week.
2fbbc2 No.188996
>>188977
Gender refers to cultural norms and rituals associated with the male and female sexes in that society. Foxes and mayonnaise are obviously not part of any gender.
b9fc7a No.189033
>>188996
So trannies are basically failed men and failed women?
a9e82f No.191339
>>134383
>Place is like an unfunny version of ED
So you're saying it's /cow/?
a9e82f No.191340
>>188996
Gender refers to the component of language that renders words as masculine or feminine. It's difficult for speakers of a largely uninflected language like English to understand, but many languages arbitrarily assign a gender to words, even inanimate objects, and even to words that have no inherent meaning at all, like articles.
Words have gender, not people.
b70310 No.191711
>>191340
Gender actually means category. Anything that can be categorized has gender.
5b64aa No.191731
>>188700
3 MONTH NECROBUMP
>>188712
>Liberals champion individual liberty, in theory.
How does it feel to be back in the 1800s? Liberals are all about big government and death of freedom these days because freedom is "triggering" and can hurt feelings.
3d38b9 No.191783
I can remember that place being fairly reasonable back in, like, 2007? (shit, time flies).
When Gamergate first blew up, I went to their article about it, for a laugh. The article was just a dismissive "geeks are angry about girls in games". Inaccurate, but nothing really interesting. And besides, compared to, say, unemployment and peak oil, Gamergate is pretty much a drop in the ocean.
Then I went back again after a few months, and the Gamergate article had exploded into this gigantic, disjointed screed calling them nazis, rapists etc. I could hear the gurgle as the last of their credibility vanished.
Still, the article on Top Gear used to be incredibly restrained (compared to what Lib Dems on Facebook would say about it, when it was mentioned on the trending pages). Wonder if that's changed?
e2116e No.191788
>>191783
>Top Gear
Isn't that just some fun auto shop show? What do SJWs have against it?
42075e No.191789
>>191788
Three white men are the leads.
18f846 No.191802
>>191731
Then why is it the republicans who support the patriot act? Sanders opposes it.
e2116e No.191804
>>191802
Sanders supports a lot of things, not many of which are in line with classical liberalism. If any still existed they would be closest to libertarians.
9a83fb No.191815
>>191789
>>191788
That and they love to make extremely non-PC jokes and not give a fuck about how many people they pissed off because they were the reason people watched Top Gear, which was the BBC's most profitable show. Hell, they have their own page for it on Wikipedia, here're a few examples:
>The Top Gear presenters go across Burma and Thailand in lorries with the goal of building a bridge over the river Kwai. After building a bridge over the Kok River, Clarkson is quoted as saying "That is a proud moment, but there's a slope on it." as a native crosses the bridge, 'slope' being a pejorative for Asians.
>The BBC received 600 complaints[citation needed] following the third episode of series 16, following an incident in which the presenters 'murdered' a fat Albanian and attempted to find out which of three car boots he would fit into the best. The episode was also criticised for its stereotypical views on Albania, claiming it is a nest for mafia car thieves.[58]
>During the final episode of series 13, Clarkson and May were assigned to produce a spoof advert for the new Volkswagen Scirocco. However, one of their spoof ads saw crowds of people leaving Warsaw in terror on buses and trains, because of the imminent German invasion of Poland. At the end of the advert, Clarkson announced "Volkswagen Scirocco TDI: Berlin to Warsaw in one tank"'.
And so on and so forth.
Clarkson was always a bit of a dickhead though, so I'm not all that surprised that the BBC got sick of his shit and gave him the boot when he attacked one of the producers over something stupidly trivial.
66bd86 No.191940
>>191815
It worked out for Clarkson because now he's got a whole new show with the same formula with Amazon.
2fbbc2 No.191947
>>191340
That is only the definition as it pertains to linguistics and grammar. A word often has multiple meanings. You braindead, smegma-slurping, dick-devouring, cock-crunching, faggot cuntfuck idiot.
294551 No.191969
>>137331
Yes. He kept changing everything related to gamergate to insure it said "Goobergators are anti-wimmins!" until ArbCom banned him.
1f7007 No.192605
>>134488
Ironically, for quite a few articles ed just tells it like it is.
>>137249
Changing misogyny to manboobs as a word filter would be cool.
696ac3 No.192697
>>137249
>Only thing lolcow worthy outside of that would be his apparent defense of a film being sold in a gay porn shop that included some "artistic" underage stuff in it.
W-what?
Please tell me you're joking.
feaee0 No.192726
>>134383
>ED
>funny
Sure, if you like /b/ shitposting written by 13-year old edgy tryhard memesters.
1f2bc6 No.192748
>>137361
Why is identity so important to some people? Is it narcissism?
d4890c No.192778
Oh, /pol/ would have a field day here. Have you checked the jew related articles? Two jewish mods had months lasting war with some another user who opposed zionism. Antisemite was thrown around, naturally. And it's still going on.
http://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Zionism&action=history
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Zionism
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Zionism/Archive1#The_great_mid-august_fight_over_the_Zionism_article
c55b2b No.192822
>>192726
I remember laughing my ass off reading the Goronchev page a few years ago. But some genius went through it and edited the funny out.
c815b7 No.192869
>>192748
In this sense, it's important to middle class white kids who feel that their backgrounds as privileged suburbanites is lame and embarrassing so they make inane shit like their made up sexuality/gender/religion an "identity".
5003e1 No.192870
>>192822
ED died when ODB shot his brains out. The new one is a fucking disgrace that takes itself too seriously and is edgy as fuck.
It's like going from Devil May Cry Dante to Ninja Theory's version of Donte.
79cba1 No.192913
>>136011
>>136081
The reason is simple really: most SJWs are shithead who are either unemployed and live off government and/or parents (a few have trustfunds but this is a tiny minority) so they can be literally old day at places like RW meaning that a dumb highschool dropout can 'out-colab' a member with academic credentials in a relatively short time by doing easy shit like grammar corrections (they do the exact same shit at github and other places) and so because they apparently do more for the group they start getting privileges. They are also constantly asking to be given important positions like becoming mods so that way they can further cement their power and even bring their friends over.
Pretty soon they have taken over the place, by that time most of the original users will have left because they simple can't or wont deal with this shit, only a few will stand up against this but by then it will likely be too late
79cba1 No.193325
>>192870
>ED died when ODB shot his brains out
What? who?
723f58 No.194182
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>194181
>>192697
http://www.unz.org/Pub/InTheseTimes-1994aug22-00010a02?View=PDF
wasn't sure if you have pdf enabled, on second thought, so have the avfm podcast instaed.
2eaa41 No.194311
>>193325
Former ED mod/music producer, was pretty cool despite being twice the age if not more of the average 4channer/EDiot at the time.
Had horrendous depression though and offed himself.
75f44a No.194337
>>194181
I despise what Futrelle stands for, but to be fair, I don't find an interest in shock exploitation cinema much more damning than browsing /b/.
As an edgelord teen in the 2000s who wanted to check out 'the most fucked up movies ever', I watched Salo (although I fell asleep halfway through)- along with stuff like Cannibal Holocaust, Serbian Film, etc
32e8f2 No.194340
>>193325
>>194311
olddirtybtard I assume. Not to be confused with his also dead Wu-Tang Clan namesake.
Probably.
2fbbc2 No.194347
>>194337
You don't have to be fair. This is a guy who will condemn you for the shit you did because you failed to lick the appropriate number of feminist sphincters. He's a hypocrite.
44fea9 No.194349
>>137289
>Dat second picture
lol, Rational Wiki is literally arguing Anita's case for her.
8224fb No.194355
File: 1452795858094.jpg (916.56 KB, 1048x2680, 131:335, rationalwiki on rothbard h….jpg)
Here's some proof of RW's utter inability to do their fucking research. Fresh from >>>/liberty/.
>>192748
That's what happens when you have achieved nothing in life: You find SOMETHING to be proud of, be it the fact that you're black, have red hair or a made-up sexuality no one gives a shit about.
2fbbc2 No.194356
>>194181
>Today, such a film would undoubtedly be classed as category 5 child pornography (the very worst).
Theantifeminist is definitely wrong about this, though. The film was released in an uncut version in the UK back in 2000.
8224fb No.194357
Anyone here know Ryulong? Just check him out. I'd do it myself, but then I'll probably die from
>>137289
>Mild pedophilia is bad. Violent pedophilia is worse. If you think that means you're downplaying mild pedophilia, you're a retard who can't even into simple logic.
>HE'S DOWNPLAYING MILD PEDOPHILIA!!!!1
40aefa No.194408
>>192778
> Oh, /pol/ would have a field day here. Have you checked the jew related articles? Two jewish mods had months lasting war with some another user who opposed zionism. Antisemite was thrown around, naturally. And it's still going on.
And on the other side of the shekel, there's this: https://np.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/3y7fid/rationalwikis_sjws_may_be_jihadistsforhire/
4891c8 No.194438
>>194181
>>194181
>Salo
>Evidence to condemn a person.
It's like you never been on halfchan or 420chan before 2010. Most oldfags have been exposed to shit that makes Salo look tame.
On one hand, I'm glad I'm desensitized to this kind of stuff.
On the other hand, I find it hard to relate to normal people who are horrified by this sort of thing.
I want to comfort them, but I want to laugh at them. I don't know what to do really.
8224fb No.194518
>>194438
>Most oldfags have been exposed to shit that makes Salo look tame.
What kind of stuff are we talking about? I've seen some animal torture porn and pictures of a dead baby.
9cebb9 No.194665
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>192726
>>192870
It's not funny, but it's a decent repository for references. Like if you want to find some shit on so-in-so cow, ED will have it all listed
>>191788
>>191815
Don't forget the recent Argentina special where Falklands war veterans sperged out and tried to kill the entire crew because Clarkson had a licence plate that read "H982 FKL," and the Falklands war was between Bongland and Argentina in 1982.
The production team had to flee the country and make an illegal border crossing into Chile because almost everyone in Argentine was trying to hunt down their vehicle caravan
vid related
>>191815
Well, the only other man he punched was Piers Morgan, so the producer he punched must have been at least as bad. That's my sperg logic at least, seeing as I'm a Top Gear fanboy.
75f44a No.194697
>>194518
one time on 420chan I saw a picture of a guy who tied a baby down onto a table and then pooped on it.
it was pretty vile and probably illegal, so I didn't save it, but of course at first sight I had a LOLWTF reaction and couldn't stop laughing.
They also had a good gore board.
723f58 No.194899
>>194438
hey, jus tryin to help jail a fat waste of life for thoughtcrime.
I'd be way in trouble if I namefagged articles defending what I liked like that faggot did. I'm the one posting pics of maimed/crushed/deformed children in /pol/ and /tech/ all the time.
(This'un was run over by a bulldozer she was trying to stop from destroying her pops' house, the second born from a mother hit by chemical weaponry while pregnant, 3rd self explanatory)
Although the other argument is we actually have other interests, and don't autistically linger over these things for 2-4 hours or however long that piece of crap was, then follow it up with blogposts gushing about it. If Mike Diana can land in prison and be on like a decade of prohibition for drawing it, and Handler for collecting it, when they're both easily objectively more talented than the Tin Drum director, say, then I'm pretty sure fatboy can go down over encouraging distribution of salo pretty easily. Especially since there's already a gigantic moral outrage stir targeting him on the right. Obscenity charges are a bitch to beat, and rely upon local community standards so national outcry or not, very easy to wind up toasted.
>>194347
yep. This.
Same reason I tried to push for spam-reporting cuteosphere to the local authorities (because uk is hyper-anal on that sort of thing, especially since it can be spun due to her art style it's directed at children)
in reality they're much more dangerous than Nick bate, because he'll just slobber and drool over one or two people, but they smear their cancer upon the internet to contagiously alter everyone to fit their fucked up worldviews. The only rational thing to do on behalf of others unaware they're the next potential target is to put the rabid dogs down.
>>194356
Huh, that's very strange.
The UK will allow Salo uncut but blast their tits about loli manga?
Sounds like there's a lot of FatRolls in government office.
cd55e9 No.194974
>>194899
fuck me I laughed at the third pic. stupid dindu dog
42358c No.202962
xwex
(GOD, YOU'RE PATHETIC) 18f846 No.202968
Why did you label it goyim? She's not a Jew.
18f846 No.202969
But wasn't that one joke about the fact that Volkswagen was founded by Hitler? You would think the only people really mad about it would be the car manufacturer.
433c2d No.202979
>>194899
Couldn't you fucking spoiler that stuff holy shit, not everyone has a fetish for gore.
052a31 No.203004