A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Racing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

you people are idiots



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 31st 06, 12:40 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
MagillaGorilla
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 633
Default you people are idiots

http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2006/12...-tbv-rant.html

Just because the same tech ran both the A and B sample, it doesn't
equate to the science being "bad." Remember something before you jump
off that lemming cliff: when you go to the doctor and get a lab test
done, there isn't even a ****ing B-sample and nobody calls that
"unethical" and asks the lab director to be fired.

You people are all idiots. Having the A and B samples analyzed by
different techs is a WADA rule that was broken, but isn't even used in
conventional labroatory work for cancer screenings or even for
employment drug tests.

So the idea that this breach means the test was wrong is ludicrous.


Thanks,


Magilla
Ads
  #2  
Old December 31st 06, 12:52 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Joe King
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 281
Default you people are idiots

The small number of onlookers at that point began to snap their heads
apprehensively from one to the other and back to the bot. And then, at 4
hours and 15 minutes into the process, a second feature emerged -- another
embedded marble -- and the look on the collective face made it clear that,
down to the core, each one of them felt that for none of them to have ever
been born would have been best.


  #3  
Old December 31st 06, 01:01 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Joe King
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 281
Default you people are idiots

Though we'd all like to think it came from their hearts, it was external
circumstance that finally forced Magilla Gorilla and Hitler to come together
in common cause at last, after all these years.



"It's different when you get to know someone face to face," said Hitler.
"All the group hatred melts away and you see he's just like you -- so OK,
maybe he comes from a race of people that listens to ****ty music and has
bad haircuts, but blood and guts and sinews and bile and fear and flesh and
gristle and hard throbbing cocks and mucus and smegma trump music and hair
any day."



He put his arm around Magilla and Magilla reciprocated.



But that was just the photo op before they got down to the serious business
of saving the world, saving humanity, from the greatest threat it had ever
known: me.



"We both wanted a better world," Magilla said to Hitler once they were alone
together with their aides Einstein, Da Vinci, Galileo, Sandy Koufax, Sunny
Day Real Estate, Velocity Girl, Napoleon, Tim Berners-Lee, Marvin Minsky and
Kurt Schwitters.



"We just had different ways of going about it based on our different native
temperaments and our differing early childhood experiences," Hitler finished
Magilla's thought, as he would often do with Magilla and vice versa during
the 2 weeks we spent living with them and their assistants and their
high-tech equipment, making this documentary.



Bangladesh had fronted the millions for the state of the art conference room
they were meeting in -- the 360 degree surround-vision video walls could be
split into 4096 million different individual views of anything or any
combination of things anywhere anytime at any scale from infra-nano to
ultra-cosmic, and images could be individually arranged into any conceptual
structure known to man -- like the binary branching tree structure or the
uhhh, uhhhh, the uhhh, you know, all those other structures that man is
always putting things into in order to pretend cognition works when we all
know it's just a ****ing lie -- in fact, the FIRST ****ing lie.



Whatever. The point is that Hitler and Magilla had all existence and all
knowledge at their fingertips to aid them in figuring out how to stop the
most profound threat to man and cosmos in all human history, me.



"I'm not into all this video whiz-bang technology crap," said Magilla.



"Neither am I," said Hitler. "It's just a cover for man's true ignorance."



"And a side track," said Magilla. "Nobody solves problems. Instead, they
build a TOOL to solve the problem and then nobody uses it."



"Or they use it for the opposite of what it was intended for," said Hitler.
"But let's get down to business. We may have only a few weeks before this
guy figures it all out."

But for all their great and powerful hearts, they didn't realize I was in
there with them as part of the crew making this documentary.



I had written a program that searched the internet and peoples' hard drives
looking for an optimal way to exterminate the universe.



When it came up with an idea -- any idea -- it immediately tried to
implement it -- by doing massive email bombing or devising online ad
campaigns designed to either directly force the idea into physical being, or
bring in people who could.



Using online commerce and online payment systems, the program was able to
set up meetings and conferences all over the world on its own, and book
travel for well-credentialed participants. It could rent factory space and
set up and pay a work force to build complex devices it designed with
off-the-shelf CAD-CAM software based on the assimilation and correlation of
voluminous scientific data, facts and theory off the Princeton, MIT, and MTV
websites.



And as each idea failed miserably to achieve not only its OWN ends, but ANY
****ing ends whatsoever, the program modified it ever so slightly and sent
it back out to try again -- even as it was generating newer, more
off-the-wall, more drug-crazed psychotic ideas and implementing them each
femtosecond.



As a result, I had lots of free time and so could afford to be here watching
Magilla and Hitler and writing this on the side, while my purpose bored
effortlessly ceaselessly forward on its own, tearing a near-infinite number
of paths through the sphinctral substrate of universal computation,
communication and memory.



And in my position as assistant sound man I knew that, purely as a rote
function of my trade, I would be unresistably mandated, sooner or later, to
point an index finger to the sky above and say: "Uhhh, could you hold that
thought a second, Adolph -- I've gotta change the tape."




  #4  
Old December 31st 06, 02:30 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
xzzy
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 74
Default you people are idiots

1. When being treated by doctors, 'citizens' have the option of a second
opinion. All doctors I have ever known understand the process in a positive
manner, and make good decisions with the additional information. There is
no right or wrong, there is only let's get this done.

2. Outside of sports, a person is innocent until proven guilty as the
process of proving guilt or innocence is not perfect and is subject to
opininon.

3. In cycling, a person is always guilty until proven innocent.

a. each cylist acceptances the paradigm of guilt until proven
innocent with the reciprical obligation that:

i. the people and processes that determine guilt or innocence
are always be either perfectly correct in their processes, or their
conclusion is absolutely false.


"MagillaGorilla" wrote in message
news
http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2006/12...-tbv-rant.html

Just because the same tech ran both the A and B sample, it doesn't equate
to the science being "bad." Remember something before you jump off that
lemming cliff: when you go to the doctor and get a lab test done, there
isn't even a ****ing B-sample and nobody calls that "unethical" and asks
the lab director to be fired.

You people are all idiots. Having the A and B samples analyzed by
different techs is a WADA rule that was broken, but isn't even used in
conventional labroatory work for cancer screenings or even for employment
drug tests.

So the idea that this breach means the test was wrong is ludicrous.


Thanks,


Magilla



  #5  
Old December 31st 06, 02:51 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,322
Default you people are idiots


MagillaGorilla wrote:
http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2006/12...-tbv-rant.html

Just because the same tech ran both the A and B sample, it doesn't
equate to the science being "bad."


Well, the science might be bad, when you have tests that require status
(or maybe just some notoriety g) within the scientific community for
your reading to be taken seriously-- as compared to some flunky lab
tech, for instance. "Get me a positive reader in here!".

They violated their own procedural rules. The same tech running the B
test, with the identity of the ****er or bleeder known to all and
sundry, opens the door to personal feelings influencing the "reading".
Not to mention all the bad stuff that came to light with just one lab:

http://www.chron.com/content/chronic...lab/index.html

Of course, sometimes it works out OK, like if you, say, attend Duke,
and it only takes a year or so, plus who knows how much money, to more
or less get off, with your reputation more or less intact, after a "we
know they are guilty" manhandling by the (excuse me) proper
authorities.

Remember something before you jump
off that lemming cliff: when you go to the doctor and get a lab test
done, there isn't even a ****ing B-sample and nobody calls that
"unethical" and asks the lab director to be fired.


Apples/oranges. One reason there isn't a B sample test is because the
insurance companies don't want to pay anything, even their just
obligations.

You people are all idiots. Having the A and B samples analyzed by
different techs is a WADA rule that was broken, but isn't even used in
conventional labroatory work for cancer screenings or even for
employment drug tests.

So the idea that this breach means the test was wrong is ludicrous.


When they drag you in, which of your rights are you willing to give up?
(Don't claim to be innocent if that makes you look bad, BTW) --D-y

  #6  
Old December 31st 06, 02:58 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
MagillaGorilla
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 633
Default you people are idiots

xzzy wrote:

1. When being treated by doctors, 'citizens' have the option of a second
opinion. All doctors I have ever known understand the process in a positive
manner, and make good decisions with the additional information. There is
no right or wrong, there is only let's get this done.


Not when you test positive in an employee drug test, ass****. Also, the
athlete is allowed to have their expert present to ensure the integrity
of the B-sample test. This is comparable to having a second (and third)
opinion wrapped up in one.


2. Outside of sports, a person is innocent until proven guilty as the
process of proving guilt or innocence is not perfect and is subject to
opininon.


And so are athletes, ass****. Floyd (or any other athlete) has not been
found guilty of anything yet. That will be decided by the CAS, which is
considered the same as a court of law. The CAS affords athletes due
process protection.



3. In cycling, a person is always guilty until proven innocent.


Give me an example of a cyclist who was found guilty before their CAS
hearing, and if so by whom? Good luck finding these examples because
they don't exist, you dumbass.



a. each cylist acceptances the paradigm of guilt until proven
innocent with the reciprical obligation that:

i. the people and processes that determine guilt or innocence
are always be either perfectly correct in their processes, or their
conclusion is absolutely false.



What the **** are you talking about?






"MagillaGorilla" wrote in message
news
http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2006/12...-tbv-rant.html

Just because the same tech ran both the A and B sample, it doesn't equate
to the science being "bad." Remember something before you jump off that
lemming cliff: when you go to the doctor and get a lab test done, there
isn't even a ****ing B-sample and nobody calls that "unethical" and asks
the lab director to be fired.

You people are all idiots. Having the A and B samples analyzed by
different techs is a WADA rule that was broken, but isn't even used in
conventional labroatory work for cancer screenings or even for employment
drug tests.

So the idea that this breach means the test was wrong is ludicrous.


Thanks,


Magilla




  #7  
Old December 31st 06, 03:23 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
MagillaGorilla
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 633
Default you people are idiots

wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:

http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2006/12...-tbv-rant.html

Just because the same tech ran both the A and B sample, it doesn't
equate to the science being "bad."



Well, the science might be bad, when you have tests that require status
(or maybe just some notoriety g) within the scientific community for
your reading to be taken seriously-- as compared to some flunky lab
tech, for instance. "Get me a positive reader in here!".

They violated their own procedural rules. The same tech running the B
test, with the identity of the ****er or bleeder known to all and
sundry, opens the door to personal feelings influencing the "reading".
Not to mention all the bad stuff that came to light with just one lab:



The athlete has the right to have their own expert present during the
testing of the B-sample. The expert can then testify at the CAS hearing
as to what they saw. Having said this, there's not one single case in
WADA's 6 years of existence of a single case where a lab tech has even
been accused of doctoring a B-test! So why you dumb ****s in here think
that this angle is such a terrific legal argument proves you are clueless.




http://www.chron.com/content/chronic...lab/index.html

Of course, sometimes it works out OK, like if you, say, attend Duke,
and it only takes a year or so, plus who knows how much money, to more
or less get off, with your reputation more or less intact, after a "we
know they are guilty" manhandling by the (excuse me) proper
authorities.


Give me examples in WADA where the lab has been shown to be corrupt.



Remember something before you jump
off that lemming cliff: when you go to the doctor and get a lab test
done, there isn't even a ****ing B-sample and nobody calls that
"unethical" and asks the lab director to be fired.



Apples/oranges. One reason there isn't a B sample test is because the
insurance companies don't want to pay anything, even their just
obligations.


There's nothing stopping a patient from paying for a lab test if they
felt it was so necessary. Gee, I wonder why they don't do it (Hint:
it's because they trust the "A-sample" test)



You people are all idiots. Having the A and B samples analyzed by
different techs is a WADA rule that was broken, but isn't even used in
conventional labroatory work for cancer screenings or even for
employment drug tests.

So the idea that this breach means the test was wrong is ludicrous.



When they drag you in, which of your rights are you willing to give up?
(Don't claim to be innocent if that makes you look bad, BTW) --D-y


Shut up with this "violate your rights" bull****. All athletes are
given CAS hearing where they can talk about anything they want and bring
in any evidence they want. Their rights aren't violated. Stop talking
nonsense.


The Gorilla

  #8  
Old December 31st 06, 03:49 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Phil Holman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 478
Default you people are idiots


"MagillaGorilla" wrote in message
news
http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2006/12...-tbv-rant.html

Just because the same tech ran both the A and B sample, it doesn't
equate to the science being "bad." Remember something before you jump
off that lemming cliff: when you go to the doctor and get a lab test
done, there isn't even a ****ing B-sample and nobody calls that
"unethical" and asks the lab director to be fired.

You people are all idiots. Having the A and B samples analyzed by
different techs is a WADA rule that was broken, but isn't even used in
conventional labroatory work for cancer screenings or even for
employment drug tests.


Cerebral vomit. Medical screening tests do not rely on a single result
for a diagnosis and unlike drugs, the disease sticks around for more
accurate testing and confirmation.

Here's hoping 2007 raises the quality of your tro......, I mean posts.

Phil H



  #9  
Old December 31st 06, 04:27 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
MagillaGorilla
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 633
Default you people are idiots

Phil Holman wrote:

"MagillaGorilla" wrote in message
news
http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2006/12...-tbv-rant.html

Just because the same tech ran both the A and B sample, it doesn't
equate to the science being "bad." Remember something before you jump
off that lemming cliff: when you go to the doctor and get a lab test
done, there isn't even a ****ing B-sample and nobody calls that
"unethical" and asks the lab director to be fired.

You people are all idiots. Having the A and B samples analyzed by
different techs is a WADA rule that was broken, but isn't even used in
conventional labroatory work for cancer screenings or even for
employment drug tests.



Cerebral vomit. Medical screening tests do not rely on a single result
for a diagnosis and unlike drugs, the disease sticks around for more
accurate testing and confirmation.

Here's hoping 2007 raises the quality of your tro......, I mean posts.

Phil H



So if you get a positive test for HIV, hepatitis, herpes, strep throat,
meningitis, or a positive result from a cancerous biopsy, you're telling
me the doctor doesn't go by those lab results, but instead chases some
red herring that's based upon some subjective observation?

Yeah, okay. Sure.

Nice troll. Here's hoping 2007 raises the quality of your tro...I mean
posts. Bitch.


Magilla
  #10  
Old December 31st 06, 04:42 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Carl Sundquist
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,810
Default you people are idiots


"MagillaGorilla" wrote in message
...
xzzy wrote:

1. When being treated by doctors, 'citizens' have the option of a second
opinion. All doctors I have ever known understand the process in a
positive manner, and make good decisions with the additional information.
There is no right or wrong, there is only let's get this done.


Not when you test positive in an employee drug test, ass****. Also, the
athlete is allowed to have their expert present to ensure the integrity of
the B-sample test. This is comparable to having a second (and third)
opinion wrapped up in one.


When I had to take a random test for work, the way my sample was handled for
submitting and sealing the sample was so poor, there is no way it could have
held up in court if challenged. I doubt many techs involved in the handling
of a sample are trained properly. On the other hand, very few people being
tested would know to recognize errors on the part of the tech.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Idiots heed UK 54 May 4th 06 08:46 AM
NASCAR "stars" Jeff Gordon and Kurt Busch confirmed they are idiots when they blocked people on the lead lap in Texas. [email protected] Racing 28 April 16th 06 08:00 PM
NASCAR "stars" Jeff Gordon and Kurt Busch confirmed they are idiots when they blocked people on the lead lap in Texas. [email protected] Racing 0 April 12th 06 01:03 PM
NASCAR "stars" Jeff Gordon and Kurt Busch confirmed they are idiots when they blocked people on the lead lap in Texas. [email protected] Racing 0 April 11th 06 10:45 PM
NASCAR "stars" Jeff Gordon and Kurt Busch confirmed they are idiots when they blocked people on the lead lap in Texas. [email protected] Racing 0 April 11th 06 01:07 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.