Jefferson-Designed Chemistry Lab Discovered In UVA Rotunda (virginia.edu)

schwit1 writes: An ongoing two-year renovation of the University of Virginia's Rotunda has revealed a chemical lab designed by Thomas Jefferson that dates from the 19th century. Workers uncovered the early science classroom behind a wall on Monday, according to the university. The room was sealed in one of the lower-floor walls of the iconic Rotunda in the mid-1840s and protected from a fire in 1895 that destroyed much of the building's interior. The chemical hearth inside was originally built as a semi-circular niche in the Rotunda, with two fireboxes that provided heat. Brick tunnels underneath the building led fresh air to fireboxes and workstations, while ducts carried away the fumes and smoke. Students at the time worked at five workstations cut into stone countertops.

Comments

A truly rare find

[iamacat]

An American politician who understood and respected science - this must have been the last time in nation's history that this occurred.

Re:A truly rare find

[The Real Dr John]

Agreed. I wonder if it is possible to ever go back to having intelligent people running the government. The trend seems to have been the obverse.

Re:A truly rare find

[h33t l4x0r]

He was a truly well-rounded gentleman. Politician, Philosopher, Scientist, Slave-Owner, Rapist.. The list goes on.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

And Malala is a cisgender, which makes her a nazi.

Don't measure people with absolute measures, take a relative one.

Re:A truly rare find

[rmdingler]

To be fair, a gentleman of our generation judging another gent's behavior a century and a half ago is a bit presumptive.

You could still purchase another man then.

Like it or not, it's statistically likely you had to be a tiny bit pro-slave back then to make ends meet as a southern farmer.

Re:A truly rare find

[sittingnut]

jefferson was a racist ideologist, a slave owner , a rapist, and a genocidal land/resource grabber. not much different from a typical modern "American politician". you are free to respect such people, and admire a history of nation led by such people, if you want. but if you do so you are a contemptible person imo.

Re:A truly rare find

[omtinez]

At least America got one of those, and he was able to influence politics up to this very day. I don't think many other nations can say the same.

Re:A truly rare find

[sumdumass]

There are plenty of them in today's world too. The thing is, they do not worship science like some seem to unknowingly do and they do not ignore the dangers of unrestricted access to dangerous chemicals.

Re:A truly rare find

[h33t l4x0r]

Exactly. Everybody was doing it, so that made it ok.

Re:A truly rare find

[Nutria]

As opposed to Bill Clinton, who was just a Politician and a Rapist.

I choose Thomas Jefferson, thank you very much!

Re:A truly rare find

[Nutria]

not much different from a typical modern "American politician".

How many modern American politicians could write the Declaration of Independence and found a University?

Re:A truly rare find

[roman_mir]

Jefferson also was an actual free market capitalist. In today's America he would not be electable by this mob.

Re:A truly rare find

[chipschap]

I have to agree. Though it's quite common to use 21st century thought and practice to pass judgment on someone from another era where thought and practice differed greatly, there's some logic lacking in that. We might say that we're glad society has advanced since earlier times (to the extent that it has; I see both gains and losses), but to claim that someone such as Jefferson should be condemned for being a man of his era is a bit much.

Of course for some people (I'm thinking of a poster just below this thread), anything is excuse enough for an anti-American rant combined with a complete willingness to ignore the history of his/her own country, which undoubtedly can be criticized at least as much.

Re:A truly rare find

[ArylAkamov]

[Citation needed]

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

Jefferson didn't make ends meet. He died some $2 million in debt in today's money.

Anyway there were lots of Americans at the time that were opposed to slavery. Quakers existed, abolitionists existed. It was obvious then as it is now that slavery was wrong. Jefferson and other slaver founding fathers lived in denial.

Franklin for example became an abolitionist. Jefferson could have, should have, too.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

If Clinton is a rapist, then so is Trump.

Re: A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

All of them. The first would only take the skills to prepare a letter to the editor. The second? Money would do it.

Re:A truly rare find

[slimjim8094]

I know it's fun to be holier-than-thou, but moral absolutism has just as many problems as moral relativism. Everybody was doing lots of things throughout history that they thought were OK. Today, we do things we think OK. Why are you so positive that the clock of ethics has stopped as of Friday October 16 2015 and will not change in the future? Let's pick a plausible-enough example... What if in 200 years there is such a population crunch that we need a "cap and trade" on new babies, and procreation and birth control are such that... I don't know, unsafe sex without a permit was as morally risky as driving drunk and for similar reasons? If you had a stance that such things as the choice to have a child are individual concerns and not the governments', that might be viewed as just as backwards, wrong, and dangerous as slavery. Your descendants might think "how could he be so stupid? why didn't he see the evil? it's so obvious!"

There are at least as many ethical standards that might change in 200 years as those that probably won't. I assume you're just as happy to be called evil then for your stances that seems downright progressive today.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

The arc of history is long, but it bends towards justice.

Jefferson knew slavery was wrong, but he compromised politically. That he still owned slaves, knowing it was wrong, makes him a coward.

People today who breed are morally wrong and cowardly as well. I would say that owning another human being is a greater sin than procreating though.

Eating meat is also wrong, today, yesterday, and tomorrow. Meat-eaters today are complicit to murder. It will be as obvious 200 years from now as it is today. Those who can't see it today are as cowardly and blind as Jefferson was about slavery.

Re:A truly rare find

[h33t l4x0r]

It's amazing to me that people still defend slave owners. Yes, doing cocaine in the '80s because everyone was doing might be some kind of excuse (not to me honestly because I remember the 80's). No free pass for slavers though in my book. TJ was a monster and should be remembered as one.

Re:A truly rare find

[Nutria]

Which is why I look upon a Trump vs. Clinton campaign with such anti-glee.

Re:A truly rare find

[ShanghaiBill]

lots of Americans at the time that were opposed to slavery. Quakers existed, abolitionists existed.

These people mostly lived in the north, where plantation slavery was not economical. It is easy to be opposed to something that doesn't serve your interests anyway.

Jefferson and other slaver founding fathers lived in denial.

Jefferson was not in denial. He described slavery as "holding a wolf by the ears", being able to neither subdue the wolf nor let it go. He saw it as an evil institution, but also also saw it as economically necessary, and didn't see an easy path to abolition.

Re: A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

Conversely, it is easy to do horrible things when you are the one to benefit from your actions.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

Jefferson was wrong and ignorant about blacks. He couldn't imagine an educated black; yet slave narratives existed in his day that provided proof. Jefferson was willfully blind.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. I wonder if it is possible to ever go back to having intelligent people running the government. The trend seems to have been the obverse.

Yeah recently we just had a bunch of niggers making their nigger decisions for a nigger nation. You think that is offensive or racist? Just wait until Section 8 Housing lets the fucking GHETTO move in to a nice white neighborhood style house next to you. You will change your tune when you hear them scream FUCK SHIT YOU STUPID ASS HOLE at their 3 year old children, and the pitbull they just have to have barks all night keeping your wife awake. True story. You can call me a prejudiced asshole all day. Until it happens to you. Then and only then will you understand. I mean, who the fuck screams "GET THE FUCK OVER HERE YOU SON OF A BITCH!" at a 3 year old?! What the hell kind of parent does that? Even self-centered fucks value "them and theirs". Oh and just wait until you lived in a neighborhood where cops never came for decades. Then the cops come to your nigger neighbor's every couple of weeks. Yeah, equality. Equality means giving everybody an equal chance to fail. After they failed a certain number of times, they prove they are not so equal. It's really that simple, folks.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

At least America got one of those, and he was able to influence politics up to this very day. I don't think many other nations can say the same.

I wish he would have influenced education a bit more, than you wouldn't be so grossly uninformed about other nations.

Then again, I really don't think Jefferson is to blame.

Re:A truly rare find

[bidule]

Let's pick a plausible-enough example... What if in 200 years there is such a population crunch that we need a "cap and trade" on new babies, and procreation and birth control are such that... I don't know, unsafe sex without a permit was as morally risky as driving drunk and for similar reasons?

No need to go that far. Driving a gaz-guzzing car, smoking tobacco, killing and eating animals. Although I must admit that using a woman's body for reproduction is discusting, we have tanks for that.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

It was just as wrong then as it is now. But to ignore his great accomplishments is simple minded. Even the greatest can have vile tendencies. If want a perfect human in all regards, you are wishing for the impossible.

Re:A truly rare find

[dbIII]

The US seems to export a large number of execs who have that exploitative slave owner mentality the second they get into a place with lax labour laws. I don't know whether it's a case of getting rid of dead wood or if that mentality is still rife in the country club set.

Re:A truly rare find

[ScentCone]

Jefferson also was an actual free market capitalist. In today's America he would not be electable by this mob.

To say nothing of his insistence that individual people not only could but should all own firearms, and indeed take one on walks into the woods because it's good exercise and practice.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

To be fair, a gentleman of our generation judging another gent's behavior a century and a half ago is a bit presumptive.

You could still purchase another man then.

Like it or not, it's statistically likely you had to be a tiny bit pro-slave back then to make ends meet as a southern farmer.

He was also a niggalover and he loved that nigga pussy. Some of his darkie descendants have demonstrated this. He went black and maybe he never went back.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

The arc of history is long, but it bends towards justice.

Jefferson knew slavery was wrong, but he compromised politically. That he still owned slaves, knowing it was wrong, makes him a coward.

People today who breed are morally wrong and cowardly as well. I would say that owning another human being is a greater sin than procreating though.

Eating meat is also wrong, today, yesterday, and tomorrow. Meat-eaters today are complicit to murder. It will be as obvious 200 years from now as it is today. Those who can't see it today are as cowardly and blind as Jefferson was about slavery.

Do you also believe that milk is rape? I saw such a sticker on a lamppost once. It had a black background. In bold white capital letters, it said at the top: MILK IS RAPE! In bold blood-red capital letters against the same black background, it said just below that: MEAT IS MURDER! So there definitely are at least a few people who advocate both statements, which makes sense if you believe that animals should consent to everything done with them.

By the way some plants appear to feel pain, like a fresh pea being boiled in a pot, or various plants that share common root systems so when a single plant experiences a trauma of some kind, all plants get a signal from it. But hey plants don't scream or make any sound at all so it's okay.

Re: A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

Moral arguments against slavery were well developed and widespread, long before the nation was founded. Slavery was unequivically a moral choice you had to consciously strive to defend.

Men like Jefferson at least had enough self-respect not to defend it morally, even if they were unwilling to abandon it.

Re:A truly rare find

[Khyber]

>procreating
>sin

Oh ye who is ignorant of the Bible. Procreation is one of God's first commands to man.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

All eating is violence. I try to minimize the violence. I believe plants have a different survival strategy than animals: plants produce sweet fruit and edible seeds because they want birds to eat them and carry the seeds to far-off lands where they will have a chance to germinate. So eating an apple is not comparable to killing a cow.

I believe you must get an animal's permission before imprisoning it, and milking it or whatever. So if you milk a cow that does not want to be milked, you are guilty of something like rape. Give the cow a choice. If the cow lets you milk her when she's free to go at any time, then it's probably okay.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

I, for one, do not want to ignore his great accomplishments. But as the original post which provoked the protests I was responding to said, he was "well-rounded" in ways that included morally reprehensible conduct.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

Another aspect to Jefferson that I don't like. He was right on some things, wrong on others. He was wrong on opposition to Hamilton's economic program. I like Vidal's portrayal of Jefferson in the novel "Burr". Jefferson comes across as silly, vain, foppish, politically astute; basically, a douche.

Re:A truly rare find

[JaredOfEuropa]

>quote>All eating is violence. I try to minimize the violence

Jefferson might have said: "All slavery is violence, but I try to minimize the violence". Not that slavery is in any way the same thing as eating meat, and perhaps you are trying harder than he was, but it does make you as big a coward as he was by your own standards.

By the way, it's worth reading up a bit on Jefferson. The matter of his stance on slavery while owning some himself was by no means as simple and clear cut as "he was against it but owned quite a few, therefore he's a hypocrite". I think there's a case to be made that he did the best he could, being constrained not by cowardice but by necessity.

Re:A truly rare find

[h33t l4x0r]

It's absurd to defend this. Jefferson had children from non-consentual sex with his slave mistress which were then treated not as sons or daughters, but as slaves.
It's popular to frame some ambiguity here when there is none. This is a sex crime and a moral outrage.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

Jefferson was wrong and ignorant about blacks. He couldn't imagine an educated black; yet slave narratives existed in his day that provided proof. Jefferson was willfully blind.

And after all of that struggle and suffering, how do blacks value education? Black kids that try to study in school and do well get beaten up - not by racist whites but by other blacks! They get beaten up for "acting white". Studying isn't thuggish enough. Sad.

Re: A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a difference between defending something, by saying it was perfectly okay, versus saying the degree of fault/weakness varies with time. To think of owning a slave now would require going against so much in society it takes a massive amount of actively being selfish and going against common morality. At many points into the past though, it simply means a person was not exceptional, not one to buck at tradions and habits. That is still not saying it was a-okay, just that it took a different level of weakness, that a much less of failure of a person. Being wrong in the same way as many people around you is not being an inhuman monster, but simply a weakness of most humans.

People like Jefferson were ahead of their time in many ways, but not all ways. That is true of nearly all great men, that they were advanced in some areas/fields, but not in other areas, making the same mistakes as peers. For better or worse, that is human nature that progress is made in incremental steps because people can't remove all of their own blindness at once.

Re:A truly rare find

[h33t l4x0r]

So not only should poor blacks be held down by institutionalized racism, they are also to be blamed for the ignorance in their communities? Do you have a newsletter to which I might subscribe sir?

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

No according to popular media, we have reached the pinnacle of morality at this moment right now as you are reading this. Anyone before us is unspeakably evil. Anyone after us is unspeakably decadent. We must purge our history. Just as we are purging and uprooting the evils that were Confederate civilization. We must purge the memory of this slave owning bigot who raped a poor helpless African American who he was unjustly put in charge of. We must blow up this chemistry lab. This is the modern Nancy Grace way.

If you do not subscribe to my truths, you are a religious anti black pedophile. You are also potentially a Nazi, and a white person. Perhaps much worse you are an Old White Person. (OWP). An OWP is absolutely the worst thing you can be today. Not only is being an OWP wrong in itself. There is no forgiveness. There is no absolution for being an OWP. There is the presumption that all OWP's are in fact pedophile who have bodies stacked like chord wood in their basement. So who is with me. Let's torch UVA and the memory of this OWP who is Jefferson.

Re:A truly rare find

[h33t l4x0r]

Yes, I'm a troll for thinking that raping your slave is wrong. Good call,downvoters.

Re:A truly rare find

[Bing Tsher E]

A gram is better than a damn.

Re:A truly rare find

[Bing Tsher E]

No, you're a troll for posting obnoxious opinions and then reveling in the response you get.

Re:A truly rare find

[UnknownSoldier]

While you're not wrong you forgetting one key thing.

Consciousness grows at different levels. (Both at an individual and national level.)

An analogy: You don't place a child in Grade 12 until they have had time for their mind to grow, understand, and internalize the concepts started in Kindergarten (or Grade 1), ALONG WITH demonstrating that they understand all of the preceding prerequisites.

It look Americans ~200 years to spiritually grow up and realize slavery was wrong.

Sometimes the only way to learn whether X is good is to have it, then you realize you _don't_ want it.

We can discuss all day how morally bankrupt politicians are but we need to keep in mind that, Politicians, which are just people, only reflect what society _currently_ values. They are the spiritual barometer of the nation.

As a famous teacher once said:

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -- Mahatma Gandhi

As a species we still kill one another using any excuse and justification we can. We are not _yet_ sick of war. Martin Luther King, Jr. said it best:

A true revolution of values will lay hand on the world order and say of war, "This way of settling differences is not just." This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation's homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into the veins of peoples normally humane [, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, ] cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love. A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

* Full transcript & audio of the brilliant speech:
http://www.americanrhetoric.co...

So pointing out how spiritual ignorant and immature our brothers and sisters are "solves" nothing. Focus on the problem, not the people.

I leave you with this advice:

"Preach the gospel, and if necessary, use words." -- St. Francis of Assisi

Re:A truly rare find

[KGIII]

Woohoo! It's the morning after and we're all playing "Spot the drunken fruitcake." I love this game. It makes me miss the days I used to post drunk on the internet and wake up wondering who I'd told I was a fool.

Hint: Morals are a construct - you really have no say. Meat it not murder - it is a natural instinct to eat nommy dead animal flesh. In fact, doing so is what gave you your big brain. Fire and then cooked meat. It's awesome and I thank my ancestors who got sick of the shit and crawled down from the trees, made fire, and killed themselves some fucking breakfast.

Re:A truly rare find

[KGIII]

Umm... America was born in, what was it, well 1775 the Marines came alive (Tun's tavern, PA). Slavery was done with, legally, sometime in the area of 1860. I'd submit that it took less than 100 years - slavery was outlawed by the UK before that as I recall.

Re:A truly rare find

[KGIII]

Pfft... I was doing cocaine in the 70s. Heh, once in a while I still do. It's like the only drug I don't seem to get addicted to. I'm the guy that buys an 8 ball and still has some a month later.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

No, he did one wrong thing, therefore everything he ever did was wrong and evil, so the constitution is evil, so we must have international Communism.

Makes perfect sense.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

Top cuck.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

"By the way, it's worth reading up a bit on Jefferson."

Yeah, I have. Consider Notes on the State of Virginia, by Jefferson:

The first difference which strikes us is that of colour. Whether the black of the negro resides in the reticular membrane between the skin and scarf-skin, or in the scarf-skin itself; whether it proceeds from the colour of the blood, the colour of the bile, or from that of some other secretion, the difference is fixed in nature, and is as real as if its seat and cause were better known to us. And is this difference of no importance? Is it not the foundation of a greater or less share of beauty in the two races? Are not the fine mixtures of red and white, the expressions of every passion by greater or less suffusions of colour in the one, preferable to that eternal monotony, which reigns in the countenances, that immoveable veil of black which covers all the emotions of the other race? Add to these, flowing hair, a more elegant symmetry of form, their own judgment in favour of the whites, declared by their preference of them, as uniformly as is the preference of the Oranootan for the black women over those of his own species. The circumstance of superior beauty, is thought worthy attention in the propagation of our horses, dogs, and other domestic animals; why not in that of man?

[...]

Besides those of colour, figure, and hair, there are other physical distinctions proving a difference of race. They have less hair on the face and body. They secrete less by the kidnies, and more by the glands of the skin, which gives them a very strong and disagreeable odour. This greater degree of transpiration renders them more tolerant of heat, and less so of cold, than the whites. Perhaps too a difference of structure in the pulmonary apparatus, which a late ingenious [30] experimentalist has discovered to be the principal regulator of animal heat, may have disabled them from extricating, in the act of inspiration, so much of that fluid from the outer air, or obliged them in expiration, to part with more of it. They seem to require less sleep. A black, after hard labour through the day, will be induced by the slightest amusements to sit up till midnight, or later, though knowing he must be out with the first dawn of the morning. They are at least as brave, and more adventuresome. But this may perhaps proceed from a want of forethought, which prevents their seeing a danger till it be present. When present, they do not go through it with more coolness or steadiness than the whites. They are more ardent after their female: but love seems with them to be more an eager desire, than a tender delicate mixture of sentiment and sensation. Their griefs are transient. Those numberless afflictions, which render it doubtful whether heaven has given life to us in mercy or in wrath, are less felt, and sooner forgotten with them. In general, their existence appears to participate more of sensation than reflection. To this must be ascribed their disposition to sleep when abstracted from their diversions, and unemployed in labour. An animal whose body is at rest, and who does not reflect, must be disposed to sleep of course. Comparing them by their faculties of memory, reason, and imagination, it appears to me, that in memory they are equal to the whites; in reason much inferior, as I think one could scarcely be found capable of tracing and comprehending the investigations of Euclid; and that in imagination they are dull, tasteless, and anomalous. It would be unfair to follow them to Africa for this investigation. We will consider them here, on the same stage with the whites, and where the facts are not apocryphal on which a judgment is to be formed. It will be right to make great allowances for the difference of condition, of education, of conversation, of the sphere in which they move. Many millions of them have been brought to, and born in America. Most of them indeed have been confined to tillage, to their own homes,

Re: A truly rare find

[blue trane]

"Being wrong in the same way as many people around you is not being an inhuman monster, but simply a weakness of most humans."

As I've said elsewhere in this thread, the way humans currently treat animals is inhume and monstrous. It's the way the vast majority behave; but it's still absolutely wrong. This is clear to me and will be clear to future generations.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

On Bill Maher's show last night they did a bit with Old White Person Bernie Sanders saying: "Not only do Black Lives Matter, they're all that matter. Die, whitey, die."

Re:A truly rare find

[tmosley]

[Citation needed]

Show us the proof that the sex was non consensual. The slave in question was his dead wife's half sister. I doubt he would rape one of her relatives.

He thought long and hard on the subject, and came to the conclusion that simply dumping slaves out onto the street with no training was a recipe for disaster for everyone involved, and indeed he spent time and money training his slaves up and then freed them. But training is expensive and time consuming, and they breed very quickly.

He did, however, lead the effort to implement one of the world's first bans on the slave trade.

But hey, fuck him and fuck all his actions and get rid of his entire legacy, including the constitution, because he owned slaves in accordance with social norms even as he tried to change them.

Re:A truly rare find

[tmosley]

You slander a dead man. His entire solution to slavery was to purchase salve children, educate, and then release them.

Re:A truly rare find

[tmosley]

Clinton was fingered as fucking underage sex slaves on some rich pedo's island (along with many, many other rich and powerful men). Was Trump also implicated in that?

IIRC, this was part of the mess that was uncovered after Jimmy Saville's death.

Re:A truly rare find

[tmosley]

"Rape" is not the same as finding comfort in the arms of your dead wife's half sister.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

Now we see why you REALLY don't like Jefferson. He was opposed to the enslavement of the nation to the Central Bank.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

"it is a natural instinct to eat nommy dead animal flesh. In fact, doing so is what gave you your big brain."

How come Neanderthals had bigger brains, but are now gone?

How come in India vegetarianism took root very early on?

Why do pandas choose to eat bamboo instead of the meat their carnivorous digestive tract was designed for?

" It's the morning after and we're all playing 'Spot the drunken fruitcake.'"

Put down the crackpipe.

Re:A truly rare find

[KGIII]

Current theory is that we fucked the Neanderthal out of existence - we bread with them and also consumed their resources. You probably have some of their genes according to Nova. Complete vegetarianism was not, and still is not, the entirety of India. I've been to India, I didn't find any cow to eat but I did find chicken - a lot of it, too. What has a panda got to do with humans? And you know, pandas are too stupid to fuck each other and are going extinct - that's a good way to prove my point and not argue against it.

Finally, I snort my coke. Thank you. The best choice is to wake up and say, "Holy shit, I was some fucking drunk!" Instead, you double down on it. Trust me, I've been there. I've woken up and seen some of the gibberish I typed the night before. "Heh, damn, I was really that drunk?" Is about your only way out on this one. There's absolutely no way you can win but you're welcome to try.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

"he spent time and money training his slaves up and then freed them. But training is expensive and time consuming, and they breed very quickly."

According to wikipedia, Jefferson freed about 5 slaves, not including Sally Hemings. He died with 130 slaves. He inherited close to 200. So he sold more slaves than he bred.

"However, the value of his property (land and slaves) was increasingly offset by his growing debts, which made it very difficult to free his slaves and thereby lose them as assets.[5]" (from the wiki page linked to above)

Jefferson was wrong to own slaves. He was aware of counterarguments to his own views:

In 1808, the French abolitionist and priest Henri-Baptiste Grégoire, or Abbé Grégoire, sent President Jefferson a copy of his book, An Enquiry Concerning the Intellectual and Moral Faculties and Literature of Negroes. In his text, he responded to and refuted Jefferson's arguments of African inferiority in Notes on Virginia, citing the advanced civilizations Africans had developed as evidence of their intellectual competence.[122][123] Jefferson wrote back, saying the rights of African Americans should not be dependent on intelligence and that Africans had "respectable intelligence." Jefferson wrote of the black race, "but whatever be their degree of talent it is not measure of their rights."[124] Jefferson thanked Grégoire for the book, but "had not modified his beliefs on the innate incompetence of Blacks."[125]

Jefferson was incompetent in his scientific views on blacks.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

Why didn't we get their bigger brains then? If big brains are so great?

I was born in India so I kind of know it too. Indian vegetarianism goes back to the beginning of recorded history. Jains have been vegetarian from the start, and their religion probably goes back at least 5000 years.

Pandas are an example of how biology does not dictate eating. Given a choice, pandas prefer bamboo. But they have the biology of a carnivore. Thus your statement that humans were designed to eat meat or however you put it is irrelevant.

Your ad hom about me being drunk, in addition to being false, is symptomatic of the type of bad faith argumentation tactics meat-eaters use because of the corruption of thought the murder of animals inevitabley leads to. Stick to crack, it's better for your brain than eating meat.

Re:A truly rare find

[KGIII]

Because our brains only need to be so big - there's a point where it needn't be any larger to do the more advanced tasked - we no longer need to work as hard to survive and we can live just fine without needing to constantly be on the look out for predators. We learned to cultivate, tame animals, and make fire. We don't have to look out for a big bird swooping down to eat our babies, normally. You could even argue that we're dumber - and that's okay. Evolution doesn't work like you seem to think. It's nothing to do with the best traits - it's the traits that survive.

A few religious whackos is not a viable means to determine moral relativism that is a human construct and, in this case, plain silly. Those Jains do other things, like carry skulls around with them if I recall correctly, which makes them a really strange idyll when you look at it with anything other than bias. Just because one group chooses to do something doesn't make it right. The Jewish people have been not eating pig for a long time, I'm not going to listen to them where diet is concerned either.

Pandas are an example of idiocy. They won't even fuck enough to keep themselves from going extinct. I'm not sure why you think they're a valid choice - they're an example of DOING IT WRONG.

And yes, my ad hom attack is certainly an accusation which you deny. It could be true that you're just stupid but I'm trying to give you the benefit of doubt. You're making that terrifically difficult. I'll give you one more shot to actually address any of this with a logical response. Following religion, trying to describe evolution when you don't understand it, and using a species that is going fucking extinct are not good replies. Put down the beer.

Re:A truly rare find

[blue trane]

So, eating meat allowed us to develop brains that were big enough, but not too big? And because we figured out how to eat other proteins now, and don't need to grow our brains any more, we can dispense with eating meat, but you don't because, you're not smart enough? That's the argument?

You're a whacko, a liar, and a murderer. You should do a lot more drugs. You're calling me stupid, but you're too stupid to see that your own arguments are a good reason why you shouldn't eat meat even if your biology allows it. You sling ad homs, so I'm gong to indulge too. You're an incompetent murdering drug-addled idiot. You discount Jainism because of its low numbers, ignoring the fact that they purposefully don't overbreed, and have survived many persecutions, by Muslims for example, that drove out the weaker Buddhists from India.

I'm not even reading the rest of your drivel. If you want, just exchange ad homs. That seems to be the level of discourse you really want to be at.

Fucking retard.

Re:A truly rare find

[KGIII]

Well, there went your final chance. I've neither lied nor misrepresented a damned thing. I have, on the other hand, pointed out that you're an idiot. You seem hell bent on proving to the world at large that this is true. I'm not one to stop you but I did give you three chances to do so. If you want to live unnaturally that's fine. To presume it is best, healthy, or morally superior is intellectually dishonest.

I'll murder two fluffy bunnies for every one you don't. I will, however, eat them. Bunnies taste good. Why? Because I'm supposed to eat them. Vegetables are what my food eats. Not entirely true, I do eat veggies.

Either way, you crackpot you, you're dismissed. No, seriously, you're dismissed. I'm done amusing myself.

Re:A truly rare find

[UnknownSoldier]

Thanks for the clarification; I'm not interested in debating the actual legalistic time frame.

Regardless, the greater point still stands.

Re:A truly rare find

[KGIII]

Indeed. I was only filling in some information. Or, more accurately, attempting to clarify.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

The moderation system is out of date. If ever there was a need for "-1 stupid motherfucker", you are a clear example.

Re:A truly rare find

[JimSadler]

Since there were far more poor farmers than rich farmers the use of slaves really made poor farmers even poorer. After all the poor farmer could not afford to purchase slaves so that meant that he and his family had to do all the labor and compete against slave produced goods from the richer farms. Those lab table tops most likely came from the soap stone quarry at Alberine. Soap stone is highly resistant to acids and other chemicals and the quarry is not that far from Charlottesvile.

Re:A truly rare find

[AK Marc]

How do you know it was non-consentual? Seems you are asserting your opinion as fact, to push a political agenda. That's not very ethical.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

Meat production results in the killing animals, but is not murder. Murder is the unlawful killing of persons. Killing animals for food is entirely legal.

Abortion is killing humans, but it is also not murder (in the US). When the pro-life lobby states that Abortion is Murder, they are arguing that abortion should be illegal, and not legal.

Are you advocating for killing of animals for the purposes of eating to become illegal?

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

In the end, if the community itself cannot see the value in education, how do you propose to see that community lifted out of it's current position?

There is no question that there is racism. But racism is not the only thing that is going on here.

There is racism against whites all over the world, and probably some well-earned hate, but not a one of those people suggests that the white man is not as smart as they are, nor that the white man does not value education.

Certainly, the racists need to STFU, but if the black community (or ANY community) does not see the value of education, then all the educational programs that you wish to spend money and effort on are for naught.

You can be discriminated against, and still be wrong or misguided yourself. It is as important to adopt a positive strategy within that community as it is to end the racial discrimination. Neither will be effective without the other.

And this is not a racial issue. There is nothing about being "black" that makes you disrespect education. This is a community and cultural issue that happens to affect some significant segment of that population that happens to be black in America. That needs to be seen for what it is and changed.

Re:A truly rare find

[Rujiel]

If you want to believe that Jefferson quote understood science, don't read what he wrote about black people being animals if you want to keep that rosy view

Re:A truly rare find

[AK Marc]

You are taking them to extremes when the extremes don't need to make sense for the middle case to work.

Big brains work to give us an advantage. Beyond that advantage, bigger brains become a liability. More delicate, more resources, and all that. Yes, once we've solved all those problems of big brains (helmets for all and sufficient food), one would presume natural selection would again favor larger brains, but solving all those problems also reduces the overall pressure of natural selection.

Re:A truly rare find

[AK Marc]

TJ never purchased a single slave. He freed 5-10 slaves (accounts are not clear, and differ).

Re:A truly rare find

[AK Marc]

Clinton was fingered as going to an island that has been visited by a number of "important" people, owned by a charity, and nicknamed "orgy island". I've seen no proof that he had sex there. It was all implied. Stephen Hawking has been there too, and nobody has maligned him.

The whole thing stinks of another Hillary smear campaign.

Re:A truly rare find

[kmoser]

No, it sounds like this lab was intelligently designed, which is a religious belief we hear all the time today.

Re: A truly rare find

[sysrq_BR]

I see americans complaining about their government all the time, but you don't know the feeling of having a stupid person as a president. I'm brazilian, did you saw the speech of our president about clean energy?

Re:A truly rare find

[tmosley]

Haha, as if there was any need for that. If I kept national security secrets in an unsecured server in my bathroom, I'd be in Guantanamo TONIGHT. If you are a liberal and you are voting for Hillary, you need to have your head examined. She belongs in prison, if not the gallows for her numerous crimes, up to and including treason and crimes against humanity.

Re:A truly rare find

[AK Marc]

So you are asserting that the Clinton server was in a bathroom? Ah yes, treason, much like the conservative cries of "treason" about Carter for not handling the Iran Hostage Crisis better, though the conservatives were quiet when it came out later that Reagan dealt directly with Iran to prevent the release of the hostages, for payment later (an actual case of treason). Every ignorant conservative asserts treason against anyone they don't like, yet don't manage to prove it.

I'm not voting for Hillary. I didn't vote for Bill, either. But the lies told against her are insane.

Re:A truly rare find

[ChrisMaple]

Jefferson's relationship with his slave is not adequately documented, and cannot reach the conclusions you claim even with DNA evidence. Keep in mind that the alleged sex would have occurred after Jefferson's wife had died. Jefferson could not have legally married the slave even if they both wanted it.

Modern prejudice notwithstanding, there is absolutely no evidence that any alleged sex was non-consensual

Re:A truly rare find

[ChrisMaple]

Gore Vidal hardly seems like a good character reference.

Re:A truly rare find

[ChrisMaple]

Brain size does not equal intelligence. Porpoises have relatively large brains, but most of it is irrelevant to intelligence and has more to do with being aquatic mammals. Similarly, the Neanderthal brain may not have had the proper structures to promote high intelligence, we don't know. There's been speculation that Neanderthals interbred with other human subspecies, so the "are now gone" claim is dubious.

There's no reason to believe that pandas don't eat flesh as the result of a moral decision.

Re:A truly rare find

[ChrisMaple]

say of war, "This way of settling differences is not just."

This shows extreme naivete. Most wars are a violent contest between a country whose people do not want to be killed or enslaved, and an aggressor. To view war as "settling differences" is missing the point.

A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

A nation that does not spend enough on defense ceases to exist and its citizens are dead. The subject of "social uplift" becomes moot.

Taking "nation" to mean "government": "social uplift" is not the proper realm of government because sooner or later "social uplift" becomes "agree with the exalted leader or spend your life in prison."

As long as we're considering the cost of social uplift, why is it a never-ending undertaking? Reasons include:

• __Those engaging in "social uplift" don't want it to ever end. If everyone were "uplifted", the professionals would be out of a job and would have no way to push their personal and political agendas, no way to exert power over others.
• __Some of those receiving "social uplift" recognize it as a free ride and don't want it to end
• __Some recognize "social uplift" as indoctrination, and by rejecting its message, will never be "uplifted".

"Social uplift" as a government program is theft administrated by the immoral to benefit the immoral, to the detriment of the moral who have to pay for it. Uplifting individuals should be done by individuals and private charitable organizations.

Re: A truly rare find

[ChrisMaple]

Present your standards of right and wrong behavior for human beings, and identify the foundation of your standards. Your bald claim of "absolutely wrong" means nothing.

My standard of right behavior is action that promotes the health and joy of human beings as individuals. Wrong behavior frustrates and opposes it. The foundation is the fact that we are human beings, intelligent animals that provide for our individual needs under the guidance and control of our minds.

Re:A truly rare find

[ChrisMaple]

Slave labor is not as efficient as labor for hire. Plantation owners would have been better off with the (then) never tried option of paid laborers. Poor farmers - whether they mismanaged their land or had infertile land - were not poor because of a lack of slaves.

The moral and political arguments on slavery are common. The economic argument - that a slave has negligible incentive to produce - is also important.

Re:A truly rare find

[ChrisMaple]

Hillary has knowingly violated secrecy and espionage laws. Apparently, this was just to hide bribery deals, security of government secrets was never given serious consideration.

Re:A truly rare find

[ChrisMaple]

Do you have some credible references to Trump committing rape, naming the victim? Bill Clinton's rape of Juanita Broaddrick and others has been public knowledge for two decades.

Re:A truly rare find

[AK Marc]

Ah yes, there to hide bribery deals, though all that's been found on it so far is emails that implicate Bush's invasion of Iraq as treason and a fraud. But none of the conservatives want to talk about bringing murder charges against Bush for all the blood on his hands. Personal responsibility exists only for unwed mothers, and nobody else, right?

Re:A truly rare find

[tehcyder]

To be fair, a gentleman of our generation judging another gent's behavior a century and a half ago is a bit presumptive.

You could still purchase another man then.

Like it or not, it's statistically likely you had to be a tiny bit pro-slave back then to make ends meet as a southern farmer.

Plenty of civilised people both in the US and elsewhere had decided that slavery was morally unacceptable by that stage in history.

Re:A truly rare find

[tehcyder]

Morality trumps economics.

I'm sure plenty of factory owners had their profits cut when anti child labour laws were introduced.

Re:A truly rare find

[tehcyder]

Do you have some credible references to Trump committing rape

Didn't Ivana Trump say that she was raped by him when they were married?

Of course, his real crime is that rug.

Re:A truly rare find

[tehcyder]

No, you're a troll for posting obnoxious opinions and then reveling in the response you get.

Why is it obnoxious to say that he had sex with his slave, which by definition was non-consensual and therefore (in modern terms) rape?

Re:A truly rare find

[cwsumner]

Exactly. Everybody was doing it, so that made it ok.

Actually, slavery was a liberal quick-fix to reduce the number of people slaughtered in war. If the prisoners could be sold for money, then there was a reason -not- to kill them.

Of course, that eventually led to wars just to capture slaves so they could be sold. Unintended side-effects can be a bitch!

And who sold them to the southern planters? The ships were from places like Boston and New York. I grew up in Charleston, South Carolina, and I have seen the actual shipping papers in the museum there.

Re:A truly rare find

[cwsumner]

Suppose that you live in a seaport town, in some time and place, and a ship comes in to dock.

It is loaded with people to be sold as slaves. It has cannon, more that the whole town has.

The slaves had a bad passage and several died. If they are not sold here, the ship will dump the remaining ones overboard. There is no help closer that a months travel away.

Question, do you buy slaves? Or, not? 8-(

Re:A truly rare find

[samwichse]

Don't you mean the reverse? I thought obverse was the front... which makes it seem like you're saying we are already going back to intelligent people running the government.

Not trying to be pedantic, but you seem to have chosen a fancy word on purpose here and I want to know (in a non-sarcastic way) if it has an alternate meaning.

Sam

Re:A truly rare find

[The Real Dr John]

You are right, obverse is the front side. I was thinking it meant opposite, rather than front.

Re:A truly rare find

[samwichse]

Cool beans, thanks for clearing that up.

Re:A truly rare find

[tmosley]

Uhh, no, hosting classified information on a completely unprotected server. It doesn't matter who you deal with. The treason comes from exposing the files. Whistleblowers have gone to prison for FAR less.

Re:A truly rare find

[tmosley]

Yes, and he should hang too.

Re:A truly rare find

[rmdingler]

"Plenty of civilised people both in the US and elsewhere had decided that slavery was morally unacceptable by that stage in history."

I suspect that is as late as you'd want to post to get an instantaneous upmod with a marginal opinion. I'll have my eye on you.

Re:A truly rare find

[AK Marc]

Exposing a file isn't treason. Why do you hate the Constitution? Treason is clearly defined there. And an insecure personal server for official business is not on the list.

Seems only idiots want to see the Clintons hang. They've been trying for 20 years, and haven't made anything stick. Either the haters are the dumbest people on the planet, or the Clintons are much smarter than the lying idiot haters assert.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

You weren't there.

You don't know what actually happened.

You don't know what was said, or done, by any of the parties involved.

He may well have had a policy of not initiating anything with anyone living on the plantation. She may well have initiated the approach, in response to one or more things he did. There were a lot of things he did that were worthy of respect, and perhaps she saw some of them. Even when women don't seem to have any power, they often end up making the key decisions in many matters, especially including relationships.

Perhaps you are simply assuming she was an incompetent human being, and not capable of doing that, perhaps because she was black? Are you being racist?

Unlike you, Jefferson actually did something about slavery. He was able to get the first law passed preventing the importation of any more slaves, and he did it BEFORE Great Britain did anything similar. He also tried to free his slaves, but was blocked by the lawyers (then, as now, a pretty unethical group).

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

Slave labor is not as efficient as labor for hire. Plantation owners would have been better off with the (then) never tried option of paid laborers. Poor farmers - whether they mismanaged their land or had infertile land - were not poor because of a lack of slaves.

That's a nice economic theory.

Like many ideas the laymen has about economics, it doesn't stand scrutiny.

Most societies throughout history had slavery. For example, the silver mines that funded Athenian prosperity and "democracy" were worked by slaves, and slaves in Greece far outnumbered citizens. These were not necessarily African slaves, of course. Over the centuries, millions of Europeans actually ended up in slavery in Africa of all places, owned by Africans, as a result of the enormously profitable Roman-Byzantine-Italian-Viking-Arabic slave trade.

Liberal notions that slavery didn't work - or was not economically efficient - are not compatible with the reality of slaving on such a scale. The individual worker might be less productive, but that doesn't have to prevent the whole operation from being an economic success.

The reality was that slavery could and often did work economically, but at a cost to the societies that implemented it. For example, the increasing Roman dependence on slavery was one of the major factors that destroyed the republic, and later the empire.

In some cases, technology (such as improvements to harnessing animals for plowing) could make slavery less economical. In other cases, technology (such as the cotton gin, and the machinery for producing sugar) actually made it more economical. The vast majority of slaves (about 95%) coming to the New World were not actually shipped to North America, but rather to Central and South America, to work on the sugar plantations.

Even when societies did not have slavery, they might have indentured servitude that wasn't much different. In the British Empire, this didn't get outlawed until just before WW1. This was the system used in the North American colonies before slavery became common: slavery was not the only option tried. There are still places in the world today where servitude not much different than slavery exists.

Slavery as it was implemented in the American South was especially problematic from a modern perspective, aside from the big moral issues. It established early on that it was ok for the legal profession to ignore ethics problems occurring on a major scale, with consequences that still trouble the USA today. Slavery, after all, as Morris clearly stated in his speech at the US Constitutional Convention, was not consistent with the notion of a nation founded to protect the rights of man. In modern language, there was a massive contradiction in the legal system, and contradictions in a legal system always involve unethical practice of law.

Today, the slavery is long gone, but the habit of the legal profession ignoring major ethics issues (when it is in their interest to do so) remains: the US legal system today is riddled with lots of ethics problems, with all kinds of negative economic consequences. It's not an accident that the USA ended up become the Land of the Lawsuit!

The moral and political arguments on slavery are common.

They may be common today, but I am unaware of any Greek or Roman thinker, including the "great" philosophers, that stated them. I don't know about the Eastern thinkers, perhaps somebody from that part of the world can chime in?

The argument against slavery was primarily a Christian one. Unlike most religions, Christianity didn't view slaves as any different from other people, and that was true from early on. The Romans even sometimes viewed Christianity as a slave religion. This, of course, didn't prevent many so-called Christians from owning slaves, or engaging in the slave trade, even men of the church. But at the same time, a lot of the people working first to ameliorate slavery, then later mostly elimina

Re:A truly rare find

[WindBourne]

Obama; Poppa Bush; Carter; LBJ; Kennedy; Eisenhower; FDR; all understood and supported science.
Hell, under each of these leaders, most made spending cuts while increasing science spending.
And all of them were considered intelligent.

Interesting that support for the general sciences does appear to correlate to IQ of the presidents.

Re:A truly rare find

[WindBourne]

Most of that was true, though the issue of rapists is unknown. Based on first hand accounts and other data, that Sally Hemmings was NOT raped, other than via legal terms. IOW, the 2 were together willingly.

Re:A truly rare find

[WindBourne]

Jefferson had children from non-consentual sex with his slave mistress which were then treated not as sons or daughters, but as slaves.

Really? Then you should hurry on over to the historical societies and put up your evidence, because nearly all other evidence from back then, refutes that.

Re:A truly rare find

[The Real Dr John]

Congress determines how much money the NIH and NSF get. The president can push them but he can't allocate funds. Many recent presidents including Obama have made their legacy about things other than science, including force projection in the Middle East and Asia, oil and gas extraction, international IP deals masquerading as "free trade" and helping the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries to increase their bottom lines. I have not seen a big push in support for basic science funding from any recent president. In fact, what I have seen is a commercialization of science at the NIH where they talk about "translational medicine" which is a code word for securing IP rights on drug and medical device development. Basic research is barely on the radar screen. There is good basic research being done, but very often when you write a grant proposal for funding, you better have a bottom line that it is going to lead to some treatment. This of course misses the point of doing scientific research, which is to find out how things work before you try and fix all medical problems. It is difficult to fix things you only partially understand.

Re:A truly rare find

[Anonymous Coward]

It's absurd to defend this. Jefferson had children from non-consentual sex with his slave mistress which were then treated not as sons or daughters, but as slaves.
It's popular to frame some ambiguity here when there is none. This is a sex crime and a moral outrage.

Nice propaganda piece.

A somewhat different picture appears when one bothers to research the matter.

Jefferson's relationship with Sally is believed to have occurred in France, where she was free. Jefferson was ambassador to France (replacing Ben Franklin) for many years.

There is no evidence of anything non-consensual about the relationship, or anything that would be considered a sex crime.

She didn't want to return to the USA with him, since there she would be a slave.

He promised her that she would be freed and live a life of privilege, and her children as well.

This was done.

Remember when...

[jeffb (2.718)]

Remember when it was not only permissible, but actually admirable to perform chemical experiments? To the point where even legislators would do so, as part of their well-rounded intellectual life?

No? Neither do today's legislators and law-enforcement officials, apparently.

Re:Remember when...

[quenda]

Jefferson is well know to have grown marijuana. This was probably a meth lab, which explains why it was so well hidden.

Re:Remember when...

[The Wild Norseman]

Jefferson is well know to have grown marijuana. This was probably a meth lab, which explains why it was so well hidden.

"Pray, sayeth my name."
"Jefferson."
"Thou art correct, by Jove!"

Re:Remember when...

[Darinbob]

"Let us go, Jesse. It is time to legislate."

Re:Remember when...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I mean, Ben Carson, who is not only a medical doctor but has conducted extensive scientific medical research, is being lynched for not acting the way that liberal white people on CNN have decided a black man should act.

Oh, wait, you don't think he counts because there's an "R" next to his name, which makes racism OK.

Re:Remember when...

[blue trane]

Carson's kinda like Linus Pauling. They may be smart enough in their fields, but in other areas (politics in Carson's case, supplements in Pauling's) they are complete loonies.

Re:Remember when...

[ClickOnThis]

Yeah, I mean, Ben Carson, who is not only a medical doctor but has conducted extensive scientific medical research, is being lynched for not acting the way that liberal white people on CNN have decided a black man should act.

Oh, wait, you don't think he counts because there's an "R" next to his name, which makes racism OK.

Ben Carson is an amazingly intelligent and successful man. Yet he has come up with the most spectacularly bone-headed statements since he entered political life.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/...

http://thinkprogress.org/polit...

Re: Remember when...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, for some reason we expect Ben Carson to be reasonable, to say sensible things, and not come across as a self important pompous ass with nothing better to do than run for President.

Donald Trump has that all sewn up. We don't need two people comparing everything to slavery and Adolf Hitler and making themselves out to be the third coming of Mohammed.

Re:Remember when...

[dbIII]

Carter was a nuclear engineer but came off as dumber than Reagan. Not saying stupid shit in public is a different skill to others.

Re:Remember when...

[jeffb (2.718)]

Since Ben Carson isn't actually a legislator, I think you're supporting my point.

To be fair, we do have a very few contemporary counterexamples to my cynical comment:

The retirement of Rep. Rush Holt (D., N.J.), who for 16 years was the House’s resident astrophysicist, represents the latest in a string of departures by members trained in the sciences.

His exit leaves Reps. Bill Foster (D., Ill.) and Jerry McNerney (D., Calif.) as the only remaining members who hold doctorates in the natural and hard sciences out of the 535 senators and representatives in the 114th Congress, according to the Congressional Research Service.

One caveat: this information is taken from that liberal rag, The Wall Street Journal, which is probably just parroting "reality's well-known liberal bias".

Re:Remember when...

[jordanjay29]

Carter served on a nuclear submarine, that doesn't make him a nuclear engineer. He's probably more well known for being a peanut farmer.

Re:Remember when...

[ClickOnThis]

Carter was a nuclear engineer but came off as dumber than Reagan. Not saying stupid shit in public is a different skill to others.

Carter was a wonky southern slow-speaker. Reagan was a washed-up B-movie actor. Both were successful politicians, but it's no secret who was the better "communicator" -- it was the actor.

Nevertheless, as far as who sounded dumber or said stupid shit in public, Reagan wins hands-down. Without a script, he was a gaffe-machine.

Re:Remember when...

[Bing Tsher E]

Jefferson is well know to have grown hemp. That's known in marijuana smoking circles as 'ditch weed' and it isn't very psychoactive. Said hemp had uuses for making rope and it was also used for paper making. The very founding documents of the US were printed on hemp-based paper.

Jefferson's hemp crop wouldn't have created a hallucinogenic daze if they'd been smoked.

Re:Remember when...

[Bing Tsher E]

If you had been around during the time when Reagan was president, you would know that there was always, at any time Reagan was in public, somebody there with a microphone hoping to catch him saying something they could characterize as a 'gaffe'. Usually there were multiple people hanging around hoping for that.

I'm not a huge Trump fan, but if he does win it'll be amusing to watch all the people with pee dribbing down their pantsleg sputter and fume and latch onto anything 'dumb' that a microphone can capture him as having said.

Re:Remember when...

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, because he doesn't suck the dick of the bankers who have utterly destroyed our country.

Re:Remember when...

[JimSadler]

Jefferson grew hemp and getting high on that type of pot is very unlikely. Hemp rope was a valuable commodity and i'm sure hemp fabrics were also very desirable. I wonder if the leaves were used to feed cattle or swine.

Re:Remember when...

[ToddInSF]

Well, at least they will not have to wait very long or be anxious that it may not happen. It's guaranteed.

Re:Remember when...

[ChrisMaple]

Carson hasn't thought out his politics thoroughly and carefully enough. His economics are weak. He's far from a loony, some of his statements reveal fresh insights that would do credit to anyone, and unlike all the leading Democrats he's an honorable man.

Re:Remember when...

[ChrisMaple]

Your Chicago Tribune citation is full of hatred and insults. Of the several objections to Carson's statements, only two appear to have any merit. There's also an obvious Chicago Tribune lie, that climate change [as it is politically understood] is "established science".

Re:Remember when...

[tehcyder]

Carter was a nuclear engineer but came off as dumber than Reagan. Not saying stupid shit in public is a different skill to others.

Speaking as a non American I can tell you that the only politician who ever came off as dumber than Reagan was George W Bush.

Carter always seemed like someone who was too thoughtful to be a politician.

Re:Remember when...

[tehcyder]

I'm not a huge Trump fan, but if he does win it'll be amusing to watch all the people with pee dribbing down their pantsleg sputter and fume and latch onto anything 'dumb' that a microphone can capture him as having said.

Trump specialises in saying spectacularly unpleasant things, not dumb ones. They're not accidental.

Re:Remember when...

[cwsumner]

Trump specialises in saying spectacularly unpleasant things, not dumb ones. They're not accidental.

I'm not a Trump fan either, but it does seem that what he says is not at all accidental. It might not be successful in the election, but it has definitely been successful in getting media coverage! 8-)

But that wasn't all!

[Megane]

They also found a Novell Netware server behind the wall, still up and running after all these years.

Re:But that wasn't all!

[peragrin]

If you are going to do that old joke,

There was also in that all the unix code that linus stole and put into Linux.

Re:But that wasn't all!

[Anonymous Coward]

Complete with Jaz drives. New Orleans is infuriated they no longer have the claim it was born there.

Re:But that wasn't all!

[fragMasterFlash]

There was also in that all the unix code that linus stole and put into Linux.

Shh... Don't wake the trolls

Re:But that wasn't all!

[Nutria]

It's the Utah Jazz which infuriates New Orleans.

Re:But that wasn't all!

[Anonymous Coward]

If you are going to do that old joke,

There was also in that all the unix code that linus stole and put into Linux.

Not to mention all the prior art disproving the majority of patent claims.

Re:But that wasn't all!

[perotbot]

and I was coming here to post the same joke, good job!

And it had a Novell server in it!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup....Jefferson had a Novell Network server sitting in his chem lab ;-)

Did someone say Jefferson?

[mark_reh]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

- bogus jefferson JEW -

[Anonymous Coward]

The fraud 'government' was made up by racial JEWS, look at 'washington' face on dollar, other currency, different type jew faces, all scum lying fraud JEWS including scum 'franklin' they found people buried under his house. They were the same tribe of liars like 'medved' and 'ramsee' and all the jew liars in 'media' and 'govt', the jews made up all the slobber 'founder' stories and dupes ate it all. The 'constitution' their 'states' bs a proven fraud. Their 'laws' are fraud. http://jim.com/treason.htm copy page, ignore rest of site, sites bait with L. Spooner then use other bs to distract from the fact that we are free. All 'law' is based on contract between men. There is no other form of law. Any other claim of 'law' is but cons making up fraud papers to dictate 'laws' to 'tax' and kill you. See washinton's face on the dollar, jew, same as the rest, the bogus 'founders' didn’t 'found' anything, all cons, and dupes just went along. The so-called 'consitution' is a fraud. They made up the bogus 'government' and 'states' to 'tax' dupes to get themselves trillions in weapons. The jews are anarchists in a tribe, using bogus 'government' as cover for their robbing and mass schemes. The only freedom is nature anarchism and making our own tribes. The jew doesn't want anyone else to figure that out, so they are the only tribe. The jews are a RACE. They made up the scum 'jeesus' fables so dupes 'turn the other cheek' and made up their own religion for their race to take the world.

Recognize Jew FACES - thezog.info - see all pages at right, also top of main page 'required reading' page, bottom half of list copy articles from vnn. don't waste time at vnn, also run by them just see pages, copy pages for backup.

More FACES http://web.archive.org/web/20100825152627/http://jewishfaces.com/banking.html -see all category pages at top -
they are behind porno scum smut to break up families, the 'gay' sht, all the distractions and schemes, fraud 'wars', 'bailouts' mass immigration scum 'communist 'welfare' so you pay for parasite scum while the JEW gets 'special' status now nordic whites are the minority

holo fraud
leuchter report at archive.org

http://jewishcrimenetworkdid911.blogspot.com/

holodomorinfo.com - just see pages, don't waste time on videos, even 'jew truther' sites run by them so you sit 'reading' or 'follow' and don't get off your ass and stop them.

Now they're spraying us with CHEMTRAILS nano chips and virus.
newworldwar.org/chemical.htm - ignore notes at bottom, skip rest of site.

Copy this for links and to re read. Stop 'following'. Make your own tribes. No one is going to 'save' you. Pass on links/sites to others -

bogus - jefferson a JEW con -

[Anonymous Coward]

The bogus 'founders' were all JEW cons in the tribe. The fraud 'government' was made up by racial JEWS, look at 'washington' face on dollar, other currency, different type jew faces, all scum lying fraud JEWS including scum 'franklin' they found people buried under his house.They made up the phony 'government' and 'states' and dupes allowed it. Their 'republic' 'democracy' 'voting' scams to enslave us to jew 'tax' and parasites who then 'vote' for jew 'govt'. The 'civil war', jews duped northerners to kill the southerners who were seceding to be free from jew govt, it was jews -

'who brought the slaves to america' -Walter White, archive.org - ignore dbs notes.

Recognize Jew FACES - thezog.info - see all pages at right, also top of main page 'required reading' page, bottom half of list copy articles from vnn. don't waste time at vnn, also run by them just see pages, copy pages for backup.

More FACES http://web.archive.org/web/20100825152627/http://jewishfaces.com/banking.html -see all category pages at top -
holo fraud
leuchter report at archive.org

- at top of thread slide bar over so all comments show, click show all comments button, post near bottom see post -bogus jefferson JEW - has mass of fact on their schemes from the start.

rich supremacist Jews -

[Anonymous Coward]

Those 'execs' are JEWS. It was jews who brought the slaves, it's JEWS that own most giant corporations, fraud 'govt' is JEWS fraud 'media' is JEWS. Pretending is just random 'country club' people is jew troll bs. Mass organized jew tribe.

The 'whites' in 'govt' 'media' are 'white' skin ashkenazi jews. They are a RACE. They are not nordic whites. They made up their religion so their race could take over the world and they have. They bash whites when it was JEWS who brought the slaves here.

'who brought the slaves to america' -Walter White, archive.org - ignore dbs notes.
Recognize Jew FACES - thezog.info - see all pages at right, also top of main page 'required reading' page, bottom half of list copy articles from vnn. don't waste time at vnn, also run by them just see pages, copy pages for backup.

More FACES http://web.archive.org/web/20100825152627/http://jewishfaces.com/banking.html -see all category pages at top -
holo fraud
leuchter report at archive.org

http://jewishcrimenetworkdid911.blogspot.com/

Now the jews are spraying us with chemtrails. Death sky. Get off your ass. No one is coming to save you. Make your own tribes.

jew trolls -

[Anonymous Coward]

95% of the comments and 'votes' on the web are JEW trolls, paying themselves from bogus 'governmnet' and 'tax' and their 'holocaust' fraud and a hundred other schemes. They do the 'nigga' posts to keep the black white divide going, it's JEWS behind the bogus 'kkk' and fake 'nazi' bs so jews control every side. it was JEWS who brought the slaves here.
'who brought the slaves to america' -Walter White, archive.org - ignore dbs notes.
Recognize Jew FACES - thezog.info - see all pages at right, also top of main page 'required reading' page, bottom half of list copy articles from vnn. don't waste time at vnn, also run by them just see pages, copy pages for backup.
More FACES http://web.archive.org/web/20100825152627/http://jewishfaces.com/banking.html -see all category pages at top -
holo fraud
leuchter report at archive.org
http://jewishcrimenetworkdid911.blogspot.com/

Most the comments and fake 'votes' are jew trolls so dupes waste time reading bogus posts. The jews are spraying us with chemtrails. Death sky. Get off your ass. No one is coming to save you. Make your own tribes.

Oh man

[laserhead]

Agreed. I wonder if it is possible to ever go back to having intelligent people running the government. The trend seems to have been the obverse.

You still think the problems for US is not have the right people to have the power? The biggest problem is the system.

Re:Oh man

[JaredOfEuropa]

It seems that all democratic systems will start attracting the wrong sort of people eventually. Sockpuppets for special interests, professional politicians who put their career before the good of the country, or worse. Even if your system has safeguards in place to prevent that, those will be circumvented at some point. Even if that safeguard is something as drastic as the army... Erdogan managed to defuse that safety valve just fine in Turkey. And once the bad guys are in, it is exceptionally hard to get the system itself changed.

There are a lot of problems with the US system, but many of those problems are shared with other systems of governments, and I've yet to see a system that works well.

Re:Oh man

[The Real Dr John]

Don't see how you change the system with the wrong people in power. They feed the system, and it feeds them. Getting intelligent people in charge who wants to change the system is a start, then the people that elect them are going to have to help those in power push for change. Because rich folks don't want change. They like things just the way they are right now.

Re:Oh man

[l0n3s0m3phr34k]

All systems that govern others eventually attract sociopaths.

Re:Oh man

[UnknownSoldier]

Indeed.

Fix the broken first past the goal post voting system.

Re: Oh man

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not "the system". To say it's the system is to say that you don't believe in democracy or that you just don't want someone to take ownership of the problem. It IS the people put in charge to manage it.
Many of our representatives are intelligent but that intelligence, which should be used to make things better, is obscured by their narcissism and overwhelming self imposed "need" to stay in "power". This then leads to short sighted decisions to get votes for their next election. Which is why we have term limits in some areas, but need them in more areas.
Polititians need to remember these "power" positions are put in place to serve US! Not their egos(Clinton) or big corporations(Bush).
But anyway, this is way off the initial topic. The fact that this room was found and that it was designed by Jefferson is REALLY amazing in and of itself. This discovery makes me wonder what other treasures make be out there.

Re: Oh man

[Anonymous Coward]

Democracy might be the best system, but it is not the last word on governance. It has its advantages and disadvantages and it probably cannot be used to the same effect in all circumstances.

The major problem is that everyone involved is human. Theoretically, the most efficient government is a benevolent dictatorship with expert impartial advisers who are heeded. Of course, in reality, even if you have that at the beginning, you end up with Caligula or Nero in charge and the advisers either being corrupt, incompetent, powerless, or some combination of the three.

The best way to avoid the maximum effect of sociopaths is to stop electing general purpose legislators at the apex of a super powerful central government.

For those of you who love the European example, just look at the countries, sized like US states, and the interactions with the EU, which is US-sized. The smaller states are not uniformly better off, but they tend to serve their populations better than the EU itself does.

Re: Oh man

[billdale]

Fortunately, not all superrich are as pathological as the Koch Brothers and their monstrously despicable minions, the Koch Suckers. If you keep up on Elon Musk, Bill Gates and his wife, Warren Buffet, Mark Cuban and several other multibillionaires, they're consciously using their money do more than just make more money... the Gateses, for instance, have it as just one of their mega-goals to wipe out malaria worldwide. Imagine if, somehow, the Kochs could someday wake up and realize there are bigger games to play than trying to ruin the entire planet.

Re: Oh man

[ChrisMaple]

The Koch brothers political contributions tend to be pro-freedom. Buffet is pretty consistent about contributing to the anti-freedom side, and using political influence to continue the practice of shipping crude oil on his trucks. Buffet is corrupt.

Gates' record is mixed. The anti-malaria campaign is good. The development of Common Core, which Gates contributes to, aims for politically ignorant worker-drones.

Re:Oh man

[eric_harris_76]

The bigger the country (or the bigger the jurisdiction smaller than a country, where any kind of federalism applies) the bigger the pool of sociopaths to draw from, and the more likely you'll have really horrible ones rise to the top.

It shows.

Re: Oh man

[billdale]

You could not be more wrong about the Koch brothers!!! They, are the most malevolent influence in the US today... you must limit yourself to nothing but the incredibly biased dirt from Fox News, and Rupert Murdoch! It is nearly impossible to pay attention to any less biased news sources for a better view of the poison they spew. Just between the two of them, they are spending close to a billion dollars THIS ELECTION ALONE to drown out any other views, and put as many senators and congressmen in their pockets as possible! http://www.rollingstone.com/po... http://www.kochfaqs.com/ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/... http://m.dailykos.com/story/20... http://www.juancole.com/2013/0... There are tons of such reports from nearly every major news source (notably NOT from FOX or Murdoch!). The only way you can, say they are "pro freedom" is that they don't want any restrictions on what they spend on campaigns, or how they spend it. The Bush administrations loaded the Supreme Court with justices that have been very regressive, such as allowing "Citizens United" to not only out-spend anyone more moderate, but ruling that such news outlets as Fox can report total lies on their broadcasts and it's okay because it's "free press". The Kochs complain angrily about union spending on political campaigns, but they spend TEN TIMES MORE ON ELECTIONS THAN ALL UNIONS COMBINED! Read up on the tons of dirty deals they were involved with, and then tell me how innocent and wonderful they are. The Koch brothers are the most INSIDIOUS siblings on the planet.

Re: Oh man

[billdale]

I just ran across this YouTube vid, "Koch Brothers Exposed"... everyone should see this before they are lulled into thinking there is, anything the Kochs are concerned with other than putting more cash in their pockets. Even their own brother, Bill, exposed them for a dirty deal for, which they were convicted. https://youtu.be/2N8y2SVerW8 This country is growing wealthier and wealthier every year-- the problem is that they are changing all the rules so only the oligarchs profit from it.

Re: Oh man

[The Real Dr John]

Chris, you are clearly picking up your talking points from the likes of Milton Friedman with his bullshit line about preferring freedom over fairness. He claimed falsely that "freedom" was preferable because someone that he might not agree with would have to determine what was fair. Of course the same exact thing holds for determining what freedom is. Both freedom and fairness are human concepts and are not based on any natural phenomenon. They are human constructs, and both must therefore be defined by people. Freedom for the Koch brothers means literally freedom from regulations that protect our water and air from their pollution. Freedom in the modern Republican and DLC Democrat lexicon means ability of corporations to do whatever makes the most money, no matter how much death (tobacco sales) or destruction (mountaintop removal) is done to make the money. Freedom for them means freedom from laws that protect workers and consumers. No thanks. I don't want any of that type of freedom. It is a total deception to call it freedom when what you mean is that corporations don't want to have to abide by any rules that protect people or the environment.

Re: Oh man

[tehcyder]

The Koch brothers political contributions tend to be pro-freedom.

If you define freedom purely as the absence of obstacles to making money, I suppose that's true enough.

Re: Oh man

[cwsumner]

... The Koch brothers are the most INSIDIOUS siblings on the planet.

Sounds like it was written by an agent of ISIS. Would not be the first time that foreign agants conducted Psy-ops here...

Re: Oh man

[billdale]

What in the world are you talking about?! If there are two widely differing accounts of how good or bad the Kochs are, and the only ones who say they are the "good guys" and, never mention any of the terrible stuff that all other media are exposing, and the Kochs have dozens of websites and political groups such as "Citizens United" that are supposed to look unrelated but are all directly controlled by the Kochs, and everybody else from Huffington Post to The Guardian to the New York Times keep telling you about all the crap they pull... and tou, can check out all their criminal history online... does it make any sense that these megalomaniac despots are really choir boys?!..... (how do we create page breaks for paragraphs?!? My paragraphs never appear!!!) https://youtu.be/3Q8y-4nZP6o

Re:Oh man

[WindBourne]

the system itself is not the problem. The real problem is the election system is pretty much rigged and encourages legalized bribery.

- jew trolls bogus votes -

[Anonymous Coward]

95% of the comments and 'votes' on the web are JEW trolls, paying themselves from bogus 'governmentt' and 'tax' and their 'holocaust' fraud and a hundred other schemes. See bogus jefferson JEW post above for the mass of facts on the jews. The jews are high gear covering up and distracting now because they sprayed virus in the chemtrails that's going to show effect soon and kill masses but not jews. They do every distraction, millions in the jew tribe, 'media' 'govt' 'corporations' it's not random, it's jew tribe, the mass murdering jew tribe is the conspiracy. see jefferson jew post above. Time is short-

Anti-Governent Racist's Chemical Stockpile

[Baldrson]

Obviously a domestic terrorist threat.

Re:Anti-Governent Racist's Chemical Stockpile

[PolygamousRanchKid]

No, I'll bet if the folks from "CSI: Charlottesville, Virginia took some samples from the lab, they would find that Jefferson was distilling moonshine and cooking meth.

Good 'ole southern gentlemen pastimes.

Note that NASCAR had not been invented yet in Jefferson's times.

Re:Anti-Governent Racist's Chemical Stockpile

[mark_reh]

He cooks that crystal meth because the shine don't sell
You know he likes that money, he don't mind the smell!

Re:Anti-Governent Racist's Chemical Stockpile

[KGIII]

There's a good blues ballad in the making right there. I'm thinking E minor should suit.

Re:Anti-Governent Racist's Chemical Stockpile

[JimSadler]

Seriously Washington and Jefferson were excellent terrorist and traitors. They turned against the king and sponsored a revolution that chased the greatest power the world has ever seen right out of the country.

Re:Anti-Governent Racist's Chemical Stockpile

[mark_reh]

It's called Choctaw Bingo by the James McMurtry and the Heartless Bastards. See it performed live on Austin City Limits- there's some smokin' guitar work...

Re:Anti-Governent Racist's Chemical Stockpile

[KGIII]

Cool beans, I'll look it up and watch it. I was only joking when I'd read your post - I was like, "Hey, that'd be a great song potentially."

I went and found it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

I could not find the specific version mentioned but it was still a nice listen - thanks. I was pleased. I know the area, well. I've been all over that area - often, I've gone and sat in a bit with various groups or open mic nights at the blue grass fests. I enjoy that whole area - the people are people.

Anyhow, much appreciated.

Re:Anti-Governent Racist's Chemical Stockpile

[mark_reh]

Listen to it on "Live in Aught Three"- much higher energy!

Re:Anti-Governent Racist's Chemical Stockpile

[KGIII]

Will do. I listened to quite a few more of his tracks. I'd never heard of him before. Thanks! He's not bad. I dare say, I like him.

- JEW troll doing 'racist' meme bs -

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course I'm 'anti government', your bogus scum 'govt' is a JEW FRAUD and has been from the start. The SCUM JEW made up 'terrorist' 'extremist' 'vigilante' 'racist' bs all the bullshit memes, so the scum jew tribe is free to rape and butcher children, rob the world blind, mass murder everyone else while the scum jew screeches 'terrorist' at anyone who wants to stop them. You jew trolls vote up your own bs, vote down other posts with the facts exposing your lying thieving mass murdering. You're especially in gear right now with piling on bs since you sprayed your chemtrail virus, ready for the big cull of the herd now, aren't you jew. From me personally, to you personally, take your 'terrorist' bs and fuck off.

For others, see bogus jew jefferson post above, copy, postal mail info to others, put links on notes hand out to everyone. Time is short. No one is coming to save you. Add this link to the others, jewish ritual murder of children, this the earlier records, since then they've been able to cover it all up with their bogus 'govt' fake jew 'courts', thousands of children every year raped and butchered by jews.
skrewdriver.net/ritual.html
More facts in jefferson jew post above.

Re:- JEW troll doing 'racist' meme bs -

[rpresser]

Sprinkling your comment with pejorative "JEW" words just makes Baldrson cream his pants.

Why do the clueless always try to "correct"?

[dbIII]

From http://www.achievement.org/aut...

After graduate studies in nuclear physics at Union College in Schenectady, New York, Carter was selected by Admiral Hyman Rickover to serve as engineering officer of the Sea Wolf, America's second nuclear submarine.

I've got no idea why people feel inspired to "correct" others based on wild guesses instead of reality in situations as trivial as my post above. Care to enlighten us "jordanjay29". At least your own motivations will be something that you will actually know about.

Re:Why do the clueless always try to "correct"?

[jordanjay29]

When exactly did that happen? Jimmy Carter's library website doesn't have Union College, and a similar assertion rejects the idea that he could have completed such a program.

He probably had some nuclear knowledge, just like I have some chemistry knowledge. I wouldn't call myself a chemist, though.

Re:Why do the clueless always try to "correct"?

[UnknowingFool]

I've got no idea why people feel inspired to "correct" others based on wild guesses instead of reality in situations as trivial as my post above. Care to enlighten us "jordanjay29". At least your own motivations will be something that you will actually know about.

Hmm. Wikipedia has a very different account. He attended non-credit classes at Union College after joining Rickover's program and never graduated. Maybe you should check your facts?

Re:Why do the clueless always try to "correct"?

[dbIII]

The fact is that it was his job title on a sub in the Navy - plenty of evidence of that.
That's enough for my point, so I really don't know why there are thin skinned fanboys or whatever the fuck they are trying a bit of Soviet style revisionism over something so trivial.

Re:Why do the clueless always try to "correct"?

[dbIII]

He didn't call himself that they navy called him that. What's the motivation for this attempt at Soviet style revisionism over something so trivial? Why the incredibly thin skin and the lack of morality in your reaction?

Re:Why do the clueless always try to "correct"?

[UnknowingFool]

The fact is that it was his job title on a sub in the Navy - plenty of evidence of that.

Can you provide such evidence? Some sources say otherwise.

That's enough for my point, so I really don't know why there are thin skinned fanboys or whatever the fuck they are trying a bit of Soviet style revisionism over something so trivial.

Let me understand you correctly: When someone questions your facts, you lash that they are "thin skinned fanboys"? Kettle, meet pot?

It's just a hearth, not a lab

[wonkey_monkey]

"Lab" sounds like a whole room. This is a hearth that was built in a corner of a room, and subsequently covered up.

Re:It's just a hearth, not a lab

[WallyL]

and subsequently covered up.

A government conspiracy, I knew it!

howabout that

[Anonymous Coward]

Did they find any skeletons chained up inside the secret room? Casks of wine?...

jew trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

Millions of jews financed by fraud Jew 'government' post bs to distract. 'jeffereson' was a Jew con, same as the rest of the bogus 'founders'. see 'bogus jefferson jew' post above.

Re: jew trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep. They're everywhere. Useless chatter so people waste time instead of stop the jwo. jew world order.

jew trolls switch comment posts -

[Anonymous Coward]

My post below 'bogus jefferson jew' was ABOVE your bogus 'domestic terrorist' post' last nigh. You scums moved your bogus post above mine, then inserted more troll posts between your 'terrorist' bs post and my 'jew troll doing racist meme' post replying to your 'terrorist' bs.

--

The jews control what you see. See 'bogus jefferson jew post below. The troll post 'obviously a domestic terrorist' is a jew, doing the scum jew 'threat' tactic to call anyone who calls out the scum jew tribe a 'terrorist' so the jew is free to kill you, but if you want to expose or stop them, they call you a 'terrorist'. See 'bogus jeffferson jew' post below, then 'jew troll doing racist meme bs' which is reply to the jew who moved this 'domestic terrorist' bs post up and inserted other posts to confuse the thread. As I said, fck off jew.

Nobody ever noticed?

[DirtyAmish]

Ever watch a cop show or similar where some criminal has a fake wall to cover a closet or room? And some observant person noticed the discrepancy. Maybe I'm being a little hard, but in ALL these years, nobody noticed that the measurements/distances didn't jive with what they could see? I guess since nobody was looking, and since it is and OLD building.

Re:Nobody ever noticed?

[cwsumner]

They knew, but they didn't need it. Then they died. The next ones had never heard the story, and they were not detectives or archetects. And they didn't care anyway, they had other worries... 8-)

Re:Nobody ever noticed?

[Anonymous Coward]

You ever watch This Old House where they open up a wall and discover a staircase behind the kitchen?

WTF?

[dbIII]

Read a book kid instead of making shit up. There are things called libraries that have those things called books, including some books called encyclopedias where you can look up historical figures and learn about them.

When someone questions your facts

When someone equates their gut feeling and a desire to run down the opposing team in a pissing contest to an actual fact there's no point pretending that such a lie is real - especially over something so incredibly trivial as my example of people with different skill sets above. It appears that by saying something that could be considered positive about a democrat I've pierced through a very thin skin.

Re:WTF?

[UnknowingFool]

Read a book kid instead of making shit up.

So linking to wikipedia is making things up? Do you know "making things up" means?

There are things called libraries that have those things called books, including some books called encyclopedias where you can look up historical figures and learn about them.

And I referenced an Internet version of an encyclopedia called wikipedia. You have heard of the Internet right?

When someone equates their gut feeling and a desire to run down the opposing team in a pissing contest to an actual fact there's no point pretending that such a lie is real -

Wow you seem pretty hurt when someone publishes a link that directly questions your facts. Either you have facts on your side or you don't. Getting upset does not make your facts right or wrong.

especially over something so incredibly trivial as my example of people with different skill sets above. It appears that by saying something that could be considered positive about a democrat I've pierced through a very thin skin. -

Again you seem to be the only here with thin skin. You posted facts that doesn't agree with other sources. When questioned about them, you insult other people.

I already did

[dbIII]

Can you provide such evidence?

A couple of posts up I provided the link, a quote, and bolded some text for the slow.

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

A couple of posts up I provided the link, a quote, and bolded some text for the slow.

No you did not. You presented a link which was immediately challenged. To that challenge, you insulted people and present the same link?

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

The challenge came nowhere close to refutation and was just a silly word game and straight out dishonesty. The only thing interesting at this point is why people stoop so low over something so trivial and why you jumped in to try to play some silly little troll argument game debating against reality.

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

The challenge came nowhere close to refutation and was just a silly word game and straight out dishonesty.

Using wikipedia and Jimmy Carter's library site == word games and dishonesty to you?

.The only thing interesting at this point is why people stoop so low over something so trivial and why you jumped in to try to play some silly little troll argument game debating against reality.

Basically no one can challenge your facts because in your mind only your facts are acceptable. So you'll just insult whoever challenges you rather than look to see whether your facts and conclusions are indeed correct.

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

Your wordgame required ignoring that it was a job title and a perfectly valid description for the purpose of my comparison.

Thus somewhat tangential to reality as we both know.

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

Your wordgame required ignoring that it was a job title and a perfectly valid description for the purpose of my comparison.

A nuclear engineer has a nuclear engineering degree. Plain and simple. A chemical engineer has a chemical engineering degree. And so on. People call themselves software, network, whatever "engineer" these days. But nuclear engineering is an actual discipline of engineering. I take it that you don't have an engineering degree or you would know that.

Second, you completely misinterpreted what was written. Carter worked on the nuclear propulsion of the Seawolf. He was training to be an engineering officer. Nothing in his education or his work history suggests that he was an engineer. You interpreted that and made an incorrect conclusion.

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

I take it that you don't have an engineering degree or you would know that.

Actually I do. However who are you to make such pronouncements and tell the Navy what they should be doing?

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

Actually I do. However who are you to make such pronouncements and tell the Navy what they should be doing?

The Navy never said he was a nuclear engineer. You did. That's your disconnect.

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

Just about everybody said that's what he was doing for a living because that's a perfectly good description of an engineering officer that deals with a nuclear reactor. The problem lies on your mysterious unwillingness to accept such a valid description.
Why do you not accept it?
What is there in your background that makes you be so vocal about it?
Why such a waste of time with the attempted bullying to "punish" me for daring to express it? Was it to get me angry over something so utterly trivial? Is that why you jumped on my post about some idiot trying to "correct" a perfectly good description presumably because of political tribalism bullshit where nothing positive can be said about the other tribe?

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

Just about everybody said that's what he was doing for a living because that's a perfectly good description of an engineering officer that deals with a nuclear reactor. The problem lies on your mysterious unwillingness to accept such a valid description.

You cited one source. That is not "everybody". Even then it does not say what you claim. You have yet to cite another source.

Why do you not accept it?

You expect me to "accept" what you presented with out evidence?

What is there in your background that makes you be so vocal about it?

My background is that I don't accept everything I read on the Internet without question.

Why such a waste of time with the attempted bullying to "punish" me for daring to express it?

Why do you have such a persecution complex? You made a claim. I questioned it. Rather than calmly looking at my objections, you lashed out immediately. What in your background causes you to react negatively to even the slightest criticism?

Was it to get me angry over something so utterly trivial? Is that why you jumped on my post about some idiot trying to "correct" a perfectly good description presumably because of political tribalism bullshit where nothing positive can be said about the other tribe?

Again, your description wasn't good; it was a misinterpretation. That was the whole point. If you said "Carter worked in nuclear propulsion and he said idiotic things", I wouldn't have a problem with it because that would be factually true.

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

All this shit over a paraphrase of part of a Dave Barry "the whitehouse must have a dumb ray" column - what is your problem? It's universally accepted that somebody called an engineer that works with nuclear stuff can be summed up as a nuclear engineer (as Dave Barry did) - what is your problem here? What dog do you have in the fight to waste so much time trying to give me a hard time over it?

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

I questioned it. Rather than calmly looking at my objections, you lashed out immediately

Because you were doing the equivalent of calling me a liar for stating that water is wet and stupid enough to fall for some distraction to boot - so I responded as I'm sure you expected to such ridiculously insulting behaviour.
Surely you've got better things to do than jump on people's posts and attempt to bully them, then whine when they show a backbone. You haven't got better things to do? How pitiful!

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

Because you were doing the equivalent of calling me a liar for stating that water is wet and stupid enough to fall for some distraction to boot - so I responded as I'm sure you expected to such ridiculously insulting behaviour.

Again, projection? My exact words were "Hmm. Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] has a very different account. He attended non-credit classes at Union College after joining Rickover's program and never graduated. Maybe you should check your facts?" Your response has been someone who can never be challenged.

Surely you've got better things to do than jump on people's posts and attempt to bully them, then whine when they show a backbone. You haven't got better things to do? How pitiful!

I asked a simple question. You keep escalating. You never checked your own facts. You keep insulting.

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

You picked a fight over nothing but some stupid political tribalism over something trivial and wish to complain that I did not roll over?
Consider the complaint delivered and given the complete lack of consideration it deserves.

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

Here is what I was paraphrasing you thin skinned piece of shit:
https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1298&dat=19940423&id=2-YyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=twcGAAAAIBAJ&pg=4388,4763372&hl=en

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

If you said "Carter worked in nuclear propulsion and he said idiotic things", I wouldn't have a problem with it because that would be factually true.

So, what does it say about you that you are unable to work that out for yourself from what I said above. Oh wait - you did work it out - yet you've complained at great length as if you have not? Think about that for five seconds and you'll see why I have a very low opinion of you and your behaviour on this thread. You've even demanded my fucking CV for fucks sake over something so incredibly trivial by using faux outrage, pretended stupidity and unrealisticly narrow personal definitions as an excuse.

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

You picked a fight over nothing but some stupid political tribalism over something trivial and wish to complain that I did not roll over? Consider the complaint delivered and given the complete lack of consideration it deserves.

The point you don't seem to understand is that you picked the fight when someone questioned you. This has been all you.

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

Here is what I was paraphrasing you thin skinned piece of shit:

Again with the insults? Project much?

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

So it's OK for you to insult, to demand my CV and generally be utterly ridiculous, but it's not OK for people such as me to mention politics? It appear to be a definition of a thin skinned piece of shit to me.

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

So, you saw me taking a annoying revisionist prick to task and decided to be an annoying prick as well?
All this shit over something incredibly trivial - and sinister shit about how you are going to check my qualifications no less because I disputed your definition of engineer that leaves those who run ships, locomotives, software and so on out in the cold! What a piece of work! So you don't believe I do what I do - how would you know? How about a clue as to what you do for a living that gives you such insight or are you ashamed of your profession?

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

Cite me one example where I insulted. Not once did I do so while you took every opportunity to lash out simply because I pointed out the facts did not agree with you. It was you who always insulted. It was you who escalated. It is you who refuses to admit you may have made a mistake. It was always you.

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

"Can you provide such evidence?" is pretty fucking insulting when I already have and is the passive/agressive way of calling someone a liar to their face while hiding behind the figleaf of pretending you are asking a question instead of calling someone a liar - as you well know.
"I take it that you don't have an engineering degree or you would know that" and denying my honest response was of course two instances intended to be an insult, as you well know. The icing on the cake was some shit about me providing enough info for you to do some sort of background check - now that's just getting beyond weird.

The truly amusing thing was the "I take it that you don't have an engineering degree" and your backpedalling that implies you do not but were willing to pretend you did - the exact thing you are accusing me of doing, which I would never bother since years of experience always counts for more than a undergraduate degree anyway. You really are an amusing piece of work, and I'm not going to roll over and let you "win" your childish troll game. Thin skinned piece of shit is far too accurate a description for you to be an insult anyway.

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

"Can you provide such evidence?" is pretty fucking insulting when I already have and is the passive/agressive way of calling someone a liar to their face while hiding behind the figleaf of pretending you are asking a question instead of calling someone a liar - as you well know.

So what you are saying is that no one can challenge your facts? Especially when own source doesn't actually say what you interpreted it to mean. Again, I find it hard to believe that you are engineer when you are immediately incensed when someone asks you for more data. "Can you show your calculations?" is part of engineering. As professional engineer, I take it you never took part in a design review. That you never checked someone's work; that someone never checked your work before signing off.

The truly amusing thing was the "I take it that you don't have an engineering degree" and your backpedalling that implies you do not but were willing to pretend you did - the exact thing you are accusing me of doing, which I would never bother since years of experience always counts for more than a undergraduate degree anyway.

Again, you don't know my background at all do you? How you know that I don't have a degree? How would I know that I could check on your degree and your license if I wasn't one? Did you ever think about how I knew that?

You really are an amusing piece of work, and I'm not going to roll over and let you "win" your childish troll game. Thin skinned piece of shit is far too accurate a description for you to be an insult anyway.

Again with the insults. See that's all you have when you are challenge. Never once did you just accept that you ARE WRONG. You were wrong about Carter; you will never accept it.

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

Again, you don't know my background at all do you?

A bit slow aren't you? Remember you said I was not an engineer - in that case it was an "epic fail" due to you not knowing my background at all. Can't you recognise an attempt to get you to look in the mirror at yourself even when your nose is being rubbed forcefully in it?

Re:I already did

[dbIII]

How you know that I don't have a degree?

This obsession over something so utterly trivial would make some sort of sense if it's a title you aspire to, do not have and are jealous that others are described that way. It's a guess, but it kind of makes me think that if you had studied harder in high school you may have ended up as one of my students in the 1990s instead of just being jealous of those who were :)
Kind of pathetic don't you think? Such a fixation over something so trivial as a universally accepted job title that makes you jealous.

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

A bit slow aren't you? Remember you said I was not an engineer - in that case it was an "epic fail" due to you not knowing my background at all.

Um, no. You're not good at getting details, right are you? I said that I assumed you weren't an engineer because of the simple fact you don't care about getting things right and that you consider a software engineer a real engineer even though that is not one of disciplines of engineering. But then you claimed that you were an engineer. I simply don't believe the word of a random person on the internet..

Can't you recognise an attempt to get you to look in the mirror at yourself even when your nose is being rubbed forcefully in it?

Er, what? You were wrong. You've always been wrong. You won't admit that what you interpreted was wrong. Instead you lash out at anyone who dares to point out that you're wrong.

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

This obsession over something so utterly trivial would make some sort of sense if it's a title you aspire to, do not have and are jealous that others are described that way.

So we can agree that you don't care about getting things right. That it is trivial to you. Carter was or was not a nuclear engineer is trivial, but that was your whole premise. Your premise and points are therefore trivial.

It's a guess, but it kind of makes me think that if you had studied harder in high school you may have ended up as one of my students in the 1990s instead of just being jealous of those who were :)

Again, you are really full of yourself if you would think that I would want to be taught by you. Second, jealous of them? Bahahahahahahahaha, I would be sorry for them being taught by a teacher who can't take a challenge. I can only imagine an exchange:
Student: "Um, teacher, you're calculation doesn't look right."
You: "Quit being so think-skinned!"

Kind of pathetic don't you think? Such a fixation over something so trivial as a universally accepted job title that makes you jealous.

Being unconcerned over details makes you a bad engineer. And stop projecting.

Re:I already did

[Anonymous Coward]

No, I got it right - what else do you call an engineering officer working with nuclear systems - you just have some personal definition you want to push as an excuse to have a fight.

Re:I already did

[UnknowingFool]

No, I got it right - what else do you call an engineering officer working with nuclear systems - you just have some personal definition you want to push as an excuse to have a fight

I see that you failed to correctly use the anonymous mode. He was training to be an engineering officer; he never completed his training nor got a degree. That's like saying you can call someone a doctor who merely went to medical school or someone an engineer may have taken some engineering classes.

Re:I already did

[Anonymous Coward]

Irrelevant since he worked in the engineering section on a nuclear sub - whether we like it or not a locomotive driver doesn't have an engineering degree either but gets called an engineer, same with many programmers on this site.
 

I see that you failed to correctly use the anonymous mode

You are just full of opinions of how things should be I see - pathetic.

So now it's pathetic little head games?

[dbIII]

You are clearly just here for an argument and have now driven off into a contentless realm far from the actual topic, which was never important in the first place. Pathetic.

your facts

Now that is even more pathetic - it takes a special sort of "define your own reality" type to have "their own facts". It's not some shit I've made up or bent out of shape for some "mass debate" game but instead just a link to something I don't "own", a historical footnote that is nowhere near contraversial just to illustrate a point that could have been made other ways.

You've wasted so much time here jumping in to defend some revisionist loser who was willing to lie to argue about an analogy. Why? What is the rules of the game? How do you score? How utterly pathetic do have have to be to play it at other people's expense like you are and make this site far shittier in the process?

Instead of playing such a stupid fucking game why not amuse yourself reading this instead:
http://www.amazon.com.au/Short-History-Stupid-decline-reason-ebook/dp/B00MWHQKFI

Re:So now it's pathetic little head games?

[UnknowingFool]

You are clearly just here for an argument and have now driven off into a contentless realm far from the actual topic, which was never important in the first place. Pathetic.

In the context of this discussion you asserted that Carter was a nuclear engineer and said dumb things. I have pointed out discrepancy whether he was. You continue to ignore the discrepancy. If your premise is incorrect, your conclusion is incorrect.

Now that is even more pathetic - it takes a special sort of "define your own reality" type to have "their own facts". It's not some shit I've made up or bent out of shape for some "mass debate" game but instead just a link to something I don't "own", a historical footnote that is nowhere near contraversial just to illustrate a point that could have been made other ways.

Again you seem so hurt when people point there are discrepancies. I take it you do not work in the hard sciences. "My data disagrees with your conclusion" happens all the time. Scientists don't generally accuse each other of living in different realities when data does not agree. Instead they 1) verify, then 2) explain.

You've wasted so much time here jumping in to defend some revisionist loser who was willing to lie to argue about an analogy. Why? What is the rules of the game? How do you score?

Pointing out you have discrepancies in your facts does not mean someone is trying to change history. Getting history right is the opposite of revisionism.

How utterly pathetic do have have to be to play it at other people's expense like you are and make this site far shittier in the process?

You're on slashdot. If you can't back up what you say with evidence, maybe you shouldn't be here. If you can't take criticism, you shouldn't be here.

Since you are unwilling to look at your discrepancy, I suppose I will. Let's start with your first assertion:

Carter was a nuclear engineer but came off as dumber than Reagan. Not saying stupid shit in public is a different skill to others.

You are asserting that Carter was a nuclear engineer. As evidence you provided a link which says:

After graduate studies in nuclear physics at Union College in Schenectady, New York, Carter was selected by Admiral Hyman Rickover to serve as engineering officer of the Sea Wolf, America's second nuclear submarine.

First of all, your link does not say he was a nuclear engineer. It says he attended "graduate studies" in nuclear physics and he was an "engineering officer". There is a difference between an "engineer" and an "engineering officer". Thus you have misinterpreted the author's words. The author seems to imply that Carter was a graduate student of nuclear physics but Carter's degree was not in physics. Since the author does not cite his source, it is not clear where he received the information.

From Jimmy Carter's library website, the account of that time period reads

From 1 MAR 1953 to 8 OCT 1953 he was under instruction to become an engineering officer for a nuclear power plant. He also assisted in setting up on-the-job training for the enlisted men being instructed in nuclear propulsion for the USS Seawolf (SSN575).

9 OCT 1953 -- Honorably discharged at Headquarters, 3rd Naval District

Wikipedia says during that time period:

Carter took non-credit classes at Union College in Schenectady, New York, in 1953.

The wiki page on the Seawolf says that it was laid down Sept 1953 and completed July 1955

From all the sources, my interpretation of the events is as such: Carter was selected to be trained as an engineerin

Re:So now it's pathetic little head games?

[dbIII]

Yes - you jumped on to call me a liar and then assert a different version of reality to the one that exists based upon twisting the definition of some words out of shape when the context was completely and utterly obvious from the comment and then the quote later.
Then you've laid on the petty bullying bullshit in the hope of tormenting some poor kid with low self esteem into believing some sort of trivial fantasy is real- what an utter piece of shit you are! I can take that shit, but you appear to be looking for a victim who cannot.

I suggest you consider how many software types on this site call themselves "engineer" without a degree with that name on it and then revise your words.

Re:So now it's pathetic little head games?

[dbIII]

You're on slashdot. If you can't back up what you say with evidence, maybe you shouldn't be here.

I've been here for years. It's not a fucking high school debating site even if that is what you want it to be.

Re:So now it's pathetic little head games?

[UnknowingFool]

Yes - you jumped on to call me a liar and then

And when did I do that? Point out to anywhere above where I said that. I said you need to check your facts. That's it. You took offense immediately when someone points out you had a discrepancy.

assert a different version of reality to the one that exists based upon

Again, pointing out there are different facts which contradicts yours does not mean I live in a different reality. It happens every day in the sciences. Why are you so hurt when someone points out that you have a discrepancy?

twisting the definition of some words out of shape when the context was completely and utterly obvious from the comment and then the quote later.

You said Carter was a "nuclear engineer". Those are your EXACT words. Quoting you word for word is "taking things out of context"? The fact of the matter is that it is not true. You misinterpreted what someone wrote. He worked in building a nuclear sub; he never had an nuclear engineering degree and may not have done any engineering work for what we can tell.

Then you've laid on the petty bullying bullshit in the hope of tormenting some poor kid with low self esteem into believing some sort of trivial fantasy is real- what an utter piece of shit you are! I can take that shit, but you appear to be looking for a victim who cannot.

That's a whole lot of assumption on your part. How do you know what does in my mind? You don't, do you? Projection, much?

I suggest you consider how many software types on this site call themselves "engineer" without a degree with that name on it and then revise your words.

And they are not true "engineers" according to the actual engineering disciplines and have nothing to do with actual engineering work. However, in this context, nuclear engineering is a true engineering discipline with curriculum and standards. Someone may call themselves a software engineer which is meaningless but someone who says they are a mechanical, chemical, petroleum, nuclear, civil, or aerospace engineer better have an engineering degree. On that point, you are dead wrong.

Re:So now it's pathetic little head games?

[UnknowingFool]

I've been here for years. It's not a fucking high school debating site even if that is what you want it to be.

Yet you are so hurt when someone challenges your facts, assumptions, or conclusions.

Re:So now it's pathetic little head games?

[dbIII]

Your idea that you can "own" special manufactured "facts" deserves a challenge to start with - let alone your mindless distracting shit without even attempting to address that it was a job description. Nothing you have posted has anything at all to do with what the Navy called his job.

Re:So now it's pathetic little head games?

[UnknowingFool]

Your idea that you can "own" special manufactured "facts" deserves a challenge to start with

Quoting someone else's facts on wikipedia is what? Again, I quoted and linked to wikipedia. I did not create the facts.

- let alone your mindless distracting shit without even attempting to address that it was a job description.

The job description was "engineering officer". You got it wrong. It was not engineer. I take it that you don't know how the Navy works.

Nothing you have posted has anything at all to do with what the Navy called his job.

According to the Jimmy Carter website and your own link, it was "engineering officer", not engineer.

Re:So now it's pathetic little head games?

[dbIII]

Are you deliberately attempting to be stupid? Please read the above post and try again. It's about your attitude and not where you harvest your distractions that do not actually address the issue from.

Re:So now it's pathetic little head games?

[UnknowingFool]

Are you deliberately attempting to be stupid? Please read the above post and try again. It's about your attitude and not where you harvest your distractions that do not actually address the issue from.

Insulting someone is not a civil way to act.

Re:So now it's pathetic little head games?

[dbIII]

That from the immature fool that jumped on my post in an attempt to bully me?

Re:So now it's pathetic little head games?

[UnknowingFool]

I have never once insulted you but you did at the very onset. I keep asking you to check your facts. You call that "bullying". Your projection of persecution is quite astounding.

not really

[WindBourne]

America has had multiple strings of bad leadership combined with multiple strings of great leadership.
While we had W and reagan, and most of the presidents since nixon has had some pretty blind spots ( O did decently with domestic, but his foreign situation needs a lot of work ), we also had FDR->LBJ, which was one of America's great lines. Considering how corrupt our congress is, I think that O has done fairly decently, esp. in getting us out of the GOP great recession.

IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[dbIII]

IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION - you have failed to address that issue and are instead zipping around the tangents that do not matter.
Why?
Are you paid for the word for political propaganda - or do you call it "social media work" these days?

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[UnknowingFool]

IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION - you have failed to address that issue and are instead zipping around the tangents that do not matter.

The whole point of this thread is that it was YOUR description. In your own article, the job description was "engineering officer". You misinterpreted your own source.

Why? Are you paid for the word for political propaganda - or do you call it "social media work" these days?

People like me pointed out a discrepancy in your facts. We are nerds; we should get details right. That was it. I take it again that you don't work in a field where facts sometimes disagree like the hard sciences, engineering, etc. Rather than look at your facts and other facts that were presented, you immediately began to hurl insults at anyone who dare challenges your facts when you misinterpreted your own facts. It was you who escalated.

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[dbIII]

Engineering officer working with nuclear systems sounds equivalent to me - so why the petty attempts at bullying me into changing a perfectly valid description into something you demand?

I take it again that you don't work in a field where facts sometimes disagree like the hard sciences, engineering

So now the little boy, in mind if not in body, is calling me a liar? I have been a professional engineer since the early 1990s and was teaching engineering students for a few years about the time slashdot started before going back into the resources industry. If you had applied yourself better in high school you may have had the qualifications to be one of my students instead of being a non-engineer trying to tell me what engineering is :)

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[UnknowingFool]

Engineering officer working with nuclear systems sounds equivalent to me - so why the petty attempts at bullying me into changing a perfectly valid description into something you demand?

If I've worked as an Account Manager in the Accounting Department: Does that make me an Accountant? No. To be an accountant I need an accounting degree. As for bullying, show me one link that said he was an actual nuclear engineer as your link did not say that. By all accounts he only worked 7 months in nuclear propulsion but was not an engineer. Even his own bio does not show that. It does not even list what his BS was in.

So now the little boy, in mind if not in body, is calling me a liar?

No. Please stop projecting. My assumption is that your behavior is not someone who has worked in the hard sciences. Again, "my data disagrees with your conclusion" is common in the sciences. Taking offense when that happens does not advance science. Insulting someone who disagrees with you is also not a civil way to act.

I have been a professional engineer since the early 1990s and was teaching engineering students for a few years about the time slashdot started before going back into the resources industry.

So you passed your EIT and PE? Which state?

If you had applied yourself better in high school you may have had the qualifications to be one of my students instead of being a non-engineer trying to tell me what engineering is :)

How do you know what my background is? You don't do you?

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[dbIII]

How do you know what my background is?

The bit "correcting" me about a job title you clearly do not possess was a bit of a giveaway wasn't it?
If you had tried a bit harder and studied in a different country you could have been one of my students instead of being envious of a title you do not have (and shouldn't be envious of anyway - you are pathetic).

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[UnknowingFool]

The bit "correcting" me about a job title you clearly do not possess was a bit of a giveaway wasn't it?

So you're admitting then that you don't know anything about my background then? Fair enough.

If you had tried a bit harder and studied in a different country you could have been one of my students instead of being envious of a title you do not have (and shouldn't be envious of anyway - you are pathetic).

Again you don't know my educational background do you? And you are quite full of yourself aren't you? You are a terrible teacher if you lash out at your students at the first sign of questioning.

What is your engineering degree and where did you get your EIT and PE? I would like to verify your claim.

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[dbIII]

So nothing ventured - therefore confirming nothing as big as your ego! Yet you now demand to check my background.
If I mention the country where I am a registered professional engineer will you go all nationalistic on me? I'm pretty sure you will based on your comments to date. I have been a member of the ASTM since 1994 if you think only American things are credible.
I find your tribalism of attacking because I said something that could be considered positive about a democrat utterly pathetic - the world is a big place and such pettiness marks you as a special kind of loser.

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[UnknowingFool]

So nothing ventured - therefore confirming nothing as big as your ego! Yet you now demand to check my background.

You made a claim that you are an engineer. I simply don't believe you.

If I mention the country where I am a registered professional engineer will you go all nationalistic on me? I'm pretty sure you will based on your comments to date. I have been a member of the ASTM since 1994 if you think only American things are credible.

No I will check facts unlike something that you haven't done.

I find your tribalism of attacking because I said something that could be considered positive about a democrat utterly pathetic - the world is a big place and such pettiness marks you as a special kind of loser.

Bahahahaa. See your problem is that you have so much vested on you being right that someone who challenges you must be coming from "tribalism". Has it never dawned on you that I don't give a damn about Carter at all? Someone must be a "loser" because they have correctly pointed out that you were wrong. Projection, again?

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[dbIII]

Has it never dawned on you that I don't give a damn about Carter at all?

Yes, I'm very much aware that you jumped on my post just to have an easy win in some sort of fight and I have disappointed you by not giving in to that childish bullying. The bit about asking for proof of qualifications is a classic - I'm going to quote it next time it appears you have some sort of audience and are attempting to be taken seriously.

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[UnknowingFool]

Yes, I'm very much aware that you jumped on my post just to have an easy win in some sort of fight and I have disappointed you by not giving in to that childish bullying.

So let's recap: Pointing out your mistake is calling you a liar. Citing wikipedia is "living in my reality". Responding to you is "bullying". All the while you have insulted and insulted again and again instead of simply admitting you may have made a mistake. You really are a special snowflake aren't you?

The bit about asking for proof of qualifications is a classic - I'm going to quote it next time it appears you have some sort of audience and are attempting to be taken seriously.

So you will make a claim but not back it up. That's pretty par for the course.

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[dbIII]

So then - why is it necessary for me to prove that I am a professional engineer just because you can not relate to common usage of a term?
Can you prove you are a high school English teacher? That would trump whatever I think the word means :)

Basically no one can challenge your facts because in your mind only your facts are acceptable

Correct - because otherwise they are not actual facts are they? If they can be refuted, as distinct from distractions like your antics, they are no longer facts.

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[UnknowingFool]

So then - why is it necessary for me to prove that I am a professional engineer just because you can not relate to common usage of a term? Can you prove you are a high school English teacher? That would trump whatever I think the word means :)

You made the claim but are unwilling to back it up. That's a fact at this point. You claim to know that engineering is; I don't accept the word of a random person on the Internet. I don't have to prove that I'm an English teacher as I've never made the claim that I was.

Correct - because otherwise they are not actual facts are they? If they can be refuted, as distinct from distractions like your antics, they are no longer facts.

No, what you never understood was your own facts. Your own article never said he was a nuclear engineer. That was your interpretation. When presented with other facts from other sources (including his own library), you immediate lashed out. You never actually looked at all the facts when it was your interpretation that was the problem. You never refuted my facts; I was the only one between us to actually look at all the facts and come up with a reasonable conclusion. He worked in nuclear propulsion but his background and education does not say he was an engineer. He might have become one eventually but he left the Navy before then. I've worked in the Accounting dept before on the Accounting books, I would never claim to be an Accountant as I don't have an Accounting degree.

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[dbIII]

what you never understood was your own facts

I don't get to "own" facts and neither do you.

You never refuted my facts ... and come up with a reasonable conclusion

You had a distraction and then made up shit to try to support a silly and trivial dispute between semantics, common use and job descriptions while still being utterly wrong in your definition of a word so that it would not work in naval, software, locomotive etc use - and you are still rambling on as if you have proved something instead of just ignoring the inconvenient. Why should I try to refute a distraction that strays from the topic other than to put in work to give you some form of entertainment and give you some sort of feeling of control? Fuck that for a joke.

Re:IT WAS HIS JOB DESCRIPTION

[UnknowingFool]

I don't get to "own" facts and neither do you.

Well that makes no sense. You simply misinterpreted the facts you presented and are unwilling to admit it. The facts you presented doesn't say what you interpreted. It's that simple.

You had a distraction and then made up shit to try to support a silly and trivial dispute between semantics, common use and job descriptions while still being utterly wrong in your definition of a word so that it would not work in naval, software, locomotive etc use

What you're saying: Cited wikipedia == "made up shit" to you. Correcting your error = "trivial dispute". Being precise with words = "semantics". You're an engineer. Getting things right should be part of your job. Pi is not 3. Natural Log (1) is not 3. Second, as an engineer you should know better that a software engineer is not the same as a nuclear engineer. Anyone can call themselves a software engineer but a nuclear engineer requires an actual degree in the field. I know someone who calls themselves a "Shoe Doctor". I don't make appointments with him for an annual physical exam. Third, use some correct grammar.

and you are still rambling on as if you have proved something instead of just ignoring the inconvenient.

That would be you. I made my point already. You just insulted when someone challenged you.

Why should I try to refute a distraction that strays from the topic other than to put in work to give you some form of entertainment and give you some sort of feeling of control?

Again, that would be you. Between the two of us, I believe I was the only one to look at all the facts presented and come up with an agreeing conclusion instead lashing at someone who presented a different set of facts.