Deep Thoughts

[Sakiale]

So I was wrong, its collagen from bones etc..

Im never using lotion, paper, or Jell-O again.

Lucky I live in the Los Angelian equivalent of Flushing!

 

[Snortin Norton]

Well, from a moral standpoint (or mine, anyway) it would be okay to consume gellatin. Why? Because the cows were killed for their meat, that you don't eat, and the gellatin was harvested from "leftovers". So really, you're just being a Jello vulture because they died for a different reason and were going to die anyway.

 

[Solid Lifters]

I shoot stacked newspapers soaked overnight in water than use ballistic gelatin for when I need to test the terminal ballistic potential of a hunting bullet.

However, I would use ballistic gelatin, the kind from post processed animals, if it was more convenient. I have no animal rights concerns when it comes to my shooting media. Though, I guessed you figured that out.

I understood where gelatin comes from before going through this thread. I still love it, but only if it's flavored. Unflavored gelatin is not something easily enjoyed, but perhaps one can learn. A nice flavored gelatin dessert with a scoop of cream fresh is a nice way to end a meal.

 

[Danoff]

Well, from a moral standpoint (or mine, anyway) it would be okay to consume gellatin. Why? Because the cows were killed for their meat, that you don't eat, and the gellatin was harvested from "leftovers". So really, you're just being a Jello vulture because they died for a different reason and were going to die anyway.

Would there be a moral issue if the animal were NOT going to die anyway? Like eating animal meat?

 

[Omnis]

Thats why I prefer Chinese Jello (not its real name), made of a type of seaweed. Same method. Not as disgusting. And Im a vegeterian.

Collagen is Collagen. How can gelatin be more disgusting than gelatin? I hate when vegetarians label everything that "they don't believe in" as "eww!" "disgusting!" "repulsive!", and etc., especially when the final product alone is of the same thing that they are consuming under "vegetarian" standards. It's just so immature. I'm not necessarily talking about you, Saki, but I know a lot of people that are just ridiculous.

 

[Snortin Norton]

Would there be a moral issue if the animal were NOT going to die anyway? Like eating animal meat?

I meant the animal was going to die anyway, for another cause unrelated to your own gellatin lust.

Of course, if you like gelatin that much, and you kill your cow just to make Jello, I suppose that would be ok, too. With me, anyway. I was just trying to get him to see that his eating of jello isn't promoting the slaughter of beef, merely making use of what was already killed.

 

[Danoff]

I was just trying to get him to see that his eating of jello isn't promoting the slaughter of beef, merely making use of what was already killed.

I know, I was asking if you have a problem with promoting the slaughter of beef.

 

[Snortin Norton]

Collagen is Collagen. How can gelatin be more disgusting than gelatin? I hate when vegetarians label everything that "they don't believe in" as "eww!" "disgusting!" "repulsive!", and etc., especially when the final product alone is of the same thing that they are consuming under "vegetarian" standards. It's just so immature. I'm not necessarily talking about you, Saki, but I know a lot of people that are just ridiculous.

Collagen can probably be synthesized or created in a lab from various protein and amino samples. . .

It's like the ketchup argument:

You don't like tomatoes, yet you love ketchup.
Ketchup is made of tomatoes.
Therefore you like tomatoes?

No, you like them boiled down and pasted into an nrecognisable form that tatses good. I suppose thats sort of the argument with gelatin, they'd rather get it in a form that makes them feel less guilty about eating animal hides.

 

[Snortin Norton]

I know, I was asking if you have a problem with promoting the slaughter of beef.

Oh, not at all. Well, if someone is going to use them. If they're just slaughtering for the fun of it that seems kind of wasteful (both for the ammunition (assuming it's a firearm) and the livestock).

 

[Solid Lifters]

Oh, not at all. Well, if someone is going to use them. If they're just slaughtering for the fun of it that seems kind of wasteful (both for the ammunition (assuming it's a firearm) and the livestock).

No, the bullet would have been used to its design, killing cows for fun, therefore it wouldn't have been a waste.

I'll reload a batch of cow stoppers tonight...

 

[Snortin Norton]

No, the bullet would have been used to its design, killing cows for fun, therefore it wouldn't have been a waste.

I'll reload a batch of cow stoppers tonight...

But nothing was done for the cows. Therefore they are wasted; his time and ammunition may have been well spent, but the cow wasn't.

 

[Danoff]

But nothing was done for the cows. Therefore they are wasted

What exactly is the purpose of a cow and who defined it?

 

[Dave A]

A cow is there to supply methane, a combustable source of energy, unfortunately for the cow though, they happen to taste nice, especially with gravy and mashed potatoes.

 

[TVRKing]

Don't forget the supply of milk that a cow generates.

 

[Dave A]

And ofcourse milk 👍.

 

[Snortin Norton]

What exactly is the purpose of a cow and who defined it?

The purpose of the modern day cow is to provide food, drink, and sometimes hide as defined by farmers and various laws, governments, and organisations.

 

[Danoff]

The purpose of the modern day cow is to provide food, drink, and sometimes hide as defined by farmers and various laws, governments, and organisations.

What if an organization decides that the purpose of a modern day cow is to provide entertainment, sexual pleasure, or target practice? What makes one "organization" more morally correct than the other?

 

[Famine]

What if an organization decides that the purpose of a modern day cow is to provide entertainment, sexual pleasure, or target practice? What makes one "organization" more morally correct than the other?

Obviously the second one is.

 

[Danoff]

Obviously the second one is.

Naturally. Given your location I knew you'd be on board there. I considered mentioning sheep but I figured cows are close enough

 

[Danoff]

Two more odd pronunciations:

Consequence = Con + Sequence (why isn't it pronounced that way?)
Synonymous = Synonym + ous (why isn't it pronounced that way?)

Same goes for Anonymous and Antonym.

 

[Danny]

Naturally. Given your location I knew you'd be on board there. I considered mentioning sheep but I figured cows are close enough

I'd just like to add an and a .


Proceed.

 

[ozyran]

I had a revelation a few days ago.

What happens when you walk forward and look back constantly? Exactly, you end up hitting a wall (or a pole, or a car, or someone else, etc..). That, in my opinion, is where society has landed at the moment. Constantly trying to move forward while looking back the whole time. It's led us into some sort of a developmental wall, where no groundbreaking technology is developed. All we keep doing now is refining the old, recycled ideas. Until we move on from the old ideas, we won't advance into anything new.

(On another note, we have made some astounding leaps in the past 10 years, so I do see the continual improvement of technology, but no advancement.)

 

[Danoff]

Substantial, Substantive, Substance should be pronounced the same
Pronunciation and Pronounce also share a root and it would make sense to pronounce/spell/emphasize them the same.
Similar vs. Similarity
Permit vs. Permit + Permitted (the first permit is physical, the second is an action)

Edit:
Continue vs. Continuity works except for the accent. Continuance on the other hand is perfect.
Confide vs. Confidence is craziness because confidence isn't spelled how it's pronounced.

 

[Snortin Norton]

What if an organization decides that the purpose of a modern day cow is to provide entertainment, sexual pleasure, or target practice?

Then that's added to the list purposes. But currently, since they're raised to be slaughtered and eaten, and made use of in various other areas (medical research, organ testing/"harvesting", other culinary purpose etc) that is their current purpose, since that's the reason they're raised.

What makes one "organization" more morally correct than the other?

One organization is more morally correct than the other as much as you want it to be. Or as much they think are.

Like southern Baptists.

 

[Snortin Norton]

Substantial, Substantive, Substance should be pronounced the same
Pronunciation and Pronounce also share a root and it would make sense to pronounce/spell/emphasize them the same.
Similar vs. Similarity

Why the obsession with words that have the same root that are spelled the same? I think they were/are deliberately pronounced slightly different to emphasize (or put emphasis on) the pre/suffix.

Why don't you Wiki it? Or phone Websters'?

 

[Danoff]

Why the obsession with words that have the same root that are spelled the same? I think they were/are deliberately pronounced slightly different to emphasize (or put emphasis on) the pre/suffix.

Changing the emphasis or pronunciation, or spelling in some cases, clouds the meaning and complicates our language unnecessarily... and I don't think it was done on purpose. For as many examples I can come up with that don't make sense, there are a dozen more that do, where the root spelling/pronunciation/emphasis is preserved.

 

[Snortin Norton]

Changing the emphasis or pronunciation, or spelling in some cases, clouds the meaning and complicates our language unnecessarily... and I don't think it was done on purpose. For as many examples I can come up with that don't make sense, there are a dozen more that do, where the root spelling/pronunciation/emphasis is preserved.

What about French? Lots of words are spelt similarly and then made feminine by adding an -e at the end of the word. Would that not complicate things unnnecessarily?

What if 2 words sounded alike and someone was talking really fast, the word having 2 different meanings but one common sound, would that not confuse you more had you not heard them correctly?

 

[Danoff]

What about French? Lots of words are spelt similarly and then made feminine by adding an -e at the end of the word. Would that not complicate things unnnecessarily?

If it's actually more descriptive to call things feminine or masculine, which is probably almost never the case (like in Spanish), I'd say it's a complication that should be removed to help communication be more effective.

What if 2 words sounded alike and someone was talking really fast, the word having 2 different meanings but one common sound, would that not confuse you more had you not heard them correctly?

You mean like direct and redirect or community and communication? I've never had that problem. There are a bazillion of examples where the root word keeps the same emphasis/spelling/pronunciation and it isn't confusing.





Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
"After therefore because of"

Probalby my favorite logical fallacy. And I've come to the realization that crosswalks are a good example of this fallacy. I was at a stop light the other day and I looked over to see a teenager jabbing away at the crosswalk button to make the light change so that he could get a walk signal. He was pounding and pounding. Eventually his hand got tired so he switched to the other hand and pounded some more. Eventually the light changed and all I can think is that he must figure that it was that last umptybillion and 1th hit that made the crosswalk change. Because after he hit it that time, the light changed. If he doesn't think that, why does he pound away at the button?

How is it possible that his brain (and many others that do this same thing with crosswalks) honsetly thinks that the first 30 tries were ignored but the next one is the one that did it. How can we throw away that many failed tries in favor of the one that we think works.

The same thing happens with elevator buttons, sometimes even when there's a little light to indicate that the button has been pushed. People will try again and again until it comes... thinking that the last one was the charm.

 

[Sakiale]

If it's actually more descriptive to call things feminine or masculine, which is probably almost never the case (like in Spanish), I'd say it's a complication that should be removed to help communication be more effective.



You mean like direct and redirect or community and communication? I've never had that problem. There are a bazillion of examples where the root word keeps the same emphasis/spelling/pronunciation and it isn't confusing.





Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc
"After therefore because of"

Probalby my favorite logical fallacy. And I've come to the realization that crosswalks are a good example of this fallacy. I was at a stop light the other day and I looked over to see a teenager jabbing away at the crosswalk button to make the light change so that he could get a walk signal. He was pounding and pounding. Eventually his hand got tired so he switched to the other hand and pounded some more. Eventually the light changed and all I can think is that he must figure that it was that last umptybillion and 1th hit that made the crosswalk change. Because after he hit it that time, the light changed. If he doesn't think that, why does he pound away at the button?

How is it possible that his brain (and many others that do this same thing with crosswalks) honsetly thinks that the first 30 tries were ignored but the next one is the one that did it. How can we throw away that many failed tries in favor of the one that we think works.

The same thing happens with elevator buttons, sometimes even when there's a little light to indicate that the button has been pushed. People will try again and again until it comes... thinking that the last one was the charm.

Yeah, I never got that. Im always at a elevator, and the light is on and someone will come and pummel it until it arrives. Im like 'WTF you dumbarse, cant you see the light is already on? It obviously just needs some time to get here!'

 

[Danoff]

Yeah, I never got that. Im always at a elevator, and the light is on and someone will come and pummel it until it arrives. Im like 'WTF you dumbarse, cant you see the light is already on? It obviously just needs some time to get here!'

You can't fight experience. And their mind has been conditioned by experience to think that if they push it long enough the elevator will arrive. Cause and effect are a big part of our instinctual makeup and time correlation is everything.

It is pretty stupid looking though.