Author Topic: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread  (Read 41316 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pandamonium

  • Skeptical Beer Inspector
  • Planetary Skeptic
  • *
  • Posts: 26014
  • they/them
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #30 on: July 03, 2009, 06:59:00 PM »
re: cant of P&T BS

it's their show. if the cant bothers you too much, don't watch it.
and they do tell you how full of shit they themselves are.
also, it's entertainment. yes, that is a legitimate excuse.
I am become destroyer of biology.

Online stands2reason

  • Empiricist, Positivist, Militant Agnostic
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10495
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #31 on: July 03, 2009, 07:04:35 PM »
re: cant of P&T BS

it's their show. if the cant bothers you too much, don't watch it.
and they do tell you how full of shit they themselves are.
also, it's entertainment. yes, that is a legitimate excuse.

Argumentum ad Jon Sterwartum?

Offline pandamonium

  • Skeptical Beer Inspector
  • Planetary Skeptic
  • *
  • Posts: 26014
  • they/them
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #32 on: July 03, 2009, 07:09:59 PM »
re: cant of P&T BS

it's their show. if the cant bothers you too much, don't watch it.
and they do tell you how full of shit they themselves are.
also, it's entertainment. yes, that is a legitimate excuse.

Argumentum ad Jon Sterwartum?

your use of fake latin does not alter the legitimacy of my excuse.
I am become destroyer of biology.

Online stands2reason

  • Empiricist, Positivist, Militant Agnostic
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10495
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #33 on: July 03, 2009, 07:15:39 PM »
re: cant of P&T BS

it's their show. if the cant bothers you too much, don't watch it.
and they do tell you how full of shit they themselves are.
also, it's entertainment. yes, that is a legitimate excuse.

Argumentum ad Jon Sterwartum?

your use of fake latin does not alter the legitimacy of my excuse.

I'm not disagreeing. P&T (and the rest of the production team) are entitled to make their show any way they want. Still, if they make crazy or untrue claims, they deserve criticism.

Also, I'd have to say I think their characterization of hybrid cars was inaccurate. Picking on a 1st gen car that not designed to be a "real", practical vehicle.

Offline pandamonium

  • Skeptical Beer Inspector
  • Planetary Skeptic
  • *
  • Posts: 26014
  • they/them
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #34 on: July 03, 2009, 07:19:12 PM »
re: cant of P&T BS

it's their show. if the cant bothers you too much, don't watch it.
and they do tell you how full of shit they themselves are.
also, it's entertainment. yes, that is a legitimate excuse.

Argumentum ad Jon Sterwartum?

your use of fake latin does not alter the legitimacy of my excuse.

I'm not disagreeing. P&T (and the rest of the production team) are entitled to make their show any way they want. Still, if they make crazy or untrue claims, they deserve criticism.

Also, I'd have to say I think their characterization of hybrid cars was inaccurate. Picking on a 1st gen car that not designed to be a "real", practical vehicle.

-nod- i'm not saying don't criticize. i'm just saying that the criticism is weak. or that the criticizer has much different expectations than i do, which is likely the case.
I am become destroyer of biology.

Offline Dirty J. Martini

  • Well Established
  • *****
  • Posts: 1818
  • I'm Pro-Accordian and I Vote!
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #35 on: July 04, 2009, 12:05:35 AM »
I'm confused by why people think hybrids are bullshit. I have a 1994 Toyota Camry. On a good day, it probably gets 25 mpg. My mother owns a 200x Hybrid Camry. My father claims that many times on the highway it gets 45 mpg. I don't know if that's true, but that's his claim. I should mention that he's an automotive engineer who worked for GM for ~20 years, then started his own business selling stuff to GM, Ford, and other car companies. He'd certainly know better than me, but he's human and fallible. So how is a car that gets 45 mpg bullshit compared to a car that gets 25 mpg? I don't understand (and didn't see the episode). They aren't pulling out that b.s. report from a political group on how Hummers are more efficient than the Prius because of manufacturing are they? That was debunked years ago, wasn't it?

Offline David E.

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 15291
  • Contentedly Misanthropic.
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #36 on: July 04, 2009, 12:10:22 AM »
They have already stated that the very last Bullshit with be: Penn & Teller are Bullshit.

People are so used to criticizing religion in whispers, that a normal voice, sounds like a shout.

Online stands2reason

  • Empiricist, Positivist, Militant Agnostic
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10495
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #37 on: July 04, 2009, 08:29:35 AM »
I'm confused by why people think hybrids are bullshit. I have a 1994 Toyota Camry. On a good day, it probably gets 25 mpg. My mother owns a 200x Hybrid Camry. My father claims that many times on the highway it gets 45 mpg. I don't know if that's true, but that's his claim. I should mention that he's an automotive engineer who worked for GM for ~20 years, then started his own business selling stuff to GM, Ford, and other car companies. He'd certainly know better than me, but he's human and fallible. So how is a car that gets 45 mpg bullshit compared to a car that gets 25 mpg? I don't understand (and didn't see the episode). They aren't pulling out that b.s. report from a political group on how Hummers are more efficient than the Prius because of manufacturing are they? That was debunked years ago, wasn't it?

Basically they said they were BS because they were impractical: very slow, very expensive, and usually too small. By the way, it was S05E09.

Offline David "Stubb" Oswald

  • Ass. Professor of Agronomy
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4243
  • Lived, perspicacious, philosophic wisdom.
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #38 on: July 04, 2009, 12:13:45 PM »
Quote from: jason
Australia has been touted as a great place to store the world's nuclear waste, ... We've just got to overcome the anti-nuclear bias which has been somewhat ingrained down here...

I knew South Australia would come in handy someday. 

We could even do it cheaper, because you wouldn't have to worry about shielding.  Nobody would notice if a few South Australians mutated anyway ...



Stobie Pole Man

After wrapping his Holden Commodore around a radioactive stobie pole with a blood alcohol level of 0.12, mild-mannered South Australian occa pisshead Johno gained the amazing superpowers to:

:!: Drink Emu Export without permanent neurological impairment, (and oddly enough, camel piss as well).

:!: Use his uncanny "radar-sense" to avoid speed cameras.

:!: Use his weather control powers to prevent rain whenever major flooding might threaten the Simpson Desert.
Thank you for introducing me to the culture of Southern Australia.  Another step in my journey away from being a Philistine.
If you read a book and it changes your life, you are fucked. -Seth Romatelli

Offline Nacreous

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5744
  • Some sort of anthropoid ape, as best we can tell.
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #39 on: July 04, 2009, 12:41:14 PM »
New Season...and from the nice episode list incorporated into the opening it looks like a good balance between delving into serious skeptical topics (Astrology, The Vatican) some fun (Orgasms) and a P&T Political Views Ep (Taxes)

P&T spread too much bullshit of their own to qualify as credible skeptics.  There is too much Libertarian cant in the programs.
Care to elaborate?

Yes, please do.

The second hand smoke episode, for example.
 Even in the youtube clip, PJ is bullshitting.  There was plenty of credible evidence for the danger of SHS long before the episode was made.  If he didn't know about it, he ain't much of a skeptic.  He went on to say that, though he now agrees SHS causes cancer, he is still against banning smoking in public places.  WTF?  That is straight out of the Libertarian bible.

Not surprising, since PJ is a fellow of the Cato Institute.

"The future has been here for awhile; it's just not available to everyone."
-some guy at MIT

Offline Bill K

  • Well Established
  • *****
  • Posts: 1905
  • In fear & loathing.
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #40 on: July 04, 2009, 01:45:08 PM »
How is that out of the libertarian bible? Don't they think people should live wild and do whatever the hell they want, sorta? I mean, the majority of people don't want second hand smoke, so you're violating their desires to please a minority's. Even though there may be other places to dine without worry of SHS, there are also other places to smoke.

So, in a libertarian mindset, which one would really win out?
[insert witty signature here (have I?)]

Offline Calinthalus

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6342
    • My Page
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #41 on: July 04, 2009, 02:11:24 PM »
The libertarian mindset would be that whomever owned the property got to make the rules.

If a shop owner wanted to allow smoking he should be allowed to do that.  Non-smokers can protest in front of the store or withhold their patronage.  If, on the other hand a shop owner wanted to ban smoking from his establishment then the smokers could protest and withhold their patronage.  It is the libertarian stance that the market will urge business owners to follow whatever their potential customers desire and it is none of the governments concern.

I quit smoking more than a year ago.  Most of your strongest anti-smoker types are ex-smokers.  I think anti-smoking laws are bullshit.  I'm OK with state owned buildings (courthouses, clerks offices, DMV etc.etc.) being strictly no-smoking.  I also don't mind the government forcing businesses to display their status as a smoking or non-smoking establishment.  I think the market will basically take care of the issue for businesses.  If I lose money because I allow smoking...I'll go non-smoking.  If, on the other hand, I lose money because I'm non-smoking...I'll allow smoking.  If I don't follow the market my competitors will.  That, in essence, is the real will of the people, not bullshit survey's and petitions.  People vote with their dollars.

Overall, we believe it is none of the governments concern.  I feel the same way about seat belt laws for adults...as well as helmet laws for adults.  And I've never been on a bike without a helmet, even though it's legal here.  It's not the governments job to protect you from yourself.
"I think computer viruses should count as life. Maybe it says something about human nature, that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. Talk about creating life in our own image."
--Stephen Hawking

Offline Bill K

  • Well Established
  • *****
  • Posts: 1905
  • In fear & loathing.
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #42 on: July 04, 2009, 02:18:08 PM »
If a person decides they are going to kill themselves, is it right or wrong for the government to step in? Isn't it the equivalent of the government stepping in when it comes to regulation, etc. and in this case SHS? The only difference being that this is on a smaller scale when it comes to the frequency with which harm's dealt.
[insert witty signature here (have I?)]

Offline kem

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 3074
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #43 on: July 04, 2009, 03:40:04 PM »
Suicide is no longer illegal here.  But you cop a $150 fine for not wearing your seat belt.  I reckon the difference here is intent and economics.  The state is up for all of the cost of your injuries and rehabilitation, but none of the cost of your funeral.
"Americans will always do the right thing-after they have exhausted all the alternatives."

Winston Churchill

Offline Calinthalus

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6342
    • My Page
Re: P&T Bullshit! Discussion Thread
« Reply #44 on: July 04, 2009, 04:09:11 PM »
If a person decides they are going to kill themselves, is it right or wrong for the government to step in? Isn't it the equivalent of the government stepping in when it comes to regulation, etc. and in this case SHS? The only difference being that this is on a smaller scale when it comes to the frequency with which harm's dealt.
Not really.  SHS is an effect on the non-smoker.  I can see the regulation on state owned property...or locations that are basically required to be visited like hospitals.  Locations where people don't have a choice but to visit could be regulated.  In the case of private businesses like restaurants, bars, coffee shops, book stores etc.etc. the non-smoker can avoid SHS by visiting a different book store, or can choose to take the risk of which he has been educated.  If enough people tell the management of the book store that they are not going to visit as long as he allows smoking, if he has any brains, he'll change his policy.

In the case of most suicides, there is no effect on anyone other than the deceased.  I say most because if they jump off a bridge, or into the street, or suicide by cop it effects others.  If they are blocking traffic or becoming a nuisance in their attempt, the cops should step in to restore order.  If the person wants to eat a bullet at home, the state has no interest.
"I think computer viruses should count as life. Maybe it says something about human nature, that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. Talk about creating life in our own image."
--Stephen Hawking