tooner

this thread reminded me of an essay of Malcolm Gladwell's I just read called "The Newboy Network" which talks about how people make snap judgements about those they've just met, ala-job-interview......anyway here is the relevent bit although the whole essay was quite good. Some years ago, an experimental psychologist at Harvard University, Nalini Ambady, together with Robert Rosenthal, set out to examine the nonverbal aspects of good teaching. As the basis of her research, she used videotapes of teaching fellows which had been made during a training program at Harvard. Her plan was to have outside observers look at the tapes with the sound off and rate the effectiveness of the teachers by their expressions and physical cues. Ambady wanted to have at least a minute of film to work with. When she looked at the tapes, though, there was really only about ten seconds when the teachers were shown apart from the students. "I didn't want students in the frame, because obviously it would bias the ratings," Ambady says. "So I went to my adviser, and I said, 'This isn't going to work.'" But it did. The observers, presented with a ten-second silent video clip, had no difficulty rating the teachers on a fifteen- item checklist of personality traits. In fact, when Ambady cut the clips back to five seconds, the ratings were the same. They were even the same when she showed her raters just two seconds of videotape. That sounds unbelievable unless you actually watch Ambady's teacher clips, as I did, and realize that the eight seconds that distinguish the longest clips from the shortest are superfluous: anything beyond the first flash of insight is unnecessary. When we make a snap judgment, it is made in a snap. It's also, very clearly, a judgment:we get a feeling that we have no difficulty articulating. ....etc etc, the book "What the dog saw...and other adventures" is worth a read.

Didn't the last Ice Age (and others before) drastically change the landscape though? That would render a lot of this supposed knowledge useless anyway. Surely a more likely explanation is people (who have seemingly explored throughout their history) rediscovered lands that were now hospitable again as a matter of course rather than because they knew where to go. Yeah my take is that the re-population of land freed from the ice was a natural one especially given it was still largely a hunter-gatherer lifestyle anyway. You also have to consider that there were other Hominids descended from Homo Erectus who had populated the same areas a couple of hundred thousand years before that by the same natural migration. Let's not get into this evolution bollocks. We did nothing but eat our own shit in caves for about 400,000 years. wasn't until we started eating what 'grew' on the cow-shit that things got interesting.... Aye. Mycelium and all FYP

Didn't the last Ice Age (and others before) drastically change the landscape though? That would render a lot of this supposed knowledge useless anyway. Surely a more likely explanation is people (who have seemingly explored throughout their history) rediscovered lands that were now hospitable again as a matter of course rather than because they knew where to go. Yeah my take is that the re-population of land freed from the ice was a natural one especially given it was still largely a hunter-gatherer lifestyle anyway. You also have to consider that there were other Hominids descended from Homo Erectus who had populated the same areas a couple of hundred thousand years before that by the same natural migration. Let's not get into this evolution bollocks. We did nothing but eat our own shit in caves for about 400,000 years. wasn't until we started eating what 'grew' on the cow-shit that things got interesting....

That would be the Western governments who needed a new bogeyman - you really need to watch The Power of Nightmares. So the "bogeymen" who commited Lockerbie, 9/11, 7/7 and the failed exploding undercrackers are figments of my government fuelled imagination, ah ok thing is it wasn't the fundamentalist clerics that deported him/them.......it was his/their own government But who created the climate in which, such a deportation was possible, that'll be the government I reckon you'll say grasping at straws tbh...

That would be the Western governments who needed a new bogeyman - you really need to watch The Power of Nightmares. So the "bogeymen" who commited Lockerbie, 9/11, 7/7 and the failed exploding undercrackers are figments of my government fuelled imagination, ah ok thing is it wasn't the fundamentalist clerics that deported him/them.......it was his/their own government

the government wrongly deported him/them contrary to the governments laws......who bears the responsibility if not the government? had a couple of these happen in Canada where the "deport now ask questions later" came back to bite gov't in the ass to the tune of several million dollars. as for why he thinks it'll be worth it, probably a combination of someone telling him to get on the gravy train and the fact he was betrayed by his own government. at least you understand something. so does the bolded bit trump the fact he/they were deported illeagally in your eyes? I never said anything about the "legality", I'm saying we are a bunch of soft cunts for putting up with it and for those defending such idiocy to our own cost. putting up with being illeagally deported? ..... if it had been a person/persons of a non-identfiable minorty (angry-football forum- anglo-saxon- blue collar worker.... ) that had been deported would you feel the same way?

the government wrongly deported him/them contrary to the governments laws......who bears the responsibility if not the government? had a couple of these happen in Canada where the "deport now ask questions later" came back to bite gov't in the ass to the tune of several million dollars. as for why he thinks it'll be worth it, probably a combination of someone telling him to get on the gravy train and the fact he was betrayed by his own government. at least you understand something. so does the bolded bit trump the fact he/they were deported illeagally in your eyes?

the government wrongly deported him/them contrary to the governments laws......who bears the responsibility if not the government? had a couple of these happen in Canada where the "deport now ask questions later" came back to bite gov't in the ass to the tune of several million dollars. as for why he thinks it'll be worth it, probably a combination of someone telling him to get on the gravy train and the fact he was betrayed by his own government.

In a very convoluted and unjust sort of way. His solution is to make sure the government cannot be placed on such charges to ensure they get away with it, rather than holding them to account and punishing their misdeeds to put off future governments from repeating and worsening the offences. For someone so opposed to the USSR and their style of government/justice/disappearances in the night it's a confuzzled point of view. get away with what ? Other countries torture him, he thinks he can sue us, and you agree with it ? What planet do you live on If that were the case, he wouldn't have a case and would be told to fuck off. But the facts are.... "MI5 was fully aware of the brutal treatment he received, and" not only "provided information and questions to be asked by his torturers" but also "helped 'interrogate' Mohamed in Pakistan in 2002" "The courts have concluded that British officers were, indeed, deeply enmeshed in the abuse" "MI5 kept files relating to the treatment of Mohamed from the ISC" "It is a crime to commit ‘an act which constitutes complicity in torture." you should go back and read Toonpacks post about the good guys and the bad guys HF. There are a lot of bad guys out there and its about time you recognised who they are and ask yourself again, why WE should foot the bill and others are quite happy to see us do it. We owe him nothing. He will claim from us, because we are the only ones daft enought to contemplate it. who are they exactly? good-guys muslim immigrants unjustly deported bad guys muslim immigrants justly deported fill out the other players as you see fit Leazes Yawn ...no idea then eh? I'm basically not interested. You don't need to tell me about security, and things like this. Especially being a yank. ......i would say you are basic, remedial even

In a very convoluted and unjust sort of way. His solution is to make sure the government cannot be placed on such charges to ensure they get away with it, rather than holding them to account and punishing their misdeeds to put off future governments from repeating and worsening the offences. For someone so opposed to the USSR and their style of government/justice/disappearances in the night it's a confuzzled point of view. get away with what ? Other countries torture him, he thinks he can sue us, and you agree with it ? What planet do you live on If that were the case, he wouldn't have a case and would be told to fuck off. But the facts are.... "MI5 was fully aware of the brutal treatment he received, and" not only "provided information and questions to be asked by his torturers" but also "helped 'interrogate' Mohamed in Pakistan in 2002" "The courts have concluded that British officers were, indeed, deeply enmeshed in the abuse" "MI5 kept files relating to the treatment of Mohamed from the ISC" "It is a crime to commit ‘an act which constitutes complicity in torture." you should go back and read Toonpacks post about the good guys and the bad guys HF. There are a lot of bad guys out there and its about time you recognised who they are and ask yourself again, why WE should foot the bill and others are quite happy to see us do it. We owe him nothing. He will claim from us, because we are the only ones daft enought to contemplate it. who are they exactly? good-guys muslim immigrants unjustly deported bad guys muslim immigrants justly deported fill out the other players as you see fit Leazes Yawn ...no idea then eh?

In a very convoluted and unjust sort of way. His solution is to make sure the government cannot be placed on such charges to ensure they get away with it, rather than holding them to account and punishing their misdeeds to put off future governments from repeating and worsening the offences. For someone so opposed to the USSR and their style of government/justice/disappearances in the night it's a confuzzled point of view. get away with what ? Other countries torture him, he thinks he can sue us, and you agree with it ? What planet do you live on If that were the case, he wouldn't have a case and would be told to fuck off. But the facts are.... "MI5 was fully aware of the brutal treatment he received, and" not only "provided information and questions to be asked by his torturers" but also "helped 'interrogate' Mohamed in Pakistan in 2002" "The courts have concluded that British officers were, indeed, deeply enmeshed in the abuse" "MI5 kept files relating to the treatment of Mohamed from the ISC" "It is a crime to commit ‘an act which constitutes complicity in torture." you should go back and read Toonpacks post about the good guys and the bad guys HF. There are a lot of bad guys out there and its about time you recognised who they are and ask yourself again, why WE should foot the bill and others are quite happy to see us do it. We owe him nothing. He will claim from us, because we are the only ones daft enought to contemplate it. who are they exactly? good-guys muslim immigrants unjustly deported bad guys muslim immigrants justly deported fill out the other players as you see fit Leazes

point is the governments of various countries around the world bowed to the pressure of the US regimes "with us or agin us" attitude and deported people (justly in some cases and unjustly in some cases) contrary to the laws of the deporting countries themselves and then the US held the accused at a facility with no international jurisdiction (other than "we have the biggest stick") where the detainees were systematically tortured and interogated. While I agree it's a shitty thing that the general populous has to foot the compensation bill, isn't that the best advert for higher voter turn-out to get the proper leadership in place for future decisions?

The "human rights" you mock so easily are exactly what gives you the right to hold and express your views. The weren't handed down from on high - they had to be fought for over centuries. Now you want to chuck them away because you're scared of women in veils. I am quite aware of the fact I have human rights, and how and why. I've said this before though, nobody has 100% freedom of speech, you have to accept laws and certain responsibilities in life. Women in veils ? Don't make me laugh, they are saying they will bomb us unless we let them do as they like. That is not freedom of speech, it should be a jail offence and a deportation order to another country as such that suits their beliefs. You are aware a bombers use them as disguises aren't you ? as has been proven before you DON'T have a grasp of what is and isn't allowed under free-speech laws (and by your own admission) and where have they said they'll bomb unless they are allowed to wear the burqua? i'm convinced that that is something YOU said, but I am willing to be proven wrong. as has been said before, you're a yank and know fuck all about the UK. I understand that nobody has 100% free speech, if you think they do, go down to the local muslim ghetto and start burning Islam banners and and chanting anti Islam slogans. Make sure you have an illegal firearm with you and it won't be to shoot the copper who comes to tell you to stop being a naughty boy. They have said they will take whatever action is necessary, its been posted. Look for it. Bombers have wore burkas as disguises by the way. ......again....we're talking about France.... ............again, I was commenting on Freedom of speech not the UK....... local muslim ghetto? i'll wager you have NO idea if such a thing actually exists near you, but you have your suspicions i'm sure

The "human rights" you mock so easily are exactly what gives you the right to hold and express your views. The weren't handed down from on high - they had to be fought for over centuries. Now you want to chuck them away because you're scared of women in veils. I am quite aware of the fact I have human rights, and how and why. I've said this before though, nobody has 100% freedom of speech, you have to accept laws and certain responsibilities in life. Women in veils ? Don't make me laugh, they are saying they will bomb us unless we let them do as they like. That is not freedom of speech, it should be a jail offence and a deportation order to another country as such that suits their beliefs. You are aware a bombers use them as disguises aren't you ? as has been proven before you DON'T have a grasp of what is and isn't allowed under free-speech laws (and by your own admission) and where have they said they'll bomb unless they are allowed to wear the burqua? i'm convinced that that is something YOU said, but I am willing to be proven wrong.

hmmmmm....tough one, just remember that big girls are never sure of when they may get it again.....so you could conceivably get the best of both worlds if you play your cards right...

I've heard this complaint a lot, so ok tell me a new story....... seriously most movie plot lines all go back to something that was written before....

cheers Tom.......

Cheers Enoch, but I'm sure I'll cope ok Patel Does your xenophobia stretch to Hinduism now? The use of the name Patel has been discussed. You really are totally brainwashed, xenophobia !! Typical hand wringer no nowt. Know nowt, Shirley ok mohammed. What are you studying at school tomorrow English- you should try it sometime. Expand your life experience. oh, I went to school when exams were actually difficult and they didn't just give certificates away for free. ....walked to school through three feet of snow, uphill both ways.......... omg. Junior resorts to insults and smillies. Whats the matter lad, can't you let him answer for himself. What I say is true by the way. These GCSE's these days are piss easy and there are no "failures", exams made easy. Of course, you as a yank, know better. no insults just laughing at your stereotypical assertion that everything was better and harder when you were young...guess manc-mag is right eh ........soft-cock....

Cheers Enoch, but I'm sure I'll cope ok Patel Does your xenophobia stretch to Hinduism now? The use of the name Patel has been discussed. You really are totally brainwashed, xenophobia !! Typical hand wringer no nowt. Know nowt, Shirley ok mohammed. What are you studying at school tomorrow English- you should try it sometime. Expand your life experience. oh, I went to school when exams were actually difficult and they didn't just give certificates away for free. ....walked to school through three feet of snow, uphill both ways..........

Last year's Super Bowl was watched by a global audience of 162 million but the vast majority of those tuning in were in the United States with neighbours Canada and Mexico the next biggest markets. say 110 million in the US. about 6 million people watch in Canada say double that in Mexico (110 million population vs. 32 million) that still leaves 30 million people ouside north america......but i take your point it is a NA phenomenon.

Goes without saying and anyone who GENUINELY likes them is a total cunt by definition. No one can enjoy them surely?? Saying you enjoy that is like you enjoy getting your teeth pulled out without anaesthetic. Goes without saying. Infact some Uni or other should do research into the saddo's who watch this shit...Probably some kind of syndrome or other.. I bet there's a higher percentage of paedo's watch them than those who don't. Convinced of it. Wrong uns. ...now you're just takin the piss I'm with you on the "american" sports but don't mess with ice hockey alright......it's brilliant and if you aren't a fan you just haven't watched enough. If you look past Americans, as they're the most plastic humans on earth, largely with thought process problems, anyone from a top country outside of America like this one, has to have some disturbing mental defect to appreciate this sport. I mean that. Canada as I've discussed we class that as America anyway so you fall in to that category, so I mean outside North America. I've seen worse sports than icehockey, but you don't get any coverage here at all, Whitley Bay had a team in the 1980s they were good too. YOU BASTARD!!!!......same as me calling you a mackem IMO. I mean you're both from the northeast right. same thing really..... . as far as hockey goes it's great to watch on TV, it's even better live and when a fight breaks out it's like being out at the bar(pub). coverage is as good as you are willing to pay for i guess , i'm pretty sure you could get an NHL package on satellite.

Goes without saying and anyone who GENUINELY likes them is a total cunt by definition. No one can enjoy them surely?? Saying you enjoy that is like you enjoy getting your teeth pulled out without anaesthetic. Goes without saying. Infact some Uni or other should do research into the saddo's who watch this shit...Probably some kind of syndrome or other.. I bet there's a higher percentage of paedo's watch them than those who don't. Convinced of it. Wrong uns. ...now you're just takin the piss I'm with you on the "american" sports but don't mess with ice hockey alright......it's brilliant and if you aren't a fan you just haven't watched enough.

beach volleyball?....in particular female beach volleyball......although it was probably the brazillians that came up with that one.

A minority sport with viewing figures in the hundreds of millions? Righto. Total shite. At best about 1/20th of the World Cup Final and 1/5th of the FA Cup Final even. A total non-event outside America. I will tell you now, our next live game on Sky will have more viewers outside America than the Superbowl, disgusting this wankest of sports has nine replies on this forum. 100 million plus outside America I hugely doubt 10 million outside America know the fuckin rules. It's amazing what a bubble you live in over there. No one cares and never will. 100 fuckin million CTV drew an audience of 4.16 million, up 24 per cent from last year (Indianapolis Colts-Chicago Bears). Réseau des Sport, the French-language sports service, had an audience of 905,000, a Super Bowl record for the network, up 13 per cent from 2007 and 29 per cent from 2006. Together, the CTV and RDS telecasts produced a Canadian audience of 5.065 million, which is a Super Bowl record, ahead of Global's 2006 total of 4.983 It was also the most watched Super Bowl worldwide with a total audience of 148.3 million, ahead of the previous high of 144.4 million in 2004 (Patriots-Carolina Panthers). Source Globesports.com (http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080204.wspttruth4/GSStory/GlobeSportsFootball/home) ok fair enough 100 million is in the US, i can admit when i've made a mistake. but thats still 48 million outside the US, look Stevie the point is your assertion that there will be more viewers worldwide of NUFC's next game than there were for the super bowl is plain mental. There's no way on earth 48 million people outside of America watched it, even if they were stoned flicking through channels they'd not fucking stay on and watch it. It's a tiny sport unimportant rightfully ridiculed sport, dwarfed even by the Rugby World Cup, and certainly by Cricket World Cup, when you realise the asian obsession with it. you're right these numbers are a couple of years old so it's probably higher (can't check right now as it's all a bit recent for the numbers to be published) it's been increasing every year. And I do know that quite a few people watch just for the adverts. right, i'm just making this up. I realize that you have the strength of your convictions behind your opinion that "no one watches that wank excuse for football", you just happen to be incorrect in this instance.

A minority sport with viewing figures in the hundreds of millions? Righto. Total shite. At best about 1/20th of the World Cup Final and 1/5th of the FA Cup Final even. A total non-event outside America. I will tell you now, our next live game on Sky will have more viewers outside America than the Superbowl, disgusting this wankest of sports has nine replies on this forum. 100 million plus outside America I hugely doubt 10 million outside America know the fuckin rules. It's amazing what a bubble you live in over there. No one cares and never will. 100 fuckin million CTV drew an audience of 4.16 million, up 24 per cent from last year (Indianapolis Colts-Chicago Bears). Réseau des Sport, the French-language sports service, had an audience of 905,000, a Super Bowl record for the network, up 13 per cent from 2007 and 29 per cent from 2006. Together, the CTV and RDS telecasts produced a Canadian audience of 5.065 million, which is a Super Bowl record, ahead of Global's 2006 total of 4.983 It was also the most watched Super Bowl worldwide with a total audience of 148.3 million, ahead of the previous high of 144.4 million in 2004 (Patriots-Carolina Panthers). Source Globesports.com (http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080204.wspttruth4/GSStory/GlobeSportsFootball/home) ok fair enough 100 million is in the US, i can admit when i've made a mistake. but thats still 48 million outside the US, look Stevie the point is your assertion that there will be more viewers worldwide of NUFC's next game than there were for the super bowl is plain mental.