As a lesbian trapped in a man’s body, I gotta say I loved this…
246 comments on “The comedy stylings of George Takei”
I don’t remember signing over the rights to my life’s story, Mulligan.
“Jesus saves! Everyone else, take 5d6 damage.”
OR:
“Jesus saves! For a rainy day!”
“Jesus is Lord! You’re not! Nyah nyah nyah nyah!”
Actually, that last one makes Jesus sound like an Only.
“Beyond the “edge” of the Universe is nothing” besudes a really fine restaurant where your meal introduces itself. And how do we KNOW? Have any of us been there? What exit is it off the Jersey Turnpike?
Elf, uh, Chris, uh, hey, YOU! I only brought up the Denmark thing to point out that the physicality of an organism does in fact respond to differences in environment. The nutrition thing no doubt has a lot to do with it, unless the entire nation sold their souls so they wouldn’t have to sit on phone books anymore and could FINALLY start that minor league basketball team.
Bill Myers–like you, I can’t resist. With proper acknowledgment to Mr. Jagger–Mike can’t get no…satisfaction…
And the squirrels will haunt you. Evermore.
Just thinking here. The Creation story is accepted as THE TRUTH by some people. That’s fine. But before anybody completely dismisses it(in case there was anyone out there that did) think about it. Let’s assume for a tick or two that it happened in sorta that way. Now, until God puts out the do-it-youself make-a-universe kit with the DVD with deleted scenes, all we have is what these first people saw. Now, get more than one person seeing the same thing, you’re going to get two different stories. I’m gonna call it a chance that these first humanoids weren’t big on documentation, so who knows?
Bill Mulligan–do the boots on Boot Hill start walking back to town on their own in this movie?
Bill Myers–you wouldn’t use horses, man. Squirrels, all the way.
I have good news for the “Victims of Mike Club.” I’ve gotten what I’ve been looking for here, paradigms for the motives of the people here that have been baffling me. The price for these paradigms has been my time and, as far as my attraction to the returns for my time here have diminished, you will hear less from me, if at all.
In the interest of vetting of these paradigms, I will share them with you.
Summary:
When I first came here, I compared the devotion of oppressed people to leaders who worked against the peoples’ self-interests to a høøkër knifing a guy for stopping her pimp from beating her. A pyramid occupies a smaller and smaller area the higher it goes. Why the oppressed base of the pyramid of the pretense of invulnerability should have any stake in continuing to support it is, as I’ve said, baffling to me.
I haven’t accepted that all support of pretense is driven specifically by devotion to pretense, and now I believe where this support of pretense isn’t so driven, it’s driven by fidelity to another person’s relationship with his or her environment.
Specifically, I can show:
Bill Mulligan will reserve for himself privileges he knows are morally unjustifiable.
Archived here are posts where Bill:
cites libel as a moral failing — with an accusation of libel he can’t substantiate (peterdavid.malibulist.com/archives/005107.html#311767). He arbitrarily refuses to withdraw his accusation.
cites whisper campaigning as a sign of aggressive relentlessness — by propogating a fabricated rumor (peterdavid.malibulist.com/archives/005107.html#311767, peterdavid.malibulist.com/archives/005107.html#312065).
I can think of no other virtue for the selective application of principles than to shelter a predatory agenda.
Archived here are posts where Bill:
compares protests against “I hate gay people…. I’m homophobic. It shouldn’t be in the world, in the United States, I don’t like it” to protests against “Just so you know, we’re ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas” (peterdavid.malibulist.com/archives/005186.html#314930). Comparing the retaliation against the public criticism of George W Bush to the retaliation against the celebration of oppression only makes sense as an attempt to paint any criticism of white patriarchy as predatory agenda.
compares the rumor George W Bush called the constitution a gøddámņëd piece of paper to rumors Bill Clinton conspired to murder and smuggle drugs (peterdavid.malibulist.com/archives/005031.html#309787). This only makes sense as an attempt to open to ridicule any portrayal George Bush as indulgent, while sheltering portrayals of Bill Clinton as indulging in everything short of murder and drug smuggling.
comparing in general the pennies of democratic lapses to the dollars of republican corruption (peterdavid.malibulist.com/archives/004917.html#305375).
Bill refuses to address his inconsistencies by lying about not reading my posts. I don’t think Bill believes libel, strawmen, and lying are justifiable. Instead I think Bill’s libel, strawmen, and lies demonstrate his disconnect with reality.
To an extraverted personality, a person knows who he is predominantly from his role in his or her environment. I am criticizing actions by Bill that won’t effect the perfomance of his role in his environment as long as I’m the only person holding Bill to what he says here. I think Bill takes the authority he holds in his community as evidence of his integrity, unconsciously believes his libel, strawmen, and lying somehow must be my fault, and would say so explicitly if he knew how to without leaving the idea vulnerable to cross-examination.
Though citing only strawmen or no reasons at all for why I am wrong to hold Bill to what he says, I don’t think all of my critics here are driven specifically by a need to support the pretense of invulnerability. I think other extraverted personalities, who predominently know who they are from their role in the world, Micha or Craig R for example, will intervene and say I am wrong without citing a reason out of fidelity to another person’s relationship with his environment. I demonstrate no fidelity to Bill’s relationship to his environment. As people who may only know who they are from their role in the world, Micha and Craig need no other reason to disagree with me other than my lack of fidelity to Bill’s relationship with his or her environment.
The person here paying the most for his fidelity to others’ roles in their environment is Bill Myers. As someone who has suffered obvious challenges to conformity, he benefits the least from the pretense of invulnerability.
I am of the opinion that Religion does not shelter a “predatory agenda,” it IS a predatory agenda.
Religion is of itself neither good nor evil, neither infantile nor wise. It is what it’s adherents make of it, since religion is also the search for community.
Chadwick, you have said nothing that any rational, reasoning person would find offensive, nor anything any spiritual person would find offensive….
Unless someone tries to present their personal Truth as Universal Fact, I refuse to call BÙLLSHÍT.
Chadwick said religion is inherently predatory. You said religion isn’t inherently evil. That would make saying Chadwick said nothing offensive to spiritual people WRONG.
Then you said you only reserve the right to call bûllšhìŧ someone presenting their opinion as fact.
How about presenting WRONG as fact? Would you call presenting Wrong™ as fact BÙLLSHÍT?
Whaaateeeveeer, duuude.
Mike, unless you can tell me WHAT I said and meant, rather than pursuing an O’Reilly/Limbaugh approach by cherry picking specific items to quote out of context, or simply quoting then ridiculing without any attempt at debate or presentation of a logical counterpoint, I call FÙÇKÍN’ BÙLLSHÍT!!!
Unless I’ve excluded some part of the discourse that surrounded your quote crucial to its interpretation, I haven’t taken anything you’ve said our of context.
you will hear less from me, if at all.
Don’t let the disconnect screen hit your ášš on the way off.
Craig R for example, will intervene and say I am wrong
Nope, I’m not going to do anything of the sort. In fact, I’m going to wish you well and hope that the sooner you leave, the better off the rest of us will be.
I stopped reading your posts months ago, and the only reason I’m responding to this one is that while scrolling past the latest of your inane posts, I saw you mention my name.
Sorry, Mikey ol’ boy, but in terms of internet trolling, you could be on fire and I wouldn’t take a leak on you to safe your life.
“I think other extraverted personalities, who predominently know who they are from their role in the world, Micha…”
Mike, that’s really nice of you to say this about me. I wih as was extrovert or knew my place in the world.
Are you sure you’re using the word paradigm correctly? I’m not going to get into a debate about it, but I’m not sure about the way you use it.
I find your sentences very baffling but intriguing in a weird kind of way. It doesn’t read like regular speech, acadmic or everyday. I don’t know what it says about you, but it is certainly different. I’m not even certain I know what you’re talking about some of the time.
Have you considered the possibility that Manny disagrees with Chadwick about religion but does not find his opinions offensive, and that he does not feel that Chadwick was presenting his inner truth as universal truth?
“you will hear less from me, if at all.”
That is not much of a threat.
The reason the idea of a Victim’s of Mike Club emerged was that most if not all people who were conversing with you on this blog felt that although we were hearing from you a lot, there was no real meaningful communications, because you were unwilling to engage us and our opinions in a serious, meaningful and respectful way, prefering instead to twist or ignore what we were saying while bludgening us repeatedly with sentences that were supposed to convey your opinions but were at the least incoherent and at worst downright absurd, and all too often abusive. In a way, your method of debate was disrespectful of your own opinions too (at least at the times that respect was waranted). We may have given up on having a real discussion with you, but not before many of us tried to engage you in the only way we could, by stating our opinions clearly and then waiting to hear from you. But your pattern was always the same — hostility, disrespect, flipancy, childishness, and much more. Our attempts prooved futile, and your attitude offended us to the point that we started becoming hostile, contrary to the way we usually prefered to conduct our communications here.
I don’t know why you have fixated on Bill Mulligan of all people. Not once did you engage or converse with the man, always with the shadow puppets you created out of snippets of his words, your strange binary mind, and some other parts of your psyche that are beyond me. When I defended him, I thought you just misunderstood his opinions on one specific subject. I argued with you on this both because I found your reasoning faulty and because it ran contrary to what I knew of Bill Mulligan. But clearly the problem goes deeper both with regard to your attitude toward Bill, and your ability to process what I was saying.
I also don’t understand why every conversation anybody had with you always degenerated along an always predictable pattern.
Human society depends on the ability to communicate. Since you have been unable or unwiling to communicate with us. So, unless communication becomes possible, I won’t regret seeing you leave. I hope you find a way to get out of this hole your conduct or your psyche has dug yourself into.
If you want to respind to me, know that any response thtat will involve quoting a snippet of my words, comparing to another, highlighting bits, followed by a strange incoherent assertion and completed with a rude comment, will be ignored since it is not meaningful communication.
Bill Mulligan–do the boots on Boot Hill start walking back to town on their own in this movie?
No but that’s a riot. You get it.
What’s amazing is how many people LOVE the idea of horror westerns but the western genre is dead as those aforementioned boots.
Mike says
(long string of letters and words. as though a lemur scampered repeatedly across the keyboard).
A few highlights:
I have good news for the “Victims of Mike Club.”
See, I knew he’d love the attention that even a joke like this would bring. Nobody here is a “victim” of Mike. What can he do? Has anyone suffered? Indeed, one could argue that for al the differences in our political outlooks, philosophical bents, religious beliefs or lack thereof, the near universal agreement that Mike is a LoonTM.
# Archived here are posts where Bill:
I’m glad you provided links so that any one interested can go and see what a frikkin kook you are. You’ve at least confirmed one hunch I’ve always had–truly awful people have no idea how truly awful they truly are.
I think Bill takes the authority he holds in his community…
Authority? This is PAD’s blog and I’m a guest. Any “authority” I have is the result of the friendships I’ve made here, a concept that Mike will find difficult to understand for reason we all know but are usually too kind to point out.
Micha and Craig need no other reason to disagree with me other than my lack of fidelity to Bill’s relationship with his or her environment.
Yep, that’s Craig, always afraid to say anything that might offend! 🙂 Hey Craig, quit being such a shrinking violet!
But “his or her”? Is it time for me to get another haircut?
The person here paying the most for his fidelity to others’ roles in their environment is Bill Myers. As someone who has suffered obvious challenges to conformity, he benefits the least from the pretense of invulnerability.
Yeah, the cold comforts of having friends, a good woman and a great personality are no substitute for what he could have been if only he could have been more like Mike. Poor, poor Bill.
you will hear less from me, if at all.
That would seem a wise choice. You’ve been flailing about lately and, in the process, damaged any regard anyone might have had for you as a man (your attacks on someone’s daughter) and as a thinker (the shape of snowflakes as evidence of a thermodynamic miracle?). Being remembered as a major troll is a small ambition but I guess it could be worse.
Micha says: I find your sentences very baffling but intriguing in a weird kind of way. It doesn’t read like regular speech, academic or everyday. I don’t know what it says about you, but it is certainly different. I’m not even certain I know what you’re talking about some of the time.
It is a kind of verbal jazz sometimes. Who knows, maybe he’s just on too high a level for the rest of us to understand. Genius is often misunderstood in its own time.
Just realized: there was a time gay actors wouldn’t dare “come out” because doing so would have killed their career. But George Takei doesn’t appear to have been hurt by acknowledging his sexuality; hëll, he may have even benefited from it.
Probably. Then there’s Ellen DeGeneres, whose career doesn’t seem to be hurting much.
On the other hand, there are still lots of actors whom “everyone knows” are gay, but haven’t come out of the closet. A lot depends on the circumstance. You could also argue that, as an actor primarily known for character roles, George didn’t have much to lose by coming out at age 64. If you’re an actor who hopes to play a leading man in the movies, coming out of the closet might still be career suicide.
Are you sure you’re using the word paradigm correctly?
Have you considered the possibility that Manny disagrees with Chadwick about religion but does not find his opinions offensive…
I don’t doubt Chadwick didn’t offend Manny — but Manny spoke for all spiritual people.
…and that he does not feel that Chadwick was presenting his inner truth as universal truth?
I didn’t say Chadwick expressed his opinion as fact. I said saying Chadwick said nothing offensive to spiritual people was wrong.
you will hear less from me, if at all.
That is not much of a threat.
Did I ever cite intimidation as my agenda?
Though citing only strawmen or no reasons at all for why I am wrong to hold Bill to what he says, I don’t think all of my critics here are driven specifically by a need to support the pretense of invulnerability. I think other extraverted personalities, who predominently know who they are from their role in the world, Micha or Craig R for example, will intervene and say I am wrong without citing a reason out of fidelity to another person’s relationship with his environment. I demonstrate no fidelity to Bill’s relationship to his environment. As people who may only know who they are from their role in the world, Micha and Craig need no other reason to disagree with me other than my lack of fidelity to Bill’s relationship with his or her environment.
The reason the idea of a Victim’s of Mike Club emerged was that most if not all people who were conversing with you on this blog felt that although we were hearing from you a lot, there was no real meaningful communications, because you were unwilling to engage us and our opinions in a serious, meaningful and respectful way, prefering instead to twist or ignore what we were saying…
In so far as I’ve excluded no part of the discourse surrounding your quotes crucial to their interpretation — no.
Otherwise, please cite. Make it a first.
…while bludgening us repeatedly with sentences that were supposed to convey your opinions but were at the least incoherent and at worst downright absurd…
In so far as I’ve excluded no part of the discourse surrounding your quotes crucial to their interpretation, the incoherence and absurdity are yours, not mine.
…and all too often abusive.
If holding you to your own words is abusive, how do you justify saying them in the first place?
In a way, your method of debate was disrespectful of your own opinions too (at least at the times that respect was waranted).
As I post here sincerely, I have no reservation against being held to what I say.
We may have given up on having a real discussion with you, but not before many of us tried to engage you in the only way we could, by stating our opinions clearly and then waiting to hear from you. But your pattern was always the same — hostility, disrespect, flipancy, childishness, and much more. Our attempts prooved futile, and your attitude offended us to the point that we started becoming hostile, contrary to the way we usually prefered to conduct our communications here.
I said you cite no reasons to disagree with me, and I think you hold no other reason to disagree with me other than my lack of fidelity to Bill’s pretense. Now you’ve confirmed that this is the case.
I don’t know why you have fixated on Bill Mulligan of all people.
In my previous post, I established he has the most obvious pattern of hypocrisy.
Not once did you engage or converse with the man, always with the shadow puppets you created out of snippets of his words, your strange binary mind, and some other parts of your psyche that are beyond me. When I defended him, I thought you just misunderstood his opinions on one specific subject. I argued with you on this both because I found your reasoning faulty and because it ran contrary to what I knew of Bill Mulligan. But clearly the problem goes deeper both with regard to your attitude toward Bill, and your ability to process what I was saying.
Please cite his opinion you thought I misunderstood.
I also don’t understand why every conversation anybody had with you always degenerated along an always predictable pattern.
My current working paradigm is that you throw facts out the window of Bill’s libeling, whisper campaigning, and lying because, as you may only know who you are from your role in the world, you can only imagine a lack of fidelity to the pretenses of others as predatory.
Human society depends on the ability to communicate. Since you have been unable or unwiling to communicate with us.
I’m not the one who demonstrated he doesn’t know the difference between nouns and prepositions.
If you want to respind to me, know that any response thtat will involve quoting a snippet of my words, comparing to another, highlighting bits, followed by a strange incoherent assertion and completed with a rude comment, will be ignored since it is not meaningful communication.
If you can’t be taken at your word — what are you doing here?
I don’t think Bill believes libel, strawmen, and lying are justifiable. Instead I think Bill’s libel, strawmen, and lies demonstrate his disconnect with reality.
To an extraverted personality, a person knows who he is predominantly from his role in his or her environment. I am criticizing actions by Bill that won’t effect the perfomance of his role in his environment as long as I’m the only person holding Bill to what he says here. I think Bill takes the authority he holds in his community as evidence of his integrity, unconsciously believes his libel, strawmen, and lying somehow must be my fault, and would say so explicitly if he knew how to without leaving the idea vulnerable to cross-examination.
Though citing only strawmen or no reasons at all for why I am wrong to hold Bill to what he says, I don’t think all of my critics here are driven specifically by a need to support the pretense of invulnerability. I think other extraverted personalities, who predominently know who they are from their role in the world, Micha or Craig R for example, will intervene and say I am wrong without citing a reason out of fidelity to another person’s relationship with his environment. I demonstrate no fidelity to Bill’s relationship to his environment. As people who may only know who they are from their role in the world, Micha and Craig need no other reason to disagree with me other than my lack of fidelity to Bill’s relationship with his or her environment.
Indeed, one could argue that for al the differences in our political outlooks, philosophical bents, religious beliefs or lack thereof, the near universal agreement that Mike is a LoonTM.
So your libel, strawmen, and lies are my fault?
I think Bill takes the authority he holds in his community…
Authority? This is PAD’s blog and I’m a guest.
The school you teach at isn’t a community? As a teacher, you aren’t trusted to safeguard knowledge?
So Belongs To Me.™
Any “authority” I have is the result of the friendships I’ve made here, a concept that Mike will find difficult to understand for reason we all know but are usually too kind to point out.
Now we know Authority™ feeds your drive to build relationships. Who would have thought?
…as far as my attraction to the returns for my time here have diminished, you will hear less from me, if at all.
That would seem a wise choice. You’ve been flailing about lately and, in the process, damaged any regard anyone might have had for you as a man (your attacks on someone’s daughter) and as a thinker (the shape of snowflakes as evidence of a thermodynamic miracle?). Being remembered as a major troll is a small ambition but I guess it could be worse.
Peter accepted my word I had no intention of crossing his boundary — that he is the only David who is fair game — in so far as I said so, and he sid now I know otherwise. Your attempt to cite in me a predatory agenda from this incident — and prompting me to address your accusation against me — serves no purpose except to create opportunities for Peter to relive his angst.
Any taste for blood is obviously yours.
It is a kind of verbal jazz sometimes. Who knows, maybe he’s just on too high a level for the rest of us to understand. Genius is often misunderstood in its own time.
I credit my genius to my ability to distinguish nouns from prepositions.
Captain Naraht Wrote in response that the universe is “expanding into nothing”: “Again back to cosmology. Scientists are debating that if the universe is expanding, what is it expanding *into*? Another dimension? One could postulate it contains an intelligence or liveform(s) too complex for concepts like evolution or even birth. An entity too complex for modern human minds to grasp, perhaps. (Unless they’re a bit arrogant and run Liberty University)”
and also:
“Beyond the “edge” of the Universe is nothing – that we know of… Some string theorists have with V-Ger like dispassion stated that there may be dozens or more universes. Some possibly connected to this one. Just because we cannot see does not make it not there.
“
Then Micha Wrote: “You are probably more qualified to address these issues in a serious way.”
Then Bill Mulligan wrote: “I’ll discuss forther in a bit–have to fix a water problem”
Just curious what a science teacher thinks, Bill.
–Captain Naraht
(Ray in NH)
P.S. I have to say, for the length of time I’ve posted on this blog, I haven’t gotten in a debate with Mike. Maybe it’s because my excellent cross-examination of one of Mike’s points would be, “Oh yeah….well SO’S YOUR FACE!” (Can I still order my V.O.M.I.T neck tattoo?)
To everyone who is not Mike:
Folks, we need to let this go — because Mike won’t. We need to take the high road — again, because Mike won’t. Otherwise, we’ll end up with another thread like “A Smart Move,” and I don’t think any of us wants that.
Besides, who cares what Mike says about us? Mike can point to a circle and call it a square to his heart’s content, but the circle will remain a circle.
Hey, look, I know it’s hard to ignore the trolls. I’ve succumbed to the temptation to put them in their place on more than one occasion.
The problem is that trolls crave attention — any attention. Look at Mike. He declared he would post here with far less frequency or stop entirely, and not even 12 hours later he posts again. He thrives on us talking to him and about him.
Me, I’m walking away. Mike isn’t worth even the tiniest fraction of the time I’ve given him. He gets no more.
Shrouds up — this time, permanently.
Bill, I’ve largely been ignoring Mike not because I want to shroud him, but because most of the time I don’t know what his point is to begin refuting. And when I do, it’s not like it’s going to be a conversation. Rarely have I seen Mike note and accept something posted by anyone not Mike, and he often takes the MTV approach to debate…meaning he comes up with some snide remark that substitutes for a reply, thinking that’s how debates and conversations work.
Which is a shame. When he’s not being snide, rude, condescending, or downright abusive, he has on occasion raised some interesting points. But his approach is intolerable in any format where the parties are interested in civil discourse. Of course, having earned the reputation for being snide, rude, condescending, and abusive, he kills any credibility his points might otherwise earn him.
I don’t think ignoring him will work, because so long as he posts here, he’s going to be saying things that people must respond to. There are too many folks here that can’t let a false statemet, mistatemet, or overstatement be made without trying to correct it. That’s not a failing. But when the OP of such statements really isn’t interested in hearing how others think he’s wrong, it ends up going…well…here.
Posted by: Bobb Alfred at February 26, 2007 10:49 AM
Bill, I’ve largely been ignoring Mike not because I want to shroud him, but because most of the time I don’t know what his point is to begin refuting. And when I do, it’s not like it’s going to be a conversation.
I don’t own this blog, so any suggestions I make are just that — suggestions. I wouldn’t presume to dictate your behavior.
Posted by: Bobb Alfred at February 26, 2007 10:49 AM
There are too many folks here that can’t let a false statemet, mistatemet, or overstatement be made without trying to correct it.
I’m just concerned about the trading of personal insults. I led the charge against Mike in that arena late last year. It resulted in a thread that Peter had to shut down because it had gotten so big it was threatening to undergo gravitational collapse. I’m just sayin’ trading insults with Mike leads to no good end.
Mike can cast aspersions on my character to his heart’s content. I’ve realized that my actions will speak louder than his words. The same goes for anyone else here. That’s all I’m sayin’. If Mike insults you — let it go.
Just a suggestion. Although I think it’s a good one.
“The situation eventually arises where the search for the answer to life, the universe and everything (42) eventually intersects with the question of some sort of intelligence actually pulling the strings.
Then comes the question “Is there some intelligence doing these things?”. If the assumption is yes, one then asks “What is the nature of this intelligence?”.
At some point, some bright guy assumes said intelligence not only created everything from amoebas to squirrels, but that it also wants total control of it’s creation, as well as worship and adoration. From there it’s straight on downhill to pogroms, censorship, and Bob Jones University.
Just my late night musings and two cents worth.”
Imagine the humans walking around in a prehistoric world. It is a world teaming with life.. and with death: animals hunt and are hunted, the earth tremors, the seasons change, the seas and rivers ebb and flow, the sun rises and falls, people are born and they die. It is a word of chance , of deseases, accidents, attacks by foreign and hostile forces human or other, that emerge from far away places, from dark forests and arid deserts. It is also a word of hierarchies, chieftains and followers, parents and children. and it is a word that has not yet distinguished between reason and inspiration, observation and imagination, explanation and story telling. Is it surprising that peole living in this world, that were farmiliar only with their own human consciousness and their own human society, mountains, ses and ancestors become spirits to be worshiped and bargained with? Is it not surprising that as civilization developed, and cheiftains became kings and kings emperors, some spirits became rulers and other subjects? A process of abstraction may have caused the idea of monotheism to appear, with one god gradualy subjugating and swallowing all of creation, but we still had our share of angels, demons, djinns, saints prophets etc. The book of Job is from an old source. It doesn’t say angels, it says ‘the sons of the elohim (god)’. The attempt of modern science to create a world without demons is stil an uphill battle. the assumption that you can describe the world in terms of animate laws and mechanics is very typical of the time period and place in which it was conceived. It is a hard sell for a human species that is still not that different than it was thousands of years ago.
———————–
Bill Myers, my problem is that I usually try to understand how other people think and then engage them. Right or left, religious or secular, ancient or modern, I always try to put myself inside their minds so I can understand what they are thinking and then say, “look I know what you are saying, but here is how I see it.” But here I encountered someone whose cognitive functions baffle me completely. I found it intruiging, entertaining, troubling, saddening. Perhaps it requires someone with a more professional understanding of the human psyche? At this point I’m a little concerned for the person in question.
I’m not going to make promises I’m not sure I’m going to keep. I doubt what I do or don’t do will affect this person, he is clearly living in his own world of words (prooving Chadwick statements about language wrong). I have no interest in tormenting this man just out of cruelty. My morbid curiousity might cause me to try to unravel his words. At times I might latch to something he starts, for the greater interest in a subject such as Intelligent design. I might also sometimes take a humorous attitude — I enjoy finding the humor in life [how about a T-shirt with a squirrel hitting his head repeatedly against a tree while an acorn his hitting him on the head]. But I will always try to do so in moderation. I think everything will be fine regardless of what this person does or does not do.
OK! OK! I surrender! It was only a suggestion. 😉
And you’re right, Micha. Ultimately, this blog and the community it has proven itself strong enough to survive the occasional odd troll.
Admittedly, I react badly when I perceive that I’ve been insulted. I also get angry when someone insults my friends. Perhaps my “shrouds up” attitude is an overreaction to that flaw. And perhaps I should learn to be more confident in my ability to control my negative impulses without having to go to the extent of creating an “ignore list.”
Sigh… I’d rather talk about George Takei. Jerry, I think it would be awesome if they gave Mr. Takei the best of both worlds (no ST:TNG pun intended): a Star Trek sitcom! Think of the possibilities!
Sigh… the second sentence in the second paragraph of my prior post should’ve read, “Ultimately, this blog and the community it has created have proven themselves strong enough to survive the occasional odd troll.”
“a Star Trek sitcom!”
I’m not sure that would be a good idea. I’m not even a Trekkie, but I think a regular show (as opposed to the occasional skit) that doesn’t take Star Trek seriously, will be annoying.
Part of the problem of fantasy/comics/sci-fi TV shows and movies is that they are not always taken seriously by the people who make them. The results are usually campy.
—————
Bill, You must do what ensures your own peace of mind and enjoyment of life. I think we have a clear example of someone who has let his mind loose every shred of peace.
No, Bill, never give up, never surrender.
Oh, wait, that’s a totally different yet related pop culture reference.
I don’t mean to suggest people won’t or shouldn’t ignore Mike…actually, I think we’d be better off if we could. What I meant is that, based on past repeated calls to ignore him…advocated and then broken by many, including me…I just didn’t see why this latest call would work any better than past ones, primarily because Mike’s posts are just begging for refutement.
On the few recent occasions when I’ve directly responded to Mike, I’ve had to wait a few seconds and edit my post before hitting the Post button, to erase any snide comments or insults of my own. Which is why I try my best to ignore him, because, unlike Takei, I don’t always manage to couch my responses in humor and satire, and when I do, since I’m not posting Youtube video, the funny gets losts in the medium.
“Part of the problem of fantasy/comics/sci-fi TV shows and movies is that they are not always taken seriously by the people who make them. The results are usually campy.”
I share that opinion, and, more often than not, I hate camp. Now that I’ve started collecting TV on DVD, I’m getting a chance to compare and contrast the various genre TV shows. The ones that play it straight are, by and large, far better than the campy ones. (I could barely make myself watch Lost in Space when I was a kid, nowadays I avoid it like the plague.) One interesting comparison is between Wonder Woman and The Incredible Hulk. Wonder Woman had more than a bit of camp to it, while The Incredible Hulk played it straight. I think that The Incredible Hulk wound up being the better show…although Lynda Carter is a hëll of a lot easier on my eyes than Lou Ferringo. 😉
Guys — I was only joking about a “Star Trek sitcom.”
Although the BBC did produce a wonderful sci-fi sitcom called “Red Dwarf” proving that sci-fi and comedy aren’t incompatible. If you’re not familiar with it, go out and get the DVDs. Now.
Guys — I was only joking about a “Star Trek sitcom.”
Oh… sure… I knew all along…
Just so I’m sure, the part about raping horses was true 🙂
Posted by: Micha at February 26, 2007 02:22 PM
Just so I’m sure, the part about raping horses was true 🙂
You know, I just had a wonderful idea for a short story I can write. It’s about two characters named Bill Mulligan and Micha, a couple of drug-pushing, necrophiliac Al Qaeda operatives who suffer from social anxiety and impotence.
Captain Naraht:
I don’t know that I can comment much on the cosmology questions. Physics baffles me (though not so much that I think snowflakes are…ok, I’ll let it go).
Certainly the basic premise of the Big Bang would collapse if we found other Universes coming toward us. My understanding it that the Universe is expanding but it has no edge–it isn’t expanding into anything because until it’s there, there is no anything to expand into…now my head is expanding, about to explode, but unlike the Universe it will hit something, namely my walls, making a perfectly dreadful mess.
Tim Lynch, who is very much missed around here, would be the best person to answer these things.
I do like the idea of lifeforms so different that we would not recognize them as such. Keep in mind that “life” is what we say it is. We have given it definitions based on life as it exists here. There could easily be kinds of existence completely unlike our kind of life that, nevertheless, deserve the description. If we get to the point where we replace our flesh bodies with machines but retain our individuality I would regard such cyborgs as alive, even though they might violate at least one of the basic requirements (must be made of cells).
Ok…originally this post had a bunch of stuff directed at Mike, or, more specifically, at PAD regarding what we will just call the “Mike shows his ášš” incident. Lots of sound and fury. But upon reflection, and after reading Bill Myer’s words–you’re a wiser man than me, my friend–I’ve deleted them and sent an email to PAD. There was something I wanted to say but perhaps saying it in public would just open old wounds. Gotta hand it to Mike–it’s a neat trick to do something so awful that if anyone so much as mentions it THEY feel like they are accomplices.
Mike’s need for attention will never abate. He won’t leave until he finds some other forum to infect. We aren’t the first and won’t be the last.
Stepping.Slowly.Away.From…unclean…M..post.
Must resist. Sanity at stake.
Whoo. Survived.
Either way. George Takei sitcom. It works. The adventures of…?
As for where the universe goes as it expands. I think it goes to a trailer park in ‘Bama somewhere so we can all be on Jerry or Maury or some such.
Or maybe there’s no “there” there.
Incomprehensible/inconceivable lifeforms is pretty cool. Kinda like a whole universe of squirrel dog carrying celebutantes.
“You know, I just had a wonderful idea for a short story I can write. It’s about two characters named Bill Mulligan and Micha, a couple of drug-pushing, necrophiliac Al Qaeda operatives who suffer from social anxiety and impotence. “
That’s absurd, I am way too lazy to ever be an operative.
—————
I once had the sci-fi/fantasy idea that he whole universe is like a giant brain in which the planets, galaxies etc. are neorons.
Cosmology is weird. I read Hawking’s book, barely understood it. At this stage the anwers they give to questions by laymen are about as stisfying as the answeres offered by religion about god. The oly reason to prefer them to tthe clergy is because their methodolgy is more trustworthy.
—————–
You know, I just had a wonderful idea for a short story I can write. It’s about two characters named Bill Mulligan and Micha, a couple of drug-pushing, necrophiliac Al Qaeda operatives who suffer from social anxiety and impotence.
necrophilia AND impotence? Well, at least you won’t hear any complaining about it.
“Although the BBC did produce a wonderful sci-fi sitcom called “Red Dwarf” proving that sci-fi and comedy aren’t incompatible. If you’re not familiar with it, go out and get the DVDs. Now.’
No, get them last week. Even if you have the VHS tapes, get them last week. The extras are a blast and there’s even an ep. that was never filmed that’s been included in the Season 7 DVD set.
Uhmm… Just trust me on that last sentence.
“Although the BBC did produce a wonderful sci-fi sitcom called “Red Dwarf” proving that sci-fi and comedy aren’t incompatible. If you’re not familiar with it, go out and get the DVDs. Now.'”
What about “Space Rangers”? It proved sci fi and (unintentional) comedy are not incompatible.
For fans of the “40 Year Old Virgin”, if you recall the “Space Nuts” sequence, a friend showed me a copy. Take out the XXX scenes, theres almost a decent little space opera parody there.
Okay, Sean the Science Geek time. Three potential problems I can see for spotting Bill Mulligan’s universes speeding toward us. First, we just can’t see very far into interstellar space, to say nothing of intergalactic, without the images becoming something Great Aunt Milly might see on her next eye exam. Blurry, distorted, and not very meaningful. Second, let’s assume for a tick or two that that’s taken care of, and we can see way far out there clear as an HDTV demo. How are we going to recognize the edge of the universe? I doubt very much that you’ll get to a certain point in space and see a big old wall with pictures of the universe right after the big bang sucking it’s universal thumb. And third, going on the assumption that we can in fact see this wall, edge, what have you, how do we see past it? What in the universe can see past the universe? Just for fun, though, assume that you come up with a way to peek through. Think of the universe like a bucket of water. Poke a hole in the bucket, and something’s going to happen. Either what’s inside the bucket is going to leak out, or what outside the bucket’s going to leak in if either universe has material more dense than the other one.
I was going to do a story like that a while back, so that’s why I thought about all that. If my amittedly layman’s understanding of astrophysics isn’t up to date or is just plain wrong, well, excuuuuuse me!
“What about “Space Rangers”? It proved sci fi and (unintentional) comedy are not incompatible.”
What, you mean it wasn’t supposed to be funny? Huh, shows what I know.
Hyperdrive is the new sci-fi comedy running on BBC America. Not in the same league as Red Dwarf, but it does provide a good laugh here and there. Also, anyone who has yet to see Doctor Who: Curse of the Fatal Death needs to go out and get it. You can find it on things like Google Video, but the VHS tape has several extra Doctor Who spoofs that are mostly pretty good.
And, hey, I’m always ready to prove my general dementia levels to all by recommending Killer Klowns from Outer Space at every chance.
No, get them last week.
What about last month? Or last year? 🙂
Thankfully, all 8 series are out on DVD now. It was painful to wait each year, waiting and watching as only two more series would come out each year.
But now I have them all! MUAHAHAHA!
Still, the dámņ things are overpriced. Which is why I haven’t bought a lot of other stuff from the BBC. 🙂
“And, hey, I’m always ready to prove my general dementia levels to all by recommending Killer Klowns from Outer Space at every chance.”
Jerry, m’lad, have you considered a little show called “tripping the Rift”. A villainous space clown called Darth Bobo has gotta work somehow. And does anyone but me remember “Quark”? Not the bartender on “DS9”, a sci fi sitcom starring Richard Benjaman from the late 70s.
I agree with Chadwick, sci fi creators tend to take their creations overly seriously. I try to avoid any show that won’t put out a blooper reel, or whose creator tries to block any and all parody.
A truly great unintentional sci fi chuckle was an early 70’s Canadian show called “The Starlost”. Production values that make old “Dr. Who” look like Oscar level stuff, Kier Dullea in all his post-2001 glory. I believe that Isaac Asimov actually disassociated from this mad little mis-creation.
The story concerned “the Ark”, carrying the remnants of humanity to a new home. Unfortunately, the ships guidance has been damaged, an the various domes have become cut off from each other, and have forgotten wht’s going on.
Fun idea, rotten execution. I think you can find it at TV.com.
Little detail I missed re: Starlost. Look for Walter Koenig in a couple of episodes.
These posts are now certified George Takei relevant, for your safety and enjoyment.
Craig J. Ries,
Deepdiscount.com or cduniverse are two good sites to hold down costs.
Manny,
Quark… Nice androids.
Ark… Why did you remind me that that thing was ever made?!?
Tripping the Rift and Futurama are both on the regular DVD rotations here.
Sheesh, if you guys wanna get in to listing every TV show and movie that was meant to be serious but went goofy…
Logan’s Run the Series, Ðámņáŧìøņ Ally, some TV show that used the DA truck after the film made sure that it wouldn’t be needed for a DM II, the Classic Trek where they picked up the space hippy guys, the 2nd and 3rd Highlander films (the 4th DOES NOT EXIST), Invasion Earth (BBC), Battlefield Earth, just about anything that gets played on Sci-Fi Channel’s Saturday night block, the complete works of Uwe Bowl, Trancers 6, How to Make a Monster, Robot Jox and Spacehunter: Adventures in the Forbidden Zone spring to mind without actually having to work at thinking up a list. God knows what we could all come up with if we actually tried.
“What in the universe can see past the universe?”
That’s a very succinct way to describe the point of atheism.
———–
“Logan’s Run the Series, Ðámņáŧìøņ Ally, some TV show that used the DA truck after the film made sure that it wouldn’t be needed for a DM II, the Classic Trek where they picked up the space hippy guys, the 2nd and 3rd Highlander films (the 4th DOES NOT EXIST), Invasion Earth (BBC), Battlefield Earth, just about anything that gets played on Sci-Fi Channel’s Saturday night block, the complete works of Uwe Bowl, Trancers 6, How to Make a Monster, Robot Jox and Spacehunter: Adventures in the Forbidden Zone spring to mind without actually having to work at thinking up a list. God knows what we could all come up with if we actually tried.”
OK, I’m not denying that you can have sci-fi comedy. I also admit that I have not seen most of the stuff you mentioned either because I’m too young or it didn’t make it to my part of the galaxy or I’m not geeky enough (that sucks, being to geeky for some but not enough for others).
But Highlander 3? I thought the idea of this discussion was sci-Fi comedy that’s good, not the kind that’s so bad it’s enjoyable.
I said before that:
“Part of the problem of fantasy/comics/sci-fi TV shows and movies is that they are not always taken seriously by the people who make them.”
Of course I’m not against humor about Sci-Fi. I think Sci-Fi sometimes get’s ruined because the peole who make it have no respect for the material. In a way that’s also true for comedy. I think if the creators don’t believe in the material, the characters iin the story do not.
And does anyone but me remember “Quark”? Not the bartender on “DS9”, a sci fi sitcom starring Richard Benjaman from the late 70s.
Wow, you’ve awakened a 30 year old memory…Dr. Ficus, half man, half plant…
I remember the show as actually funny. I also like The Fantastic Journey and the Planet of teh Apes TV show so I am not to be trusted…
Oh hey! Look, you can download all the peisodes of Quark right here! Yay! http://quark.name/
“On the other hand, I have a hard time imagining everything on the planet evolving completely at random.”
Bill, in response to this you’ve talked about abiogenesis. It is true that people confuse it with evltion. But I also think part of what people don’t understand is how evolution functions to create complex life forms. The idea that complex things (usually the eye) are the result of a process of evolution and not the result of a deliberate proces by an intelligence is the thing they find hard to accept.
“I remember the show as actually funny. I also like The Fantastic Journey and the Planet of teh Apes TV show so I am not to be trusted…”
Was Fantastic Journey the one about the people lost in the Bermuda Triangle? Or am I way out?
“I remember the show as actually funny. I also like The Fantastic Journey and the Planet of teh Apes TV show so I am not to be trusted…”
Hey, I put those and things like Otherworld, Manimal, Man from Atlantis, The Invisible Man and the TV version of War of the Worlds amonst other clunkers on my must watch lists. We’ve all been there. That’s what the support groups are for.
****Posted by Bill Mulligan at February 26, 2007 02:56 PM
Tim Lynch, who is very much missed around here, would be the best person to answer these things.****
??????
I don’t read every last post on this blog (mainly for time constraints). What happened to Tim Lynch? And why?
Chris
A truly great unintentional sci fi chuckle was an early 70’s Canadian show called “The Starlost”. Production values that make old “Dr. Who” look like Oscar level stuff, Kier Dullea in all his post-2001 glory. I believe that Isaac Asimov actually disassociated from this mad little mis-creation.
Actually, that was Harlan Ellison who had his name removed. I read his novelization of what the first episode was supposed to be like. It was intended as an Ark of sorts, transporting a number of human cultures away from a vaguely doomed Earth, keeping them all in separate environments so that they wouldn’t contaminate one another. Then a young Amish boy finds the door out of his world. He meets up with a couple of other escapees, they’re pursued by Security bots, and in the process, they find that the ship was damaged by a meteor collision, the command crew was killed, and the ship’s trajectory was altered so it was heading for a star. The MacGuffin of the series was supposed to be the search for the controls. Harlan tells of a producer who commissioned a script about six episodes in in which the controls are found. When Harlan called him to scream, the producer didn’t see the problem. He figured they could start looking for the backup controls – which he thought were the controls that would make the ship back up.
Manny, Fantastic Journey was a movie (based on a treatment by Asimov, so he does figure in somewhere) in which a group of people had to be shrunk to submicroscopic size, along with their submarine, to go burn a blood clot out of a defecting Russian scientist. They had several interesting adventures, based on Asimov’s knowledge of human anatomy (for instance, they were diverted on their way to the brain when they hit an arterial fistula, and were abruptly transferred to the neighboring vein – headed straight for the heart).
Jonathan (the other one),
Actually, Fantastic Journey was a TV show from the mid-70’s (re-cut into the syndicated TV film LOST IN TIME) that was set in the Bermuda Triangle.
Fantastic Voyage was the submicroscopic submarine movie (that was later turned into an animated TV series) based on the treatment by Asimov.
Is it at all sad that I can remember all this stuff without even trying but I forget my own cell phone number half the time?
%(
Thanks for the clarification. However, no discussion of inintentional HA HA sci fi TV can be complete without Irwin Allen (cue forboding music).
Time Tunnel, Land of the Giants, Journey to the Bottom of the Sea (?), Lost in Space. C’mon. Irwin da man!
Who else can present such a cornucopia of sci fi schlok?
I keep hearing about a Time Tunnel feature film caught in development hëll
Tim Lynch, who is very much missed around here, would be the best person to answer these things.****
??????
I don’t read every last post on this blog (mainly for time constraints). What happened to Tim Lynch? And why?
I didn’t mean to worry anyone that that something happened to Tim. It’s his participation and intellect I miss. Last I heard he was dealing with some illness in his family and the considerably happier time consumption of a small daughter. Hey Tim, if you read this drop us all a line and tell us how things are going.
“However, no discussion of unintentional HA HA sci fi TV can be complete without Irwin Allen (cue forboding music).”
I’m more of admirer of Irwin Allen’s Master of Disaster phase myself. But even then Allen gifted the world with…THE SWARM! 😀
****sted by Bill Mulligan at February 28, 2007 06:59 AM
I didn’t mean to worry anyone that that something happened to Tim. It’s his participation and intellect I miss. Last I heard he was dealing with some illness in his family and the considerably happier time consumption of a small daughter. Hey Tim, if you read this drop us all a line and tell us how things are going.****
Ah, okay, he was just caught in a hit-and-run by Life, then. 🙂 No worries. Hope all’s okay with him and his.
• 
I don’t remember signing over the rights to my life’s story, Mulligan.
“Jesus saves! Everyone else, take 5d6 damage.”
OR:
“Jesus saves! For a rainy day!”
“Jesus is Lord! You’re not! Nyah nyah nyah nyah!”
Actually, that last one makes Jesus sound like an Only.
“Beyond the “edge” of the Universe is nothing” besudes a really fine restaurant where your meal introduces itself. And how do we KNOW? Have any of us been there? What exit is it off the Jersey Turnpike?
Elf, uh, Chris, uh, hey, YOU! I only brought up the Denmark thing to point out that the physicality of an organism does in fact respond to differences in environment. The nutrition thing no doubt has a lot to do with it, unless the entire nation sold their souls so they wouldn’t have to sit on phone books anymore and could FINALLY start that minor league basketball team.
Bill Myers–like you, I can’t resist. With proper acknowledgment to Mr. Jagger–Mike can’t get no…satisfaction…
And the squirrels will haunt you. Evermore.
Just thinking here. The Creation story is accepted as THE TRUTH by some people. That’s fine. But before anybody completely dismisses it(in case there was anyone out there that did) think about it. Let’s assume for a tick or two that it happened in sorta that way. Now, until God puts out the do-it-youself make-a-universe kit with the DVD with deleted scenes, all we have is what these first people saw. Now, get more than one person seeing the same thing, you’re going to get two different stories. I’m gonna call it a chance that these first humanoids weren’t big on documentation, so who knows?
Bill Mulligan–do the boots on Boot Hill start walking back to town on their own in this movie?
Bill Myers–you wouldn’t use horses, man. Squirrels, all the way.
I have good news for the “Victims of Mike Club.” I’ve gotten what I’ve been looking for here, paradigms for the motives of the people here that have been baffling me. The price for these paradigms has been my time and, as far as my attraction to the returns for my time here have diminished, you will hear less from me, if at all.
In the interest of vetting of these paradigms, I will share them with you.
Summary:
When I first came here, I compared the devotion of oppressed people to leaders who worked against the peoples’ self-interests to a høøkër knifing a guy for stopping her pimp from beating her. A pyramid occupies a smaller and smaller area the higher it goes. Why the oppressed base of the pyramid of the pretense of invulnerability should have any stake in continuing to support it is, as I’ve said, baffling to me.
I haven’t accepted that all support of pretense is driven specifically by devotion to pretense, and now I believe where this support of pretense isn’t so driven, it’s driven by fidelity to another person’s relationship with his or her environment.
Specifically, I can show:
Bill Mulligan will reserve for himself privileges he knows are morally unjustifiable.
I can think of no other virtue for the selective application of principles than to shelter a predatory agenda.
Bill refuses to address his inconsistencies by lying about not reading my posts. I don’t think Bill believes libel, strawmen, and lying are justifiable. Instead I think Bill’s libel, strawmen, and lies demonstrate his disconnect with reality.
To an extraverted personality, a person knows who he is predominantly from his role in his or her environment. I am criticizing actions by Bill that won’t effect the perfomance of his role in his environment as long as I’m the only person holding Bill to what he says here. I think Bill takes the authority he holds in his community as evidence of his integrity, unconsciously believes his libel, strawmen, and lying somehow must be my fault, and would say so explicitly if he knew how to without leaving the idea vulnerable to cross-examination.
Though citing only strawmen or no reasons at all for why I am wrong to hold Bill to what he says, I don’t think all of my critics here are driven specifically by a need to support the pretense of invulnerability. I think other extraverted personalities, who predominently know who they are from their role in the world, Micha or Craig R for example, will intervene and say I am wrong without citing a reason out of fidelity to another person’s relationship with his environment. I demonstrate no fidelity to Bill’s relationship to his environment. As people who may only know who they are from their role in the world, Micha and Craig need no other reason to disagree with me other than my lack of fidelity to Bill’s relationship with his or her environment.
The person here paying the most for his fidelity to others’ roles in their environment is Bill Myers. As someone who has suffered obvious challenges to conformity, he benefits the least from the pretense of invulnerability.
Chadwick said religion is inherently predatory. You said religion isn’t inherently evil. That would make saying Chadwick said nothing offensive to spiritual people WRONG.
Then you said you only reserve the right to call bûllšhìŧ someone presenting their opinion as fact.
How about presenting WRONG as fact? Would you call presenting Wrong™ as fact BÙLLSHÍT?
Unless I’ve excluded some part of the discourse that surrounded your quote crucial to its interpretation, I haven’t taken anything you’ve said our of context.
you will hear less from me, if at all.
Don’t let the disconnect screen hit your ášš on the way off.
Craig R for example, will intervene and say I am wrong
Nope, I’m not going to do anything of the sort. In fact, I’m going to wish you well and hope that the sooner you leave, the better off the rest of us will be.
I stopped reading your posts months ago, and the only reason I’m responding to this one is that while scrolling past the latest of your inane posts, I saw you mention my name.
Sorry, Mikey ol’ boy, but in terms of internet trolling, you could be on fire and I wouldn’t take a leak on you to safe your life.
“I think other extraverted personalities, who predominently know who they are from their role in the world, Micha…”
Mike, that’s really nice of you to say this about me. I wih as was extrovert or knew my place in the world.
Are you sure you’re using the word paradigm correctly? I’m not going to get into a debate about it, but I’m not sure about the way you use it.
I find your sentences very baffling but intriguing in a weird kind of way. It doesn’t read like regular speech, acadmic or everyday. I don’t know what it says about you, but it is certainly different. I’m not even certain I know what you’re talking about some of the time.
Have you considered the possibility that Manny disagrees with Chadwick about religion but does not find his opinions offensive, and that he does not feel that Chadwick was presenting his inner truth as universal truth?
“you will hear less from me, if at all.”
That is not much of a threat.
The reason the idea of a Victim’s of Mike Club emerged was that most if not all people who were conversing with you on this blog felt that although we were hearing from you a lot, there was no real meaningful communications, because you were unwilling to engage us and our opinions in a serious, meaningful and respectful way, prefering instead to twist or ignore what we were saying while bludgening us repeatedly with sentences that were supposed to convey your opinions but were at the least incoherent and at worst downright absurd, and all too often abusive. In a way, your method of debate was disrespectful of your own opinions too (at least at the times that respect was waranted). We may have given up on having a real discussion with you, but not before many of us tried to engage you in the only way we could, by stating our opinions clearly and then waiting to hear from you. But your pattern was always the same — hostility, disrespect, flipancy, childishness, and much more. Our attempts prooved futile, and your attitude offended us to the point that we started becoming hostile, contrary to the way we usually prefered to conduct our communications here.
I don’t know why you have fixated on Bill Mulligan of all people. Not once did you engage or converse with the man, always with the shadow puppets you created out of snippets of his words, your strange binary mind, and some other parts of your psyche that are beyond me. When I defended him, I thought you just misunderstood his opinions on one specific subject. I argued with you on this both because I found your reasoning faulty and because it ran contrary to what I knew of Bill Mulligan. But clearly the problem goes deeper both with regard to your attitude toward Bill, and your ability to process what I was saying.
I also don’t understand why every conversation anybody had with you always degenerated along an always predictable pattern.
Human society depends on the ability to communicate. Since you have been unable or unwiling to communicate with us. So, unless communication becomes possible, I won’t regret seeing you leave. I hope you find a way to get out of this hole your conduct or your psyche has dug yourself into.
If you want to respind to me, know that any response thtat will involve quoting a snippet of my words, comparing to another, highlighting bits, followed by a strange incoherent assertion and completed with a rude comment, will be ignored since it is not meaningful communication.
Bill Mulligan–do the boots on Boot Hill start walking back to town on their own in this movie?
No but that’s a riot. You get it.
What’s amazing is how many people LOVE the idea of horror westerns but the western genre is dead as those aforementioned boots.
Mike says
(long string of letters and words. as though a lemur scampered repeatedly across the keyboard).
A few highlights:
I have good news for the “Victims of Mike Club.”
See, I knew he’d love the attention that even a joke like this would bring. Nobody here is a “victim” of Mike. What can he do? Has anyone suffered? Indeed, one could argue that for al the differences in our political outlooks, philosophical bents, religious beliefs or lack thereof, the near universal agreement that Mike is a LoonTM.
# Archived here are posts where Bill:
I’m glad you provided links so that any one interested can go and see what a frikkin kook you are. You’ve at least confirmed one hunch I’ve always had–truly awful people have no idea how truly awful they truly are.
I think Bill takes the authority he holds in his community…
Authority? This is PAD’s blog and I’m a guest. Any “authority” I have is the result of the friendships I’ve made here, a concept that Mike will find difficult to understand for reason we all know but are usually too kind to point out.
Micha and Craig need no other reason to disagree with me other than my lack of fidelity to Bill’s relationship with his or her environment.
Yep, that’s Craig, always afraid to say anything that might offend! 🙂 Hey Craig, quit being such a shrinking violet!
But “his or her”? Is it time for me to get another haircut?
The person here paying the most for his fidelity to others’ roles in their environment is Bill Myers. As someone who has suffered obvious challenges to conformity, he benefits the least from the pretense of invulnerability.
Yeah, the cold comforts of having friends, a good woman and a great personality are no substitute for what he could have been if only he could have been more like Mike. Poor, poor Bill.
you will hear less from me, if at all.
That would seem a wise choice. You’ve been flailing about lately and, in the process, damaged any regard anyone might have had for you as a man (your attacks on someone’s daughter) and as a thinker (the shape of snowflakes as evidence of a thermodynamic miracle?). Being remembered as a major troll is a small ambition but I guess it could be worse.
Micha says:
I find your sentences very baffling but intriguing in a weird kind of way. It doesn’t read like regular speech, academic or everyday. I don’t know what it says about you, but it is certainly different. I’m not even certain I know what you’re talking about some of the time.
It is a kind of verbal jazz sometimes. Who knows, maybe he’s just on too high a level for the rest of us to understand. Genius is often misunderstood in its own time.
Just realized: there was a time gay actors wouldn’t dare “come out” because doing so would have killed their career. But George Takei doesn’t appear to have been hurt by acknowledging his sexuality; hëll, he may have even benefited from it.
Probably. Then there’s Ellen DeGeneres, whose career doesn’t seem to be hurting much.
On the other hand, there are still lots of actors whom “everyone knows” are gay, but haven’t come out of the closet. A lot depends on the circumstance. You could also argue that, as an actor primarily known for character roles, George didn’t have much to lose by coming out at age 64. If you’re an actor who hopes to play a leading man in the movies, coming out of the closet might still be career suicide.
As far as a paradigm is an example or pattern; especially : an outstandingly clear or typical example or archetype, yes.
I don’t doubt Chadwick didn’t offend Manny — but Manny spoke for all spiritual people.
I didn’t say Chadwick expressed his opinion as fact. I said saying Chadwick said nothing offensive to spiritual people was wrong.
Did I ever cite intimidation as my agenda?
In so far as I’ve excluded no part of the discourse surrounding your quotes crucial to their interpretation — no.
Otherwise, please cite. Make it a first.
In so far as I’ve excluded no part of the discourse surrounding your quotes crucial to their interpretation, the incoherence and absurdity are yours, not mine.
If holding you to your own words is abusive, how do you justify saying them in the first place?
As I post here sincerely, I have no reservation against being held to what I say.
I said you cite no reasons to disagree with me, and I think you hold no other reason to disagree with me other than my lack of fidelity to Bill’s pretense. Now you’ve confirmed that this is the case.
In my previous post, I established he has the most obvious pattern of hypocrisy.
Please cite his opinion you thought I misunderstood.
My current working paradigm is that you throw facts out the window of Bill’s libeling, whisper campaigning, and lying because, as you may only know who you are from your role in the world, you can only imagine a lack of fidelity to the pretenses of others as predatory.
I’m not the one who demonstrated he doesn’t know the difference between nouns and prepositions.
If you can’t be taken at your word — what are you doing here?
So your libel, strawmen, and lies are my fault?
The school you teach at isn’t a community? As a teacher, you aren’t trusted to safeguard knowledge?
So Belongs To Me.™
Now we know Authority™ feeds your drive to build relationships. Who would have thought?
Peter accepted my word I had no intention of crossing his boundary — that he is the only David who is fair game — in so far as I said so, and he sid now I know otherwise. Your attempt to cite in me a predatory agenda from this incident — and prompting me to address your accusation against me — serves no purpose except to create opportunities for Peter to relive his angst.
Any taste for blood is obviously yours.
I credit my genius to my ability to distinguish nouns from prepositions.
Captain Naraht Wrote in response that the universe is “expanding into nothing”: “Again back to cosmology. Scientists are debating that if the universe is expanding, what is it expanding *into*? Another dimension? One could postulate it contains an intelligence or liveform(s) too complex for concepts like evolution or even birth. An entity too complex for modern human minds to grasp, perhaps. (Unless they’re a bit arrogant and run Liberty University)”
and also:
“Beyond the “edge” of the Universe is nothing – that we know of… Some string theorists have with V-Ger like dispassion stated that there may be dozens or more universes. Some possibly connected to this one. Just because we cannot see does not make it not there.
“
Then Micha Wrote: “You are probably more qualified to address these issues in a serious way.”
Then Bill Mulligan wrote: “I’ll discuss forther in a bit–have to fix a water problem”
Just curious what a science teacher thinks, Bill.
–Captain Naraht
(Ray in NH)
P.S. I have to say, for the length of time I’ve posted on this blog, I haven’t gotten in a debate with Mike. Maybe it’s because my excellent cross-examination of one of Mike’s points would be, “Oh yeah….well SO’S YOUR FACE!” (Can I still order my V.O.M.I.T neck tattoo?)
To everyone who is not Mike:
Folks, we need to let this go — because Mike won’t. We need to take the high road — again, because Mike won’t. Otherwise, we’ll end up with another thread like “A Smart Move,” and I don’t think any of us wants that.
Besides, who cares what Mike says about us? Mike can point to a circle and call it a square to his heart’s content, but the circle will remain a circle.
Hey, look, I know it’s hard to ignore the trolls. I’ve succumbed to the temptation to put them in their place on more than one occasion.
The problem is that trolls crave attention — any attention. Look at Mike. He declared he would post here with far less frequency or stop entirely, and not even 12 hours later he posts again. He thrives on us talking to him and about him.
Me, I’m walking away. Mike isn’t worth even the tiniest fraction of the time I’ve given him. He gets no more.
Shrouds up — this time, permanently.
Bill, I’ve largely been ignoring Mike not because I want to shroud him, but because most of the time I don’t know what his point is to begin refuting. And when I do, it’s not like it’s going to be a conversation. Rarely have I seen Mike note and accept something posted by anyone not Mike, and he often takes the MTV approach to debate…meaning he comes up with some snide remark that substitutes for a reply, thinking that’s how debates and conversations work.
Which is a shame. When he’s not being snide, rude, condescending, or downright abusive, he has on occasion raised some interesting points. But his approach is intolerable in any format where the parties are interested in civil discourse. Of course, having earned the reputation for being snide, rude, condescending, and abusive, he kills any credibility his points might otherwise earn him.
I don’t think ignoring him will work, because so long as he posts here, he’s going to be saying things that people must respond to. There are too many folks here that can’t let a false statemet, mistatemet, or overstatement be made without trying to correct it. That’s not a failing. But when the OP of such statements really isn’t interested in hearing how others think he’s wrong, it ends up going…well…here.
Posted by: Bobb Alfred at February 26, 2007 10:49 AM
Bill, I’ve largely been ignoring Mike not because I want to shroud him, but because most of the time I don’t know what his point is to begin refuting. And when I do, it’s not like it’s going to be a conversation.
I don’t own this blog, so any suggestions I make are just that — suggestions. I wouldn’t presume to dictate your behavior.
Posted by: Bobb Alfred at February 26, 2007 10:49 AM
There are too many folks here that can’t let a false statemet, mistatemet, or overstatement be made without trying to correct it.
I’m just concerned about the trading of personal insults. I led the charge against Mike in that arena late last year. It resulted in a thread that Peter had to shut down because it had gotten so big it was threatening to undergo gravitational collapse. I’m just sayin’ trading insults with Mike leads to no good end.
Mike can cast aspersions on my character to his heart’s content. I’ve realized that my actions will speak louder than his words. The same goes for anyone else here. That’s all I’m sayin’. If Mike insults you — let it go.
Just a suggestion. Although I think it’s a good one.
“The situation eventually arises where the search for the answer to life, the universe and everything (42) eventually intersects with the question of some sort of intelligence actually pulling the strings.
Then comes the question “Is there some intelligence doing these things?”. If the assumption is yes, one then asks “What is the nature of this intelligence?”.
At some point, some bright guy assumes said intelligence not only created everything from amoebas to squirrels, but that it also wants total control of it’s creation, as well as worship and adoration. From there it’s straight on downhill to pogroms, censorship, and Bob Jones University.
Just my late night musings and two cents worth.”
Imagine the humans walking around in a prehistoric world. It is a world teaming with life.. and with death: animals hunt and are hunted, the earth tremors, the seasons change, the seas and rivers ebb and flow, the sun rises and falls, people are born and they die. It is a word of chance , of deseases, accidents, attacks by foreign and hostile forces human or other, that emerge from far away places, from dark forests and arid deserts. It is also a word of hierarchies, chieftains and followers, parents and children. and it is a word that has not yet distinguished between reason and inspiration, observation and imagination, explanation and story telling. Is it surprising that peole living in this world, that were farmiliar only with their own human consciousness and their own human society, mountains, ses and ancestors become spirits to be worshiped and bargained with? Is it not surprising that as civilization developed, and cheiftains became kings and kings emperors, some spirits became rulers and other subjects? A process of abstraction may have caused the idea of monotheism to appear, with one god gradualy subjugating and swallowing all of creation, but we still had our share of angels, demons, djinns, saints prophets etc. The book of Job is from an old source. It doesn’t say angels, it says ‘the sons of the elohim (god)’. The attempt of modern science to create a world without demons is stil an uphill battle. the assumption that you can describe the world in terms of animate laws and mechanics is very typical of the time period and place in which it was conceived. It is a hard sell for a human species that is still not that different than it was thousands of years ago.
———————–
Bill Myers, my problem is that I usually try to understand how other people think and then engage them. Right or left, religious or secular, ancient or modern, I always try to put myself inside their minds so I can understand what they are thinking and then say, “look I know what you are saying, but here is how I see it.” But here I encountered someone whose cognitive functions baffle me completely. I found it intruiging, entertaining, troubling, saddening. Perhaps it requires someone with a more professional understanding of the human psyche? At this point I’m a little concerned for the person in question.
I’m not going to make promises I’m not sure I’m going to keep. I doubt what I do or don’t do will affect this person, he is clearly living in his own world of words (prooving Chadwick statements about language wrong). I have no interest in tormenting this man just out of cruelty. My morbid curiousity might cause me to try to unravel his words. At times I might latch to something he starts, for the greater interest in a subject such as Intelligent design. I might also sometimes take a humorous attitude — I enjoy finding the humor in life [how about a T-shirt with a squirrel hitting his head repeatedly against a tree while an acorn his hitting him on the head]. But I will always try to do so in moderation. I think everything will be fine regardless of what this person does or does not do.
OK! OK! I surrender! It was only a suggestion. 😉
And you’re right, Micha. Ultimately, this blog and the community it has proven itself strong enough to survive the occasional odd troll.
Admittedly, I react badly when I perceive that I’ve been insulted. I also get angry when someone insults my friends. Perhaps my “shrouds up” attitude is an overreaction to that flaw. And perhaps I should learn to be more confident in my ability to control my negative impulses without having to go to the extent of creating an “ignore list.”
Sigh… I’d rather talk about George Takei. Jerry, I think it would be awesome if they gave Mr. Takei the best of both worlds (no ST:TNG pun intended): a Star Trek sitcom! Think of the possibilities!
Sigh… the second sentence in the second paragraph of my prior post should’ve read, “Ultimately, this blog and the community it has created have proven themselves strong enough to survive the occasional odd troll.”
“a Star Trek sitcom!”
I’m not sure that would be a good idea. I’m not even a Trekkie, but I think a regular show (as opposed to the occasional skit) that doesn’t take Star Trek seriously, will be annoying.
Part of the problem of fantasy/comics/sci-fi TV shows and movies is that they are not always taken seriously by the people who make them. The results are usually campy.
—————
Bill, You must do what ensures your own peace of mind and enjoyment of life. I think we have a clear example of someone who has let his mind loose every shred of peace.
No, Bill, never give up, never surrender.
Oh, wait, that’s a totally different yet related pop culture reference.
I don’t mean to suggest people won’t or shouldn’t ignore Mike…actually, I think we’d be better off if we could. What I meant is that, based on past repeated calls to ignore him…advocated and then broken by many, including me…I just didn’t see why this latest call would work any better than past ones, primarily because Mike’s posts are just begging for refutement.
On the few recent occasions when I’ve directly responded to Mike, I’ve had to wait a few seconds and edit my post before hitting the Post button, to erase any snide comments or insults of my own. Which is why I try my best to ignore him, because, unlike Takei, I don’t always manage to couch my responses in humor and satire, and when I do, since I’m not posting Youtube video, the funny gets losts in the medium.
“Part of the problem of fantasy/comics/sci-fi TV shows and movies is that they are not always taken seriously by the people who make them. The results are usually campy.”
I share that opinion, and, more often than not, I hate camp. Now that I’ve started collecting TV on DVD, I’m getting a chance to compare and contrast the various genre TV shows. The ones that play it straight are, by and large, far better than the campy ones. (I could barely make myself watch Lost in Space when I was a kid, nowadays I avoid it like the plague.) One interesting comparison is between Wonder Woman and The Incredible Hulk. Wonder Woman had more than a bit of camp to it, while The Incredible Hulk played it straight. I think that The Incredible Hulk wound up being the better show…although Lynda Carter is a hëll of a lot easier on my eyes than Lou Ferringo. 😉
Guys — I was only joking about a “Star Trek sitcom.”
Although the BBC did produce a wonderful sci-fi sitcom called “Red Dwarf” proving that sci-fi and comedy aren’t incompatible. If you’re not familiar with it, go out and get the DVDs. Now.
Guys — I was only joking about a “Star Trek sitcom.”
Oh… sure… I knew all along…
Just so I’m sure, the part about raping horses was true 🙂
Posted by: Micha at February 26, 2007 02:22 PM
Just so I’m sure, the part about raping horses was true 🙂
You know, I just had a wonderful idea for a short story I can write. It’s about two characters named Bill Mulligan and Micha, a couple of drug-pushing, necrophiliac Al Qaeda operatives who suffer from social anxiety and impotence.
Captain Naraht:
I don’t know that I can comment much on the cosmology questions. Physics baffles me (though not so much that I think snowflakes are…ok, I’ll let it go).
Certainly the basic premise of the Big Bang would collapse if we found other Universes coming toward us. My understanding it that the Universe is expanding but it has no edge–it isn’t expanding into anything because until it’s there, there is no anything to expand into…now my head is expanding, about to explode, but unlike the Universe it will hit something, namely my walls, making a perfectly dreadful mess.
Tim Lynch, who is very much missed around here, would be the best person to answer these things.
I do like the idea of lifeforms so different that we would not recognize them as such. Keep in mind that “life” is what we say it is. We have given it definitions based on life as it exists here. There could easily be kinds of existence completely unlike our kind of life that, nevertheless, deserve the description. If we get to the point where we replace our flesh bodies with machines but retain our individuality I would regard such cyborgs as alive, even though they might violate at least one of the basic requirements (must be made of cells).
Ok…originally this post had a bunch of stuff directed at Mike, or, more specifically, at PAD regarding what we will just call the “Mike shows his ášš” incident. Lots of sound and fury. But upon reflection, and after reading Bill Myer’s words–you’re a wiser man than me, my friend–I’ve deleted them and sent an email to PAD. There was something I wanted to say but perhaps saying it in public would just open old wounds. Gotta hand it to Mike–it’s a neat trick to do something so awful that if anyone so much as mentions it THEY feel like they are accomplices.
Mike’s need for attention will never abate. He won’t leave until he finds some other forum to infect. We aren’t the first and won’t be the last.
Stepping.Slowly.Away.From…unclean…M..post.
Must resist. Sanity at stake.
Whoo. Survived.
Either way. George Takei sitcom. It works. The adventures of…?
As for where the universe goes as it expands. I think it goes to a trailer park in ‘Bama somewhere so we can all be on Jerry or Maury or some such.
Or maybe there’s no “there” there.
Incomprehensible/inconceivable lifeforms is pretty cool. Kinda like a whole universe of squirrel dog carrying celebutantes.
“You know, I just had a wonderful idea for a short story I can write. It’s about two characters named Bill Mulligan and Micha, a couple of drug-pushing, necrophiliac Al Qaeda operatives who suffer from social anxiety and impotence. “
That’s absurd, I am way too lazy to ever be an operative.
—————
I once had the sci-fi/fantasy idea that he whole universe is like a giant brain in which the planets, galaxies etc. are neorons.
Cosmology is weird. I read Hawking’s book, barely understood it. At this stage the anwers they give to questions by laymen are about as stisfying as the answeres offered by religion about god. The oly reason to prefer them to tthe clergy is because their methodolgy is more trustworthy.
—————–
You know, I just had a wonderful idea for a short story I can write. It’s about two characters named Bill Mulligan and Micha, a couple of drug-pushing, necrophiliac Al Qaeda operatives who suffer from social anxiety and impotence.
necrophilia AND impotence? Well, at least you won’t hear any complaining about it.
“Although the BBC did produce a wonderful sci-fi sitcom called “Red Dwarf” proving that sci-fi and comedy aren’t incompatible. If you’re not familiar with it, go out and get the DVDs. Now.’
No, get them last week. Even if you have the VHS tapes, get them last week. The extras are a blast and there’s even an ep. that was never filmed that’s been included in the Season 7 DVD set.
Uhmm… Just trust me on that last sentence.
“Although the BBC did produce a wonderful sci-fi sitcom called “Red Dwarf” proving that sci-fi and comedy aren’t incompatible. If you’re not familiar with it, go out and get the DVDs. Now.'”
What about “Space Rangers”? It proved sci fi and (unintentional) comedy are not incompatible.
For fans of the “40 Year Old Virgin”, if you recall the “Space Nuts” sequence, a friend showed me a copy. Take out the XXX scenes, theres almost a decent little space opera parody there.
Okay, Sean the Science Geek time. Three potential problems I can see for spotting Bill Mulligan’s universes speeding toward us. First, we just can’t see very far into interstellar space, to say nothing of intergalactic, without the images becoming something Great Aunt Milly might see on her next eye exam. Blurry, distorted, and not very meaningful. Second, let’s assume for a tick or two that that’s taken care of, and we can see way far out there clear as an HDTV demo. How are we going to recognize the edge of the universe? I doubt very much that you’ll get to a certain point in space and see a big old wall with pictures of the universe right after the big bang sucking it’s universal thumb. And third, going on the assumption that we can in fact see this wall, edge, what have you, how do we see past it? What in the universe can see past the universe? Just for fun, though, assume that you come up with a way to peek through. Think of the universe like a bucket of water. Poke a hole in the bucket, and something’s going to happen. Either what’s inside the bucket is going to leak out, or what outside the bucket’s going to leak in if either universe has material more dense than the other one.
I was going to do a story like that a while back, so that’s why I thought about all that. If my amittedly layman’s understanding of astrophysics isn’t up to date or is just plain wrong, well, excuuuuuse me!
“What about “Space Rangers”? It proved sci fi and (unintentional) comedy are not incompatible.”
What, you mean it wasn’t supposed to be funny? Huh, shows what I know.
Hyperdrive is the new sci-fi comedy running on BBC America. Not in the same league as Red Dwarf, but it does provide a good laugh here and there. Also, anyone who has yet to see Doctor Who: Curse of the Fatal Death needs to go out and get it. You can find it on things like Google Video, but the VHS tape has several extra Doctor Who spoofs that are mostly pretty good.
And, hey, I’m always ready to prove my general dementia levels to all by recommending Killer Klowns from Outer Space at every chance.
No, get them last week.
What about last month? Or last year? 🙂
Thankfully, all 8 series are out on DVD now. It was painful to wait each year, waiting and watching as only two more series would come out each year.
But now I have them all! MUAHAHAHA!
Still, the dámņ things are overpriced. Which is why I haven’t bought a lot of other stuff from the BBC. 🙂
“And, hey, I’m always ready to prove my general dementia levels to all by recommending Killer Klowns from Outer Space at every chance.”
Jerry, m’lad, have you considered a little show called “tripping the Rift”. A villainous space clown called Darth Bobo has gotta work somehow. And does anyone but me remember “Quark”? Not the bartender on “DS9”, a sci fi sitcom starring Richard Benjaman from the late 70s.
I agree with Chadwick, sci fi creators tend to take their creations overly seriously. I try to avoid any show that won’t put out a blooper reel, or whose creator tries to block any and all parody.
A truly great unintentional sci fi chuckle was an early 70’s Canadian show called “The Starlost”. Production values that make old “Dr. Who” look like Oscar level stuff, Kier Dullea in all his post-2001 glory. I believe that Isaac Asimov actually disassociated from this mad little mis-creation.
The story concerned “the Ark”, carrying the remnants of humanity to a new home. Unfortunately, the ships guidance has been damaged, an the various domes have become cut off from each other, and have forgotten wht’s going on.
Fun idea, rotten execution. I think you can find it at TV.com.
Little detail I missed re: Starlost. Look for Walter Koenig in a couple of episodes.
These posts are now certified George Takei relevant, for your safety and enjoyment.
Craig J. Ries,
Deepdiscount.com or cduniverse are two good sites to hold down costs.
Manny,
Quark… Nice androids.
Ark… Why did you remind me that that thing was ever made?!?
Tripping the Rift and Futurama are both on the regular DVD rotations here.
Sheesh, if you guys wanna get in to listing every TV show and movie that was meant to be serious but went goofy…
Logan’s Run the Series, Ðámņáŧìøņ Ally, some TV show that used the DA truck after the film made sure that it wouldn’t be needed for a DM II, the Classic Trek where they picked up the space hippy guys, the 2nd and 3rd Highlander films (the 4th DOES NOT EXIST), Invasion Earth (BBC), Battlefield Earth, just about anything that gets played on Sci-Fi Channel’s Saturday night block, the complete works of Uwe Bowl, Trancers 6, How to Make a Monster, Robot Jox and Spacehunter: Adventures in the Forbidden Zone spring to mind without actually having to work at thinking up a list. God knows what we could all come up with if we actually tried.
“What in the universe can see past the universe?”
That’s a very succinct way to describe the point of atheism.
———–
“Logan’s Run the Series, Ðámņáŧìøņ Ally, some TV show that used the DA truck after the film made sure that it wouldn’t be needed for a DM II, the Classic Trek where they picked up the space hippy guys, the 2nd and 3rd Highlander films (the 4th DOES NOT EXIST), Invasion Earth (BBC), Battlefield Earth, just about anything that gets played on Sci-Fi Channel’s Saturday night block, the complete works of Uwe Bowl, Trancers 6, How to Make a Monster, Robot Jox and Spacehunter: Adventures in the Forbidden Zone spring to mind without actually having to work at thinking up a list. God knows what we could all come up with if we actually tried.”
OK, I’m not denying that you can have sci-fi comedy. I also admit that I have not seen most of the stuff you mentioned either because I’m too young or it didn’t make it to my part of the galaxy or I’m not geeky enough (that sucks, being to geeky for some but not enough for others).
But Highlander 3? I thought the idea of this discussion was sci-Fi comedy that’s good, not the kind that’s so bad it’s enjoyable.
I said before that:
“Part of the problem of fantasy/comics/sci-fi TV shows and movies is that they are not always taken seriously by the people who make them.”
Of course I’m not against humor about Sci-Fi. I think Sci-Fi sometimes get’s ruined because the peole who make it have no respect for the material. In a way that’s also true for comedy. I think if the creators don’t believe in the material, the characters iin the story do not.
And does anyone but me remember “Quark”? Not the bartender on “DS9”, a sci fi sitcom starring Richard Benjaman from the late 70s.
Wow, you’ve awakened a 30 year old memory…Dr. Ficus, half man, half plant…
I remember the show as actually funny. I also like The Fantastic Journey and the Planet of teh Apes TV show so I am not to be trusted…
Oh hey! Look, you can download all the peisodes of Quark right here! Yay! http://quark.name/
“On the other hand, I have a hard time imagining everything on the planet evolving completely at random.”
Bill, in response to this you’ve talked about abiogenesis. It is true that people confuse it with evltion. But I also think part of what people don’t understand is how evolution functions to create complex life forms. The idea that complex things (usually the eye) are the result of a process of evolution and not the result of a deliberate proces by an intelligence is the thing they find hard to accept.
“I remember the show as actually funny. I also like The Fantastic Journey and the Planet of teh Apes TV show so I am not to be trusted…”
Was Fantastic Journey the one about the people lost in the Bermuda Triangle? Or am I way out?
“I remember the show as actually funny. I also like The Fantastic Journey and the Planet of teh Apes TV show so I am not to be trusted…”
Hey, I put those and things like Otherworld, Manimal, Man from Atlantis, The Invisible Man and the TV version of War of the Worlds amonst other clunkers on my must watch lists. We’ve all been there. That’s what the support groups are for.
****Posted by Bill Mulligan at February 26, 2007 02:56 PM
Tim Lynch, who is very much missed around here, would be the best person to answer these things.****
??????
I don’t read every last post on this blog (mainly for time constraints). What happened to Tim Lynch? And why?
Chris
A truly great unintentional sci fi chuckle was an early 70’s Canadian show called “The Starlost”. Production values that make old “Dr. Who” look like Oscar level stuff, Kier Dullea in all his post-2001 glory. I believe that Isaac Asimov actually disassociated from this mad little mis-creation.
Actually, that was Harlan Ellison who had his name removed. I read his novelization of what the first episode was supposed to be like. It was intended as an Ark of sorts, transporting a number of human cultures away from a vaguely doomed Earth, keeping them all in separate environments so that they wouldn’t contaminate one another. Then a young Amish boy finds the door out of his world. He meets up with a couple of other escapees, they’re pursued by Security bots, and in the process, they find that the ship was damaged by a meteor collision, the command crew was killed, and the ship’s trajectory was altered so it was heading for a star. The MacGuffin of the series was supposed to be the search for the controls. Harlan tells of a producer who commissioned a script about six episodes in in which the controls are found. When Harlan called him to scream, the producer didn’t see the problem. He figured they could start looking for the backup controls – which he thought were the controls that would make the ship back up.
Manny, Fantastic Journey was a movie (based on a treatment by Asimov, so he does figure in somewhere) in which a group of people had to be shrunk to submicroscopic size, along with their submarine, to go burn a blood clot out of a defecting Russian scientist. They had several interesting adventures, based on Asimov’s knowledge of human anatomy (for instance, they were diverted on their way to the brain when they hit an arterial fistula, and were abruptly transferred to the neighboring vein – headed straight for the heart).
Jonathan (the other one),
Actually, Fantastic Journey was a TV show from the mid-70’s (re-cut into the syndicated TV film LOST IN TIME) that was set in the Bermuda Triangle.
Fantastic Voyage was the submicroscopic submarine movie (that was later turned into an animated TV series) based on the treatment by Asimov.
Is it at all sad that I can remember all this stuff without even trying but I forget my own cell phone number half the time?
%(
Thanks for the clarification. However, no discussion of inintentional HA HA sci fi TV can be complete without Irwin Allen (cue forboding music).
Time Tunnel, Land of the Giants, Journey to the Bottom of the Sea (?), Lost in Space. C’mon. Irwin da man!
Who else can present such a cornucopia of sci fi schlok?
I keep hearing about a Time Tunnel feature film caught in development hëll
Tim Lynch, who is very much missed around here, would be the best person to answer these things.****
??????
I don’t read every last post on this blog (mainly for time constraints). What happened to Tim Lynch? And why?
I didn’t mean to worry anyone that that something happened to Tim. It’s his participation and intellect I miss. Last I heard he was dealing with some illness in his family and the considerably happier time consumption of a small daughter. Hey Tim, if you read this drop us all a line and tell us how things are going.
“However, no discussion of unintentional HA HA sci fi TV can be complete without Irwin Allen (cue forboding music).”
I’m more of admirer of Irwin Allen’s Master of Disaster phase myself. But even then Allen gifted the world with…THE SWARM! 😀
****sted by Bill Mulligan at February 28, 2007 06:59 AM
I didn’t mean to worry anyone that that something happened to Tim. It’s his participation and intellect I miss. Last I heard he was dealing with some illness in his family and the considerably happier time consumption of a small daughter. Hey Tim, if you read this drop us all a line and tell us how things are going.****
Ah, okay, he was just caught in a hit-and-run by Life, then. 🙂 No worries. Hope all’s okay with him and his.
Chris