Apropos of Nothing

Palomar · 2003-11-20 08:04:45

*I think Michael Jackson is innocent.
No, he is guilty at least of bad behavior. You need to be insane to invite a 12 old boy in your bed, even a friend (I don't know what is friendship between a 12 and a 45 old), or to have "bad ideas" behind your head. No normal adult man, exhausted after a day at work, would ask a 12 old, hyperactive kid to sleep with him, if not to have some sort of sexual voyeurism, at least. Jacko played with the fire, or the devil if you prefer, and lost once again.

*Hi dickbill:

I agree that his behavior in that regard is totally inappropriate. According to his long-time friends David Gest (entertainment mogul) and Uri Geller, Michael "doesn't get it." He sees nothing wrong or inappropriate about this at all, and cannot understand why others view it as weird or inappropriate.

His cluelessness in this regard doesn't excuse him, however. He could be a bit wiser, even if just for purposes of self-protection from blackmailers and gold-diggers.

Michael lives in a fantasy world; besides being eccentric, he's also been described as a musical genius...that, added to his unusual childhood, plus his wealth and fame isolating him from "the real world" -- well, I think those all factor into his not understanding why others have issues with this. He doesn't live in the "real world" because he hasn't had to; his life and everything have been so unusual. I think he's about to collide with the real world, however.

Why do the parents of these children allow them to sleep over?

Again, I think Jackson is simply guilty of very poor judgment and he's hurting himself (obviously) by disregarding the advice of his friends.

And again, I'm usually cynical about these sorts of matters. I usually wouldn't take this sort of stance, but I just think Michael Jackson is in a class all of his own (not entirely complimentary to him, btw). He's naive, a child in a man's body (which answers your question of how a 45-year-old man can be friends with a 12-year-old). I would be very surprised if the allegations against him are true, because I don't think he's capable of it. But if he is, then of course he should be punished.

I guess we'll find out.

--Cindy

clark · 2003-11-20 09:21:54

So we have a childs accusation versus an adults protestetations. A similar circumstance as a woman making an accusation of rape against a man who denies any such behavior. Who do you believe?

Well, I suppose we make basic assumptions based on the known character of the two individuals. Child or adult, man or woman. Then look for any evidence that might bolster either sides claim. Without that, we at least must assume a certain level of innocence on the part of the accused. Right?

Now, without any hard evidence, we can fall back on circumstantial evidence- and try to connect the dots as well as possible, but doing so allows for misunderstanding, or incorrect conclusions without enough hard evidence to establish fact.

I suppose we will find out more as time goes on, but what will we learn, and how much will we just 'suppose'?

Now, I for one am eager to see different points of view on this. Afterall, it was only yesterday that I was accused of improper behavior off of this board. My little out burst was unwarranted, and for that I do apoligize, but I don't take kindly to being accused of perverse behavior. I haven't been bugging anyone, unless of course you count my poorly understood posts in these threads.

Cindy, think of me what you will, but you owe me an apology. Flat out. What you said was wrong, and defamatory.

dickbill · 2003-11-20 11:36:50

What you said was wrong, and defamatory.

I didn't follow all the thread, but given the very little number of people posting in that forum, we need to keep using the good "etiquette" of internet CHAT.
At some moment, I have feel offensed basically in all the forum I have participated, but I think a rule is to avoid too much personnal or diffamatory attack when you verbally fight with your opponent. Just look at other forum, unfortunatly the New Mars forum is no exception.
Well, I am not the moderator, I just don't like to see "old" members fighting each other.

What said Confucius already ? turn your tongue 7 times in your mouth before you open it, oops no it's no confucius, it's a french proverb
I have another one :

"Souvent femme varie, fol est celui qui s'y fie"

And another one:

"Bat ta femme, si tu ne sais pas pourquoi, elle, elle le sait"

etc...
I think I'm gonna be in trouble soon.

Palomar · 2003-11-20 11:58:03

This isn't "news" to me!

*Geez! I've known this all along.

He's just so...so...so YUMMY.

Mega-sexy.

I'd better quit before I have a coronary...

--Cindy :laugh:

Palomar · 2003-11-20 12:11:39

I have another one :
"Souvent femme varie, fol est celui qui s'y fie"
And another one:
"Bat ta femme, si tu ne sais pas pourquoi, elle, elle le sait"

*Ce n'est pas toujours le d?faut de la femme.

--Cindy

clark · 2003-11-20 12:18:07

Pardon me, perhaps Dickbill can correct me if I butcher his language...

dans ce cas-ci, la femme est fautive.

dickbill · 2003-11-20 12:25:43

"Bat ta femme, si tu ne sais pas pourquoi, elle, elle le sait"

*Ce n'est pas toujours le défaut de la femme.

According to the proverb, yes it is... just kidding.

Another proverb:
The Matrix, as opposed as the german wurst which has two ends (often quoted by one of our collegue in the forum), has no end and It was very disapointing, again.

Josh Cryer · 2003-11-20 17:48:20

Hehe, dickbill, you always brighten my day.

I love the French.

dickbill · 2003-11-20 18:07:50

I also love this one, it's not french, it's english :

"Marriage, it's not a word, it's a sentence"

....
deadly silence
....

The joke only makes sense in english, so some proverbs are not really translatable but this one at least you get it.

dickbill · 2003-11-20 18:12:02

dans ce cas-ci, la femme est fautive.

Clark, in a couple ultimately, the man is always guilty. No matter what. Even if he is right. And that's not a proverb.

Palomar · 2003-11-20 19:59:54

*A little astronomy thing I've been doing since childhood:

1. Pick out a bright star, bright planet, or at least 1/4 full moon.

2. Place yourself in such a way that 2 or 3 telephone or electrical wires between poles form a "grid" of sorts, with the bright celestial object either below the "grid" made by the wires (if facing east-southeast) or above the "grid" made by the wires (if facing westward).

3. Stand perfectly still, with head perfectly still. Now watch the celestial object as it slowly moves through the sky and behind the wires. It's especially fun to watch the moon sliding up or down behind the wires; first touching one edge against a wire, then gradually moving up or down to touch the other edge against the next wire. You can, of course, watch the progression of a star's movement with the sky in this manner. I like watching a star being "occulted" by the wire, especially the skinnier wires; it'll blink out for a few seconds, then slowly re-emerge on the other side of the wire.

You can literally see the sky move.

--Cindy

Shaun Barrett · 2003-11-21 05:28:45

How very ingenious and inventive of you, Cindy!

clark · 2003-11-21 08:45:45

I love Cindy.

Wait, strike that, what I meant to say is, Candy. I love Candy.

I sure do need to learn how to spell.

George H · 2003-11-21 09:41:30

I love Cindy.
Wait, strike that, what I meant to say is, Candy. I love Candy.
I sure do need to learn how to spell.

Yeah, we now REALLY beleive Clark doesn't bug people, or give them a hard time

LOL

clark · 2003-11-21 09:42:55

If I be damned, I be damned. And I'll see you in warmer climes. :laugh:

George H · 2003-11-21 10:15:39

Afterall, it was only yesterday that I was accused of improper behavior off of this board. My little out burst was unwarranted, and for that I do apoligize, but I don't take kindly to being accused of perverse behavior. I haven't been bugging anyone, unless of course you count my poorly understood posts in these threads.
Cindy, think of me what you will, .

Lot's of good humor at the boards!! Haven't been bugging anyone ---- LOL, LOL.

clark · 2003-11-21 10:18:25

I'm glad I can amuse.

Who said theater is dead? Hah!

clark · 2003-11-21 14:47:48

We all have a choice.

dickbill · 2003-11-21 16:05:28

I have two quotes that I remember, because i find them so true or ironic.
First from Gen. Charles de Gaulle.

De Gaulle was pissed off against his compatriotes, the french, and wanted to quit the presidential post. Somebody asked the General to stay in his post of president because he was irreplaceable:
"irremplacable ? said the General, "personne n'est irremplacable, les cimetieres sont pleins de gens irremplacables"
or
"irreplaceable ? nobody's irreplaceable, cimeteries are full of irreplaceable people"

and another one, from a former CNRS director (the french national research organisation) pissed off because he tried to reform the system of research and save money grants from being attributed to frivolous research, that some justified and called Fundamental research, with a capital F :

"ce n'est pas parce qu'une recherche est inutile qu'elle est fondamentale "
or
" It's not because a research is useless that it must be considered fundamental research" (and funded)

appreciate the caustic humour of these guys.

Adrian · 2003-11-21 17:52:52

Clark, I don't know why you're doing this; it seems incredibly immature and nothing better than simple trolling. Please knock it off. You know it's easy for me to ban people here, both temporarily and permanently. I would have absolutely no qualms with doing such a thing, even though I do think that you have and still can contribute to this forum in a good way. So, I am going to ask you to stop harassing Cindy, and if you don't agree to do so within two days, I'll ban you. This is not just about you, this is about the level of behaviour that I and the Mars Society expect on these forums.

dickbill · 2003-11-22 09:02:22

and if you don't agree to do so within two days, I'll ban you.

woosh, tough people here. After the Kobe Bryant's affair, the Clark's affair.
You don't have any choice Clark, you have to surrender in the next 48 hrs. Don't escape to Canada, France or something like that.

Palomar · 2003-11-22 09:45:53

*Does anyone else here own a small telescope? I have an Astroscan 2001, as some may recall. I'm wondering if small refracting telescopes have proven more beneficial/powerful than a small reflector? Astroscan 2001s are reflectors.

I thought Byron mentioned he has an Astroscan 2001?

--Cindy

Palomar · 2003-11-22 09:49:52

*Speaking of telescopes, my parents bought a small refracting telescope for me -- perhaps only 2.5" lens -- in the late 1970s. I think they got it from K-Mart. I remember us setting it up outside our hometown's roller-skating rink...I can remember looking north with it, but can't recall the precise objects.

I probably had my little "AstroCards" with me as well.

--Cindy

Byron · 2003-11-22 09:50:59

*Does anyone else here own a small telescope? I have an Astroscan 2001, as some may recall. I'm wondering if small refracting telescopes have proven more beneficial/powerful than a small reflector? Astroscan 2001s are reflectors.
I thought Byron mentioned he has an Astroscan 2001?
--Cindy

Yep, I've got one of those....lol...

I've had it since I was 12, and it still works great.

My father has a "decorative" refractor telescope...it looks pretty in the living room, but it's not practical for astronomy, since the field of view is so limited. Reflectors are the way to go for general use, and the bigger the better...lol.

When Mars made its closest approach last Aug, I had the privilage of looking through a home-built 18-incher...talk about light-gathering ability! I could pick out things like the southern polar ice cap and everything.

B

Palomar · 2003-11-22 09:55:24

*Astronomy magazine's e-mailing list is, IMO, better than Sky & Telescope's e-mailing list. I really enjoy the "Fun Facts" included with Astronomy e-list.

I began subscribing to Sky & Telescope (snail mail) when I was around 10. Can't recall how I got my penny-pinching folks to splurge for the subscription; I guess it came out of my allowance, LOL.

I used to have quite a stack of S & T mags from the 70s...I wish I'd kept them.

--Cindy

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#426 2003-11-20 08:04:45

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#427 2003-11-20 09:21:54

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#428 2003-11-20 11:36:50

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#429 2003-11-20 11:58:03

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#430 2003-11-20 12:11:39

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#431 2003-11-20 12:18:07

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#432 2003-11-20 12:25:43

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#433 2003-11-20 17:48:20

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#434 2003-11-20 18:07:50

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#435 2003-11-20 18:12:02

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#436 2003-11-20 19:59:54

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#437 2003-11-21 05:28:45

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#438 2003-11-21 08:45:45

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#439 2003-11-21 09:41:30

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#440 2003-11-21 09:42:55

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#441 2003-11-21 10:15:39

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#442 2003-11-21 10:18:25

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#443 2003-11-21 14:47:48

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#444 2003-11-21 16:05:28

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#445 2003-11-21 17:52:52

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#446 2003-11-22 09:02:22

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#447 2003-11-22 09:45:53

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#448 2003-11-22 09:49:52

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#449 2003-11-22 09:50:59

Re: Apropos of Nothing

#450 2003-11-22 09:55:24

Re: Apropos of Nothing

Board footer