You can't make this stuff up

By P. M. Jaworski -

Yes, you read correctly. Have some Ranch Chicken, and become aware of the Vegan lifestyle.

Comments

  1. Anonymous3:30 PM

    I'm not sure exactly what makes a chicken a "ranch chicken", nor am I sure how a domestic animal merits the title "free range."

    Chickens are omnivores, but maybe the ranch chicken is kept away from animal products (chickens enjoy insects and tiny mammals) and fed a pure vegetable diet. If you're really into being a vegan, a vegan pet could very well be the perfect addition to your family.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous10:33 PM

    I think it means you're suppose to acknowledge vegans, as you bite into your ranch chicken, shaking your head and saying "better you than me!"

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous9:35 PM

    If you only wish to acknowledge vegans, why would you waste your time with any kind of chicken? Sometimes, while whittling a rare t-bone with my teeth, I think of the vegans. I think: "You've got to be kidding me, statistically you're only buying six months with that kind of diet!" How much do we really value that last six months if we're to be attached to a respirator in a nursing home?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous1:40 PM

    Great article! Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous7:19 PM

    Thanks for interesting article.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous10:22 AM

    Excellent website. Good work. Very useful. I will bookmark!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous7:02 PM

    The page is so wonderful that I want to write something about myself.
    I get a lot of rappelz rupeesand the rappelz gold is very important for me. Some of the rappelz money is given by my friends who buy rupees to let me happy. Thanks for my friends and the cheap rappelz rupees.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Machine Learning"

By -
 The name is a misnomer. And a harmful one, because it interferes with understanding the process that is really occuring. What is really occurring is a search of a constrained program space. Let's say you want to be able to identify images of hot dogs . You begin with a plausible program for doing so, that is able to also search the space of nearby programs that might get better results on the problem. You then (in "supervised learning") provide scores that indicate how well one of these possible programs has done on solving the problem. After doing this for some time you settle upon a program that solves the problem "well enough." This is a great technique that can produce truly impressive results on a wide class of problems, such as identifying images of hot dogs. But notice that, except for the phrase in scare quotes, there is no "learning" in the description. Calling this "learning" is importing ideological baggage that just obscures what
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more