Who's That Man?

By -


No cheating!

Comments

  1. Anthony4:58 PM

    I quite enjoyed surfing through this site. Plenty of laughs to be had. And ideas to be pondered.

    As for this guy, several lifetimes ago when I was putting on the big buzz, I think he sold me a dime bag in Pittsburgh.

    A quick note to let you know I've included you in the newest edition of Surfer's Paradise. I hope this link serves you well.

    Should you have an opportunity to come for a look I'll be interested to see what you think.

    ReplyDelete
  2. gcallah1:00 AM

    "As for this guy, several lifetimes ago when I was putting on the big buzz, I think he sold me a dime bag in Pittsburgh."

    Maybe so, but it's his name we'll be wanting, laddie.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous1:39 AM

    That's the link between the inherent coolness of James Brown and the pure funk of George Clinton...Sly Stone

    ReplyDelete
  4. gcallah4:53 AM

    Anonymous #2 has it in one!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous12:02 AM

    Thank you. Whom do I contact regarding my prize? Regards, David

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous10:36 PM

    You mean that's not Doug Pinnick of King's X?

    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

"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