29 definitions by FigurinOutLife
A strategy used to conceal ignorance in a debate when unable to answer a question by deferring to a Google search as "proof" that a good answer exists.
Google Punting is an intellectually lazy way out of an argument. In essence, it is an admission of defeat by saying "I don't know, and I'm unable to put together an intelligent argument, but someone else probably could. Plus, this is great because I'm forcing you to do all the work, while implying that you're the lazy one (not me) because you couldn't look it up yourself. And, if you're stupid enough to do it, it's even better because if you find something that disproves my point I can counter with 'hey, I didn't say that', or 'you're just cherry-picking' *and* send you back searching for the 'real' answer".
by FigurinOutLife September 30, 2012
Yes, I realize your friend died an unnecessary death at a very young age, but God works in mysterious ways.
by FigurinOutLife April 8, 2004
Cindy McCain: "John! Just what are you doing going into the closet again with those pictures of Sarah Palin in her bathingsuit?"
John McCain: "Nothing, dear, I'm just going to vet the veep."
John McCain: "Nothing, dear, I'm just going to vet the veep."
by FigurinOutLife September 19, 2008
The Name That Race game (NTR for short) entails viewing news articles and trying to guess the race of the person(s) involved before such information is given or implied. Players bet between 1 to 3 points prior to reading further or digging into other information sources to find the answer. If correct, they get the points bet added to their total, if wrong, the points are deducted.
Some critics have characterized NTR as "mean-spirited" but it is actually intended as a means of demonstrating liberal hypocrisy in that liberals do not believe racial behaviors can be stereotyped. So, in theory, if the liberals are correct, then no one should be able to attain a positive score in this game. However, skilled players somehow manage to "beat the odds" consistently.
Some critics have characterized NTR as "mean-spirited" but it is actually intended as a means of demonstrating liberal hypocrisy in that liberals do not believe racial behaviors can be stereotyped. So, in theory, if the liberals are correct, then no one should be able to attain a positive score in this game. However, skilled players somehow manage to "beat the odds" consistently.
As an example of how to play the Name That Race game, contrast two news article summaries (taken from actual recent news events) describing two unrelated rapes:
Article 1) "The rapist apparently had stalked his victim for weeks prior to breaking into her home. As the victim entered her home, the rapist surprised her and threatened her with a gun to remain silent. After raping the victim, the rapist left, warning her not to call the police for at least an hour or else he would return for her"
Article 2) "A victim was approaching her car in a fairly busy mall parking lot when the rapist ran up to her and threw her in the car, all in broad daylight. He drove a small distance away from the mall before stopping the car and beating the victim viciously prior to raping her. The rapist then drove off in her car, leaving her by the roadside without knowing if she would die of her wounds or not."
According to liberals, the odds of either rapist being black should be about 13% (which is the prevalence of blacks in the general population), so even if you're only right 50% of the time, you're still about four times more accurate than you should be. For the record, in this particular case, rapist #1 was white and rapist #2 was black. Try the game yourself and remember if you're not absolutely honest about the # of times you're right versus wrong and the # of points you bet, you're not playing NTR, you're plaing BTR (Blame That Race), which is much more boring. It's best to have a mediator who keeps score, but this is not always possible.
Article 1) "The rapist apparently had stalked his victim for weeks prior to breaking into her home. As the victim entered her home, the rapist surprised her and threatened her with a gun to remain silent. After raping the victim, the rapist left, warning her not to call the police for at least an hour or else he would return for her"
Article 2) "A victim was approaching her car in a fairly busy mall parking lot when the rapist ran up to her and threw her in the car, all in broad daylight. He drove a small distance away from the mall before stopping the car and beating the victim viciously prior to raping her. The rapist then drove off in her car, leaving her by the roadside without knowing if she would die of her wounds or not."
According to liberals, the odds of either rapist being black should be about 13% (which is the prevalence of blacks in the general population), so even if you're only right 50% of the time, you're still about four times more accurate than you should be. For the record, in this particular case, rapist #1 was white and rapist #2 was black. Try the game yourself and remember if you're not absolutely honest about the # of times you're right versus wrong and the # of points you bet, you're not playing NTR, you're plaing BTR (Blame That Race), which is much more boring. It's best to have a mediator who keeps score, but this is not always possible.
by FigurinOutLife May 12, 2006
The Rainbow/PUSH Coalition (RPC) is an organization founded by the Reverend Jesse Jackson, the name derives from the roots of the organization - a merger between the Rainbow coalition (founded 1985) and Operation PUSH (started about 1971). The stated mission of the organization is to foster "civil rights" and empower people of color (i.e. black). RPC frequently uses political pressure tactics bordering on blackmail designed to coerce companies into "donating" to the RPC (i.e. bribe them to go away) or employing RPC members in nice cushy jobs to ensure "liason" between the company and the black community (i.e. provide continuous welfare and the ability to monitor companies from the inside for future blackmail operations).
We have a rainbow of races at our company, but Jesse Jackson decided there were not enough black ones in top management positions so he PUSHed us around with threats until we paid him to go away, gave mandatory promotions to unqualified blacks (including his friends he owed favors) and ended with a nice flowery speech about how this showed our commitment to diversity. Hopefully now we are under the "protection" of Jesse and no one else will come and blackmail us.
by FigurinOutLife March 24, 2004
An apparently unprovable hypothesis that living creatures were created by an all-powerful, intelligent entity that itself did not have a creator. Contrast with evolution. ID proponents typically fail to understand 4 things:
1) Scientists use the word "theory" differently than the layperson
2) Science operates just fine in the absence of absolute truths. Thus, if evolutionary theory doesn't explain everything, that's not a problem - it's a "work in progress"
3) People are no better off substituting a slightly imperfect scientific theory for a completely unsupported religious hypothesis
4) The fact that ID cannot be disproven is a weakness, not a strength (e.g. There are 482,331 raisins orbiting Saturn right now... I defy you to prove me wrong).
1) Scientists use the word "theory" differently than the layperson
2) Science operates just fine in the absence of absolute truths. Thus, if evolutionary theory doesn't explain everything, that's not a problem - it's a "work in progress"
3) People are no better off substituting a slightly imperfect scientific theory for a completely unsupported religious hypothesis
4) The fact that ID cannot be disproven is a weakness, not a strength (e.g. There are 482,331 raisins orbiting Saturn right now... I defy you to prove me wrong).
If Intelligent Design is such a great alternative explanation to evolutionary theory, why aren't proponents actually USING it to advance scientific understanding? In short, they should practice what they preach... literally.
by FigurinOutLife September 23, 2005
Afrocentrism is a set of beliefs that depicts ancient African achievement as the driver and foundation for modern philosophical thoughts and technologies. Afrocentrism verges on being classified as a religious faith because of the required suspension of skepticism and the irrelevance of empirical evidence. Afrocentrism is a backlash against the pervasive and powerful negative images of black (African) people that exist in the world today. These images arise from the countries, regions and cities that are dominated by blacks, each one being mired in poverty, violence, AIDS, famine and in constant need of support from other countries or other races. Without words, these images stir up powerful needs among blacks to imagine a glorious past where they were once the center of the world and looked down upon everyone else. To conduct Afrocentric research, one simply searches for evidence that could be interpreted as blacks ruling over others or inventing things. No further thought process is required.
Napoleon shot of the Spinx's nose because it "looked" like a black nose and he didn't want the world to know that blacks ruled ancient Egypt. Or, images within an Egyptian tomb that appear similar to a glider are evidence that blacks "invented" flight because, of course, the Egyptians were black then even though they are not now. And where is the physical evidence of these devices and their implementation? Again, no further thought process is required.
by FigurinOutLife March 24, 2004