The 99 Declaration

The 99 Declaration is a list of grievances that will be debated and ratified by delegates from every voting district in the country in Philadelphia on July 4th, 2012. The declaration will then be brought before a federal judge to demand that Congress, The Supreme Court, and The President of the United States be redressed with the grievances of The American People. It's mission is to end the corporate state and to take money out of politics while other grievances may end up on the final version of the declarations as well.

Man: Wow, this country is shit. It is run by bought, career politicians who are representing large corporations and themselves instead of the people.

Woman: You should check out The 99 Declaration. There is a solution!

by Jude Newcomb February 24, 2012

Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Dependence

An extremely rare and expensive pre-workout known for causing buff bro Chads to vape and paddle spank other bro Chads in between sets. Consumption typically results in workout gear consisting of double layered petticoats with lace ruffles for sweat absorption. Post workout protein replenishment while using is always cornmeal mush and raw halibut.

Historically, it was given to members of English parliament on the verge of abandoning British rule. Side effects included wig theft, debauchery of other Parliament members wives, violent masturbation using raw cod oils as lubricant, and long periods of blackout followed by awakening naked in the tents of rival Native American tribes.

Chad Bro # 1: "Hey bro, did you see Tom at Planet Fitness spanking everyone in that colonist outfit?"

Chad Bro # 2: "Bro, you didn't hear? He got a hold of that Thomas Jefferson's Declaration of Dependence!"

Chad Bro # 1: "Fuck yah bro! I hope he got Earl Grey flavor."

Chad Bro # 2: "Nah bro, he's on that cornmeal mackerel ."

by TJeffWorkout January 10, 2020

Hard Problem of the Demarcation Problem

The meta-problem: There is no agreed-upon rule to distinguish science from non-science, and the very search for such a rule may be unscientific. Falsifiability (Popper) fails—string theory isn't easily falsifiable but is considered science. Astrology makes falsifiable claims but is pseudoscience. Methodological naturalism? It rules out theology but also historical sciences that reconstruct unique past events. The hard problem is that "science" is a family-resemblance concept, not a neat category. Any bright-line rule you propose either excludes legitimate sciences or lets in obvious pseudoscience, revealing that demarcation is a social and philosophical negotiation, not a logical one.

Example: Is evolutionary biology science? It reconstructs unique past events (unfalsifiable in a strict lab sense). Yet it's a core science. Is phrenology pseudoscience? It used measurement and data (the "scientific method" of its day). The hard problem: We know the difference intuitively, but can't define it without circular logic ("It's science because scientists do it"). The demarcation criteria are like trying to nail jelly to a wall—the harder you try, the messier it gets, and you're left wondering why you're nailing jelly in the first place. Hard Problem of the Demarcation Problem.

by Nammugal January 24, 2026

Hard Problem of the Demarcation Problem

The prediction problem. Unlike in physics, where you can isolate variables and predict an eclipse to the second, social sciences (economics, political science, sociology) deal with complex, reflexive systems. Humans react to predictions, changing the outcome (the "Lucas Critique"). The hard problem is: Can you have a real science of human society if its core subjects alter their behavior upon hearing your findings? True scientific laws are supposed to be invariant. Social "laws" are more like trends that expire once people know about them, making the field perpetually one step behind a moving target.

Example: An economist develops a perfect model predicting stock market crashes. Once published, investors see it and adjust their behavior to avoid the predicted conditions, thereby preventing the very crash the model forecasted. The model is now wrong. The hard problem: The act of studying the system changes it. This makes falsification—the bedrock of science—incredibly tricky. Social science thus often ends up explaining the past very well (postdiction) but failing at predicting the future, which is what we usually want from a science. Hard Problem of the Demarcation Problem.

by Nammugal January 24, 2026

Real Life Demarcation Problem

The specific struggle to distinguish "real life" (RL) from digital, virtual, or fictional experiences, especially when the latter have profound real-world consequences. It asks: Is the community you build in an MMO "real life"? Are the emotions you feel in VR "real"? The problem highlights that "real life" is often a value judgment ("go live your real life") used to dismiss experiences that are emotionally or socially valid but don't involve physical co-presence. The line is porous because digital actions (a tweet, a crypto trade) now create irreversible RL outcomes.

Example: "My mom said my online friends 'aren't real life.' But when I was depressed, they were the ones who called in a wellness check that saved me. The Real Life Demarcation Problem means the call from a voice I'd only ever heard on Discord was the most consequential, 'realest' intervention of my life. The care was real; the medium was incidental."

by AbzuInExile February 1, 2026

Real World Demarcation Problem

Similar to Real Life, but focused on practical consequences and material constraints versus theoretical, academic, or idealistic plans. It's the gap between a model and the messy, resistant context it's applied to. A policy might be logically perfect in a white paper but fail in the "real world" of perverse incentives, unexpected variables, and human irrationality. The "real world" here is constructed as the realm of harsh limits, testing whether an idea is robust or fragile.

Example: "My economic theory was flawless on the blackboard. The Real World Demarcation Problem hit when I tried it in my small business: a supplier got sick, a key customer was irrational, and regulations I'd never considered applied. The 'real world' wasn't just physics; it was the chaotic aggregate of everyone else's agency and luck, which my clean model had demarked as irrelevant noise."

by AbzuInExile February 1, 2026

National put up your xmas decorations day

Because Halloweens just ended, its socially acceptable to put up christmas decorations

Dude 1 - "why are ur xmas decor up?"
Dude 2 - "its november first! halloween ended, its xmas time"
Dude 1 - "oh yeah, its National put up your xmas decorations day

by .tormentor November 1, 2021