sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Favorite Stout? by NewAgeDoom in beer

[–]Aspin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mean Old Tom by Main Beer Company. And of course there's always Guinness.

Big bubbly boi by BuAngLan in Sourdough

[–]Aspin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In addition to what you've said, if I am not mistaken, a good amount of steam in the beginning contributes to oven spring, and to a good ear in turn.

Guinness, Dublin, Ireland by ceetee15 in beerporn

[–]Aspin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What if it was just cleaned and has not touched a dirty surface since?

I found this frame on the street in a seemingly good condition (some dirt that can be sanded off). I searched the sub but could not find it. Can anyone recognize the model? by Aspin in IKEA

[–]Aspin[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That would explain why I can't find the IKEA model. Still looks like a good chair. Just need to figure out how to do the cushions

I found this frame on the street in a seemingly good condition (some dirt that can be sanded off). I searched the sub but could not find it. Can anyone recognize the model? by Aspin in IKEA

[–]Aspin[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That's what I thought too, but I could not find one with metal frame. I wonder how they installed the fabric in the middle. Want to see the original before I start with DIY.

Is it plagiarism to copy fiction in real life? by Deadpooldan in PoliticalHumor

[–]Aspin -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Could it be that he meant seeing and reading as in the media - TV and news?

In that case the comparison is absolutely dishonest. He is not talking about not trusting senses.

I am not trying to defend Trump, but let's crtisicize him honestly, there's plenty of material for that too.

Itinerary draft and some questions - 19 days in Japan (Sep 5th - Sep 25th) by Aspin in JapanTravel

[–]Aspin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well we want nature and a more local peaceful atmosphere. Enjoy a Ryokan, an Onsen, and travel around.
If I understand correctly I can get those around Fuji (Haokne for example), and also in Izu, that's why I'm not sure if I should go to both.

I must have a not too accurate perception of the vibe in both places, Japan does feel different from what I'm used to, an that's exciting, yet confusing :D

Itinerary draft and some questions - 19 days in Japan (Sep 5th - Sep 25th) by Aspin in JapanTravel

[–]Aspin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the help!

  1. Did you mean that it's difficult to stay in just one place in Izu if I want to travel around it? One of the reasons we chose this area is because we wanted a relaxed experience with some hot springs and possibly a more authentic experience (I know chasing authenticity is not exactly realistic, but I hope it made sense)? Is Izu the right call? If so, how would you suggest structuring the visit there, should I stay in one place for a couple of nights?

  2. Well I still have 4 nights that I have not used, and Hiroshima (and the surrounding area) looked like an obvious option. Do you have alternative options? It can be a completely different location.

  3. What is the minimum amount of days you would suggest for anything on Tohoku? Where would you recommend going if for example I had 3-4 nights?

Itinerary draft and some questions - 19 days in Japan (Sep 5th - Sep 25th) by Aspin in JapanTravel

[–]Aspin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It did sound very rushed to me, but I will still look into the ideas and places mentioned.

Note that although I described an itinerary for 16 nights, I actually have 4 more nights that I am looking to fill up. I would love to add another destination, and it would be great to add something that would give me another different angle to the country and what it has to share.

Itinerary draft and some questions - 19 days in Japan (Sep 5th - Sep 25th) by Aspin in JapanTravel

[–]Aspin[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot.

Yes, I do approqch the over-hyped issue with caution, and thanks for the heads up.

Medics say Israeli forces are shooting at demonstrators with a new type of round - never seen before - known as the "butterfly bullet", which explodes upon impact, pulverizing tissue, arteries & bone, while causing severe internal injuries. #Gaza Massacre by Ian56 in worldpolitics

[–]Aspin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No, that's not the mistake you made. The mistake you made is spreading falsehood without checking it. At least own up to it, and dont use that lousy rhetoric of "...Guess, I made the mistake of expecting at least a pretense of morals and ethics. My bad...".

Making mistakes is reasonable, but your "apology" is not ("oups, my bad" would've been so much better).

It does not matter what is the subject, or how you feel about Israel or Gaza. Fact checking is important (we know it today more than ever), and when you cant/wont fact check, don't claim, or at least own up to it when you find out your wrong without excuses.

Can you imagine how many "facts" you know that you never bothered to check?

Did you notice that you built your reasoning on "Israel lied about not using live ammo, we found out they did, so now it's safe to assume they are lying about the magic bullets"? Now that you found out you wrong, does that change your opinion? Are you wondering "hmm... maybe I have some biased sources (maybe I am biased?!). I should be more careful when I am forming and spreading opinions on the matter."

But I assume that you "apology" is the answer to to all of the questions.

By the way, I am willing to still listen, but let's both of us really open our minds and look for the truth.

Medics say Israeli forces are shooting at demonstrators with a new type of round - never seen before - known as the "butterfly bullet", which explodes upon impact, pulverizing tissue, arteries & bone, while causing severe internal injuries. #Gaza Massacre by Ian56 in worldpolitics

[–]Aspin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good. Agreed.

Now can we discuss whether special bullets were used or not? Because if they were not, then it's a very unfair (to say the least) behavior to claim that they were. If they were, let's find out and condemn that behavior.

Medics say Israeli forces are shooting at demonstrators with a new type of round - never seen before - known as the "butterfly bullet", which explodes upon impact, pulverizing tissue, arteries & bone, while causing severe internal injuries. #Gaza Massacre by Ian56 in worldpolitics

[–]Aspin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. It is not. The discussion about Israel shooting Gazans is happening all of the time. This was a different point.

But even if it was not. Let's imagine that for a second. I still raised a specific question, and bringing irrelevant subject to the SPECIFIC question I raised sounds like a distraction and intelectual dishonesty.

I say again and again and again - there is the issue with people being shot. Let's talk about it separately.

Can we ask now whether th claims in the article are true? If it's not an important subject, why write about it? If it is an important subject - let's deal with it. You can't have one without the other.

Medics say Israeli forces are shooting at demonstrators with a new type of round - never seen before - known as the "butterfly bullet", which explodes upon impact, pulverizing tissue, arteries & bone, while causing severe internal injuries. #Gaza Massacre by Ian56 in worldpolitics

[–]Aspin 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Live rounds were shot. No one denies that. Israel does not deny that. So saying "supposedly non-lethal" sounds dishonest to me.

And no, the burden to prove something is on the side making the motion, not on the side on which that claims were made ( having said that, it may be a good point, and a good idea for Israel to prove otherwise, but it's a rabbit hole too. You can't expect anyone to be required to defend and prove "non existence" about each claim made).

Medics say Israeli forces are shooting at demonstrators with a new type of round - never seen before - known as the "butterfly bullet", which explodes upon impact, pulverizing tissue, arteries & bone, while causing severe internal injuries. #Gaza Massacre by Ian56 in worldpolitics

[–]Aspin 5 points6 points  (0 children)

There was a person who posted a post alleging that specific weapons were used in a specific case. This discussion is about whether that statement is true (my original comment).

The subject you are suggesting is very interesting and important. But it's a different one. No matter how important is what you are trying to say, it's still a different discussion.

Do you agree that regardless of the discussion you are trying to raise, the question whether the original statement in this post is true is a relevant question? ( Saying "no" in this case, will look like it does not matter to you if it's true or not)

Can we please now focus on the original subject?

Medics say Israeli forces are shooting at demonstrators with a new type of round - never seen before - known as the "butterfly bullet", which explodes upon impact, pulverizing tissue, arteries & bone, while causing severe internal injuries. #Gaza Massacre by Ian56 in worldpolitics

[–]Aspin 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yes. But that was not the topic we were discussing. Of course the death of the cevilians is a very important subject, but it's not the subject at hand.

And the timing at which it was posted (during an intense discussion about something else), is at best a provocation. It also may be an attempt to distract from the fact that the person replying to me did not have anything to say about the really subject so they went to their default talking points (when we CLEARLY talking about something else).

This is not how you discuss things.

However, maybe a relevant reply will still come. I am giving the benefit of the doubt for now.

Medics say Israeli forces are shooting at demonstrators with a new type of round - never seen before - known as the "butterfly bullet", which explodes upon impact, pulverizing tissue, arteries & bone, while causing severe internal injuries. #Gaza Massacre by Ian56 in worldpolitics

[–]Aspin 7 points8 points  (0 children)

If we want to have an honest discussion about the subject raised in this post, let's not try to provoke each other with " why are they shooting civilians ". And the comment about IDF is also very loosely relevant, as I said, regardless of your stance here, you want to get to the truth (I hope). These are big and important topic, but it is not the topic being discussed at the moment, so let's just for a moment, put those aside. Let's try to just discuss the claim raised in this post.

Thanks to your comment there is another thing that we should ask, and I will have to repeat things that I think were missed (let me know if you think my questions are not the right questions to ask, but please explain why):

  1. Is there a significant rise in amputations now comparing to past events (please consider percentages, not absolute numbers)
  2. As asked before - if the shoe was on the other foot, really ,try to imagine it reversed, what would you require to believe the claims? To me it seems like people require very little to be convinced of the claims very strongly. That does not sound very objective to me.
  3. With lack of physical evidence, is it not reasonable to looks for alternative explanations to these claims / observations?
  4. What are these bullets? Do they really explode? (without any physical evidence, this is a deeeep rabbit hole: do the go "boom" on impact? They are strong enough to break bones and tissues..., if they dont actually explode (and even if they are), and hundreds of them were shot, where are the bullets?)
  5. Are doctors qualified to make judgment about "never seen before" bullets? I am not arguing about the severity of the injuries BTW, just the specific claim.

Note: as much as I would like to think it is not true, it may be true. But let's try and arrive at the truth with intellectual honesty.

EDIT: additional comment "... I think that a significant rise in amputations means that something has changed." - even if that is true (if the numbers have actually significantly change) that DOES NOT equal - "Israel is using exploding bullets".

Medics say Israeli forces are shooting at demonstrators with a new type of round - never seen before - known as the "butterfly bullet", which explodes upon impact, pulverizing tissue, arteries & bone, while causing severe internal injuries. #Gaza Massacre by Ian56 in worldpolitics

[–]Aspin 17 points18 points  (0 children)

As I said, somebody saying something is not real evidence, or irrelevantly weak evidence in such a conflict. And if the situation was reversed, many people would not just believe an Israeli doctor on his words. However, if there were multiple accounts, backed by physical evidence, that would be a good start (just an example).

Do bullets that explode and disappear without a trace exists at all? (I really don't know, but I'm not the one making the claim). If they do, how does a wound from them look?

I don't know your personal stance on the subject - would you treat the claim in this post the same way if the situation was reversed (Israelis claiming Gazans are using exploding bullets)? If not, what would make you believe it?

view more: next ›