Valsuelm

And in light of the last few posts: Reached #1 the world over in the summer of '85. I don' think there's ever been a bigger more successful collaboration in music.

So, I just watched the above video again for the who knows how many timeth, and was promptly inspired to break out my Live Aid DVDs. Thanks Keyrock. You changed the trajectory of my evening towards a much more rockin one than it likely otherwise would have been. On the Live Aid DvDs: can't recommend them enough. Sadly the video quality is lacking on many of the performances (it really wasn't mastered well), but the music quality is there on almost all of them. And there were many great performances at Live Aid. It's arguable that Live Aid was the pinnacle of live concert events so far in modern recorded history. While looking at the lineup a few moments ago while deciding which DvD I'd start listening to, it occurred to me that there's not enough U2 in this tread. So here: Also, not enough Madonna: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2LUnbH_0kw Really, get your hands on these DvDs. You will be glad you did. Youtube is missing a lot.

This is probably my favorite live performance of any band I've ever seen in a video. I remember seeing this on TV when I was younger. It was a huge event and Queen stole the show from some of the biggest names in the biz. Wish I'd been there. Magic this is. I can't name a best guitarist ever, a best band ever, a best drummer ever, and so on. I certainly have a short list for them all though. I can however name the best frontman ever: Freddie Mercury.

Pretty much this: Also, it's a sad thing that so many actually think there's been integrity in gaming journalism, at all. For the most part there hasn't been in well over a decade. The last time I read a good, impartial, intelligent review of a game by a website was for 'Mask of the Betrayer' back in '07-'08, and at the time I remember thinking that was the first good review I'd read in years. I sadly don't recall what website that was anymore, but it wasn't one of the biggies, nor was it completely off the mainstream radar. As some have said already in this thread: gaming went mainstream quite some time ago. It's been cool to be a 'geek' for a long time now. The 'eternal September' of the game industry happened before the 'eternal September' of the cell phone world, and that was way back in '02 or so. Good gaming journalism was always rare, even in the 80s, but it's been like the fabled Mokele-Mbembe since the late 90s.

While not directly related to Columbus Day, very much directly related to why Columbus Day is under fire: Edit: Oh yea... bonus points if anyone actually watches the above, does some research to enlighten themselves, and then can tell me how it indirectly debunks some of the credibility of 'Guns, Germs, and Steel.' (which is not in any way discussed in either video).

Alas, no.

Here's another picture of the same person that should make this much easier: Still nobody, eh? Okay, here's one more: Kicking myself for not placing him on the first two pics (yea, I'd seen the first before). He was the man!

I didn't attack his credentials as a scholar, I said his scholarship in 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' was ****ty. It is, even if for the sake of argument he's 100% correct. Perhaps you don't know what good scholarship is, and the fundamentals of writing a concise and well written history, science, or other work. But in regards to his credentials, you obviously hail from the number of folk who think that just because someone has a PhD after their name, or because they went to a prestigious school like Harvard or Cambridge, or because PBS went and made a documentary based on their work, that they know what they are talking about. Once upon a time I thought that way too. Then I went to college, met a lot of these people (know oodles to this day), and became disappointed and disillusioned with that illusion. People in universities by and large are not that smart, even at the most prestigious ones. If you think otherwise, you either never have been to one at length, or are one of the not that smart ones. Mr. Diamond and the subject at hand aside, there are more incompetent folks with PhDs in field X than there are competent ones, especially these days when they've lowered the standards of getting them, and on average widened the # of people that receive them (there are a number of reasons for this but the primary one is probably just plain old $$$). Just as if you walk into your average McDonalds or most other businesses there are generally more incompetent employees than competent ones. Same is true of both Harvard and Cambridge, two institutions I've spent quite some time at and know many from. I even dated a girl for years while she was going to both and has a PhD from the latter. And herein lies a fundamental problem so many on this forum, and so many throughout the modern world have. They buy into the hype, the prestige, the frankly: propaganda. They assume that people from these institutions know what they are talking about. Heck many think that these folks are the cream of the crop. On rare occasion this is true, just as it is true of many other areas of life and academia that don't have the well advertised prestige, but the norm is that it is not. Also, as most well read historians would tell you: The majority of the best and most informative history books/papers/etc are not done by even remotely famous people. This is also true of most scientific works.

I'd love for you to cite your reference for that one, because no.

Except it doesn't. It's a work that is very poorly cited, which is at the heart of the problem of the work. He makes assertions with zero evidence or citations, again and again in his book. If I'd have written a history paper in college, or even high school the way that book is written I'd have gotten a deserved F even if what I wrote was 100% correct. I realize the standards have slipped in the last decade or two (holy **** at what I've seen some AP history teachers let their kids get away with recently), but there's no good reason someone with the credentials and background as Diamond is writing so poorly. 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' appeals to the layman, appeals to some modern theories of genetics, fits a popular dialogue regarding plague, and other often misguided things. Read a bunch of history books on the subject prior to it's publication (as I did once upon a time) that actually do have good scholarship, citations,and much better discussions of the evidence known, and you'll realize that Diamond is grasping at straws much of the time in his work, especially when he's discussing the 'germs' aspect of it. And no, for the most part, the Europeans were not actively trying to spread disease, that's another myth. Especially smallpox, which is generally believed to be the biggest killer. Doing so could and would very possibly lead to suicide, as the Euros were not exactly immune to it themselves. And yes, Howard Zinn was a quack historian on par with Diamond. They both are cut from the same ****ty cloth.

To my knowledge, no one has stated either on this forum. Both assertions you make are gross exaggerations of what some have said about both things. Insofar as the Inca and 'genocide in the Americas'. I'll just say these two things. 1) If we accept that the 'Inca were decimated' by disease, brought by the Europeans, what does that have to do with the Navajo, Iroquois, Apache, Maya, and countless other tribes who did and didn't suffer serious bouts of disease to varying degrees? The inca are indeed the best general examples of plague in the New World after the Euros showed up. 2) The evidence that there is fairly overwhelmingly suggests that the Inca were in the midst of a plague and a civil war before the Europeans actually showed up (the Spanish really got lucky in their timing). The evidence further suggests that there were a series of devastating civil wars and widespread bits of death (unknown for sure causes) in the few centuries prior to Columbus ever setting sail for the 'New World'.

I hope you know that there's little to no evidence that Euro diseases wreaked near as much havoc as modern myth spearheaded by such popular historians as Jared Diamond would have people believe. Someone who really represents the worst of what's come out of the history corner of academia the last few decades. There's theory, some of which is plausible, much of which is not, but folks who push the 'Germs' aspect of what happened in the Americas post Europeans showing up tend to have about zero evidence to support their theory, and ignore all sorts of evidence that would refute it. Not to mention, when you get down to it, they're racist eugenicists who think that Europeans are genetically superior to those native to the Americas. Whether they acknowledge that or not, that's one of the things their theory is saying at the end of the day. However it is more than likely they didn't think that theory through and are not guilty of racism, just guilty of intellectual laziness on many levels, as on many levels this theory largely falls flat. But yes, even if those theories were true (something which would fly in the face of most of the evidence that there is the world over), calling it genocide is beyond ridiculous. 'Genocide' is a term that is far far overused and misapplied in all sorts of contexts these days, not just this one. To be clear, this is not to say for the uninformed that disease wasn't an issue for Europeans, Native Americans, et al back in the day, but it wasn't the genocidal widespread wiping out most of the population stuff that idiots like Diamond would have you believe. This myth is possibly the most widespread bit of hogwash revisionism to catch on in modern times.

That's up for debate. What did he contribute? Does it really rank higher than slavery and genocide? And I ask that in complete honesty. Slavery has been around since before recorded history, it's still around today. Columbus isn't guilty of genocide. You apparently aren't as well versed with what you think is propaganda as you think (though I'd say you're too well versed in it if you think Columbus is guilty of genocide), or you weren't paying enough attention in first grade when they filled you in on what Columbus did if you really have to ask what he contributed. And yes, what Columbus did does rank higher than slavery, especially in the context of the times and the effect his efforts had on the world over to this day. Few points and people in history loom as large as Columbus and what he did does.

They're coming up with excuses for their stupid policy; not denying whole events. Big Difference. The point is that they're concealing information American citizens have the right to know. If they're concealing this, you can't be confident in anything they say. Right? 'Oh she's just lying about how many times ****ed the other guy last week, oh and maybe for how long it's been going on or exactly how many other guys there are, but she's not covering it up completely that she's ****ing around on me. Oh, and she's not saying she's going to stop lying either, or even asking my forgiveness. Think I should forgive her? I do. I don't think she'll lie to me again. Why would she when I'm so loyal? Not my honey bunches of government agency with all her cute little experts. No no no! :)' Some of you guys are willing dupes.

The Fault in Our Stars was probably the best film I saw in theaters this year. With The Edge of Tomorrow and The Rover also being pretty good. Though, it's been a bad bad bad year in film. So much crud. As for Gone Girl.

I'm going to kick myself when I find out who this is. I know that face. In other news:

I'm going to temporarily turn this into a post apoc music thread, because, as it turns out, there's some really great end of the world songs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=068AFYvd58E

Hadn't seen that video in a looooong time. Duran Duran is in my regular music rotation though. Great band. Here's another great post apoc song:

I had to look up 'obola'. What fantasy land are you living in where the President can close off the USA from all travellers? Is it the same one where the US doesn't intervene of get involved in other countries. *ding ding ding* Hello in there. This is the World. As usual, you don't know what you're talking about. Just two examples: http://www.eturbonews.com/48315/us-travel-ban-israel-extended http://aids.about.com/od/healthytraveling/qt/travel_ban.htm Try doing a little research before you type/speak. You might post a lot less as a result, but you might actually become smarter in the process.

Restricting travel from nations with Ebola outbreaks is the no-brainer thing to do. Arguing otherwise is retarded, because as WoD points out: had it been done we wouldn't have any cases in the U.S. yet. Travel bans in the U.S. to and from other nations isn't anything new, and it's done for all sorts of lesser reasons (ie: infamously Cuba). It remains to be seen just how big a catastrophe or not it's going to be that we're not doing to obvious in this case.

Ha! I almost posted that one, but Ashley looking so nice in the Smoke vid enticed me to post the one I did instead. Here's another video of some hot Ashley, worth a watch even if you don't dig Bolton: And if you don't dig Bolton, here's this to make up for it: