Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Insectum7 wrote: I admit, every time I use multiple Drop Pods I can hear the tune "It's raining men!"
But on the original song it was clearly heterosexual, or possibly bisexual, men!
Spoiler:
While the original video (and oh yeah I watched the video before posting originally ) is hetero, I think it's widely recognized as a gay anthem. Also suspiciously it's a disco hit released in the 80s.
(or is that the joke? - it's hard to tell sometimes)
Somebody went through a lot of trouble to make that and I can only applaud them in my most secret place of my heart.
That somebody was Jim Holloway, a sci-fi/fantasy illustrator of popular gaming franchises such as D&D and Battletech. Somebody PDFd the original publication for the image, Dragon Magazine, 1994, here: https://annarchive.com/files/Drmg204.pdf Article includes new moves using Action Points in Space Hulk.
Xenomancers wrote: My personal opinion is they do not have genitalia - they are removed during the process. Other organs are inserted which serve more important purposes for a murder machine. Which is what a marine is.
Luciferian wrote: Come on, you've never seen a really good-looking lamp before?
Do you mean something like a flashlight? Or something very, very close to a flashlight, but just very slightly different? Like, one letter different?
Insectum7 wrote: (or is that the joke? - it's hard to tell sometimes)
Nope, just knew the video but not the context .
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
Did you saw that result and made the conclusion that men are evaluating lamps, mountains and loaf of bread as sexual partners, or did you saw that result and made the conclusion that it likely meant that this part of the brain was not only used for the evaluation of sexual partners, but also for a bunch of other things?
The conclusion wasn't my own, that's just how it was presented in the BBC documentary I was watching. The pictures of the objects were zoomed or cropped in such a way as to suggest that they vaguely resembled boobs, bums or "badger's dens," even though they quite obviously weren't any of those things. When similar objects were shown with all straight lines, right angles and no curves, the brain regions just sat quietly.
Xenomancers wrote: My personal opinion is they do not have genitalia - they are removed during the process. Other organs are inserted which serve more important purposes for a murder machine. Which is what a marine is.
What purpose would that even serve at all, nevermind it's been expressly confirmed to not be the case?
Lets see - they are a worthless - fragile heap of flesh for a "sterilized murder machine. Also - where is that confirmed? I think it was the 4th eddition space marine codex which had a detailed list of the process to become a space marine. It was something like 16 steps. Detailing removal of unneeded organs and implanting of superior astartes organs. It's like something out of Frankenstein.
Considering that Emperor's Gift makes a joke about space marine impotency as an Inquisitor is simultaneously impressed and disappointed when showering with a Grey Knight (who doesn't even understand the joke, somebody else has to explain it to him), they aren't sexually mauled in any manner beyond their own psychology. Furthermore no organs are removed in the production of a Marine, a Marine is solely made by adding transplant organs to the body with nothing removed. Removing the testicles in particular would be moronic as it would be removing the source of testosterone in the body, which is critical for the creation of a space marine in the first place. I would advise to re-read material instead of relying on fogged memories.
Xenomancers wrote: I would disagree that marines are an archetype. They might pull from some ideas of other "perfect warriors" through out literature and history but that just gives them character - the defining characteristic of space marines is that they are can no longer even be considered human. They are monsters - but these monsters fight for righteousness!
Space marines are literally just Imperial Knights from the Holy Roman Empire. The Free Imperial Knights were a group of knights established in the 14th century after multiple civil wars and bickering nobles changing sides constantly due to loyalties complicated by land ownership and the issue of feudal obligations. The Free Imperial Knights, unlike other Knights, held their land directly from the Holy Roman Emperor bar none other. Thus they owed fealty exclusively to the Emperor and obeyed no other authority, and would immediately assemble when called to war by him. Considering how much of 40k is just repainted Fantasy, I'd be shocked if GW wasn't familiar or purposefully copied the Free Knights from the HRE when establishing Space Marine lore.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/29 09:20:49
“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
Ginjitzu wrote: The conclusion wasn't my own, that's just how it was presented in the BBC documentary I was watching.
Oh, so it's just the stupid BBC messing up science and putting up stupid myth in the open for sensationalist purposes again, I guess.
Reminds me of this:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=18237
So to sum the story up as I understand it: The experiment shown in the documentary was a dramatization; the genuine color experiments done with the Himba, some years before, used a different sort of stimuli and a different experimental method; the stimuli shown in the documentary were modeled on those used by Paul Kay and others in experiments on other groups; but in all of the relevant experiments, the dependent measure was reaction time (in finding a matching color or an oddball color), not success or failure.
The BBC's presentation of the mocked-up experiment — purporting to show that the Himba are completely unable to distinguish blue and green shades that seem quite different to us, but can easily distinguish shades of green that seem identical to us — was apparently a journalistic fabrication, created by the documentary's editors after the fact, and was never asserted by the researchers themselves, much less demonstrated experimentally.
You'll find the stupid myth that Himba can't see green because they don't have a word for it plastered all over the internet because of just BAD reporting on the part of the BBC.
Screw the BBC. Unless I've read the actual research papers, or at least some vulgarization of it that I can trust, I will consider what they say to be junk.
[edit]Of course it's entirely on the BBC and not on you, please don't take it as an attack on you or anything [/edit]
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/29 11:14:34
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
Duskweaver wrote: We know that psychic blanks are incompatible with Astartes geneseed, so it is entirely possible that a certain strength of soul is required to make the process work.
Just coming back to this. There's a Grey Knights marine in the Emperor's Gift that's a Blank. Not just an Astartes, but a Grey Knight of Titan.
Who? That sounds wrong as GK are meant to be all psykers so having someone whose existence hurts them is weird.
I'm not sure where they got the part about him becoming a pariah. I don't recall that from the novel.
Having not yet read that novel, is he explicitly described as a 'Pariah' as in a psychic blank, or is he merely a 'pariah' as in metaphorically an 'outcast' because he's no longer part of a squad or brotherhood (or even in the original Tamil sense of a member of a caste devoted to a particular ritual role and therefore forced to live apart)?
A little bit of righteous anger now and then is good, actually. Don't trust a person who never gets angry.
Wyzilla wrote: He's not a blank, he's a weird reflective psyker who acts as a kind of psychic mirror.
Hyperion was the mirror psyker, not Phlegyras.
I have the Ebook version so took a quick look. The guys at lexi were right. He was a null (Phlegyras). I had forgotten all about it.
"The Inquisition made use of psychic nulls, mortals casting no soul-echo in the warp, as anathema to all psychic activity in their proximity. Such creatures were useful as weapons, in their own servile, incorruptible ways, but it took effort just to stand near the hollow man. I wondered how he was even alive, and what genetic aberration allowed him to be born.
Outwardly, he was one of us – his bulky physique was unarguably the result of Adeptus Astartes genetic enhancement – yet he stood unarmed and unarmoured, clad only in a patchwork grey robe that had clearly seen better years. Eyes of unremarkable blue watched each of us in turn before resting on the coffin we’d carried, until he lowered his shaved head in a nod of greeting.
‘Who speaks for the fallen?’
My revulsion got the better of me. ‘What are you?’ I asked.
‘Focus,’ Dumenidon hissed.
I cleared my throat, forcing myself to look at the figure. ‘Hyperion of Castian speaks for the fallen. Who bears our slain to the Dead Fields?’
‘Phlegyras of Titan will bear your slain to the Dead Fields."
And
"Even meeting his eyes made me want to spit, knowing there was no soul beyond them. Knowledge of my hatred’s irrationality was no salve against its heat"
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Astartes sexuality?
Well, simple. The marines are all gay. 100% gay. That's why there is no female space marine: no het, no bi marine, so noone wants to bring women into the chapter.
That's the only plausible explanation.
I knew it would only be a matter of time.
Back on topic, what IS it with nerd fandoms where people's thoughts eventually turn towards the genitalia of whatever fictional thing they follow? I'm dealing with this crap almost daily on the Transformers forums, I don't need that gak here.
Fembot threads can get frickin hilarious to be fair.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Ginjitzu wrote: The conclusion wasn't my own, that's just how it was presented in the BBC documentary I was watching.
Oh, so it's just the stupid BBC messing up science and putting up stupid myth in the open for sensationalist purposes again, I guess.
Reminds me of this:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=18237
So to sum the story up as I understand it: The experiment shown in the documentary was a dramatization; the genuine color experiments done with the Himba, some years before, used a different sort of stimuli and a different experimental method; the stimuli shown in the documentary were modeled on those used by Paul Kay and others in experiments on other groups; but in all of the relevant experiments, the dependent measure was reaction time (in finding a matching color or an oddball color), not success or failure.
The BBC's presentation of the mocked-up experiment — purporting to show that the Himba are completely unable to distinguish blue and green shades that seem quite different to us, but can easily distinguish shades of green that seem identical to us — was apparently a journalistic fabrication, created by the documentary's editors after the fact, and was never asserted by the researchers themselves, much less demonstrated experimentally.
You'll find the stupid myth that Himba can't see green because they don't have a word for it plastered all over the internet because of just BAD reporting on the part of the BBC.
Screw the BBC. Unless I've read the actual research papers, or at least some vulgarization of it that I can trust, I will consider what they say to be junk.
[edit]Of course it's entirely on the BBC and not on you, please don't take it as an attack on you or anything [/edit]
I had no idea the BBC had such a bad reputation for misreporting science. Considering they're beholden to the British public, rather than advertisers, actually led me to believe that they're probably more reliable than any other network. I guess sensationalism isn't relegated to commercial interests. Thank you for informing me.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Astartes sexuality?
Well, simple. The marines are all gay. 100% gay. That's why there is no female space marine: no het, no bi marine, so noone wants to bring women into the chapter.
That's the only plausible explanation.
I knew it would only be a matter of time.
Back on topic, what IS it with nerd fandoms where people's thoughts eventually turn towards the genitalia of whatever fictional thing they follow? I'm dealing with this crap almost daily on the Transformers forums, I don't need that gak here.
Fembot threads can get frickin hilarious to be fair.
Well, if you think I'm a bot there's not much I can do that 1. would convince you otherwise and 2. be worth the time to do so, but on the whole I've enjoyed reading about the marine creation process and gak so I'm happy
Edit: Aha, I've been informed that fembot means something different here than on some other forums I've been on. I apologize for my misunderstanding.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/11/30 05:17:19
"The sword can be anklebiter as well as throatcleaver. We need no new weapons to defeat the sons of the hydra, merely new doctrines."
-Joriah Stendall, second Chapter Master of the Red Grail Crusaders
Danielle Rae wrote: I was under the impression that, apart from the Space Wolves and post-heresy Slaaneshi types, Space Marines were essentially asexual.
Space Marines are frat bro jocks, so they are definitely not asexual. They're all gay and perverted.
The Space Wolves are definitely into bestiality. The "Imperial Fists" and "Crimson Fists" are self-explanatory.
Just Tony wrote: I'm dealing with this crap almost daily on the Transformers forums, I don't need that gak here.
Fembot threads can get frickin hilarious to be fair.
Well, if you think I'm a bot there's not much I can do that 1. would convince you otherwise and 2. be worth the time to do so, but on the whole I've enjoyed reading about the marine creation process and gak so I'm happy
Since Just Tony was talking about sex questions on Transformers forums, I don't think “fembot threads” are about you, unless you can somehow turn into a car or a truck.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ginjitzu wrote: I had no idea the BBC had such a bad reputation for misreporting science. Considering they're beholden to the British public, rather than advertisers, actually led me to believe that they're probably more reliable than any other network. I guess sensationalism isn't relegated to commercial interests. Thank you for informing me.
You are welcome, it was an unexpected disappointment for me too!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/30 05:10:36
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
Ginjitzu wrote: The conclusion wasn't my own, that's just how it was presented in the BBC documentary I was watching.
Oh, so it's just the stupid BBC messing up science and putting up stupid myth in the open for sensationalist purposes again, I guess.
Reminds me of this:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=18237
So to sum the story up as I understand it: The experiment shown in the documentary was a dramatization; the genuine color experiments done with the Himba, some years before, used a different sort of stimuli and a different experimental method; the stimuli shown in the documentary were modeled on those used by Paul Kay and others in experiments on other groups; but in all of the relevant experiments, the dependent measure was reaction time (in finding a matching color or an oddball color), not success or failure.
The BBC's presentation of the mocked-up experiment — purporting to show that the Himba are completely unable to distinguish blue and green shades that seem quite different to us, but can easily distinguish shades of green that seem identical to us — was apparently a journalistic fabrication, created by the documentary's editors after the fact, and was never asserted by the researchers themselves, much less demonstrated experimentally.
You'll find the stupid myth that Himba can't see green because they don't have a word for it plastered all over the internet because of just BAD reporting on the part of the BBC.
Screw the BBC. Unless I've read the actual research papers, or at least some vulgarization of it that I can trust, I will consider what they say to be junk.
[edit]Of course it's entirely on the BBC and not on you, please don't take it as an attack on you or anything [/edit]
I had no idea the BBC had such a bad reputation for misreporting science. Considering they're beholden to the British public, rather than advertisers, actually led me to believe that they're probably more reliable than any other network. I guess sensationalism isn't relegated to commercial interests. Thank you for informing me.
Science reporting is oft a tricky subject due to the hyperbolic nature of the news versus the rather slow crawl of learning that is science. News wants big headlines with big updates and great leaps forward, while in truth science moves like a snail in a slow reverse current of molasses. If you want to know what's what in any scientific related news, always read the study itself if you can obtain a copy, or search for a reputable summary/review by others in the same field as the paper's subject. The news is just going to tell you cancer is solved whenever somebody manages to reduce the proliferation of a specific tumor in a rat's bloodstream, hark about how the singularity is upon us whenever any kind of progress is made with drone AI that is about as intelligent as a cockroach, and claim that nuclear fusion is just twenty years away(tm). It could be the most reputable news organization in the world, but it's still not going to be terribly reliable compared to the source itself.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/30 07:16:31
“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance.”
Just Tony wrote: I'm dealing with this crap almost daily on the Transformers forums, I don't need that gak here.
Fembot threads can get frickin hilarious to be fair.
Well, if you think I'm a bot there's not much I can do that 1. would convince you otherwise and 2. be worth the time to do so, but on the whole I've enjoyed reading about the marine creation process and gak so I'm happy
Since Just Tony was talking about sex questions on Transformers forums, I don't think “fembot threads” are about you, unless you can somehow turn into a car or a truck.
Thank you for answering that correctly while I was away. Love you too.
Ginjitzu wrote: The conclusion wasn't my own, that's just how it was presented in the BBC documentary I was watching.
Oh, so it's just the stupid BBC messing up science and putting up stupid myth in the open for sensationalist purposes again, I guess.
Reminds me of this:
http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=18237
So to sum the story up as I understand it: The experiment shown in the documentary was a dramatization; the genuine color experiments done with the Himba, some years before, used a different sort of stimuli and a different experimental method; the stimuli shown in the documentary were modeled on those used by Paul Kay and others in experiments on other groups; but in all of the relevant experiments, the dependent measure was reaction time (in finding a matching color or an oddball color), not success or failure.
The BBC's presentation of the mocked-up experiment — purporting to show that the Himba are completely unable to distinguish blue and green shades that seem quite different to us, but can easily distinguish shades of green that seem identical to us — was apparently a journalistic fabrication, created by the documentary's editors after the fact, and was never asserted by the researchers themselves, much less demonstrated experimentally.
You'll find the stupid myth that Himba can't see green because they don't have a word for it plastered all over the internet because of just BAD reporting on the part of the BBC.
Screw the BBC. Unless I've read the actual research papers, or at least some vulgarization of it that I can trust, I will consider what they say to be junk.
[edit]Of course it's entirely on the BBC and not on you, please don't take it as an attack on you or anything [/edit]
I had no idea the BBC had such a bad reputation for misreporting science. Considering they're beholden to the British public, rather than advertisers, actually led me to believe that they're probably more reliable than any other network. I guess sensationalism isn't relegated to commercial interests. Thank you for informing me.
always read the study itself if you can obtain a copy, or search for a reputable summary/review by others in the same field as the paper's subject.
Most people simpley wont be able to read and understand even a simple paper.
) is hetero, I think it's widely recognized as a gay anthem. Also suspiciously it's a disco hit released in the 80s.
.
[/edit]
-- $k 
-- 9k 
-- 6k 
-- 4k 
-- 