MattH

Members
  • Content count

    513
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

MattH last won the day on February 13 2015

MattH had the most liked content!

About MattH

  • Rank
    Filmmaker / regular forum member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. It's all a load of hot air. Read noise is all they need to measure.
  2. Umm, I'm not even American so I didn't vote for anyone in this election. Nor have I actually said anything positive about trump whatsoever. It seems to be that you have created a bogey man in your head, and seem keen to superimpose this bogey man of your own making on to other people willy nilly. When I said CNN narrative, I didn't mean CNN specifically. I meant the narrative specifically. CNN was just an example. The narrative on CNN is the same narrative peddled by the majority of the mainstream media in the US and in the UK. And no doubt Europe. Its a 100% biased narrative. Just as Fox news is biased one way. Every single other channel was 100% biased the other way. And you regurgitated the entire over the top and off-base narrative.
  3. I feel for you man. I'm all for criticising people where criticism is due. It's nonsense and blowing things out of proportion that irritate me. I think its interesting that you have basically regurgitated the whole CNN media narrative, proven by the fact that you have actually missed the one element that Trump should be criticised on more than any other: The fact that he supports waterboarding and 'stronger than waterboarding'. Of course the media stopped talking about that because it wasn't juicy enough to put in their headlines. The fact that he said that and you are whinging about what he said about his daughter: That tells me what I need to know.
  4. Thank you. You have in a way agreed to what I said, though you said it in such a way to try and save face. The fact that you accept there are other possible meanings for what he said disqualifies his comments from being declared an admission or confession. As an admission would have to be explicit. A confession would have to be an admission of all facts neccesary for conviction of a crime. As for the timing of the allegations. It is true that the timing has no bearing on whether the allegations are true or not. I didn't say that it did. What the timing has a great bearing on is whether people believe the allegation are true. It effects the believing, not the truth itself. It should also be noted for the record that an allegation existing also has no bearing on whether it is true or not.
  5. Firstly, surely you cant honestly be telling me the timing of these allegations (and the relevance of this timing) has eluded you? Can you? Not a peep for 69 years and then pumf, a few weeks before a presidential election they all emerge from no-where with their half assed tittle tattle stories. I feel sorry if one of them is telling the truth because this was the worst possible time to come out. This was an obvious last ditch attempt at mud slinging. Any fool can see that. And apart from with drama queens the mud hasn’t stuck. As for whether he has in fact ever committed such an act, I cant say, and neither can you. To be intellectually honest we must separate fact from opinion. With respect to the tape, We are not asking whether he has in fact commited such acts, We are not asking whether it is your opinion that he has committed such acts. We are asking whether he is admitting to doing so. And to be an admission it has to be explicit. Lets take the easiest first. The grabbing by the pussy comment. Could it be be admitting to actually grabbing a women by the crotch as soon as he meets them? It's possible. I cant say for sure it isn't. But could he mean something else? Please be honest with yourself. In my opinion it is highly unlikely that he would suddenly admit this in this situation. What it clearly is in my opinion is a ridiculous hypothetical. Imagine, for example, he had said “grab em by the pussy like scorpion from mortal combat”. Would that be an admission that he fires a grappling hook from his wrist in to womens groin. Or would you accept it as a ridiculous hypothetical. As for the “I don’t wait” comment. Where in that sentence does he make any reference to consent? Waiting, as far as I am aware, relates to time, not consent. Could he be saying that he kisses women immediately even if they don’t want to? Possibly. But could he also be saying that he just does't mess around going on dates, and he goes in for the kill at the earliest reasonable occasion? Any honest non drama queen would have to accept that he could be saying this also. He also could be bullshitting completely. That is another possibility. So I hope that you can concede that this notion that he admitted anything has been thoroughly debunked. As for my opinion of what he has done. Say we had a crystal ball and could watch his entire life and could bet on it. I would bet that on occasion he has been more forward with women then I ever would be. Probably kissed them when they were to embarrassed to shut him down. I doubt he has ever said “Can I kiss you?” or acquired written permission, but seriously, who has? Would I bet that he has ever forced himself on someone in any way more than this. No I wouldn’t. That is my hunch, which is as good as your hunch. But they are both hunches.
  6. Wow, you really have drunk the cool aid! Trump is no Florence Nightingale but "serial sex assaulter" and "white supremacist"? Come on man, you're making yourself look silly.
  7. The only issue I would take in how you phrase things is using the word "Western" or "US led". There is no more a coherent western position than there is a coherent Syrian position. By saying western it sounds to some that you are against 'western' liberalist values such as free speech etc, which I am sure is not the case. If you were to say "Globalist corporatist factions of the western establishment" or something along those lines, it would help avoid this misconception. The fact is that these factions are only getting away with this because the corporatist media are brain washing everyone. They exploit the fact that people understandably have suspision of dictatorial governments, but if the media were honest that western agencies where arming and militarily supporting wahabist islamists (the word extremist is obviously superfluous), and were honest about what these people represent, then more people in western countries would be opposed to it.
  8. I think I mostly agree. A well mannered discussion about a particular issue of government policy isn't of any harm. Its when people start spewing highly opinionated views on partisan politics like elections and referendums that things get messy. Particularly if the views are demeaning and incendiary like the cartoon in the opening post. Like many people I think that if I spent an hour talking face to face with any reasonable person that I could convince them that any opinion I have on politics is well reasoned and well thought out. But it is clearly impossible to do this with everybody, so I have to accept that there are millions of people whose opinions are different to mine and whose opinions I cannot change. The most prudent way of avoiding conflict with such people is to refrain from talking about such things in situations where they aren't relevant. Unfortunately but perhaps fittingly it seems to be the less thoughtful and the less prudent that are the most vocal. The issue is that when people feel the discussion from such people begin to snowball into a back patting session they feel more compelled to reveal their hand. People are free to do what they want of course, but I'd rather leave that stuff for youtube comments.
  9. You really should separate your business and your politics. It is a very foolish business decision to actively alienate up to half your audience/client base. Especially when you are mistaken, your judgement will be questioned. For the record, Britain is still in the EU, so no present economic situation can possibly be blamed on Britain having left the EU, because it hasn't happened yet.
  10. Clearly not a mathematics major!
  11. Looks cool, but is it any real use. All the shots from the actual device looked pointless. Looks more fun as just a novelty flying toy.
  12. For me it says it is private.
  13. In real terms though, you knew what you were buying when you bought it and you thought it was worth the money. It's the same camera that can do exactly the same thing whether or not a newer camera comes out. You aren't in anyway disadvantaged any more than if they hadn't brought it out. What you are asking is that sony innovate less in order to moddycoddle your irrational sense of camera inadequacy. Maybe they did have it ready when the 6300 came out, in which case its fair to say you wished it was released then, but maybe they threw it together after they'd taken a look at the competition. It that is the case, how would it disadvantage anyone releasing it as soon as its ready.
  14. My mistake. I will repost with correction: I cant see sony going 10 bit with 4k in stills cams. Not in the next 4 years, nevermind half a year. The FS5 doesnt even have 10bit 4k. Regardless of how long the GH5 will take I think the fact that it's comming is why sony have released this upgrade so soon. I mean lets face it, they could have waited another year and then called it the A6300 mkii.
  15. I cant see sony going 10 bit with 4k in stills cams. Not in the next 4 years, nevermind half a year. The FS7 doesnt even have 10bit 4k. Regardless of how long the GH5 will take I think the fact that it's comming is why sony have released this upgrade so soon. I mean lets face it, they could have waited another year and then called it the A6300 mkii.