![]() |
Word
|
people say that, at this time, if you are heading eastbound on I-70 in Kansas or I-80 in Nebraska, and have out-of-state plates, the chances are outstanding that you will be pulled over for some minor unconfirmable infraction to see if you are hauling weed out of Colorado.
ordinary law-abidin' people say they were pulled over three times before they could get through Kansas |
My parents, both in their 80's can confirm UT's post. They drive out every year to ski and have been pulled over multiple times
while driving back. |
I-40 is a drug superhighway. I-10 is losing due to heavy enforcement. ANY E-W highway is a target nowadays.
|
I used to think all these political things were just a little weird with a mild interesting streak thrown in--at least it's not a viagra ad, right? Except now I see all of them as Russian tools to destabilize other countries' governments, and they make me nauseous.
|
2 Attachment(s)
Museum offers gold toilet to Trump instead of Van Gogh's work
Attachment 62991 Quote:
Quote:
Sorry about the above indelicacy, but sometimes these things just have to be said. Link |
If not Dali, the largest fraud ever foisted on the art world, Jackson Pollock. :rolleyes:
|
You know I'm going to get on my Pollock soapbox.
His work near-perfectly reproduces what scientists have determined is the most pleasing visual distribution of an image--something found in nature, for example, as a dense forest canopy. This wasn't by accident. Computer analysis of the visual distribution of his work shows a clear, unmistakable trend--he was fairly close, in his earlier works, to the perfect distribution; he steadily, empirically, improved over time; and once he was able to produce his most "pleasing to the human eye" images, he never wavered and never fell back down in effectiveness--there were no statistical outliers in this trend, it was methodically consistent. This was a purpose-driven result. He knew exactly what he wanted to do and he achieved it through persistent effort. Computer analysis of a Pollock work can accurately date at which period of his career he produced it, and determine with complete confidence if it is a forgery of a Pollock work--others are not able to produce the images he does, even when "copying" his work. Taste is subjective, but appreciation of a craftsman's facility and technique isn't an evaluation of taste. I don't think "fraud" is the correct word to describe someone who is literally, scientifically verified to have achieved a very specific, measurable result. |
I like Pollock's art. Draws you in. There's something primal about it, but also kind of delicate and organic.
|
Quote:
|
1 Attachment(s)
If you need a computer to tell you whether a painting is good or not, it's not art it's science.
The "experts" running around fawning about how great it is to drive up the prices(commissions) are fraudsters. |
Haggis!
1 Attachment(s)
Not so much weird as eminently sensible. :)
Attachment 63016 Quote:
Link. |
More comfortable than eating and then hurling. :vomit:
|
Haggis is better tossed than eaten.
|
Haggis is best eaten. With tatties and neeps.
Ftw. Food of the fucking gods, man. You can actually get some pretty decent vegetarian haggis these days too. Me, though, I prefer the real deal. [eta] mind you, y'all are probably against black pudding too. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:16 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.