PDA

View Full Version : The Eclipse Is Racist Because It Fails To Affect Enough Black People



SarasotaRepub
08-21-2017, 12:13 PM
You can't make this shit up!!!! (http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/20/the-eclipse-is-racist-because-it-fails-to-affect-enough-black-people-the-atlantic-suggests/)


Eric Owens
(http://dailycaller.com/author/eric-owens/)Education Editor
(http://dailycaller.com/author/eric-owens/)
6:18 PM 08/20/2017



The Atlantic, a once-great magazine, has determined that the total eclipse of the sun due to occur on Monday will fail to affect enough black people.


The Atlantic’s very lengthy essay (https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/08/american-totality-eclipse-race/537318/#article-comments) on the failure of the eclipse to occur where a sufficient number of black people reside is entitled “American Blackout.” It clocks in at a remarkable 4,544 words and does not appear to be satire.


Concerning “the Great American Eclipse,” Brooklyn Law School professor Alice Ristroph (https://www.brooklaw.edu/faculty/directory/facultymember/biography?id=alice.ristroph) writes in the rapidly deteriorating magazine, “there live almost no black people” “along most of its path.”


The Atlantic’s longwinded law professor assures readers that “implicit bias of the solar system” is “presumably” not the cause of eclipse’s failure to affect enough black people.





Please tell me this is made up!!!

ralph wiggum
08-21-2017, 12:15 PM
Ridiculous. Heard about that last week, and couldn't stop laughing at the idiocy.

Banacek
08-21-2017, 12:43 PM
Stop watching the eclipse. It's racist.

If you want evidence that the American leftist cult has reached a point of fanatical unreason every bit as bad as the darkest of dark ages, here's a sentence from the Atlantic's piece on the eclipse.

On August 21, 2017, a total solar eclipse will arrive mid-morning on the coast of Oregon. It has been dubbed the Great American Eclipse, and along most of its path, there live almost no black people. Presumably, this is not explained by the implicit bias of the solar system.

Presumably.

We can't rule out the possibility entirely. It's presumably not the case. But you never know with white supremacy. It could be embedded in the very orbital trajectories of the solar system. We really need some intersectional astronomy to figure this one out.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/267635/atlantic-eclipse-racist-solar-system-has-implicit-daniel-greenfield

SVPete
08-21-2017, 12:50 PM
The Atlantic article by the Law prof is all too real. It's about what I've come to expect out of academia.

Zathras
08-21-2017, 05:33 PM
And these are the people that say those on the right ignore science?

hai
08-21-2017, 07:10 PM
I wonder though if the daily caller can be considered reputable.

I just read something about a white supremist writing articles for the site.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Caller#Articles_by_white_supremacist_Jas on_Kessler

ABC
08-21-2017, 09:20 PM
The Atlantic’s very lengthy essay on the failure of the eclipse to occur where a sufficient number of black people reside is entitled “American Blackout.” It clocks in at a remarkable 4,544 words and does not appear to be satire.

"Does not appear to be satire." huh? ... :rolleyes:

What absolute nonsense!

Perhaps this fool of a professor should take up the matter with his Creator. Oh right ...

Whatever am I thinking?

Rockntractor
08-21-2017, 09:33 PM
"Does not appear to be satire." huh? ... :rolleyes:

What absolute nonsense!

Perhaps this fool of a professor should take up the matter with his Creator. Oh right ...

Whatever am I thinking?
It is a she liberal who could use an introduction to Revlon, make up is your friend.

Retread
08-21-2017, 10:55 PM
From the comments:


I vaguely remember when The Atlantic wasn't a shrieking hive of retardation. It was in the 1990s. Ok, maybe the first half of the Bush admin, but that's probably it.

SVPete
08-22-2017, 09:37 AM
I wonder though if the daily caller can be considered reputable.

I just read something about a white supremist writing articles for the site.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Caller#Articles_by_white_supremacist_Jas on_Kessler

W'pedia appears to be talking of just one DC article having been written by Kessler, but I'll bite.

Ummmmm ... did you bother to do a very little rudimentary research about the Daily Caller? Like maybe go to the site? And click their "About Us" webpage? (http://dailycaller.com/about-us/)

Their "Co-Founder & Publisher" is Neil Patel. Not knowing how much you know about such things. I'll point out that Patel is a fairly common Indian family name. I'll leave to you to explain why a guy from India - or whose family is from India - would knowingly employ a white supremacist.for a man of Indian heritage.

Also on DC's Editorial Staff is Betsy Rothstein, "Media Columnist". I could be incorrect in her case, but the suffix "stein" is common among Jewish family names. So that raises more questions for you, hai. Why would a Jewish woman (or a woman married to a Jewish man) work with a white supremacist? And why would a white supremacist work with a Jewish woman?

On DC's Corporate Staff is Patrick Kuo, Infrastructure and Hosting Specialist. Again, not knowing how much you know about such things. I'll point out that Kuo is a fairly common Chinese family name. More of the same questions.

You need to understand your information sources, hai. When it comes to political matters and many historical matters, W'pedia is strongly biased liberal. In the MSM, which have gone full-lunatic-Prog, the term "white supremacist" is slung about carelessly, with substantial disregard for facts. Put it together and two things are clear: some W'pedia writer is trying to broom-paint The Daily Caller as racist; the racist label very obviously doesn't work, just based on their senior staff. Use W'pedia really carefully - if at all - regarding politically controversial people, ideas, and history.

As for Kessler, he's done some really odd ideological contortions. 5 or 7 years ago he was part of the Occupy movement and campaigned to reelect Obama. Whether he now is a raving racist or simply a "fisherman" who went odd places where he perceived "fish" might be found, I don't know and have no need to find out.

Retread
08-22-2017, 10:59 AM
Number one reason I don't do Wiki.....

SVPete
08-22-2017, 11:34 AM
W'pedia is a handy first reference for something not political, like basic specs on the USS Indianapolis (CA-35). For bio info on Bush or Trump? I wouldn't read much past their college years.

hai
08-23-2017, 12:42 AM
erm

http://www.snopes.com/eclipse-racist/

Rockntractor
08-23-2017, 12:43 AM
erm

http://www.snopes.com/eclipse-racist/
Snopes doesn't count it's an arm of the Democrat party.

Angry Old White Man
08-23-2017, 12:51 AM
Snopes doesn't count it's an arm of the Democrat party.


The husband wife team who own Snopes are card carrying democrats, true !

Rockntractor
08-23-2017, 12:55 AM
The husband wife team who own Snopes are card carrying democrats, true !
I have read that they divorced and their fighting may take down their little gig.

hai
08-23-2017, 12:56 AM
Is this true about this song?
http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/louie.asp

I have heard the song on a classic oldies station one time.

Rockntractor
08-23-2017, 01:11 AM
http://i.imgur.com/KtfjNR2.jpg

Rockntractor
08-23-2017, 01:12 AM
Is this true about this song?
http://www.snopes.com/music/songs/louie.asp

I have heard the song on a classic oldies station one time.
Snopes does okay on nonpolitical subjects.

SVPete
08-23-2017, 09:50 AM
erm

http://www.snopes.com/eclipse-racist/

Here's the Atlantic article, hai. (https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/08/american-totality-eclipse-race/537318/) The article and his author's moronicity are very real.

SVPete
08-23-2017, 10:10 AM
Snopes does okay on nonpolitical subjects.

As with W'pedia, one needs to understand sources' biases. Snopes' partisan and ideological biases are well known. If you're checking something political, they have to be taken with a block of salt. Outside of politics, they're probably OK.

At this point, I don't think ANY information source can be TRUSTED when it comes to politics. Sadly.