57
   

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

 
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2019 08:08 pm
@McGentrix,
It's not white. It is a pretty pale and dull blue, but it is blue.
McGentrix
 
  2  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2019 08:15 pm
@oralloy,
I assure you, we are both wrong.

Quote:
The Journal of Vision, a scientific journal about vision research, announced in March 2015 that a special issue about the dress would be published with the title A Dress Rehearsal for Vision Science. Scientific work is ongoing. The first large-scale scientific study on the dress was published in Current Biology three months after the image went viral. The study, which involved 1,400 respondents, found that 57% saw the dress as blue and black; 30% saw it as white and gold; 11% saw it as blue and brown; and 10% could switch between any of the color combinations. A small number saw it as blue and gold. Women and older people disproportionately saw the dress as white and gold. The researchers further found that if the dress was shown in artificial yellow-colored lighting almost all respondents saw the dress as black and blue, while they saw it as white and gold if the simulated lighting had a blue bias. Another study in the Journal of Vision, by Pascal Wallisch, found that people who were early risers were more likely to think the dress was lit by natural light, perceiving it as white and gold, and that "night owls" saw the dress as blue and black.


I should also point out this part:
Quote:
A study carried out by Schlaffke et al. reported that individuals who saw the dress as white and gold showed increased activity in the frontal and parietal regions of the brain. These areas are thought to be critical in higher cognition activities.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2019 08:50 pm
@McGentrix,
The number of people who agree does not indicate correctness. I've stood my ground on facts in cases where everyone was against me before.

I determined the colors of the dress by finding the original picture (to ensure accuracy), and then taking samples of each color and looking at that color alone.

While tracking down the original picture, I came across this image. What it shows is the same thing that I found by sampling the colors individually from the original picture.

http://i.imgur.com/6RhLoni.jpg


If anyone else is interested in the original picture to sample the colors directly themselves, it is here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20150227014959/swiked.tumblr.com/post/112073818575/guys-please-help-me-is-this-dress-white-and
http://web.archive.org/web/20150228001230/swiked.tumblr.com/image/112073818575
http://web.archive.org/web/20150227230205/41.media.tumblr.com/a391a1b4b46dd6b498d379e50f96ecbc/tumblr_nkcjuq8Tdr1tnacy1o1_1280.jpg
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2019 10:10 pm
@oralloy,
On the other hand, it is possible that the camera did not capture the colors well, perhaps because of the lighting where the picture was taken.

Here are the color options from the actual dressmaker:

http://web.archive.org/web/20150703135018if_/romanoriginals.co.uk/content/ebiz/romanoriginals/invt/70931/70931bla_zoom0.jpghttp://web.archive.org/web/20150227141727if_/romanoriginals.co.uk/content/ebiz/romanoriginals/invt/70931/70931ivo_zoom0.jpghttp://web.archive.org/web/20150227212332if_/romanoriginals.co.uk/content/ebiz/romanoriginals/invt/70931/70931pin_zoom0.jpghttp://web.archive.org/web/20150227212400if_/romanoriginals.co.uk/content/ebiz/romanoriginals/invt/70931/70931rbl_zoom0.jpghttp://web.archive.org/web/20150227212427if_/romanoriginals.co.uk/content/ebiz/romanoriginals/invt/70931/70931sca_zoom0.jpg

http://web.archive.org/web/20150227152205/romanoriginals.co.uk/invt/70931

Clearly what appears gold in the picture is really supposed to be black.

I think we can exclude the "all black dress" and the "blood red dress".

It was either the "deep blue dress" under light that made the blue seem much paler, or the "white dress" or "salmon dress" under light that cast a blue tint on it.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2019 10:12 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:
Are you too dumb to know the goddam dress was designed and promoted to have ambiguous colors? It’s like you look at the optical illusion that appears as both a young and old lady and INSIST it’s a young lady. Do you understand how freaking daft that is?

It is interesting the way you concoct falsehoods and then proclaim that anyone who does not accept your falsehoods is dumb.

I bet you've had a lot of success using this technique against people with weak minds.
0 Replies
 
neptuneblue
 
  4  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2019 10:15 pm
Aw, men fighting over a dress.

Makes my heart just swoon.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2019 11:19 pm
@oralloy,
We get testy when rightists get stupid.
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Mon 23 Sep, 2019 11:28 pm
@MontereyJack,
It's funny that you characterize "pointing out facts and reality" as stupid.
0 Replies
 
Glennn
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 08:49 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
(In order to divert our attention that these weapon are copies of military rifles most used for urban assault.

No matter how many times anti-gun nuts have it pointed out to them, they still refuse to acknowledge the difference between style and function. They even use the word copy, but seem genuinely ignorant of just what that means.
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 09:04 am
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
Semi autos aren't popular with the majority either.

Semi-auto's make up over 80% of all firearms. Keep talking about things you don't understand.
farmerman
 
  5  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 09:11 am
@Glennn,
no ignorance except you deny and divert away from the real issue of large capacity and rapid fire. Even making the argument about pistol grips is incomplete.(Pistol grips are automatically designed as part of the rifle's bottom receivers ) . You wont hit a target at 400 yd with one of these .222's , as originally designed, the flip stock and short barrels make it easy for URBAN ASSAULT, not hunting feral hogs. A boar will run at you head down and you really want some firepower and distance between you and he. You could pop 6 .222's into one and youd just piss him off as he drives you into a tree.

I probably use guns more than all you gun nutz combined. Every time Im in the gas fields , Im worried about black bear boars, and when Im in the South Carolina gold fields Its feral (Hogzillas) all the way. I have a 45-70 and a 45 Sig . Only had to use the pig loads twice in the past and really one time was jut me being over cautious.
Ar-i5's are really a pussy gun for wannabe Rambos. I never hunt with one like some of these city guy boast.
MontereyJack
 
  4  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 09:17 am
@Baldimo,
I'm talking about the majority of the POPULATION, doofus, not gunbunnies. We're civilized, we can live perfectly happily without millions of guns and thousands of people with anger management issues walkiing around with them.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 09:25 am
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
I'm talking about the majority of the POPULATION, doofus, not gunbunnies.

The majority of the population have less of an understanding of the guns then you do, and you don't know **** about them.

Quote:
We're civilized, we can live perfectly happily without millions of guns and thousands of people with anger management issues walkiing around with them.

Sorry to tell you, but your side is not civilized, your side has more anger than the average person. Look at all the uncivilized protests that have been taking place in the last 2 years. The Dayton shooter was from your side of the aisle, that's why the media never talk about that shooters reasons for the shooting. They only highlight the El Paso shooter, because it fits the media narritive. I will also point out that one of the STEM shooters will be in court today, either the gay one or the trans one. Civilized you say?
0 Replies
 
Glennn
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 09:44 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
no ignorance except you deny and divert away from the real issue of large capacity and rapid fire.

Well then ban large-capacity magazines. And it seems that all of you anti-gun nuts want to believe that some semiautomatic guns fire faster than other semiautomatic guns. Of course, that's just part of the bullshit hysterics that come from the mind of the obsessed.

By the way, if you had your way, and AR-15s are banned, what is it about your thinking process that prevents you from considering the reality that anyone wanting to go on a shooting rampage would simply saw off the barrel of a different gun if they thought that's what it would take to accomplish their goal?

And then there's the ignorance of those like yourself who are obsessed with pistol grips. Why don't you produce the studies, or tests that were performed, which prove that a pistol grip increases the lethality of a rifle? In the meantime, I'll hunt down a list of the worst mass shootings between 1984 and 2017 so that we can see whether or not your obsession with semiautomatic rifles is justified.
RABEL222
 
  2  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 10:20 am
@MontereyJack,
I am in the 11% category. Blue and brown?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  5  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 10:49 am
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:
... all of you anti-gun nuts ...
I'm wondering now even more what qualifies to be an "anti-gun nut", especially, since farmerman doesn't hide his gun experiences and adventures.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 11:19 am
@Walter Hinteler,
An eagerness to violate people's civil liberties for no reason other than one's own entertainment, combined with an outright rejection of reality, would qualify someone I think.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 11:20 am
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
you deny and divert away from the real issue of large capacity and rapid fire.

That is incorrect. We are not the ones who are diverting away from the issue of large capacity magazines. That would be your compatriots on the left.

Given that you never complain when your fellow leftists divert away from the issue of large capacity magazines, you are complicit as well.

Rapidity of fire of the sort provided by semi-auto, pump-, and lever-action is necessary for self defense. It is also pretty useful in hunting when a quick follow-up shot is needed.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 11:24 am
@oralloy,
Thanks for responding in the name of Glenn
oralloy wrote:
We are not the ones
So you are the spokesperson not only of Glenn but a larger group - or do you use the pluralis majestatis?
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 24 Sep, 2019 11:30 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Thanks for responding in the name of Glenn

I responded in the name of Oralloy.


Walter Hinteler wrote:
So you are the spokesperson not only of Glenn but a larger group - or do you use the pluralis majestatis?

I merely point out facts and reality. The gun rights side are not responsible for everything always being about pistol grips.

That is entirely the fault of the people who always insist on trying to outlaw pistol grips. And the fault of their compatriots who refuse to confront them about this.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.24 seconds on 11/25/2024 at 10:23:13