KeoTV: Boks in Blacks’ dust

KeoTV: Boks in Blacks’ dust

MARK KEOHANE says there has to be drastic changes to the Springboks’ game plan if they hope to compete with and beat the All Blacks consistently.

 


452 Comments

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 » Show All

  • 301.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    @fitz1ella-297: Cayce… a scientist?? Come now… farken drank too much green fairy juice in his life… Only expert he was, was on absinthe and funny farken nightmares…

    Farken Carry on up the Tugela, wont you…. :wink:

  • 302.victoriabok: Reply to this comment

    @fitz1ella-268:

    > so IF you reckon you are human by some randomly selected fluke of nature.. you are WRONG .. you have EARNED the right to occupy this human frame.. but only insofar as you EARN the capacity to utilize it for the purpose it has been developed for or bestowed on you

    So Extrabollocks has earned the right to be a pr-ick?

  • 303.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    @SodaJoe-296: Beat me to it, sorry Soda,,,

    Hellsteeth, the funniest post for a long time…

  • 304.cab: Reply to this comment

    295 – Hello Joe , nice to see you

    how goes it in the mineapolis summer?

  • 305.SodaJoe: Reply to this comment

    @katman-300: Hows life in the Cape? Been cold it seems.

    Your little one must be getting big. Its a while since I have been on.

  • 306.katman: Reply to this comment

    Anyone want to escape the biblical evolutionary quantum molecular creationism potato potahto stuff for a while and have a good old belly wobble, check out this guy’s stuff on YouTube. It’s called Bad Lipreading, and he sticks nonsense voice-vers to (mostly Republican, but some others too) politicians in almost perfect sync. I almost wet myself. Check any of them out, they’re all fcken funny.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5i3F0YnkP0&feature=share
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BagYRDEFvy0&list=UU67f2Qf7FYhtoUIF4Sf29cA
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uE5xZKszXMQ&feature=relmfu
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igQlbesF0zA&feature=fvwrel
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcjet2MwUR0&feature=relmfu
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=js3BYcHmBhE&list=UU67f2Qf7FYhtoUIF4Sf29cA

  • 307.cab: Reply to this comment

    Rudolph Steiner ? Hoe? Of hoe even ?

  • 308.Jinx2: Reply to this comment

    @SodaJoe-292:

    I relate. One lives in blind hope. i was in Glasgow recently. Never been more scared in my life.

  • 309.fitz1ella: Reply to this comment

    According to modern science the earth is about 4.6 billion years old. The radiometric dating methods used by science assume that radioactivity began as soon as the earth formed and that the rate of radioactive decay has always been constant. Radioactivity is a sign of etherealization and began in earnest only about 4½ million years ago, at the midpoint of the earth’s life-cycle, and will accelerate as time goes on. Prior to that, the overall trend was towards the condensation of matter — the opposite of radioactivity. The first unicellular organisms are said to have appeared about 3.8 billion years ago, as soon as the young earth became habitable. If life evolved by accident, it is difficult to see how this could have happened so quickly, given the amazing complexity of organic molecules. For example:

    the protein histone-4 has essentially the same chain of l02 amino acids in all life-forms. If you had random shots at assembling this particular chain from a supply of individual amino acids to suit yourself — one shot for every atom in every star in every galaxy visible in the largest telescopes, your chance of successfully finding histone-4 would be like backing a horse at odds of 5 x 10132 (that is, 5 followed by 132 zeros) to 1 against, and histone-4 is just one of very many critical proteins.

    Theories of the origin of life tend to take for granted that there is such a thing as dead matter. From a materialistic standpoint, living organisms consist of one or more cells, but while cells are considered to be alive, the atoms of which they are composed are believed to be lifeless, and life is regarded as no more than a by-product of complex physicochemical processes. Reproduction is sometimes cited as one of the essential characteristics of life, yet viruses — regarded as alive — cannot reproduce by themselves, but only by taking over a host cell. Other properties of life are said to be complexity, metabolism, and interaction with the environment. But is there anything in nature which does not possess these properties? Even ‘fundamental’ subatomic particles, for example, far from being simple, structureless points, as most physicists believe them to be, may be just as complex in their own terms as a planet or sun, but their complexity may be obscured by the fact that they are so minuscule and live at such fantastic speeds compared to ourselves.

  • 310.SodaJoe: Reply to this comment

    @cab-304: Very nice actually Cab, if perhaps too hot. But I am not going to jinx a fukkenbastardcold winter on myself.

    We took a cruise on the Med this summer which was very nice.

    Malta – there’s an interesting place by the way.

  • 311.Jinx2: Reply to this comment

    Tomorrow would have been a perfect day for Coenie.

  • 312.katman: Reply to this comment

    @SodaJoe-305: A little wet and cold, yes. Apparently our wettest winter since about ’78. But today felt like spring is here, although I’m not counting my blossoms until they’ve opened.

    The little ones are two and a bit, and four. Although the 2 year old reckons she’s about 16. Knows it all. Keeps me entertained though.

    And on your side of the pond?

  • 313.cab: Reply to this comment

    Katman – can’t access that link – is it from the show : ‘the revolution will be televised’ – funniest **** I seen in a long time ?

  • 314.SodaJoe: Reply to this comment

    So I jump ship in Hong Kong and I make my way over to Tibet, and I get on as a looper at a course over in the Himalayas.

    A looper, you know, a caddy, a looper, a jock. So, I tell them I’m a pro jock, and who do you think they give me? The Dalai Lama, himself. Twelfth son of the Lama. The flowing robes, the grace, bald… striking. So, I’m on the first tee with him. I give him the driver. He hauls off and whacks one – big hitter, the Lama – long, into a ten-thousand foot crevasse, right at the base of this glacier. Do you know what the Lama says? Gunga galunga… gunga, gunga-lagunga. So we finish the eighteenth and he’s gonna stiff me. And I say, “Hey, Lama, hey, how about a little something, you know, for the effort, you know.” And he says, “Oh, uh, there won’t be any money, but when you die, on your deathbed, you will receive total consciousness.” So I got that goin’ for me, which is nice.

  • 315.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    @fitz1ella-309: Carry on up the Bosun…?

  • 316.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    @Heavens Game-315: or the Boson…

  • 317.SodaJoe: Reply to this comment

    @katman-312: Believe it or not – but we are empty nesters now. Both kids in college – one in NYC and the other in Seattle.

    Takes a bit of getting used to actually.

  • 318.cab: Reply to this comment

    Hey listen he can’t dangle that **** out there without expecting a response – Etherealusation – liewe fok asb tog.

  • 319.fitz1ella: Reply to this comment

    @victoriabok-302: pretty much it.. as you earn you reap.. ain’t that the common law of everything under the sun… pricks beget pricks and prats beget prats ..

    as you wanna be so you shall

  • 320.katman: Reply to this comment

    @cab-313: No, it’s about 6 different links to a guy/collective on YouTube by the name of BadLipReading. Just type that into the search bar and you’ll get all his stuff.

    He’s done movie dialogue (Twilight) and music vids (Black Eyed Peas) too, but his political speeches stuff is the funniest.

    He probably studies their lips with the sound down and writes (and then records) what it looks like to him. He then syncs it up, and the results are fcken hilarious.

  • 321.victoriabok: Reply to this comment

    @Heavens Game-315:

    Carry on up the Hadron Collider?

  • 322.SodaJoe: Reply to this comment

    Bye everyone. See you through the window. Go Boks.

  • 323.katman: Reply to this comment

    @SodaJoe-317: Ja, apparently that kinda sneaks up on you. For me it feels a lifetime away, but at some point I’ll be financing some little jalopy for him and setting her up in a university res room.

    You’ll need a hobby now. Do you play golf? I’m playing a round tomorrow with some mates – something I only do about three times a year now that I have the small ones.

  • 324.katman: Reply to this comment

    @SodaJoe-322: Ciao.

  • 325.cab: Reply to this comment

    310 Soda hehe yeah u a glutton for punishment on that lake in the winter – shoulda told me u were in the med – those cruises look nice.

    Dunno if u okes remember an Oke called Duiwel on here – well he was living around tge area where they just had murder of family in annecy all over Brit news – wonder if he’s close by – a whole family gunned down in car on frnch/Swiss Border – crazy world this.

  • 326.fitz1ella: Reply to this comment

    The expression employed by Science, ‘inorganic substance,’ means simply that the latent life slumbering in the molecules of so-called ‘inert matter’ is incognizable. ALL IS LIFE, and every atom of even mineral dust is a LIFE, though beyond our comprehension and perception . . .

    From one point of view, the distinguishing mark between what is called the organic and the inorganic is the function of nutrition, but if there were no nutrition how could those bodies which are called inorganic undergo change? Even crystals undergo a process of accretion, which for them answers the function of nutrition. In reality, everything which changes is organic; it has the life principle in it, and it has all the potentiality of higher evolved life.

    Life and consciousness are universal: everything is alive and conscious, though the degree of manifest life and consciousness varies widely. Physical matter is a crystallized, sleeping form of life-consciousness. More complex physical forms do not create life but merely allow a greater degree of inner vitality to be expressed through the physical form. If ‘inorganic’ matter seems to possess an innate tendency to self-organize into ‘organic’ forms, it is because of a creative impulse originating and acting from within outwards.

  • 327.katman: Reply to this comment

    @cab-325: That’s terrible man. Although that kind of sht happens too often here. A few days ago a family – dad and two girls – were shot in their driveway in Muldersdrift, west of Joburg, for a couple of cellphones. The 13 year old girl died on the scene, in front of her mom, and the dad is fighting for his life. You run out of stuff to say about that. It’s so sad.

  • 328.victoriabok: Reply to this comment

    @fitz1ella-319:

    Agreed

  • 329.fitz1ella: Reply to this comment

    The process of aging ultimately leads to death, but there is no known physical mechanism which controls this process. A physical organism functions as an integrated whole for as long as it is animated and held together by inner energy fields, composed of finer, nonphysical grades of substance. An organism is born with a certain store of vital energy and, after this energy has been expended, the inner entity withdraws for a period of rest and the physical body dies. Once the individual molecules are freed from the restraint imposed by this coordinating force, they become more active or full of life and go their separate ways, causing the body to decay.

    As far as the evolution of living organisms is concerned, the fossil record contradicts the Darwinian belief in a branching evolutionary tree, in which all creatures have descended in small steps from a primitive common ancestor. The tree of life is divided into different levels, beginning with kingdoms (the broadest group), followed by phyla, classes, orders, families, genera, and finally species (the twigs on the tree of life). But it is only at the lowest levels — genera and species — that significant fossil evidence of intermediate forms has been found, and even here the links are not nearly as gradual as required by Darwinian theory.

    It used to be claimed that there was a fairly complete sequence of fossils showing how the modern, one-toed horse had evolved from a horse the size of a dog, with four toes on the forefeet and three on the hindfeet. Even if this were true, it would merely show that a particular kind of creature can evolve into a similar kind of creature. Nowadays, however, it is generally admitted that this picture of straight-line evolution is far from accurate. Instead of gradual change, fossils of each intermediate species of horse appear fully formed, persist unchanged, and then become extinct, with no transitional forms. What’s more, three-toed and one-toed horses appear to have lived side by side. Horses and bears belong to different orders of mammals and supposedly descended from a common ancestor, yet there is no fossil evidence whatsoever of ancestral creatures that were part-bear, part-horse. This is just one of countless ‘missing links’, and the stock excuse that they are missing due to the imperfection of the fossil record is wearing increasingly thin.

  • 330.cab: Reply to this comment

    Tell u what u explain the link from organic to inorganic matter and u watchatuts would have acually discovered something hitherto unknown.

    So where does the law of entropy come from if everything has the power to self-organize? Go read about entropy.

  • 331.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    @fitz1ella-326: Hmmm… Cellular automatons…

    Conway’s Game of Life… a staple of Complexity and Chaos theory.

    Farken hogwash at the end of it all… They always forget the Deus ex Machina.

    Like the “Game” of evolution does too.

  • 332.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    Dead or alive

    Gliders, pulsars, blinkers and the whole bang chute…

    Yup… AI Crystals…

    Governed by rules…

    Who made the rules?

  • 333.cab: Reply to this comment

    Katman – yeah terrible stuff.

    Strange bladdy world – wrong place at wrong time and who knows.

  • 334.fitz1ella: Reply to this comment

    Far from being characterized by slow and steady progress, evolution on earth has been punctuated by mass extinctions and the sudden appearance of new species. The first multicellular organisms (or metazoans) appeared in the fossil record about 600 million years ago, according to conventional dating, but they are relatively few compared to the incredible proliferation of such organisms that occurred some 530 million years ago, in the early Cambrian. Since the ‘Cambrian explosion’ not a single new basic anatomical design (or phylum) has appeared in the animal world; in fact the number has declined from about 49 to 28, and the overall trend has been towards an increasing number of species based on fewer and fewer basic body plans. For instance, there are about a million species of insects alive today, but only three basic arthropod designs, compared with over twenty in the mid-Cambrian. The cause of the Cambrian explosion has not been satisfactorily explained by Darwinian theory and hence it cannot be concluded that life is linear in its evolutionary progression.

  • 335.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    @fitz1ella-334: Evolutionary progression is never linear, cuzzie…

    Sorry for you… I reckon this wiki you got is farked…

  • 336.cab: Reply to this comment

    Horsemanure – the cambrian was an explosion of life and the fossill record is puncuated (as it would be trying to find preseved remains 500mil years old) but it does have inttermefiare specimens – they recently found the link between the vis and the landlubber – but noaways they got DNA genetic tracing that is far more accurate and an additional source of evidence that gives credence to the theory – in contrast there is absolutely no evidence, zip, for the theory of evolution by intelligent design.

  • 337.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    Evolution by revolution… linear my left foot.

  • 338.cab: Reply to this comment

    331 and them automota are one explanation as to how order or laws might emerge from chaos.

  • 339.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    Evolution, revolution, chaos… and back again… cyclic steps.

    Governed by rules… Where do them rules come from…

    Are they just there?

    Did they just fall into place…

    How come them laws and rules didn’t evolve…?

  • 340.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    @cab-338: Ja, but automata need rules or conditions to exist…

  • 341.fitz1ella: Reply to this comment

    The purpose of evolution is the unfoldment of the latent faculties and capabilities, the slumbering potential, locked up in each specific embodiment, through the building of ever fitter vehicles for self-expression. Changes within a species take place in response to internal as well as environmental stimuli, and build up until they are able to burst into physical manifestation as a sudden ‘mutation’. When a new type of physical vehicle is required for a specific development, a suitable prototype is provided by the patterns from previous cycles of evolution stored in the earth’s memory field. On the other hand, if a particular species of plant or animal is no longer needed as a vehicle for evolutionary experience, their bodies are no longer embodied and it eventually dies out and becomes extinct. This process may be accelerated by environmental changes brought about by natural catastrophes such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and comet and asteroid impacts.

    The largest known extinction occurred at the end of the Permian period, some 245 million years ago (according to main stream scientific deduction), when 96 percent of marine species were wiped out. Another mass extinction took place at the end of the Cretaceous period and the beginning of the Tertiary (the K-T boundary), about 65 million years ago (according to main stream theorists); it wiped out half of all the genera of animals, and every species of animal weighing more than about 25 kilograms (55 pounds), including the dinosaurs. The most popular explanation is that the earth was struck by an asteroid or comet, generating a huge dust cloud which blocked out sunlight and led to the collapse of the food chain. However, the extinctions began many millions of years before the K-T boundary, and other scientists believe that the main causes were a long period of intense global volcanism, related climatic changes, and changes in sea-level or land elevation. Alternative theory believe that infection with lethal viruses was involved, since the extinctions were not confined to large animals but went all the way down to microorganisms, and occurred in every kind of habitat, including the bottom of the sea. Whatever its cause or causes, this extinction was followed by the rapid diversification and rise to dominance of the mammals.

  • 342.cab: Reply to this comment

    How many other universes are there? Do they have their own rules? Does everything that can happen, actually happen?

    But the only question that really supports a watchatutu perspective is:
    why something rather than nothing?

  • 343.TASSIES: Reply to this comment

    WOW. I think you guys are getting carried away with scientific intelect-fencing which sprints way above the greymatter of most folk on this site. Possible for a return to earth Major Tom?

  • 344.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    @Heavens Game-340: and these rules/conditions are the deus ex machina… an artificial device resolving the difficulties of this little game of life on its own steam…

    Them laws (whether for physics, evolution or cellular automata) are the artificial device, without which these things couldn’t happen…

    Little fingerprints of Zeus, Jupiter, Yahweh maybe…

  • 345.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    @cab-342: Do they? How can you know for sure…

    What we do know for sure are them laws and rules governing our our one… and we discovering new rules of the game of life in our little universe all the time…

  • 346.TASSIES: Reply to this comment

    Heaven forbit. And I thought I was exchanging a rational(and boring) chat with the handbrake with an irrational(and exciting) divergence of ideas amongst you lot. And all I got was a mindblowing invasion o f Nobel Prize for Physics wannabe’s fighting it out for blogspace. Spoilt my whole friday you have. Sies man

  • 347.cab: Reply to this comment

    Laws could evolve as you say – but the idea of many worlds is an alternative explanation to your questions that laws require a law-maker or a directing mind or a cosmic spookasem conscious or a god.

    But there is one thing that reason or plausability or science got no semblance of an answer for – hoekem iets nie niks?

  • 348.cab: Reply to this comment

    Apologies Tassies – gnight

    it won’t happen again.

  • 349.Heavens Game: Reply to this comment

    @cab-347: I think therefore I am? But what made me think?

    And what made iets…?

    Laws and rules enable iets…But what enables laws…?

    Many Universes?

    Or our own goddamn imaginations…?

  • 350.TASSIES: Reply to this comment

    I’ll leave you guys to your sparring. Off to catch up on my Plato.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 » Show All

Keo.co.za has always promoted uncensored views, but has never tolerated racist or crass outbursts. Come on guys and girls. If you can't moderate yourselves or each other then I am going to be forced to regulate the posts and enforce a registration process for comments. The choice is yours.

Have your say

You must be logged in to post a comment.