It’s a game of inches.
Anthony Ammirati failed the bar and the commentators are clearly having a hard time acknowledging what happened 😂 HELP I'M DYING pic.twitter.com/5hOHttVA5g
— Gladys Wotching (@Glodyswotcher) August 3, 2024
Pole vaulter loses a medal when he dislodges the bar with his dick
Sounds like something J.D Vance would do intentionally.
Wait. J.D. Vance has a dick? Then how do you explain the eye make-up?
I’d never noticed that. I’ve taken the full I.Q test and I’m one of the small number of people with a very high verbal I.Q and a very low spatial I.Q. (I took the test in 2010 and the verbal I.Q part has been separated into three sections since. The ‘spatial’ test component has also been renamed as ‘perceptual reasoning.)
People who score like this often have Asperger’s or other forms of high functioning autism. The gap between my two scores was 60 which according to the person who scored the test is higher than even anything he’d read about.
Anyway, the upshot is I not only often miss visual cues, I often don’t notice stuff like eyeliner.
One of my sons has the diametrically opposite profile. When he was tested in school, his verbal score was OK, maybe 90th percentile, but he wasn’t even assigned a score on the non-verbal portion. They just gave him a “H,” whatever that is supposed to mean. I think he broke the test. The weakness in his verbal aptitude is that he seems unable to comprehend any figurative language. So strange. When he was a kid we couldn’t speak to him using idioms, metaphors, nuance, etc. While he is brilliant at anything scientific (he has a doctorate and three masters degrees in three unrelated subjects that are also unrelated to his doctorate), he sometimes responds with a blank stare in response to any language that is not completely literal unless he has heard the expression before. Of course he can usually reason it out, but it’s not automatic as it would be for the rest of us. When you say, “Until the cows come home,” his mind is immediately filled with all the possibilities involving the locations and movement of cattle.
As you might guess, none of his degrees involve poetry.
That’s just the way his brain works.
The human brain is certainly complex and often opaque.
That’s also very likely a form of high functioning autism I can’t handle anything in physics that requires forming images in the mind.. Not totally the same as this, but I think that this is also very likely related to the idea of the ‘absent minded professor.’
So, not surprisingly, there are people who claim that Einstein was a high functioning autistic or had Asperger’s. As well as claims that Isaac Newton and Henry Cavendish were as well.
Obviously it’s in the interests of those who want to help young people with autism to show successful people who had autism and also obviously nobody can go back to test these people, so, who knows?
So…. he’s completely literal like Drax from Guardians of the Galaxy where his people do not understand the concept of metaphors?
You could have said that about him when he was a small boy, for sure. Over time he has come to understand that he can’t trust his initial instincts, and to think about what people are trying to say, rather than focusing on the exact words they use. The adult reality is that he has to make an effort to interpret what the rest of us can read instantaneously.
I can remember that when he was a boy he insisted that the wind could not blow up a canyon – only a massive explosion could do something like that. His older brother tried to explain patiently that the verb “to blow up” just happened to sound the same as the verb “to blow” followed by the preposition “up,” and that phrases could often have many meanings, which often provided for humor and literary tropes. No help. Their talk turned into an argument, since the younger boy just insisted multiple interpretations were a source of confusion, and their very existence should force people to choose their words more carefully.
He was not really wrong, but he definitely sees the world from a very different perspective, and it’s difficult to explain to a genius that he’s confused by something that is so easily processed by the rest of us. He’s used to it being the other way around!
The fictional character that reminds me the most of that son is not Drax, but Dr. Shaun Murphy. They are not identical, but there are distinct similarities. Is my son also on the spectrum? I think many would say so, although there was never such a formal diagnosis, and people were not then as attuned to autism as they are now. When a kid gets through school at the very top of every class, participates in extracurricular activities with other kids, and never causes any more trouble than any other kid, no parent ever calls a doctor for a diagnosis. Instead, they count their blessings. Mostly, my wife and I agreed with his older brother’s description of him as “strange and wonderful,” stressing the wonderful, and dealing with the strange as best we could.
Taking things literally – there’s more to it than meets the eye!
My difficulties arise from sensory processing differences rather than a lack of understanding.
‘Taking things literally’ is a trait or stereotype commonly associated with autism.
Also worth mentioning – I don’t know that you missed anything. The eyeliner thing is an internet meme, but the evidence seems flimsy.
By the way, I’m not sure I “get it.”
I have a dick and i vote!
Jockstrap anyone?
Looks like his knees and thighs hit first, his pole did’nt want to get left out.
Yeah, I think the legs started the bar wobbling, but the endowment definitely finished the job. Oh, what a terrible affliction…
He lost the pole vault because his pole was too big.
With my I.Q the way it is, I’m usually good at picking up word play, but I’m watching the 1992 NBC U.S Presidential election night broadcast and there is a Ford commercial that states “Have you driven a Ford lately? It’s more than just a question, it’s an answer.” WTF?
The term “it” is meant to be ambiguous. In this case, “it” doesn’t refer to the interrogative sentence itself. It refers to driving a Ford lately.
This was clearer in their print ads, which said things like, “How did Car and Driver find the answer to ‘What is this year’s best pickup?’ They drove a Ford lately.” (Larger font size: “Ford is the answer.”)
That’s not exact, I’m recalling that without research.
I guess most people read between the lines to realize they were just finding a fancy way to say “No matter what you’re looking for in a vehicle, “Ford” is the answer. They were trying to convey that message without abandoning their old stand-by, “Have you driven a Ford lately.”
I agree with you that it was probably “too much message” for a simple TV ad, but they were rebutting how wise-asses were responding to their slogan. “Yeah, I’ve driven a Ford lately. It sucked. The brakes gave out. Next question.”
Ah, thanks. I don’t remember that ad campaign at all.
The reason I’ve been watching this is because I re-watched The War Room yesterday. So, they’re obvious companion pieces.
While I imagine some viewers at the time were thinking ‘that damn establishment media!’ the most amusing thing for me in the broadcast, is Tom Brokaw’s frequent and gentle needling of Ross Perot (in the first hour.) For instance, as I’m sure you know about Main’s electoral college votes, Perot was competitive in Maine’s 2nd House District and Brokaw said about that “Perot spent $65 million of his own money on this campaign. He deserves something for it.”
He later quoted Perot saying to his supporters “Go vote, the bus is outside waiting to take you back to the insane asylum” You can certainly say that about Trump voters.
Looking back, I’m sure some people here would know better than me about this, but while I’m sure there was a kernel of truth, the painting of Perot as a paranoid lunatic probably was nothing more than a sensationalized media narrative. However, what was certainly correct about Perot is that he was basically a self made billionaire Chauncey Gardner spinning homilies.
James Carville in the War Room didn’t refer to Chauncey Gardner, but he did mock Perot’s homilies: “the deficit is like the crazy aunt in the basement, and we’re gonna go to the basement and beat some sense into her. We’re just gonna beat the crap out of her.”
I didn’t know Perot, but one of my employees, who later became my best friend, had worked for him. She told me that the consensus of his employees was that he was a cagey guy, certainly not nuts, but was so arrogant and narcissistic that he could never accept criticism or advice.
If correct, he was not that different from Elon Musk (or Trump, except for the “not nuts” part.)
Did she think the media deliberately tried to take him down, or did the media just find this narrative that he was a paranoid lunatic and ran with it. I’m increasingly of the view that the mainstream news media isn’t really left or right but just constantly looking for the next new sensational narrative that may or may not have much relationship; reality. And, I think this has been the case for many years. Of course, that’s not to say that there are no diligent reporters seeking the truth or no news reports that are as close to straight reporting as possible. The real problem occurs when the media engages in what they themselves used to refer to as a ‘feeding frenzy.’
I don’t remember our conversations distinctly enough to answer you.
I do remember that she didn’t like him, and that she was always happy to see the media shit on him for any reason, whether deserved or not. I’d bet that the media felt the same way she did: “We hate this guy. What can we do to diminish him?”
Despite the ongoing narrative from the mainstream media, that little rapscallion got twenty million Americans to vote for him, so he was makin’ sense to somebody!