Live data from Hacker News

Art Bell Back in Time

podcasts.apple.com

71–80 of 91 posts

Re: Art Bell Back in Time

#71
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back in the 90s, my girlfriend and I would go out drinking and end the night in the back of her van listening to Art Bell and sobering up. The show I remember most was when a guy called saying he was flying into area 51 and Art was trying to talk him out of it.

Link to an MP3 of that call with the dude flying into Area 51: https://www.area51.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Man-tries-...

Username checks out...

Re: Art Bell Back in Time

#73
post #28
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back in the 90s, my girlfriend and I would go out drinking and end the night in the back of her van listening to Art Bell and sobering up. The show I remember most was when a guy called saying he was flying into area 51 and Art was trying to talk him out of it.

Yep that one and the just as chilling and lesser known one where the line gets mysteriously cutoff after some guy claims he discovered the secret to all phenomena being in the form of inter dimensional beings living amongst us.

What? Wondering if there's any more information about this...

Re: Art Bell Back in Time

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes shame is useful. Cigarettes are gross and unhealthy, not just for the user, but for the people around them. It is a costly habit, and most importantly, often leads to premature death. If anybody I care about smokes, you can bet your ass I'm shaming them. They shouldn't be doing it.

Only something like 10-15% of lifelong heavy smokers in the United States develop lung cancer. Something like 20-30% of all lung cancer comes from life-long non-smokers. Shame doesn't work in the way you think it does. Especially when the target of the shaming knows the reasons why they're being shamed. More likely you're just going to be traumatizing and pushing away your loved ones.

https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/lung/basic_info/risk_factors.htm :

> In the United States, cigarette smoking is linked to about 80% to 90% of lung cancer deaths.

> People who smoke cigarettes are 15 to 30 times more likely to get lung cancer or die from lung cancer than people who do not smoke.

> Cigarette smoking can cause cancer almost anywhere in the body. Cigarette smoking causes cancer of the mouth and throat, esophagus, stomach, colon, rectum, liver, pancreas, voicebox (larynx), trachea, bronchus, kidney and renal pelvis, urinary bladder, and cervix, and causes acute myeloid leukemia.

And https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/heal... :

> Smoking causes more deaths each year than... [HIV, illegal drug use, alcohol, automobile injuries, and firearms]

> Smoking causes about 90% (or 9 out of 10) of all lung cancer deaths.

> Smoking causes about 80% (or 8 out of 10) of all deaths from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

The second link includes a lovely list of other smoking-related health risks.

Re: Art Bell Back in Time

#75
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep that one and the just as chilling and lesser known one where the line gets mysteriously cutoff after some guy claims he discovered the secret to all phenomena being in the form of inter dimensional beings living amongst us.

What? Wondering if there's any more information about this...

look here (google search is getting scary good now) : https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/the-outer-limits-a-...

Re: Art Bell Back in Time

#76
Many drives across the country Art kept me awake. The more crazy and outrageous, the more alert I remained. Seemed like a feature I’m sure saved lives in the short term; and seemed, at the time, harmless in the long term.

Re: Art Bell Back in Time

#78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only something like 10-15% of lifelong heavy smokers in the United States develop lung cancer. Something like 20-30% of all lung cancer comes from life-long non-smokers. Shame doesn't work in the way you think it does. Especially when the target of the shaming knows the reasons why they're being shamed. More likely you're just going to be traumatizing and pushing away your loved ones.

https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/lung/basic_info/risk_factors.htm : > In the United States, cigarette smoking is linked to about 80% to 90% of lung cancer deaths. > People who smoke cigarettes are 15 to 30 times more likely to get lung cancer or die from lung cancer than people who do not smoke. > Cigarette smoking can cause cancer almost anywhere in the body. Cigarette smoking causes cancer of the mouth and throat, esopha…

That's not a direct response to "Only something like 10-15% of lifelong heavy smokers in the United States develop lung cancer." Instead it's a copy-pasted list of large numbers.

Jet ski riding causes 100% of jet ski accident deaths, but that tells me very little about the safety of riding a jet ski.

Not here to defend smoking, but to defend argument.

Re: Art Bell Back in Time

#79
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shaming single mothers or having a baby out of wedlock or shaming someone for being gay are great examples why you shouldn't shame people and why the practice should shamed out of existance.

I'm not going to speak to those particular examples, but shaming someone for a voluntary act, such as committing a crime, is very different from shaming someone for something they are and cannot control, like their race or their gender. Those why the latter are considered "protected classes" for the purpose of anti-discrimination laws.

That's a very common rubric, but also a very offensive one. The reason we should consider those protected classes (under particular circumstances) is because we have judged discrimination against them in areas of employment and housing to be both irrational and damaging (because limits on employment and housing are damaging.)

It's not because it's morally wrong to punish someone for being bad if they can't help being bad. That's why we allow people to plead not guilty for reason of insanity. People in protected classes aren't bad.

edit: this is the kind of thinking that leads people to desperately look for gay genes - because otherwise, they wouldn't be able to justify laws barring discrimination against gay people.

I relate it to modern child-worship: the belief that babies are born purely. without stain, and are thereby most deserving of life and happiness; but from the first moment of life the decisions that they make cover their souls with filth, gradually making them less deserving of life and happiness. Therefore, by applying this extreme Protestant reasoning to modern science, the things in your genes can't be judged because they were placed there by God. If you die because your sin literally turns your lungs black and diseased, the most important thing to do is condemn your corpse so no babies will follow your example.

Re: Art Bell Back in Time

#80
I'm in the UK, and I would listen to Art Bell recordings late night in the office (absolutely HAS to be listened to late at night!). I always loved the slightly lonely, ominous vibe it conjured up, and I'm delighted to hear other people describe the EXACT same thing! Reading some people's memories on here about listening while driving through the night desert in the South Western US - proper UFO country! That must have been super intense.
Post reply on HN