Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Trekkin]

Max supports Nazism in marine life, pass it around.

Only because he wants to boast about how much he wants to punch a (Nazi) shark. He is a tough guy, you see.

[Dunamisdeos]

Max supports Nazism in marine life, pass it around.

Only because he wants to boast about how much he wants to punch a shark.

Max supports Nazism in marine life and wants to violently discriminate against Carcharodon carcharias by physically assaulting them. Pass it on.

[JoshuaFH]

Max supports Nazism in marine life, pass it around.

Those sharks are just caught up in The Wave.

[PTTG??]

Jesus Chris Max^TM, what happened to you? I know you're not a young earth creationist or an oil shill, so where did this global warming denialism come from? I mean, if you're saying Folly's obvious hyperbole is obviously hyperbole, well yeah, great contribution to the discussion. If you're saying that we don't face a huge threat from climate change, that it requires urgent response, then you're talking nonsense, and I know that's not you.

[Tack]

Thanks for the info guys. I know there was a little shutdown sometime in the Obama administration but I didn't know too much about it.
Now I know far more than I had expected.


Also to jump on the discussion because I'm an idiot: I'd happily use a boogeyman if it gets dumb people to act responsibly.
But the same power could be used by corrupt people to make dumb people stay controllable.
Is it 'better' if you're doing it for a good cause?

[Dunamisdeos]

I mean unless I am mistaken, I think he's saying that climate change is real and requires immediate attention, and also isn't going to result in the fucking forests literally ablaze with the hubris of man. Projections are showing serious, relatively severe, and detrimental changes, but not all of these end of all life on earth ultra-alarmist projections that get thrown around.
 
Also that many proponents of climate change seem to think that if you exaggerate the situation as much as possible you will somehow attract more support, whereas the opposite is actually true.
 
Realism ≠ Denialism, essentially.

[sluissa]

Thanks for the info guys. I know there was a little shutdown sometime in the Obama administration but I didn't know too much about it.
Now I know far more than I had expected.


Also to jump on the discussion because I'm an idiot: I'd happily use a boogeyman if it gets dumb people to act responsibly.
But the same power could be used by corrupt people to make dumb people stay controllable.
Is it 'better' if you're doing it for a good cause?

One thing to note is that the reason Trump has taken a lot of the blame for this, is that there WAS a budget passed by congress. It was temporary, would have only funded things through February, but would have avoided a shutdown at least until then. Trump said he'd sign it, and then at the last minute changed his mind and vetoed it. That was right before Christmas. Nothing got done. New year's passed. Democrats have the house, Republicans won't let a vote happen in the senate. Government still shut down.

The fact that a viable (even temporarily) budget, got all the way to Trump's desk and then he stopped it from happening is a big part of why he's being blamed for this one.

[Max™]

Max supports Nazism in marine life, pass it around.

Only because he wants to boast about how much he wants to punch a (Nazi) shark. He is a tough guy, you see.

No, I want to FEED nazi sharks by using them to torturously murder fat old white dudes, I like regular sharks and wouldn't want to force them to eat human garbage, and I regularly saw, rasp, or stab my fingers and only stop to check if I need a bandaid to avoid having to clean blood off my project, I've done it too often and it's annoying.

I've damn near built up an immunity to steel. I'm a tough man.

I mean unless I am mistaken, I think he's saying that climate change is real and requires immediate attention, and also isn't going to result in the fucking forests literally ablaze with the hubris of man. Projections are showing serious, relatively severe, and detrimental changes, but not all of these end of all life on earth ultra-alarmist projections that get thrown around.
 
Also that many proponents of climate change seem to think that if you exaggerate the situation as much as possible you will somehow attract more support, whereas the opposite is actually true.
 
Realism ≠ Denialism, essentially.

My personal take on what is happening with the climate isn't relevant to my point that blatant lies and misinformation is not something which should be used to try and scare people into supporting your cause, much less if your cause is supposed to involve doing science. Whether or not I agreed that this is bad and we should try to prevent it, I would have to disagree with lying to laypeople while acting as a scientist, it's literally their duty to explain where and how they might be wrong, and to regularly suggest checking their work.

Letting people run off with the idea that the most absurd interpretation of the most unrealistic model projections of what might happen in a few centuries as though it was currently an imminent threat is damned irresponsible.

[Gentlefish]

I'm going to go with location.

Yeah. The closer you get to either coast, the more likely you'll be accepted as an open atheist. Especially Westerly (once you get past the American Redoubt) since Cascadia seems to be a pretty ideal America right now.

[Max™]

Jesus Chris Max™, what happened to you? I know you're not a young earth creationist or an oil shill, so where did this global warming denialism come from? I mean, if you're saying Folly's obvious hyperbole is obviously hyperbole, well yeah, great contribution to the discussion. If you're saying that we don't face a huge threat from climate change, that it requires urgent response, then you're talking nonsense, and I know that's not you.

I take issue with the use of denialism, indeed to deny something implies a hard stance which I don't take: I doubt everything I can't rigourously define as true, and use various arrangements of useful-if-true assumptions and degrees of doubt to replace the sort of foundation which I assume others would fill with beliefs about reality. Gravity being the apparent result of spacetime warping in the vicinity of a massive object is useful if true, but I have no way to prove it is true, so it is accurate to say I do not believe in gravity, I just have no good reason to doubt it like I doubt the idea that there are pink talking dragons flying around us all the time.

I think lying to non-scientists is wrong, even if you think it's for a good cause, I think sticking your head in the sand because you don't like the politics of the people raising alarms is wrong, even if I agree that science shouldn't be politicized. I certainly don't like the politics of the "global warming is a myth" crowd either. In the interest of honesty I'll say that the only reason you haven't noticed I'm not on either side is because I forced myself to stop trying to fight any part of this issue because I have to accept that it is something many people believe, indeed it is something many people believe good people support, and trying to dismantle flawed portions of those beliefs with facts is never going to accomplish anything. Suffice to say I don't value beliefs and work to keep myself free of them so if you have something which you know is true but don't know why you know it is true or are unable to prove it is true, I don't share that belief with you.

Oh, if you hit ctrl+shift+u and type 2122 plus a space it does the unicode ™ symbol.

[Trekkin]

EDIT: Nope, not going to be that mean.

[hector13]

Oh, sick burn.

careful with that sawdust

[PTTG??]

Apparently prognosticators thought that the shutdown would end with DACA for the wall, but that's just the republicans building a crisis and then offering to stop it in exchange for other concessions. The old era democrats would have fallen for it.

[Baffler]

Apparently prognosticators thought that the shutdown would end with DACA for the wall, but that's just the republicans building a crisis and then offering to stop it in exchange for other concessions. The old era democrats would have fallen for it.

Old era Republicans would probably have fallen for the Dems' "give up all your leverage and then we'll negotiate" shtick too. I guess this is just where we are as a political entity.

[Frumple]

... man, I'm trying to figure out a way to read that that doesn't come across as kinda' fucking horrible. What exactly are you calling "leverage", here?