Print

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

[Nadaka]

Unfortunately what you call progress I see as the failed and bloodied dreams of the 20th century. So long as you are wrongly convinced "progress" lies with your side and the "dark ages" lie with my side, we will not be able to have a reasonable discussion.

Ok...

Tell me this. Name one crime that Obama has done to deserve impeachment. When Bush and Cheney funneled billions of dollars into corporations they owned while ignoring the legally mandated procurement procedure, instituted a policy of torture, secret spying on Americans in clear violation of the 4th amendment, fabricated an lie to use as an excuse for a war that killed thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of others, crashing the US economy, spending unprecedented amounts on waste and graft while slashing taxes on the few wealthy people who make a living fleecing and oppressing the rest of America for fun and profit didn't. Obamas only crimes have been to continue the policies of the previous administration.

[Nikov]

Yeah, I told you we couldn't have a reasonable discussion.

[Nadaka]

Yeah, I told you we couldn't have a reasonable discussion.

You can not have a reasonable discussion if you never put forward your position. It makes people think that you know that your position is to weak to stand up to the rigor of argument.

Unfortunately what you call progress I see as the failed and bloodied dreams of the 20th century.

BTW what does that mean? I will gladly share what I mean by "a new dark age".

[Nikov]

Your position is "why would you impeach Obama when all he's done is repeat a horrible distortion of the previous administration". This is irrational because it presumes wrongdoing from someone in the past excuses someone in the present from guilt if he does the same. Frankly I only have limited time and I won't be presenting my position to someone who's already declared his opposition is fascist neo-feudalist traitors who are your nation's enemies and who want to regress society to a new dark age.

[Nadaka]

Your position is "why would you impeach Obama when all he's done is repeat a horrible distortion of the previous administration". This is irrational because it presumes wrongdoing from someone in the past excuses someone in the present from guilt if he does the same. Frankly I only have limited time and I won't be presenting my position to someone who's already declared his opposition is fascist neo-feudalist traitors who are your nation's enemies and who want to regress society to a new dark age.

It doesn't excuse his inaction by failing to repeal the sins of the previous administration, and if I had my way Obama would be impeached for that and replaced with someone more willing to defend justice and ethical behavior. I would have also had Bush/Cheney impeached, given a fair trial and spend the rest of their life in prison. But that is not the reason anyone wants to impeach Obama, I have heard no rational arguement except he is a dirty nazi socialist liberal commie black*. Did you oppose and decry those crimes when they imposed their crimes on the American people by the previous administration?

*a synonym used for proprieties sake.

You want to impeach Obama and hate the "bloodied dreams of the 20th century", that is all I know about what you believe. In my experience the 20th century saw the right to vote extended to women and other "minorities", the freedom of speech, right to bare arms, freedom from unlawful search and seizure defended, an increase in social equality in nearly all forms and our nation expand to a become a world power with a handful of setbacks here and there. I would really like to know what your opposing opinion is.

I've been pretty vocal, but I have not explained all the reasons and details. So I can understand if you need me to explain anything that might confuse you.

[GlyphGryph]

one that present a challenge now that is quite far from intractable.

So when amphibians are gone (as in all amphibians... all of them... probably not long now) we'll be able to fix that?

I have absolutely no idea what that has to do with what you quoted, which was directly relevant only to energy and resources - humans will, I'm absolutely certain, figure out a way to innovate themselves into increased wealth and prosperity. By no means does that extend to other lifeforms! If there's sufficient incentive we find a way to replace amphibians (though nature will fill in that hole on her own soon enough, I'm sure), but no, there's certainly no guarantee we'd be able to fix that at all. It also has jack and shit to do with any of the things were discussing and which I was being optimistic about. Environmental preservation is one of those things thats going to be difficult and take a ton of political will and is by no means guaranteed. We're certainly, as a people, far more inclined to try than we ever have been in the past! (though that is more than counterbalanced by the amount of damage we are now able to cause inadvertently)

Basically - good job moving those goalposts, I guess? I don't mind conceding this point, especially since its irrelevant to the thread. You want to talk about environmental degradation issues, I really recommend you start a new one. I'd love to demand sources and argue with and probably agree with you about a lot of those issues!

Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, "This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!" This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for. 

Not sure if I understand the analogy, truth be told! Humanity doesn't seem a whole like like a puddle, we don't seem to be evaporating, we don't tend to think the world was made for us (rather, it seems more common that we have to go out of our way to build ourselves a place in it). So, uh... nice quote, I guess? Not sure what you're point is, though!

[Max White]

Not sure if I understand the analogy, truth be told! Humanity doesn't seem a whole like like a puddle, we don't seem to be evaporating, we don't tend to think the world was made for us (rather, it seems more common that we have to go out of our way to build ourselves a place in it). So, uh... nice quote, I guess? Not sure what you're point is, though!

Clearly you have never met one of those creationists who think that all their problems can be solved by praying...

[KaelGotDwarves]

Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, "This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!" This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for. 

Not sure if I understand the analogy, truth be told! Humanity doesn't seem a whole like like a puddle, we don't seem to be evaporating, we don't tend to think the world was made for us (rather, it seems more common that we have to go out of our way to build ourselves a place in it). So, uh... nice quote, I guess? Not sure what you're point is, though!

Your entire argument was that humanity can adapt and we'll find a way right before/or after fossil fuels run out or implying that we don't have to begin preparing for the future; we're governing ourselves rather poorly as moral beings while claiming to be "intelligent". It's always been a history of placing the burden on future generations.

All I'm saying is that blindly and haphazardly fucking our way into the future is what has got us into all these messes in the first place, and it does not look good for all of our futures.

[UltraValican]

Not sure if I understand the analogy, truth be told! Humanity doesn't seem a whole like like a puddle, we don't seem to be evaporating, we don't tend to think the world was made for us (rather, it seems more common that we have to go out of our way to build ourselves a place in it). So, uh... nice quote, I guess? Not sure what you're point is, though!

Clearly you have never met one of those creationists who think that all their problems can be solved by praying...

Im a evolutonary creationist and I don't think that
I worship a god that threw to kids ou into the wilderness, wihtout the knowledge of agriculture, In my opinion God expects us to fix out own sh*t.

[Max White]

Im a evolutonary creationist and I don't think that
I worship a god that threw to kids ou into the wilderness, wihtout the knowledge of agriculture, In my opinion God expects us to fix out own sh*t.

What?
They are very contrary terms. If you think the world started with 'to kids out to the wilderness' rather than a very primitive form of life that developed due to evolutionary pressure, I don't see the 'evolutonary' part.

[Agdune]

Not sure if I understand the analogy, truth be told! Humanity doesn't seem a whole like like a puddle, we don't seem to be evaporating, we don't tend to think the world was made for us (rather, it seems more common that we have to go out of our way to build ourselves a place in it). So, uh... nice quote, I guess? Not sure what you're point is, though!

It's pretty common responce to predictions and warnings of bad things happening in the future - the majority of people don't want to hear about it and dismiss warnings out of hand, because their life experience tells them that things have always gone pretty well, and will thus likely continue going pretty well and nothing anywhere near as bad as the warnings could possibly happen and upset their status quo too much.

It's just like the whole climate change debate in Australia - no matter how many organisations or studies are done (y'know, confirming and refining the doom-and-gloom predictions if no action is taken and all that), around a 3rd of the population refuse to listen and claim that it's all a conspiracy and panic-mongering. Just because there hasn't been a catastrophic climate shift caused by humans in our history, therefore there mustn't be any upcoming in the future! And even if there were, it 'certainly couldn't cause us any harm, because the world can't possibly be a place hostile to easy human life, it just doesn't work that way! It'll be liveable no matter what!'

[UltraValican]

Im a evolutonary creationist and I don't think that
I worship a god that threw to kids ou into the wilderness, wihtout the knowledge of agriculture, In my opinion God expects us to fix out own sh*t.

What?
They are very contrary terms. If you think the world started with 'to kids out to the wilderness' rather than a very primitive form of life that developed due to evolutionary pressure, I don't see the 'evolutonary' part.

I just figured seven days= shit ton of years., life develops, the big guy dose his thing.

[SalmonGod]

one that present a challenge now that is quite far from intractable.

So when amphibians are gone (as in all amphibians... all of them... probably not long now) we'll be able to fix that?

I have absolutely no idea what that has to do with what you quoted, which was directly relevant only to energy and resources - humans will, I'm absolutely certain, figure out a way to innovate themselves into increased wealth and prosperity. By no means does that extend to other lifeforms! If there's sufficient incentive we find a way to replace amphibians (though nature will fill in that hole on her own soon enough, I'm sure), but no, there's certainly no guarantee we'd be able to fix that at all. It also has jack and shit to do with any of the things were discussing and which I was being optimistic about. Environmental preservation is one of those things thats going to be difficult and take a ton of political will and is by no means guaranteed. We're certainly, as a people, far more inclined to try than we ever have been in the past! (though that is more than counterbalanced by the amount of damage we are now able to cause inadvertently)

I was pointing out that these issues are broader than simply meeting human demands, which I also believe is something Kael was trying to point out.  I'm not trying to turn this into an environmentalist thread, but I couldn't just let slide the idea that there's no other incentive to solve issues such as fossil fuel than the fact that they're going to run out.  I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but you're giving me the impression that you're the type that believes humanity exists somehow separately from nature.  We may not directly depend on amphibians for our survival, but their existence is tied to the stability of natural resources that we do depend on.

[GlyphGryph]

All I'm saying is that blindly and haphazardly fucking our way into the future is what has got us into all these messes in the first place, and it does not look good for all of our futures.

And what I'm saying is that history has given us a pretty good idea of what sorts of situations humanity is really really good at fixing and the sort they aren't.

Situations with huge potential profits for leading the way, plus severe and immediate potential threats from screwing up? (energy+resources) Coming up with technological solutions to overcome those problems, or modifying our environment to suit our behaviour?
We got that shit down. One could almost say we have it down to a science. And we are, honestly, EXTREMELY prepared for it. The technology has already been innovated, well in advance, and its just waiting for the right opportunity to jump out and take over. Oil running out would provide the last piece of the puzzle (huge potential profits) for other energy sources to take over. Of all the things we're screwing up, this is NOT one of the areas where we are operating blind. (and historically, blindly fucking our way into the future has been pretty damn good for us regardless! Shit is a ton better for us, personally, now, than it has been in the past, in a whole lot of ways. Even if we take a bunch of huge steps backwards, our flailing has gotten us into a surprisingly comfortable position) Fossil fuels running out is honestly one of the best things that could happen to us now, mostly because its one of the the easiest ways to make strides fixing...

The environmental stuff? That is something we don't have a great history with, and we've actually been getting much much better (but not fast enough). We've been exctinctioning animals as a hobby since before we discovered metal. The problem is, the threat is NOT immediate, NOT personal, and is difficult to fix by modifying our environment instead of our behaviour. If anything, this is the exact opposite of our many strong points, and I don't have a lot of optimism for our approach here, except that we've been doing better. Though as I said, not better enough.

[Phmcw]

Your position is "why would you impeach Obama when all he's done is repeat a horrible distortion of the previous administration". This is irrational because it presumes wrongdoing from someone in the past excuses someone in the present from guilt if he does the same. Frankly I only have limited time and I won't be presenting my position to someone who's already declared his opposition is fascist neo-feudalist traitors who are your nation's enemies and who want to regress society to a new dark age.

His question are three : why would you talk to impeach Obama when the senate is democrat? Why would you impeach Obama for respecting the constitution? Why would you want to impeach him when he's saving your country?

Answer that if you can.

Now of course he also think that the GOP is filled with sellouts and traitors, but that seems to me an evidence, because there no way that so many madmen made it into politics, and that the Dems are filled with sellouts and traitors, because he'd expect that a minimum of courage would be needed to succeed in politic as well.
(And frankly, did you ever see what the communication of the GOP is? Nadaka hasn't even begun to be offensive compared to that).