444 réponses à ce sujet

[tractrpl]

medcsu wrote...

Let me ask you this. What exactly do you believe leads to a decline in a country because all you mentioned truthfully seem like personal issues you have dealt with. I am actually not trying to be offensive on that but that is simply how it looks. A decline in a country deals with considerably different things.

Garrus says "I always plan for the worst. There's always a small chance I'll be pleasantly surprised". I don't see how factoring the possibilities and recognizing the issues that could cause our country to decline or cause another country to supercede our own could be considered "unpatriotic". I consider it assessing and recognizing threats.

All the things I mention could easily lead to decline. The two most damaging thing is anti-intellectualism and the assumption that we don't need to do anything because we'll always be on top no matter what. Also, you seem to be in support of killing or kicking out people that vote for politicians differently than your do. This troubles me greatly.

Modifié par tractrpl, 28 avril 2012 - 05:23 .

[medcsu]

tractrpl wrote...

medcsu wrote...

Let me ask you this. What exactly do you believe leads to a decline in a country because all you mentioned truthfully seem like personal issues you have dealt with. I am actually not trying to be offensive on that but that is simply how it looks. A decline in a country deals with considerably different things.

Garrus says "I always plan for the worst. There's always a small chance I'll be pleasantly surprised". I don't see how factoring the possibilities and recognizing the issues that could cause our country to decline or cause another country to supercede our own could be considered "unpatriotic". I consider it assessing and recognizing threats.

All the things I mention could easily lead to decline. The two most damaging thing is anti-intellectualism and the assumption that we don't need to do anything because we'll always be on top no matter what. Also, you seem to be in support of killing or kicking out people that vote for politicians differently than your do. This troubles me greatly.

I do not agree with anti-intellectualism at all. The states are at the highest rate of college graduate/attendees in it's history. I realize there are pockets of morons that come down on "nerds", in HIGH SCHOOL, but that doesn't lead to the decline of a country in any manner. It simply leads hurt feelings. You consider this to be a threat to the nation? I see a threat to the nation as a stock market crash...or being invaded....but to each their own I guess...

What gave you the impression that I am for "killing" or "kicking people out" who vote differently than I do? I am so very much excited to read where you pulled this one out of. As I said earlier though, you claimed you wouldn't post again so it's extremely obvious you are just trolling since you are now pulling ridiculous things out of your asz. I will say, however, that I don't back down from what I think or feel, if I feel it I'll say it instead of masking my thoughts and pretending to be something I am not. Regardless, I can now see what all that "anti-intellectualism" treatment you dealt with did to you. Let's hear it though, let's hear where I said I advocate the ridiculous things you just stated.

[tractrpl]

medcsu wrote...

I do not agree with anti-intellectualism at all. The states are at the highest rate of college graduate/attendees in it's history. I realize there are pockets of morons that come down on "nerds", in HIGH SCHOOL, but that doesn't lead to the decline of a country in any manner. It simply leads hurt feelings. You consider this to be a threat to the nation? I see a threat to the nation as a stock market crash...or being invaded....but to each their own I guess...

What gave you the impression that I am for "killing" or "kicking people out" who vote differently than I do? I am so very much excited to read where you pulled this one out of. As I said earlier though, you claimed you wouldn't post again so it's extremely obvious you are just trolling since you are now pulling ridiculous things out of your asz. I will say, however, that I don't back down from what I think or feel, if I feel it I'll say it instead of masking my thoughts and pretending to be something I am not. Regardless, I can now see what all that "anti-intellectualism" treatment you dealt with did to you. Let's hear it though, let's hear where I said I advocate the ridiculous things you just stated.

First, the anti-intellectualism goes far beyond high school. First there's the mass rejection of evidence supported by roughly 97% of all scientists on both evolution and global warming, but roughly half the population disbelieves both. Either they distrust scientists (think they're under some massive conspiracy), or they think scientists don't know what they're talking about, or they just don't know. To me, the first two definitions fit anti-intellectualism. This scientific distrust has led to a decline in absolute science funding. As far as more Americans getting college degrees, they are increasing, but you need to look at what they're graduating IN. There's a distinct shortage of American engineering graduates. Only 15% of Ameicans graduate with technical degrees, one of the lowest among developed nations. Half of those graduates aren't even American. Even then, there's a shortage of Engineering graduates in the US. Let's face it, we're lazy. We complain about performing simple math. Then there's the beyond high school redneck platitudes about how "them math smart people not able to figure out how to tie their own shoes" or something. Besides autistic people, I haven't met any truly intelligent person (including scientists) that wasn't able to take care of themselves.

As far as the "agreeing with killing or kicking out people that voted for Obama comment" you walked yourself into that one. You supported those people instead of denouncing them. Those people haven't weighed evidence. They made assumptions regarding Obama based on his labels. They said this thing immediately after he was elected, so it has nothing at all to do with his track record, yet you defended them. The appropriate retort, if any, should have been "such talk is reprehensible, but is assuradely very rare" at which point I would point out that it's actually not. Defending such people is tantamount to defending their beliefs. If you ever hear someone say something like that, it is your duty to let them know that such talk is innappropriate and damaging IMO.

[medcsu]

tractrpl wrote...

medcsu wrote...

I do not agree with anti-intellectualism at all. The states are at the highest rate of college graduate/attendees in it's history. I realize there are pockets of morons that come down on "nerds", in HIGH SCHOOL, but that doesn't lead to the decline of a country in any manner. It simply leads hurt feelings. You consider this to be a threat to the nation? I see a threat to the nation as a stock market crash...or being invaded....but to each their own I guess...

What gave you the impression that I am for "killing" or "kicking people out" who vote differently than I do? I am so very much excited to read where you pulled this one out of. As I said earlier though, you claimed you wouldn't post again so it's extremely obvious you are just trolling since you are now pulling ridiculous things out of your asz. I will say, however, that I don't back down from what I think or feel, if I feel it I'll say it instead of masking my thoughts and pretending to be something I am not. Regardless, I can now see what all that "anti-intellectualism" treatment you dealt with did to you. Let's hear it though, let's hear where I said I advocate the ridiculous things you just stated.

First, the anti-intellectualism goes far beyond high school. First there's the mass rejection of evidence supported by roughly 97% of all scientists on both evolution and global warming, but roughly half the population disbelieves both. Either they distrust scientists (think they're under some massive conspiracy), or they think scientists don't know what they're talking about, or they just don't know. To me, the first two definitions fit anti-intellectualism. This scientific distrust has led to a decline in absolute science funding. As far as more Americans getting college degrees, they are increasing, but you need to look at what they're graduating IN. There's a distinct shortage of American engineering graduates. Only 15% of Ameicans graduate with technical degrees, one of the lowest among developed nations. Half of those graduates aren't even American. Even then, there's a shortage of Engineering graduates in the US. Let's face it, we're lazy. We complain about performing simple math. Then there's the beyond high school redneck platitudes about how "them math smart people not able to figure out how to tie their own shoes" or something. Besides autistic people, I haven't met any truly intelligent person (including scientists) that wasn't able to take care of themselves.

As far as the "agreeing with killing or kicking out people that voted for Obama comment" you walked yourself into that one. You supported those people instead of denouncing them. Those people haven't weighed evidence. They made assumptions regarding Obama based on his labels. They said this thing immediately after he was elected, so it has nothing at all to do with his track record, yet you defended them. The appropriate retort, if any, should have been "such talk is reprehensible, but is assuradely very rare" at which point I would point out that it's actually not. Defending such people is tantamount to defending their beliefs. If you ever hear someone say something like that, it is your duty to let them know that such talk is innappropriate and damaging IMO.

Show me the evidence from a primary source that shows that half of the population (roughly as you said) disbelieves both of what you posted.

As far as the Obama issue. So what you're saying is if one doesn't denounce something, that means they are on board with them? Well...I guess there is really no reason for you to put yourself into the intellectual category after that one, isn't there? I think Obama has been a trash President who has done not one single thing of value for this nation, yet....get ready for it.....I voted for him. Amazing concept isn't it? From your perspective you probably only thought blacks voted for Obama since, afterall, you advocate race warfare. Oh, see what I did there? You never denounced a race war so that must mean you advocate it, right?

As far as "the appropriate" retort. Says who? You? I think this same mind set happens in China doesn't it? Surprise, surprise....Again though (3rd time), didn't you say you wouldn't post again? You sure are a "man" of your word aren't you...

[mmm buddah23]

They could have made them all from Queens with NY accents, but then everybody would be to busy laughing their balls off to ply the game....or perhaps MR T would be more appropriate.

[mmm buddah23]

medcsu wrote...

tractrpl wrote...

medcsu wrote...

I do not agree with anti-intellectualism at all. The states are at the highest rate of college graduate/attendees in it's history. I realize there are pockets of morons that come down on "nerds", in HIGH SCHOOL, but that doesn't lead to the decline of a country in any manner. It simply leads hurt feelings. You consider this to be a threat to the nation? I see a threat to the nation as a stock market crash...or being invaded....but to each their own I guess...

What gave you the impression that I am for "killing" or "kicking people out" who vote differently than I do? I am so very much excited to read where you pulled this one out of. As I said earlier though, you claimed you wouldn't post again so it's extremely obvious you are just trolling since you are now pulling ridiculous things out of your asz. I will say, however, that I don't back down from what I think or feel, if I feel it I'll say it instead of masking my thoughts and pretending to be something I am not. Regardless, I can now see what all that "anti-intellectualism" treatment you dealt with did to you. Let's hear it though, let's hear where I said I advocate the ridiculous things you just stated.

First, the anti-intellectualism goes far beyond high school. First there's the mass rejection of evidence supported by roughly 97% of all scientists on both evolution and global warming, but roughly half the population disbelieves both. Either they distrust scientists (think they're under some massive conspiracy), or they think scientists don't know what they're talking about, or they just don't know. To me, the first two definitions fit anti-intellectualism. This scientific distrust has led to a decline in absolute science funding. As far as more Americans getting college degrees, they are increasing, but you need to look at what they're graduating IN. There's a distinct shortage of American engineering graduates. Only 15% of Ameicans graduate with technical degrees, one of the lowest among developed nations. Half of those graduates aren't even American. Even then, there's a shortage of Engineering graduates in the US. Let's face it, we're lazy. We complain about performing simple math. Then there's the beyond high school redneck platitudes about how "them math smart people not able to figure out how to tie their own shoes" or something. Besides autistic people, I haven't met any truly intelligent person (including scientists) that wasn't able to take care of themselves.

As far as the "agreeing with killing or kicking out people that voted for Obama comment" you walked yourself into that one. You supported those people instead of denouncing them. Those people haven't weighed evidence. They made assumptions regarding Obama based on his labels. They said this thing immediately after he was elected, so it has nothing at all to do with his track record, yet you defended them. The appropriate retort, if any, should have been "such talk is reprehensible, but is assuradely very rare" at which point I would point out that it's actually not. Defending such people is tantamount to defending their beliefs. If you ever hear someone say something like that, it is your duty to let them know that such talk is innappropriate and damaging IMO.

Show me the evidence from a primary source that shows that half of the population (roughly as you said) disbelieves both of what you posted.

As far as the Obama issue. So what you're saying is if one doesn't denounce something, that means they are on board with them? Well...I guess there is really no reason for you to put yourself into the intellectual category after that one, isn't there? I think Obama has been a trash President who has done not one single thing of value for this nation, yet....get ready for it.....I voted for him. Amazing concept isn't it? From your perspective you probably only thought blacks voted for Obama since, afterall, you advocate race warfare. Oh, see what I did there? You never denounced a race war so that must mean you advocate it, right?

As far as "the appropriate" retort. Says who? You? I think this same mind set happens in China doesn't it? Surprise, surprise....Again though (3rd time), didn't you say you wouldn't post again? You sure are a "man" of your word aren't you...

Oh yeah, that little thing called universal health care, that helps people with pre-existing conditions get insurance totally is OTHING, you have no idea what you are talking about, just STFU you are making yourself look like a complte ass. Before obama we would have to pay UNBELIEVABLE ammounts of money to get health care, IF the companies decided to give it to us, if not, well they pretty much just gave us the finger. Absolute idiot.

[Nefla]

mmm buddah23 wrote...

They could have made them all from Queens with NY accents, but then everybody would be to busy laughing their balls off to ply the game....or perhaps MR T would be more appropriate.

OMG if there was a DLC where everyone had this accent, I would buy it XD

[mmm buddah23]

Nefla wrote...

mmm buddah23 wrote...

They could have made them all from Queens with NY accents, but then everybody would be to busy laughing their balls off to ply the game....or perhaps MR T would be more appropriate.

OMG if there was a DLC where everyone had this accent, I would buy it XD

Completely off topic, my navigation system uses snoop dogg instead of the default voice, hahahaha. But yes, So would I, and shepard could be hulk hogan or randy savage O_O

[tractrpl]

medcsu wrote...

Show me the evidence from a primary source that shows that half of the population (roughly as you said) disbelieves both of what you posted.

Dear lord, I didn't think I'd have to produce evidence for something obvious. These are wikipedia links. You can say what you want about wikipedia, but these contain links to various polls which basically cooberate the statements here. Also, in the same place you can look into scientific consensus for both global warming, which runs between 90-99% on both. It basically depends on the questions asked in the poll and who they actually asked. Some asked anyone with a science or engineering degree, these people might not have done any research at all on the subject. When they asked actual bioligists (for evolution) or geologists (for global warming), the numbers approached more like 99%.

medcsu wrote...

As far as the Obama issue. So what you're saying is if one doesn't denounce something, that means they are on board with them? Well...I guess there is really no reason for you to put yourself into the intellectual category after that one, isn't there? I think Obama has been a trash President who has done not one single thing of value for this nation, yet....get ready for it.....I voted for him. Amazing concept isn't it? From your perspective you probably only thought blacks voted for Obama since, afterall, you advocate race warfare. Oh, see what I did there? You never denounced a race war so that must mean you advocate it, right? 

First of all, you're making assumptions again. You're assuming I agree with Obama on all policies or even in general. I do not (I do think he's a better choice than Romney, but that's kind of like asking which color explosion would you like). I do disagree very strongly with statements like the ones I describe and I think such attitudes are very damaging towars our country in general.

Do I think that not denouncing something equates to agreeing with it? Yes, I do. If someone seriously said something like that regarding race war I would denounce them if I was in earshot or saw it on the web. If someone said "Obama is the worst president ever cause he's a half-breed, and half-breed's are no good!", even if you don't like Obama, you should speak out against such things. 

Here's  a letter from Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau on the aquiescence by the government on the murder of Jews during WWII. Essentially he said that knowing that the Germans were killing so many Jews, yet consciously choosing to do nothing about it, is equivalent to actually killing them yourself. I agree with him 100%.

[Nefla]

mmm buddah23 wrote...

Nefla wrote...

mmm buddah23 wrote...

They could have made them all from Queens with NY accents, but then everybody would be to busy laughing their balls off to ply the game....or perhaps MR T would be more appropriate.

OMG if there was a DLC where everyone had this accent, I would buy it XD

Completely off topic, my navigation system uses snoop dogg instead of the default voice, hahahaha. But yes, So would I, and shepard could be hulk hogan or randy savage O_O

Especially if it's femshep

[mmm buddah23]

Nefla wrote...

mmm buddah23 wrote...

Nefla wrote...

mmm buddah23 wrote...

They could have made them all from Queens with NY accents, but then everybody would be to busy laughing their balls off to ply the game....or perhaps MR T would be more appropriate.

OMG if there was a DLC where everyone had this accent, I would buy it XD

Completely off topic, my navigation system uses snoop dogg instead of the default voice, hahahaha. But yes, So would I, and shepard could be hulk hogan or randy savage O_O

Especially if it's femshep

HAHAHAHA, they could change the pitch so it would be a really high pitched randy savage O_O

[medcsu]

mmm buddah23 wrote...

medcsu wrote...

tractrpl wrote...

medcsu wrote...

I do not agree with anti-intellectualism at all. The states are at the highest rate of college graduate/attendees in it's history. I realize there are pockets of morons that come down on "nerds", in HIGH SCHOOL, but that doesn't lead to the decline of a country in any manner. It simply leads hurt feelings. You consider this to be a threat to the nation? I see a threat to the nation as a stock market crash...or being invaded....but to each their own I guess...

What gave you the impression that I am for "killing" or "kicking people out" who vote differently than I do? I am so very much excited to read where you pulled this one out of. As I said earlier though, you claimed you wouldn't post again so it's extremely obvious you are just trolling since you are now pulling ridiculous things out of your asz. I will say, however, that I don't back down from what I think or feel, if I feel it I'll say it instead of masking my thoughts and pretending to be something I am not. Regardless, I can now see what all that "anti-intellectualism" treatment you dealt with did to you. Let's hear it though, let's hear where I said I advocate the ridiculous things you just stated.

First, the anti-intellectualism goes far beyond high school. First there's the mass rejection of evidence supported by roughly 97% of all scientists on both evolution and global warming, but roughly half the population disbelieves both. Either they distrust scientists (think they're under some massive conspiracy), or they think scientists don't know what they're talking about, or they just don't know. To me, the first two definitions fit anti-intellectualism. This scientific distrust has led to a decline in absolute science funding. As far as more Americans getting college degrees, they are increasing, but you need to look at what they're graduating IN. There's a distinct shortage of American engineering graduates. Only 15% of Ameicans graduate with technical degrees, one of the lowest among developed nations. Half of those graduates aren't even American. Even then, there's a shortage of Engineering graduates in the US. Let's face it, we're lazy. We complain about performing simple math. Then there's the beyond high school redneck platitudes about how "them math smart people not able to figure out how to tie their own shoes" or something. Besides autistic people, I haven't met any truly intelligent person (including scientists) that wasn't able to take care of themselves.

As far as the "agreeing with killing or kicking out people that voted for Obama comment" you walked yourself into that one. You supported those people instead of denouncing them. Those people haven't weighed evidence. They made assumptions regarding Obama based on his labels. They said this thing immediately after he was elected, so it has nothing at all to do with his track record, yet you defended them. The appropriate retort, if any, should have been "such talk is reprehensible, but is assuradely very rare" at which point I would point out that it's actually not. Defending such people is tantamount to defending their beliefs. If you ever hear someone say something like that, it is your duty to let them know that such talk is innappropriate and damaging IMO.

Show me the evidence from a primary source that shows that half of the population (roughly as you said) disbelieves both of what you posted.

As far as the Obama issue. So what you're saying is if one doesn't denounce something, that means they are on board with them? Well...I guess there is really no reason for you to put yourself into the intellectual category after that one, isn't there? I think Obama has been a trash President who has done not one single thing of value for this nation, yet....get ready for it.....I voted for him. Amazing concept isn't it? From your perspective you probably only thought blacks voted for Obama since, afterall, you advocate race warfare. Oh, see what I did there? You never denounced a race war so that must mean you advocate it, right?

As far as "the appropriate" retort. Says who? You? I think this same mind set happens in China doesn't it? Surprise, surprise....Again though (3rd time), didn't you say you wouldn't post again? You sure are a "man" of your word aren't you...

Oh yeah, that little thing called universal health care, that helps people with pre-existing conditions get insurance totally is OTHING, you have no idea what you are talking about, just STFU you are making yourself look like a complte ass. Before obama we would have to pay UNBELIEVABLE ammounts of money to get health care, IF the companies decided to give it to us, if not, well they pretty much just gave us the finger. Absolute idiot.

The same universal HC plan that wont see the light of day due to the amounts of legal suit against it? Besides, if it did in fact see the light of day who does it benefit really? I pay my medical insurance bills and frankly, can care less about someone who doesn't work or someone who is here illegally. That is the key issue. Half of the countries tax payers want nothing to do with paying into a system that, in a majority sense, helps those that wont help themselves and brings the states toward a socialist society. Have you even read the HC plan? Well I have, all 1000+ pages and I would suggest you do the same. People who work have utterly no problem getting and affording solid health care. I assume, from your statement, that you do not work and want things handed to you.

[medcsu]

tractrpl wrote...

medcsu wrote...

Show me the evidence from a primary source that shows that half of the population (roughly as you said) disbelieves both of what you posted.

Dear lord, I didn't think I'd have to produce evidence for something obvious. These are wikipedia links. You can say what you want about wikipedia, but these contain links to various polls which basically cooberate the statements here. Also, in the same place you can look into scientific consensus for both global warming, which runs between 90-99% on both. It basically depends on the questions asked in the poll and who they actually asked. Some asked anyone with a science or engineering degree, these people might not have done any research at all on the subject. When they asked actual bioligists (for evolution) or geologists (for global warming), the numbers approached more like 99%.

medcsu wrote...

As far as the Obama issue. So what you're saying is if one doesn't denounce something, that means they are on board with them? Well...I guess there is really no reason for you to put yourself into the intellectual category after that one, isn't there? I think Obama has been a trash President who has done not one single thing of value for this nation, yet....get ready for it.....I voted for him. Amazing concept isn't it? From your perspective you probably only thought blacks voted for Obama since, afterall, you advocate race warfare. Oh, see what I did there? You never denounced a race war so that must mean you advocate it, right? 

First of all, you're making assumptions again. You're assuming I agree with Obama on all policies or even in general. I do not (I do think he's a better choice than Romney, but that's kind of like asking which color explosion would you like). I do disagree very strongly with statements like the ones I describe and I think such attitudes are very damaging towars our country in general.

Do I think that not denouncing something equates to agreeing with it? Yes, I do. If someone seriously said something like that regarding race war I would denounce them if I was in earshot or saw it on the web. If someone said "Obama is the worst president ever cause he's a half-breed, and half-breed's are no good!", even if you don't like Obama, you should speak out against such things. 

Here's  a letter from Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau on the aquiescence by the government on the murder of Jews during WWII. Essentially he said that knowing that the Germans were killing so many Jews, yet consciously choosing to do nothing about it, is equivalent to actually killing them yourself. I agree with him 100%.

I asked for a primary source and you linked wikipedia. Thus I stopped reading the rest as it was then obvious what I am dealing with.

[Abraham_uk]

Can someone please tell me the ethinic origins of each of the human squadmates?
Are they all confirmed?

Admiral David Anderson (British maybe? He was born in London)
Jenkins (the first human to die in a Mass Effect game)
Wilson (that Cerberus guy who gets killed by Miranda)
Dr Kensun (I honestly have no idea. She's from Arrival DLC)
Ashley Williams (Mexican?)
Kaidan Alenko (Canadian and part Indian)
Jacob Taylor (I honestly haven't a clue. American?)
Miranda Lawson (Australian, possibly part Eastern European given voice actress name)
Zaeed Massani (British, Italian and a bit of Middle Eastern)
Jack (Honestly don't know. American?)
Kasumi Goto (American/Japanese)
James Vega (Definitely Mexican. Possibly a bit of American too)

[Sicarius07]

Zaeed is an Arabic name. It means, one who exceeds.

[Abraham_uk]

Sicarius07 wrote...

Zaeed is an Arabic name. It means, one who exceeds.

That is a hell of a name!

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 28 avril 2012 - 08:11 .

[tractrpl]

medcsu wrote...

I asked for a primary source and you linked wikipedia. Thus I stopped reading the rest as it was then obvious what I am dealing with.

Are you really going to have me waste time providing original sources when you're completely capable of finding them yourself (since the wikipedia article produced links)? Do I need to check out hard copies of research from a university and physically hand them to you? Or do you need me to take you to the researcher in question to physically inspect his qualifications and equipment yourself? Where does it stop?

Here you go.

Public support for/against evolution in the US:
article 1
article 2

Public support for/against global warming
article 1
article 2
Note: A more recent poll done in March of this year shows that 61% of Americans now believe that global warming is real, a huge jump. This is probably due to the fact that this spring is much warmer than usual. In other words, they won't believe the evidence until it hits them in the face.

Now that I've produced originals could are you happy now?

Modifié par tractrpl, 28 avril 2012 - 08:13 .

[tractrpl]

One of those articles shows public support for climate change dropping from 70% all the way down to 57%. There was no drop in scientific support. This is only explained by political campaigning.

[Danielsun2]

I liked that part where Britain and Scotland are two seperate nations lol

[Abraham_uk]

Danielsun2 wrote...

I liked that part where Britain and Scotland are two seperate nations lol

They will be pretty soon. There is going to be a referendum on this.

Anyway, back to the thread! I digress. I think the fact that they have western names is simple. Bioware is Canadian.  There we go. Explained.

If you want a game where heroes are Japanese then play a ... Oh wait. How come Japanese video games have western heroes. Japanese people look badass! Why aren't they represented in their games?

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 28 avril 2012 - 08:26 .

[tractrpl]

Abraham_uk wrote...

Danielsun2 wrote...

I liked that part where Britain and Scotland are two seperate nations lol

They will be pretty soon. There is going to be a referendum on this.

I personally think that's a bad idea. That's kind of like the South splitting from the US because southerners are of a different culture slightly. This did happen, tragic results, would not like a repeat.

[Irishfafnir]

tractrpl wrote...

medcsu wrote...

Show me the evidence from a primary source that shows that half of the population (roughly as you said) disbelieves both of what you posted.

Dear lord, I didn't think I'd have to produce evidence for something obvious. These are wikipedia links. You can say what you want about wikipedia, but these contain links to various polls which basically cooberate the statements here. Also, in the same place you can look into scientific consensus for both global warming, which runs between 90-99% on both. It basically depends on the questions asked in the poll and who they actually asked. Some asked anyone with a science or engineering degree, these people might not have done any research at all on the subject. When they asked actual bioligists (for evolution) or geologists (for global warming), the numbers approached more like 99%.

medcsu wrote...

As far as the Obama issue. So what you're saying is if one doesn't denounce something, that means they are on board with them? Well...I guess there is really no reason for you to put yourself into the intellectual category after that one, isn't there? I think Obama has been a trash President who has done not one single thing of value for this nation, yet....get ready for it.....I voted for him. Amazing concept isn't it? From your perspective you probably only thought blacks voted for Obama since, afterall, you advocate race warfare. Oh, see what I did there? You never denounced a race war so that must mean you advocate it, right? 

First of all, you're making assumptions again. You're assuming I agree with Obama on all policies or even in general. I do not (I do think he's a better choice than Romney, but that's kind of like asking which color explosion would you like). I do disagree very strongly with statements like the ones I describe and I think such attitudes are very damaging towars our country in general.

Do I think that not denouncing something equates to agreeing with it? Yes, I do. If someone seriously said something like that regarding race war I would denounce them if I was in earshot or saw it on the web. If someone said "Obama is the worst president ever cause he's a half-breed, and half-breed's are no good!", even if you don't like Obama, you should speak out against such things. 

Here's  a letter from Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau on the aquiescence by the government on the murder of Jews during WWII. Essentially he said that knowing that the Germans were killing so many Jews, yet consciously choosing to do nothing about it, is equivalent to actually killing them yourself. I agree with him 100%.

Theres a big difference between choosing to do nothing about, and not being able to do anything about it. Most of the concentration camps were located in Eastern Europe there wasn't anything Allied forces could do in the short term . Not to mention according to his letter the earliest the Allies even knew anything about the killing of the JEws was December 1942. We would have been busy in North africa at the time. It sucks for the jews but to suggest that the American government could have done anything meaningful is assinaie.

I also do not understand your race comments, racists in this country are politically ostricized the chances of them ever coming to political power at a national level are nonexistant. 

Modifié par Irishfafnir, 28 avril 2012 - 09:03 .

[Irishfafnir]

tractrpl wrote...

Abraham_uk wrote...

Danielsun2 wrote...

I liked that part where Britain and Scotland are two seperate nations lol

They will be pretty soon. There is going to be a referendum on this.

I personally think that's a bad idea. That's kind of like the South splitting from the US because southerners are of a different culture slightly. This did happen, tragic results, would not like a repeat.

No there is a big difference Scotland was an Independent nation until the 18th century. Secondly I doubt it is going to happen as most economists predict it would be devasting to the Sottish economy. 3rd Britian would probably let them go peacefully, and most of the speeches I have seen by Scottish PMS have said they would want some kind of economic union with GB

[tractrpl]

Irishfafnir wrote...

Theres a big difference between choosing to do nothing about, and not being able to do anything about it. Most of the concentration camps were located in Eastern Europe there wasn't anything Allied forces could do in the short term . 

Please read the article. This was written by the secretary in January of 1944. What he's talking about is not just about the death camps, although knowledge of the death camps was already established long before this  time. What he's talking about is missed opportunities the government had to rescue Jewish refugees from the clutches of the N*zis. These efforts were blocked by presumably anti-semitic members of the administration. Please read. It's a historical document, not some recent political machination.

Modifié par tractrpl, 28 avril 2012 - 09:32 .

[tractrpl]

Actually, it's more than just missed opportunities, he's talking about how there were opportunities to rescue Jews, and certain members of the government actively did whatever they could to sabotage any rescue attempts.

Edit: this is off-topic. The point is that Morgenthau saw people had the opportunity to rescue people from death. Those people either chose not to help them or actively prevented any attempted rescue. In his opinion, that's the same as actually killing the person yourself. My point is tied to his remark. If you witness someone do or say something morally wrong, you should do whatever you can to correct it.

Modifié par tractrpl, 28 avril 2012 - 09:50 .