lord of flies Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 I thought this forum was better because I did not believe the people I was arguing with were actually social darwinists. I do not understand how anyone, in this day and age, can endorse that sort of brutalistic savagery, much less apply it on a national level, that is, say that nations in a worse position are full of inferior people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreasyDogMeat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 I thought this forum was better because I did not believe the people I was arguing with were actually social darwinists. I do not understand how anyone, in this day and age, can endorse that sort of brutalistic savagery, much less apply it on a national level, that is, say that nations in a worse position are full of inferior people. Inferior governments... not inferior people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord of flies Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Inferior governments... not inferior people.Who do you think put these governments in power, exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreasyDogMeat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Hmmm... LET ME GUESS WHAR U ARE GOING WITH THIS... THE UNITED STATES! What do I win!? I'm pretty sure the US didn't set up every government in the world... then again that would explain their INFERIORITY... OH SNAP! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord of flies Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Hmmm... LET ME GUESS WHAR U ARE GOING WITH THIS... THE UNITED STATES! What do I win!? I'm pretty sure the US didn't set up every government in the world... then again that would explain their INFERIORITY... OH SNAP! Answer the question, please. Don't attempt to dodge it. If not the United States, then who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lare Kikkeli Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 posting that article wasn't really trolling, although he did do it a trollish way. now attacking a poster and the contents of a video he posted that you haven't seen based on the posters previous behaviour? trolling. oh and i'm just pointing out that the video in question is nothing like you guys seem to think it is. but i guess these threads aren't for actually discussing things, are they? they're just for silly flaming, calling everyone a commie and promoting nihilism and social darwinism while eating cheetos and drinking mountain dew. lol. This 'poster' has a history of ignoring other links of information... completely ignoring counter arguments. What part of calling out someone for being a hypocrite who calls others morons who behave exactly as he has consistently in the past do you not understand? I know this is some really hardcore intellectual stuff here. You seem hung up on the content of the link... ignore that... it was not the point of my comment. Then again I think you are just looking for drama and feel the need to rush in to defend trolls for the excitement. Its also Doritos and Diet Coke... jerk. now had you only done that, sure, it would have been alright. but you also attacked his link as well, multiple times while it's pretty obvious you have no idea what it is. pot kettle black. also i'm not defending him, really, i'm defending the post he made. the video is relevant to this discussion, unlike any of the posts you've made in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreasyDogMeat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 now had you only done that, sure, it would have been alright. but you also attacked his link as well, multiple times while it's pretty obvious you have no idea what it is. pot kettle black. also i'm not defending him, really, i'm defending the post he made. the video is relevant to this discussion, unlike any of the posts you've made in this thread. Yet another of his constants is one sided links... shame on me for ignoring the one time he posts something 'fair and balanced'. It would be his first. Being the slow learner that I am, I didn't learn to ignore his links after 1, 2 or even 3 of them. I'm still not watching it though 'cause he don't watch mine. Call me petty... Answer the question, please. Don't attempt to dodge it. Speaking of pot kettle black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord of flies Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Answer the question, please. Don't attempt to dodge it. Speaking of pot kettle black. So, are you ready to speak to your own conclusion on this subject, or will you continue to dodge the question? I answer questions people ask. I have a whole thread about it, though posting there has died down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lare Kikkeli Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Yet another of his constants is one sided links... I'm still not watching it though 'cause he don't watch mine. Call me petty... you should stop now, you're making yourself look really stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreasyDogMeat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Stupid would be actually watching it... responding with some long counter argument then getting absolutely no response. Something that has happened over and over in the past. He doesn't care about any sort of actual debate or discussion... something that keeps flying over your head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lare Kikkeli Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Stupid would be actually watching it... responding with some long counter argument then getting absolutely no response. Something that has happened over and over in the past. He doesn't care about any sort of actual debate or discussion... something that keeps flying over your head. i'm not talking about him, i'm talking about you making stupid assumptions. admit it, you have no idea what the link is, the posters posting history has no relevance in it and your stupid posts are just that, stupid. don't watch it, don't make a long counter argument. no one is forcing you. just dont make assumptions based on your right wing bias, or if you do don't act like you're right even when proven wrong. cos that just makes you look stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreasyDogMeat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 i'm not talking about him, i'm talking about you making stupid assumptions. admit it, you have no idea what the link is, the posters posting history has no relevance in it and your stupid posts are just that, stupid. don't watch it, don't make a long counter argument. no one is forcing you. just dont make assumptions based on your right wing bias, or if you do don't act like you're right even when proven wrong. cos that just makes you look stupid. WHAT assumptions? That he's a hypocrite for calling others morons for not watching his video is not an assumption. As for the poster's history, it has complete relevance over what my whole beef is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lare Kikkeli Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 i'm not talking about him, i'm talking about you making stupid assumptions. admit it, you have no idea what the link is, the posters posting history has no relevance in it and your stupid posts are just that, stupid. don't watch it, don't make a long counter argument. no one is forcing you. just dont make assumptions based on your right wing bias, or if you do don't act like you're right even when proven wrong. cos that just makes you look stupid. WHAT assumptions? That he's a hypocrite for calling others morons for not watching his video is not an assumption. As for the poster's history, it has complete relevance over what my whole beef is. assuming that the video he posted is crap on par with incovinient truth. attacking it multiple times while stating that you haven't watched it and don't plan to. how many times do i have to say this? you have beef with the poster, fine. keep it in pm if all you can do is troll this thread by attacking the one relevant link he's posted in his entire posting career here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreasyDogMeat Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 assuming that the video he posted is crap on par with incovinient truth. attacking it multiple times while stating that you haven't watched it and don't plan to. how many times do i have to say this? you have beef with the poster, fine. keep it in pm if all you can do is troll this thread by attacking the one relevant link he's posted in his entire posting career here. I'm not attacking his link... atleast I didn't mean to. I don't care about it. You keep wanting to 'troll' about it... and I shouldn't have even brought up those documentaries... it was an attempted point aimed more at him than the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killian Kalthorne Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 What he linked was not truth, just one man's interpretation of the crisis. Hell, in my ever so humble opinion this crisis started with the Democrats under jimmy Carter with his Community Reinvestment Act which made it it almost criminal for banks not to give home loans to people who can't pay them back. the CRA was then expanded under another Democrat president, Bill Clinton, which in turn gave us the housing bubble that later burst under G.W. Bush. The CRA made Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac possible and started this whole subprime loan bull. "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guard Dog Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 What he linked was not truth, just one man's interpretation of the crisis. Hell, in my ever so humble opinion this crisis started with the Democrats under jimmy Carter with his Community Reinvestment Act which made it it almost criminal for banks not to give home loans to people who can't pay them back. the CRA was then expanded under another Democrat president, Bill Clinton, which in turn gave us the housing bubble that later burst under G.W. Bush. The CRA made Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac possible and started this whole subprime loan bull. Add to that the Gramm Leach Biley Act passed under Bill Clinton which allowed investment banks to merge operations with FDIC ensures savings banks, undoing a depression era law (The Glass Stengal Act) that was passed as a lesson learned from 1929. Also a BIG factor was the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act passed under Carter by an all democrat congress that got the federal governmet out of the business or regulating banks and setting interest rates. I laugh when I hear liberals and democrats complain about Wall Street being out of control and needing regulation. They used to be regulated, it was the DEMOCRATS who removed the regulations in the first place, then passed laws forcing them to loan to bad credit risks and then acted surprised when the whole thing collapsed. It was almost like they wanted the financial system to collapse, I'd say it was a conspiracy but they are not smart enough for that. Merely incompetent and lacking any idea how economies actually work. "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightshape Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Asking for proof positive that god exists is a pit unfair no ?. Like beating up a cripple. Anyway that's why they call it belief. Those who state belief as fact offend me. One can percieve belief in many ways, maybe a person believes in god, and I believe in one less god than he does, or perhaps christians should accept the existence of all gods, otherwise their own is infact unjustified. I came up with Crate 3.0 technology. Crate 4.0 - we shall just have to wait and see.Down and out on the Solomani RimNow the Spinward Marches don't look so GRIM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightshape Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 The proof of God's existence does not exist outside the self, Nightshape. The proof is within if He chooses to reveal it to you. So it's an acceptable self-dellusion? Well unless you're one of the initiated, and then well you know, because you've had it proven to you... It's all against reason. love. honor. beauty. faith. none o' the aforementioned gots any objective reality... is all pleasant self-delusions. at least for Gromnir, those things worth dying for... those things worth Living for is all no more than self-delusion. we do not feel the least bit diminished by our admission o' self-delusion. HA! Good Fun! Sure, deluded as we are... Perhaps delusion insulates us from the simple harsh facts. Maybe not. I'm merely questioning many concepts. Delusion can cause both creative and destructive consequence, what is what, is in turn entirely subjective. I came up with Crate 3.0 technology. Crate 4.0 - we shall just have to wait and see.Down and out on the Solomani RimNow the Spinward Marches don't look so GRIM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killian Kalthorne Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 What he linked was not truth, just one man's interpretation of the crisis. Hell, in my ever so humble opinion this crisis started with the Democrats under jimmy Carter with his Community Reinvestment Act which made it it almost criminal for banks not to give home loans to people who can't pay them back. the CRA was then expanded under another Democrat president, Bill Clinton, which in turn gave us the housing bubble that later burst under G.W. Bush. The CRA made Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac possible and started this whole subprime loan bull. Add to that the Gramm Leach Biley Act passed under Bill Clinton which allowed investment banks to merge operations with FDIC ensures savings banks, undoing a depression era law (The Glass Stengal Act) that was passed as a lesson learned from 1929. Also a BIG factor was the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act passed under Carter by an all democrat congress that got the federal governmet out of the business or regulating banks and setting interest rates. I laugh when I hear liberals and democrats complain about Wall Street being out of control and needing regulation. They used to be regulated, it was the DEMOCRATS who removed the regulations in the first place, then passed laws forcing them to loan to bad credit risks and then acted surprised when the whole thing collapsed. It was almost like they wanted the financial system to collapse, I'd say it was a conspiracy but they are not smart enough for that. Merely incompetent and lacking any idea how economies actually work. So basically that economist doesn't know jack when he started to blame everything on the Republicans. It isn't all the Democrats fault either, but to blame just one side for this mess is just looking for an easy scapegoat. "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pidesco Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 He doesn't blame everything on the Republicans, he blames everything on corporations and a lack of regulation. "My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian touristI am Dan Quayle of the Romans.I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands.Heja Sverige!!Everyone should cuffawkle more.The wrench is your friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Asking for proof positive that god exists is a pit unfair no ?. Like beating up a cripple. Anyway that's why they call it belief. Those who state belief as fact offend me. One can percieve belief in many ways, maybe a person believes in god, and I believe in one less god than he does, or perhaps christians should accept the existence of all gods, otherwise their own is infact unjustified. GD was stating facts about his personal beliefs. I thought that was pretty clear. You really don't need to be so hung up on it. I share his opinion, and I have a lot of evidence to back up my belief in God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightshape Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Asking for proof positive that god exists is a pit unfair no ?. Like beating up a cripple. Anyway that's why they call it belief. Those who state belief as fact offend me. One can percieve belief in many ways, maybe a person believes in god, and I believe in one less god than he does, or perhaps christians should accept the existence of all gods, otherwise their own is infact unjustified. GD was stating facts about his personal beliefs. I thought that was pretty clear. You really don't need to be so hung up on it. I share his opinion, and I have a lot of evidence to back up my belief in God. GD was stating he knows for a fact that God exists. Truth is he doesn't, he has faith and belief like every other god bothering self rightious ****. I wouldn't be offended if he had said, I believe that God exists. I've always loved the arguement, "The universe exists, so God must exist", it is the arguement of intellectual dullards who fear the truth, and what the truth may indeed be, nobody really knows, but those who place a belief in God, well huh, may aswell believe that rivers flow because of water sprites and fire burn because of fire sprites. *sigh* I came up with Crate 3.0 technology. Crate 4.0 - we shall just have to wait and see.Down and out on the Solomani RimNow the Spinward Marches don't look so GRIM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killian Kalthorne Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 If I meet any water sprites or fire sprites you will be the first to know, Nightshape. In any case you hit it right on the knob why I choose not to worship God. For the most part, He's an ass. "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lord of flies Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Where's the Islamic golden age? Apparently, during the dark ages, we were just as poorly advanced as Egyptians. Also, loving the SCIENTIFIC ADVANCE sidebar, truly an objective measurement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killian Kalthorne Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 After WW2, our technology has sky rocketed. I do have to agree that if it wasn't for the Muslims, particularly those in Iraq and Iran, of that time a lot of the advancements we did make up to the Dark Ages would have been lost. "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now