Pavlov, Lemmings, BS, & Strawberries

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by XXL TideFan, May 24, 2009.

  1. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,733
    I understand, but a global problem requires global thinking. The loss of the arctic ice sheets WILL cause sea-level to rise. It already is rising and Louisiana has thousands of square miles of coastal land less than a meter above sea level. That will hit Louisiana (us) hard in the pocketbook, mon ami.

    [​IMG]

    Values for predicted sea level rise over the course of the next century typically range from 0.9 to 8.8 meters, with a central value of 4.80 meters.

    Breaux Bridge is 7.1 meters above sea level. In 50 years, your sons will see the Atchafalaya Basin become an estuary with the open ocean less than 40 miles away. The redfish will be closer, but when the hurricanes come it will be like living in Golden Meadow.

    Even New York City will suffer inundation with a 4.8 meter rise. LINK
     
  2. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,733
    For once I agree with you!
     
  3. SabanFan

    SabanFan The voice of reason

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    26,080
    Likes Received:
    1,247

    One son lives in Atlanta and the other hates the heat and is skedaddling up north as soon as he graduates from USL, so I'm not going to lose any sleep.
     
  4. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    again, this is like saying some of you favor policy that is "bad", while i favor policy that is "good". the tems are totally subjective. you use them because you are scared of specifics, which have actual consequences that can be argued. you do not like to take positions that can be argued.
     
  5. tirk

    tirk im the lyrical jessie james

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    47,369
    Likes Received:
    21,535
    to me, this means you have zero core or subset of your own personal beliefs. whether you consider the ends of the branch or whatever is irrelevant. your position is never your original thought. its an average; a math equation if you will.


    we're talking specifics, not generalization. specific beliefs and truths of your own, you know like the founding fathers had that still ring true today. not something abstract.




    ok heres best I see it. if you were to be on a debate team regarding an issue, you'd have to have a list of things you would have to argue for or against. you dont know what you believe until the other two groups you see as extreme qualified their positions. or actually had their debate.




    so you'd have no principles or beliefs to write down for your debate based on your own principles. its determined by others.

    is there anything you strongly stand for or against thats controversial? or is it best to just pick a spot that pleases most everyone.
     
  6. XXL TideFan

    XXL TideFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,701
    Likes Received:
    981
    Not so different after all...............
     
  7. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,733
    You don't know what subjective means either, do you? :hihi:

    Once again, you can't stay on topic and keep changing the subject to Red55. Why are you so jealous?

    I remind you that YOU are the one who has failed to provide specifics upon repeated requests. I asked you a dozen questions about the specifics of the carbon swap plan because I haven't studied them and because I'm not obsessed with Al Gore, unlike yourself. But your continued silence proves that you don't know them either. Just like everyone else you debate what you want to and ignore what you want to. Well, so do I, chum! Everybody else does, too.

    You just have to let go of the preposterous notion that someone else is compelled to argue the opposite of your thesis. It is too laughable for words. :lol:

    Provably false. I've argued 100 topics with you alone and I can cite them. But I get to choose what I care to argue about. As do you, so live with it. I'm not going to get caught up in your silly chit.

    If you want a detailed debate, ask a detailed question and be prepared to stand behind it with some facts. But the schoolyard tactic of crying "no fair" just don't play here, stumpy.
     
  8. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    because red55 is awesome.

    not only did i tell you what the carbon tax was, i linked you to a video of al gore explaining what it is.

    given that the carbon tax is not a law right now or even up for a vote, there is not an exact proposal on the table. so you will have to manage without the exact text and try to understand the concept. it isnt that difficult. i oppose the idea in theory.

    the best move for you would be to keep quiet until the idea gets more traction and americans are polled on it, which will indicate to you where your position is, in the middle. thats pragmatic and prudent.
     
  9. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,733
    You may not be logical or analytical, but you always were perceptive.

    Clever. You didn't like the question, so you answered some other question. No, twice a I pressed you for details so that I could consider the issue without guessing. Al Gore offered no details talking to Larry King. Two of the great scientists of our time . . . :rolleye33:

    Ah, so the concept is not mature or developed and any numbers that might support or undermine it are not yet available. You oppose it in theory. But then you castigate me for not engaging the issue IN SPECIFIC. :grin:

    I'm tying you in logical knots with the rope you are giving me. Why don't you quit while I'm ahead.

    I'd rather just point out that your theoretical objection to the abstract concept has no evidentiary basis and isn't even a real proposal yet.

    Therefore it deserves no response and I can answer with a heartfelt, "Well, good for you."

    When you can manage to craft a substantiated objection to an established proposal with corroborating evidence and suporting examples . . . then I may agree with you or disagree with you based on your thesis. That's pragmatic and prudent.
     
  10. tirk

    tirk im the lyrical jessie james

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    47,369
    Likes Received:
    21,535
    i think red is completely full of shiit but doesnt know it but man, he can wear me down. can talk in circles forever.

    my ex could do this to me(for years) at one time.

    and im not even sleeping with red.
     

Share This Page