I didnt call you a self centered prick for not fellating bicycists, I assumed you were already doing that as a side gig. I called you one for demanding that the above poster should "Appeal to my self-interest, or fuck off" which strongly suggests a "you" centered world view.
It's only on bikes over $200 to keep cheap bikes cheap so that people too poor to afford cars don't have an extra fee piled on to a very handy mode of transportation for them.
It's only on 26" or larger wheels because fat children are still a looming future health crisis in this country and they don't want to do anything to discourage kids getting something like a bike which can encourage exercise.
Now, I don't know those two things for certain but that's what popped into my head when I read the article.
How will solving our gas emission problems disrupt mass transit? How will cars running off batteries (the current mainstream solution) change mass transit at all? Some people still wont be able to afford cars and traffic will still suck.
I don't know what's wrong with you but you should avoid serious conversations with adults to try look smarter going forwards.
You just posted a time line of 500 million years and then tried to claim that it proved that there hasnt been mammal population decline in recent human history when that graph wouldn't even register the 6,000 years or so that there have been human civilizations let alone the relatively recent period in human history where there have been the massive declines.
Furthermore, it's clear you not only don't understand the time frame and how that effects what's shown on the graph but that you also have no knowledge of what the Phanerozoic Eon is that the graph you posted is meant to illustrate.
The Phanerozoic Eon encompasses a timeline that stretches from the first complex life forms (which means it starts with little to no life on land and almost nothing but bacteria in the oceans) to modern day. Of course there's a major increase of bio diversity over time, it's the entire history of complex life.
Anyways, it's too irritating talking to you because over the course of multiple posts you have demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge on the subject at hand, an opinion that you do, a complete unwillingness or inability to properly read up on a topic even after being provided a list of sources, and one of my least favorites, trying to change the discussion to be about an irrelevant semantics issue. I'm done with this conversation.
and posting a graph that you dont even understand as "evidence"? Honestly, as I'm finishing this there's a small part of me that wonders "Has this conversation been for real or am I really just getting fucked with by a troll here?" If you are a troll, kudos to you. You play the infuriating idiot well.
No, not to be rude but you're the one who isnt accurate here. Fascism is a hybrid system thus placing it opposite communism at the far extreme doesnt make sense as it did posses many left wing ideals, many of which are features in modern social democracies.
Nowadays most people associate them with the far right because no one cares about their economic policies and the like, what they care about are the social policies (which are indeed extreme far right) that resulted in their becoming one of history's greatest monsters (deservedly so of course). If you actually look at their economic policies and stuff outside of the context of social issues they most definitely run with some left wing ideals, although nothing extreme. Sure, communists and fascists had no use for each other but dont let that fool you into thinking fascism didnt have leftist elements.
You've just flown you ideological blindness flag high and proud blaming progressives for educational faults that were most commonly found in our most conservative region, the South. By the end i just had a huge smile on my face and was shaking my head as you equated me wanting only science to be taught in science classes with Nazism. You really are just desperately lashing out at this point. Your link that you put up so condescending doesnt even back up your claim. I read through about a dozen European countries and while many certainly do teach religion in school, it's seems to be usually in seperate classes. This is because, once again, religion isnt science.
Science should be what is taught in science classes. We dont teach students alternate fantasy histories in their history classes and we should do the same for science. If parents want not-science to be taught in science class then there are likely plenty of private schools for them out there but they shouldnt expect public assistance for an education that fits their every desire. Meanwhile the general public shouldnt have the quality of their public education diluted by a single faith's belief system that they may not even believe in. Teaching creationism in a science class is a true indocturation of religious beliefs on young minds because it establishes a link between creationism (a completely unscientific process) and science thus creating the illusion that it scientifically stands on equal footing with evolution
But hey, I'm not even saying religion cant be part of a public education. I think everyone should take a comparative religion class in their lifetime (I have, it was great) and Junior or Senior years of high school sound like good times to do something like that.
Right, so you can just go secure yourself a solid spot on that preppers tv show for the looming blood bath that will surely follow your ordained collapse.
The rest of us will keep looking for and talking about viable solutions to future problems.
Or maybe you dont have a strong grasp on what UBI is for or how it would work.
What it is for: a future where automation is cutting large numbers of people out of work. While there have always been people who have lost their jobs to automation the worry now is that robotics may be replacing manual labor almost entirely in the future. What are the manual laborers in this country going to do if that happens? Furthermore, advances in "ai" threaten many traditionally well paying jobs which makes the problems even worse.
How UBI works: UBI isnt as expensive as you make out. With UBI there's no unemployment payouts, food stamps, or any other number of social programs along with the large bureaucracies needed to make them work. While that money saved wont cover all the costs there's enough static wealth at the top even right now (let alone in a world so heavily automated) to make up the difference.
And really, I havent heard any viable solutions to what looks like a looming labor crises that isnt "let them all starve" or UBI
Well i think a good start on that is getting a few people elected who will actually talk about that. Right now UBI is outside our political mainstream.
"1. Big government is a left wing position." I feel like this covers this: "left wing economic policy"
"2. The communist bloc was well known for its huge rallies and personality cults. The remnant countries from that era still are." Oh, an ideological extreme. How insightful of you. Maybe consider the Western social democracies the entire West enjoys.
"3. It's not that they're not big on minorities. They're just not big on unchecked immigration." You don't see racist banners flying high and proud at left wing rallies in this country and if you did they would be asked to leave the private event. Now I'm not saying the right is uniformly racist in this country by a long shot but xenophobia is certainly a Right wing thing with their problems with Muslims, gays, and the like.
"4. Rule of law is a good thing. It prevents preferential treatment (you know like via all your favorite -isms?). The real problem is bad law." Um, okay.
Anyways, the wikipedia entry should be good enough.
You'll just have to deal with my opinion that the tweet categorises this guy as of an extremist political ideology and thus not worth my time. I don't have patience for the extremes of the Right or the Left and this guys tweet makes it a hundred percent clear to me that he enjoys his conspiracy theories.
That wasn't a single article I linked to. Furthermore, your obsession with "large mammals" and "mammals" is a dumb semantics game. Is it some how just fine if mammals in general are in decline but large mammals "aren't" (which they are). the difference between "large mammals" and "mammals in general" is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.
The far right is anti-intellectual because the values and ideologies that they disagree with aren't based on scientific evidence. There are a lot of school boards in this country that seek to undermine the scientific theory of evolution and/or introduce doubt into the age of the earth.
So college's are bad because professors require proper sources for people's citations?
Sorry but we all live with a scarcity of time. I wouldn't waste my precious time watching videos on any topic by a flat earther and I wouldn't waste my time watching videos by an organization headed by some one who makes the preposterous claim that western media is more dangerous than the Russians.
You sound very compelling here until I remember that there are plenty of New Earthers and outright climate change deniers among the American Right. What you describe is the Republican party moderates but unfortunately they don't have the power in the party that they used to.
Slashdot Mirror
I didnt call you a self centered prick for not fellating bicycists, I assumed you were already doing that as a side gig. I called you one for demanding that the above poster should "Appeal to my self-interest, or fuck off" which strongly suggests a "you" centered world view.
"DUH, it's government so the money will just get wasted!"
Just a heads up, you interact with things, entities, and services that taxes pay for all the time.
And yet all of those car dealerships in National City are still open when everyone goes to Carlsbad. How strange....
Or maybe you're self centered prick?
Welcome to the real world....
It's only on bikes over $200 to keep cheap bikes cheap so that people too poor to afford cars don't have an extra fee piled on to a very handy mode of transportation for them.
It's only on 26" or larger wheels because fat children are still a looming future health crisis in this country and they don't want to do anything to discourage kids getting something like a bike which can encourage exercise.
Now, I don't know those two things for certain but that's what popped into my head when I read the article.
Yeah but which hand does he write with?
How will solving our gas emission problems disrupt mass transit? How will cars running off batteries (the current mainstream solution) change mass transit at all? Some people still wont be able to afford cars and traffic will still suck.
Probably about as much as when their suppliers change prices, or a product's details change.
I have no idea how much that is but if it's a terrible burden then they already went out of business a while ago.
I don't know what's wrong with you but you should avoid serious conversations with adults to try look smarter going forwards.
You just posted a time line of 500 million years and then tried to claim that it proved that there hasnt been mammal population decline in recent human history when that graph wouldn't even register the 6,000 years or so that there have been human civilizations let alone the relatively recent period in human history where there have been the massive declines.
Furthermore, it's clear you not only don't understand the time frame and how that effects what's shown on the graph but that you also have no knowledge of what the Phanerozoic Eon is that the graph you posted is meant to illustrate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Phanerozoic Eon encompasses a timeline that stretches from the first complex life forms (which means it starts with little to no life on land and almost nothing but bacteria in the oceans) to modern day. Of course there's a major increase of bio diversity over time, it's the entire history of complex life.
Anyways, it's too irritating talking to you because over the course of multiple posts you have demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge on the subject at hand, an opinion that you do, a complete unwillingness or inability to properly read up on a topic even after being provided a list of sources, and one of my least favorites, trying to change the discussion to be about an irrelevant semantics issue. I'm done with this conversation.
and posting a graph that you dont even understand as "evidence"? Honestly, as I'm finishing this there's a small part of me that wonders "Has this conversation been for real or am I really just getting fucked with by a troll here?" If you are a troll, kudos to you. You play the infuriating idiot well.
No, not to be rude but you're the one who isnt accurate here. Fascism is a hybrid system thus placing it opposite communism at the far extreme doesnt make sense as it did posses many left wing ideals, many of which are features in modern social democracies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Nowadays most people associate them with the far right because no one cares about their economic policies and the like, what they care about are the social policies (which are indeed extreme far right) that resulted in their becoming one of history's greatest monsters (deservedly so of course). If you actually look at their economic policies and stuff outside of the context of social issues they most definitely run with some left wing ideals, although nothing extreme. Sure, communists and fascists had no use for each other but dont let that fool you into thinking fascism didnt have leftist elements.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You've just flown you ideological blindness flag high and proud blaming progressives for educational faults that were most commonly found in our most conservative region, the South. By the end i just had a huge smile on my face and was shaking my head as you equated me wanting only science to be taught in science classes with Nazism. You really are just desperately lashing out at this point. Your link that you put up so condescending doesnt even back up your claim. I read through about a dozen European countries and while many certainly do teach religion in school, it's seems to be usually in seperate classes. This is because, once again, religion isnt science.
Science should be what is taught in science classes. We dont teach students alternate fantasy histories in their history classes and we should do the same for science. If parents want not-science to be taught in science class then there are likely plenty of private schools for them out there but they shouldnt expect public assistance for an education that fits their every desire. Meanwhile the general public shouldnt have the quality of their public education diluted by a single faith's belief system that they may not even believe in. Teaching creationism in a science class is a true indocturation of religious beliefs on young minds because it establishes a link between creationism (a completely unscientific process) and science thus creating the illusion that it scientifically stands on equal footing with evolution
But hey, I'm not even saying religion cant be part of a public education. I think everyone should take a comparative religion class in their lifetime (I have, it was great) and Junior or Senior years of high school sound like good times to do something like that.
Right, so you can just go secure yourself a solid spot on that preppers tv show for the looming blood bath that will surely follow your ordained collapse.
The rest of us will keep looking for and talking about viable solutions to future problems.
Or maybe you dont have a strong grasp on what UBI is for or how it would work.
What it is for: a future where automation is cutting large numbers of people out of work. While there have always been people who have lost their jobs to automation the worry now is that robotics may be replacing manual labor almost entirely in the future. What are the manual laborers in this country going to do if that happens? Furthermore, advances in "ai" threaten many traditionally well paying jobs which makes the problems even worse.
How UBI works: UBI isnt as expensive as you make out. With UBI there's no unemployment payouts, food stamps, or any other number of social programs along with the large bureaucracies needed to make them work. While that money saved wont cover all the costs there's enough static wealth at the top even right now (let alone in a world so heavily automated) to make up the difference.
And really, I havent heard any viable solutions to what looks like a looming labor crises that isnt "let them all starve" or UBI
Well i think a good start on that is getting a few people elected who will actually talk about that. Right now UBI is outside our political mainstream.
Uh....
Here you go
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"1. Big government is a left wing position."
I feel like this covers this: "left wing economic policy"
"2. The communist bloc was well known for its huge rallies and personality cults. The remnant countries from that era still are."
Oh, an ideological extreme. How insightful of you. Maybe consider the Western social democracies the entire West enjoys.
"3. It's not that they're not big on minorities. They're just not big on unchecked immigration."
You don't see racist banners flying high and proud at left wing rallies in this country and if you did they would be asked to leave the private event. Now I'm not saying the right is uniformly racist in this country by a long shot but xenophobia is certainly a Right wing thing with their problems with Muslims, gays, and the like.
"4. Rule of law is a good thing. It prevents preferential treatment (you know like via all your favorite -isms?). The real problem is bad law."
Um, okay.
Anyways, the wikipedia entry should be good enough.
Nope, I wont. I'm done with this conversation
You'll just have to deal with my opinion that the tweet categorises this guy as of an extremist political ideology and thus not worth my time. I don't have patience for the extremes of the Right or the Left and this guys tweet makes it a hundred percent clear to me that he enjoys his conspiracy theories.
That wasn't a single article I linked to. Furthermore, your obsession with "large mammals" and "mammals" is a dumb semantics game. Is it some how just fine if mammals in general are in decline but large mammals "aren't" (which they are). the difference between "large mammals" and "mammals in general" is irrelevant to the conversation at hand.
Don't know why that was posted anonymously.....
I was refering to your videos coming from a highly questionable source, not anything having to do with the videos in general.
Also, that tweet is pretty damn clear. I would say there is zero ambiguity there.
The far right is anti-intellectual because the values and ideologies that they disagree with aren't based on scientific evidence. There are a lot of school boards in this country that seek to undermine the scientific theory of evolution and/or introduce doubt into the age of the earth.
So college's are bad because professors require proper sources for people's citations?
Sorry but we all live with a scarcity of time. I wouldn't waste my precious time watching videos on any topic by a flat earther and I wouldn't waste my time watching videos by an organization headed by some one who makes the preposterous claim that western media is more dangerous than the Russians.
I bet the American right persecutes more minorities and gays than in Russia and all middle eastern countries combined
There you go, just as factual as your claim.
You sound very compelling here until I remember that there are plenty of New Earthers and outright climate change deniers among the American Right. What you describe is the Republican party moderates but unfortunately they don't have the power in the party that they used to.