Example: They'll only refer to the cities / countries showing warming trends, and ignore those that are actually showing cooling trends. Both sides do it.
If big tobacco was smart (and I'm sure they are), they would play both sides of the game. Like for instance, big tobacco would do studies to support the claim the global warming exists, screw up the study, and get this to be one of the top studies that people use when trying to prove that global warming exists. They aren't going to do any damage to their cause because there would already be valid scientific studies out there. They are just replacing the valid scientific studies with crappy studies.
If you can't beat your enemy, replace them with something you can beat.
Actually, you are incorrect. There is nothing in there that requires me to pay taxes. It may not be obvious to you because simple everyday words like Head of Household are legal terms in here and are redifined.
For example, it says that Head of Households must pay but if you look at the definition of Head of Household it says:
"maintains as his home a household which constitutes for more than one-half of such taxable year the principal place of abode, as a member of such household..."
So the year has to be taxable, which would lead you to looking for another law that tells you what determines a taxable year. This goes on forever in circles and that is why the IRS has NEVER been able to tell anyone what law requires a person to pay taxes.
Just rattling of sections of a code is not impressive. Next time do a little research.
On another list, someone looked into this after reading a similar article about this "magical pill". I haven't done all the research myself but I trust their conclusions:
"It looks to me like they do not claim it reduces or erases the memory,
more media hype.
They say it lessens the hormonal reaction to the event (adrenaline
etc) so that later when recalling it you do not get a replay of that
same hormonal response.
It is presently used for high blood pressure."
Plus, this is not a good way to handle that problem anyway. Drugs are usually a bad solution to problems of the mind. Rather than reduce a person's awareness with drugs the person's awareness should be increased and they should be brought to the point where they can confront the memory.
The interesting thing here is that they assume that we are just meat bodies. Who is to say that memories are even stored in the brain? It could be some energy manifestation. Most people believe that we have souls (or more accurately are souls.) Maybe it's stored in the soul.
If you constructed a neural network in a computer the size of the brain, which could probably be done now, do you think you could fit 80 years of video in it somehow? I think not.
The whole point of all this is that there are people in this world with incredible amounts of power who would have an interest in bringing this about. There are people that are smart enough to make this type of scenario work out. They could make it happen many different ways. It's not really an issue of how it happens. Whichever way it happens, you end up with the same result. I'm not saying it is going to happen in the exact way I described, I am only giving an example. I thought this would be obvious since it would be kind of stupid if someone really believed that this is exactly how things would unfold over the next 50 years. Slippery Slope Logical Fallacy does not apply because the post is not focused on the link between one event and the next. It is focused on intentions and ability.
So if you are arguing anything, you should be arguing that I am paranoid for thinking that anyone could be so clever to make this type of thing happen (or something along those lines.)
Step 1) Put chips in handicapped people
"It's okay, they're handicapped. It's all we can do for them."
Step 2) Put chips in normal people to monitor health hazards
"It's important that we know if granny is in trouble."
Step 3) Diseases and illnesses like SARS can be stopped in their tracks with these chips
"We have to use these chips to protect ourselves. Everyone else is doing it and they are fine."
Step 4) We can now use these to detect terrorists by watching for dangerous thought formations.
"It's the only way we can stop them. It must be done."
Step 5) The line between terrorist and criminal is blurred and it's used to stop criminals.
"We might as well do it with criminals since we are already doing it with terrorists."
Step 6) These thought-forms can be prevented entirely.
"If terrorist and criminal thoughts are stopped from the git-go, it will be a utopia. The end of crime forever!"
Step 7) All unwanted thoughts are filtered out
"You have to pay a price for freedom. I am okay with slavery. We need it to be safe. What would you like me to do today?"
Your hate for the US clouds your thinking. Here in the US we know all about getting screwed over by large goverment bodies. It's not that I don't want it to happen because the UN has always had a lot of disagreements with the US. In fact, I probably hate the US goverment just as much as you do. The problem is when you give any single entity control over something that influences people as much as the Internet, then you are going to have problems. I don't care if its the UN, UK, or a US company. It makes no difference.
Right now, there is not one US company that controls the entire Internet. It may be mostly US companies that are running the show, but there are many, not one. They all have different aims. Some are corrupt, but at least they vary in how they are corrupted. At least now you can at least choose. There are places where things are not censored to oblivion, like slashdot.org. How would you like it if threads like these were taken out because they were seen by the UN to be a attempt by "terrorists" at Social Engineering or some BS like that?
I know this will sound crazy but not all people in the US agree with the way our goverment is destroying the world. About half the people in the US despise the goverment. There is not just two viewpoints either, so summing up all US people to some image you have in your head fed to you by your news station or website is just plain stupid. The US is not all dumb people (only about half of us.)
If the UN ever got corrupted, biased, out of line, etc. then they would effect the entire Internet. To match this in the current system, every single company in the world that could censor anything on the Internet would have to become corrupted, biased, or out of line and start cesoring everything in the same way. If that happened, the people themselves would be just the same so it wouldn't really matter.
If you don't think that anyone will ever get power-hungry or corrupt or payed off in the UN then I guess you are new to Earth. If you count on any entitiy to not become corrupted then you haven't learned from the past couple thousand years of our history. Anything can become corrupted. I guess when you live in America and get raped by the government every day, this is a bit more obvious.
Slashdot Mirror
Example: They'll only refer to the cities / countries showing warming trends, and ignore those that are actually showing cooling trends. Both sides do it.
If big tobacco was smart (and I'm sure they are), they would play both sides of the game. Like for instance, big tobacco would do studies to support the claim the global warming exists, screw up the study, and get this to be one of the top studies that people use when trying to prove that global warming exists. They aren't going to do any damage to their cause because there would already be valid scientific studies out there. They are just replacing the valid scientific studies with crappy studies. If you can't beat your enemy, replace them with something you can beat.
Actually, you are incorrect. There is nothing in there that requires me to pay taxes. It may not be obvious to you because simple everyday words like Head of Household are legal terms in here and are redifined.
For example, it says that Head of Households must pay but if you look at the definition of Head of Household it says:
"maintains as his home a household which constitutes for more than one-half of such taxable year the principal place of abode, as a member of such household..."
So the year has to be taxable, which would lead you to looking for another law that tells you what determines a taxable year. This goes on forever in circles and that is why the IRS has NEVER been able to tell anyone what law requires a person to pay taxes.
Just rattling of sections of a code is not impressive. Next time do a little research.
On another list, someone looked into this after reading a similar article about this "magical pill". I haven't done all the research myself but I trust their conclusions: "It looks to me like they do not claim it reduces or erases the memory, more media hype. They say it lessens the hormonal reaction to the event (adrenaline etc) so that later when recalling it you do not get a replay of that same hormonal response. It is presently used for high blood pressure." Plus, this is not a good way to handle that problem anyway. Drugs are usually a bad solution to problems of the mind. Rather than reduce a person's awareness with drugs the person's awareness should be increased and they should be brought to the point where they can confront the memory.
The interesting thing here is that they assume that we are just meat bodies. Who is to say that memories are even stored in the brain? It could be some energy manifestation. Most people believe that we have souls (or more accurately are souls.) Maybe it's stored in the soul. If you constructed a neural network in a computer the size of the brain, which could probably be done now, do you think you could fit 80 years of video in it somehow? I think not.
They did, it's called a labotomy.
The whole point of all this is that there are people in this world with incredible amounts of power who would have an interest in bringing this about. There are people that are smart enough to make this type of scenario work out. They could make it happen many different ways. It's not really an issue of how it happens. Whichever way it happens, you end up with the same result. I'm not saying it is going to happen in the exact way I described, I am only giving an example. I thought this would be obvious since it would be kind of stupid if someone really believed that this is exactly how things would unfold over the next 50 years. Slippery Slope Logical Fallacy does not apply because the post is not focused on the link between one event and the next. It is focused on intentions and ability.
So if you are arguing anything, you should be arguing that I am paranoid for thinking that anyone could be so clever to make this type of thing happen (or something along those lines.)
Step 1) Put chips in handicapped people
"It's okay, they're handicapped. It's all we can do for them."
Step 2) Put chips in normal people to monitor health hazards
"It's important that we know if granny is in trouble."
Step 3) Diseases and illnesses like SARS can be stopped in their tracks with these chips
"We have to use these chips to protect ourselves. Everyone else is doing it and they are fine."
Step 4) We can now use these to detect terrorists by watching for dangerous thought formations.
"It's the only way we can stop them. It must be done."
Step 5) The line between terrorist and criminal is blurred and it's used to stop criminals.
"We might as well do it with criminals since we are already doing it with terrorists."
Step 6) These thought-forms can be prevented entirely.
"If terrorist and criminal thoughts are stopped from the git-go, it will be a utopia. The end of crime forever!"
Step 7) All unwanted thoughts are filtered out
"You have to pay a price for freedom. I am okay with slavery. We need it to be safe. What would you like me to do today?"
See a problem here?!?
Right now, there is not one US company that controls the entire Internet. It may be mostly US companies that are running the show, but there are many, not one. They all have different aims. Some are corrupt, but at least they vary in how they are corrupted. At least now you can at least choose. There are places where things are not censored to oblivion, like slashdot.org. How would you like it if threads like these were taken out because they were seen by the UN to be a attempt by "terrorists" at Social Engineering or some BS like that?
I know this will sound crazy but not all people in the US agree with the way our goverment is destroying the world. About half the people in the US despise the goverment. There is not just two viewpoints either, so summing up all US people to some image you have in your head fed to you by your news station or website is just plain stupid. The US is not all dumb people (only about half of us.)
If the UN ever got corrupted, biased, out of line, etc. then they would effect the entire Internet. To match this in the current system, every single company in the world that could censor anything on the Internet would have to become corrupted, biased, or out of line and start cesoring everything in the same way. If that happened, the people themselves would be just the same so it wouldn't really matter.
If you don't think that anyone will ever get power-hungry or corrupt or payed off in the UN then I guess you are new to Earth. If you count on any entitiy to not become corrupted then you haven't learned from the past couple thousand years of our history. Anything can become corrupted. I guess when you live in America and get raped by the government every day, this is a bit more obvious.