The 19th centuries views concerning the races of humanity as developed in the Western world have been obsolete for ages, because science tends to improve itself.
Advertisement

by Hurdegaryp » Thu Dec 10, 2015 3:40 pm
CVT Temp wrote:I mean, we can actually create a mathematical definition for evolution in terms of the evolutionary algorithm and then write code to deal with abstract instances of evolution, which basically equates to mathematical proof that evolution works. All that remains is to show that biological systems replicate in such a way as to satisfy the minimal criteria required for evolution to apply to them, something which has already been adequately shown time and again. At this point, we've pretty much proven that not only can evolution happen, it pretty much must happen since it's basically impossible to prevent it from happening.

by Valaran » Thu Dec 10, 2015 3:42 pm
Archeuland and Baughistan wrote:"I don't always nice, but when I do, I build it up." Valaran
Valaran wrote:To be fair though.... I was judging on coolness factor, the most important criteria in any war.
Zoboyizakoplayoklot wrote:Val: NS's resident mindless zombie
Planita wrote:you just set the OP on fire

by Mike the Progressive » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:07 pm
Geilinor wrote:Mike the Progressive wrote:
I agree. So who decides that? Me the right-center neoconservative monetarist? You? Hitler? Etc.?
I mean I agree the guy is an asshole who says stupid things. So your solution is to not let him come to the UK? Are you fucking kidding me?
If they can stop extremist Muslim preachers, why not Trump?

by Soldati Senza Confini » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:08 pm
Tekania wrote:Welcome to NSG, where informed opinions get to bump-heads with ignorant ideology under the pretense of an equal footing.

by Gauthier » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:09 pm

by Fartsniffage » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:09 pm

by Ugatoo » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:09 pm

by Mike the Progressive » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:13 pm

by Fartsniffage » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:14 pm
Mike the Progressive wrote:Gauthier wrote:
Give him real political power like office and let's see if he'll just stick to bluster.
Couldn't you say that for a lot of people? I mean at the end of the day he's a person saying shitty things. They're talking about banning him not because he's saying the people of the UK should rise up and commit jihad against their government. They're talking about banning him because they find his comments offensive.

by Gauthier » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:15 pm
Mike the Progressive wrote:Gauthier wrote:
Give him real political power like office and let's see if he'll just stick to bluster.
Couldn't you say that for a lot of people? I mean at the end of the day he's a person saying shitty things. They're talking about banning him not because he's saying the people of the UK should rise up and commit jihad against their government. They're talking about banning him because they find his comments offensive.

by Mike the Progressive » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:16 pm
Gauthier wrote:Mike the Progressive wrote:
Couldn't you say that for a lot of people? I mean at the end of the day he's a person saying shitty things. They're talking about banning him not because he's saying the people of the UK should rise up and commit jihad against their government. They're talking about banning him because they find his comments offensive.
Like how people in the US signed a White House petition to deport Piers Morgan because he didn't worship the Second Amendment?

by Fartsniffage » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:18 pm

by Ugatoo » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:18 pm

by Mike the Progressive » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:23 pm

by Ugatoo » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:24 pm
Mike the Progressive wrote:Fartsniffage wrote:
Why does Trumps free speech trump the free speech of the people who signed the petition?
People have the right to sign any petition they want. People also have the right to speak their minds. I don't have a problem with any of this and I don't think the petition will amount to much. But I think it's concerning you have people who want to ban somebody simply because they don't like what he has to say.

by Mike the Progressive » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:25 pm

by Fartsniffage » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:26 pm
Mike the Progressive wrote:Fartsniffage wrote:
Why does Trumps free speech trump the free speech of the people who signed the petition?
People have the right to sign any petition they want. People also have the right to speak their minds. I don't have a problem with any of this and I don't think the petition will amount to much. But I think it's concerning you have people who want to ban somebody simply because they don't like what he has to say.

by Mike the Progressive » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:26 pm
Ugatoo wrote:Mike the Progressive wrote:
People have the right to sign any petition they want. People also have the right to speak their minds. I don't have a problem with any of this and I don't think the petition will amount to much. But I think it's concerning you have people who want to ban somebody simply because they don't like what he has to say.
I love that anti-sjw mentality. When it's something or someone you support it's censorship, when it's something you don't like it's freedom.

by Gauthier » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:28 pm
Mike the Progressive wrote:Ugatoo wrote:I love that anti-sjw mentality. When it's something or someone you support it's censorship, when it's something you don't like it's freedom.
I don't support Trump. I hate him and I think he's a fucking moron. But he's entitled to his opinions. That's not a crime.

by Imperializt Russia » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:29 pm
Mike the Progressive wrote:Fartsniffage wrote:
Why does Trumps free speech trump the free speech of the people who signed the petition?
People have the right to sign any petition they want. People also have the right to speak their minds. I don't have a problem with any of this and I don't think the petition will amount to much. But I think it's concerning you have people who want to ban somebody simply because they don't like what he has to say.
Also,Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

by Ethel mermania » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:30 pm

by Mike the Progressive » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:31 pm

by Fartsniffage » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:32 pm

by Ugatoo » Thu Dec 10, 2015 4:38 pm
Fartsniffage wrote:Ethel mermania wrote:it doesn't it only infriges on trumps speech if the ban is carried out. it just shows there are 300,000 intolerant jerks, in the UK
More like half a million at this point. And he's not being banned from speaking, just being denied a venue in which to do so. Does even the first amendment guarantee a venue for speech?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: -Astoria-, Alvecia, Amenson, American Legionaries, Eahland, Grand matrix of Dues ex machina, Shrillland, Southeast Iraq, Stellar Colonies, Thermodolia, Vassenor
Advertisement