NATION

PASSWORD

MAGAThread XIV: All persons born or naturalized ...

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Tarsonis
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5550
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tarsonis » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:23 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
That is basically what you said. Republicans need to compromise, or else it’s their fault the government shuts down. But when the roles are reversed, the narrative is Republicans need to shut up and accept the Democrats Legislative agenda and approve what they say.

In every dialogue it’s always the other side that needs to compromise, never “our” side.


I thought that we could all like the working man and not destroying the planet.

Silly me, I forgot those were partisan issues for some reason.


Ah I See, we should compromise cause your views are right, and the Democrats should not compromise cause our views our wrong.



Quelle surprise
Proud NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005. M.A.R. Yale Divinity School ‘18.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17903
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Valrifell » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:26 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
That is basically what you said. Republicans need to compromise, or else it’s their fault the government shuts down. But when the roles are reversed, the narrative is Republicans need to shut up and accept the Democrats Legislative agenda and approve what they say.

In every dialogue it’s always the other side that needs to compromise, never “our” side.


I thought that we could all like the working man and not destroying the planet.

Silly me, I forgot those were partisan issues for some reason.


Also, you're still putting words in my mouth. I just want a functioning government (and a healthy planet, but you can't win 'em all) at this point. Currently, Dems have offered compromise at every turn, even when Republicans were in a similar position.

This level of noncooperation is so extreme and radical that it's honestly amazing you're here trying to make the case that it's not or it's both sides, when most metrics point to that not being the case. All while putting words in my mouth

Anything to morally justify why you're okay with the shutdown for the wall, I guess.
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you

I did some things

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17903
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Valrifell » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:27 am

Tarsonis wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
I thought that we could all like the working man and not destroying the planet.

Silly me, I forgot those were partisan issues for some reason.


Ah I See, we should compromise cause your views are right, and the Democrats should not compromise cause our views our wrong.



Quelle surprise


Alexa, what is a scientific consensus?
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you

I did some things

User avatar
Tarsonis
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5550
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tarsonis » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:27 am

Valrifell wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
I thought that we could all like the working man and not destroying the planet.

Silly me, I forgot those were partisan issues for some reason.


Also, you're still putting words in my mouth. I just want a functioning government (and a healthy planet, but you can't win 'em all) at this point. Currently, Dems have offered compromise at every turn, even when Republicans were in a similar position.

This level of noncooperation is so extreme and radical that it's honestly amazing you're here trying to make the case that it's not or it's both sides, when most metrics point to that not being the case. All while putting words in my mouth

Anything to morally justify why you're okay with the shutdown for the wall, I guess.


No you’re telling me things we should compromise over. Funny how they’re all things you want.
Proud NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005. M.A.R. Yale Divinity School ‘18.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Tarsonis
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5550
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tarsonis » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:28 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
Ah I See, we should compromise cause your views are right, and the Democrats should not compromise cause our views our wrong.



Quelle surprise


Alexa, what is a scientific consensus?


TDIL science is done by consensus.
Proud NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005. M.A.R. Yale Divinity School ‘18.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Telconi
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20807
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:29 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
Ah I See, we should compromise cause your views are right, and the Democrats should not compromise cause our views our wrong.



Quelle surprise


Alexa, what is a scientific consensus?


It isn't a political policy...
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17903
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Valrifell » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:29 am

Tarsonis wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
Also, you're still putting words in my mouth. I just want a functioning government (and a healthy planet, but you can't win 'em all) at this point. Currently, Dems have offered compromise at every turn, even when Republicans were in a similar position.

This level of noncooperation is so extreme and radical that it's honestly amazing you're here trying to make the case that it's not or it's both sides, when most metrics point to that not being the case. All while putting words in my mouth

Anything to morally justify why you're okay with the shutdown for the wall, I guess.


No you’re telling me things we should compromise over. Funny how they’re all things you want.


The only two suggesions I've made was not letting Miami drown and a vague notion of not fucking over the working class.

Again, you're imagining my views to cast me as the villainous hypocrite to morally justify why you're okay with Reps not compromising on the wall.
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you

I did some things

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17903
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Valrifell » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:29 am

Tarsonis wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
Alexa, what is a scientific consensus?


TDIL science is done by consensus.


Usually, yes.

Consensus until an anomaly presents itself, as of now our climate models are pretty fucking on point.
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you

I did some things

User avatar
Tarsonis
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5550
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tarsonis » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:31 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
No you’re telling me things we should compromise over. Funny how they’re all things you want.


The only two suggesions I've made was not letting Miami drown and a vague notion of not fucking over the working class.

Again, you're imagining my views to cast me as the villainous hypocrite to morally justify why you're okay with Reps not compromising on the wall.


Because you and everyone else who talks about compromising, aren’t being honest. Your notion of compromise is “give me what I want, and you get nothing” and you couch it in “my stance is reasonable your stance is not”
Proud NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005. M.A.R. Yale Divinity School ‘18.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17903
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Valrifell » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:33 am

Tarsonis wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
The only two suggesions I've made was not letting Miami drown and a vague notion of not fucking over the working class.

Again, you're imagining my views to cast me as the villainous hypocrite to morally justify why you're okay with Reps not compromising on the wall.


Because you and everyone else who talks about compromising, aren’t being honest. Your notion of compromise is “give me what I want, and you get nothing” and you couch it in “my stance is reasonable your stance is not”


In the terms of the environment, I am right, though.

And these are the views of the party you support more, not mine. I'd be happy to up funding in the military for other stuff, relax gun laws for other stuff, and deregulate for other stuff.

The environment is non-negotiable for a variety of reasons, most of which boil down to "the experts agree with me and I like living (most days)"
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you

I did some things

User avatar
Petrasylvania
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10649
Founded: Oct 20, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Petrasylvania » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:33 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
Ah I See, we should compromise cause your views are right, and the Democrats should not compromise cause our views our wrong.



Quelle surprise


Alexa, what is a scientific consensus?

The wall is less a deterrent to migration than a monument to Donnie's vanity.
Crimes committed by Muslims will be proof of a pan-Islamic plot and Islam's inherent evil. On the other hand, crimes committed by non-Muslims will merely be the acts of mentally ill lone wolves who do not represent their professed belief system at all.
The probability of someone secretly participating in homosexual acts is directly proportional to the frequency and loudness of their publicly professed disapproval and/or disgust for homosexuality.
If Donald Trump accuses an individual of malfeasance without evidence, it is almost a certainty either he or someone associated with him has in fact committed that very same malfeasance to a greater degree.

New Flag Courtesy of The Realist Polities

User avatar
Tarsonis
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5550
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tarsonis » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:34 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
TDIL science is done by consensus.


Usually, yes.

Consensus until an anomaly presents itself, as of now our climate models are pretty fucking on point.


Nevermind the 97% figure is incredibly contrived, science is not done by consensus. If 97% of all scientists were in consensus that chlorophyll had nothing to do with photosynthesis, then 97% of scientists would be wrong.
Proud NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005. M.A.R. Yale Divinity School ‘18.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Telconi
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20807
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:34 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
No you’re telling me things we should compromise over. Funny how they’re all things you want.


The only two suggesions I've made was not letting Miami drown and a vague notion of not fucking over the working class.

Again, you're imagining my views to cast me as the villainous hypocrite to morally justify why you're okay with Reps not compromising on the wall.


These suggestions become policies, these policies become bills. These bills suck.
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Petrasylvania
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10649
Founded: Oct 20, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Petrasylvania » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:35 am

Tarsonis wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
Alexa, what is a scientific consensus?


TDIL science is done by consensus.

So Andrew Wakefield was right all along.
Crimes committed by Muslims will be proof of a pan-Islamic plot and Islam's inherent evil. On the other hand, crimes committed by non-Muslims will merely be the acts of mentally ill lone wolves who do not represent their professed belief system at all.
The probability of someone secretly participating in homosexual acts is directly proportional to the frequency and loudness of their publicly professed disapproval and/or disgust for homosexuality.
If Donald Trump accuses an individual of malfeasance without evidence, it is almost a certainty either he or someone associated with him has in fact committed that very same malfeasance to a greater degree.

New Flag Courtesy of The Realist Polities

User avatar
Tarsonis
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5550
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tarsonis » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:35 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
Because you and everyone else who talks about compromising, aren’t being honest. Your notion of compromise is “give me what I want, and you get nothing” and you couch it in “my stance is reasonable your stance is not”


In the terms of the environment, I am right, though.

And these are the views of the party you support more, not mine. I'd be happy to up funding in the military for other stuff, relax gun laws for other stuff, and deregulate for other stuff.

The environment is non-negotiable for a variety of reasons, most of which boil down to "the experts agree with me and I like living (most days)"



Of course you are. “I’m right, my opponents wrong. And that’s just abject fact I’m in no way obligated to convince my opponents they must just capitulate to my sheer verocity.”

Funny how that hasn’t worked yet after 20 years
Proud NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005. M.A.R. Yale Divinity School ‘18.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Tarsonis
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5550
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tarsonis » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:36 am

Petrasylvania wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
Alexa, what is a scientific consensus?

The wall is less a deterrent to migration than a monument to Donnie's vanity.


Gauth reaching do the illogical conclusion. Must be Tuesday.
Proud NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005. M.A.R. Yale Divinity School ‘18.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Telconi
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20807
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:36 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
Because you and everyone else who talks about compromising, aren’t being honest. Your notion of compromise is “give me what I want, and you get nothing” and you couch it in “my stance is reasonable your stance is not”


In the terms of the environment, I am right, though.

And these are the views of the party you support more, not mine. I'd be happy to up funding in the military for other stuff, relax gun laws for other stuff, and deregulate for other stuff.

The environment is non-negotiable for a variety of reasons, most of which boil down to "the experts agree with me and I like living (most days)"


You're also not part of the Democratic leadership, which doesn't make good compromises.
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17903
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Valrifell » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:38 am

Tarsonis wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
Usually, yes.

Consensus until an anomaly presents itself, as of now our climate models are pretty fucking on point.


Nevermind the 97% figure is incredibly contrived, science is not done by consensus. If 97% of all scientists were in consensus that chlorophyll had nothing to do with photosynthesis, then 97% of scientists would be wrong.


"99% of scientists say gravity exists, there's still a possibility that they're wrong so jury's out"

Again, consensus until anomaly, then divergence and new consensus. "Consensus" isn't even the right word, for "metascience" the term is "paradigm"

Yes, paradigm shifts happen. This does not render the predictions made thirty years ago (which are being proven right) invalid. Quite the opposite, a theory that survives this long under such scrutiny and skepticism tends to be correct. Like evolution.

Since the science and facts are in agreement we should not compromise.
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you

I did some things

User avatar
Valrifell
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17903
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Valrifell » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:40 am

Tarsonis wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
In the terms of the environment, I am right, though.

And these are the views of the party you support more, not mine. I'd be happy to up funding in the military for other stuff, relax gun laws for other stuff, and deregulate for other stuff.

The environment is non-negotiable for a variety of reasons, most of which boil down to "the experts agree with me and I like living (most days)"



Of course you are. “I’m right, my opponents wrong. And that’s just abject fact I’m in no way obligated to convince my opponents they must just capitulate to my sheer verocity.”

Funny how that hasn’t worked yet after 20 years


With regards to environment, you've elected to ignore the current scientific consensus under the notion that paradigm shifts happen. Clearly no amount of facts or logic will help here considering you've granted yourself a mechanism to handwave that.

All of this still doesn't change the fact that this argument is you trying to cast me in a particular role to justify how you can support Reps here with the wall while bemoaning the loss of compromise.
Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio
Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you

I did some things

User avatar
Telconi
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20807
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:41 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
Nevermind the 97% figure is incredibly contrived, science is not done by consensus. If 97% of all scientists were in consensus that chlorophyll had nothing to do with photosynthesis, then 97% of scientists would be wrong.


"99% of scientists say gravity exists, there's still a possibility that they're wrong so jury's out"

Again, consensus until anomaly, then divergence and new consensus. "Consensus" isn't even the right word, for "metascience" the term is "paradigm"

Yes, paradigm shifts happen. This does not render the predictions made thirty years ago (which are being proven right) invalid. Quite the opposite, a theory that survives this long under such scrutiny and skepticism tends to be correct. Like evolution.

Since the science and facts are in agreement we should not compromise.


We're not talking about facts, or science, or paradigm. We're talking about policies and laws, on which you are expressing an opinion. That opinion isn't objective fact.
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Tarsonis
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5550
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tarsonis » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:42 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:
Nevermind the 97% figure is incredibly contrived, science is not done by consensus. If 97% of all scientists were in consensus that chlorophyll had nothing to do with photosynthesis, then 97% of scientists would be wrong.


"99% of scientists say gravity exists, there's still a possibility that they're wrong so jury's out"

Again, consensus until anomaly, then divergence and new consensus. "Consensus" isn't even the right word, for "metascience" the term is "paradigm"

Yes, paradigm shifts happen. This does not render the predictions made thirty years ago (which are being proven right) invalid. Quite the opposite, a theory that survives this long under such scrutiny and skepticism tends to be correct. Like evolution.

Since the science and facts are in agreement we should not compromise.


Just like Gauth reaching to the exteme, though you’re more on track. Gravity is a probable, measurable phenomenon (though nobody is really sure how it works). So it wouldn’t matter if 99% said it didn’t exist, what matters is the demonstrable evidence. The problem with the GE argument is it rests on consensus, not demonstrable phenonmenon.

And, side note, the validity of GW isn’t the point. The point is nobody is realiy interested in compromising. Everyone’s view of compromise is “my position is right, your position is wrong and you should just see how right I am and capitulate to me rather than work out a deal”


Believe it or not, “because I’m right” doesn’t have the persuasive power you think it does, even if it’s true.
Last edited by Tarsonis on Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
Proud NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005. M.A.R. Yale Divinity School ‘18.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Tarsonis
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5550
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tarsonis » Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:44 am

Valrifell wrote:
Tarsonis wrote:

Of course you are. “I’m right, my opponents wrong. And that’s just abject fact I’m in no way obligated to convince my opponents they must just capitulate to my sheer verocity.”

Funny how that hasn’t worked yet after 20 years


With regards to environment, you've elected to ignore the current scientific consensus under the notion that paradigm shifts happen. Clearly no amount of facts or logic will help here considering you've granted yourself a mechanism to handwave that.

All of this still doesn't change the fact that this argument is you trying to cast me in a particular role to justify how you can support Reps here with the wall while bemoaning the loss of compromise.


No I’ve ignore the consensus because the concensus isn’t proof of anything. 1000 years ago everyone thought Galen’s humors was “settled science”. The one guy who knows it’s bullshit doesn’t still practice it just because everyone else says so.
Last edited by Tarsonis on Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Proud NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005. M.A.R. Yale Divinity School ‘18.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Corrian
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 69484
Founded: Mar 19, 2011
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Corrian » Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:01 am

My Last.FM and RYM

RP's hosted by me: The Last of Us RP's

Look on the bright side, one day you'll be dead~Street Sects

User avatar
Tarsonis
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5550
Founded: Sep 20, 2017
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Tarsonis » Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:09 am



Hmm maybe they are sneaking the money in the Defense Budget to build the wall
Proud NS Keyboard Warrior since 2005. M.A.R. Yale Divinity School ‘18.
Ecclesiastes 1:18 "For in much wisdom is much vexation, and those who increase knowledge increase sorrow"
Galatians 6:7 " Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow."
1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
T. Stevens: "I don't hold with equality in all things, but I believe in equality under the Law."
James I of Aragon "Have you ever considered that our position is Idolatry to the Rabbi?"
Debating Christian Theology with Non-Christians pretty much anybody be like

User avatar
Maineiacs
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6403
Founded: May 26, 2005
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Maineiacs » Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:14 am

Tarsonis wrote:
Valrifell wrote:
With regards to environment, you've elected to ignore the current scientific consensus under the notion that paradigm shifts happen. Clearly no amount of facts or logic will help here considering you've granted yourself a mechanism to handwave that.

All of this still doesn't change the fact that this argument is you trying to cast me in a particular role to justify how you can support Reps here with the wall while bemoaning the loss of compromise.


No I’ve ignore the consensus because the concensus isn’t proof of anything. 1000 years ago everyone thought Galen’s humors was “settled science”. The one guy who knows it’s bullshit doesn’t still practice it just because everyone else says so.



So how do you know it's bullshit? What's your expertise in this area?
Economic:-8.12 Social:-7.59 Moral Rules:5 Moral Order:-5
Muravyets: Maineiacs, you are brilliant, too! I stand in delighted awe.
Sane Outcasts:When your best case scenario is five kilometers of nuclear contamination, you know someone fucked up.
Geniasis: Christian values are incompatible with Conservative ideals. I cannot both follow the teachings of Christ and be a Republican. Therefore, I choose to not be a Republican.
Galloism: If someone will build a wall around Donald Trump, I'll pay for it.
Bottle tells it like it is
add 6,928 to post count

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Absolon-7, Aeresetar, Auzkhia, Cannot think of a name, Cerinda, Confederate States of German America, Des-Bal, Diopolis, Eastfield Lodge, El-Amin Caliphate, Elketreth, Ethel mermania, Google Adsense [Bot], Grinning Dragon, Hystaria, Internationalist Bastard, Liriena, Lost Memories, Major-Tom, Menna Shuli, Minachia, New Elesar, Ors Might, SD_Film Artists, Shrillland, Straisn, Tatarica, Terruana, The Cotton Club, The Huskar Social Union, The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord, Thermodolia, Valrifell

Advertisement

Remove ads