Wars

MilesAway

Bongalong
Back in January or February, Biden thought Trump closing travel from China was an example of hysterical xenophobia. Nancy Pelosi encouraged everyone to come to Chinatown (in her home district) and commingle in the business district.

European countries didn't take affirmative steps either, and we saw what coronavirus did in Europe.

Your country let coronavirus into your country, and now 904 people are dead. Tell me, who do you blame for that? Which of your leaders murdered those 904 people?

War is a deliberate act, intended to cause death. I don't believe Trump, the leaders in Europe, or in Australia deliberately killed anybody from the virus, and so there is no equivalence. My country has anywhere between 20-50,000 deaths from influenza every year. Who do you want to blame for that? Who do you blame for that in Australia? How about in Europe?
Greg just hates the western world 😂
 

HBS Guy

Head Honcho
Staff member
It was the Feds let the COVID19 infected people disembark from the Ruby Princess cruise ship.

Scummo also delayed closing the borders so his Pentecostal church could have its conference, hundreds of foreigners bringiong the disease with them.
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
Humans GET fleas from their cats and dogs. But humans don't generally HAVE fleas, because fleas can't survive on humans.
Dogs GET fleas too you dopey moron. Or if you prefer we can apply 'catch, acquire, receive, gain, obtain' or any other word you want to use? They don't just magically appear. You're applying one rule for one species , and another for the other. Why? Because if you applied the same rule to both you'd have to admit you were wrong. .. and that is simply beyond you.


Either dogs have fleas, or dogs do not have fleas. Which is the fact, and which is just a figment of your imagination?
Neither, both are wishful thinking. The fact is that 'SOME dogs have fleas'.

I'm not pretending anything
sure you are ... here's one example from you: 'Stating that dogs have fleas is a general statement of fact. '

How many dogs does it apply to genius? Some dogs, most dogs, all dogs, or the majority of dogs? What percentage of all dogs have fleas John? What is your evidence?
So now I have to count them? You are beyond ridiculous.

Please just stop talking!!! Believe whatever you want.
Go fuck yourself. Anytime you wanna run away, feel free. Until then, I'll talk all I want.
 
Well indeed Shell that IS what people do. As you have clearly come to understand.
So belief can be religious.. not my thing.. or anything else you can imagine.
Elvis is alive. Man never went to the Moon. Aliens live among us.
By definition, there can only be ONE God. And by extension, there can only be ONE religion. All religions can't be right. But all religions can certainly be wrong. In fact, scientifically, NO GOD CAN EXIST IN OUR PHYSICAL REALITY, WITHOUT DESTROYING THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE.

There have been 6 crewed moon landings between 1969 and 1972. We can even see the 3 lunar rovers that we left there from the earth. Are these facts, also just a conspiracy?

Elvis IS dead, and is buried in Graceland. Just ask his doctor, family, close friends and relatives, who all had to ID his body. Are all these people lying as well?

Aliens either do not exist, or they do. If they do exist, then we should be knee-deep in them by now(Fermi Paradox, Drake Equation).
.

Belief is the total absence of facts. Many people choose belief over facts, because it affords them the protection from ever being proven wrong. This is the domain of the deliberately ignorant. No matter how strong your beliefs may be, without facts, they will crumble under the slightest bit of scrutiny. You can believe all you want that you can fly, or travel to some enlightened world, by just using your mind. But in reality, you will still have never left the ground. No matter how strongly your belief may be.

FACTS don't matter when it comes to believing things in many cases...
You've got it backwards. Beliefs don't matter in the presence of facts. The more facts you know, the less you need to believe you know. Beliefs will always be conceptual, while facts will always be perceptual. It will still be a fact that dogs have fleas, regardless of your beliefs. Maybe you can provide an example of where FACTS don't matter, regarding your beliefs?

I do understand the very basis of your argument.. that facts exist irrespective of human input.
Clearly you don't. I was speaking about perspectives. From the moon's perspective, your existence is totally irrelevant to its existence. But from your perspective, the moon can only exist if you do. This is because all of reality is subjective, from your perspective.

Dogs having fleas is a fact. Whether you exist or not. Or, whether you believe or not. Quite cogent and relevant.

But that is a broad fact. It does other stuff as well.
Stating that dogs have fleas, is a broad fact. In respect to what? The type of fleas, or the percentage of dogs? What other stuff?

So arguing about human issues of fact is just a waste of time.. well assuming TIME exists.
Perhaps we just think it does, because our brains can't accept that everything is happening at once. !
Should we be arguing human issues based only on beliefs? Now THAT would be a true waste of time.

We live in a universe where if we drop ink in a glass of water, it will spread out over time, and eventually fill the glass. This is consistent with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Which says that systems will gain disorder(entropy) over time. The ink does NOT unfold backwards in time. This order to disorder, defines the direction of time. Yet we can physically move through space in ALL directions, but can only move through time in only one direction. Maybe time exists as an emergent property of the entire system. Emergent properties are things that don't exist as individual pieces of a system. But do exist for the system as a whole. Here are some examples.

A picture in a picture puzzle does not exist, until all the pieces are put together. A water molecule does not have a tide. But the whole ocean does. A movie creates change through time by creating a series of still images. These images will appear to continually change, if we flip through them fast enough. This is the emergent illusion of time passing, that our brain system creates for us. NO individual still image contains time. It is an emergent property for the entire system. In our universe, the passage of time is real and in one direction. But our individual perception of time is only an illusion, relative to our passing through spacetime. In fact, we have no conception of past-time at all, do we? Can you conceive of any passage of time, between the time you fell asleep and woke up?

Again, my two cents worth.
 
My initial comment was, "And, humans CAN get fleas from their pets(fact).". And your response was,

"get fleas? Is that somehow relevant? Does it matter the source or are you now claiming fleas are produced by the dogs own body? Just as SOME people have fleas, some dogs have fleas. You're not likely to argue that 'people have fleas' is a fact, because it's conditional ... so why apply a different rule when talking about dogs?".

Now you are saying,

Dogs GET fleas too you dopey moron. Or if you prefer we can apply 'catch, acquire, receive, gain, obtain' or any other word you want to use? They don't just magically appear. You're applying one rule for one species , and another for the other. Why? Because if you applied the same rule to both you'd have to admit you were wrong. .. and that is simply beyond you.
I won't ask you what rule you are talking about, because clearly you don't have a clue. We say that dogs HAVE fleas is a fact, because dogs clearly do HAVE fleas. When you think about fleas, what are the first animals that come to mind? Humans? We associate dogs as having fleas as a truism, Also, there are no species of humans. But there are 340 species of dogs.

No rational human associates humans as having fleas. The reasoning is, that fleas do not survive on humans(blood, environment, etc.). Therefore, I said that humans GET fleas from their pets, because dogs and cats are the primary pets of humans. And, because dogs and cats also have fleas. Therefore, dogs and cats, being pets of humans, and both having fleas, is the primary source of where humans can GET fleas from. I CAN'T MAKE THIS ANY SIMPLER FOR YOU!!!

It is also totally irrelevant, WHERE DOGS OR CATS GET THEIR FLEAS FROM. All that is relevant in my statement, is where HUMANS GET their fleas from. What other obvious sources do humans get their fleas from?

Go fuck yourself. Anytime you wanna run away, feel free. Until then, I'll talk all I want.
I'd say go fuck your own self, but clearly you've already been fucked. And, every time you open your mouth only proves it! The minute your opinions are challenged, you go off on these mind numbing profanity tirades. You are only an expert at running, avoiding, misrepresenting, back-peddling, and changing the goal post. Hence why you won't answer my questions directly, without the added BS. I certainly wish you would stop talking, because it is so painful to read. But I can't make you. That has always been a given, Capt. Obvious.

People simply end arguments with you out of frustration, not out of agreement or disagreement. I may disagree with Seth, but at least he makes valid, logical, consistent, and fact based arguments. So the best I can do is to agree to disagree. You just keep changing the goal posts to keep going the distance. Any person arguing with you, is essentially arguing with himself. You keep misrepresenting their words, to keep them defending against things they've never said.

I've never said, "ALL" dogs, "SOME" dogs, or even a "FEW" dogs, in my initial comments. These were the red herrings, you used to support your moronic interpretation of my comments. Just stick to what I actually said, and NOT what you wanted me to say. Unlike you, I take the time to make sure that my statements are "idiot proof". Obviously in your case, I was clearly unsuccessful.

Now, lets see what new version of what I've said, will you come back with!!
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
By definition, there can only be ONE God. And by extension, there can only be ONE religion. All religions can't be right. But all religions can certainly be wrong. In fact, scientifically, NO GOD CAN EXIST IN OUR PHYSICAL REALITY, WITHOUT DESTROYING THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE.

There have been 6 crewed moon landings between 1969 and 1972. We can even see the 3 lunar rovers that we left there from the earth. Are these facts, also just a conspiracy?

Elvis IS dead, and is buried in Graceland. Just ask his doctor, family, close friends and relatives, who all had to ID his body. Are all these people lying as well?

Aliens either do not exist, or they do. If they do exist, then we should be knee-deep in them by now(Fermi Paradox, Drake Equation).
.

Belief is the total absence of facts. Many people choose belief over facts, because it affords them the protection from ever being proven wrong. This is the domain of the deliberately ignorant. No matter how strong your beliefs may be, without facts, they will crumble under the slightest bit of scrutiny. You can believe all you want that you can fly, or travel to some enlightened world, by just using your mind. But in reality, you will still have never left the ground. No matter how strongly your belief may be.



You've got it backwards. Beliefs don't matter in the presence of facts. The more facts you know, the less you need to believe you know. Beliefs will always be conceptual, while facts will always be perceptual. It will still be a fact that dogs have fleas, regardless of your beliefs. Maybe you can provide an example of where FACTS don't matter, regarding your beliefs?



Clearly you don't. I was speaking about perspectives. From the moon's perspective, your existence is totally irrelevant to its existence. But from your perspective, the moon can only exist if you do. This is because all of reality is subjective, from your perspective.

Dogs having fleas is a fact. Whether you exist or not. Or, whether you believe or not. Quite cogent and relevant.



Stating that dogs have fleas, is a broad fact. In respect to what? The type of fleas, or the percentage of dogs? What other stuff?



Should we be arguing human issues based only on beliefs? Now THAT would be a true waste of time.

We live in a universe where if we drop ink in a glass of water, it will spread out over time, and eventually fill the glass. This is consistent with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Which says that systems will gain disorder(entropy) over time. The ink does NOT unfold backwards in time. This order to disorder, defines the direction of time. Yet we can physically move through space in ALL directions, but can only move through time in only one direction. Maybe time exists as an emergent property of the entire system. Emergent properties are things that don't exist as individual pieces of a system. But do exist for the system as a whole. Here are some examples.

A picture in a picture puzzle does not exist, until all the pieces are put together. A water molecule does not have a tide. But the whole ocean does. A movie creates change through time by creating a series of still images. These images will appear to continually change, if we flip through them fast enough. This is the emergent illusion of time passing, that our brain system creates for us. NO individual still image contains time. It is an emergent property for the entire system. In our universe, the passage of time is real and in one direction. But our individual perception of time is only an illusion, relative to our passing through spacetime. In fact, we have no conception of past-time at all, do we? Can you conceive of any passage of time, between the time you fell asleep and woke up?

Again, my two cents worth.

TWO CENTS WORTH.

No lots more worth than that... see I am showing you........ I see things in a very literal sense. The way my mind works..

I'll need time to to read that post.
 
What did anyone expect Trump to do, once the Coronavirus was known? Shutdown all flights in and out of the US? Close down Wall Street and Big Businesses? Tell 350M people to keep 1.5 meters apart? Shutdown all sporting venues, libraries, weddings, churches, funerals. the Hospitality and Tourist Industries, and all parks and recreational facilities? Or, to tell people to wear useless masks, or to download government tracking apps? Does he tell small business owners to close their doors to stop the spread of a flu-like virus? Does he continue to increase the average unemployment rate to over 15%, with over 40M people unemployed(15M during the Great Depression)? Should he now start deputizing special government inspectors, to enforce these government mandates?


Who in their right mind would cripple their own government, fuck with the future of its own citizens, isolate the entire country from the world, and give enforcement powers to anyone willing to enforce government mandates? Oh! Australia. Does anyone see any problems with that much power? Do the means justify the cause, or does the cause justify the means. In Australia, it seems that it is the means that is justifying the cause. Especially, when we consider, that only 0.1% of the population has been infected(2.3% of the US population), and only 0.003% of the population has died(0.06% of the US population)? I won't even begin to look at the demographics of the mortality rates. Only 20 Australians under 60 years old have died from Covid-19(2% of all those who have died). This means that over 98% of Australians dying from Covid-19 are over 60. That is 1 in 7 infected Australians.

If the infection and mortality rates of this virus were even at 5% or 10% of the population, I would be leading the fight for isolation and more government intervention. But the facts just don't justify the actions.

Also, any war that is based on greed, idealism, imperialisms, or is clearly provoked, is a complete and total waste of human life. Our soldiers should be sacrificing their lives, protecting real and imminent threats to their own country's sovereignty and way of life. Any other reason is NOT worthy of their sacrifice. But humans cause wars, not viruses
 
TWO CENTS WORTH.

No lots more worth than that... see I am showing you........ I see things in a very literal sense. The way my mind works..

I'll need time to to read that post.

I think that there are those that will consider WHATEVER I write, or how MUCH I write, as only "Non-cents".
 

johnsmith

Moderator
Staff member
We say that dogs HAVE fleas is a fact, because dogs clearly do HAVE fleas
No, you are wrong. Again, I've had multiple dogs throughout my life, most have never had fleas. Some dogs have fleas and thats only when they GET them from another source. From the sounds of it I'm doubting you've ever even owned a dog.

I won't ask you what rule you are talking about, because clearly you don't have a clue
Here's another FACT for you ..... the only one of us sounding clueless right now is you

I'd say go fuck your own self, but clearly you've already been fucked.
no prizes for second place you dumb cunt.

I've never said, "ALL" dogs, "SOME" dogs, or even a "FEW" dogs, in my initial comments. These were the red herrings, you used to support your moronic interpretation of my comments.
No, you didn't ... and that was your mistake. The claim that 'dogs have fleas' IS absolutely WRONG. The 'red herrings' as you so called them are not red herrings at all, they're holes in your argument. You claim people don't have fleas they catch fleas, whilst ignoring the fact that dogs catch fleas too. The claim that 'dogs have fleas' is an all encompassing statement, implying all dogs. Then when you are called on it you make out ther claims of red herrings or play the victim, rather than admit you were wrong. You keep telling yourself that your right and everyone else is wrong if you like, it won't help you. You're still WRONG
 
No, you are wrong. Again, I've had multiple dogs throughout my life, most have never had fleas. Some dogs have fleas and thats only when they GET them from another source. From the sounds of it I'm doubting you've ever even owned a dog.


Here's another FACT for you ..... the only one of us sounding clueless right now is you


no prizes for second place you dumb cunt.


No, you didn't ... and that was your mistake. The claim that 'dogs have fleas' IS absolutely WRONG. The 'red herrings' as you so called them are not red herrings at all, they're holes in your argument. You claim people don't have fleas they catch fleas, whilst ignoring the fact that dogs catch fleas too. The claim that 'dogs have fleas' is an all encompassing statement, implying all dogs. Then when you are called on it you make out ther claims of red herrings or play the victim, rather than admit you were wrong.

DO DOGS HAVE FLEAS OR NOT, YOU DUMB FUCK??? YES or NO?

CAN FLEAS SURVIVE ON HUMANS, YOU CLOSET MISANTHROPE??? YES or NO?

WHAT IS THIS RULE THAT YOU CLAIM I'M MISAPPLYING, YOU ANNOYING LITTLE TROLL???

So, is it NOT a fact that humans have 2 eyes and 2 arms, because ALL humans don't have 2 eyes and 2 arms? Is it NOT a fact that mammals give live birth, because ALL mammals don't give live birth? Is it NOT a fact that birds fly, because ALL birds don't fly? And, I suppose that it is NOT a fact that elderly people die from Covid-19, because ALL elderly people don't die from Covid-19? What is your answer, dumb dumb?

My initial statement regarding dogs having fleas was to Pinkeye(post #491) . I was trying to explain to her, that facts are still facts, regardless of where they come from. Dogs having fleas was just one example that I used. It was meant to be only an example, not the entire subject.

DOGS HAVE FLEAS IS A FACT. Doesn't matter where the info comes from. Light travels at a certain speed in a vacuum is a fact. It doesn't matter who tells you this.
So where in my initial comments do I include the words ALL, SOME, or FEW? These are the red herrings that you use to misrepresent my statement. I don't know if ALL, SOME, or a FEW dogs have fleas. But I certainly know for a fact, that DOGS do have fleas!! It is totally irrelevant WHERE dogs get their fleas from. But it IS relevant where humans GET their fleas from. Because, it is NOT NORMAL for humans to have fleas, for the reasons I've mentioned. But it is certainly normal for dogs to have fleas.

What was my mistake genius? Are you saying that dogs DON'T have fleas? Is that the mistake I'm making? So prove it. I have had 3 dogs(Kippy, Shilo, and Beaudog), and 3 cats(TC, Chubbs, Mrs. B). All of them had fleas. But just because all my dogs have had fleas, I'm not stupid enough to make the claim that ALL dogs must have fleas. And, certainly not stupid enough to claim,
"When I had my dogs I had for 8 and 12 years ... they never had fleas. So your 'fact' is in fact a flop.". What are you implying here genius? That because YOUR dogs don't have fleas, therefore dogs don't have fleas? Insane logic!

You keep telling yourself that your right and everyone else is wrong if you like, it won't help you. You're still WRONG
The difference here is that I AM right. And, you know it. It is simply arrogance, pride, ego, shame, ignorance, and immaturity, that prevents you from just admitting it. Who else is willing to admit that dogs DON'T have fleas is a fact John? Certainly no Vets. Or anyone else on the internet. Who are these everybody's that think like you?

Are you just going to keep huffing, puffing, ducking, and posturing, to avoid answering my questions? Or, will you just admit that dogs having fleas, is really a statement of fact? Not just a generalized statement? Like the red herrings you deposited.
 

pinkeye

Wonder woman
What did anyone expect Trump to do, once the Coronavirus was known? Shutdown all flights in and out of the US? Close down Wall Street and Big Businesses? Tell 350M people to keep 1.5 meters apart? Shutdown all sporting venues, libraries, weddings, churches, funerals. the Hospitality and Tourist Industries, and all parks and recreational facilities? Or, to tell people to wear useless masks, or to download government tracking apps? Does he tell small business owners to close their doors to stop the spread of a flu-like virus? Does he continue to increase the average unemployment rate to over 15%, with over 40M people unemployed(15M during the Great Depression)? Should he now start deputizing special government inspectors, to enforce these government mandates?


Who in their right mind would cripple their own government, fuck with the future of its own citizens, isolate the entire country from the world, and give enforcement powers to anyone willing to enforce government mandates? Oh! Australia. Does anyone see any problems with that much power? Do the means justify the cause, or does the cause justify the means. In Australia, it seems that it is the means that is justifying the cause. Especially, when we consider, that only 0.1% of the population has been infected(2.3% of the US population), and only 0.003% of the population has died(0.06% of the US population)? I won't even begin to look at the demographics of the mortality rates. Only 20 Australians under 60 years old have died from Covid-19(2% of all those who have died). This means that over 98% of Australians dying from Covid-19 are over 60. That is 1 in 7 infected Australians.

If the infection and mortality rates of this virus were even at 5% or 10% of the population, I would be leading the fight for isolation and more government intervention. But the facts just don't justify the actions.

Also, any war that is based on greed, idealism, imperialisms, or is clearly provoked, is a complete and total waste of human life. Our soldiers should be sacrificing their lives, protecting real and imminent threats to their own country's sovereignty and way of life. Any other reason is NOT worthy of their sacrifice. But humans cause wars, not viruses

Yep in answer... we do.
 
Top