logo Sign In

China — Page 4

Author
Time
Post link
Apparently no one caught this:

FanFiltration said:

I got that graph from a very entertaining article about how the seeds of the next American civil war can be seen in worthless debates such as this.


Yeah, a debate that you're actually participating in. So it seems to me that you're just as guilty as the rest of us.

FanFiltration said:

This tool is for people such as myself that enjoy baiting, and also observing the types of debate tactics, reactions, and over reactions employed by the posters here.


And here you admit to baiting, which is generally a bannable offense on most sites. There are actually statements in the TOS that could fall under that, but I'll leave it to the mods to decide if it's worth a ban.

FanFiltration said:

Do some of you truly feel you are changing anyones mind about any issues here? By the amount of strong emotions placed in some of the postings, I think they do.


Maybe, maybe not. We're all, with the possible exception of you, here to have a hopefully civilized debate.

FanFiltration said:

Do some lose sleep about any of this, have their ego bruised, or even carry a feeling of pride of a battle well fought over this banter?


I doubt it. At least I don't. That would truly be a waste of time.

FanFiltration said:

Does the ability to have personal interactions and debate with others outside the virtual confines of this forum mirror your etiquette here?


Of course not. In person, people can see my facial expression. I don't have to curse in order to express "You go to hell!" if someone dares call me a racist in person (not saying it's happened, just using an example). In fact, in person I can either ignore the person who has made the comment and just not talk to them or I can totally walk away with some visible sign that they're just a retard. Online, all I can do is not respond, which is sometimes taken as the person thinking they're right.

So if you're just going to continue to bait us, then either this thread needs to die, it needs to be locked, or you need to be banned.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link
lordjedi said:

Apparently no one caught this:


FanFiltration said:

This tool is for people such as myself that enjoy baiting, and also observing the types of debate tactics, reactions, and over reactions employed by the posters here.


lordjedi said:

And here you admit to baiting, which is generally a bannable offense on most sites. There are actually statements in the TOS that could fall under that, but I'll leave it to the mods to decide if it's worth a ban.


You are taking my statement out of context. "Baiting" with the intent to draw someone into a civil dialog, political or social debate is common here, and not done for the use of causing personal grief to members such as personal name calling tactics. "Baiting" for personal attacks is something that I do not endorse or engage in. Please reference a direct act of any bannable type of "Baiting" that you feel I have done here on OT. Harmless "Baiting" can be used in debate for luring a person into using "logical fallacies" such as I mentioned before. A good example of harmful "Baiting" would be the last few posts above directed at me specifically on a past personal medical and legal issue. I'm sure the intent of the posters is to have me respond or react in an emotional manner to the statements, and make me feel uncomfortable on a purely personal level, and also feel unwelcome. That is destructive"Baiting" to cause personal unsolicited grief to a specific OT member for reasons outside the scope of the topic. I'm not asking anyone to be banned for it, but that kind of digging up of personal issues for an attack is still out of line and uncalled for. That kind of tactic is way more in line with a bannable offense.

All that I have done in this thread is make a few general statements about the
way issues are debated here on this forum, and on the internet. I targeted no one member in a personal manner, did not lie, nor make any false accusations to personally discredit, or lure anyone into a heated debate with the sole intent to create an unwelcoming atmosphere for members, or detract from the discussion. That seems to be the agenda of others for sure, but not me. What I have done with my statements in this thread is no worse then other posters making general insults about liberals, conservatives, hippies, conspiracy nuts, etc.! My original post of the graph was a response to a back and forth argument about "killing the planet". It was a one sentence comment and the photo of a graph, as well as a quote from the article that the graph was taken from. After that, all my posts in this thread have related to me answering questions people have asked me about that graph, and my reasons for posting it.

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link
lordjedi said:

Apparently no one caught this:


FanFiltration said:

I got that graph from a very entertaining article about how the seeds of the next American civil war can be seen in worthless debates such as this.


lordjedi said:

Yeah, a debate that you're actually participating in. So it seems to me that you're just as guilty as the rest of us.


That would be an incorrect observation. I did not enter into the sub-debate of "Global Warming". What I did do was make a very general comment on the manner in which "Global Warming" was being debated, and how I felt some had no clue as to what they even were talking about on the subject. I should have used the word useless and not worthless. I'll admit that was an error on my part. I feel that you can't debate an issue with any type of effective resolution when so many don't even admit the problem exists.
Sorry, but that's how I feel. My comment was reasonable, and I stand by it.

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
Post link
Talk about splitting hairs. The graph you posted sure doesn't seem like it was baiting to get discussion going. No, that graph was clearly posted as a means of baiting people into what could possibly be a negative reaction. You even said yourself following that that even though it didn't target anyone specifically, you aren't surprised by the responses and who responded. That's typical baiting.

You're right, you didn't specifically enter any part of the debate. But you did post the graph in the middle of the debate expecting some kind of reaction. The posting of the graph alone was enough to make everyone on one side of the argument believe that you were targeting them with the graph. It doesn't take a genius to think that's what the intent was either.

Seriously, if you want no part of this debate and are just here to "see the reactions of the participants", then why do you even post? Why even read the thread?

Your personal history was brought into it because if you act like this IRL then yes, it's no wonder those things happened to you. Just because you're actually benefiting from the bad treatment you received, doesn't mean you were right in the first place. All it means is that you suddenly have friends in high places. We've seen time and time again how that works out in the end.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
lordjedi said:

Talk about splitting hairs. The graph you posted sure doesn't seem like it was baiting to get discussion going. No, that graph was clearly posted as a means of baiting people into what could possibly be a negative reaction. You even said yourself following that that even though it didn't target anyone specifically, you aren't surprised by the responses and who responded. That's typical baiting.


You are truly grasping at straws here. Posting of photos of smog in Beijing could be said to accomplish the same end, as could posting a photo of a watch of Mao Tse-tung. The photo of the graph was posted as an aid to my opinion of the ongoing debate, just as the smog photos had been posted by another user. Sure you are offended because you seem to me to be type of person who thinks they know more then they truly do, and deep down you are aware of it. Another user on OT named Darth Chaltab has a sig graphic putting down liberals.

http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/678/animation3rq8.gif

This is also the same as my graph. It's without question meant to offend a number of members, and that is in no way different. You are annoyed when confronted with what you consider to be an insult, but that's your problem. It's sure not Bannable in other cases on this board. If my views are not popular, so be it. You may be happyier in a culture like that in China. You just seem to to take to wanting to silence your political and social opposers. This method is a common trait with fascists and communists. Not saying you are one, just pointing that out.

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
Post link
I love the Great Wall of China.
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link
Arnie.d said:

I love the Great Wall of China.


Said to be the only man-made object that can be seen from space. When the smog is not too bad that is.

"They've got a wall in china
Its a thousand miles long
To keep out the foreigners they made it strong
And Ive got a wall around me
That you cant even see
It took a little time
To get next to me" - Paul Simon (Something So Right)

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link
FanFiltration said:

Arnie.d said:

I love the Great Wall of China.


Said to be the only man-made object that can be seen from space. When the smog is not too bad that is.

"They've got a wall in china
Its a thousand miles long
To keep out the foreigners they made it strong
And Ive got a wall around me
That you cant even see
It took a little time
To get next to me" - Paul Simon (Something So Right)


I'm pretty sure you can also see the Piramids and other objects (not that I've been in space...).

They shipped a few soldiers from the Terracotta Army to the Netherlands. I want to go and visit the museum were they are on display if I have the time. I read a newsreport a few weeks ago saying the soldiers dug up so far may only be the tip of the iceberg.
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
Post link
Arnie.d said:


I'm pretty sure you can also see the Piramids and other objects (not that I've been in space...).

They shipped a few soldiers from the Terracotta Army to the Netherlands. I want to go and visit the museum were they are on display if I have the time. I read a newsreport a few weeks ago saying the soldiers dug up so far may only be the tip of the iceberg.


Snopes says that the claim that the Great Wall is the only object seen from space is indeed false. I only remember hearing that at one time.

That Terracotta Army is indeed fascinating! I would also love to see that display and travel to the Netherlands for other reasons. It's a great thing that China is preserving these finds, unlike radical groups in Afghanistan who blew up their own historical monuments.

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
Post link
Oh yeah, I saw the teracotta army myself about ten years ago and I remember I saw the exhibit twice. My town was one of the few american cities to display the army, which was no small footnote.
Author
Time
Post link
vbangle said:

CO2 is what green plants BREATHE....in fact the more CO2 there is the GREENER the planet......you would think tree huggers would know that.....go figure.


Ahm... not quite. Carbon dioxide concentration does have a direct relation with rate of photosythesis; however, too high a concentration can inhibit the light-independent reactions (though certain plants have evolved around this inhibition). Anyway, any increases in rates of photosynthesis are most likely negated by clearing trees and other plant life (lowering the amount of carbon dioxide that gets converted to oxygen) while continuing to burn more fossil fuel (increasing carbon dioxide concentration).

fsb
I have a bad feeling about this...
Author
Time
Post link
FanFiltration said:

I feel that you can't debate an issue with any type of effective resolution when so many don't even admit the problem exists.
Sorry, but that's how I feel. My comment was reasonable, and I stand by it.


I suppose the above comment was meant to bait us by using such a ridiculous argument.

By the way, what are your opinions on the impending invasion of the poop people from the planet Vagthatch? The government has known about it for years. They received a transmission from the Vagthatch military sometime around the turn of the century, and have kept it under wraps since then. The transmission said something to the effect of "we are coming to kill you, just wait". I think this is very irresponsible of our government not to inform the people about this. They have been developing an IPBM (Interplanetary Ballistic Missile) with nuclear capabilities in order to take these guys out when they come to get us, but many of us feel that the repercussions of this bomb may be more severe than the enslavement/harvesting/death/etc. that the poop people have planned for us. The world deserves to know about this. Myself and others are convinced that we can come up with a better solution to this problem, violence is not the answer. We need to use diplomacy or reason with the Vagthatchian poop peoples, this is a HUGE problem, but an even bigger problem is that nobody will admit this problem exists!!!

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Post link
C3PX said:

FanFiltration said:

I feel that you can't debate an issue with any type of effective resolution when so many don't even admit the problem exists.
Sorry, but that's how I feel. My comment was reasonable, and I stand by it.


I suppose the above comment was meant to bait us by using such a ridiculous argument.

By the way, what are your opinions on the impending invasion of the poop people from the planet Vagthatch? The government has known about it for years. They received a transmission from the Vagthatch military sometime around the turn of the century, and have kept it under wraps since then. The transmission said something to the effect of "we are coming to kill you, just wait". I think this is very irresponsible of our government not to inform the people about this. They have been developing an IPBM (Interplanetary Ballistic Missile) with nuclear capabilities in order to take these guys out when they come to get us, but many of us feel that the repercussions of this bomb may be more severe than the enslavement/harvesting/death/etc. that the poop people have planned for us. The world deserves to know about this. Myself and others are convinced that we can come up with a better solution to this problem, violence is not the answer. We need to use diplomacy or reason with the Vagthatchian poop peoples, this is a HUGE problem, but an even bigger problem is that nobody will admit this problem exists!!!

An IPBM sounds like something we should develop. You never know when it comes in handy.
Fez: I am so excited about Star Whores.
Hyde: Fezzy, man, it's Star Wars.
Author
Time
Post link
End Credits said:


Ahm... not quite. Carbon dioxide concentration does have a direct relation with rate of photosythesis; however, too high a concentration can inhibit the light-independent reactions (though certain plants have evolved around this inhibition). Anyway, any increases in rates of photosynthesis are most likely negated by clearing trees and other plant life (lowering the amount of carbon dioxide that gets converted to oxygen) while continuing to burn more fossil fuel (increasing carbon dioxide concentration).

fsb


At which point we have even more carbon dioxide and even stronger plant growth to offset the destruction of forests and the like.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link
C3PX said:

By the way, what are your opinions on the impending invasion of the poop people from the planet Vagthatch?


No need to spend the money on a IPBM, Just call Silent Bob!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEdOqYEwcT8&e

*Grin*

“First feel fear, then get angry. Then go with your life into the fight.” - Bill Mollison

Author
Time
 (Edited)
Post link
FanFiltration said:

lordjedi said:

Talk about splitting hairs. The graph you posted sure doesn't seem like it was baiting to get discussion going. No, that graph was clearly posted as a means of baiting people into what could possibly be a negative reaction. You even said yourself following that that even though it didn't target anyone specifically, you aren't surprised by the responses and who responded. That's typical baiting.


You are truly grasping at straws here. Posting of photos of smog in Beijing could be said to accomplish the same end, as could posting a photo of a watch of Mao Tse-tung. The photo of the graph was posted as an aid to my opinion of the ongoing debate, just as the smog photos had been posted by another user. Sure you are offended because you seem to me to be type of person who thinks they know more then they truly do, and deep down you are aware of it. Another user on OT named Darth Chaltab has a sig graphic putting down liberals.


Huh? When did I say I was offended? I never made such a response. All I did was point out how one side of this discussion could easily think that graphic was targeting them. In fact, I actually perused the site the graphic came from for a bit before anything else (it wasn't hard to figure out where it came from). Then I left the thread alone to see if there would be any responses to it. Yesterday I was so busy taking care of my kid that the response you see is the only one I had time for.

Chaltab's signature was a direct response to another users signature that put down conservatives.

I do not wish to see you banned. On the contrary, I love debating topics with those of opposing views. However, there are many websites that will not tolerate bullshit. I've seen a fair number of users here that are given a pass on their comments because we tolerate everything. I've seen other sites where very similar users are summarily banned. Since you outright admitted to baiting, I simply mentioned that many many message boards consider that a bannable offense. Your justification of how you "bait" people wouldn't be enough to keep you around. But I guess that mods at OT.com just don't give a shit.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
lordjedi said:

But I guess that mods at OT.com just don't give a shit.


They care, they just have a very mature approach to forum moderation. While some sites will immediately issue you a warning or ban you for using bad language or suggestive terms, some of us are able to get away with profanity in our signitures, and I am allowed to make up fake planets withs names such as "Vagthatch". These really are great forums because of this... well... until Rob starts posting pictures of guys nude or in suggestive posses... but those usually get edited out pretty quick...

"Every time Warb sighs, an angel falls into a vat of mapel syrup." - Gaffer Tape

Author
Time
Post link
False planet? That's not a false planet. That's the biggest cover-up the world has ever known!

I'm all for most of what's allowed here. It just seems to me that when someone admits to baiting, they deserve at least a temp ban. I guess the community here is small enough that they don't want to alienate anyone though.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Post link
Tiptup said:

End Credits said:


Ahm... not quite. Carbon dioxide concentration does have a direct relation with rate of photosythesis; however, too high a concentration can inhibit the light-independent reactions (though certain plants have evolved around this inhibition). Anyway, any increases in rates of photosynthesis are most likely negated by clearing trees and other plant life (lowering the amount of carbon dioxide that gets converted to oxygen) while continuing to burn more fossil fuel (increasing carbon dioxide concentration).

fsb


At which point we have even more carbon dioxide and even stronger plant growth to offset the destruction of forests and the like.


I do not believe that the empirical evidence supports this.

fsb
I have a bad feeling about this...
Author
Time
Post link
End Credits said:

Tiptup said:

End Credits said:


Ahm... not quite. Carbon dioxide concentration does have a direct relation with rate of photosythesis; however, too high a concentration can inhibit the light-independent reactions (though certain plants have evolved around this inhibition). Anyway, any increases in rates of photosynthesis are most likely negated by clearing trees and other plant life (lowering the amount of carbon dioxide that gets converted to oxygen) while continuing to burn more fossil fuel (increasing carbon dioxide concentration).

fsb


At which point we have even more carbon dioxide and even stronger plant growth to offset the destruction of forests and the like.


I do not believe that the empirical evidence supports this.

fsb


The empirical evidence supporting what? That carbon dioxide promotes plant growth? Or that wild vegetation will retake land when that land is left alone? Both are heavily supported by the empirical evidence that I'm aware of.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005