[dynosor]

"I am a scorpion, that is what I do......"

Any connection with "I think, therfore I am" or "I lie, therefore I am a politician"?

[dufas]

Any connection with "I think, therfore I am" or "I lie, therefore I am a politician"?

Close....which brings to mind Handlewanker...He is the perfect type for political office...He has all the same traits. can't get his arguments straight, flip-flops all the time. Self centered, no one else counts, blowhard, devious,wants complete control and holds hands with other guys under the desk.......

[handlewanker]

Mariss, I'll rise to your obvious bait, as that's my prerogative, and state categorically that at no time did I suggest that the body bag bit.......(what crap), that's in your tiny and warped imaginative mind.

Kindly quote the text to which you refer, verbatim, and you will see that I sympathise wholeheartedly with YOUR predicament, now that you have sobered up from celebrating your family's expedition to the middle east to kick arse for oil, but cast a cold and jaundiced eye at the activities that are guaranteed to bring grief perhaps to some middle eastern mothers family or at worst your own.

I don't find war exhilerating, even when you are, so say, "the good guys" LOL, but sometimes it takes going to the max to defend your home and hearth, but this does not include going abroad to kick arse at someone else's bidding, and not for such an ignoble cause as in the current debacle where a drop of oil is the prize.

Does your group never learn? I thought Vietnam was an object lesson that will forever ring in the annals of misdirection, where the very heads of state came and went like dirty underwear, and the very people sent to do their bidding got tarred with the same brush by their own countrymen, who also shed their blood, but at the hands of their own countrymen.

Perhaps it would be "having a nice day yo'all hear" if you put your own house in order and showed what a true Democracy can achieve if it became a cohesive force in the coming claimate change.

Even China, that has been held to be the "wolf at the door" for so long, is forging ahead on all fronts, and on all accounts doesn't give a fig for the crisis to which you lot are now so deeply ensnared.

It would pay you to look closer to home for solutions to your problems, for what does it profit a man if he solves the problems of the world but cannot solve his own?
Ian.

[handlewanker]

Dufa, you're getting a bit personal again, not that I worry too much....a fool laughing at someone playing the fool is still a fool.
Ian.

[dufas]

Dufa, you're getting a bit personal again, not that I worry too much....a fool laughing at someone playing the fool is still a fool.
Ian.

Oh, the clown speaketh....or just crept in, crapped, and crept out. What is that smell anyway, Ode el Fecal ??? Playing the fool suits you well, probably based on your life experience.. Perfect casting, now if you could just read your lines correctly......................

[dufas]

Mariss, I what does it profit a man if he solves the problems of the world but cannot solve his own?
Ian.

What an odd thing for a handlewanker to say while telling everyone else how things should be................the clown is a also hypocrite, else he thinks himself perfect.... Well, most koolaide sippers do think this way so it is to be expected.............

[dufas]

Dufa, you're getting a bit personal again,
Ian.

One would have to be a person in order to get personal with one, isn't this correct??? Since you are not a person, just a non-humanoid, it is impossible for any one get personal with you. To get personal would require that you have a conscience, ethics and otherwise be somewhat moral. Non-humans do not understand such concepts and therefore, are again unable to feel any personal antagonism. A lot like the ant that you favor so much... Notta, zero, nothing, an ant....or some other inanimate object...

[NinerSevenTango]

Flattery gets you.........NOWHERE.
<Snip> I have contempt for your species ....<Snip>
<Snip> .... ants .... <Snip>

Your delusion that you are superior, and your contempt towards honest men is duly noted.

This admiration for ants is quite common among collectivists. It provides a thought-model for how they think human societies ought to work.

Couple this with faith in the inevitability of catastrophic global warming and the parallel with religion is complete: You are doomed to a miserable existence and your demise is inevitable whether you choose to acknowledge it or not. The fact that you exist makes you a sinner against nature, and you should feel guilty for it. Your only salvation is to become part of the colony and devote yourself to performing your function without question. Unless you are the one with the superior knowledge, in which case you are qualified to judge everything and everybody, and direct all activity.

This ant-model has been tried out, actually. Modern proponents of it like to ignore that they can make their arguments in English because of people who wouldn't fall for it.

Sure, there are books that view humans as just another kind of vermin, parasitizing their environment and gobbling up resources like mold on an orange until it is all gone. The view seems to be that subsistence farming and lack of a division of labor economy is best because Nature thereby keeps population in check, etc. Or, if any mechanization is to be permitted, it should be directed along the lines of the ant model, with wise leaders making enlightened decisions for everything. I will go along with that to the extent that the authors have every right to prescribe such conditions for themselves. Those who advocate it really deserve to live in mud huts amongst sewage and mosquitoes, and lorded over by a tinpot dictator. Oh, wait. There are many millions of people already living this way, and it seems the authors of those books choose to continue to live where there is hot and cold running water and a means to pay for it instead of joining those who already live under the conditions they would see imposed on the rest of us. Because, you see, for collectivism to work, everybody has to go along. Everybody, and that means you, too.

I categorically reject the two basic premises behind this line of thinking.

Faith is a belief in that which cannot be proven. We can be fooled or mistaken, but when evidence shows a hypothesis to be no longer tenable, we continue to believe it at our peril. Of course, foolish humans will fall over themselves to prove their undying belief, profess their faith, sacrifice for the cause. This gives them social status without all the hard work of making something of themselves. And it is very useful to the ant-masters. A mind deeply committed to reliance on faith in the reasoning process is the dictator's best tool. That's beside the point, though. I reject the premise that man is bringing a cataclysmic climate change upon the world simply by existing on it for his own sake, and that he must sacrifice his interests and his life to prevent it. The evidence doesn't support the hypothesis, and the climate argument is the only new portion of a millenia-old tactic of cutting the mind off at the knees in order to get slaves to willingly submit.

And I reject the premise that I don't deserve to live for my own sake. I do deserve to live for my own sake, and I won't willingly let the collectivists rule over me.

Red herring arguments about the history of U.S. government policy may or may not have merit, but they are beside the point. The government is a monster out of control, and it ceased representing the interests of the individuals in the nation many decades ago. It has insured that only a tiny minority of the public care about what it does outside their neighborhood or know anything about the things it really does. It has insured that the ants it leads will follow the opinions it makes. It is dangerous to people inside and outside its borders alike. The immoral things it does are because it is shot through with collectivist true believers and tax pigs, and ruled by the lowest and most dangerous form of life on earth: the hybrid true-believer / tax pig / authoritarian -- the politician.

Most amusing to me are the useful idiots who believe they are superior to their fellow man because they are more fervent in their belief that their fellow man needs to be ruled over because of his unworthiness to live on this planet, and who advocate the programs of dictators to put people back into the mud where he thinks they belong.


--97T--

[dufas]

Your delusion that you are superior, and your contempt towards honest men is duly noted.

This admiration for ants is quite common among collectivists. It provides a thought-model for how they think human societies ought to work.


--97T--

You do realize that you are trying to communicate with a thing that has the brains of one of those ants........

Ok everybody, line up, single file, altogether now, one, two, three, four..... Handlewanker, your out of step, straighten up.....Oops, sorry, you're at the head of the line, aren't you..??? I guess that would make everyone else out of step, one two, three, four.......

[dufas]

Actually, if one examines handlewanker's past postings, one will find that the non-huminoid is consistently inconsistent. In many of the postings, an argument is made for the individual to be self sufficient, then, some form of collectivism is called for while espousing that IT is not interested in any sort of collective society unless IT is represented by a union or IT can sell or barter IT's carrots for something that IT may need unless IT has to take something by force under the flag survival of the fittest.

So far, a new form of society has been created. It is an "Individualist Collective Free Market Survivalist Union" commonly known as the ICFMSU. I assume that the head of this new government will be located on a small hill in Australia near a carrot patch. IT's new government flag is a red clenched fist against a brown background covered by ants scurrying around carrying half eaten carrots.

All citizens will be required to wear aluminum hats.........

[Geof]

You do realize that you are trying to communicate with a thing that has the brains of one of those ants........

You sorta contradict yourself in your next post. Yes Ian shows 'inconsistency'; does it ever occur to you that he is playing with you. I did the same thing months back with a poster who has now vanished; take one viewpoint and when it is attacked take another that is opposite and also get attacked. More or less demonstrating that the attacker is not following what they have written in the past.

[dufas]

You sorta contradict yourself in your next post. Yes Ian shows 'inconsistency'; does it ever occur to you that he is playing with you. I did the same thing months back with a poster who has now vanished; take one viewpoint and when it is attacked take another that is opposite and also get attacked. More or less demonstrating that the attacker is not following what they have written in the past.

It is somewhat a chore to describe a contradiction without appearing contradictive in describing the details of the contradiction which in turn will read like a contradiction of the original contradictive posts that were a contradiction at the outset.....;-> [Note: this is ant logic...]

Handlewanker does not know how to play, this is IT's logic working at full tilt... IT doesn't know any better. As far as taking the opposite view point, it is rare for a rational person to present and support opposing views in a single post yet the non-human IT does this all the time and IT doesn't even notice much less care..... It is the 'pull wings of flies' syndrome that IT is so adept at...

handlewanker = IT

[Geof]

..... It is the 'pull wings of flies' syndrome that IT is so adept at...

Correct, and you, and others, insist on behaving like flies.

And if you find this an uncomplimentary comment it is meant to be; I think you should rise above the deliberate bating and pettiness that is being displayed in many posts by different people.

[dufas]

Correct, and you, and others, insist on behaving like flies.

And if you find this an uncomplimentary comment it is meant to be; I think you should rise above the deliberate bating and pettiness that is being displayed in many posts by different people.

Yes...You are so correct. I owe Handlewanker an abject apology and now I will do penance and then rise high above him.

Handlewanker should feel proud and grateful to have such a staunch defender who is willing to go to such lengths in his defense. Thankyou for correcting me in such a gentle way. Your leniency is greatly appreciated...

[Geof]

In what way am I defending Ian? I am critical of him; yes I do not stoop to 'gutter' language in doing so, but I am critical. I am also critical of you and others who are displaying a similar level of immaturity. And if you think that is superior and condescending that is fine because it is. I cannot understand why you or anyone finds it necessary to go down to the level of crude insults.

[dufas]

In what way am I defending Ian? I am critical of him; yes I do not stoop to 'gutter' language in doing so, but I am critical. I am also critical of you and others who are displaying a similar level of immaturity. And if you think that is superior and condescending that is fine because it is. I cannot understand why you or anyone finds it necessary to go down to the level of crude insults.

You are defending him just as I tried to give him the benefit of the doubt previously which was excepted with all the grace and gentle eloquence of an dock worker.

I seem to remember a post where you agreed with what he stated. But then, I owe Handlewanker an apology, correct???

[Mariss Freimanis]

It seems there is some breaking of the ranks in the million scientist GW parade:

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/


"The American Physical Society, an organization representing nearly 50,000 physicists, has reversed its stance on climate change and is now proclaiming that many of its members disbelieve in human-induced global warming. The APS is also sponsoring public debate on the validity of global warming science. The leadership of the society had previously called the evidence for global warming “incontrovertible.”

In a posting to the APS forum, editor Jeffrey Marque explains,”There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution.”

The APS is opening its debate with the publication of a paper by Lord Monckton of Brenchley, which concludes that climate sensitivity — the rate of temperature change a given amount of greenhouse gas will cause — has been grossly overstated by IPCC modeling. A low sensitivity implies additional atmospheric CO2 will have little effect on global climate."

Mariss

[Geof]

You are defending him.........I seem to remember a post where you agreed with what he stated.......

..... But then, I owe Handlewanker an apology, correct???

I do not think I am defending him but if that is your interpretation so be it.

I do agree with a lot of the things he has stated, go back through my posts (not a serious suggestion ) and you would find many instances. In some cases I have made the same or highly similar statements long previous. One that comes to mind is Ian's rather nastily phrased advice to your daughter regarding education; it was not word for word, but it was essentially meaning for meaning, identical to the advice I offered many weeks previous.

Do you owe Ian an apology? I don't know, I do know that I very rarely apologize, and it is necessary for me to have done something very boneheaded before I will even consider an apology. I have been told on occasion that I owe someone an apology and have instead told the complainer that they can like it or lump it.

[dufas]

It seems there is some breaking of the ranks in the million scientist GW parade:
Mariss

Did you notice Al Gore on the news tonight. He didn't use the term global warming...replacing same with climate change. He didn't mention CO2 or how awful we humans are. Instead he argued about ways to get out from under high gas prices. Strange that the guru of doom and gloom would start chanting what most of the population is concerned about. There must be money in it for him somewhere..

[Mariss Freimanis]

I do know that I very rarely apologize, and it is necessary for me to have done something very boneheaded before I will even consider an apology. I have been told on occasion that I owe someone an apology and have instead told the complainer that they can like it or lump it.

Interesting comment Geof. It goes to show there are many ways to skin a cat. "I'm sorry" are the easiest words for me to say and I say them often. I think of that phrase as an interpersonal lubricant. It quickly defuses misunderstandings and smooths ruffled feathers much like a shot of WD-40 quiets a squeaky door hinge.

Where I'm careful with the phrase is when I perceive it will be used as leverage. The "There, I knew you were wrong and you apologizing proves it!" kind of situation. I always consider if these words turned around will be used as a weapon.

Otherwise, saying "I'm sorry" to a genuine and up-front person oftentimes serves as entry to discuss and amicably settle other issues that led up to them being offended.

Now for the narrow "I see the world from my perspective" thing. If I dispense apologies easily, I stupidly expect to be apologized to if I am wronged. If something said to me is not rectified by an apology, I assume the sayer meant it intentionally and in earnest. I take to heart because I see it as a deliberately delivered insult.

I have known people who apologize easily and people who'd rather have a root-canal procedure before they'd say the words. Both kind have been nice people. It evens out because those who won't apologize don't expect apologies in return.

Where things get difficult is on the internet. You cannot see the faces of the people you converse with. This removes vital social cues as to the intent and tone of the words passing back and forth. Second, the anonymity of the internet causes most people (myself included) to become caricatures of our actual selves. It can't be helped; things are said in ways one would be embarrassed to ever say to someone sitting across a table from you. Take this thread; I wonder what the tenor of the transcript would have been had we all been sitting down face to face with each other.

Mariss



Mariss