Someone cast Wolven Winter on New Orleans!

[SlipperyJim]

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

I must not be fun to argue with on this subject, no one wants to argue the validity of my points anymore.

Since you seem to be curious, I don't bother to debate certain issues on Teh Internetz unless some circumstance forces my hand. Global Warmism (and environmentalism, generally) belongs on that list. Religion and politics are the other topics I don't usually discuss online.

For an example of why, I refer you back to the highly-OT Bible discussion thread a while ago. I think we had a good discussion. My chief purpose was to dismantle a few stereotypes that the media has created. I don't know how well I succeeded, but I believe that I encouraged at least a few people to think beyond the cliche of evangelical Christians as being toothless, ignorant bigots.

Still, that thread took a lot of my time. Hours per day. The effort wasn't sustainable in the long term, and I had to retire from the discussion. Also, while we did a good job of remaining civil, the thread was starting to devolve. Much longer, and I think we would have had a flame war going. Better to let the matter drop before that happens!

To recap, I don't debate Global Warmism online because:

1. It's too time-intensive, and
2. People get too hot about it, so the threads tend to degenerate into flaming.

But let's be clear: Simply because there isn't anyone who's willing to argue Global Warmism with you does not mean that you've "won" the argument. (Whatever "winning" means in this context.) It simply means that people don't want to argue with you.

[Soyweiser]

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

But let's be clear: Simply because there isn't anyone who's willing to argue Global Warmism with you does not mean that you've "won" the argument. (Whatever "winning" means in this context.) It simply means that people don't want to argue with you.

Isn't the only way to win an argument to convince the other guy of your points? This never really happens on the internet sadly. Especially regarding certain touchy subjects (Global warming, religion, vegetarianism, terrorism, windows vs linux, piracy , all ages mod vs no all ages mod, etc). It is a waste of time, sadly. Because people don't really want listen to each other.

[MaxWilson]

Originally Posted by Soyweiser

Isn't the only way to win an argument to convince the other guy of your points? This never really happens on the internet sadly. Especially regarding certain touchy subjects (Global warming, religion, vegetarianism, terrorism, windows vs linux, piracy , all ages mod vs no all ages mod, etc). It is a waste of time, sadly. Because people don't really want listen to each other.

It does happen sometimes on the Internet. Look at Baalz' guide to Marverni, and how many people changed their minds about the horribleness of Marverni after that. The trick is recognizing when you're not getting anywhere. (Monkey PD!)

-Max

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by SlipperyJim

Since you seem to be curious, I don't bother to debate certain issues on Teh Internetz unless some circumstance forces my hand. Global Warmism (and environmentalism, generally) belongs on that list. Religion and politics are the other topics I don't usually discuss online.

Well I made that post specifically, because others were still arguing amongst themselves, but something odd had happened - my last few posts got no response whatsoever. Usually the "opposition" hops in to say I am wrong, but no one was doing so, and I wanted to know why.

I like discussing and debating. The curious thing, is that most forums are organized for a certain segment of the population, and either most agree with eachother to a great degree, or everything that is strictly off topic is completely out of bounds, period.

If anyone knows of a place where people debate such things in a healthy manner, I'd check it out. Though it seems silly if the point is debating such issues, as I would get told off for starting a "new" GW thread instead of searching for the old one, and my first post would be on page 312.

[tgbob]

Looks like someone just cast Wolven Winter on the San Francisco bay area too.

[Soyweiser]

Originally Posted by tgbob

Looks like someone just cast Wolven Winter on the San Francisco bay area too.

Somebody has cast mist on the Netherlands.

By the way, pandemic, or asteroid impact, or...

I hope you don't seriously think that in the next 100 years it is more likely to be killed by a asteroid than by global warming or another form of man-made pollution.

[licker]

I stand by what I said.

Pointless and baseless fearmongering FTW!!!

By the way, pandemic, or asteroid impact, or...

All more likely than your doomsday scenario. I suppose you have thoughts on those issues?

[JimMorrison]

Originally Posted by licker

I stand by what I said.

Pointless and baseless fearmongering FTW!!!

By the way, pandemic, or asteroid impact, or...

All more likely than your doomsday scenario. I suppose you have thoughts on those issues?

All you're doing is trolling now.

In case you haven't been on the internet long enough yet, let me clarify for you - mocking me only shows that you are incapable of continuing with reasonable debate. This generally can only stem from one of two reasons: a)my assertions are true enough but you don't want to admit it, or b)you are out of your depth, and incapable of continuing with a reasonable and meaningful discussion.

[licker]

Originally Posted by JimMorrison

All you're doing is trolling now.

In case you haven't been on the internet long enough yet, let me clarify for you - mocking me only shows that you are incapable of continuing with reasonable debate. This generally can only stem from one of two reasons: a)my assertions are true enough but you don't want to admit it, or b)you are out of your depth, and incapable of continuing with a reasonable and meaningful discussion.

Gee...

Ya think?

I've already made it clear that an argument with you on this topic is pointless, you've made up your mind beyond any shadow of doubt, so yeah, I'll just have some fun with it.

There's also c)this thread has gone on long enough and has become tedious to bother with in a serious manner.

If you are truly interested in a discussion of GW PM me, if you are only interested in parroting some meaningless alarmist babble don't bother.

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=010405M

Is an interesting article by Tim Patterson which touches some of the points that have been made. If you would care to share your critique of it feel free.

[Tifone]

licker, your answers sometimes presuppose links in the neural network beyond human comprehension I can't understand really why you answer to serious, science-supported concerns about the foreseeable future, with FTWs and exclamation marks and unrelated matters and invitations to other users to "find other forums for that" (which would eventually be the job of the admins -who are also partecipating the discussion- , in case you missed the memo ).

-

On another topic, I actually think that krpeters's post was a joke... Thanks to Jim for having made clear the absurdity of the whole thing anyway

@ Max... are you auto-quoting yourself as a source??