Sorry, that's just what I understood from it. You showed a video of young and old people being skilled, controlled, responsible, etc... owners and titled it as an example of gun control being effective.

Perhaps it is just the charged atmosphere around this topic these days, but I have encountered a lot of people saying something to the effect of ”there is plenty of gun control already, I am responsible and in control of my guns" so I just put two and two together...

What were you saying then?

Got to love the TSA, we spend millions every year to "protect us" haven't found one bomb. But a couple hundred dollars worth of drugs...that's something. I can hear the orwellian loudspeaker now. "Be safe Shitizen, don't help old people with there bags, it's for your own safety, they might be smuggling MARI-JUANA".

Why do these liberals worry about things that never are going to happen? They want to tax us and spend our money.

There is no man made global warming, except Al Gore’s mouth

Norm-who-Chomsky has lost it, he is very sad, why can’t he just be in an old people’s home where he does not annoy the rest of us.

That doesn't sound like circular reasoning to you?

It would sound circular if none of those had any other basis for their timelines other than each other, which, not being an expert, I have to guess is not the case. You, the one making the enormous claim that the entire field of geology is unscientific, have to demonstrate that.

I found some more cherry-picking. From that article about mudstones, you take this one quote: "One thing we are very certain of is that our findings will influence how geologists and paleontologists reconstruct Earth's past" and determine from it that the age of the planet will be scientifically revised from many billions of years to a few thousand. You have no basis for that. Also, why are you quoting geologists? That isn't even a science, I thought, right? Is it just because these ones happen to sound like their story could be twisted to agree with yours?

Your argument from incredulity not-withstanding, I think Max Planck sums it up rather nicely: " A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

If by that quote you mean that old people tend to have a hard time changing their minds about things in face of contradictory evidence, you're right -- that's human nature. If you mean that scientific theories change randomly because new opinions grow and the old ones die out like cultural habits, you're wrong.

There was a paradigm shift from catastrophism to uniformitarianism in the late 19th century. It was a deliberate move away from the idea of a global flood. To make their theories worked, they needed vast amount of time

This is another grand claim. Can you give a verifiable non-biased (non ID) reference as to the deliberateness of the shift, and the pre-formed idea that they needed to conjure up vast amounts of time? Science doesn't become conventional wisdom without a preponderance of evidence to back it up. It doesn't mean any of it is correct, just that there's a lot of supporting evidence.

In other words, you believe whatever the scientists say and there is no reason to understand the alternative viewpoint.

No. You're the one making ridiculous claims. I'm rebutting for fun, for sport. I don't believe your religion is real. I trust scientists more than dogmatists, and if I have to choose how to spend 1.5 hours, it's going to be reading Feynman or watching TYT or studying math or practising card tricks. You brought up the topic, and I happen to only care enough about it to rebut a bit, not to dedicate hours to it. Also, you have a history here of providing horribly unscientific quotes and references without any attempt at intellectual honesty, and based on that, I can guess the quality of that video, and I don't need to spend 1.5 hours only to be disappointed in myself for trying. If I were really that curious, I would go to the geology department of my university and ask some professors about the circular argument, and what the original basis was for the dating. If you care that much about actually finding the truth, you'll do just that. But I think you're too afraid to learn something contradictory to your dogma.

It's all predicated upon the philosophy of deep time. Deep time is the cornerstone of modern research, and it supported by flimsy, circumstantial evidence.

Non-ID reference for the flimsiness required for grand claims.

Drives faster than most old people

Old people - they were cool before you existed.

>> ^shagen454:

I use to have a philosophy about the neighborhood I used to live in: if you become annoyed or complain about noise at any time... two in the morning, five in the morning, whenever theen its time for you to leave the mission district. Hey it happened to me and I moved out of the neighborhood somewhere less crazy and less fun.
The same is true for old people. If you are pushing your out of date ideas onto people... maybe its time to shut the fuck up and retire.


In Pat Robertson's case, I'd replace "retire" with "die".

I used to have a philosophy about the neighborhood I used to live in: if you become annoyed or complain about noise at any time... two in the morning, five in the morning, whenever then its time for you to leave the mission district. Hey it happened to me and I moved out of the neighborhood somewhere less crazy and less fun.

The same is true for old people. If you are pushing your out of date ideas onto people... maybe its time to shut the fuck up and retire.

I realize I am debating with a brick wall aka @bobknight33, but...:

"You believe in the gay thing and are proud also in that belief. No one is bashing you for that belief."

my "thing" doesn't infringe on anyone's rights. Yours and the CEO's does.

"Maybe 5% not 1/2"

nope, pull your head out of the sand/ass Look it up on gallup or any reputable site. Gay marriage support is over 50 percent. If you don't want your money supporting anti-gay causes, you won't be supporting chik-fil-a anymore. And it's a hell of a lot easier to NOT eat there as opposed to those who would support who now have to eat there frequently in order to make up for that lost business. Even if it was five percent. From a business standpoint, that's still a retarded thing to do. I noticed that there were a lot of old people who showed up to support chik-fil-a. Those old people aren't going to be around for much longer and regardless of whether it's 5 or 50 percent, It's only going to go up.

"If I am not mistaken his statement was on a religious station so he was speaking his religious beliefs. He does not regret saying those words. He just regrets the childish hatred from the " open minded" community. You guys don't seem too open minded. "

again, mr. brick wall. My views don't infringe anyone's rights. yours ultimately do. not being tolerant of those who are intolerant is not intolerance.

"I don't know of any hard evidence to support this statement Time will tell. I strongly believe that Divorce and single parenting is dangerous and destructive to the fabric of the country. I believe there are no "winners" in a divorce. I would rather see pro marriage agenda being push rather than call now for a quick divorce ad."

If I had a nickel for all the things people claimed would destroy the fabric of america, but didn't I would have a lot of nickels. allowing women to vote. interracial marriage, ending slavery, civil rights, the list goes on and on.

How exactly does one measure the "fabric" of america? Does it have good tensile strength? Or is the "fabric" argument just a bullshit way of invoking fear to scare people into agreeing with you. Agree with my view or AMERICA WILL DIE!!! WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA!! All these things that will supposedly destroy america have been around long before America even existed. If they were destroying america, they're doing a shitty job of it.

You and your ilk have demonstrated time and time again that you have no actual evidence as to why homosexuality is bad or harmful other than some old book. If you can't make your case, then prepare to be another footnote in society along with those who thought the earth was flat.

My first reaction was to say that Mitt doesn't understand how the internet works. But then I realized...he doesn't have to.

He just has to say stuff to make the old people clap.

"My first order, if elected as president will be to create a law, banning kids off your lawn, punishable by torture and to impose a strict, mandatory call from your kids.

...and free hard candy for all!

This is sort of what old people think about cellphones.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

What about people up the autism scale - unable to experience empathy? If so - it's the end of Gorillaman.>> ^gorillaman:

>> ^bmacs27:
I say we kill all the old people first. Anyone with dementia, or forget it, let's just save on social security. Once you can't work, you can fertilize the fields. I mean, really, old people, or human primate hybrids (man-gorillas if you will) they're all subhuman.
Like you said, wounded animals... the lot of them. I mean hell, if I couldn't get it up anymore, it would be common decency for you to put me out of my misery.
Then we should move on to the puppies. I mean, they're subhuman too right?

Yes, anyone with (advanced) dementia and yes, puppies. Pet ownership is a cause of colossal environmental damage and human poverty.
This all seems obvious to me; is recognising the unique quality of intelligence as being essential to our conception of personhood really such an obscure revelation?
Any creature without human intelligence is literally not a human being.

>> ^bmacs27:
I say we kill all the old people first. Anyone with dementia, or forget it, let's just save on social security. Once you can't work, you can fertilize the fields. I mean, really, old people, or human primate hybrids (man-gorillas if you will) they're all subhuman.
Like you said, wounded animals... the lot of them. I mean hell, if I couldn't get it up anymore, it would be common decency for you to put me out of my misery.
Then we should move on to the puppies. I mean, they're subhuman too right?


Yes, anyone with (advanced) dementia and yes, puppies. Pet ownership is a cause of colossal environmental damage and human poverty.

This all seems obvious to me; is recognising the unique quality of intelligence as being essential to our conception of personhood really such an obscure revelation?

Any creature without human intelligence is literally not a human being.

>> ^gorillaman:

@KnivesOut
You couldn't be more wrong. We are poor and overpopulated, and we desperately need to correct that. Now is not the time to be keeping luxuries like pet underpeople.


I say we kill all the old people first. Anyone with dementia, or forget it, let's just save on social security. Once you can't work, you can fertilize the fields. I mean, really, old people, or human primate hybrids (man-gorillas if you will) they're all subhuman.

Like you said, wounded animals... the lot of them. I mean hell, if I couldn't get it up anymore, it would be common decency for you to put me out of my misery.

Then we should move on to the puppies. I mean, they're subhuman too right?

When people borrow something, like your car, and feel the need to adjust every single fucking thing in it. You really don't need to mess with the sunroof, the radio presets (volume and on/off, stop there). And the side mirrors....those things once set cover a large portion of visibility how in the hell do you manage to make it so you can't see a single thing in it and manage to safely drive down the road?


People who bark/yell/scream at other people's dogs trying to get them to be quiet and just making it worse. Who also don't seem to understand that the dog is barking at their dumb ass because they are acting weird and it would STFU if they would ignore it and move on.

People who insist on getting into an already crowded elevator, despite every single person needing to get into uncomfortable proximity to each other to accomplish this. Wait for the next elevator prick.

People who walk onto elevators before actually looking if there is someone trying to get out. This goes in with the above one, they just make shit more difficult. You want on the elevator, great I understand. Wait for people to get the fuck out of it instead of making me feel like you're trying to pickpocket me with the all the bumping and shoving. This one is a real big peeve of mine. Along with people who don't seem to understand how doorways work and that you should move out of the way so other people can go in and out without risk of bashing you or your kid in the head with the door handle.

People who walk on the wrong side of the aisle for the direction they are going. This goes for anything...buffet bars, roads, sidewalks.....etc. There's a traffic flow, get into it...fighting it just makes everything take longer.

Grocery stores, when two people stop with their carts right next to each other and block everyone else. Especially when they don't seem to notice they are doing it, even though people say excuse me......and they just step to the side half a step like that's going to fix it. Add on to this, what is the deal with people not understanding that walking right next to the aisle entrance and exits makes it really f-in hard to see you? If you're going to do this you need to watch for people trying to get out of the aisles if you don't want to get bashed with a cart because they think it's clear since you're hiding behind the 6 foot stack of dog food.

People who wait for parking spots that are about 10 seconds walk closer than the next available spot. Instead of just parking and getting on with their day. Full parking lot? Sure, wait for a spot. Can SEE a empty spot 2 car lengths down? Park there asshole instead of snarling up traffic because you just have to have the 15 foot closer to the door spot.

Old people driving who are clearly not safe to be driving. You'll see this during working hours at doctors offices and hospitals. I understand the need for them to be able to get to the doc, but I'd rather not get ran over because someone won't take grandma or grandpa's license away because it would inconvenience them. Used to get allergy shots, I about got ran over twice on foot, backed over countless times (because they can't turn their heads to look and just back out blind...and fast), and hit trying to exit the place in my vehicle (short turns because they just don't have time to stop and make a proper turn). And I only had to walk a couple hundred feet to my vehicle and the door each way. Was dangerous just getting near the doors due to all the people dropping off or picking up. One guy even yelled at me because him doing 30-40 miles an hour in a small half filled parking lot seemed perfectly acceptable to him and walking to my car along the edge of the parking row was highly inappropriate to him since he needed it all to turn his car at those speeds.

Could go on and on. But clearly people who ignore social niceties or make nuisances of themselves really bug me. Little dumb things like that can just set the mood for a lot of your day, being a prick in a lot of these cases is not actually making things go faster...more often they slow it down and just piss everyone off. No benefit at all to anyone and yet it happens all the time.