sidney_b

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
*shrugs* There's less debate on climate change than you think. What's at question is actually whether humans have anything to do with it or not.

You're perfectly justified in continuing as is, to be honest, but I'd rather be more cautious; after all, generating renewable energy, relying more on mass transit, buying produce locally, eating less meat, all of these lessen the impact one has on the environment--and, in many cases, can actually boost the local economy, always a good thing.

It's not like Earths are a dime a dozen. Why take the chance?

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, there's a crapload of debate on whether there is global warming. Much like the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, one only is familiar with the activity if you're involved in it. There's debate if its occuring, debate if it is anthropogenic, and debate if carbon emission is related to it.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm familiar with the debate on the last two. As far as the first one, it's my understanding that the general debate is that the climate is changing--not necessarily warming, mind you.

[ QUOTE ]
Engaging in large-scale campaigns of deception and propaganda is not right.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ends do not justify the means, then?

Even setting the issues aside, none of the solutions I've suggested really do fall into the category of deception, propaganda, or even ethically dubious. Buying local produce helps stimulate the local economy--note that I did not stipulate that it had to be organic. Reducing meat consumption (but not necessarily becoming vegetarian) will reduce our reliance on industrial livestock, which will reduce the toxic runoff from the waste lagoons and lower methane emissions. Finding sources of renewable energy will reduce our reliance on fossil fuels from political instable regions in the world (though, admittedly, it will increase our reliance on rare elements).

[ QUOTE ]
And if you think propaganda is a strong world, that's what the British public education system calls Gore's "Inconvenient Truth." And they're right. Regardless of whether the AGW is a valid theory, nothing in that film resembles the truth.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, please continue to attack An Inconvenient Truth. Because that's clearly the only argument anyone has when speaking of climate change. And yes, continue to attack it, because even if it does heinously distort the truth, destroying it will really make people more inclined to conserve.

If anything, it makes more sense to take propaganda like that, smile, and then shove it into the back room where it can be forgotten.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Since when is michael crichton anything but a hack author?

[/ QUOTE ]

I dunno, since he wrote his way through medical school and starting writing books with longer lists of references and sources than most people's theses?

[/ QUOTE ]

Stephanie Meyer wrote her way to fortune as well, but that hasn't made her writing any less atrocious.

Philip K. Dick wrote his entire life and still ended up a pauper, even though he's clearly not a hack.

Just because people buy your work does not mean that your work is worthwhile.

As far as Crichton goes, he's all right, but I'd no sooner place much value on his scientific expertise than I would Robin Cook's medical knowledge.

*shrugs* There's less debate on climate change than you think. What's at question is actually whether humans have anything to do with it or not.

You're perfectly justified in continuing as is, to be honest, but I'd rather be more cautious; after all, generating renewable energy, relying more on mass transit, buying produce locally, eating less meat, all of these lessen the impact one has on the environment--and, in many cases, can actually boost the local economy, always a good thing.

It's not like Earths are a dime a dozen. Why take the chance?

Moody, you say?

One second.

*lights a cigarette, sweeps hair before eyes, gazes out a window*

I shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, mayo should be considered harmful, like GOTO, if only because once it's out in the sun...

That, and it's gross.

[/ QUOTE ]

C. S. Goto. Such a poor writer even Sid here considers him harmful.

[/ QUOTE ]

To be fair, just because I have been occasionally known to read things by Helen Fielding doesn't mean I don't have more discriminating tastes.

Goto just suffers from spaghetti code^W plot, and his dialogue is mushy, rather than al dente.

Actually, mayo should be considered harmful, like GOTO, if only because once it's out in the sun...

That, and it's gross.

Interesting is an interesting word. Has a pleasant ring.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You all have become tender little morsels of writhing wormwood. Soft. Soft. Sofly crying about your exposure to "bad pugs" ... or worse! "Rookery threads"! Is that the best you have? Spitting vile against harmless self-contained "fluff". Find a worthwhile target. There's nothing wrong with the daily existance of Rookery. There's something wrong with the distinct lack of everything else in terms of volume.

Now I'm not talking about being better at being mean. Not talking about being better at being inciteful. Not talking about being a better troll. No. I am talking about the air in these forums reeks of incompetent angst. This town deserves a better class of criminal.

Until then, you're all fired. <grin>

[/ QUOTE ]

I remember when this forum had a better class of criminal. It was an utterly repellent place that drove off a ton of really good, worthwhile people who had interesting things to post about. Not what I'd call an upgrade to the relatively bland but harmless stuff going on now.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was actually a lot more interesting then. Mostly because we had really interesting things to post about. These days? Not so much.

Bland and harmless is about as interesting as wonderbread and mayo sandwiches.

I'm going to retch at the thought of that now.

Well, we had the thread about a flash portrayal of enhanced interrogation techniques. An actual discussion never took flight, since it seems that a certain someone who despises Latin decided to clip the thread.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Emgro believes in old-fashioned manliness, not this new-fangled bromosexuality.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't like the term bromosexuality. It makes me think someone has a paraphilia for bromine, which, if you're unfamiliar with it, is a stinky, toxic, brown liquid halogen.
One could say that description has striking similarities to one of diarrhoea, but such bromides aren't that funny.

[/ QUOTE ]

but bromine is used in keeping jacuzzis/hot spas clean...

[/ QUOTE ]

It's related to chlorine, after all. It's just in a long line of things considered harmful that have useful purposes.

Y'know, like helicopters and high-powered rifles.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
*hands Haetron a blank restraining order, then hugs him in a manly way, which is shaking hands*

[/ QUOTE ]
I've seen men hug in manly ways. It's all over the media, with their current infatuation for bromances. McCain and Bush, for example.

[/ QUOTE ]

Emgro believes in old-fashioned manliness, not this new-fangled bromosexuality.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't like the term bromosexuality. It makes me think someone has a paraphilia for bromine, which, if you're unfamiliar with it, is a stinky, toxic, brown liquid halogen.
One could say that description has striking similarities to one of diarrhoea, but such bromides aren't that funny.

[ QUOTE ]
*hands Haetron a blank restraining order, then hugs him in a manly way, which is shaking hands*

[/ QUOTE ]
I've seen men hug in manly ways. It's all over the media, with their current infatuation for bromances. McCain and Bush, for example.

[ QUOTE ]
*hands Sidney some sunglasses*

<== Is a smart aleck

[/ QUOTE ]
No thanks, I'd rather go blind.

[ QUOTE ]
Re: NYT, does anyone read that fishwrap anymore? Circulation is down an average of 8% a quarter for the past 2 or 3 years (or maybe longer, wasn't paying attention before then.) The last I looked I think they were below 900,000.

[/ QUOTE ]
I like hearing this line of reasoning, as it presumes that just because physical circulation is down, people "don't read the paper", when in fact during the same period, website views have skyrocketed.

No, nobody reads the fishwrap, dead-tree version. Instead, they read the articles on magnificent electronic screens.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I like the highly rarified discussions that take place here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that I have to point it out to you, but...

...eh, I already stressed that I don't have to so why bother?

[/ QUOTE ]
I like how you're always such a ray of sunshine.

I like the highly rarified discussions that take place here.

[ QUOTE ]
Happens to all of us at some point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I refuse. Most forum software isn't smart enough to also hide people quoting those you've ignored, so you end up seeing it anyway.

Instead, it's much more interesting to apply selective blinders to what you read. Y'know, what everyone does with (quickly becoming defunct) newspapers and news sites.

I bet most of you missed the enormous change to internet taxation rates buried on page A24 of the NYT this morning.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This many posts, and nobody's mentioned Depeche Mode? (And what heck? Lacuna Coil did a cover?)

[/ QUOTE ]

Depeche mode is not something I listen to, since last I checked, it isn't an 80s girl band.

[/ QUOTE ]
I had no idea you were a fan of Bananarama.

This many posts, and nobody's mentioned Depeche Mode? (And what heck? Lacuna Coil did a cover?)

[ QUOTE ]
Sidney might be..... /e eyes warily.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nothing but us electrons^W squishy human brain cells here.

[ QUOTE ]
Ok I like you. Just had to make sure you weren't a bot. Bzzt!

[/ QUOTE ]
That scene in Wall-E with the kiss was so sweet.

[ QUOTE ]
Allow me to apologize.

[/ QUOTE ]
Why should you? There was no offense caused.

[ QUOTE ]
I understand that the initial lines in my first post may have sounded critical to yours.

[/ QUOTE ]
As these are message boards, one ought to be relatively inured to the possibility that someone, somewhere, will criticize your post.

[ QUOTE ]
I assure you that they were not.

[/ QUOTE ]
As I have no reason to doubt you...

[ QUOTE ]
I used your words as a jumping off point into absurdity without asking your permission. in the future I will request permission in writing, or better yet, fabricate a post to use as a diving board.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, one could probably make a weak case for fair use when quoting someone else's words here, but I am not a lawyer. Then again, I hadn't tried copyrighting it, and I'll admit that I'm uncertain as to whether NCSoft has claimed ownership of all text on these message boards, but that seems to me a risky move, as it'll cause quite a bit of liability for them.

[ QUOTE ]
I assumed that as my post went on into its second, third, and fourth lines that it would have been apparent that my intent was not to criticize you or anyone but myself and the basic absurdity of the forums.

[/ QUOTE ]
The absurdity was made quite apparent. It's like the same tired argument that an intolerance of opinions does not equate to an intolerance of people, a distinction which seems to escape many commentators on, say, Fox News.

[ QUOTE ]
I assumed wrong. I'm sorry. There really is no forgiving my transgressions, as the one just witnessed is the proverbial tip of the floating poop mountain one may see when travelling down a scenic river on an innertube as a child,

[/ QUOTE ]
Before White Water of Atlanta became a Six Flags-owned water park, there were occasional outbreaks of E. Coli there. The sheer amount of chlorination they had in the water, though, makes the outbreaks all the more surprising.

[ QUOTE ]
that one time when your BB gun misfired

[/ QUOTE ]
This sounds like personal experience. Did you happen to nearly shoot your eye out with a Red Rider BB gun?

[ QUOTE ]
Amen.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, I love the warmth in this thread.

I do have to say that Eisregen has a point here, though. You can't ask people not to partake of certain privileges that you do, particularly if they're granted on a relatively equal basis.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well you can't ask people to not ask people not to partake of certain privileges, so neener neener neener!

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course. I'm not saying Cien_Fuegos can't have threads like this, but I am saying that these threads make little sense.

If anything, it serves only to attract more flames and trolls and garner attention. Which, if that was the intent here, worked~

[ QUOTE ]
Oh wait... I guess that means I can't tell people that they can't ask people to not ask people not to partake of certain privileges, neener neener...

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, I suppose that interpretation flows from a rather literal reading of my post here, where my use of "can't" is understood as an imperative instead of the simple observation it was.

[ QUOTE ]
That'll show me.

[/ QUOTE ]
Indeed it will.

Would you like some fries, too?

Oh, I love the warmth in this thread.

I do have to say that Eisregen has a point here, though. You can't ask people not to partake of certain privileges that you do, particularly if they're granted on a relatively equal basis.

[ QUOTE ]
I dunno.. now that we've finally got a new "token vitriol" post, everything feels to be right back to normal.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dunno, it almost seems like these are all too rare these days.