Contradict This Guy!

I DARE YOU…Make it good cause I am kind of bored with conservatives who have forgotten how to act…conservatively…

Poetman

Advertisements

9 responses to “Contradict This Guy!

  1. renaissanceguy

    So, he applies Pascal’s wager to Global Warming. Interesting.

    One could apply his logic to any crackport theory that comes along. For example, what if I predict that if people don’t stop watching television, our IQ’s will drop to subhuman levels and we’ll all become ferocious killers, so that most of our species dies out? Since it might be true, and the consequences would be horrible if it did, then we’d better destroy all TV’s, right?

  2. RG – Is this your best attempt at contradicting this persons argument…perhaps you have taken too easy of a way out…seems you leave a lot on the table, while you throw the baby out with the bath water…sorry for the clinches but those were just to easy.

    And while your coming up with an actual argument to counter this guy and my challenge as well, perhaps you will be wise enough to also shed some light on how it is that conservatives, especially religious conservatives don’t have organizations similar in intent to Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, Earth First etc.

    Please don’t inform me that many of these organizations have religious people within their membership rolls because I will stipulate to that easily. But where is there a Falwell, Schuler, or Dobson showing active concern for the conservation of this planet?

    Poetman

  3. renaissanceguy

    No, it’s not my best attempt. It’s the first thing that came to mind. Of course, the problem with my argument is that many people believe that Global Warming is much more than a crackpot theory.

    A conservative version of Greenpeace? I suppose one reason that Dobson and others avoid the issue, weak as it might appear, is that they believe that there are more pressing concerns in our world today. Or maybe they leave that work to those who feel more passionate about it. I don’t really speak for them.

    For myself, I try not to pollute my local environment. I reduce, reuse, and recycle. I don’t kill anything I don’t have to. (I have to kill cockroaches, because my wife forces me to.)

  4. Thanks 1poet4man,

    I am going to be adding this to my blog right now.

  5. bint alshamsa – Thank you for your visit…

    RG – Cockroaches, well…what are you going to do, I mean if she says that they got to go – well then it’s settled; they got to go. πŸ™‚

    By the way I am kind of buying into the sub-human level IQ thing of yours with regard to the ubiquitous box – I mean it’s possible…

    RG – It is clear that almost all the people on earth, whether liberal or conservative, are contributing to a vast and global negative effect on our planets environment. The severities of these effects are questioned by some – but no credible person can claim that there are no negative effects from human activity on this planet.

    Liberals have spokespersons working to educate people on how to reduce these effects.

    Conservatives don’t seem to.

    Poetman

  6. renaissanceguy

    Poetman, maybe it’s just the liberals’ calling. More power to them. And may more people listen to them when they are reasonable, which they often are.

    The earth is here for us, Poetman. It’s ours to use–within limits. If we want to keep using it, then we do have to be more careful, but we also need not subscribe to the “humans as cancerous tumors on the earth” model of the radical environmentalists. I mean, those mountains they love so much won’t do any good once there are no more of us to view them and climb them.

  7. “liberals calling” – by whom?

    Who gets to decide – “reasonable?”

    Through what consensus has “the earth is here for us” been arrived at?

    Who is “us?”

    What are the “limits?”

    How much “more careful?”

    Explain how poisoning our environment is not “cancerous?”

    I am not even going to comment on your last sentence. My suggestion, think that thought through better next time…

    Poetman

  8. Apologies for being off topic, but I’m meant to let you know I tagged you…

  9. renaissanceguy

    “liberals’ calling–by Whom?”

    Pick someone if you like: God, themselves, Mother Nature, Kismet, the Fates

    “Who gets to decdie ‘reasonable?’

    Anybody and everybody. We all do it all the time.

    “Through what concensus has ‘the earth is here for us’ been arrived at?”

    Millions of Christians, Jews, and Muslims think so. Evolution certainly has favored us.

    “Us” refers in my post to human beings.

    “What are the ‘limits?'”

    Ask Al Gore. He thinks that using more energy than the average American is perfectly acceptable.

    My serious answer is that the limits are whatever people decide they should be–as groups and as individuals. I have my own set, and obviously our various levels of governments have some, too.

    “How much ‘more careful?'”

    See my previous answer.

    “Explain how poisoning our environment is not ‘cancerous?'”

    Our environment is not an organism. As I stated above, my belief is that our environment is put here for us to use. We belong here; cancer does not “belong” in a body. The real problem with poisoning our environment is that it harms us in the longrun.

    “I am not even going to comment. . .”

    I thought it through again. I still like it. I still believe it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s