Total posts: 124
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I don't disagree. 'Renewable' is not an accurate term, but sometimes inaccurate terms need to be used in the context of a conversation.
Nuclear energy is the only logical solution for fossil fuel replacement.
For the time being.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Anywhoo, to avoid getting into an argument that is only indirectly related to the topic, let's settle on agreeing that nuclear energy is a viable alternative and these 'renewable' energy sources are not the single solution to reversing climate change.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
By human standards, the amount of resources needed to construct these turbines and panels is considerable. Put that into the context of natural resources still out there and the lifespan of the sun, and it becomes minuscule. We wont run out of light or the means to harness it any time soon. However, they are expensive in terms of economic impact and destructive to the environment within their own right.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
That backfire effect article was extremely interesting. Thank you for posting that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yes, true, both the sun and the materials required to harness its radiance are finite in their existence. However, that period of time required for any significant toll to be taken on those resources is so large that it becomes irrelevant. The toxic waste produced from 'renewable' sources is minuscule, yet still should be a consideration.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I agree that nuclear is a far better option than anything else we currently have available. I personally pin my hopes on cold fusion, but that is both experimental and highly theoretical. This being said, nuclear power is subject to its own downfalls, but nothing that mitigates its superiority as an energy source. I just find it funny that renewable energy sources were posed as such a clear and obvious alternative, when in reality they are not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
True, but you are omitting the individual spheres of impact each source has on its environment, and the specific inefficiencies they suffer from.Duhh. Wind power requires not batteries.Duhh. Hydro requires no batteries.Duhh. Solar feeding into the world grid requires not batteries.
Wind inflicts severe casualties on bird populations and requires an external power source to run. As such, wind turbines usually rely upon an auxiliary generator which is fueled by combustion. Not only this, but they are limited in their application, as they can only be placed in ideal environments.
Hydro - Electric is much the same, culling fish populations and eradicating small river ecosystems. While this power source is more reliable than wind, it is equally expensive if not more expensive to implement.
Solar is possibly the most viable of all these options, and while they are considerably more efficient in energy production than the alternatives, the amount of space required to implement them en mass is extensive to say the least.
In truth, it will require either an alternative and truly superior energy source to become available, or these existing technologies must be significantly improved.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
The ability to perceive and understand the options in a choice is the prerequisite to making one. This dictates that some element of consciousness must be present in order for free will to even be a consideration.It's not clear to me!
Idle speculation doesn't. But maybe in the end that's all this is, I suppose.
Ultimately this is all the topic boils down to. While stimulating and entertaining to discuss, neither position - any position, has enough substantial backing to validate its case.
As far as I am concerned, the existential functioning of the universe can be explained by any of three philosophies.
Premise One - The happenings of the universe can be explained by its deterministic mechanisms and the predictable nature of all its base components, which dictates any complex being built from these parts is subject to those same constraints
Premise Two - The universe exists in a state of inherently random events, which in any case, states that our fundamental decisions must also be regulated by a law of randoms.
Premise Three - If free will exists, it can only do so while having an intrinsically unknowable nature to human beings, which is either impossible to understand, or beyond our current capability to do so.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
I'm not sure why you think consciousness would necessitate freewill. Why could we not have consciousness as an emergent quality of the physical universe as determined by cause and effect?
Because consciousness entails a specific awareness and acknowledgment of the universe around the entity which has it. By this measure, free will, which is defined as action carried out within the parameters of discretion, and discretion defined as choice, it is clear conscious perception of options inherently constitutes free will.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Would you agree that determinism is essentially causation? That if something is subject to cause and effect that it is at least somewhat deterministic in nature?
Causation is a core component of both determinism and hard - determinism, the distinction being that the latter precludes any sort of conscious thought or a 'soul' if you will, with humans being husked automatons defined only by the universe around them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
The underlying concept there can be reversed. What little we understand about the essence of thought and the physical markers of its presence neither confirms determinism or absolves it of truth.there is no specific evidence that it is more. That is as specific an answer as the evidence will support
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fallaneze
DisagreeHuman thoughts and behaviors, as far as we know, are produced by deterministic forces such as chemistry and physics. Agree or disagree?
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Neither of us have any intent to dox. The data collected will simply be used to compile some graphs and make inferences about public opinion on science fiction (On the micro-scale of course). Our goal is to get at least 20 replies (This is the minimum quota for the assignment). Nothing shady, just a senior literature elective.
Created:
Survey is about four questions longs. I already got mine out of the way, but a friend needs to fulfill his responses quota. Shouldn't take but a minute or two. Please avoid trolling the form.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Link >
Also, would be helpful if you could give a brief reply to this forum topic to let me know it has been completed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
And it would also be the singular reason I am interested in thanksgiving, family gathering aside.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
Probably Priessknockerlsuppe with Schnitzel, Knoblauch Pommes, Kaesespaetzle, Preiselbeersosse, Kartoffelsalat, and eingelegte Karotten
Sounds like a very large meal, but then again, that is the German way...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drafterman
I vote in favor. The character of a vote should be judged thoroughly by its content and relevance to the matter at hand, not off of the identity of the sender. If it is spam, it can evaluated as such without the association of a name.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@warren42
We need to bring this decision to a head. Either you back this vote, or nothing gets accomplished this round, and we make no progress in either direction. That, and someone is likely to be killed tonight as well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
What, am I supposed to pick an extremely effeminate picture? I thought choosing a female character would do the job.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
And to make it widely known from this point forward, I am she, not he. This is like the sixth time I have brought this up. TF.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@Wylted
Fair enough.
He also has lesser scum tells such as announcing he is going to visit budda, who ends up dead. This is a common scum taxtic incase anybody tracks him or watches budda.
This was what stood out to me the most. It seemed like a distinct possibility to me that GP was covering all his bases, by establishing plausible deniability during the night phase and maintaining a neutral verdict on the lynch while at the same time advocating both for and against it when needed.
You can also refrain from insulting me any further. I may have come off incompetent, but that was not the case. I am wary of just about everyone at this point, and my pressure on you was simply to get a read. I already noticed some of the things you attributed to GP, all be it I had my reservations. I wanted to be sure that your reasoning was sound and that it was not an attempt at subverting or baiting.
Unvote
Vote ( Lynch ) GreyParrot
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
It would be a lot easier to engage with you in a reasonable fashion if you were not consistently insulting me. Has GP made a fair number of posts? Yes. Have they mostly been substantive? No. The vast majority of them are one sentence or less quips, not nearly the kind of material you can get in depth with. Even considering the broader picture, I still am unable to see this obvious trend in GP's behavior. Now I will ask you again, while still being decent and polite to you, please explain your hard scum read on GP. Do not insist that you do not have time, because if you had opted not to make a slew of small and irrelevant comments over a extended period of time, you might have been able to draft a meaningful response by now. Do not simply point me to sections in the previous DP, because I want to understand your logic, not analyze the content with my own. And Do not resort to insulting me further, because that is utterly pointless and a waste of time. You have the burden of proof because you are advocating that GP should be lynched. Appealing to your credibility and the conviction placed in your decision are not valid arguments, because this a game of deception. In the real world, I might take those into consideration.
So I will iterate this again. No semantics. Just a straightforward response.
What is the evidence and your line of reasoning on declaring GP scum?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
I don'the care what his reads at the end were I care that his earlier analysis had merit.
Then why exactly were you directing everyone to take a look at the final stages of DP1 for proof that GP is scum if by your own reasoning there is none there? It seems to me that this is a half-assed argument constructed out of desperation in order to get GP lynched. Your passion has no credibility, especially in the context of the game. If anyone is roped into this vote by sheer emotional content, they should think twice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
I read the entire DP1 phase from front to back, and while there was a fair bit of criticism of GP, no one ever definitively defined him as scum. On top of that, GP has been one of the players that has put the least content forward. Not sure where you are getting this obvious scum read.
Anyone who reads through the last 4 pages of dp1, looks at budda's analysis and uses common sense knows gp is scum.
I found the one post you could be referring to, though I would not exactly describe it as being in your favor.
Dude I'm just saying, you notice how GP bit into my bait for voting Supa? My post was obliviating about mostly the irrelevant, except to paint it as if a scum lynch = almost all town on that lynch. He immediately votes Supa.I asked him about what changed between him saying he wasn't gonna vote for a lynch i was pushing.Then he unvotes and reiterates that he's not gonna vote Supa because I am. It all looks so transparent, and its almost like he didn't have an answer to the question, so he just walked it back once given an opening by Wylted.God it just looks so much like him and Wylted have been telegraphing that they're scumbuddies .
Post #705.
Furthermore, both Budda and Aporia more or less agreed in the final phases of the DP that GP was... oh... what was the word they used, annoyingly town? Getting all blustery and heated will not convince me to lynch someone.
So, instead of pointing us back to DP1 pages that do very little to cement your point, how about you explain why you are so convicted about GP being scum. And no, throwing out Ad - Hominem does not count as evidence either.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
I read through the entirety of DP1 before it's conclusion, and I honestly have not observed this scum trend that you are pushing onto GP. Quite a few of us, including two deceased town players, had a solid town read on him, one I still maintain.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
His wagoning was scummy on my DP1 lynch so I am assuming he will wagon on the next lynch.
I would hesitate to describe the decision to lynch your previous character as a bandwagon, regardless of your affiliation. In all honesty, you shot yourself in the foot with the series of mistakes you made. Even if they were honest mistakes, they came off as intentional attempts at subverting and scheming, which is a distinctly scum behavior. Budda and everyone else for that matter who pushed the decision were completely justified, and to contend that all supporters of the vote should be strongly considered as lynch candidates is a a sure way to end up without tangible results at the end of this day phase.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
Just off of the top of my head and something that occurred to me, a dark theme option would be actually very nice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
Regardless of your opinion on my ethics and tastes I agree that the elite league is a good idea. I just do not agree on the method through which to dictate membership. I refuse to get into an argument, especially here, over anything other than the topic at hand.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
Not necessarily a cynic. I just have a firm predilection for a strong and well defined central authority, but by the same token a compact and efficient one. I would much rather give the privilege of issuing out invitations to a small group of or one individual (s) than give that power to the public.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
Ah, but there is no way to guarantee the group would be restricted to that number and the mistake would not be made. That is, assuming you do not add more regulations, which would be necessary. All it would take would be one misstep and the entire system goes into a state of shock and disorder.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
I think that is a far better idea. And so long as the moderation of tournaments is trusted a central and honorable authority, that might be the best manner through which to induct new members.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bsh1
In theory, that suggestion could work, but not in practice. Assuming the invite can circulate among one group of elite individuals, all it would take would be for that invitation to go viral, and soon the torch has been passed to people who are not as deserving nor as trustworthy. Perhaps you can try and vet people coming into the league, but eventually the influx will get out of control. I think there should be a starting cabal of top debate users who can deliberate on who to let in. Place the ability to invite with one central authority.
Created:
Will we know immediately the result of SupaDudz' flip once the DP ends?
Created:
-->
@Wylted
Genuine curiosity, but how could even a light investigative role be classified as useless?
Created:
-->
@Buddamoose
I was under the impression that both town and mafia had players with comparable role sets and abilities. In theory that means role has absolutely nothing to do with affiliation this early in the match.
Created:
-->
@Buddamoose
I was just thinking the same thing. I vividly recall Grey declaring that he was of town affiliation with a useless night power. Now he suddenly has the ability to verify roles.
I win with the town. I have a useless night action power.
Created:
-->
@Wylted
You have me confused with someone else. This is my first and only account.
Created:
-->
@Wylted
I have placed a lynch vote. And it was quite clearly on SupaDudz.
Created:
-->
@Wylted
Agent is not a beginner, just full of shit.
I am being completely honest actually. This is my first match of mafia, in any form. I have never played this sort of game.
And I would like to point out that I am She, not he.
Created:
-->
@Wylted
I have a light leaning town read on Budda. Aside from his contention with Aporia regarding tactics and strategy application in the match, I have found his logic to be sound. Perhaps it can be perceived as a bit aggressive, but I think that he has issued criticism more or less equally around the table.
I have a solid opinion that Supa is scum. He is a proven and self proclaimed player of experience and some skill, and it is entirely unusual for him to make mistakes to the degree that he has. The case can be made that these were and are genuine mistakes, however I can prove within reason that they were not. Furthermore, the only response Supa has had to his accusers has been to be irate, obscene, and otherwise desperate in his pleas. It would be far more beneficial to make his case with more than pure Ad Hominem. I believe it was suggested earlier in the thread that his actions have been a form of reverse psychology, a sentiment with which I agree.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Perhaps that is his strategy.Budda and his completely irrational, stupid, and borderline mental reasoning makes me angry because
And, if I might be so bold, I think the anger and frustration is part of yours.
But, that being said, this game is simply an exercise in manipulation and subversion, as well as investigation and deductive reasoning. To be angry about being proficient in any of these tactics is pointless.
Created: