Total posts: 469
Posted in:
Hello all,
I am in the middle of preparing my first argument for a foreign policy debate I want to post. However, I am weary about actually doing the debate for one reason, my sources. The vast majority of my sources come from books, which obviously aren't available for free on the internet, which sort of leaves me in a bind. I know it is poor form to cite something that is trapped behind a price tag, but I really like my sources and I do not want to scouer the internet to find something which makes the same claims as those contained in my books.
Could I take screenshots of the part of the book I am looking to source (they're all online copies) or does that remove too much context? Is there anything I can do?
Created:
-->
@Lunatic
I know the crowd wasn't digging the fight, but I thought Gane was remarkable. He was incredibly evasive, purposeful, and intelligent from my POV. Lewis never really had Gane in trouble at all, it was simply an impressive performance from every angle.
If I'm being completely honest, I think I would bet on Gane if he were to ever fight Ngannou, which he probably will.
Created:
-->
@Sum1hugme
Stipe and prime Cain are/were better than JDS
I agree, if it were up to me, Cain would easily rank above JDS. The points system was incredibly generous to JDS because he stuck around for a long period of time and was able to compete with top level opposition through it all.
Mark Hunt is not a more impressive fighter than Vitor Belfort
As a heavyweight, Mark Hunt is definitely more accomplished. Vitor did some awesome stuff at middleweight, I do not deny that, but he never really did much at heavyweight. Don't get me wrong, if I were to make a list of the best pound for pound mixed martial artists of all time, athletes like Vitor Belfort and Dan Henderson would be way higher than Mark Hunt, but I think my points system was correct when placing Hunt above those guys in the heavyweight division.
Created:
-->
@Lunatic
No, not really. The main point was to try and decipher who left behind the most impressive legacy. If we were to try and figure out the best heavyweights based off their skill during their prime years, I'm sure guys like Bas Rutten would drop a lot. The sport has evolved significantly overtime, and I'm sure great heavyweights of old would struggle a lot against modern fighters. My points system measures a fighter's legacy, with points being accumulated by remaining in the top 10 for an extended period of time.
That is why guys like Daniel Cormier score so poorly. Even though he was an incredible athlete in his prime, his time in the heavyweight division was relatively short, resulting in a ranking on par with guys like Frank Mir.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
@Lunatic
@Sum1hugme
@Theweakeredge
Any thoughts?
Created:
I decided to try and decipher the best MMA heavyweights of all time using the long and rich 31-year history of Fight Matrix rankings.
For my points system, if a fighter was ranked in the top 10 in a quarterly ranking published by Fight Matrix, they would receive at least 1 point. The full points scheme is listed below...
1st place - 15 points
2nd place - 12 points
3rd place - 9 points
4th place - 7 points
5th place - 6 points
6th place - 5 points
7th place - 4 points
8th place - 3 points
9th place - 2 points
10th place - 1 point
The final results can be seen below...
1. Fedor Emelianenko - 514
2. Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira - 418
3. Junior dos Santos - 372
4. Cain Velasquez - 368
5. Fabricio Werdum - 350
6. Stipe Miocic - 324
7. Josh Barnett - 259
8. Alistair Overeem - 233
9. Bas Rutten - 187
10. Randy Couture - 184
Semmy Schilt - 176
Daniel Cormier - 176
Brock Lesnar - 173
Francis Ngannou - 170
Mark Hunt - 165
Mirko Filipovic - 154
Frank Mir - 151
Yuki Kondo -137
Andrei Arlovski - 133
Mark Coleman - 130
Masakatsu Funaki - 113
Derrick Lewis - 91
Curtis Blaydes - 85
Tim Sylvia - 82
Antonio Silva - 80
Travis Browne - 63
Guy Mezger - 61
Jason DeLucia - 61
Alexander Volkov - 57
Ryan Bader - 51
Pedro Rizzo - 45
Kiuma Kunioku - 43
Kiyoshi Tamura - 41
Ricco Rodriguez - 41
Gilbert Yvel - 37
Dan Henderson - 36
Ben Rothwell - 34
Dan Severn - 33
Gabriel Gonzaga - 33
Shane Carwin - 32
Vitor Belfort - 31
Jairzinho Rozenstruik - 31
Ricardo Morais - 26
Gary Goodridge - 24
Kevin Randleman - 24
Ken Shamrock - 23
Igor Vovchanchyn - 23
Assuerio Silva - 23
Keiichiro Yamamiya - 22
Renato Sobral - 22
Ciryl Gane - 18
Valentijn Overeem - 17
Heath Herring - 15
Sergei Kharitonov - 14
Magomedkhan Gamzatkhanov - 13 (great name)
Jason Godsey - 13
Ryushi Yanagisawa - 13
Cheick Kongo - 13
Tariel Bitsadze - 12
Brett Rodgers - 12
Ron Waterman - 10
Evan Tanner - 9
Tsuyoshi Kosaka - 9
Frank Shamrock - 8
Vladimir Matyushenko - 8
Wanderlei Silva - 8
Maurice Smith - 7
Lyoto Machida - 7
Jeremy Horn - 6
Kazuhiro Nakamura - 6
Osami Shibuya - 4
Kazuyuki Fujita - 4
Akira Shoji - 3
Alexey Oleynik - 3
Manabu Yamada - 2
Vitaly Minakov - 2
Oleg Taktarov - 1
Vernon White - 1
Carlos Barreto - 1
Leon van Dijk - 1
Bob Stines - 1
Sanae Kikuta - 1
Brendan Schaub - 1
Roy Nelson - 1
Muhammed Lawal - 1
Matt Mitrione - 1
Marcin Tybura - 1
2. Antonio Rodrigo Nogueira - 418
3. Junior dos Santos - 372
4. Cain Velasquez - 368
5. Fabricio Werdum - 350
6. Stipe Miocic - 324
7. Josh Barnett - 259
8. Alistair Overeem - 233
9. Bas Rutten - 187
10. Randy Couture - 184
Semmy Schilt - 176
Daniel Cormier - 176
Brock Lesnar - 173
Francis Ngannou - 170
Mark Hunt - 165
Mirko Filipovic - 154
Frank Mir - 151
Yuki Kondo -137
Andrei Arlovski - 133
Mark Coleman - 130
Masakatsu Funaki - 113
Derrick Lewis - 91
Curtis Blaydes - 85
Tim Sylvia - 82
Antonio Silva - 80
Travis Browne - 63
Guy Mezger - 61
Jason DeLucia - 61
Alexander Volkov - 57
Ryan Bader - 51
Pedro Rizzo - 45
Kiuma Kunioku - 43
Kiyoshi Tamura - 41
Ricco Rodriguez - 41
Gilbert Yvel - 37
Dan Henderson - 36
Ben Rothwell - 34
Dan Severn - 33
Gabriel Gonzaga - 33
Shane Carwin - 32
Vitor Belfort - 31
Jairzinho Rozenstruik - 31
Ricardo Morais - 26
Gary Goodridge - 24
Kevin Randleman - 24
Ken Shamrock - 23
Igor Vovchanchyn - 23
Assuerio Silva - 23
Keiichiro Yamamiya - 22
Renato Sobral - 22
Ciryl Gane - 18
Valentijn Overeem - 17
Heath Herring - 15
Sergei Kharitonov - 14
Magomedkhan Gamzatkhanov - 13 (great name)
Jason Godsey - 13
Ryushi Yanagisawa - 13
Cheick Kongo - 13
Tariel Bitsadze - 12
Brett Rodgers - 12
Ron Waterman - 10
Evan Tanner - 9
Tsuyoshi Kosaka - 9
Frank Shamrock - 8
Vladimir Matyushenko - 8
Wanderlei Silva - 8
Maurice Smith - 7
Lyoto Machida - 7
Jeremy Horn - 6
Kazuhiro Nakamura - 6
Osami Shibuya - 4
Kazuyuki Fujita - 4
Akira Shoji - 3
Alexey Oleynik - 3
Manabu Yamada - 2
Vitaly Minakov - 2
Oleg Taktarov - 1
Vernon White - 1
Carlos Barreto - 1
Leon van Dijk - 1
Bob Stines - 1
Sanae Kikuta - 1
Brendan Schaub - 1
Roy Nelson - 1
Muhammed Lawal - 1
Matt Mitrione - 1
Marcin Tybura - 1
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
OMG, the 50s version is my favourite movie of all time! (or at least one of my favourites)
Have you seen the original???
Created:
-->
@oromagi
The USFG should invade Canada at once
Do it, end our suffering.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Barring the 2 world wars and the Balkan wars, post revolution Greece has been relatively peaceful.
Created:
Posted in:
I suppose it is racist, but the real question here is whether this racial discrimination is okay. Now, if someone doesn't want to date a person of x race because, "we all know how they are," than that would not be okay. However, if you don't want to date a certain race for aesthetic reasons, then there is no problem. People have little control over what they are attracted to, so I have no issue with people rejecting a race for that reasons.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I suppose I could accept that argument; however, I do believe that he should have focused on the minimum wage bill and dropped the stimulus; we have been promised this bill for a long time coming, I suppose its not fair to criticize the current president for the failures of the one before him - as Trump's inability to get the stimulus passed means that Biden has to. I'll concede that he is not necessarily in the wrong here, but I would argue that it would have been better for him to have passed the minimum wage bill instead of the stimulus - especially considering that the stimulus package for individuals citizens has been dramatically reduced from his initial promise - he did fail to keep a promise, and I don't think its entirely because of Trump's underperformance, though I essentially do accept that Trump's role had a part to play
Personally, I would still go for the stimulus package over the minimum wage increase. The only reason we can even pass this stimulus bill is because it falls under "Budget Reconciliation," meaning that it can't be filibustered. A straight 15 dollar minimum wage is going to be filibustered (meaning the Dems need 60 Senate votes), making it impossible to pass. Luckily though, Biden says that he wants to reform the filibuster, making it far more difficult to execute (abolishing the filibuster is impossible because of Dems like Manchin). Perhaps if he passes that, a 15 dollar minimum wage will become more viable.
stimulus package for individuals citizens has been dramatically reduced
Yep, their opening proposal was 1,400, I have no idea why the Dems didn't even try to push for 2,000.
In summary, I understand the yearning for a minimum wage increase, but I think we should primarily focus on what we can pass, if a bill can't pass, then it won't help nobody.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I read a couple articles to get a better understanding and to refresh my memory, this is what I learned...
You can't overrule the Parliamentarian without dealing with the strings attached.
A vote to overrule MacDonough [That's the Parlimentarian] would require the support of all 50 Democrats and Harris. [LINK]
Dems like Dick Durbin have openly voiced opposition against the overruling, so that separate vote would be a whole other battle to fight.
But even with an overruling, it needs to get through the Senate. The original draft had the 15 minimum wage, it got through the house and lost in the Senate (the vote being 58 against and 42 for). The stimulus package with the minimum wage increase was voted on, and it lost decisively. But, when Biden removed it, the vote changed to 50-50, allowing it to pass. You may note his lack of effort, but swaying 8 Senators is a daunting task, notably when you want your bill passed quickly.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
didn't sign in the 15 dollar wage deal
Wasn't this because the Parliamentarian deemed that the Dems didn't have the authority to (or if they were to the Reps could filibuster)? I've heard people say that the Dems could have overruled that decision the Parliamentarian made, but even then, the senate would need to approve it, and when it did go to a vote, 8 Dems voted no.
Put simply, from my understanding, Biden would have had to sway a massive 58-42 decision to a 50-50, and Biden said he felt the bill needed to be passed quickly, so it makes sense why he didn't want to die on this hill, at least if my understanding is correct. I read some CNBC and WaPo articles when this first went down.
Created:
Posted in:
For anyone interested, there are a couple links I think are pretty useful with regard to abolishing the police.
This is a very interesting essay that attempts to empirically justify that the police are not a necessity. What I like most about this essay is the fact that the author specifically strung together replacements for the police. This is by far the best piece arguing for police abolition.
This is also an interesting piece. It delves into the impact of adopting a police force, specifically comparing British counties before and after police were adopted. The implementation of sufficiently large police forces decreased rural crime by 19% and decreased London robberies by 40-46%. These decreasing effects also held true for violent and property crime. However, there was no impact on homicide. This suggests that conservative police forces may be better than pure policelessness.
This also delves into the impact of policelessness. It states that the abolition of police in Denmark resulted in a 10-fold increase in robbery almost instantly.
Created:
Posted in:
I wonder if a school classroom got exposed to the website or something.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
I would say that these things might as well be the same thing. I suppose you could argue that bachelors are married, as in it would be physically possible for 2 people to talk about it, but such a conversation would require an unprecedented level of ignorance and/or absurdity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Reece101
Allow me to clarify. Presuming definitions are established beforehand, certain things are, by definition, true, thus making them practically undebatable.
Created:
Posted in:
Certain things are, by definition, true, thus making them practically undebatable. For instance, the statement, "A bachelor is not married," is true by definition, making any counter-argument futile.
Created:
Posted in:
I think 'Dead Silence' has a neat soundtrack.
The theme song is the best of the bunch IMO.
Created:
Posted in:
A book every 15 days (365/23)? Damn. That's a crazy good pace (at least by my standards).
Created:
Posted in:
As someone who has never had anything other than the store bought iterations of these products, I will say that ice cream is undeniably the superior food choice.
Created:
Posted in:
From what I've read on mainstream news, the largest beneficiaries are going to be the other hedges. Also, it seems like GME is staying firmly planted on Earth's soil.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I will close on these thoughts then.
1- Increased police presence (generally) does not lead to a meaningful negative or positive impact on crime. There are studies I know of that swing both ways on the issue, but whatever relationship exists must be rather weak.
2- Britain appeared to be better off following the introduction of a police force and Copenhagen appeared to be worse off without a police force. However, it could be true that these same benefits could be found with other programs. Additionally, the police forces implemented in Britain were much smaller than existing police forces.
Conclusion: Money allocated to the police should be reallocated to more useful endeavours, but after the necessary programs are created police (in their reduced form) could serve some social function (you say no I say yes). We have seen the empirical successes of Britain moving from a policeless society to a policed society. However, you would say that the police merely filled a void that could be filled in cheaper ways. Presumably you would argue that any police force would have a null impact on crime provided the right programs were created beforehand.
We agree that police services are far too large today, I think that a more conservative arsenal can make society better, you think that the of totality of the social function of police services can be accounted for.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Okay tell me if I've got this right...
-You think the police should be defunded and slowly phased out until they no longer exist.
-We should bolster and develop institutions to replace the police (that will hopefully do their job better).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
If your not for abolishing the police then we don't disagree. I said in my first post...
Put simply, a policeless society probably isn't good, but a reduced role of police (at least in the United States) doesn't seem to be a massive detriment.
(reduced role means that they're defunded)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Hello, I was very happy with our short exchange, however I was disappointed with my reliance on conjecture and complete and total lack of information on the issue of police abolition. As a result, I took some time to do a little reading on the issue.
Put simply, police abolition would probably need to be tested on a small scale with decent success before I could support it nationally.
1944 Denmark underwent the dismantling of the Danish police force by the Nazis, 4 years after the cowardly Nazi attack in 1940. This event was dubbed ‘7 months without police.’ Jorgen Trolle, the head of the Copenhagen state prosecutor's office recorded the outcomes of the event. He wrote of the unmistakable increase in crime, though this crime was more potent in certain types of crime. To start, there were merely 10 robberies throughout the entirety of 1939 in Copenhagen. However, this rose about 10 a month (120 a year) in 1943. This is an undeniable increase, but it is nothing compared to the remarkable increase to 100 per month following the destruction of the Copenhagen police.
This tenfold increase in Copenhagen was seen in burglary and larceny as well. Despite this, crimes where the perpetrator could be detected without the police like fraud and embezzlement there was no notable increase.
My source for this (which I will link in your PMs) states that the Danish experience was ‘imperfect and of short duration,’ however the author argues that ‘a modern industrial society can hardly be kept going without police and penal courts.’
A 2019 study looked into the impact of implementing a police force for the first time on crime across English counties. In other words, it looks at crime before and after a police system, the study ultimately concludes that there was a notable crime decrease following the implementation of police so long as the police force was ‘sufficiently large.’ Counties that only established a small police force did not see much change. More specifically, the implementation of sufficiently large police forces decreased rural crime by 19% and decreased London robberies by 40-46%. These decreasing effects persisted for violent and property crime. In contrast, there was no notable decrease in homicides following the creation of sufficiently large police forces. However, it is important to note that ‘sufficiently large’ was defined as 1 officer per 1500 citizens, but this is very low by today's standards. For instance, America has 3.9-4.5 per 1500 citizens, England today has 3.2, and Germany has 4.5. So, it could be argued that we have jumped the gun on police forces, making them too big and suffering for it.
I will link you my sources in your PMs at your request.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Better idea, we have something that prevents the economic stagnation that isn't also highly corruptable.
Perhaps, but what other force could protect property to prevent said stagnation? The only thing I can think of is the military or providing landowners with weaponry to defend their property. These alternatives sound much worse to me (though this is merely off the back of my intuition).
Created:
Posted in:
It doesn't seem that increased police budgets have a meaningful impact on crime from my limited reading on the topic. However, I know from a book I read that historically societies like Somalia that lacked the wherewithal to defend private property from wrongdoers saw their societies locked in economic stagnation, I would imagine that a police system could have alleviated these issues, therefore suggesting that some police presence is important. Put simply, a policeless society probably isn't good, but a reduced role of police (at least in the United States) doesn't seem to be a massive detriment.
Created:
Posted in:
As for who will win...I don't have the football knowledge to say. But I hope the Buccaneers take it, I rarely enjoy a singular team (barring the New York Jets) dominating the NFL for consecutive years, plus I like Tom Brady a lot. Also, as a die hard hockey fan I think it would be kinda neat to see Tampa Bay become the most recent Superbowl and Stanley Cup champions.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Cool, so it seems like you believe that ultimate freedom in a utopian society would be optimal, but intrinsic human nature makes this level of freedom difficult to implement. I suppose then that my difference with you would be our respective faith in freedom (with you having far more faith than I).
Thank you for clarifying, I always have this question for people who describe themselves as "Libertarians."
Created:
-->
@Vader
Just out of curiosity, would you say that freedom is an end in and of itself or is it merely a means to an end (presumably that end being a better society)?
Created:
Posted in:
I also got "Solid Liberal."
I really like the analytics showing where you are relative to people of your political leanings and the general population.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
I'm sure you're a nice guy, but you will not understand the reason why your post was ridiculously illogical. Your last post confirms that. It would be a waste of my time to try and explain it to you, and you would probably come away feeling insulted, and that is not my intention. Have a good day!
I must say that I'm disappointed, I wasn't even trying to prove a point, I was just curious if RM was correct or not so I relied on a broad and reputable analysis to see if America became more or less corrupt under a Democrat relative to a Republican. If you don't want to talk (even though you started the conversation and ad hominem attacked me), I suppose I will disengage.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
The fact that you think your post was logical, and worse, not ashamed to post it, shows that you will not understand the reason why it was ridiculously illogical.
Are you unhappy with the index I used? There was one flaw in my interpretation, I used America's ranking relative to the rest of the world, not America's actual score, this means that America might see no gain or loss in their corruption score but may still rise or fall in the rankings given the expected ebbing and flowing of the scores of the other countries. Also, my index merely looks at perceptions of corruption, not corruption itself, however there have been studies verifying the efficacy of my index in determining how corrupt a given international body is.
Could you please elaborate on what I said that is "ridiculously illogical".
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
I can try to find an index that stretches back a little farther, the one I used only went back to 1995.
Created:
I decided to take a little look into this using the Corruption Perception Index, it documents corruption around the world from 1995 to 2020.
Clinton from 1995 to 2000 made America marginally less corrupt relative to the rest of the world, with America moving from 15th to 14th world wide.
The Bush era from 2000 to 2008 saw a regression in America's international standing, with America falling from 14th to 18th.
Obama's reign from 2008 to 2016 saw no improvement nor regression in America's corruption ranking, with America remaining at 18th.
Lastly, the Trump era from 2016 to 2020 saw a spectacular descension in America's international standing, with America falling from 18th to 25th.
Clinton +1
Bush -4
Obama +0
Trump -7
Reps -11 Dems +1
So Dems do appear to be less corrupt, but they only appear to marginally improve America's worldwide standing.
Created:
Posted in:
Oh you simpletons, how are all of you unable to comprehend the definitive justification for far left collectivism (seen below).
I was skeptical at first, but eventually I realized that I was just another victim of motivated reasoning. Look at the above content closely, escape your echo chamber and inject yourself with pure, unadulterated KNOWLEDGE.
Created:
Posted in:
I am very thankful that I have never had to endure such a tragedy, tackling peoples mental hardships will certainly be one of the many battles our societies must undergo in the 21st century.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
😱😱😱
Woah, be careful Oro, Moloch isn't going to be very happy with you after this post...
Created:
Posted in:
I think it's reading a little too deep into a pretty innocent scene. Especially since there is no evidence that this scene was intended to display a racist message.
Created:
-->
@MgtowDemon
I'm not sure "no study" can do this, but it's certainly an extremely tall order that the overwhelming majority of studies haven't/will not be able to do.
Perhaps for very very simple topics yes, all variable could be accounted for. But for a topic as multifaceted as this, I can't imagine everything being taken into account.
After our conversation ended here, I did some research to see if SES actually affects crime. A meta-analysis (Faulk 2016), of a whole variety of topics involving race and SES, found that there was only a "weak" relationship with crime in general Race, Poverty, and Crime – The Alternative Hypothesis . Although, that is not to eliminate low SES entirely as a predictor of crime(as it is still weak), but we know what is left is "small", if it exists at all. So, SES matching the participants wouldn't matter all that much.
Your study sidesteps the question I think. This isn't about whether high or low SES made you more likely to commit crime, we want to see how it impacts sentencing specifically.
The above meta analysis (can't find the whole thing) does state a statistically significant impact of SES on sentencing.
As for age, I don't know how much this affects crime (will need to research further).
I am not quite sure, but I did find this as a top result when I searched around.
The existing research indicates that, at the individual-level, offender characteristics have important relationships with sentencing outcomes. Specifically, age and sex of defendant have been found in some research to be important predictors ofsentence severity. For instance, while the research is clearly not uniform in this regard, several studies have found women receive more lenient sanctions than men (Bernstein45This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
1979; Daly and Tonry 1997; Frazier and Bock 1982; Steffensmeier 1980; Mustard 2001). Similarly, research by Steffensmeier et al. (1998), Spohn and Holleran (2000), Zatz and Hagan (1985) among many others, have found sentence severity is related to age of defendant. Such findings suggest that these characteristics are potentially important moderator variables;
[SOURCE FOR QUOTE] Page 45
This links only to an abstract. Do you have the meta-analysis in full?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
That was indeed a very stupid (surprisingly racist) video.
Created:
Posted in:
I have a very hard time grasping topics that can't be argued wholly from an empirical standpoint . This is generally why I avoid a lot of philosophical topics, because I don't really have the wherewithal to do so.
Created:
Posted in:
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with having billionaires, but if we had to implement a set of policies that lead to the end of billionaires, there wouldn't necessarily be anything wrong with this either.
In other words, if I got news tomorrow that the number of billionaires doubled or halved, I would be indifferent to both without the surrounding information.
Just look at the countries with the most billionaires, there are a lot of prosperous liberal or social democratic societies. I don't think taking those countries off this list make them any better.
Created: