SleepingSilence

The Savage And Subservient (SleepingSilence x KatherinWinter)

Maybe rash but not stupid. Rash maybe but not stupid.

@KatherinWinter

I think she might consider him to be rash. XP

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

@POOHEAD189 (I did this from my phone.) A bit yeah. I don't like brietbart either but that article was referring to a liberal environmental website study. (from what I can tell.) Hence why I posted the direct link underneath. A broken clock is still right twice a day. The easiest way to become biased and to keep yourself in a bubble is never reading the opposition's work.

Look, I don't think anyone actually likes people polluting and if you think buying green light bulbs will save the planet you should be more than free to be able to buy them. But the government is incompetent and can't run anything effectively I don't think it can change Mother Nature. Europe has been constantly trying to go all green, like Germany using mostly alternative energy and their CO2 emissions skyrocketed.

I'm not opposed to companies trying to compete to provide alternative energy sources that might be considered Greener for the Earth. But to be honest I'm still under the impression that a lot of climate change is natural due to the Earth's changing climate like it has since its creation. USA CO2 levels have dropped exponentially compared to Europe's. And the climate Accord would of flooded the US with most if not all of the bill, it was primarily to hurt the United States which is exactly why Trump correctly got out of the Paris climate Accord. That's just how I see it.

I have no problems with people thinking that we as a society need to try harder when it comes to taking care of our environment, because it is important. And they're certainly things that we could do. But this catastrophe narrative that constantly shifts and moves goalposts and lies consistently and makes a mockery out of Science by proclaiming that it's a consensus and people like Bill Nye wanting to throw people who deny their every thought into prison is steps to far that I'm not willing to accept.

Bill Nye is not a scientist, and the reason that's important is because he constantly uses the appeal to authority fallacy. You telling me that you won't believe or even listen to someone's opinion because they are not a climate scientist. But you'll take Bill Nye word as gospel. Is itself the very idea of bias, double standard. I'm certain that you believe what you were talking about. But I certainly don't think that Al Gore or Bill Nye cares about anything other than money and themselves. I can't post any links because I'm on my phone but you should just look into how exorbitant their lifestyles are, to show the blatant hypocrisy of their words. I sort of find the Doom and Gloom scenario, as Insidious as the religious extremists that proclaim the world will end. Though it's less of a problem because less people take it seriously.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

(Sorry, there's so much stuff. I need to cut it down a bit. Doing my best to respond to all of that, without making it too cluttered.)

By 'biased' links, I meant about all of them were Trump or Conservative reported sites. I'd like some data that has no bias.

@POOHEAD189

That doesn't change my response that calling them bias, doesn't change anything that sources you provided had the same problem. Because their isn't any such thing as unbiased opinion. You cannot have an opinion, without using your own frame of mind.

The important difference is transparency, you see those sites as less biased and more sensible, specifically because they match your own point of view. (Whether you realize that or not.)

I'll make it as clear as possible. I do not care what site or video you use. It -will- have bias. What needs to be discovered, if it actually is factual or not.

And while you might not think Trump or Conservatives are guilty of any Russian conspiracy, I would think you would agree that they are very biased on their own agendas and lie often. Not that liberals are much better.

@POOHEAD189

Well for starters, it's either one or the other. Because Trump isn't a conservative in anyway. I hardly believe he is even right leaning on the political spectrum. But disregard liberals, because I think leftist is a clearer term.

They've clearly already lied many, many times regarding this conspiracy, in a desperate attempt to double down even after many figures were caught on camera admitting to lacking any substantial/real evidence. So the burden of proof absolutely lies with the ones that actually have an ongoing, nonstop rating machine, agenda.

(Regardless of my feelings that both sides both use similar tactics in politics, often because they unfortunately work. But we aren't talking about corrupt politics, unless we want to get into the "Why would you want to give the corrupt government more money and power, since you'd have to think money and power corrupts?")

Bill Nye hasn't ever changed his science (from what I can tell).

@POOHEAD189

This is easily and provably false. (Though the edited episode of gender chromosomes is defended as a "money" issue. Which sure, let's go with that. Still doesn't change the fact that this was an opinion that changed.)

There's articles about him changing his mind about philosophy and science being connected, and about GMO's in food.

In link

"Nye has actually angered many scientists. Over the years, including in a chapter in his 2014 book “Undeniable,” Nye has suggested that there’s something fundamentally problematic with foods containing GMO crops. He has argued that GMOs may carry environmental risks that we can never rule out with certainty.

Now, Nye seems to have changed his mind. Backstage after an appearance on Bill Maher’s “Real Time,” Nye said an upcoming revision to his book would contain a rewritten chapter on GMOs. "

washingtonpost.com/news/energy-enviro…

But assuming we are talking about solely his views on climate change, I can bet his opinions have changed with the times, after Al Gore failed his predictions with the global warming movie. Because they both worked together to make a video at one point. But his opinions are extreme and as someone who isn't a real scientist should stop lying and misleading his viewerbase.

mystudentvoices.com/we-need-to-talk-a…

wattsupwiththat.com/climate-fail-file…

(Seriously, go through all the information on this link above and tell me that looks like something that wasn't constructive at tearing something apart.)

dailywire.com/news/20769/bad-science-…

But Global warming/climate change has been a moving goal post for years now. There is no answer for "What exactly do we need to do, for how long, and will that fix everything?"

instituteforenergyresearch.org/analys…

Look, Marc Morano has a bachelor's degree in political science, with no degree in any scientific field. His wiki page. And not only did you post a video of him arguing against an actual scientists...

@POOHEAD189

...Are you being fully sincere right now? I can honestly no longer tell. Because this point is just...So, so wrong. It's not only an appeal to authority fallacy. Bill Nye ISN'T a climate scientist. He got a degree in mechanical engineering. (and the other guy is a news anchor.)

I haven't found any climate change denier, scientist or no (and most are not) that aren't conservatives, while I have found plenty of climate change scientists on every spectrum of the political sphere.

@POOHEAD189

The personal story anecdote aside, this 97% percent agree thing isn't anywhere near accurate. It's also disingenuous. Yes earth's climate is changing, naturally like it has since it's creation. We had a 15 year pause that goes unexplained by these theories. And there's tons of scientists that disagree, because science isn't done by consensus. This idea that everyone agrees except for political ignorance. Isn't true at all.

pewinternet.org/2016/10/04/public-vie…

ossfoundation.us/projects/environment…

nas.org/articles/Estimated_40_Percent…

To be more specific in your last question however, the CO2 emissions are speeding up the process in a dangerous rate. It is not the only factor, no. But it's the unnatural swiftness of the climate rising. This is why much of the coral reefs are dying the past few years. This is why sea levels are rising much quicker than most have anticipated. How, due to the sudden change in humidity, a normally harmless bacteria has now killed off two thirds of the world's Saiga. Literally 200,000 animals dropped dead over the course of a few days back in 2015, as the world grows hotter.

@POOHEAD189

Like I said before, literally everything has been blamed on climate change. But even if those things are in fact happening, it may very well be for different and much more complex reasons. I'm not "denying" climate doesn't change, that the earth is warming or even that humans pollute and do things that may effect nature.

My gripe is that's it's somehow all our fault (despite the fact, stuff like Cow farting, actually raises CO2 emissions more than Cars.) and it can easily be fixed. Just by handing power/money to a big government. When stuff like the paris climate accord and other things were admitted to basically do nothing to change the temperature, but still wanted us to foot a huge, costly bill and do it anyway.

breitbart.com/big-government/2016/07/…

(The source it talks about.)

ecowatch.com/which-is-worse-for-the-p…

Stuff on sea levels:

telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/ch…

drroyspencer.com/2017/07/study-sea-le…

forbes.com/sites/trevornace/2017/08/1…

Here is a non american link, to show all of the factors that affect climate change. Humans are on there, as well as currents, locations of mountains, etc.

@POOHEAD189

Also, the last link gave me a dud.

Now assuming the response is, "you gave me more biased links." I feel like I can't do anything more, if the argument continues using circular logic.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

So we won't at least take note of this. Just a bunch of denials.
Alright.

---

@SleepingSilence So despite myself I actually looked at your climate change links and video.
You do know that every source you linked was biased, and that Marc Morano has literally no scientific expertise and has been called the 'Climate Change Misinformer of the Year' a few years back, and that Bill Nye caught him in pigeon holding the facts like, 2 minutes into your video.

Do you actually try to look up unbiased facts or do you look up facts that adhere to your preferred world view? And that is a legit question, I am not trying to be an ass to you.

@POOHEAD189

Seriously none taken.

Though the very first part of the post, despite being vague, is kind of broadly doing that. Whether to me or not, it's still at least ad-hominem that doesn't really add any conversation. But I'm not taking it personally in that regard, assuming you meant the others who failed to address you with any counter information. (you did use a separation thingy, so I'll assume that's the case. ^-^')

I see this proclaimed a lot, so I feel like debunking this general idea through your question. Hopefully you'll better understand my position.

You cannot just state "bias" information, and expect that to be a proper counter to anything I stated. That doesn't actually make it wrong or right. Everyone in the world has bias and you can easily be accused of the same thing, but that wouldn't matter. Even sites, I wouldn't normally use, because their often bias themselves. Mashable and Talking Points is left leaning bias sites.

mediabiasfactcheck.com/talking-points…

mediabiasfactcheck.com/mashable

You need to counter what was actually wrong in the articles, the 2015 article has an absolute truckload of inside link sources and I at least discredited NOAA through various sources on their previous shady practices.

I'm probably not always providing the best resources possible, but I blame google's outright burial of possible better content. And because I can't be expected to do everything for only a passive response, but I do sincerely at least do a through skimming before I post anything. (the video was just sort of, off the cuff, but Bill Nye should never be taken seriously after his gender videos/outright denial of actual science/biology.)

Also, whether that one guy has done things wrong in the past. "Marc Morano" I'm willing to accept is true, if you provide me with any sources. But otherwise, who cares what someone is called? Trump was/is called Hitler, doesn't make it true. But the fact you'd seemingly defend Bill Nye, who is outright proclaiming to jail skeptics is precisely why I think their is caution by many in the first place, because it leads to extremism politics like Bill Nye. Who straight up lies and misleads his audience.

My follow up question to you, which may sound like a leading question, but it really is exactly what you need to believe...

Do you agree with my assessment (and Bill Nye's) That mainstream 'climate change' theory) is that CO2 is the major problem, it will lead to global catastrophe and it's solely/nearly all man made and it can only be fixed by big government intervention and somehow our example, can also allow us to do the same things for all third world countries, somehow allowing us humans to subsequently change the weather?

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

So we now have some good evidence of Trump Money Laundering and 2017 was one of the top 3 hottest years ever recorded.

@POOHEAD189

It's just more attempts to directly tie Trump with the Russian Conspiracy, and the guy that claims this, is the very guy who made the dossier which Hillary Clinton paid for. Which included a story about pissing on prostitutes...

Can't say I'm anything but skeptical of that man's word.

They have claimed that for global warming literally every consecutive year now. And they were wrong each time.

2015 was debunked.

climatedepot.com/2015/01/16/scientist…

2016 was debunked.

wattsupwiththat.com/2017/01/19/noaa-d…

And in that very article it states "putting it behind 2016 and 2015 in that agency's database." Implying it's the third hottest year behind those two years which is false data/statics. And now I'm seeing people trying to argue that it's the "second" on google. So I'll wait for more information to come out for this one, but...

science.house.gov/news/press-releases…

climatechangedispatch.com/u-s-congres…

Whether true or not, the NOAA, which is always consistently used by the left. Has been accused many times, including by former employee's of manipulating data, why they'd do this is obvious.

Edit: Also just to stick my foot into the "global warming" idea, let's be honest what you have to believe to be apart of that movement. The whole thing is CO2 is the major (and basically) only factor that predicts climate change and it's predominantly or completely man made. And giving the government more power is the only way to combat the problem. (so one side is promising to change/solve the problem of weather...)



At 6:30 he commits the biggest fallacy that is basically the whole end game in this. So if the earth is "warming" but it's caused by natural causes. Nothing can actually be done about it. Which means no more millions/billions of funding being wasted on vanity projects.

forums.tesla.com/forum/forums/100-rea…

Explain a Song Badly

A song that asks what you'll be praying for, after the song has finished raping your eardrums.

Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

And then they add inane jargon and blatant not!(Geographic Area) to inflate it more than a dead pig that's been left out in the sun for a few days.

@Didgeridont

That's quite descriptive. xP

Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

Bad writing is like poison, if you take a small bit of it every so often, you can build some resistance to it. Like I said before (and I don't mean this as a personal attack), pushing your own standards on others is a tad unfair way to go about life.

It's like an accountant saying that they can't tolerate a cashier that's slow to do her job. It feels quite a bit of a snobbish conduct even when the person in question is an expert in their field.

Writing skills is one of the last things you can choose to bitch about.

@KoL

Nah, of course you should share your opinions to your heart's content. (Hopefully no ones writing is that bad. Not even sure "My immortal" cuts your lifespan. ;3)

I often fail to read as much as I should. (I mean outside material, I read everything in my roleplays, I assure you.) And reading, good or bad writing is still a helpful tool for improving yourself.

I mean nearly every complaint given comes from some kind of standard, that you could stretch into saying it's a selfish desire. Though, I'll say in regards to myself. (or really anyone who does so.) Sharing your own personal desires, isn't the equivalent or related to forcing anyone into doing something. Not everything I complain about presumes those must follow those words, in fact I'm nearly exclusively laid back as a roleplayer.

But I also think it's perfectly fair. Judgement is done by everyone and everywhere in life. I don't think it's unfair to have standards either. If one didn't have any standards, would GM's ever be allowed to deny character sheets or certain things they disliked? Is it always unfair? Maybe it seems that way for the person who wrote it. But as long as critique remains constructive, it's always a necessary part of improvement. Some may not roleplay for improvement, some may just do it for fun. But assuming everyone will take an idea of someone else's frustration, negatively, is a false equivalence.

I think in a roleplaying thread specifically meant for complaining, I think the best possible thing you could post about, is a richly detailed description of something in writing or roleplaying that stresses you out, while providing examples of how those things could be fixed. At least that's my own two cents. ^_^

Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

I role-play in casual a lot, so I think it is safe to presume I have a level of tolerance for genuine mistakes regarding grammar, fluidity, spelling, and formatting. I think for a user, you would have to be a very special type of English Major elitist if some genuine mistakes bother you so much you cannot participate in a story.

It is more common for me to have the opposite problem of this. I often see where a sentence could be elaborated on for greater introspection or description in general for the benefit of the reader. Minimalism is not exclusively nor objectively better than Maximalism.

@Inkarnate

Thanks. Just for clarity sake, I don't even mean sentences that have a typo, misspelling or a missing comma in them. Just sentences that work perfectly well as sentences, or at least don't have blatant mistakes. But just strike a certain nitpick line with you. I'd give examples of what I'm talking about, but I fear making it more personal than necessary. So I'll use one of my own sentences as a possible example.

Like some people can't handle anything with edge or angst, the very idea makes them cringe, like when I ever read any line that's even vaguely smutty. So if I gave you lines like this-

Life was like flowers laid beside a gravestone. The surface level smile you put on daily, embellishing bleakness that eventually withers without support and dies.

(Second question because I want to share the embarrassment. Anyone write a line that you liked and hated at the same time? How many people have self awareness, but just keep lines like that in their story anyway? :3)

As my own worst/honest critic. That's some angst-ridden sounding bullshit ain't it? It doesn't have any real mistakes, the analogy works fine and leaves enough visual stimulation to the reader's imagination. But without reading the rest, could you handle an entire story filled with nothing but slam poetry? (Please, don't dwell on the line. I think I was critical enough. XD)

That's kind of what I mean. Yes, I know length can help in certain circumstances for sure. But for instance, a certain thing I often see, maybe it's how people are supposed to write and I'm doing it wrong. But, it feels like you aren't doing solving any problems by doing so.

The ongoing list thing, where you just keep repeating the word like a Dr.Seuss novel. For a made-up example.

"Time passed, Time went, Time goes, Time slowed, time stopped, but time dwelled on. One fish, two fish, red fish..." You get me right?

Does "Time passed, went, goes, slowed, stopped but dwelled on." Change literally anything about the cohesive structure of that sentence? Did adding that one word over and over again help the reader understand what they meant? That's the kind of word padding that drives me nuts. I never usually bitch directly at people for nebulous stuff like this, so it's not about elitism or at least not the "I'm better than you, let me (and more than likely my entire posse) remind you." mentality. At least I don't think it is. <.<

Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

Question of the day. How much does an individual part of a story, effect the whole product for you?

Can a couple really bad sentences make you stop reading something and kill your desire to even finish it? People say the first lines make all the difference. Is that the case for you? Can something really hook you within the first bit? Or is the first sentence such a slog that you can't imagine reading the rest? Because I feel like my brain is overly nitpicky at times. But when I read nearly every single line and go, "You probably could have found a way to shorten what you just said." I genuinely feel like my time is being wasted, like I'm reading someone expanding an essay word count for class, rather than expanding a narrative, action, character or emotion being conveyed.