Re: OT: "We're not treating this as a terrorist attack"

On 6/01/2025 4:52 am, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 05 Jan 2025 08:26:56 -0800, john larkin wrote:
 

On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 11:09:12 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
>

On 1/5/2025 11:01 AM, john larkin wrote:
>

Deplorable is is deplorable does, man. What am I supposed to tell
people who think violent crime "is way up" when it's been going down
for 50 years and that children are regularly getting sex changes, or
whatever nonsense some significant fraction of citizens choose to
believe today. "Yeah, you're right?"
>
Plenty of very well-to-do people seem to believe the same nonsense,
so it's not really a class-thing.

>
You invent people as targets for your need for contempt. You would
have been an ardent Nazi in the 1930's Germany. Tribal.
>
>

'Fraid people who believe nonsense of the type I mentioned are not at
all "invented", if you don't personally know any or have never met any
maybe it's cuz you live in one of the most leftist places on Earth? ???

>
Humans are incredibly diverse.  You blame and mock (and imagine) people
who have different opinions than yours.
>
I think this intolerant diversity is evolved, naturally selected, as a
tribal survival mechanism. Probably your intolerance is genetic,
inherited; you can't help yourself.
>
This tribal tendency for intolerance is why we have wars.
>
You are emotionally driven to believe that you are always right. That
attitude, emotionally selective blindness and hostility to ideas, is
toxic to electronic design. I guess that's why so few people are good at
it.

 Well, to be fair, unlike Bill Sloman, Bitrex at least *attempts* to put
together some form of rational argument - even if it doesn't stand up to
scrutiny (very few Leftist arguments stand scrutiny, so that's no
reflection on him, he just has crap ideology to work with and you can't
make a silk purse out of a pig's ear).

Cursitor Doom imagines that he can do rational argument, or follow it.
He thinks that he has demolished the case for anthropogenic global warming by finding some crummy data published in the 1890s that recorded values that are as high as the much reliable - and reproducible - data we record now in remote places where the atmospheric CO2 level doesn't vary very much through the year.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney