In our lifetime..

[ydoaPs]

he seems to think that radical religious groups, that go against their religion to attempt to desamate anyone that looks at them crosseyed, are civilised.

[Enski]

#73 ,

 

Would you think that by eliminating specific genes that we would also eliminate the possibility of evolving because how we would know that by removing our inherent traits that we are also removing something fundamental which has evolved with us for hundreds of thousands of years ?

[Enski]

bettina ,

No offence or anything but I think it was a bit wrong to say some country you haven't been to is uncivilized .

[Vladimir]

Your ignorance shocks me. What is so civilised about the western world that would allow you to sit on your high horse and preach truth this is a science forum, and im sure if i tracked through your posts Bettina i would find absolutely no science at all

[Bettina]

bettina ' date='

No offence or anything but I think it was a bit wrong to say some country you haven't been to is uncivilized .[/quote']

 

No offense taken, but since I am a girl, I would not want to visit any mideast country that treats females as they do, and secondly, most of the religious fanatics that like to kill people have been from the middle east. This is just my opinion.

 

Bettina

[Bettina]

Your ignorance shocks me. What is so civilised about the western world that would allow you to sit on your high horse and preach truth this is a science forum, and im sure if i tracked through your posts Bettina i would find absolutely no science at all

 

Since you have taken this to a personal level and shown your dislike for me, I won't be bothering you anymore. I think it may be wise if we place each other on our ignore lists. Sorry you took it so personal.

 

Bettina

[Vladimir]

Cultural perspective. America is renowned for its greed and it never ending quests for more profit.

If you feel that people in the middle eastern regions Asia are being opressed look at your own population.

[Enski]

I don't wanna sound like I'm arguing with you or mean to go off topic for the sake of this but I feel some things need a lil explaining .

 

Besides the mention of dirty bombs being the potential threat , women have nothing to do with national security , I see your point but however I don't think religous fanatics are the only people around who are most likely to kill .

 

If I were to see things your way ( from what I hear about things ) ,rather about America then I would see ;

 

-Columbine Massacres

-Cult fanatics

-Rednecks / KKK

-Muggings / Stabbings

 

I wouldn't would want to vist America knowing those things but that is only my perception of the things I seen on TV and I know those things don't make the country what it is ( or does it really ? )

 

Vladimir , I don't think pointing fingers at anyone is mature - the blame is a result of misunderstanding , no ones fault .

 

en

[BenSon]

I wasn't speaking of the uncivilised middle east countrys waging a full scale nuclear war. I was referring to uncivilized religious fanatics detonating a nuclear weapon like a "dirty bomb" on a civilized country. That is the real danger, much less than the US using nukes. I am not worried about North Korea because though not free, they are still civilized. However, I am really worried about Iran. They are uncivilized, overly religious, fanatical, unlikely to be converted to civility, and will nuke us for just looking crosseyed at the Quran.

That is the real danger? to who, a few thousand people? the US has the capacity to kill the world 10 times over and the real danger is a dirty bomb?

Not free? I detest America trying to bring democracy to the world its not like other countries are pushing their systems on America. I think the whole argument about you using the terms 'uncivilised' ect has stemed from the fact that you are condeming the whole country as uncivilised shows a lack of reasoning.

I was not being blatent. By my profile, you can see where I come from. I have nothing to hide. But I do read the news.

I'm glad you read the news but I would suggest that you sample many scources that have different opinions. I didn't say you had something to hide rather that you should just say what you mean rather then sugar coat it with euphemisms.

 

~Scott

 

Edit I don't want you to think I'm just shitcanning America and that i hate Americans. I lived in America for two years its a great country and most of the perople a good people. I just can't agree with the politics.

[Bettina]

I have read about Hiroshima for example and I detest my country for doing that. I imagined young mothers pushing a baby carriage down a street, or getting their kids ready for school when the blast hit. I saw photos of things like watches, hospitals, playgrounds, and people. I am not proud of having the Enola Gay hung up on a ceiling as a display of victory and I shook my head when I first saw it. I never watch "Pearl Harbor" movies because its a slap in the face to the present Japanese population.

 

The reason we did this was to "end the war", but I know different. I believe the military wanted to test the bomb on a living target and still be "legal" before the war ended. Nobody will change my mind that we brought inhumanity right to the innocent. We were not targeting soldiers, we targeted the innocent men, women, and children who were not part of the war. People who were not fighting but just trying to get along. We purposely targeted civilians and I for one am ashamed of that.

With that said, I don't throw stones at other countries without throwing them at mine. Hurting innocent people is nothing to be proud of. Thats what makes you uncivilized.

 

I don't feel safe in my country either, for the reasons listed by Enski, only he forgot to add rapists and child molesters to it too and I don't agree with my president on anything either....Yes Benson, I worry about a few thousand people and as far as having the nuclear capability to destroy the world, I cannot argue that either.

 

The point I was trying to make, is that religious fanatics and nuclear weapons don't mix. What do you think would have happended to New York on 9/11 if the Taliban had a nuke and could deliver it. Our secretary of defense made a statement that keeps ringing true in my ears. "If these people get their hands on a nuclear weapon they won't hesitate to use it". I believe him and it scares me to death.

 

I don't worry about China, US, Russia, or other "civilized" countries having nukes. I worry about "uncivlilized" countries who force their women to wear Burkas, and/or have "religious ideologies" as there constitution driving them to develop dirty bombs to use against "infidels"...or giving death to those who grab the koran without gloves on....and please don't insult me by saying these things are "customs", there not.

 

Bettina

[Mokele]

If you feel that people in the middle eastern regions Asia are being opressed look at your own population.

 

While the US has some problems, and some oppression, I don't think any of it can seriously hold a candle to telling a woman "You were raped, so it's *your fault*, and, furthermore, to preserve our bullshit family honor, we're now going to stone you to death."

 

Mokele

[Enski]

Bettina ,

While I see you made your point clear I can see that a lot of your words have been marked by the fear that terrorists will arrive in America with nuclear weapons , yes which is scary to imagine . I can understand that by seeing the 9/11 event is an

example of "how anything is possible " is something I don't blame you for

 

Thanks your president for that one .

[Bettina]

Bettina ' date='

While I see you made your point clear I can see that a lot of your words have been marked by the fear that terrorists will arrive in America with nuclear weapons , yes which is scary to imagine . I can understand that by seeing the 9/11 event is an

example of "how anything is possible " is something I don't blame you for

 

Thanks your president for that one .[/quote']

 

I don't think our president was in office long enough to do anything to cause 9/11, and the Clinton era was mild. The "strike" on America was clearly of religious origin by fanatics who dont like the fact that:

 

1. I dont pray to allah four times a day

2. I am unveiled

3. I wear a bikini when I swim

4. Read non religious books

5. Fly kites

6. Ride a bycycle

7. Go to school past 8 years old

8. Have a computer

9. Think there god is as fake as the rest.

 

I could go on, but I'm tired.

 

Bettina

[calbiterol]

IMHO, I think longer average lifespan goes hand-in-hand with everything else, particularly designer babies, and Mars colonization, fusion power plants, and nuclear war are also possibilities. I think there might be a correlation between those last three - fusion power plants lead to a full-scale colonization effort of planets other than Terra Firma, which in turn could cause a nuclear war... Scary to think of interplanetary war, but it could happen.

[BenSon]

I have read about Hiroshima for example and I detest my country for doing that. I imagined young mothers pushing a baby carriage down a street, or getting their kids ready for school when the blast hit. I saw photos of things like watches, hospitals, playgrounds, and people. I am not proud of having the Enola Gay hung up on a ceiling as a display of victory and I shook my head when I first saw it. I never watch "Pearl Harbor" movies because its a slap in the face to the present Japanese population.

Good for you A political boycot is always good for your health (no sarcasim intended)

With that said, I don't throw stones at other countries without throwing them at mine. Hurting innocent people is nothing to be proud of. Thats what makes you uncivilized.

I'm glad your not a die hard patriot and that you can see the flaws in your country. That being said, I don't know what gave you the inpression that hurting innocent people was something I was proud of . From my posts I though it was fairly obvious that I oppose war and that i am anti-nuclear weapons. Personal attacks are not nice escpechialy when they are toatly unfounded. I may be a hippocrit in saying this as I have dolded out personal digs before, but thay were always for a reason.

I don't feel safe in my country either, for the reasons listed by Enski, only he forgot to add rapists and child molesters to it too and I don't agree with my president on anything either....Yes Benson, I worry about a few thousand people and as far as having the nuclear capability to destroy the world, I cannot argue that either.

I'm glad that you don't support nukes too (Looks like we have a few things in common) But can you see which has the propensity to do more damage and therefore the real danger.

The point I was trying to make, is that religious fanatics and nuclear weapons don't mix. What do you think would have happended to New York on 9/11 if the Taliban had a nuke and could deliver it. Our secretary of defense made a statement that keeps ringing true in my ears. "If these people get their hands on a nuclear weapon they won't hesitate to use it". I believe him and it scares me to death.

Agreed

I don't worry about China, US, Russia, or other "civilized" countries having nukes. I worry about "uncivlilized" countries who force their women to wear Burkas, and/or have "religious ideologies" as there constitution driving them to develop dirty bombs to use against "infidels"...or giving death to those who grab the koran without gloves on....and please don't insult me by saying these things are "customs", there not.

Your still using those inclusive terms 'civilised' and 'uncivilised', could you please stop. Just because these countries may have uncivilised factions i think it is unfair to label them all as 'uncivilised' and makes you sound ignorant which I think your not. Also about having religious idelologies in constitutions well I think you should look a little closer to home before you label this practice as 'uncivilised'.

 

~Scott

[Bettina]

Good for you A political boycot is always good for your health (no sarcasim intended)

 

I'm glad your not a die hard patriot and that you can see the flaws in your country. That being said' date=' I don't know what gave you the inpression that hurting innocent people was something I was proud of . From my posts I though it was fairly obvious that I oppose war and that i am anti-nuclear weapons. Personal attacks are not nice escpechialy when they are toatly unfounded. I may be a hippocrit in saying this as I have dolded out personal digs before, but thay were always for a reason.[/quote']

Umm..where did I make a personal dig. I would not have done that to you. Your ok in my book. I made a general statement but if I did somehow, it was unintended.

I'm glad that you don't support nukes too (Looks like we have a few things in common) But can you see which has the propensity to do more damage and therefore the real danger.

If you feel the US is the real nuke danger, then your worrying for nothing. Those days and presidents are gone. It's the religious extremists getting one that is the realdanger. They will use it because they believe there god allah allows its use. Not political. Not civilized.

Your still using those inclusive terms 'civilised' and 'uncivilised', could you please stop. Just because these countries may have uncivilised factions i think it is unfair to label them all as 'uncivilised' and makes you sound ignorant which I think your not. Also about having religious idelologies in constitutions well I think you should look a little closer to home before you label this practice as 'uncivilised'.

~Scott

I can't stop using the word "uncivilized", because if fits perfectly with the people I'm describing. Also, our constitution separated church and state right from the beginning because our forfathers knew what religion could do. I agree there is some mixing in politics, but nowhere near what the mideast countries have done.

"Uncivilized factions", using your own words, are the majority rule in some countries. Remember the Taliban, the opression of women, the beheadings, the stoning to death of pregnant women, cutting off a persons hands, are almost a daily occurence. The utter lack of respect for life makes these people uncivilized in my book.

 

Hope were still ok....

 

Bettina

[BenSon]

Hurting innocent people is nothing to be proud of. Thats what makes you uncivilized.

Umm..where did I make a personal dig. I would not have done that to you. Your ok in my book. I made a general statement but if I did somehow, it was unintended.

Must have been a typo maybe you ment 'them'? Thats fine then if no harm no fowl

If you feel the US is the real nuke danger, then your worrying for nothing. Those days and presidents are gone. It's the religious extremists getting one that is the realdanger. They will use it because they believe there god allah allows its use. Not political. Not civilized.

All I'm saying is that if provoked with nuclear weapons even as wimpy as a dirty bomb then I think the US will respond in kind. Only not with one dirty bomb but a fleet of nuclear weapons. I think it is unlikely that the US will strike with nuclear weaponds first, but when they do the damge will be much greater then that done by terrorists.

I can't stop using the word "uncivilized", because if fits perfectly with the people I'm describing. Also, our constitution separated church and state right from the beginning because our forfathers knew what religion could do. I agree there is some mixing in politics, but nowhere near what the mideast countries have done.

"Uncivilized factions", using your own words, are the majority rule in some countries. Remember the Taliban, the opression of women, the beheadings, the stoning to death of pregnant women, cutting off a persons hands, are almost a daily occurence. The utter lack of respect for life makes these people uncivilized in my book.

 

Hope were still ok....

Alright can you say that everysingle person who is a citizen is mid-east countries is uncivilised? I hope you can see that labeling everybody in these countries as 'uncivilised' is poor form. I totally agree with you that all the practises you have mentioned are 'uncivilised' but can you say with any authority that every single person in the mid-east is guilty of such practises?

Of course were still ok

 

~Scott

[Bettina]

Must have been a typo maybe you ment 'them'? Thats fine then if no harm no fowl

All I'm saying is that if provoked with nuclear weapons even as wimpy as a dirty bomb then I think the US will respond in kind. Only not with one dirty bomb but a fleet of nuclear weapons. I think it is unlikely that the US will strike with nuclear weaponds first' date=' but when they do the damge will be much greater then that done by terrorists.[/quote']

I don't see how we can morally respond with nukes, but I do worry about what military people think about. (That "you" by the way, was not you)

Alright can you say that everysingle person who is a citizen is mid-east countries is uncivilised? I hope you can see that labeling everybody in these countries as 'uncivilised' is poor form. I totally agree with you that all the practises you have mentioned are 'uncivilised' but can you say with any authority that every single person in the mid-east is guilty of such practises?

 

No...I can't say that all the people in the mideast are uncivilized, but there are so many that are. Many.

All I know is that I'm 17 and want to be around a radiation free world when I'm 30. But when I look, I don't see it.

 

Of course were still ok

~Scott

Bettina

[BenSon]

I don't see how we can morally respond with nukes, but I do worry about what military people think about. (That "you" by the way, was not you)

I don't think the US can moraly respond with nukes under any circumstance. But morals don't come into this, unfortunatly, if past behaviour is any prediction of future behaviour.

No...I can't say that all the people in the mideast are uncivilized, but there are so many that are. Many.

All I know is that I'm 17 and want to be around a radiation free world when I'm 30. But when I look, I don't see it.

I agree with you that there are many uncivilised people in those countries maybe even the majority but I still think the terminology is wrong. How about uncivilised people? or uncivilised factions? but to label a whole country like that poor, poor form.

I too am 17, but guess what, we already don't live in a radiation free world

 

~Scott

[Bettina]

I don't think the US can moraly respond with nukes under any circumstance. But morals don't come into this' date=' unfortunatly, if past behaviour is any prediction of future behaviour.

 

I agree with you that there are many uncivilised people in those countries maybe even the majority but I still think the terminology is wrong. How about uncivilised people? or uncivilised factions? but to label a whole country like that poor, poor form.

I too am 17, but guess what, we already don't live in a radiation free world

 

~Scott[/quote']

 

Now.....don't yell at me.....but those guys who flew those planes into those buildings in New York city firmly believed that they were martyrs in the name of allah, would become heros in the name of Islam, and would live in paradise bedded by virgins. They were considered heroes.

 

So, if "we" (you and I) don't change the thinking of the middle east religious groups, they are going to kill us, and it will all be for the glory of allah, another false god.

 

Bettina

[bascule]

I don't think our president was in office long enough to do anything to cause 9/11

 

No, but he certainly didn't so anything to prevent it, even though he had concise, spot-on intelligence over a month in advance spelling out the entire 9/11 formula.

 

This is page 2 of the August 6th "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike In US" Presidential Daily Briefing:

 

[Bettina]

No' date=' but he certainly didn't so anything to prevent it, even though he had concise, spot-on intelligence over a month in advance spelling out the entire 9/11 formula.

 

This is page 2 of the August 6th "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike In US" Presidential Daily Briefing: (deleted by bettina)

[/quote']

 

I don't know anything about that, but this irked me.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7965623/

 

Over 200,000 people died because of those two bombs. It killed women and children who were unarmed civilians, not soldiers. How you can defend that is beyond me. We could have shown the "then" enemy regime the power of the abomb by demonstrating it on some islands.

 

Bettina

[MolecularMan14]

Cultural perspective. America is renowned for its greed and it never ending quests for more profit.

If you feel that people in the middle eastern regions Asia are being opressed look at your own population.

I'll ask you sir' date=' to lay the hell off. What is it she has done so wrong? stated an opinion on a forum? OPINIONS ARE SUBJECTIVE, THAT IS THE NATURE OF AN ONPINION. You cannot consider yourself civilized and attack a person's opinion. You can, however inform them on something that makes your opinion solid, and they, in turn, will counter your arguement with something that solidifies theirs. This is the nature of debate, rather than mindless arguement. By taking things to a personal level, you have made yourself uncivilized ([u']by my standards[/u]) by retracting from debate policy. Look, I understand you are apparently very biased, as everyone on the planet is, but if you cannot follow proper arguement procedure, and just jump right to the yelling and fussing, don't get into the arguement.

She has stated her arguement, and no matter how out-of-line it may have been, it is worthy of rebuttal. This is not a formal debate, so if it goes unanswered, there is no consiquence, but if you want to be taken seriously, at least make an attempt to respond to individual points. She has made hers, make some reasonable arguements in return and get on with the debate. Don't bicker.

 

Now, for my response to your most recent statement.

Sure, let's just say that somewhere in the societal expression of Western Civilization, we are all very greedy. Is this possible? Are there no altruists left to speak for themselves? Are you a member of western culture? I consider myself greedy in some respects, but altruistic when it comes to science.

What do you say of the altruists? Are they only alive in order to turn a profit? No. The definition of Altruism eliminates that (go ahead a pull some alien definitinion of altruism out of your ass and call it topicality if you like, but I've handled that garbage before.)

"The quality of unselfish concern for the welfare of others" - Altruism.

If we are so damned greedy, and always on our high horses, then I suppose we will simply pull out of the UN. Alright, so there goes the UN. Now, let's pull our foreign aid programs. Who is helping now? The UN? Well, since we just pulled out, that'll be tough, but still possible. Now, lets say we isolate ourselves, just because we're so much higher than the rest of the planet. The Western civilization alone will depend upon eachother for resources now. How does the world look? Feel better now that the Western Yankee Pig Dogs are out of the picture? Will a new era of radicalism begin? Who, if not those with great power, those with the most rapidly growing population on the planet: the Muslims. THIS IS NOT TO SAY THAT ALL MUSLIMS ARE RADICAL. I HAVE DOZENS OF MUSLIM FRIENDS, WHO I CARE FOR VERY MUCH. But the groups with power, radicals (not necessary Muslims), will take hold of nations for what they want, and what will you do? Will you join them, or will you fight them? We won't, remember, we're providing for eachother, because now you're not in the club. Will you fight it out for power, like the evil westerners would have? Or will one gang of radicals take hold over the rest? Make a decision and get back to me

[alan2here]

I will see all those as I will live forever.

And Nobody can prove otherwise.

[Mokele]

I will see all those as I will live forever.

And Nobody can prove otherwise.

 

I can, and all I need is your photo, address and a gun.

 

Mokele