• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Right, Left and coddling

Wayward son said:
And one of my favs was how completely pissy JBP got when a couple female authors wrote stories about how most mass shooters were male and that might be a problem. It might seem odd that JBP would be pissy about someone pointing out a well documented reality that is highly prevalent to only one gender, when JBP spends so much time bitching about how women should just shut up and accept the supposedly scientifically-based claims he makes about women because reality is reality. Especially when JBP has written about male violence himself. But the reality is that JBP simply hates women and really hates it when uppity women have the gall to complain about men. They should know their place.
Click to expand...

Lets not forget about "Women who wear make-up at work are hypocrites".
 
Jerrymander said:
Lets not forget about "Women who wear make-up at work are hypocrites".
Click to expand...

Yeah, and that's why it is their fault that he has been accused of sexual impropriety three times in his career.

My basic summary of Peterson:

JP: We need rules. Because of these uppity women we don't know what the rules are anymore.

How about don't have a student in your office while the door is closed? Super simple.

JP: F that. I am not going to let the feminists win by following their rules.


----

JP: Feminists and SJWs are destroying society they are the extremely dangerous

Oh look, a horrible terrorist attack in your city, by an incel who explicitly explained his reasons - he hates women and believes feminists are destroying society. This isn't make believe dangerous. People are actually dying.

JP: "An attack without explanation."


---

JP: It is your duty to slay the dragon or else you will be useless to society.

Sounds good, I got a couple friends together and together we will slay the dragon.

JP: No, no, no!!!! That is collectivist neo-Marxism. It will completely destroy society.
 
Last edited:
Wayward son said:
Opposition to GMOs in Canada has nothing to do with trade protectionism. Nor would that even make any sense.
Click to expand...

Much of the Left-wing opposition to GMO is more of an environmental thing.

We know from a lot of experience that introduced evasive species are detrimental to the environment and devastating to the ecology of the area the organism is released into. This is complicated and exacerbated when that organism has no natural predators.

If we introduce a glyphosate resistance crop to an area and there is cross pollination with other plants, especially weed species, we could end up with glyphosate resistant weeds. We might also see glyphosate resistant weeds simply because as we kill off all of the ones that aren't, we only have those ones left, kind of like the super bug issues. And in fact we are seeing this with hundreds of reports around the world about the increasing nature of glyphosate resistant plants, in particular Perennial Ryegrass, Kochia, and a number of the members of the Amaranthaceae family.

Weeds are invasive species and without the ability to control them, then they can do huge damage not just to the natural environment, pushing out local species of plant, but also to farming where the farmers simply can't control the weeds in their crop fields anymore, dropping their production and yields.

There is also a valid concern that making crops, such as corn, canola, soy, and others, glyphosate resistant leads to farmers using it more often on the food crops that we then consume, and that this means we are consuming more of these herbicides in our food, and thus suffering for health related issues that have been linked to them.

These are highly valid concerns associated with GMO's, and ones that we shouldn't just handwave off as pseudoscience or scare-mongering because there is real evidence of their effects on us and our environment.
 
Last edited:
PhantomWolf said:
Much of the Left-wing opposition to GMO is more of an environmental thing.
Click to expand...

True.

We know from a lot of experience that introduced evasive species are detrimental to the environment and devastating to the ecology of the area the organism is released into. This is complicated and exacerbated when that organism has no natural predators.
Click to expand...

Many ecologists are shifting on this. There are a couple examples of invasive species that cause a lot of damage, but most invasive species don't, or only cause short term damage. Regardless, domesticated crops will not become invasive species. Farming would be extremely simple, instead of hard, if that were the case.

If we introduce a glyphosate resistance crop to an area and there is cross pollination with other plants, especially weed species, we could end up with glyphosate resistant weeds.
Click to expand...

Sure. There are 42 glyphosate resistant weeds. That is not a good thing. But what about the 452 cases of weeds being resistant to other herbicides created through non-GMO methods? Last I checked 452 is more than 42? Things like EMS mutagenesis - much riskier and a tiny fraction of the regulations - which long predates GMOs and is something that the environmental movement says nothing about because they are simply anti-science and understand that their followers are completely ignorant about agriculture, know nothing about plants, and don't care that if GMOs were made illegal tomorrow 100% of herbicide resistant GMOs would be replaced with herbicide resistant non-GMOs (and the creation of glyphosate resistant plants predates GMOs too).

We might also see glyphosate resistant weeds simply because as we kill off all of the ones that aren't, we only have those ones left, kind of like the super bug issues. And in fact we are seeing this with hundreds of reports around the world about the increasing nature of glyphosate resistant plants, in particular Perennial Ryegrass, Kochia, and a number of the members of the Amaranthaceae family.
Click to expand...

You know a lot about glyphosate resistant weeds, but nothing about all the resistant weeds to other herbicides. Why do you think that is? And what do you think the financial incentives are for certain groups to loudy focus on one issue and ignore the others?

Herbicide resistant crops are going to continue to be a thing. Farmers are not going to go back to having a ton of kids so they can spend the whole summer weeding fields. Consumers are not going to agree to pay the ridiculous cost increases that would be required for farms to employ even the cheapest labour to do that either. The solution was (and is) crops that are resistant to multiple herbicides acting on multiple different sites rotated with other crops that are resistant to other herbicides acting on different sites. This should have been a requirement from the get go, but activist groups vocally opposed this commonsense solution. While this can be done with older non-GMO methods, GMO would be much better, and CRISPR in turn will be much better, which is why countries that have been very anti-GMO are not classifying CRISPR as GMO - which requires amazing acrobats, but nations understand that how incredibly stupid they were to accede to the anti-science of the anti-GMO groups and won't make the same mistake again, but at the same time won't do the commonsense action of changing directions on GMOs because they understand that their populations have been made unredeemably stupid by the anti-GMO groups.

There is also a valid concern that making crops, such as corn, canola, soy, and others, glyphosate resistant leads to farmers using it more often on the food crops that we then consume, and that this means we are consuming more of these herbicides in our food, and thus suffering for health related issues that have been linked to them.
Click to expand...

Again, you have been sold conspiracy theories by ideological activist groups that are financially dependent on selling you those stories.

These are highly valid concerns associated with GMO's,
Click to expand...

They are both not highly valid concerns, nor are the concerns a GMO issue. Again, you are just a sucker for conspiracy theories.

and ones that we shouldn't just handwave off as pseudoscience or scare-mongering because there is real evidence of their effects on us and our environment.
Click to expand...

We should call it what it is: pseudoscience and scare-mongering, created by Andrew Wakefield level kooks, such as Vandana Shiva and the Maharishi cult, and sold to ideologically agreeable people who don't know enough to even evaluate the lies they are being fed.
 
Wayward son said:
You know a lot about glyphosate resistant weeds, but nothing about all the resistant weeds to other herbicides. Why do you think that is? And what do you think the financial incentives are for certain groups to loudy focus on one issue and ignore the others?
Click to expand...

Or perhaps it's because I used to work in a factory that made the stuff.

Again, you have been sold conspiracy theories by ideological activist groups that are financially dependent on selling you those stories.
Click to expand...

I guess the company I worked for (not Monsanto) fell for the same conspiracy theories and was wasting its money on the safety protocols, medical checkups, and yearly blood testing for its workers.
 
kellyb said:
Radioactive waste and white phosphorus are rational fears, and regarding GMOs, it's both liberals and conservatives equally.
Click to expand...

There are things to rationally fear about radioactive waste and white phosphorus, but there are also things said about radioactive waste and white phosphorus that are overblown and fed by fear and not science.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Much of the Left-wing opposition to GMO is more of an environmental thing.

We know from a lot of experience that introduced evasive species are detrimental to the environment and devastating to the ecology of the area the organism is released into. This is complicated and exacerbated when that organism has no natural predators.

If we introduce a glyphosate resistance crop to an area and there is cross pollination with other plants, especially weed species, we could end up with glyphosate resistant weeds. We might also see glyphosate resistant weeds simply because as we kill off all of the ones that aren't, we only have those ones left, kind of like the super bug issues. And in fact we are seeing this with hundreds of reports around the world about the increasing nature of glyphosate resistant plants, in particular Perennial Ryegrass, Kochia, and a number of the members of the Amaranthaceae family.

Weeds are invasive species and without the ability to control them, then they can do huge damage not just to the natural environment, pushing out local species of plant, but also to farming where the farmers simply can't control the weeds in their crop fields anymore, dropping their production and yields.

There is also a valid concern that making crops, such as corn, canola, soy, and others, glyphosate resistant leads to farmers using it more often on the food crops that we then consume, and that this means we are consuming more of these herbicides in our food, and thus suffering for health related issues that have been linked to them.

These are highly valid concerns associated with GMO's, and ones that we shouldn't just handwave off as pseudoscience or scare-mongering because there is real evidence of their effects on us and our environment.
Click to expand...

Much of the left wing opposition to GMOs is not cogent and has a lot of talk about fish DNA.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Jesus Christ.

Fine whatever. If anyone, from either side, believes that a full 40% of the population has gotten so cartoonishly evil that's there's no going back then start acting like it. Just start shooting them on sight as the inhuman monsters you think they are. Just straight go full Civil War if things really and truly are this far past the point of no return.
Click to expand...

Ziggurat said:
No. This is absolutely wrong. Read his post again. He doesn't take a stand for or against Trump or his supporters. His post was about extremism of any kind.
Click to expand...


Nope. In this context, what you're reading in the highlighted part above are weasel words.

You can't take a current reality, prefix it with "If anyone, from either side", and pretend that it's not referring to a group that actually, currently looks unfavorably upon 40% of the population.
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
Depleted uranium isn't radioactive.

Case in point for an irrational fear.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I've never heard of people worrying about it. It sounded radioactive. I honestly think y'all are stretching to find a leftwing equivalent to, say, the rightwing fear that all the guns are going to be confiscated to usher in martial law and tyranny, but okay. At least I know what sort of thing you were thinking of now.
 
kellyb said:
Radioactive waste and white phosphorus are rational fears
Click to expand...

Radioactive waste is thousands of times less threatening to us than sunshine, a transatlantic flight, going to the dentist or the very rocks under our feet.
 
baron said:
Radioactive waste is thousands of times less threatening to us than sunshine, a transatlantic flight, going to the dentist or the very rocks under our feet.
Click to expand...

Because of the elaborate and extreme care with which it's handled and removed from populated areas, right?
 
kellyb said:
Honestly, I've never heard of people worrying about it. It sounded radioactive. I honestly think y'all are stretching to find a leftwing equivalent to, say, the rightwing fear that all the guns are going to be confiscated to usher in martial law and tyranny, but okay. At least I know what sort of thing you were thinking of now.
Click to expand...

There are people who want mass confiscation and little evidence that the people who are willing to settle for some regulation is willing to stop them.

People who point to Australian gun laws are calling for mass confiscation.
 
kellyb said:
I've never seen a postmortem of 2016 that pinned the loss on "insufficient mockery and berating of Trump fans."
Click to expand...

But "mockery and berating of Democrats/Hillary Fans/Liberals*" does not seem to have been an impediment, has it?

Philosophically, I absolutely agree with taking the high road. That does not mean that slinging mud and insults is not an effective way of making things happen.



* Hell, through "Republicans, veterans, women, minorities, and the physically disabled" into that list, too. Trump mocked and berated them all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom