1000 ~ 13

Ever heard of making a dramatization, HS7? I took some of your statements and pulled them out to their full and overly-dramatic extents. When you said "most people don't care", that then turned into "nobody cares".

Dramatizations. I also used one when I was referencing Hitler in my last post. Of course I know that you don't think that he could literally put himself together and walk the earth again. Look for the dramatizations I use. I have a tendency to use them.

I'm not quite sure while you're still harping on women being treated as they are and have been, HS7. Like I said and like you repeated, this is nothing new. Just like you brought up racism. Nothing can change in a snap-instant, HS7. There's always going to be some sort of conflict in the human world, such as straights vs the LGBT community. While views have been easing up on these and the situations have been improving, it takes awhile for the human nature to change. It doesn't happen in a snap-instant, as I said. I, for one, believe that we've come quite a long way. LGBTs used to hide their gender preferences and try to convince themselves that they were straight. Now, there are those who are out in the open about which gender they prefer. And racism? We have a black president, for crying out-loud. That's a pretty far step from the slaves that they once were.

I think you mistook me when I said that people learn from their past. This was a generalization of the human race. If there are certain individuals out there who do not wish to learn from some mistakes they've made, that's perfectly okay. But you have to consider, do they even know that they've made a mistake? Last year, I was constantly asking Blizz for help and... I wasn't such a great person. Did I realize that I was consistently doing something wrong? No, I didn't. And if she hadn't kept a blog to vent her frustrations at me and sent me the link one day over the summer, would I have ever known? No. I wouldn't have. But since I learned about my mistakes, I was able to fix them. There are people out there like that. They need a little guidance in fixing their mistakes, but most people, upon realizing a mistake, are willing to fix it. And if they are one of the bull-headed mentioned before, then, I must say, these people are rare and extremely stupid.

You talk about people having role-models. Role-models are defined as people that one looks up to and holds high in their minds above other people. Most people have God or their parents or someone who's made a huge impact on their life their role model. It is very unlikely that a role-model would tell their followers to, say, for example, jump off a building to their death. That would be my parallel to "someone's-going-to-try-and-be-Hitler".

Also, don't you think that the world is prepared for this kind of thing? People realize that there are crazies out there who might try and reenact this. But you've said it yourself, it's stupid for them to even try. Because, as I said, the world knows that there are people out there like this. And since we've stopped it once, we can always stop it again.

As I have said earlier, it's easier now to keep track of such things. Where some people used to stay quiet in the past, now things are coming out into the open. This includes murders, rapes, kidnappings. We have a simpler to use system now. I firmly believe that the rates, however much they seem to be going up, have merely remained near the same over the years, with small fluxes in it every now and then. Also, it depends on where you live.

I like how you explained how extinction works. I know how it works, thank you very much.

But, once again, you're wrong in that big paragraph. Let me point out the exact spot:

"If there is less space, animals will begin competing for resources. They will fight each other to survive. There goes your survival of the fittest statement."

You are entirely wrong in those sentences. That is exactly what survival of the fittest is. I should know -- I wrote an entire research paper on it last year. I'm explaining it, because I really think you need it. Basically, Charles Darwin came up with the theory of 'survival of the fittest'. In it, he explains that there is competition within species. There is competition for food, for living space, for mates. If one can't find this, they will die. The goal of most animals in nature is to pass their genes along down the generations. However, if they die, they cannot do this. Therefore, there is competition over these resources. If an animal has undesirable characteristics in them, they will most likely not survive. A good example that I remember is a herd of moose. One year, there are a lot of light brown coloured moose. But as the years go by, dark brown moose start to overtake the light brown moose. The light brown moose starts to die off, and the dark brown moose starts to take over the forest. Why? Because the traits it has have become desirable in its environment. That is exactly what survival of the fittest it-- Competition for resources and passing on genes.

What you said? Yeah. My statement was actually correct.

You also talk like I have never heard of the butterfly effect. Actually, I've read a story on it. And yes, I know that killing something as simple as, say, a butterfly, can have a negative change on the world. However, it takes hundreds of years for these changes to even become apparent. And even if they do become apparent, how will we know that they are caused by the simple killing of a single butterfly? It's not something that can be easily traced. You say it more like it's a chain of fast-acting events, when it actually takes hundreds of hundreds of years. Yeah, so there's one less butterfly to reproduce. The sparrow or something that feeds off this isn't going to exactly die -- He is going to move to a new food source. Survival of the fittest also plays into the Butterfly effect a lot. If the butterfly had been better at blending in, it would have been able to pass its genes onto the next generation. As it hadn't, it is now dead.

We went from videogames, to discussing nature.

Good job at staying on topic. Even better for us to continue arguing with you.

Also, HS7, do me a favour and drop the condescending tone. There's something called 'respect' during a debate. Using a condescending tone does not tell me that you have any of the respect that you should have for your opposing side. Get some respect, drop the condescending tone, and then we'll continue to debate.

Wow, I don't even know what we're talking about here. A supposed debate but debating too many topics! The main point being that people are evil and will one day destroy the world? Or am I misinterpreting things? Last I checked we were talking about Sims....and then the effect of violent video games on todays youth.....and now we have a mix of war, racisim, evil humans, the end of the world.....the butterfly effect... I don't like this topic. But anyways, of course I have an opinion

I wouldn't be surprised if people caused their own demise in the end. If humans ever cease to exist, which I'm sure eventually it has to happen. That said, I love people.

I'm hardly a part of this conversation but parts of it stuck out. I'm just commenting not debating anything. Like repeating mistakes, it is only a mistake if it is viewed as a mistake. Many murderers are very twisted or mentally ill, they kill on purpose, for whatever their reason. They get out and do it again because they have to, need to, want to, whatever. Apparently jail time or even the death sentence isn't motive enough to abide by the law for some people. Makes for really good story plot ideas, I love murder mysteries.....just saying. As for the butterfly effect, I watched a movie on it once, it was cool. But really the butterfly effect is nothing but a "what if." It's a waste of time. What if I hadn't killed that bug, what if I had let my dog have puppies? There's no point in thinking about it, unless you're just pondering, because there's nothing you can do about it. I was attacked by a moth once.....it was really scary O.o I'm glad I killed it so it can't have any more creepy moth babies

Theoretically if the end of humanity or almost end where we became endangered species, I hope nature hasn't given me good survival genes. I don't think I'd want to live anymore Though I suppose it would kind of be cool to be able to say you were the last person to live.....I guess you wouldn't have anyone to brag to hehe.

Animals do fight each other to survive. How else will they survive? Explain to me EXACTLY how they do not do that. I would love to see what you come up with.

I never said it was going to change in an instant. Nothing ever will. Things change over a gradual amount of time, and to be honest, this has gone on fore quite a long time, hasn't it?

Why he's our president, I don't understand. So many people are still so mad about it. Why can't they just check his freaking birth certificate and get over it? Anyways, back to other part. Yes, people learn from their past, but it takes times for them to get use to it. It seems like you're saying it can take a single second for them to just completely change.

There is nothing wrong with saying somethign again. It's not like you're stupid or anything. People tend to elaborate on details, even if everyone knows about it, to help them fit them together.

Ah, that might have happened, but you brought up movies, remember? Now, that was a huge subject change. And that's waht arguements are for, correct? What kind of arguement would it be if it went the same way again and again?

There is also something called 'respect' during everyday life, not just during a debate. Debates can get out-of-hand, so if you can't handle a simple little thing, you might want to change the topic to something else so you won;t have to discuss the topic everyone is getting so heated up about and you can still argue.

And how have I even suggested I'm smarter and mroe sociable than you? Where in any of the things I have said up there does it even suggest that? To be honest, you are actually the one saying that you have far more intellect than I do.

All of your points can easily be fought against and proved wrong with a little thought, HS7. Why not give us something a little more challenging?

That suggests that you think everything I say is very weak, meaning I can't even talk about something right. You're saying that my words are pretty much nothing. So you think I have that sort of tone? Look into yours. Not to mention the last bit you just posted. You sound sort of like a... Hypocrite? Yeah, that's the word. If you can't show me some respect even in this, tehn I can't show you repect.

Holy freaking crap.
I'm not reading all of that.
It doesn't even have to do with the original topic anyway.
And you guys are ruining it by starting to attack each other. Cool.
Maybe I'd take part, but I don't really have an opinion about the new subject.
Each line of this post is slightly longer than the last one. See what I did there? I'm so cool.

I hope you guys are having fun instead of actually getting mad at each other, because otherwise this whole thing is pointless.

Except maybe for entertainment.

/grabs popcorn

Yeah it's sort of turning into a fight over debate. I suppose arguing could sort of be fun. I don't usually think so unless I feel like I'm winning haha. There is no original topic in theory, that's why it's the 10000 thread.....it's random.

I have an opinion on absolutely everything. I'm not opinionated....at all, in the slightest bit. All the same I'm liking this popcorn idea.

/throws popcorn at innocent bystanders

YOU'RE HURTING INNOCENT BYSTANDERS?! You must be playing too many violent games!

They aren't getting hurt!
/throws more popcorn for emphasis

But it looks like they're being hurt, so now you'll be used to seeing people get hurt and go out and shoot people.

man I'm a jerk.

Oh and throw some over here, I'm out. --> O:

I'm not sure I can do that. You might get hurt. And then I'll be used to seeing you get hurt so I'll go out and shoot you...

hehe joking. I know how to share

gimmeh some. /steal

I recent that. Stealing is a crime! Law breaker!

Well sorry, I thought it was okay because I've been playing video games. hahaha :P

Yup, well you've been corrupted. You might as well keep playing them because there is no cure.

Oh okay, fun. (:

I suppose it could get worse. Oh well, have fun

You know......even no-violent video games can make you aggressive.....sometimes I get soo mad....and I only play things like pacman haha ......perhaps I'm corrupted too.... O.o

So when you decide to start your rampage, you'll go around eating people instead of shooting them.... gross. o.o

HS7... Where are you getting the 'animals don't fight each other to survive' thing from? Never in my post did I say that they didn't. Survival of the fittest, let me paraphrase:

Survival of the fittest is a theory by Charles Darwin. In it, he states that, in order to survive, an animal needs food, its territory, and a mate. All animals need these things to survive. The pure instinct in nature is to pass ones genes along. And if one does not have desirable traits, that animal will die. So there is competition within a species and even of different species.

So yes, animals of the same species do fight each other to survive. However, they also fight with animals of other species for that survival as well. It's survival of the fittest -- And only the most adapt at survival will survive.

Since I agree with you on that -- and since I really don't have an interest in politics -- let's just forget that Obama was ever mentioned in this debate, even though I brought him up. Sound good?

As far as people go... I'd say it depends on the person. Yes, it can take a single second for one person to change, once they realize their mistakes or even what they're doing now isn't to their advantage, if they're that kind of person. For others, it might take them awhile to realize these mistakes or problems or whatever they'd like to call them. And even then, some people might not be too inclined to fix them. If what they've been doing works for them, they might ask themselves, why stop? It all depends on the person and their circumstances.

As far as the 'debate vs real life' thing goes... In a debate, things that happened outside of the debate are usually forgotten, unless those things are what is being argued in said debate.

And as for respect, I'm trying hard to keep my tone respectable. I'm trying not to attack you. And when I write something 'attack-worthy', I usually catch it and erase it. But can I do this for every little thing? Nope. You also described my tone. Tone, as I figure it, is hard to pick up on. Some bits I've written in more of a light-hearted tone, others in a more serious tone. None, however, have tried to be condescending. If I were trying to be condescending, you would instantly know. I'd be calling you all sorts of nicknames, such as "sweetie", and explaining everything to you like you were a dolt or something. Trust me, I'm not being condescending in any way. This whole 'debate' is actually more of a humorous and fun thing for me. I love debates. I've said it before, and I'll keep saying that until I'm somehow proved otherwise.

And I'm curious. Where did I ever suggest something that makes you think that I said something about you being smarter and more sociable than me? Where did being sociable even come into play in this debate? If I had to pull an answer out of thin-air for the 'I-you-I' question, however, I'd have to say it would be this:

"You think my points can be easily fought against, but you're only brushing the surface of it. Really think about it and your head will come up with all sorts of things. If you think mine are easy to be proved wrong like that, then think about yours. When you only see the broad point of view, it seems like it can be simple to over look. But you have to learn how to reach into the text and read in it. When you do that, please do answer. I haven't wasted a huge part of my life reading in between the text for nothing."

This paragraph is both condescending and tone and lacking respect. You imply that I cannot read between the lines or see past the bigger picture into the details. You also seem to imply that I cannot think hard enough about something for my head to come up with a ton of things. (Actually, that's not really implied. It's more-or-less said in the first few sentences.) So, please, don't go lecturing me on how you think that I'm trying to prove my intelligence over yours. Or my 'sociableness'.

This is a debate, not an argument on who is showing respect and who isn't and who's sounding condescending and who isn't, even though that is what makes up a lot of the last posts. Let's keep it a debate on topics that are actually, say, somewhat important.

...And if we can't find a topic, I'm going to join Tim and Hazel in throwing popcorn.

Yay! We could use some more people.

/throws at Starr's face

Go look back where you quoted me. You might want to clear that up since you said I was completely wrong, and then you say that's it's right. Which one is it?

Oh, I know about all that stuff. A few years of learning and AND relearning it in biology because I have a test on that stuff on Friday is what I got on it.

You see, that's the thing. You say that you're trying not to attack me, and if you do, it's a complete accident because we don't think about it. How do you think I feel about what I day? You automatically assume that I'm trying to be disrepectful so you go and bring that up, which makes me defense, which makes me say something back to you, which makes you get a bit defense and try to prove your point.

What I say is that you didn't read between the lines in that paragraph. I never said that you never could. I'm saying that when you jsut think abouit things for a few seconds, your brain doesn't come up with as much things as it would if you thought about it for about a minute. No one can think of all the things that has to do with a subject in a few seconds. If they could, they would have to be a super genius. And yet, you were saying how I couldn't come up with someone 'challenging enough' for all of you, so that implies that i can only do simple things and not use my brain to think of things that require a bit of thoughtful thinking.

When someone calls some condescending, you in a way call that person a snob since that tone sounds exactly like a tone a snob would use when speaking to another person. Snobs think they're all better than everyone else, so there goes the sociable and intellect part. When you said I sounded like that, that was the first thing that popped into my head. If I thought about it for a little longer, I would have come up with something else to say, but since I didn't, there is the result.

Techinically, anything is important, it's just the level of importance a person thinks it's in. Like, your birthday may be super important to you because, you know, it's your birthday! But to someone else, that could be the last thing on their minds while they think about... Um... Not crashing into trees or failing a test or something.

And this is the 1000! thread. There is no main topic located within in this thread since this thread is counted as spam. So, the changing of topics happens all the time.

Alrighty, this argument now bores me.
Talking about the human nature and how people act and why they act and arguing about them and stuff like that: Interesting.
Arguing how two people think the other was being condescending and getting uptight about respect and disrespect: Not interesting.
THEREFORE, Starr has declared herself bored and tired of this. (Not to mention lazy.)
Just like she said earlier.

/throws popcorn at tim-

Oh okies good. It was rather boring. :/

SO. HOW WAS EVERYONE'S DAY? ((Other than being bored because I got that from the popcorn throwing. ))

Holleh is too lazy to re-read everything and comment. xP

UH. My day - my past two days actually - have been pretty good.

Oh, has it now? Did you do anything special?

Delicious. /popcorn
Yours?

... Interesting. I suppose.

And yours? You haven't said anything about yours yet.