Climate Change- Are Our Genes to Blame for our Inaction?

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by Rissask

I was trying to think of how to incorporate abortion and Obama in there too, but I struggled.

Maybe, yes. But evolution, as you know, doesn't work that quickly.

It's easy to get discouraged when you read how even people who are somewhat educated and intelligent are saying things like climate change isn't real, the oil replenishes itself in the earth's crust....chupacabras are real, etc. I mean, I am rooting for us to come to our senses, but we don't have much time.







So you are going to be the orchestra on the Titanic, playing while it goes down in flames? Either way, we all drown.

Of course we should try. I think you have a far more rosy view of man in general than I. Dumb mammal driven by genes and hormones, mostly.... versus enlightened and creative intellectual driven by the brain.

as usual, the truth is likely somewhere in the middle.

On this we agree...no surprise given that we are both moderates.

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by Rissask

Maybe, yes. But evolution, as you know, doesn't work that quickly.

But culture changes as quickly as skirt lengths. Why, we've nearly wiped out murder, war, rape, racism...............oh hell, we're screwed.

[Rissask]

Originally Posted by Jacko

On this we agree...no surprise given that we are both moderates.

we are?? I mean, I knew I was....but...

But culture changes as quickly as skirt lengths. Why, we've nearly wiped out murder, war, rape, racism...............oh hell, we're screwed.

And don't forget religious fanaticism and terrorism and genocide....the Mormons are still around, too...



see.....I KNEW you'd come around to my way of thinking....

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by Rissask

we are?? I mean, I knew I was....but...

Of course we all think we are moderate..that we are "the center" as we contrast our thinking with people to the right and the left of us.......tell me again where you stand on these issues below? Perhaps we should then let the forum decide if you are more liberal or more moderate? From wiki...

In 1950, Leonard W. Ferguson carried out an analysis of political values using ten scales measuring attitudes toward:

• Birth control
• Capital punishment
• Censorship
• Communism
• Evolution
• Law
• Patriotism
• Reality of God
• Treatment of criminals
• War

Submitting the results to factor analysis, he was able to identify three factors, which he named Religionism, Humanitarianism, and Nationalism.
Leonard Ferguson's Religionism was defined by belief in God and negative attitudes toward evolution and birth control; Humanitarianism was related to attitudes opposing the harsh treatment of criminals, capital punishment, and war; and Nationalism described variation in opinions on censorship, law, patriotism, and communism.
This system was derived empirically; rather than devising a political model on purely theoretical grounds and testing it, Ferguson's research was exploratory. Although replication of the Nationalism factor was inconsistent, the finding of Religionism and Humanitarianism had a number of replications by Ferguson and others.[3][4]




Or, you could try a couple of these on.....

Other proposed axes include:

• Focus of political concern: Communitarianism vs. Individualism. This axis is often considered perpendicular to the left-right axis in popular multi-axis charts (often rendered "populism" vs. "libertarianism"), but is a legitimate axis in itself, comparing a focus on the community vs. a focus on the individual. This language is preferred to the prejudiced language of "totalitarianism" (anti-freedom) vs. "libertarianism" (pro-freedom), because one can have a political focus on the community without being totalitarian and undemocratic (see the Nolan chart below). Christian Democracy is a political philosophy that would be counted as communitarian on this axis, but is not totalitarian or undemocratic.
• Role of the church: Clericalism vs. Anti-clericalism. This axis is less significant in the United States (where views of the role of religionEurope tend to be subsumed into the general left-right axis) than in (where clericalism versus anti-clericalism is much less correlated with the left-right spectrum).
• Urban vs. rural: This axis may be the most useful and significant today in European as well as Australian politics and Canadian politics. The urban vs. rural axis was equally prominent in the United States' political past, but its importance is debatable at present. In the late 18th century and early 19th century in the United States, it would have been described as the conflict between Hamiltonian FederalistsJeffersonian Democrats. and
• Foreign policy: interventionism (the nation should exert power abroad to implement its policy) vs. non-interventionism (the nation should keep to its own affairs); similarly, multilateralism (coordination of policies with other countries) vs. isolationism and unilateralism

• Relations with individual states or groups of states may also be vital to party politics. During the Cold War, parties often had to choose a position on a scale between pro-American and pro-Soviet Union, although this could at times closely match a left-right spectrum. At other times in history relations with other powerful states has been important. In early Canadian history relations with Great Britain were a central theme, although this was not "foreign policy" but a debate over the proper place of Canada within the British Empire.

• Political violence: pacifism (political views should not be imposed by violent force) vs. militancy (violence is a legitimate or necessary means of political expression). In North America, particularly in the United States, holders of these views are often referred to as "doves" and "hawks", respectively.
• Foreign trade: globalization (world economic markets should become integrated and interdependent) vs. autarky (the nation or polity should strive for economic independence). During the early history of the Commonwealth of Australia, this was the major political continuum. At that time it was called Free trade vs. Protectionism.
• Trade freedom vs. trade equity: Free trade (businesses should be able trade across borders without regulations) vs. Fair trade (international trade should be regulated on behalf of social justice).
• Diversity: multiculturalism (the nation should represent a diversity of cultural ideas) vs. assimilationism or nationalism (the nation should primarily represent, or forge, a majority culture).
• Participation: Democracy (rule of the majority, or mob rule) vs. Aristocracy (rule by the enlightened) vs. Tyranny (total degradation of Aristocracy, ancient Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotlepassion, and not reason like the philosopher, resulting in the tyrant pursuing his own desires rather than the common good.) recognized tyranny as a state in which the tyrant is ruled by utter
• Freedom: Positive liberty (having rights which impose an obligation on others) vs. Negative liberty (having rights which prohibit interference by others).
• Social power: Totalitarianism vs. Anarchism (Control vs. No Control) Analyzes the fundamental political interaction between people, and between individuals and their environment. Often posits the existence of a 'moderate' system as existing between the two extremes.
• Change: radicals (who believe in rapid change) and progressives (who believe in measured, incremental change) vs. conservatives (who believe in minimal or cautious change) vs. reactionaries (who believe in changing things to a previous state).
• Origin of state authority: popular sovereignty (the state as a creation of the people, with enumerated, delegated powers) vs. various forms of absolutism and organic state philosophy (the state as an original and essential authority) vs. the view held in anarcho-primitivism that "Civilization originates in conquest abroad and repression at home."[21]
• International action: Multilateralism (states should cooperate and compromise) versus Unilateralism (states have a strong, even unconditional, right to make their own decisions).
• Levels of sovereignty: unionism vs. federalism vs. separatism; or centralism vs. regionalism. Especially important in societies where strong regional or ethnic identities are political issues.

[Mexivoof]

Originally Posted by Rissask

So you are going to be the orchestra on the Titanic, playing while it goes down in flames? Either way, we all drown.

The Titanic did not go down in flames. Maybe if it had the iceberg would have melted

[sctx]

[*]Birth control
good thing, should be mandatory in most cases to limit population growth and slow climate change
[*]Capital punishment
good thing, limits population growth but not nearly as much as birth control
[*]Censorship
bad thing, except in the case of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid
[*]Communism
laughably unrealistic given the nature of human beings
[*]Evolution
happens every day
[*]Law
good thing, anarchy sucks
[*]Patriotism
depends on who's side your on
[*]Reality of God
god is an alien
[*]Treatment of criminals
give them the basics and let them serve their sentence
[*]War
based on human nature

[Rissask]

I hate labels...in some ways I am very liberal and in others, fairly conservative... overall I would say I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

Abortion- should be legal and safe

world population- way too high, MORE birth control, WAY more!!

religion- is mass delusion, atheist agnostic

Gay marriage- should be legal and equal

Drugs- pot legal, hard no way

Healthcare- universal for all, paid by taxes, but with private clinics for those who want to skip the queue and pay

women/minorities- should be equal in terms of power and money (with some exceptions, ask ryberg about the sports thing )

government- medium, not overly involved and not too uninvolved. Should have high enough taxes to make sure all have healthcare, good libraries, safe streets. great schools, etc.

Environment- should have strict laws regarding emissions and pollution, and money going toward verifiably good alternate energy, etc. At the same time, one of our biggest resources is oil and uranium and potash, all non-renewable....we must weigh the need to grow our economy with using up all the resources too fast....tough one.


on the other hand, I think:


Unions- mostly bad

capital punishment- used to be no...now, for child killers, serial killers and pedophiles, I am okay with that

Credit and debt- bad

having a huge debt and deficit as a country- bad (so vote LIBERAL, Canadians!)

Gambling- not too ethical but as long the gov't only takes a reasonable chunk, then okay, people have free will

Animals - I think we should we treat them humanely but meat tastes good....and I very much dislike PETA....and I am fine with the seal hunt.


So what am I? Just confused?

[Rissask]

Originally Posted by Mexivoof

The Titanic did not go down in flames. Maybe if it had the iceberg would have melted

semantics

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by Rissask

I hate labels...in some ways I am very liberal and in others, fairly conservative... overall I would say I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

Abortion- should be legal and safe

world population- way too high, MORE birth control, WAY more!!

religion- is mass delusion, atheist agnostic

Gay marriage- should be legal and equal

Drugs- pot legal, hard no way

Healthcare- universal for all, paid by taxes, but with private clinics for those who want to skip the queue and pay

women/minorities- should be equal in terms of power and money (with some exceptions, ask ryberg about the sports thing )

government- medium, not overly involved and not too uninvolved. Should have high enough taxes to make sure all have healthcare, good libraries, safe streets. great schools, etc.

Environment- should have strict laws regarding emissions and pollution, and money going toward verifiably good alternate energy, etc. At the same time, one of our biggest resources is oil and uranium and potash, all non-renewable....we must weigh the need to grow our economy with using up all the resources too fast....tough one.


on the other hand, I think:


Unions- mostly bad

capital punishment- used to be no...now, for child killers, serial killers and pedophiles, I am okay with that

Credit and debt- bad

having a huge debt and deficit as a country- bad (so vote LIBERAL, Canadians!)

Gambling- not too ethical but as long the gov't only takes a reasonable chunk, then okay, people have free will

Animals - I think we should we treat them humanely but meat tastes good....and I very much dislike PETA....and I am fine with the seal hunt.


So what am I? Just confused?

Given your caveats....you are a liberal....or I am a moderate like you.

[Rissask]

Originally Posted by Jacko

Given your caveats....you are a liberal....or I am a moderate like you.

hmmm.....


you LIE!


j/k. I am certainly not 'far left' liberal, though...although when it comes to some topics maybe I am.....

[Mexivoof]

Originally Posted by Rissask

I hate labels...in some ways I am very liberal and in others, fairly conservative... overall I would say I am socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

Abortion- should be legal and safe Agree

world population- way too high, MORE birth control, WAY more!! Agree

religion- is mass delusion, atheist agnostic Agree

Gay marriage- should be legal and equal Not a big problem either way

Drugs- pot legal, hard no way Pot, deciminalized in small amounts, hard, get the pusher, not the user.

Healthcare- universal for all, paid by taxes, but with private clinics for those who want to skip the queue and pay ???, but not for illegals you liar

women/minorities- should be equal in terms of power and money (with some exceptions, ask ryberg about the sports thing Agree)

government- medium, not overly involved and not too uninvolved. Should have high enough taxes to make sure all have healthcare, good libraries, safe streets. great schools, etc. "The government that governs least, governs best" T. Jefferson

Environment- should have strict laws regarding emissions and pollution, and money going toward verifiably good alternate energy, etc. At the same time, one of our biggest resources is oil and uranium and potash, all non-renewable....we must weigh the need to grow our economy with using up all the resources too fast....tough one. Agree


on the other hand, I think:


Unions- mostly bad Still serve a purpose, but have to wake up to todays economic reality

capital punishment- used to be no...now, for child killers, serial killers and pedophiles, I am okay with that And any Canadian trying to sneak across our border (actually agree, if we can do it w/o 15 years of appeals)

Credit and debt- bad Agree

having a huge debt and deficit as a country- bad (so vote LIBERAL, Canadians!) Huge no, but some is necessary

Gambling- not too ethical but as long the gov't only takes a reasonable chunk, then okay, people have free will Keep the Gov't out of my office pool!

Animals - I think we should we treat them humanely but meat tastes good....and I very much dislike PETA....and I am fine with the seal hunt. Agree, as long as we can take bets on the seal hunt


So what am I? Just confused?

So, I guess I'm a moderate conservative, kinda like Mc Cain

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by Rissask

hmmm.....


you LIE!


j/k. I am certainly not 'far left' liberal, though...although when it comes to some topics maybe I am.....

Given that the your "center" is likely pretty left of our country, I suspect you are right....er...no I mean far left......

And other than your belief that, perhaps based on where you live, it is worthwhile to try to squeeze oil outta that sand, I tend to agree even with your desire to "spend your money on good, verifiable alternative energy"...

[Jacko]

P.S. But I just can't do that to the seals.

Perhaps I am a liberal after all.

[sctx]

the real problem has nothing to do with genes, it is the widespread skepticism of the existence of superior alien life forms. If we would just welcome them, they would enlighten us to a better way

[Mexivoof]

Originally Posted by sctx

the real problem has nothing to do with genes, it is the widespread skepticism of the existence of superior alien life forms. If we would just welcome them, they would enlighten us to a better way

That's why we elected him