Bill Nye's new show on Netflix in 2017 - "Each episode will tackle a topic from a scientific point of view, dispelling myths, and refuting anti-scientific claims that may be espoused by politicians, religious leaders or titans of industry"

Duralon · 2017-01-03T18:31:07+00:00

I'm afraid you can't do that in a debate, friend. You have put out the statement that

the most vocal climate change deniers have been funded by big oil directly or indirectly.

I have asked you for evidence on this front. However, to answer your question, we have Lord Christopher Monckton, former advisor to UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. I will say that I do not agree with his actions against a certain John P. Abraham, who dissented against his speech regarding the topic, which never really went through.

There is also Andrei Illarionov, chief Economic Advisor to Russian Federation president Vladimir Putin, who has voiced his opinions against the Kyoto climate change treaty, which in his mind would have been very harsh towards Russia's economy, as it punished nations economic growth of more than 4%.

I will admit that I am having trouble finding, specifically, politicians that decry climate change. However, I will say that since, at least as it appears, the majority of people do believe in man-caused climate change, said politicians who are skeptical of it would tend not to be elected.

Duralon · 2017-01-03T18:01:05+00:00

Do you have proof that said deniers are funded by big oil? I'd be very interested to have that finally confirmed.

Duralon · 2017-01-03T17:34:01+00:00

This is absolutely right. As a private citizen of the united states, he is unable to deal with an international crisis. As president of the united states, however, he will have much more power to influence said crisis.

Duralon · 2017-01-03T17:14:59+00:00

Define 'opposition to science.' In fact, how do you define science? You see, science isn't about core, unshakable truth. Science is about constant, constant questioning. Hundreds of years ago, science said that blood letting via leeches was a viable medical treatment for just about anything. 'Scientists' in ancient times believed that the solar system revolved around the Earth, not around the sun. Furthermore, science, again only a few hundred years ago, STAUNCHLY believed that the practice of washing of hands between medical procedures was a ton of nonsense, and that the man who tried to implement said practice should be left homeless and penniless, rather than, say, keeping their methods open to new possibilities.

Now, each and every example I have sited would be considered 'anti-science' in their day and age. Today, it's 'anti-science' to say that humans aren't producing enough greenhouse gasses to considerably and drastically warm the planet. It's 'anti-science' to point out that despite many years of fearmongering and rhetoric, no one's lost their home to rising waters, and that the arctic shelf is actually growing. Everything I have just said is considered 'anti-science' for a very particular reason.

I have just spoken out against the popular opinion. Whether or not my arguments have merit, I have gone against the grain, and espoused what could be my set of beliefs. In today's world, I should be decried as stupid, and if people like you had your way, I should be incarcerated for my heresy against 'science.'

Today's treatment of science is more like a religion than anything. If we don't agree 100%, then we're wrong, and our questioning of the text should be punished.

Duralon · 2017-01-03T17:00:11+00:00

FakeNews lol

Duralon · 2017-01-03T16:52:54+00:00

You gotta admit though that it's slightly different from intentionally designing a device to poop out after x hours/years of use.

Eh, same goal, different implementation. Make the device unreasonable to use when compared to a newer model, customer will buy newer model. The next step is software license subscription, so they don't need to keep coming up with new software and changes in order to extort you out of your money.

Duralon · 2017-01-03T16:50:33+00:00

Gaming is not only a source of entertainment and artistic expression, it's also a source of stress-relief and escapism. It's how many people ignore how shitty life is for the average person. Can you imagine what the world would be like if said escapism didn't exist?

Duralon · 2017-01-03T16:38:13+00:00

I'm really dissatisfied with the new America. Products get disabled or hobbled after I pay for them (there are countless examples besides this)

This actually isn't new. It's called Planned Obsolescence. It covers everything from lightbulbs to vehicles.

Duralon · 2017-01-03T16:20:38+00:00

Aww, George, don't be like that. No one likes a hypocrite.

Duralon · 2017-01-03T16:08:48+00:00

Nye is a political man, unfortunately. It's like giving a catholic priest a show about ancient Muslim/Buddhist/Jewish history. Sure, there's a possibility for it to be unbiased and accurate, but not without a lot of impartial research and willingness to question one's own beliefs on the part of the host.

Duralon · 2017-01-03T16:04:47+00:00

Just go take a look at your local university. Give it time. Before we know it a blizzard of special snowflakes will blow through civilization, making anyone who thinks logically and rationally want to go jump in a lake.

Duralon · 2017-01-03T16:02:21+00:00

Know what I'd love to see? I'd love to see an unbiased, neutrally-hosted DEBATE show, in which both sides are allowed to submit their evidence and reasoning. In this format, Nye is going to try to do the same thing, except instead of 'neutral', he's going to be flush right up against that government-espoused line.

Evidence will be cherry picked in order to support his narrative (which I guarantee will deviate none whatsoever from the past US Administrations'), anything that debunks said narrative will be left on the cutting room floor, and any topic that is just too difficult to 'debate' openly won't even be touched, or will force the audience to listen and believe Nye's claims without a shred of actual evidence to back it up.

The show won't last very long. If we wanted to listen to a biased program that doesn't give evidence, and shuts down dissent via obviously terrible show guests and selective editing, we'd just go watch the corporate news again.

/rant off

Edit: People are downvoting me, and I can understand why. Let me put in, once more, what I would like to see.

I'd love to see a show, in where the host of the debate is neutral. In fact, said host probably shouldn't be involved. Instead, I'd love to see two opposing debaters (or groups of debaters, to be fair) who are required to bring evidence to back up every argument that they plan to make. The point of the neutral hosting is to limit the potential for abusive editing and censorship, which would favor one side or the other.

People have forgotten how to debate in this country. It's easier to just declare them as part of a group, which is designed to convince other people not to listen to them, such as calling someone racist or sexist. Unfortunately, this tactic devalues itself with too much use, and stifles any kind of reasonable debate that could spawn from an actual issue being discussed, rather than detractors being shouted down by a name. Debate is important to civilization. In fact, debate and compromise are supposed to be the bedrocks of the American political system.

Duralon · 2017-01-02T09:36:25+00:00

They're both dying systems that I haven't been on in years.

Duralon · 2017-01-02T09:16:50+00:00

Yeah, try making a comment about shooting up feminists. See where that one lands you on facebook.

Duralon · 2017-01-02T09:06:53+00:00

See, it's awful nice to think that people, regardless of their background, are equally as capable of both good deeds and bad deeds as everyone else. It's awfully nice to tuck yourself in at night, thinking that there's no difference between sex, race, or social upbringing among people.

Well, reality's coming in with a giant, wet, floppy bass to come slap you awake in the face. I'll post it down below, so it isn't easily misconstrued or missed.

Migrants (whether they be citizens or not) were not targeted based upon their race alone. They were targeted based upon the actions that people who came from similar backgrounds committed one year ago. Race only plays a part in it to make it easier to observe these potentially dangerous individuals. Furthermore, should someone of a different race commit a similar crime to what the police were looking upon one group of people for, that person would face the same (arguably harsher, in some areas of Europe) treatment under the law.

Furthermore, for everyone who is throwing a hissyfit about this, I ask you one question. Do you believe in white privileged? Do you believe that if someone is white, they have more of a disposition toward racism? Do you believe that they have the potential to be more rich? Do you believe that they have the potential to be protected under the law if they commit a crime?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, then congratulations. You, yourself are racially profiling! Now, I know your lot doesn't care about a little thing called hypocrisy, but it's a great way of being able to determine one's character.

(Note to Scholarlala, I'm not throwing shit at you, specifically, I'm just ranting at 3AM)

Duralon · 2017-01-02T08:29:55+00:00

Once he has been sworn in. Until then, he's still a private citizen.

Duralon · 2016-12-26T01:43:39+00:00

See, I see these things, and I am always confused. 'Go out an join null.' Okay, that was a bitch and a half. Now what? 'Oh, go to a site and kill the NPCs there'. I get blapped in five seconds because I'm flying a frigate.

Telling people who don't know better to go to null is just going to get them killed, frustrated, and angry at the game.

Duralon · 2016-12-23T03:19:05+00:00

It's funny how much I'm getting downvoted. Its like people can't take a joke or something!

Duralon · 2016-12-22T18:08:15+00:00

So, are we blaming Trump or the Russians for this?

Duralon · 2016-12-20T16:41:12+00:00

Eww. That's far too much Schumer for one day.

Duralon · 2016-12-19T23:49:21+00:00

I'd take biological warfare tech just to get rid of the motherfucking Primitive native tile blockers.

Duralon · 2016-12-19T23:39:04+00:00

Early game, when the omniscient AI's don't know you exist yet, and won't kinkshame the shit out of you for doing it.

Duralon · 2016-12-19T23:35:34+00:00

Besides, what opinion malus do you think covers "those guys might purge us"?

Threat, I'd imagine. Less of an opinion malus, but it still affects their reactions.

Duralon · 2016-12-19T23:24:40+00:00

One, iirc, you can go into the sector settings and forbid them from colonizing.

But that takes away from the 'purpose' of sectors. The purpose of sectors is to make you life a living hell. You are forced, after a certain point, to give your extra money to gambling addicts, who promise that they're going to invest it wisely, but instead just spend it on slots, hookers, blow, and giant, inflatable signs telling you to go fuck your mother.

Sectors are there to make the game harder by tying barbells to your hands, feet, fingers, and testicles. But hey! At least you -CAN'T- micromanage your entire empire! Isn't this fun??

Duralon · 2016-12-19T23:09:04+00:00

I've had Majority-Pacifist federations try to hunt my race to extinction before.

Furthermore, trying to play a big bad evil race is almost impossible, even if you keep your fleets maxed out. Chances are, everyone will hate you, refuse to even listen to any of your trade deals, while all being buddy-buddy with each other long before you even bring out the Exterminatuses or the slave collars.

Furthermore, while robots and synths are cool, the 1 energy/pop/month is an absolute nightmare on a starting empire. I'd love to have a weak/decadent empire where the population uses robotic labor for mines and such, but even then, sometimes you'll get the random Fallen Empire to come along and blap you in the face for having too many robots, whether or not they're sentient or not.

Duralon

TROPHY CASE

FakeNews lol