Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You mean the area Sandy most affected did not vote for Obama? And New Orleans is not a vile and sinful place and those areas of Tuscaloosa are not crime ridden? When did all that change?
New Orleans is no more a vile and sinful place than anywhere else, including ultra religious Bible belt cities. Tuscaloosa doesn't even show up on the crime radar compared to most cities. No clue why you picked that one. If you want to pick crime ridden, try going with Oakland, Detroit, or St. Louis, all far far more crime ridden than Tuscaloosa.
The area affected by Sandy did primarily vote for Obama. And the area hit by the worst natural disaster in US history, all voted for Bush, Mr. "Christian" President himself, twice.
New Orleans is no more a vile and sinful place than anywhere else, including ultra religious Bible belt cities. Tuscaloosa doesn't even show up on the crime radar compared to most cities. No clue why you picked that one. If you want to pick crime ridden, try going with Oakland, Detroit, or St. Louis, all far far more crime ridden than Tuscaloosa.
The area affected by Sandy did primarily vote for Obama. And the area hit by the worst natural disaster in US history, all voted for Bush, Mr. "Christian" President himself, twice.
You must not have been to New Orleans if you believe that! Or you just making a joke
I did not say all of Tuscaloosa. I live near there and know the parts of town it hit. Read what I post before you respond, will you!
Not sure which natural disaster you are referring to but it's not one I mentioned. Please stick to the topic and not try and dodge facts with smoke and mirrors.
But the point is well made. You have to admit I told the truth.
Every generation has people who insist that due to war, famine, disaster...it is "end times". In my opinion that just shows how self-absorbed we as human beings are. We forget that terrible things have always happened and only focus on the horrible things we have personally witnessed.
I believe that that is an ad hominem: you are attempting to challenge an argument by placing your opponent in a group whose members have been wrong; irrationally, the conclusion is that your opponent is wrong by association. (It couldn't possibly be that your opponent is using the same argument as members of the group that you've cited because the disasters are different, and every disaster belongs to a completely new argument.)
ETA: I should mention that it's an extremely weak inductive argument (It's comparable to: the stock market has always gone up; therefore, the stock market will always go up.) and a fallacious deductive argument.
Last edited by The Homogenizer; 12-04-2012 at 10:28 PM..
I believe that that is an ad hominem: you are attempting to challenge an argument by placing your opponent in a group whose members have been wrong; irrationally, the conclusion is that your opponent is wrong by association. (It couldn't possibly be that your opponent is using the same argument as members of the group that you've cited because the disasters are different, and every disaster belongs to a completely new argument.)
ETA: I should mention that it's an extremely weak inductive argument (It's comparable to: the stock market has always gone up; therefore, the stock market will always go up.) and a fallacious deductive argument.
OK. Well, I think my argument has merit. I don't know why you only c&p'd a tiny bit. My point is that it's human nature to witness catastrophes in our own time and think (religiously or not) that they are a sign of some sort. Why is Sandy any more important in sending a sign than say the earthquake of 1556 in China, killing 830,000 people? Disasters have always happened, we just tend to focus on the one's we personally witnessed. That's why I say humans are self-absorbed.
I had no reason to repeat the rest; that portion revealed the irrationality.
Quote:
My point is that it's human nature to witness catastrophes in our own time and think. . . that they are a sign of some sort.
I understand that. But that isn't relevant to the argument that this storm might be some sort of sign. You are attacking the poster's motivation, not his argument.
Quote:
Why is Sandy any more important in sending a sign than say the earthquake of 1556 in China, killing 830,000 people?
I had no reason to repeat the rest; that portion revealed the irrationality.
I understand that. But that isn't relevant to the argument that this storm might be some sort of sign. You are attacking the poster's motivation, not his argument.
In my opinion, that is the question to ask.
Sorry, not so good with multi-quote on this laptop. I wasn't attacking, or even questioning, his motivation but rather his argument (the OP of the thread, not responding posters).
Yes, my question is why is Sandy more important...more revealing....than every other horrible disaster in history? I don't think it is, but we (general) *think* it is because it's most familiar to us. To me this just shows short-sighted thinking on our part.
Sandy is the product of WEATHER. One could perhaps argue that it's intensity was amplified by the effects of global warming. It isn't for us to try to turn it into "a sign" even if it were one. The ills of American society have no relation to the weather in any way shape or form. If all of the U.S. was to be born again tomorrow, there would still be hurricanes and more severe storms due to global warming. We might be a lot more compassionate toward one another and help more (I'd like to think that's what Christians would do), but it wouldn't result in perfect weather.
Here's a wild a crazy thought: God gave us free minds and the ability to learn through SCIENCE. Maybe if we love the earth and each other as Christ intended, we'll use science to figure out how to get global warming under control and the increasing intensity of such storms will reverse. Maybe that's how God wants us to prevent disasters and save lives. Maybe when our children are sick, God wants us to trust the doctors (use science) to save them, rather than refuse all medical treatment and insist that "our faith will heal them". Maybe God WANTS us to use doctors!
I noticed the areas impacted by Sandy voted for Obama in both elections. I noticed New Orleans was a vile and sinful place. I noticed the tornado that hit Alabama a few years ago mostly hit the parts of Tuscaloosa where you buy drugs and sex and most crimes were committed.
I have to say that this is one of the most stupid comments I've read on City-Data Forum. Ever.
I wasn't attacking, or even questioning, his motivation but rather his argument. . .
You have not done so. You stated:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXNGL
My point is that it's human nature to witness catastrophes in our own time and think. . . that they are a sign of some sort.
. . . humans are self-absorbed.
You're suggesting that the OP "thinks" that the catastrophe is "a sign of some sort" as a consequence of his 'self-absorption.'
You're adjusting your argument to more clearly challenge the OP's argument, but you're still trying to keep the ad hominem. His self-absorption that you suspect is irrelevant. His psychological reason for believing that a catastrophe is a sign is irrelevant.
Last edited by The Homogenizer; 12-05-2012 at 12:31 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
