Discussion about hot topics trending today

[Gatecat]

It's not Halal!!!
SHARIA LAW!!!!

Seriously?!

[Womble]

It took you all the way to the climate change paragraph to realized that was raw BS? Damn, I thought you were brighter than that. The title was a dead giveaway, right at the very start.

Anyone with a brain and no leftism virus in the system can spot this as raw BS from a hundred miles away. But the climate change part is just pure gold!

Destructive, unsustainable hegemonically male approaches to pressing environmental policy and action are the predictable results of a raping of nature by a male-dominated mindset. This mindset is best captured by recognizing the role of [sic] the conceptual penis holds over masculine psychology. When it is applied to our natural environment, especially virgin environments that can be cheaply despoiled for their material resources and left dilapidated and diminished when our patriarchal approaches to economic gain have stolen their inherent worth, the extrapolation of the rape culture inherent in the conceptual penis becomes clear.

This is a classic exercise in everything-and-the-kitchen-sink-intersectionality, taken to its absurd conclusion.

[Womble]

the fake cock study is a priori amusing but I'm attempting to discern the author's stance on climate change (not easy since that's not really the object of the "study". maybe someone more perspicacious can figure it out?)

I don't think the author bothered to state his stance of climate change, and I don't see why they would. They have two clear targets with this hoax - pseudoscientific lefty academia which will swallow any nonsense so long as it flatters their politics, and the lax peer-review standards of pay-to-publish science journals. They also cautiously hint that the whole gender studies field lacks scientific merit because it is "crippled academically by an overriding almost-religious belief that maleness is the root of all evil".

[Gatefan1976]

I don't think the author bothered to state his stance of climate change, and I don't see why they would. They have two clear targets with this hoax - pseudoscientific lefty academia which will swallow any nonsense so long as it flatters their politics,

Politicisation of science is hardly unique to the left

and the lax peer-review standards of pay-to-publish science journals. They also cautiously hint that the whole gender studies field lacks scientific merit because it is "crippled academically by an overriding almost-religious belief that maleness is the root of all evil".

I dunno if I would use the word "cautious", that's pretty blatant

[Annoyed]

ah but if the job market is changing so fast that we're stuck in a never ending loop of "re-education".....who's gonna pay the bills? cuz if we have to spend time in school full time with the bulk of the free time studying....that ain't gonna leave much room for a job that pays enough to pay the bills and if we're stuck in a never ending loop of "re-education" all those bills will go unpaid

Of course, the people who advocate "re-education/retraining" are secure in their own positions, so they don't bother to think of the practical barriers to what they're suggesting. In addition to what you've listed, there is always the matter of how they will pay for this re-education. If they're always in school, where does the money come from?

[Annoyed]

Let's hope it was just pure BS and they really didn't send that into one of those journals and it actually got published.. Otherwise heads should roll at that Jorunal for someone NOT doing their editorial job and VETTING the sources that were quoted in it (since as the article said, many were made UP!)..

These days, even the phrase "peer reviewed" is a red flag for me. Half the time, I think it means that "We've submitted this to other people who think as we do and they agree with us". Just as "fact checking" these days means "We have checked with other leftist media outlets and they agree with us".

I'm not trashing science in general at all. It's the best tool we have for progressing. But the fact is that so many so-called "Scientists" have prostituted themselves out to political causes, primarily global cooling err.. global warming err.. "climate change" that they have discredited their whole profession.

[Gatefan1976]

Of course, the people who advocate "re-education/retraining" are secure in their own positions,

Yeah, I'm super secure in a shelf packing role as the bricks and mortar sales positions are shrinking..........

so they don't bother to think of the practical barriers to what they're suggesting.

Like hell, "we" just don't just stomp our feet and say "but it's too HARD", or "how will it impact MEEEEEEEEEEEEE"

In addition to what you've listed, there is always the matter of how they will pay for this re-education. If they're always in school, where does the money come from?

Do you have -any- clue how much cheaper re-education is in comparison to doubling, trebling or even more your unemployment rate would be? You get to 15-20% unemployment, you are rooted. First you will support all those people with social security, then you will pick up their healthcare tabs (which will spiral out of control because they cannot afford to do anything remotely healthy), then they will become criminal by outright need, turn to drugs as an "escape" which makes them commit even more crimes.
You ask "who is going to pay for it?" Ask yourself instead, who is going to pay for it if you do not. The price of education may be high, the cost of ignorance is devastating.

[Pharaoh Hamenthotep]

These days, even the phrase "peer reviewed" is a red flag for me. Half the time, I think it means that "We've submitted this to other people who think as we do and they agree with us". Just as "fact checking" these days means "We have checked with other leftist media outlets and they agree with us".

I'm not trashing science in general at all.

Of course.. without peer review you just have one guy making **** up.. and you'll just have to take his word for it, and hope he knows what he's talking about..

And you are trashing the scientific process because, as you've demonstrated so many times before, you do not understand it.

[Annoyed]

Yeah, I'm super secure in a shelf packing role as the bricks and mortar sales positions are shrinking..........

Like hell, "we" just don't just stomp our feet and say "but it's too HARD", or "how will it impact MEEEEEEEEEEEEE"

Do you have -any- clue how much cheaper re-education is in comparison to doubling, trebling or even more your unemployment rate would be? You get to 15-20% unemployment, you are rooted. First you will support all those people with social security, then you will pick up their healthcare tabs (which will spiral out of control because they cannot afford to do anything remotely healthy), then they will become criminal by outright need, turn to drugs as an "escape" which makes them commit even more crimes.
You ask "who is going to pay for it?" Ask yourself instead, who is going to pay for it if you do not. The price of education may be high, the cost of ignorance is devastating.

Or, here's a novel thought. What about operating your society so that their jobs don't get outsourced en-mass?

[Annoyed]

Of course.. without peer review you just have one guy making **** up.. and you'll just have to take his word for it, and hope he knows what he's talking about..

And you are trashing the scientific process because, as you've demonstrated so many times before, you do not understand it.

No, I'm trashing it because they've been feeding us a line of shiznit in order to push a political agenda. This leads to distrust of anything else they might claim.

Even their own high priests have willingly and publicly stated that the goal is not concern for the environment, it's "wealth redistribution". Email leaks have also shown that they know it's hooey.

They have damaged the reputation of their whole profession.

[Gatefan1976]

Or, here's a novel thought. What about operating your society so that their jobs don't get outsourced en-mass?

Here is another one, stick to the topic instead of running away when your flimsy arguments collapse, eh?
The discussion is on retraining when employable fields "go away", not trade or outsourcing.
BUT, as you brought it up, Do you buy all "made in America" stuff -even when it was available-, or did you by the made in China one because it was half the price?
Consumers go for two options, quality and price, and when you remove the option for Joe average to pay for quality, they will invariably base all decisions on price point. The ability to decide on price point is a guiding principle of capitalism, so I have to ask, are you against capitalism?
The reverse is protectionism, but protectionism is all but a communist position, I can't imagine a "good republican" being for something communist.

[jelgate]

Let's just ignore the fact that peer review is part of the scientific process and expermation.

[Womble]

Of course, the people who advocate "re-education/retraining" are secure in their own positions, so they don't bother to think of the practical barriers to what they're suggesting.

I don't think many people today can be secure in their position. Everything is shifting as technology edges man out of more and more automation-able tasks. Menial jobs, assembly lines, retail, service, accounting, paralegal work- most existing professions will employ fewer and fewer people over time.

That's why, as a travel agent, I chose to specialize not in sales but in backoffice work. People increasingly become their own salespeople through websites and price comparison engines. 40% of our sales are through the website and app. But when a passenger needs to cancel a non-refundable ticket because his mother died, you don't send a robot to handle that. You send me. I studied in the tourism school to be a classic travel agent-read sales agent - but I shifted with the times. Most people will have to as well.

In addition to what you've listed, there is always the matter of how they will pay for this re-education. If they're always in school, where does the money come from?

Well that brings us back to the problematic model of education-as-a-business as opposed to education-as-a-right...

[Womble]

Let's just ignore the fact that peer review is part of the scientific process and expermation.

Did you mean excrementation?

[garhkal]

So the Left are now against Smoking, Sugar, and Now Bacon?

IT is official ...The Left is NO FUN!!!!!

I've been saying that for years!

Did you mean excrementation?

If he didn't he bloody well should have!