|
Post by DrCank on Jan 22, 2007 13:57:21 GMT -5
There is a very disturbing photo of a Katrina victim in the "where have all the UNOs gone" thread.
I made A joke directed towards FEMA's handling of Katrina, and I guess that some how opened the door for this distasteful post, so I will take my portion of the blame.
However, it does not change the fact that there is currently a picture of an innocent victim of circumstance on this message board. I know morbid curiousity will bring some to few this photo, however it is graphic so don't say you had no prior warning.
|
|
|
Post by chriscank on Jan 22, 2007 17:04:59 GMT -5
The picture is no longer up...and I appologize for my shocking discretions...but I want to ask Dr. Cank one thing....
If you had a relative who passed during the debacle of Katrina, would you have still made that joke?
|
|
|
Post by chriscank on Jan 22, 2007 17:13:02 GMT -5
My point is the "too soon?" joke has become a rediculous concept of making light of serious situations that happen amongst people around the earth...when poking fun at a terrible disaster, it is ALWAYS too soon.....do I think it is "too soon" to make a joke about the Children's Crusade? YES do I think it is "too soon" to make a joke about the Johnstown Flood? YES.....do I think it is "too soon" to make a joke about the holocaust, YES...do I think it is "too soon" to make a joke about Katrina? YES.
Now, when we are amongst friends an NOT in a public forum, that type of joking, while it may not be appropriate, it is at the discretion of the people involved.
But this message board is a public forum...and when a joke is made about Katrina...no one gets up at arms....BUT, when a picture of the direct result of Katrina is posted, all of a sudden it is the most distasteful thing and it MUST be censored...so really, what is truly distasteful? Reality? or making fun of it?
|
|
|
Post by Boo f***ing hoo on Mar 5, 2007 6:28:05 GMT -5
Hey now, Global warming caused katrina so maybe degicank can put it on trial? EFFING polluters; they should be held accountable for a city surrounded by levees. I imagine if the population was white (like amsterdam which is also surrounded by levees; the most advanced system BTW) we wouldn't be trying to show sympathy towards the victims. Blaming FEMA or GWB is pretty lame too. The people of New Orleans were told of the danger of the storm and told to evacuate. where is the blame of the community leaders not organizing an escape plan?
They seem to be all to eager to point fingers and lay blame after the fact but the true question is where were all these people before the catastrophy? Logic tells us that there is no clear answer just hind sight of very very very poor communication
|
|
|
Post by DrCank on Mar 6, 2007 13:29:48 GMT -5
Out of curiosity what evidence do you have connecting Katrina with Global Warming. I personally feel that this issue was extremely exaggerated in the media. And as to your subject of race in the catastrophe; Floods and storm surges don't care what color you are, I think you are confusing a socioeconomic issue with a racial issue.
But I do agree with your underlying statements. To rely on your government to hold your hand in a time of need, is a lesson in absolute futility. However in the defense of those how did not heed the call to evacuation, it is rather confusing when the media proclaims every hurricane as the “Storm of the century”. Can you imagine the economic hit one would take if he/she fled town every time the media over hyped a storm? And finally having said all that just remember, you live in a city below sea-level in a hurricane prone location, do some research on your own. NOAA provides tons of info on every storm (including long range predictions), that can easily be viewed free of cost over the internet provided at you at the local library. In the words of the Wu you gotta protect your neck.
|
|
Bleeding heart Liberal
Guest
|
Post by Bleeding heart Liberal on Mar 6, 2007 18:31:22 GMT -5
Step out of your college educated, suburban raised shoes. Step into a persons shoes who hasn't set foot in a public library, a person who hasn't logged on to the internet, a person who doesn't have a mattress let alone a computer. These are the people who were left behind.
We have a third world nation living in this country that NO ONE cares about. This level of society is the only reason the lower "middle class" can bitch about being raped by those above them; the unsteady "bottom" you stand apon to barely keep your head above water is this level of society.
The Hype that has brought attention to "Global Warming" is Al Gore Blaming Katrina. Like it or not that's the only reason the general public has "embraced" this issue. Kyoto happened ten years ago; where was ther reaction outside of the scientific community then?
|
|
|
Post by DrCank on Mar 7, 2007 9:20:48 GMT -5
Are you funking kidding me? I am sick and tired of always getting blamed (as a white middle-class male) for everyone else’s problems. At what point in this culture did it become expectable to simply through up your hands, and say "well it ain't my fault". If you are left behind in this society you need to take your own responsibility for at least part of your situation. Because the fact remains our country provides more than ample amounts of programs to aid anyone interested in improving their personal situation. Why am I supposed too feel pity for someone who doesn’t use the library my tax dollars pay for, just because they don’t want to put in any effort to existence.
I am not trying to come off completely callus here, but it is one of my pet peeves, when people give up into empathy like this. I, like a lot of us on this forum, come from Irish descent. At the turn of the last century (~1900 C.E.), it was easier to a get a job as a freed black in this country, than it was to get a job as an Irishman. All the way up to the 1930’s the Irish where the lowest form of existence in the eyes of the aristocracy; thirty years later we where in the White house. How you ask? Hard work, the Irish have many reputations, drunks, fighters, thieves (some true, some false) but they also have the reputation as workers.
If this nation was so difficult to get ahead in, then way do people risk their lives on rafts, and running thru miles deserts with only 10 gallons of water to get here. The fact is with a effort you can raise yourself (or at least your family) in this nation. I am in the first generation in my family to attend an institute of higher education, which was only possible because the men who came before knew that their sacrifice may not provide them all the conveniences in life but it can provide the next generation to get a little further than they did. It took my family four generations in this country, about one –hundred years in this nation, before someone got to go to university, but it happened. So I will be proud to stand in my "college educated, suburban raised shoes", because my family has made a lot of sacrafices to put me into them.
And if you think it is Katrina that brought the “hype” to global warming you really need to due some more research. That is a preposterous claim, people where upset when Bush dropped out of Kyoto seven years ago. But nothing got done then for the same reason nothing is getting done now. People are too lazy to due there own research, so they listen to what ever their favorite blow-hard says. Or they just watch Tv to escape, because thinking to much is hard work (thanks to Fox News (and others) they can do both at the same time).
|
|
|
Post by lame on Mar 7, 2007 9:40:23 GMT -5
You see an opinion different than yours on this forum and you attribute it to Fox News. Go listen to NPR you drunk ,Irish, fourth gener.
The Irish had a cake walk compared to the Italians. Hell if it weren't fo the Irish getting so concerned over the Jews intrusion in NYC in the early 1900's we'd be watching the McWeirs instead of the Sopranos.
And as far as getting blamed; give the other classes a break. The rich would give half their cash to the middle class if it made them shut the hell up about "my money" "my taxes" going to other things besides "my pocket".
And the poor would stop selling crack and coke and dirt weed for the upper class if the middle class didn't need them so bad to deal with their "taxed" life.
This middle class you speak of varies greatly so to view it strictly from your stand point is short sighted. Their are very few Weirs out there and not that many more that stand on values generationally like you claim to do. Remember 85% of the middle class is living way beyond their means; you do not share that trait thus making you vastly different for a majority of with whom you claim to belong.
|
|
Same game different side
Guest
|
Post by Same game different side on Mar 7, 2007 9:42:49 GMT -5
People are too lazy to due there own research, so they listen to what ever their favorite blow-hard says
is blow hard an academic name for a scientist?
|
|
|
Post by chriscank on Mar 7, 2007 10:13:26 GMT -5
wow. a completely uninteresting and ignorant, heated debate...never thought I'd see that on the degicank message board.
keep up the good pointless work folks.
which came first, the chicken or degicank?
|
|
|
Post by My Taxes on Mar 8, 2007 0:28:39 GMT -5
people where upset when Bush dropped out of Kyoto
The four USA scientists that got upset don't count when 389 million other USA citizens didn't care. George W Bush is the leader of the free world, the USA is the undisputed free world. We have more important things to deal with then proving or disproving global warming. we have to start planning victory parades for our troops fighting in Iraq. It's been 3 long years since we claimed "Mission Accomplished" and now it's time to bring them home.
|
|
|
Post by DrCank on Mar 8, 2007 8:44:45 GMT -5
Man seriously are you going to drag this same argument onto every thread in this message board? I am to the understanding that I am not going to change your views on this subject (at least not with these short burst of information flayed out in a rather incoherent manner). And I hope you understand that you are not going to change my opinion on this matter (Simply put, you lack the ethos to convince me to your arguments. Sure they are thought provoking, however the keystone of your argument is that all of the scientific community is crooked, and thus not to be trusted. I find this to be preposterous). Personally I feel the need to believe that not every one in this world is greedy, some people just honestly have passion. I would rather believe in that and be wrong from time to time, than to become a callus individual he sees every thing as a personal assault. And that is where I am going to leave it.
|
|
|
Post by dont cry on Mar 8, 2007 10:32:54 GMT -5
Main Stream anything is crooked. Nature of the beast. It's not like that's something I'm trying to argue about; it's just a faceable fact. Scientist's, contrary to what you think of my opinion, are the most honest type of person out there.
Ones that aren't paid off to influence government or public opinions (not that there are mny of them but they exist by the thousand for every "honest" scientists) work, devote ( a word you can't use in 99% of the jobs out there) their lives to something they believe in.
I personally would love to study the northern lights; others monocropping, other scientists are gung hoe about the human genome. But like a crooked cop, all it takes is one bad scientist abusing the system to mar all of their associates.
|
|
|
Post by Bad Science on Mar 8, 2007 10:39:59 GMT -5
Science stories usually fall into three families: wacky stories, scare stories and "breakthrough" stories. Last year the Independent ran a wacky science story that generated an actual editorial: how many science stories get the lead editorial? It was on research by Dr Kevin Warwick, purporting to show that watching Richard and Judy improved IQ test performance (www.badscience.net/?p=84). Needless to say it was unpublished data, and highly questionable.
This misrepresentation of science is a direct descendant of the reaction, in the Romantic movement, against the birth of science and empiricism more than 200 years ago; it's exactly the same paranoid fantasy as Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, only not as well written. We say descendant, but of course, the humanities haven't really moved forward at all, except to invent cultural relativism, which exists largely as a pooh-pooh reaction against science. And humanities graduates in the media, who suspect themselves to be intellectuals, desperately need to reinforce the idea that science is nonsense: because they've denied themselves access to the most significant developments in the history of western thought for 200 years, and secretly, deep down, they're angry with themselves over that.
|
|