KOS: The correct are reckless? Please explain.greenspun.com : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread
I think "stupid" is really to harsh a term for the pollies, after much reflection. For the great, vast majority of people who did not show any interest in the Y2K issue, probably "disinterested" is the right term. For those who did take an interest, but rejected out of hand any notion that the world as they knew it could be anything other than what they had always known in their short life time, probably "ignorant" would be a better fit. For those who studied the Y2K problem and reached the (correct) conclusion that it was going to be a non-event, yet did nothing to prepare for the possibility they might be wrong, "reckless" would be more on target.
Is reckless the correct word here? Or are you, as Mr. Decker so aptly put it, a "non-reconstructed doomer" masqerading as an enquiring mind?
As I see this, I examined the evidence and drew a (mostly) correct conclusion. (Perhaps a series of my quotes from last year would help?)
If a scientist states that gravity will cease as a force in the universe tomorrow morning, and another scientist contradicts that claim, one would hope evidence would rule the day, and the more supported position be accepted as most probable. Such is the case in many scientific arenas (at least those not tainted by poilitics...).
This was definitely not the case with Y2k. (Perhaps the reason CPR is most disliked and indirectly attacked is because of his refusal to allow any to "wiggle" out of this position - yourself included...) With Y2k, again as Mr. Decker points out, there was a religious-like zeal attached to a "true believer" mentality - and mere facts and evidence held little sway.
The conclusions you stated above reveal to me (disappointingly) that you are on a different path than I thought. Perhaps CPR is correct about your true identity after all...
Re-writing history may provide some comfort for the intellectual sloth, but in the end, it is no solution. The solution is to identify the thought processes that made one susceptible to the meme in the first place, and to replace them.
It is interesting to note who now "Doesn't Want to Get It."
-- Andy Ray (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 06, 2000
"KOS: The correct are reckless? Please explain"
-- King of Spain (email@example.com), October 06, 2000.
"If a scientist states that gravity will cease as a force in the universe tomorrow morning, and another scientist contradicts that claim, one would hope evidence would rule the day, and the more supported position be accepted as most probable. Such is the case in many scientific arenas (at least those not tainted by poilitics...)".
Is there a logical fallacy here? Can induction have "evidence"? I don't know; just asking.
-- Lars (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 06, 2000.
a "non-reconstructed doomer" masqerading as an enquiring mind?
NOPE........"BETA TESTER" FOR........TRIAL BALLOONS TO RATIONALIZE IRRATIONAL ACTIONS INDUCED BY FEAR : or "Y2K PREPPING".
KOSpin LIKE MANY OTHERS IS TRYING TO GET OUT OF THE SELF SET INTELLECTUAL TRAP INDUCED BY THE SELLERS OF "PREP OR DIE" MENTALITY. IT WILL TAKE YEARS FOR THE HUCKSTERS AND SHILLS TO "RAMP UP" ANOTHER........"CRISIS" OF THE MAGNITUDE OF Y2K FUD/FEAR.
"PREPARATION" (NOW CALLED "SELF RELIANCE" ((NICELY FITTING INTO THE PARA-MILITARISTS VIEWS))........IS A ***BIG BUSINESS*** CATERING TO THE FEARFUL AND THE PARANOIDS OF SOCIETY.
ANYTHING WILL BE SAID AND WRITTEN TO JUSTIFY "PREPPING". THE FAILURE OF Y2K TO PROVIDE CONCRETE EXAMPLES OF **SOCIETY DAMAGING FAILURES***.....WAS A ...........SERIOUS, DAMAGING BLOW FOR THE ***HUCKSTERS**** LIKE HYATT, LORD, NORTH, McELVANEY AND THE REST OF THE BULL SHITTERS.
...EVER SINCE 1/1/2000, THE EVASIONS AND FAILURE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR BEHAVIOR HAVE RANGED FROM THE "FALLBACK" TO 'IT WAS PRUDENT' TO "NON-DOOMERS ENDANGERS OTHERS BY NOT PREPARING".
-- cpr (email@example.com), October 07, 2000.
Gravity? Andy Ray, that is without a doubt the worst analogy for Y2K that has ever passed before my eyes.
Now if on a daily basis there were isolated interruptions of gravity that affected daily living, and there were also scientists who stated that on January 1st the occasional interruptions would happen all at once, you would be on to something. But as it stands I must rate that analogy an F-.
-- Uncle Deedah (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 07, 2000.
...THE EVASIONS AND FAILURE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR BEHAVIOR... -- The Great and Mighty, All-Powerful, All-Seeing, All-Knowing, CPR!!!
Mmmmmm... What taking "responsibility for their behavior" are people supposed to grovel to YOU for, O Great and Wise Ranting Master of All-Capital Letters?
-- I'm Here, I'm There (I'm Everywhere@so.beware), October 07, 2000.
Te wrecked are feckless.
-- (email@example.com), October 07, 2000.
The wrecked are feckless.
-- (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 07, 2000.