Debate: Can Humanity survive our technolgical infancy?
Side: Long Live Humanity

This is most likely an insult, though I shan't take it as such.What I meant was that you have a very active imagination, since you seem to be seeing more then is actually there.Yes, and new diseases keep appearing.And what's your point? New diseases would keep appearing regardless of whether we are technologically advanced or not. Because we have modern medicine, however, we actually have a chance to fight and cure these diseases.And how are links to blogs any better (something which you have done, by the way)?Where have I based one of my arguments based solely on information in a blog? Seriously, show me. You have numerous times cited things you remember people told you, unreliable blogs, and sites that are obviously ridiculous.And how many people today can afford to eat?I already showed you that we are healthier then we were in the past by showing you the dramatic increase in life expectancy, but now you want to talk about how there's not enough food because people are starving. People have always been starving, but now as a whole we have a much lower percentage of people starving thanks to increased agricultural technology and globalization. Even now, the numbers are still improving everywhere except for those nations which don't have the technological advantages of the west (like in Africa).Let me as though, what are you doing to help solve the problem? I've already seen that you are against welfare, so obviously you don't want to do that to help, but what would you suggest? We are much wealthier now (in real per capita terms) than we have ever been thanks to technology, so we are all in a better position to help those in need then we would be without technology, but from what I've seen you don't want to help.I'm not saying our world is perfect, but it's a lot better than it was, and is constantly improving. If we got rid of technology, we wouldn't have millions facing starvation, it would be billions.You, and most likely nearly all of your friends, are teenagers. Wait a few decades, then you'll feel it. . .Well, fortunately I will be able to wait probably at least another 6 decades...I could not wait this long in your hypothetical world without technology. Like I've said before, I'd be happy to live with gas if it means I almost double my lifespan.Everything is unreliable.First of all, no. Secondly, even if this were the case then we would both be equally unequal to argue anything. Thirdly, you can't look at things like this in such a black and white way. Maybe you think nothing is completely reliable, but certainly there are degrees of reliability. For example, when Kim Jong Il claims to shoot 38 under par his first time golfing, then that's the time to be more than a little bit skeptical. Obviously a peer reviewed scientific study would be a much more reliable source...in fact I'm having difficulty thinking of a more reliable source. The point is that you can't just say: nothing is reliable, because you know that it isn't true even if you don't want to admit it.There's quite a bit of proof - both of American involvement in 9/11No, there's just a bunch of crazy people who like to stir up conspiracies. Look at the site again. The quotes they give of prominent people who think there's a conspiracy are taken out of context. Most of the time it's just senators saying that the Bush administration is trying to hide the fact that it was incompetent, not that they were trying to covering up the fact that they had actually planned the attacks. What conspiracy theories like this appeal to is our innate desire to find patterns. The human mind is designed to see patterns, and make conclusions off of them even when sometimes there isn't anything there.Let's get a reality check real quick: you think that the Bush administration staged an entire plot to attack our own buildings, framed Osama Bin Laden and an afghan terrorist group, and this group willingly agreed to accept responsibility, and the whole point of this was to start a war in a nation that caused the Russians to essentially lose the cold war because it's nearly impossible to fight against people that hide in caves, and among civilians? I could go on about any number of other things that make this story even less plausible, but I'm going to stop before I catch myself arguing with a crazy person. Speaking of...If you don't mind my asking, just what was it called? While I still find [most] reports of that kind of stuff to be ludicrous, it'd still be an interesting watch.It was a joke! I was mostly joking about the 9/11 thing because I didn't think anyone in their right mind would take these claims seriously, but come on terminator, use your head!Believe? No. Use as a source? Yes.That just makes you a hypocrite who isn't actually after the truth but merely wants to try to "win" an argument. That is extremely intellectually dishonest.I do not need to believe something to argue itWell this explains why your out of touch with reality at least...also why you seem to have such a high opinion of yourself.First off, what made you think I got any of this from an uncle of mine? Frankly, I can't say we've ever spoken on this subject.Once again, I was being facetious. I didn't actually mean that your uncle told you anything, but my point was that you use unreliable sources. Try and keep up.Of course not, you're a liberal. The world will fall apart under your nose, and you won't even think anything is wrong - other than that there seem to be fewer and fewer of us damn non-liberals around.Lol, what?You don't seem to think anything is wrong with John Holdren.Mostly because there isn't. Go to his book and read the passages that these right wing bloggers are referring to. He don't advocate anything of the sort that they claim he does. The phrases they use are taken completely out of context.Once again: use reliable sources.Nor do you seem to mind the fact that Obama's pastor (and former religious adviser) hates white people and, according to Wright's mentor, they ought be destroyed along with any pro-white Gods.Nor do you seem to mind Obama's countless lies.Nor do you mind that Obama praises Satan.Tell me, what do you think of the decision regarding the New Black Panthers?Liberals ought to be ashamed of themselves for who they voted into office.That's it, I'm done arguing with you. If you are willing to take any of these articles seriously then clearly I am wasting my time arguing with a crazy person who doesn't have the ability to distinguish reality from bullshit. You claim to be a skeptic yet I find your skepticism clearly lacking when it comes to these articles... even a 5 year old could tell these are bullshit, not to mention the fact that your conspiracy theories contradict each other (how can he be an ardent supporter of the doctrine of his church and worship satan?). When you decide to go outside and begin to actually use that brain that I'm starting to doubt is in your head then maybe I'll continue with these arguments. Until then don't waste my time with bullshit.