CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
I'd imagine not. You aren't denying scientific evidence in favor of religious belief, you are simply altering the decision while not necessarily denying the science.
I'd imagine not. You aren't denying scientific evidence in favor of religious belief, you are simply altering the decision while not necessarily denying the science.
Of course he's denying the science. Money is a completely arbitrary human invention. It has nothing to do with the natural world and therefore it has nothing to do with science. It's like asking are you a science denier if you believe decisions should be made based on comic book characters from the 1980s instead of the laws of physics.
On the strictest sense money has nothing to do with science save for that you need money to be able to preform scientific discovery. Science is science, money can grease the wheels to encourage findings to read a different way but the science is still absolute.
But you don't have to deny science to make a decision based on money.
save for that you need money to be able to preform scientific discovery.
That is literally stupid. You don't need a fucking social construct to "preform" scientific discovery, because social constructs are the opposite of science. Maybe in our current social order you need money to do anything but that is not inherently and eternally how it was or will be or should be.
you don't have to deny science to make a decision based on money
No one ever said you did. What is being said is that money is not scientific and when you have a society in which rich people make decisions based on what keeps them rich and is good for a made up economy of social constructs you do not have a logical society that bases it's decisions on what is tangible and objectively the best for civilization as a whole.
You don't need a fucking social construct to "preform" scientific discovery,
Ok. How does one test genes to see if someone is susceptible to certain diseases or possibly find cures? How does one visually see planets beyond what is visible with the naked eye?
How do you get a telescope? How do you get the equipment to test the genes?
In fact I'll go ahead and hurry this along.
"On the strictest sense money has nothing to do with science save for that you need money to be able to preform scientific discovery."
BUT I think I see where there could be confusion as I used the wrong word. It should be perform, not preform. However I would think you still could have gotten my meaning if you actually read what I wrote. Apologies if you didn't though.
How do you get a telescope? How do you get the equipment to test the genes?
You seem to be operating under the assumption that money is an inescapable eternal reality of civilization and that there could never be a technologically advanced civilization that doesn't have a monetary system. You do not need money to make scientific discoveries, you need money to do pretty much anything in a society that happens to operate based on the unscientific social construct of money. Technically the equipment you speak of has nothing to do with money inherently. What if there was a tax on breathing, and someone said "you cannot breath without money". Maybe that is true in a society that taxes you for breathing, but in reality there is no inherent connection between that made up rule and the physical process of breathing which was once not taxed and will someday no longer be taxed.
Besides, your whole argument misses my point entirely. Why should we allow social constructs to get in the way of what is objectively logical in objective reality just because it is good for a socially constructed economy and good for those who only care about increasing their amount of social construct points? Why should we allow people who don't have any technical real world knowledge to make all the decisions just because they have a lot of social construct points and know how to use social constructs to enrich themselves? A truly scientific and rational civilization is one that has no money. A retarded civilization is one that has people saying "you can't do science without unscientific social constructs" meanwhile we let climate change deniers decide what kind of energy we use based on what's good for their pouch of social construct certificates.
Do you roll up a 20 dollar bill and peek through it??
Then shut your stupid mouth. Money has absolutely ZERO relevance to what can or cannot be build using the laws of physics. It is an entirely arbitrary human invention used to denominate POWER, and it has nothing to do with objective reality unless we choose to make it so.
You Americans are really something else. You cannot even DREAM of a world where money is not God.
Money is the root of all evil (that's why churches are always begging for it .. to get it off the streets ;-).
Science, on the other hand, they choose to ignore, so it must NOT be evil. They'd rather deny it, let it go its merry way. THEY are the science deniers, they make decisions based on the money they get off the streets, so, YES. Logical??? ;-)
Science, on the other hand, they choose to ignore, so it must NOT be evil. They'd rather deny it, let it go its merry way. THEY are the science deniers, they make decisions based on the money they get off the streets, so, YES. Logical???
They absolutely are science deniers Al, and everybody with half a shred of intelligence knows it. They depend upon rhetoric, superstition, populism and myth to push their false reality onto the world. That, and of course lots of MONEY.
The proof is in the pudding, of course. You have one of Brontoraptor's puppet accounts underneath you (i.e. Gremlin), who has upvoted himself more than once again (as per usual) and downvoted you the same. They do stuff like this very deliberately, as a form of false marketing. They want to convince other lowbrow minds that their beliefs are popular, and that their popularity is proportionate to their scientific validity.
They are based on money. That's why all scientists who say the leftist ideology is full of crap are blackballed from liberal universities and defunded.
Are you a science denier if you think decisions should be made based on money, not science
Hello hater:
I haven't the first clue what you're trying to say.. Hate must make you stupid..
As a Jewish human, I make scientific decisions based on science, I make money decisions based on money, and I always defend myself against haters.
When haters like you murdered 6,000,000 of my ancestors, we said NEVER AGAIN.. So, I will ALWAYS defend Jews against haters like you. That would be ALWAYS!
I haven't the first clue what you're trying to say.. Hate must make you stupid..
You know you're a retard when you not understanding something leads you to conclude that the person saying the thing you don't understand must be the stupid one.
I make scientific decisions based on science, I make money decisions based on money
What about when the two conflict with one another? Like when rich people make decisions based on profit rather than what is good for the environment or the human species. The problem with capitalism is that rich people make all the decisions based on what keeps them rich and/or makes them more rich rather than what is technically the best course of action from a purely logical and scientific standpoint. As a capitalist, you believe that whoever has the most money should get their way rather than whoever is objectively right and pointing to what is actually best for everyone.
It's not my fault you're too stupid to see how capitalism leads to an unscientific decision making process that ignores and denies science. Why do you think the fossil fuel industry loves right wingers who deny climate change? Climate change deniers get to make decisions and become president because whoever has the most money decides how resources are used for their own benefit rather than that of the planet. Since you are a capitalist this is very relevant to why you are a retard, even if you don't personally deny climate change. You really have no right to complain when you support the system that allows it to happen nor do you have a right to call others science deniers when you think science and objective reality should be ignored when it comes to how resources are used in favor of simply allowing everything to be decided according to the interests of rich people.
You said never again? Then why do you support the Democrat Party that supports killing viable Jewish babies?
You are not much better than the Nazi's that killed your ancestors. They also denied the right to life of Jewish people. You deny it even to viable unborn babies, yet you call yourself better?
