Fuck you too.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
I know im bored its fun watching them squirm / get so upset they cant face the truth they will keep on going and going swearing there head off showing there childish happy meal nature etc.Spark wrote:
Ok, this is getting dumb...AirForce2076 wrote:
Yeah sure, your words speak the truth, you sir, have the mentality of a 4 year old. Yes I can get as upset as I want to when some dumbass canadian like you starts talking shit about my country, because we are going to be Number 1 forever, bitch. Case closed.Berserk_Vampire wrote:
My words speak the truth thats why you and the rest of the americans get so upset its not you're fault you cant help you're 4 year old mentality problems.
Maybe you should downgrade to a happy meal like the insects you are / eat
Hehe you should stop replying to Berserk_Vampire everyone can see the points he makes are......kinda strange....
And dont insult ppl please its not very constructive.
ps: still wating for an answer whittsend
And dont insult ppl please its not very constructive.
ps: still wating for an answer whittsend
You are still looking at government giving only. In the US private giving boosts the total to 300% of the government figure. This is FAR more than any other country.ArMaG3dD0n wrote:
@whittsend
About the link you posted: Where exactly does it say there that the US is giving more than ANY OTHER country?
All I found is:
"While Adelman admits that “there are no complete figures for international private giving” she still says that Americans are “clearly the most generous on earth in public — but especially in private — giving”. Hence these numbers and claims may be taken with caution, but even then, these are high numbers."
But later on it says:
"Adelman, further above noted that the US is “clearly the most generous on earth in public — but especially in private — giving”, yet the CGD suggests otherwise, saying that the US does not close the gap with most other rich countries; “The US gives 13c/day/person in government aid....American’s private giving—another 5c/day—is high by international standards but does not close the gap with most other rich countries. Norway gives $1.02/day in public aid and 24c/day in private aid” per person."
--->since Norway seems to give more than the US I cant understand why you are saying:"the US actually gives substantially more than any other country". Did I get sth. wrong? Or do you mean they are in actually giving more because they are more people. I usually interpret "giving more" as the money that is given/capita since anything else would be pretty dumb.
So am I. Army, Infantry in Somalia, 1993. 16 months as an MP in Iraq 03-04.welcometotheempire wrote:
I remind you again: I am the guy on the news with the machine gun. I am what Noam Chomsky unfairly refers to as "the fist of the empire." However, I sleep soundly every night with a clear concience, because I CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MANIFESTATION OF THIS NATIONAL DESTINY.
I believe that it is not only wrong, but that it is counter-productive. You can use it, but I wholly disagree with it.welcometotheempire wrote:
I am at a loss to understand your distaste for the Rome analogy, so I can't continue to use it.
I don't know about contending anything, but I disagree with that statement (except in so far as any industrial nation is seeking economic dominance). Given that you are the one advancing a theory here, surely it is your burden to explain.welcometotheempire wrote:
Do you contend that America is not attempting to establish global hegemony through economic leverage and through overt and covert military intervetions? If so, explain.
To clarify - I say that the US (embodied by the private enterprises contained therein) seeks economic dominance in precisely the same way as any other nation does. This is done (of necessity) in proportion with GDP; larger GDP = larger/more companies in the market. Nevertheless, economic entities in other countries are doing precisely the same thing. I believe that to say the US is seeking world domination in any other way is categorically untrue.
I expect that the probability of the presense of products from those countries in your home is proportional with those countries GDP: In the case of Chile, very small. In the case of Nicaragua, virtually nonexistent. If those countries develop a larger economic presence, the probability will increase, but the lack of it does not indicate an American hegemony over them.welcometotheempire wrote:
Lastly, I appreciate your barb about the products in my house and their nation of origin, but I ask you in relation to point I was making, how much of it came from say, Chile or Nicauragua?
Uhm helloooooooo?whittsend wrote:
You are still looking at government giving only. In the US private giving boosts the total to 300% of the government figure. This is FAR more than any other country.
I already wrote this before but you didnt seem to read it so again: This is from your link:
“The US gives 13c/day/person in government aid....American’s private giving—another 5c/day—is high by international standards but does not close the gap with most other rich countries. Norway gives $1.02/day in public aid and 24c/day in private aid” per person."
Did you read the part about private giving?? 24c/day is more than 5c/day I suppose........
So one thing has to be wrong, the information given in your link or you. I guess it s not the link......
Last edited by ArMaG3dD0n (2006-01-27 08:19:34)
Its not that we dont like ur country...
We feel pity towards u and ur ignorant government.
We feel pity towards u and ur ignorant government.
Lol, right on.... you go girl.Vilham wrote:
Its not that we dont like ur country...
We feel pity towards u and ur ignorant government.
I stand corrected: The US is not the MOST generous nation, even counting private donations. But what you are saying is still misleading.ArMaG3dD0n wrote:
Uhm helloooooooo?whittsend wrote:
You are still looking at government giving only. In the US private giving boosts the total to 300% of the government figure. This is FAR more than any other country.
This is from your link:
“The US gives 13c/day/person in government aid....American’s private giving—another 5c/day—is high by international standards but does not close the gap with most other rich countries. Norway gives $1.02/day in public aid and 24c/day in private aid” per person."
Did you read the part about private giving?? 24c/day is more than 5c/day I suppose........
So one thing has to be wrong, the information given in your link or you. I guess it s not the link......
You are looking at numbers per person - which of course will be higher in a country with a smaller population and high GDP/capita. I am looking at totals (total Government + total private) factored by GDP. This brings US total contributions to approximately .45% GDP (and one assumes that more recent numbers would be somewhat higher as the trend has been upward). In any case, this brings the US ahead of most other industrial nations, but still short of the Norway/Luxumbourg standards.
I would still argue that the US is quite generous, and not the cheapskate nation it is often painted.
Edit: Sorry it takes me so long to reply. I post from work and that has to take priority
Last edited by whittsend (2006-01-27 09:25:39)
Since you were looking at official+private aid /GDP:whittsend wrote:
In any case, this brings the US ahead of most other industrial nations, but still short of the Norway/Luxumbourg standards.
I would still argue that the US is quite generous, and not the cheapskate nation it is often painted.
May i show you some statistics from your link?
This is about PRIVATE contributions/GDP:
http://www.globalissues.org/images/cgd- … ed-aid.png
And this is about official contribution/GDP:
http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/3439 … nnt7qg.jpg
It s not just tiny countries like Luxembourg that give more than the US. Hey I really dont intend to make the US somehow look bad or demand more of them but looking at these numbers you cant claim you d be "ahead of most other industrial nations" except some tiny countries which are not important.
The first is 'quality' adjusted....someone is making a judgement call. That was made clear. If you want to make those kind of judgements, you can make some more going the other way which will even it up again. The US spends a much higher % of GDP on Defense, as a result some of these other countries don't have to, and can spend the difference on charitable giving. You may not agree, but I can quite easily disagree with the 'quality' adjustments that go the other way, too.ArMaG3dD0n wrote:
Since you were looking at official+private aid /GDP:whittsend wrote:
In any case, this brings the US ahead of most other industrial nations, but still short of the Norway/Luxumbourg standards.
I would still argue that the US is quite generous, and not the cheapskate nation it is often painted.
May i show you some statistics from your link?
This is about PRIVATE contributions/GDP:
http://www.globalissues.org/images/cgd- … ed-aid.png
And this is about official contribution/GDP:
http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/3439 … nnt7qg.jpg
It s not just tiny countries like Luxembourg that give more than the US. Hey I really dont intend to make the US somehow look bad or demand more of them but looking at these numbers you cant claim you d be "ahead of most other industrial nations" except some tiny countries which are not important.
The second does not include private donations, which, as I said, triples the total.
My statement stands.
Last edited by whittsend (2006-01-27 11:04:24)
Yeah the first one is about private givings/gdp but just as you said its quality adjusted. I really cant say if this quality adjusted stuff changes the statistics very much because I m not 1337 enough at your language to know all the economic terms they use to describe how they adjusted it.
If you d give me some statistics showing that the US private donations/GDP/person or whatever combined with official aid/gdp is indeed higher than in most of the other countries I d be content.
If not we could just say that everyone is giving his fair slice to 3rd world countries which is what I wanted to say in the begining because someone claimed that the US is kind of the only nation helping out there.....
If you d give me some statistics showing that the US private donations/GDP/person or whatever combined with official aid/gdp is indeed higher than in most of the other countries I d be content.
If not we could just say that everyone is giving his fair slice to 3rd world countries which is what I wanted to say in the begining because someone claimed that the US is kind of the only nation helping out there.....
Last edited by ArMaG3dD0n (2006-01-27 09:46:36)
A few of these charts are misleading. For instance, the chart Carbon Dioxide 400kyr-2.png uses the Vostok core for the majority of the data, then superimposes data from other sources, making it appear that the concentrations are rocketing up disproproportionally. However, if you look at this chart, which ONLY uses the Vostok core:Spark wrote:
atlvolunteer, I was talking to jarhedch, and would like him to present HIS sources.
More, irrefutable, proof of warming:
For an overview, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
Or if you want proof NOW:
Proof that the warming trend is recent and due to the revolution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Inst … Record.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:2000 … arison.png
Proof that CO2 levels are rising and have an effect on Global temperatures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Co2- … e-plot.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carb … 0kyr-2.png (sorry if you've seen before)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carb … Flux-2.png
More proof that ALL Greenhouse gases are on the rise
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Majo … trends.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … y_Type.png
Proof that the ozone layer is thinning (and that I'm gonna need more sunscreen)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ozon … ecline.png
Remember what I said about temps? That a 5C degree increase in global temperatures was enough to trigger a mass extinction?
Well,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … ctions.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … ns_Map.jpg
Proof that the ice caps are melting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Arct … ckness.gif
Need More?
--
Ok, Beserk_Vampire, that's just strange...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vost … lation.jpg
it looks like the CO2 concentrations are normal.
I don't think it is valid to superimpose different sources onto each other to show a trend.
Also, showing that the temperature has risen over the last 140 years doesn't prove anything. If temperature is related to CO2 concentrations (I don't know if this is true or not), then this would also appear to be normal. The fact of the matter is that, according to the Vostok core, we are currently on an upswing.
The problem is that we don't have enough temperature data to form a valid picture of what it should be versus what is actually is.
Yeah i'm definitely squirming, it's more like i'm saying this is a scoffing matter to you. it's ok berserk you can continue making your useless comments that no one cares about. continue on...Berserk_Vampire wrote:
I know im bored its fun watching them squirm / get so upset they cant face the truth they will keep on going and going swearing there head off showing there childish happy meal nature etc.Spark wrote:
Ok, this is getting dumb...AirForce2076 wrote:
Yeah sure, your words speak the truth, you sir, have the mentality of a 4 year old. Yes I can get as upset as I want to when some dumbass canadian like you starts talking shit about my country, because we are going to be Number 1 forever, bitch. Case closed.
I couldn't find any stats (I looked back when I first posted that other link), so that works for meArMaG3dD0n wrote:
If not we could just say that everyone is giving his fair slice to 3rd world countries which is what I wanted to say in the begining because someone claimed that the US is kind of the only nation helping out there.....
I certainly will not say that other countries don't give their fair share, even if other Americans do say it. The figures show otherwise, no matter how you look at them.
Vostok, however, is the most important single station for recording climate data. The reasons are both obvious and irrelevant. Also, as you can see, the data for the different stations is highly similar (fro the C02 v. temp graph)atlvolunteer wrote:
A few of these charts are misleading. For instance, the chart Carbon Dioxide 400kyr-2.png uses the Vostok core for the majority of the data, then superimposes data from other sources, making it appear that the concentrations are rocketing up disproproportionally. However, if you look at this chart, which ONLY uses the Vostok core:Spark wrote:
atlvolunteer, I was talking to jarhedch, and would like him to present HIS sources.
More, irrefutable, proof of warming:
For an overview, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
Or if you want proof NOW:
Proof that the warming trend is recent and due to the revolution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Inst … Record.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:2000 … arison.png
Proof that CO2 levels are rising and have an effect on Global temperatures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Co2- … e-plot.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carb … 0kyr-2.png (sorry if you've seen before)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carb … Flux-2.png
More proof that ALL Greenhouse gases are on the rise
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Majo … trends.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … y_Type.png
Proof that the ozone layer is thinning (and that I'm gonna need more sunscreen)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ozon … ecline.png
Remember what I said about temps? That a 5C degree increase in global temperatures was enough to trigger a mass extinction?
Well,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … ctions.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Glob … ns_Map.jpg
Proof that the ice caps are melting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Arct … ckness.gif
Need More?
--
Ok, Beserk_Vampire, that's just strange...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vost … lation.jpg
it looks like the CO2 concentrations are normal.
I don't think it is valid to superimpose different sources onto each other to show a trend.
Also, showing that the temperature has risen over the last 140 years doesn't prove anything. If temperature is related to CO2 concentrations (I don't know if this is true or not), then this would also appear to be normal. The fact of the matter is that, according to the Vostok core, we are currently on an upswing.
The problem is that we don't have enough temperature data to form a valid picture of what it should be versus what is actually is.
Read the comment at the bottom. Esepecially: This figure shows apparent correlations between historical CO2 and temperature records based on Antarctic ice cores, providing data for the last 750,000 years. The data has been normalised so as to be presented on a common scale. Current CO2 concentrations (380 ppmv) would be 5.48 (3 s.f.) on this scale. By this graph, temperature should also be much higher.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
and there 300 pound women.Vilham wrote:
Its not that we dont like ur country...
We feel pity towards u and ur ignorant government.
New fat facts about canada:
http://www.ihpra.org/canadian_obesity.htm
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department … ll/sis8438
http://news.monstersandcritics.com/heal … ata_issued
Looks like canada is on the rise of having fat people.
http://www.ihpra.org/canadian_obesity.htm
http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department … ll/sis8438
http://news.monstersandcritics.com/heal … ata_issued
Looks like canada is on the rise of having fat people.
Last edited by AirForce2076 (2006-01-27 19:37:53)
True, it's not all given through the government, people give their own aid everywhere, (things like sposering a child,) and in America, richer people can give substantially more, (Bill Gates gives enough for a small country.)whittsend wrote:
Tyferra
Wrong. As I have already posted twice, the US actually gives substantially more than any other country. It simply isn't all given through the government (which is fine, as goverment aid is less effective than private aid).
I said America gives the least in charitable aid per capita This mean per person, America gives the least. I was just backing up a fact. America gives a lot of money for a country, because it is a rich country, but for money spent on charitable aid per person, America is left behind.
It wasn't an attack on America, it was a statement of fact. That's the fucking problem you know, Americans are always keen to fly off the handle without fully registering what they hear.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Sorry, we'll send more free aid.
Our apologies.
Our apologies.
Last edited by Aegis (2006-01-27 20:01:21)
Charitable aid is free aid. I'm not quite sure what you're on about there.
I would like to once again back up my statement that I'm not making a verbal attack on America. It's a very nice place.
I would like to once again back up my statement that I'm not making a verbal attack on America. It's a very nice place.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
You don't say?!Tyferra wrote:
Charitable aid is free aid.
Lol about that my keyboard was fucked up that day, the 0 wasn't working right. I got a new keyboard and I edited my post.mcminty wrote:
No I didn't know that...Jack_Danger wrote:
Did you know that less then 50% of people eligible to vote here in the U.S. actually do right? So out of the about 2 million people over the age of 18, 1 million of them vote. Which means that a little over half a million people actually voted for him, therefor about 1/6 of Americans voted for him not half of us. So before you say that half of Americans voted for him and generalizing that into meaning that most Americans suck, GET YOUR FUCKING FACTS STRAIGHT!281,241,906 x 25.7% = 72,279,170 persons under 18.USA Census Data wrote:
Population, 2000.............................................281,421,906
Persons under 18 years old, percent, 2000........25.7%
therefore
218,241,906 - 72,279,170 = 208,962,736 persons over 18, eligeble to vote.
Also look at this
Its about IQ in relation to Politics. Go here http://chrisevans3d.com/files/iq.htm. Well worth the look for those that hate bush.
berserk do you have any idea of the stupid things that you are saying? Okay first of all lets suppose the chinese or anyone else never invented gunpowder, then we'll imagine America(lets say the time of the revolutionary war) and then we'll magically have a civilization that collapsed and died out about 2000 years ago(Rome) fight the Americans. I say that even if any of that could happen(WHICH IS IMPOSSIBLE DUMBASS) the Americans would still win, because at that time even without gunpowder we still had so much more advanced technology than the romans. Also you can't say "oh yeah if something wasn't ever invented America would suck because of this reason" just because you are an ignorant canadian hick. Think of what the whole world would be like if gunpowder was never invented, first of all we probably wouldn't be in North and South America because the indians would have pwned the europeans if they didn't have gunpowder.AirForce2076 wrote:
Lol, @ this idiot. Yeah sure let's all take a magical portal back in time and let's see what happens to Americans. My god you fucking idiot, Americans migrated from other countries, they didn't come from America. Please let's meet somewhere face to face and I'll give you the pleasure to pound your face flat. I suppose too many Hollywood movies have got you by the ass. America really does brainwash you idiots don't they.Please Berserk_Fag, you are our bitch and always will be our bitch, so please, don't talk anymore or we will constitute an new amendment by not allowing dumbass canadians to talk on message boards anymore. Now go back to your coffin you fucking freak.Berserk_Vampire wrote:
I dont think so with out guns you guys are useless cowards if it was close combat weapons with swords Japan or Rome would slaughter all of you and when you talk about america it doesnt deserve to be with a captial A because its small time just like insects.AirForce2076 wrote:
Well then I'd just have to use my club to beat your worthless head in instead.
Please spell "American" with a capital A please, ok thanks, now back to enjoying my super greasy McDonalds double cheeseburger, mmm, so greasy. Wow all this grease all over, I'm gonna slurp it all up. I love America, mmmmm.
Omg I could write so much more stuff about that but I doubt anyone would read it(let alone all that) anyways. So in short STFU YOU ARE A DUMB SON OF A BITCH AND HAVE NO CLUE ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON OUTSIDE OF YOUR LITTLE FOUR WALLS.
P.S. You cannot make an even decently good point in an arguement about something like this.
Here we go again the mentality of these people i tell you lmao you gotta let go of you're fantasy world being funded by mcdonalds and accept the world hates you and you're country will always be attacked by terrorists and made fun of and will always have overweight 300 pound women unless you fix up you're countries mentality problems.
Just do the right thing and target you're own country with you're nukes so you can put you're corrupted country out of its misery as fast as possible.
Do it for me if not me then Mcdonalds wich you love so much for example.
I can see why you guys get so touchy i would too if are women looked like that
Just do the right thing and target you're own country with you're nukes so you can put you're corrupted country out of its misery as fast as possible.
Do it for me if not me then Mcdonalds wich you love so much for example.
I can see why you guys get so touchy i would too if are women looked like that