cuda1179 wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:
[
"... I know this sounds dangerously close to eugenics." Compulsory sterilization doesn't sound "dangerously close" to eugenics, it pretty much is the cornerstone of eugenics. It sounds like a couple of other things I could think of as well.

I never stated that sterilization should be mandatory. I stated that there should be a short-term economic incentive for voluntary sterilization. That's a pretty big difference.

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
Meanwhile in Canada...

And meanwhile, our Energy Secretary believes the world is 5000 years old. When did the GOP start accepting stupid as currency?

...remembers why I no longer carry a RNC card.

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:
[
"... I know this sounds dangerously close to eugenics." Compulsory sterilization doesn't sound "dangerously close" to eugenics, it pretty much is the cornerstone of eugenics. It sounds like a couple of other things I could think of as well.

I never stated that sterilization should be mandatory. I stated that there should be a short-term economic incentive for voluntary sterilization. That's a pretty big difference.

As a refresher, this is what you said: "How bad would it look to offer additional financial assistance to women in 3rd world countries if they are under the age of 27 and agree to a permanent birth control procedure? "


The fact that sterilization of any kind would be put on the table as a consideration is staggering!

 Frazzled wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
Meanwhile in Canada...

And meanwhile, our Energy Secretary believes the world is 5000 years old. When did the GOP start accepting stupid as currency?

...remembers why I no longer carry a RNC card.

Where do you see the Dept of Energy head believes the earth is 5,000 years old?

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
Meanwhile in Canada...

And meanwhile, our Energy Secretary believes the world is 5000 years old. When did the GOP start accepting stupid as currency?

...remembers why I no longer carry a RNC card.

Where do you see the Dept of Energy head believes the earth is 5,000 years old?

When Perry was governor, he went on record with that statement.

PERRY: How old do I think the Earth is? I don’t have any idea. I think it’s pretty old. It goes back a long long ways. I’m not sure anybody actually knows completely and absolutely how long ago the Earth is.

 Frazzled wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
Meanwhile in Canada...

And meanwhile, our Energy Secretary believes the world is 5000 years old. When did the GOP start accepting stupid as currency?

...remembers why I no longer carry a RNC card.

Where do you see the Dept of Energy head believes the earth is 5,000 years old?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:
[
"... I know this sounds dangerously close to eugenics." Compulsory sterilization doesn't sound "dangerously close" to eugenics, it pretty much is the cornerstone of eugenics. It sounds like a couple of other things I could think of as well.

I never stated that sterilization should be mandatory. I stated that there should be a short-term economic incentive for voluntary sterilization. That's a pretty big difference.

As a refresher, this is what you said: "How bad would it look to offer additional financial assistance to women in 3rd world countries if they are under the age of 27 and agree to a permanent birth control procedure? "


The fact that sterilization of any kind would be put on the table as a consideration is staggering!

Wait you think the founder of Planned Parenthood was wrong?

 cuda1179 wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:
[
"... I know this sounds dangerously close to eugenics." Compulsory sterilization doesn't sound "dangerously close" to eugenics, it pretty much is the cornerstone of eugenics. It sounds like a couple of other things I could think of as well.

I never stated that sterilization should be mandatory. I stated that there should be a short-term economic incentive for voluntary sterilization. That's a pretty big difference.

 Frazzled wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
Meanwhile in Canada...

And meanwhile, our Energy Secretary believes the world is 5000 years old. When did the GOP start accepting stupid as currency?

...remembers why I no longer carry a RNC card.

Where do you see the Dept of Energy head believes the earth is 5,000 years old?

When Perry was governor, he went on record with that statement.

Please cite your fakenews.

This is the only thing I've seen.

PERRY: How old do I think the Earth is? I don’t have any idea. I think it’s pretty old. It goes back a long long ways. I’m not sure anybody actually knows completely and absolutely how long ago the Earth is.

That appears to be pretty damn accurate. Pinning a scientist down to an absolute statement is like trying to pin a lawyer down to an absolute statement. It doesn't happen. In my lifetime alone, estimates of the earth, the galaxy, and the universe have fluctuated substantially. Considering the theory of gravity itself was just called into question, the only thing we know absolutely is that people who like cats have no insides.

http://mirrorspectrum.com/behind-the-mirror/a-new-theory-puts-einsteins-theory-of-gravity-and-dark-matter-into-question

I am no fan of Governor Blowdry, but you need to back this crap up once in awhile.

 Frazzled wrote:

Spoiler:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
Meanwhile in Canada...

And meanwhile, our Energy Secretary believes the world is 5000 years old. When did the GOP start accepting stupid as currency?

...remembers why I no longer carry a RNC card.

Where do you see the Dept of Energy head believes the earth is 5,000 years old?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:
[
"... I know this sounds dangerously close to eugenics." Compulsory sterilization doesn't sound "dangerously close" to eugenics, it pretty much is the cornerstone of eugenics. It sounds like a couple of other things I could think of as well.

I never stated that sterilization should be mandatory. I stated that there should be a short-term economic incentive for voluntary sterilization. That's a pretty big difference.

As a refresher, this is what you said: "How bad would it look to offer additional financial assistance to women in 3rd world countries if they are under the age of 27 and agree to a permanent birth control procedure? "


The fact that sterilization of any kind would be put on the table as a consideration is staggering!

Wait you think the founder of Planned Parenthood was wrong?

I made a statement on the barbarism of sterilization as a solution to third world population and how even entertaining the topic of Eugenics crosses the line in ways that I can't even believe. You want to start deflecting to PP with only one post?

 Frazzled wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 BigWaaagh wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
Meanwhile in Canada...

And meanwhile, our Energy Secretary believes the world is 5000 years old. When did the GOP start accepting stupid as currency?

...remembers why I no longer carry a RNC card.

Where do you see the Dept of Energy head believes the earth is 5,000 years old?

When Perry was governor, he went on record with that statement.

Please cite your fakenews.

This is the only thing I've seen.

PERRY: How old do I think the Earth is? I don’t have any idea. I think it’s pretty old. It goes back a long long ways. I’m not sure anybody actually knows completely and absolutely how long ago the Earth is.

That appears to be pretty damn accurate. Pinning a scientist down to an absolute statement is like trying to pin a lawyer down to an absolute statement. It doesn't happen. In my lifetime alone, estimates of the earth, the galaxy, and the universe have fluctuated substantially. Considering the theory of gravity itself was just called into question, the only thing we know absolutely is that people who like cats have no insides.

http://mirrorspectrum.com/behind-the-mirror/a-new-theory-puts-einsteins-theory-of-gravity-and-dark-matter-into-question


I am no fan of Governor Blowdry, but you need to back this crap up once in awhile.

It was back in 2006. Perry said he believes in the inerrant bible. That can only mean he believes in a young earth. It also means he disagrees with science in general, electrons, the internet and common sense.

How Old is Earth?
By Nola Taylor Redd, Space.com Contributor | February 27, 2014 11:57pm ET

986 230 30 51 156 MORE

How Old is Earth?
A 'Blue Marble' image of the Earth taken from the VIIRS instrument aboard NASA's Earth-observing satellite - Suomi NPP – on Jan. 4, 2012.
Credit: NASA/NOAA/GSFC/Suomi NPP/VIIRS/Norman Kuring

Since the planet Earth doesn't have a birth certificate to record its formation, scientists have spent hundreds of years struggling to determine the age of the planet. By dating the rocks in the ever-changing crust, as well as neighbors such as the moon and visiting meteorites, scientists have calculated that Earth is 4.54 billion years old, with an error range of 50 million years.
How old are your rocks?

Several attempts to scientifically date the planet have occurred over the past 400 years. Scientists attempted to predict the age based on changing sea levels, the time it took for Earth or the sun to cool to present temperatures, and the salinity of the ocean. As science progressed, these methods were proven to be unreliable; for instance, the rise and fall of the ocean was shown to be an ever-changing process rather than a gradually declining one.

In an effort to calculate the age of the planet, scientists turned to the rocks that cover its surface. However, because plate tectonics constantly changes and revamps the crust, the first rocks have long since been recycled, melted down and reformed into new outcrops.

In the early 20th century, scientists refined the process of radiometric dating. Earlier research had shown that isotopes of some radioactive elements decay into other elements at rates that can be easily predicted. By examining the existing elements, scientists can calculate the initial quantity, and thus how long it took for the elements to decay, allowing them to determine the age of the rock.


The oldest rocks on Earth found to date are the Acasta Gneisses in northwestern Canada near the Great Slave Lake, which are 4.03 billion years old. Rocks older than 3.5 billion years can be found on all continents. Greenland boasts the Isua Supracrustal rocks (3.7 to 3.8 billion years old), while rocks in Swaziland are 3.4 to 3.5 billion years. Samples in Western Australia run 3.4 to 3.6 billion years old.

Research groups in Australia found the oldest mineral grains on Earth. These tiny zirconium silicate crystals have ages that reach 4.3 billion years, making them the oldest materials found on Earth so far. Their source rocks have not yet been found.

The rocks and zircons set a lower limit on the age of Earth of 4.3 billion years, because the planet itself must be older than anything that lies on its surface.
Meet the neighbors

In an effort to further refine the age of Earth, scientists began to look outward. The material that formed the solar system was a cloud of dust and gas that surrounded the young sun. Gravitational interactions coalesced this material into the planets and moons at roughly the same time. By studying other bodies in the solar system, scientists are able to find out more about the early history of the planet.

The nearest body to Earth, the moon, does not suffer from the resurfacing problems that cover Earth's landscape. As such, rocks from early lunar history should be present on the moon. Samples returned from the Apollo and Luna missions revealed ages between 4.4 and 4.5 billion years, helping to constrain the age of Earth.

In addition to the large bodies of the solar system, scientists have also studied smaller rocky visitors to that fell to Earth. Meteorites spring from a variety of sources. Some are cast off from other planets after violent collisions, while others are leftover chunks from the early solar system that never grew large enough to form a cohesive body.

Although no rocks have been deliberately returned from Mars, samples exist in the form of meteorites that fell to Earth long ago, allowing scientists to make approximations about the age of rocks on the red planet. Some of these samples have been dated to 4.5 billion years old, supporting other calculations of the date of early planetary formation.

More than 70 meteorites have fallen to Earth to have their ages calculated by radiometric dating. The oldest of these have ages between 4.4 and 4.5 billion years.

Fifty thousand years ago, a rock hurled down from space to form Meteor Crater in Arizona. Shards of that asteroid have been collected from the crater rim and named for the nearby Canyon Diablo. In 1953, Clair Cameron Patterson measured ratios of lead isotopes in samples that put tight constraints on Earth's age.

The Canyon Diablo meteorite is important because it represents a class of meteorites with components that allow for more precise dating. Samples of the meteorite show a spread from 4.53 to 4.58 billion years. Scientists interpret this range as the time it took for the solar system to evolve, a gradual event that took place over approximately 50 million years.

By using not only the rocks on Earth but also information gathered about the system that surrounds it, scientists have been able to place the age of the Earth at approximately 4.54 billion years. For comparison, the Milky Way galaxy that contains the solar system is approximately 13.2 billion years old, while the universe itself has been dated to 13.8 billion years.

Related:

 Frazzled wrote:
Still no cite on where Perry said the earth was 5,000 years old.

So, body mutilation over birth control education and access combined with the promotion of women's roles, access to education and status in the third world(which are the actual issues driving third world population growth)? Sure, in that context it seems downright civilized.

 Ahtman wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Still no cite on where Perry said the earth was 5,000 years old.

So if one specifically alludes to a thing, or says something that is synonymous with the concept, or uses a dogwhistle yet doesn't use an exact string of words it doesn't count?

 Frazzled wrote:

So, body mutilation over birth control education and access combined with the promotion of women's roles, access to education and status in the third world(which are the actual issues driving third world population growth)? Sure, in that context it seems downright civilized.

Blah blah...are voluntary vasectomies barbaric or are they not?

If they are...thats a very interesting morality tale on your part. You better go tell the millions of Westerners that.


"just going to take a little off the top."
-Zombieland.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ahtman wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Still no cite on where Perry said the earth was 5,000 years old.

So if one specifically alludes to a thing, or says something that is synonymous with the concept, or uses a dogwhistle yet doesn't use an exact string of words it doesn't count?

Nope not at all, because they aren't the same except in fake news land.

Its a simple thing. Someone posted a statement that Perry believes the earth is 5,000 years old.
I simply ask...where's the cite?
No cite is given.

Therefor poster is what we call full of da poopy, unless they can specifically cite something, in which case I will happily add it to my List of Reasons Why I Can't Stand Rick Perry.
(its a long list).

EDIT: To be clear I will happily add it to the list if someone can show a cite.

 Frazzled wrote:
Answer the question. Is voluntary sterilization barbaric?

 Ahtman wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Answer the question. Is voluntary sterilization barbaric?

Depends on how voluntary we are talking about. If actually voluntary probably not but if it only appears voluntary without actually giving real choice then yeah. People can say a thing is voluntary but if there are serious repercussions for not doing a thing the voluntary nature of it comes into question. People have argued that wearing a Hijab is voluntary but when the alternative is to be killed or beaten it really isn't very voluntary.

 Frazzled wrote:
Answer the question. Is voluntary sterilization barbaric?

 Frazzled wrote:

It was back in 2006. Perry said he believes in the inerrant bible. That can only mean he believes in a young earth. It also means he disagrees with science in general, electrons, the internet and common sense.

Still no cite on where Perry said the earth was 5,000 years old.
I believe in the Bible too. So does the Catholic Church. Neither say its 5,000 years old. Please show a cite of him saying its 5,000 years old.


A nice summary of attempts to quantify the age of Terra. As time wears on we think we're getting more accurate. I'll note when I was a wee lad the Earth was thought to be a hair over 3.5 billion years, but that has changed over time. Admittedly a portion of that change is that when I was a young lad we'd just killed off the dinosaurs (we just let you think an asteroid did it. Nope mammals for the win!) but that still only account for 100mm years of that difference.
Even this statement below is not exact. I am sure in the future it will be revised again or become more precise.

Spoiler:

How Old is Earth?
By Nola Taylor Redd, Space.com Contributor | February 27, 2014 11:57pm ET

986 230 30 51 156 MORE

How Old is Earth?
A 'Blue Marble' image of the Earth taken from the VIIRS instrument aboard NASA's Earth-observing satellite - Suomi NPP – on Jan. 4, 2012.
Credit: NASA/NOAA/GSFC/Suomi NPP/VIIRS/Norman Kuring

Since the planet Earth doesn't have a birth certificate to record its formation, scientists have spent hundreds of years struggling to determine the age of the planet. By dating the rocks in the ever-changing crust, as well as neighbors such as the moon and visiting meteorites, scientists have calculated that Earth is 4.54 billion years old, with an error range of 50 million years.
How old are your rocks?

Several attempts to scientifically date the planet have occurred over the past 400 years. Scientists attempted to predict the age based on changing sea levels, the time it took for Earth or the sun to cool to present temperatures, and the salinity of the ocean. As science progressed, these methods were proven to be unreliable; for instance, the rise and fall of the ocean was shown to be an ever-changing process rather than a gradually declining one.

In an effort to calculate the age of the planet, scientists turned to the rocks that cover its surface. However, because plate tectonics constantly changes and revamps the crust, the first rocks have long since been recycled, melted down and reformed into new outcrops.

In the early 20th century, scientists refined the process of radiometric dating. Earlier research had shown that isotopes of some radioactive elements decay into other elements at rates that can be easily predicted. By examining the existing elements, scientists can calculate the initial quantity, and thus how long it took for the elements to decay, allowing them to determine the age of the rock.


The oldest rocks on Earth found to date are the Acasta Gneisses in northwestern Canada near the Great Slave Lake, which are 4.03 billion years old. Rocks older than 3.5 billion years can be found on all continents. Greenland boasts the Isua Supracrustal rocks (3.7 to 3.8 billion years old), while rocks in Swaziland are 3.4 to 3.5 billion years. Samples in Western Australia run 3.4 to 3.6 billion years old.

Research groups in Australia found the oldest mineral grains on Earth. These tiny zirconium silicate crystals have ages that reach 4.3 billion years, making them the oldest materials found on Earth so far. Their source rocks have not yet been found.

The rocks and zircons set a lower limit on the age of Earth of 4.3 billion years, because the planet itself must be older than anything that lies on its surface.
Meet the neighbors

In an effort to further refine the age of Earth, scientists began to look outward. The material that formed the solar system was a cloud of dust and gas that surrounded the young sun. Gravitational interactions coalesced this material into the planets and moons at roughly the same time. By studying other bodies in the solar system, scientists are able to find out more about the early history of the planet.

The nearest body to Earth, the moon, does not suffer from the resurfacing problems that cover Earth's landscape. As such, rocks from early lunar history should be present on the moon. Samples returned from the Apollo and Luna missions revealed ages between 4.4 and 4.5 billion years, helping to constrain the age of Earth.

In addition to the large bodies of the solar system, scientists have also studied smaller rocky visitors to that fell to Earth. Meteorites spring from a variety of sources. Some are cast off from other planets after violent collisions, while others are leftover chunks from the early solar system that never grew large enough to form a cohesive body.

Although no rocks have been deliberately returned from Mars, samples exist in the form of meteorites that fell to Earth long ago, allowing scientists to make approximations about the age of rocks on the red planet. Some of these samples have been dated to 4.5 billion years old, supporting other calculations of the date of early planetary formation.

More than 70 meteorites have fallen to Earth to have their ages calculated by radiometric dating. The oldest of these have ages between 4.4 and 4.5 billion years.

Fifty thousand years ago, a rock hurled down from space to form Meteor Crater in Arizona. Shards of that asteroid have been collected from the crater rim and named for the nearby Canyon Diablo. In 1953, Clair Cameron Patterson measured ratios of lead isotopes in samples that put tight constraints on Earth's age.

The Canyon Diablo meteorite is important because it represents a class of meteorites with components that allow for more precise dating. Samples of the meteorite show a spread from 4.53 to 4.58 billion years. Scientists interpret this range as the time it took for the solar system to evolve, a gradual event that took place over approximately 50 million years.

By using not only the rocks on Earth but also information gathered about the system that surrounds it, scientists have been able to place the age of the Earth at approximately 4.54 billion years. For comparison, the Milky Way galaxy that contains the solar system is approximately 13.2 billion years old, while the universe itself has been dated to 13.8 billion years.

Related:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Answer the question. Is voluntary sterilization barbaric?

The way it's been floated about in this thread?

Yes.

50 million years compared to 4.5 billion is a very small margin of error for this kind of science, it would be less misleading for people who may not realise how much bigger a billion is than a million to put both ages in the same units. So the Earth is 4.54 +/- 0.05 billion years old, which is around 1% margin of error.

That's pretty damn good.

As for your argument that you heard it was 3.5 billion years old, you must have had really bad teachers since rocks recovered from the Apollo program proved it was likely between 4.4 and 4.5 billion years old and uranium-lead dating of meteorites in the 50s estimated it to be around 4.5 billion years old.

Not everything in science gets narrowed down to the level of accuracy as fundamental constants of the universe.

 Frazzled wrote:
I mean my question parameters. This thread is like 400 pages or so long now so I can't be responsible for additional parameters that may have flown about.

 d-usa wrote:
Nobody paid me for mine

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
I mean my question parameters. This thread is like 400 pages or so long now so I can't be responsible for additional parameters that may have flown about.

I didn't think I would have to spell it out for you so specifically, but yes, they you and Cuda are talking about it is barbaric. Paying poor people to sterilize themselves is barbaric, no matter which way you slice it.

Understand it now?

 Frazzled wrote:
Apollo program was primarily in the 70s.

 Frazzled wrote:
[Why? Many poor people pay for it.

Why is it barbaric to give poor people the option of a life of continued misery with having more children?

Why should the wealthy be the only ones who have the option of small families-thus focusing resources on education in a world where education takes priority over brawn?

Why do you hate poor people?

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Apollo program was primarily in the 70s.

Not really.

The program ran from 1961 until 1972, with all of the Moon landings taking place in the last three years of the program.

 Frazzled wrote:
Well being as you have to land on the moon to generally get moon rocks related to the Apollo Program and that didn't happen until the first one in 1969 I'd say I was correct.

Because not having children is easy. If you want to lift people from poverty, paying them to sterilize themselves isn't how to do it. The fact that I needed type that out for you says way more about me than it does you.

Why are you making idiotic strawman arguments?

Why do you like making bs baseless claims? Why do you waste everyone's time with your nonsense?

6. While the right of couples to have the number of children

they desire is accepted in a number of international instruments,

many couples in the world are unable to exercise that right

effectively. In many parts of the world, poor economic conditions,

social norms, inadequate knowledge of effective methods of family

regulation and the unavailability of contraceptive services result

in a situation in which couples have more children than they desire

or feel they can properly care for. In certain countries, on the

other hand, because of economic or biological factors, problems of

involuntary sterility and of subfecundity exist, with the result

that many couples have fewer children than they desire. Of course,

the degree of urgency attached to dealing with each of these two

situations depends upon the prevailing conditions within the

country in question.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Well being as you have to land on the moon to generally get moon rocks related to the Apollo Program and that didn't happen until the first one in 1969 I'd say I was correct.

That isn't what you said. You said the Apollo program was "primarily in the 70s," which I just showed you was incorrect.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
In other news, a pipeline in North Dakota has been leaking oil over a hill and into a creek and the people in charge of it didn't have a clue until some locals found it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/12/13/pipeline-150-miles-from-dakota-access-protests-leaks-176000-gallons-of-oil/?utm_term=.29d4ce4858d0