Jump to content

iNow

Senior Members
  • Posts

    24076
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    156

iNow last won the day on November 23

iNow had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Location
    Iowa
  • Interests
    http://www.planetary.org/explore/space-topics/earth/pale-blue-dot.html
  • Favorite Area of Science
    .

Recent Profile Visitors

84159 profile views

iNow's Achievements

SuperNerd

SuperNerd (12/13)

6.2k

Reputation

  1. So, if China tries to take control of Taiwan… and intelligence suggests it’s more likely to happen now,than it has been for decades… should the US and any country considered an ally respond? How might they respond?
  2. Who’s upset? All I said is I’d prefer realistic responses over pie in the sky horseshit. It seems you have nothing but horseshit and off topic nonsense to add. Again, you’re encouraged to reread the thread title. There’s an actual topic here to explore. Tourism to China is not it. Again, this might be an interesting topic to explore. Consider doing so in another thread. This one has a specific topic. You’re responses suggests you struggle to comprehend this. Then stop posting to this thread, because that’s what it’s about. This is pretty basic. Stop trolling.
  3. Do you think Canada would join the US if the US tried to forcibly stop it?
  4. Your overconfidence in your opinion is staggering. You speak as if your assertions are fact. Do you know next weeks lotto numbers, too? You shared no answers. You explicitly stated you wouldn’t answer me until I answered your total red herring questions back to me. It’s be great if you’d stop trolling the thread. Again, not the topic here. The premise of the thread is that it already happened, what happens next. I hope this clarifies. Perhaps, but AGAIN… not relevant here. See OP and thread title if you remain confused. I appreciate this makes sense academically, but would never happen in reality. Daily life is too dependent on them. Hoping to remain focused on realistic responses that aren’t akin to saying a magical unicorn will solve it.
  5. Open your own thread. That’s not the topic here.
  6. So oil and minerals out of Ukraine and semiconductors out of Taiwan. Any sanctions imposed if either get annexed would only hurt our own pocketbooks and our own economy in the US. So, sanctions as a response seem unlikely. Does NATO declare war to push back if this happens? If the US goes in alone, do other nations follow like in Iraq?
  7. Exactly. This plus the increasing rise of authoritarian tendencies and simple minded support for narrow populist messages across the planet has me wondering what happens next and what a weakened US could even achieve. Another challenge is that people (John Q. Public) are so distracted and occupied by catnip social issues like anti mask and anti vax and abortion and inflation and related topics that they never even bother to engage with the actual big deal issues like hundreds of thousands of troops preparing to invade sovereign countries.
  8. Intelligence suggests Russia is planning to invade Ukraine in January apparently with the intent to take it over. Likewise, China has been stepping up plans to seize Taiwan. Have been talking about it for years, but seem to sense more opportunity in todays global political climate. Should US respond if/when either of those two things happen? If so, how and for how long? Does your answer change if both events happen at the same time? Game it out…
  9. When it happens (which all available evidence thus far indicates as the most likely outcome), that definitely won’t be the reason.
  10. iNow

    Fake News

    Is the claim that they make errors sometimes and ideologues often blow those up into pretend scandals, or is the claim that they actively lie and spread disinformation knowingly on purpose? Asking bc you’re only sharing evidence in support of the first.
  11. I’ve been called worse things by better people
  12. This might be an interesting question to explore, especially in its own thread. Here in this thread, however, it's not terribly relevant, nor does it impact any of the arguments I've made. It's a bit like asking me to explain abiogenesis in an evolution thread. Related, but separate. Thank you for sharing. This too is entirely irrelevant to the actual discussion happening here.
  13. Irrelevant. Embedded in your comment is the assumption that ability to bare children is definitive when determining sex. It's very clearly not, and this point remains valid EVEN IF if we stipulate the point against which I've been arguing and even if we proceed with the "THERE ARE ONLY 2 SEXES!!!1!!2!!one!11!!" mindset. Why? Because we still call individuals female when a) they are infertile, b) they are postmenopausal, and c) they are prepubescent. If one continues classifying any of the above 3 populations as "female," then by definition we know ability to bare children is not definitive in terms of sex classification. I understand, but many are. This is necessary, but insufficient in terms of answering the actual topic of this thread. Also, almost no matter what definition gets chosen for those 2 binary groups, we will continue to have outliers which mandate a 3rd category of "other." No, in neither the animal kingdom nor in humans. It's sometimes useful to say there are only 2 sexes, but it is never accurate.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.