And again gaming gets the blame! [CNN
by James Laker (BurNinG) · in General Discussion · 09/14/2006 (7:10 am) · 85 replies
This makes me sick. So what if he played Games!!! I wanna kill the reporter who added that... No not because I played GTA too much! He seems to be an real idiot though. But you get them eveywhere!
CNN Report
Snippet from Story:
CNN Report
Snippet from Story:
NEW: Alleged gunman played Internet game about Columbine shootings
#62
Psychotic is what the idiot in this story was. That's what we call people who are disconnected from humanity. They have no empathy for other people and usually for animals as well.
I don't morally agree with games like the Calumbine game, but I don't think it actually caused him to go on a shooting spree. Do I think the person who makes these games should be able to make them? Yes. The only emotions those games would cause is sadness in the people who were directly affected by the incident. I think the families of the 13 people who died at Calumbine should sue the crap out of that guy for moral reasons, not because that game is going to cause someone to wake up one day and say "hey, I think I'm going to go shoot up a school because it was so fun to do it on that game." Get real. After playing Monopoly, do you go forclose on someone's property? Do you go throwing moltovs at ships down at the shipyard after playing battleship?
There are far, FAR more violent books and movies (saw anyone?) than any game I've ever seen.
Edit: You really loose credibility when you list stats that were a decade ago.
09/19/2006 (7:36 am)
Evil is not human nature, killing is. Every carnivore on the planet has killing in their instincts. Humanity is the only reason people don't kill. Morality doesn't even come into the equation. You either care about other people's lives, or you don't. You can't say "don't call them crazy because I've been in a ward for depression and am now certified crazy." Psychotic and crazy are waaaaaay different. Crazy is: mentally deranged; demented; insane. Psychotic is someone who has Psychosis which is: [bold]A severe mental disorder, with or without organic damage, characterized by derangement of personality and loss of contact with reality and causing deterioration of normal social functioning.[/bold]Psychotic is what the idiot in this story was. That's what we call people who are disconnected from humanity. They have no empathy for other people and usually for animals as well.
I don't morally agree with games like the Calumbine game, but I don't think it actually caused him to go on a shooting spree. Do I think the person who makes these games should be able to make them? Yes. The only emotions those games would cause is sadness in the people who were directly affected by the incident. I think the families of the 13 people who died at Calumbine should sue the crap out of that guy for moral reasons, not because that game is going to cause someone to wake up one day and say "hey, I think I'm going to go shoot up a school because it was so fun to do it on that game." Get real. After playing Monopoly, do you go forclose on someone's property? Do you go throwing moltovs at ships down at the shipyard after playing battleship?
There are far, FAR more violent books and movies (saw anyone?) than any game I've ever seen.
Edit: You really loose credibility when you list stats that were a decade ago.
#63
"Calibine"? Isn't that some sort of a lotion for itches?
09/19/2006 (11:04 am)
Quote:I don't morally agree with games like the Calibine game
"Calibine"? Isn't that some sort of a lotion for itches?
#64
09/19/2006 (11:57 am)
I'm tired, leave me alone =P 
#65
The human instinct is to survive, not to kill or injure others.
There is no need for name calling, even in this sercumstance. It is impossable for us to determine what was happening within his mind directly, Only can speculate as to what he was thinking. Chances are, he was on drugs.
True, a game will never cause a person to want to reinact it in real life. It is the person that does what they do, and choose to do it.
Not only are there more vioence in books and movies than in games, the movies show the violance right there in front of you. The books paint mental immages of the surroundings, and once can easilly find themselves being the main charecter of the books.
Nice place for that... "EDIT" as an after thaught, tho the sensus was 9 years ago, not alot has changed. And since I am not the one who created the sensus in the first place, it does not discredit me at all, it just shows they have not done a recent consensus of what is available on the internet. Or they chose not to display a more recent one cause it changed for worse, and do not wish to scare people away from it, or it has not changed enough to make an update on it. By editing yourself and adding it in after you already started posting just might discredit yourself. Think of it as going to court, The verdict is in, your edit to your testimony carries no weight, and might even discredit your entire testimony.
I sugest, before clicking post, to reread your post, and the post you are responding to, do not be hastey in your replies and think about things as you post them. Should you happen to forget something, with hope, you catch it before you click post.
Right and wrong... Is an average of the bassis of the people. 20 years ago, cussing even of the smallest of words was bad, now it is totally acceptable to say them. As we are discussing the morality of one game, the Morallity of Humans in general is what should be discussed, cause it is becomming more and more acceptable for things that were not acceptable 20-30 years ago. It is possiable that we might end up with real gladiators again, at the rate we are going.
And with that, I return to the void of silence from whence I came. Love and Light be with you.
09/19/2006 (1:53 pm)
Carnavores... Interesting, since when do humans actually bare resemlence to true meat eaters? The teeth are designed not for chewing raw meat, but for chewing on nuts. Go ahead, eat a piece of raw meat, see how long it takes for chewing, no nife, no fork, and also see the effects on the stomache of eating raw meat. True carnavors eat alot of raw meat. You will find that you can only eat a few bites before your stomache begins to turn, and you need to eat something else such as bread (wheat or rye is healthiest) to curb the sensations of illness. Humans need not kill to eat and remain healthy. I'll admit, I like a well prepaired and cooked piece of meat, and anything more than an 8 oz steak is overkill, considering it's only half a pound, a person would need alot of time to eat 1 whole cow. True Carnavours can eat as much as they weigh in a short amount of time. Wolves, who sometimes go months without eating anything. A single wolf can bring down and eat all the meat off a dear in a couple of hours. Thier bellies as big as they are and slugishly return to thier dens. Female wolves are notourious for this.The human instinct is to survive, not to kill or injure others.
There is no need for name calling, even in this sercumstance. It is impossable for us to determine what was happening within his mind directly, Only can speculate as to what he was thinking. Chances are, he was on drugs.
True, a game will never cause a person to want to reinact it in real life. It is the person that does what they do, and choose to do it.
Not only are there more vioence in books and movies than in games, the movies show the violance right there in front of you. The books paint mental immages of the surroundings, and once can easilly find themselves being the main charecter of the books.
Nice place for that... "EDIT" as an after thaught, tho the sensus was 9 years ago, not alot has changed. And since I am not the one who created the sensus in the first place, it does not discredit me at all, it just shows they have not done a recent consensus of what is available on the internet. Or they chose not to display a more recent one cause it changed for worse, and do not wish to scare people away from it, or it has not changed enough to make an update on it. By editing yourself and adding it in after you already started posting just might discredit yourself. Think of it as going to court, The verdict is in, your edit to your testimony carries no weight, and might even discredit your entire testimony.
I sugest, before clicking post, to reread your post, and the post you are responding to, do not be hastey in your replies and think about things as you post them. Should you happen to forget something, with hope, you catch it before you click post.
Right and wrong... Is an average of the bassis of the people. 20 years ago, cussing even of the smallest of words was bad, now it is totally acceptable to say them. As we are discussing the morality of one game, the Morallity of Humans in general is what should be discussed, cause it is becomming more and more acceptable for things that were not acceptable 20-30 years ago. It is possiable that we might end up with real gladiators again, at the rate we are going.
And with that, I return to the void of silence from whence I came. Love and Light be with you.
#66
You speak about stats of 'true carnivores' yet you don't post stats of 'humans.' Let's take a look at the two as well as that of a sheep (herbivore):
* The capacity of the stomach in the man and wolf is one-half gallon, but the sheep is a voluminous 8 gallons. Can you imagine filling up a stomach 8 gallons in size. Perhaps you could be a healthy vegan if you had an 8 gallon stomach.
* The man's digestive tract is five times his body length, very similar in size to the wolf's digestive tract which is seven times his body length. In contrast, the sheep's digestive tract is a whopping twenty-seven times his body length.
That is just two points out of several that scientists have found. Humans are classified as Carnivores. For a complete comparison of us versus a wolf, see http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/carn_herb_comparison.html.
Did you just tell me not to call the guy who went on a shooting spree at a college just because he wanted to die "in a blaze of gunfire" an idiot? Wow. I don't quite know what to say about that.
It wasn't an 'afterthought' it was a 'crap, I forgot to post about the census being so old thought'. Just because you did a search on 'internet census' doesn't mean the first hit is the only information that's available. If I cared enough to waste a few hours digging, I could come up with current internet use census data. I quickly found data on the US Census Bureau website for 2003 about internet use up to age 18, but nothing for adults, so I didn't bother linking it.
To say that not much has changed in the past 9 years with regards to the internet is completely ignorant. Go check the census data again my friend, you'll find that many, MANY more people now use the internet and nearly every house in the us has a computer with internet access now. A LOT has changed with regards to technology and the internet and its use in the past 9 years.
Ahahahahahaha. Wow. Thanks. I needed that laugh.
*points at the edit button* That's the beauty of the edit button, I don't have to reread 5 times to make sure I got everything.
Books with sci-fi in them were considered evil back in the day, should we start burning Star Trek
Edit: there's that damn edit tag again!
09/19/2006 (2:53 pm)
@Mogartin - Oh boy. I better stop replying before this gets into a religious discussion. We don't eat raw meat now (most of the time) because we've evolved into what you know of today. Even when the first homo-sapiens came about, they were still raw meat eaters with far sharper teeth. The front of your teeth are still for tearing meat, only the back teeth are used for 'grinding.' Carnivores eat meat, period. Cooked, non-cooked, deli-style; it just doesn't matter so long as it's meat.You speak about stats of 'true carnivores' yet you don't post stats of 'humans.' Let's take a look at the two as well as that of a sheep (herbivore):
* The capacity of the stomach in the man and wolf is one-half gallon, but the sheep is a voluminous 8 gallons. Can you imagine filling up a stomach 8 gallons in size. Perhaps you could be a healthy vegan if you had an 8 gallon stomach.
* The man's digestive tract is five times his body length, very similar in size to the wolf's digestive tract which is seven times his body length. In contrast, the sheep's digestive tract is a whopping twenty-seven times his body length.
That is just two points out of several that scientists have found. Humans are classified as Carnivores. For a complete comparison of us versus a wolf, see http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/carn_herb_comparison.html.
Quote: There is no need for name calling, even in this sercumstance. It is impossable for us to determine what was happening within his mind directly, Only can speculate as to what he was thinking. Chances are, he was on drugs.
Did you just tell me not to call the guy who went on a shooting spree at a college just because he wanted to die "in a blaze of gunfire" an idiot? Wow. I don't quite know what to say about that.
Quote: Nice place for that... "EDIT" as an after thaught, tho the sensus was 9 years ago, not alot has changed. And since I am not the one who created the sensus in the first place, it does not discredit me at all, it just shows they have not done a recent consensus of what is available on the internet. Or they chose not to display a more recent one cause it changed for worse, and do not wish to scare people away from it, or it has not changed enough to make an update on it.
It wasn't an 'afterthought' it was a 'crap, I forgot to post about the census being so old thought'. Just because you did a search on 'internet census' doesn't mean the first hit is the only information that's available. If I cared enough to waste a few hours digging, I could come up with current internet use census data. I quickly found data on the US Census Bureau website for 2003 about internet use up to age 18, but nothing for adults, so I didn't bother linking it.
To say that not much has changed in the past 9 years with regards to the internet is completely ignorant. Go check the census data again my friend, you'll find that many, MANY more people now use the internet and nearly every house in the us has a computer with internet access now. A LOT has changed with regards to technology and the internet and its use in the past 9 years.
Quote: By editing yourself and adding it in after you already started posting just might discredit yourself. Think of it as going to court, The verdict is in, your edit to your testimony carries no weight, and might even discredit your entire testimony.
Ahahahahahaha. Wow. Thanks. I needed that laugh.
Quote: I sugest, before clicking post, to reread your post, and the post you are responding to, do not be hastey in your replies and think about things as you post them. Should you happen to forget something, with hope, you catch it before you click post.
*points at the edit button* That's the beauty of the edit button, I don't have to reread 5 times to make sure I got everything.
Quote: Right and wrong... Is an average of the bassis of the people. 20 years ago, cussing even of the smallest of words was bad, now it is totally acceptable to say them. As we are discussing the morality of one game, the Morallity of Humans in general is what should be discussed, cause it is becomming more and more acceptable for things that were not acceptable 20-30 years ago. It is possiable that we might end up with real gladiators again, at the rate we are going.
Books with sci-fi in them were considered evil back in the day, should we start burning Star Trek
Edit: there's that damn edit tag again!
#67
1) The human body wasn't designed, it evolved.
2) Teeth are not an indicator of a species carniverous nature. Emperor penguins, for instance, do not have teeth, and they live on fish and other marine animals.
3) Human teeth are the teeth of omnivores, useful for eating meat, vegetables and other things, not just nuts.
4) There are entire cultures that eat more than just a few bites of raw meat at a time. Sushi is a good example. Please don't invent problems that humans don't have.
5) All carnivores do not eat their body weight in a "short" amount of time for most reasonable definitions of "short". Some do, some don't; this isn't an indicator of "carnivore". Since you seem to know nothing, really about wolves, let me educate you. They need between 2 and 5 lbs of food per day, usually eaten in larger amount, up to about 20 lbs at a time. Since they weigh, on average, about 100 lbs, that means they eat their body weight in about a month or so. I wouldn't call that "short".
6) Your statistics are nearly 10 years old, and you never provided a source, so that makes it all quite questionable. Even if they *were* accurate 10 years ago, I cannot believe they're still as applicable.
7) 10% of the US is *not* in psycho wards. First off, there is no such place as a "psycho" ward. If you mean in a mental hospitals, you're still wrong. I would *love* to know where you found that load of crap out. That would mean that 30 MILLION people are in mental hospitals in the US -- I would be absolutely SHOCKED if there were 30 million people in any hospital for any reason at one time. Maybe you're in a place where people go nuts more often than where I am, but out of every 10 people I know, one of them certainly is not located in a hospital at any time.
I'm too bored to keep this going, but I think I've proved my point: I'm pretty sure that whatever arguments you're making can be safely ignored simply by looking at your track record of accuracy (currently hovering at or near 0%). When you have something to say that you can document, please come back, but until they I suggest you spend your time learning about the subjects you feel you need to talk about. You won't embarass yourself that way.
09/19/2006 (2:57 pm)
@Mogartin: I don't even know where to begin with you. You need to stop making shit up, or at least stop blindly believing things you hear from I don't even know who.1) The human body wasn't designed, it evolved.
2) Teeth are not an indicator of a species carniverous nature. Emperor penguins, for instance, do not have teeth, and they live on fish and other marine animals.
3) Human teeth are the teeth of omnivores, useful for eating meat, vegetables and other things, not just nuts.
4) There are entire cultures that eat more than just a few bites of raw meat at a time. Sushi is a good example. Please don't invent problems that humans don't have.
5) All carnivores do not eat their body weight in a "short" amount of time for most reasonable definitions of "short". Some do, some don't; this isn't an indicator of "carnivore". Since you seem to know nothing, really about wolves, let me educate you. They need between 2 and 5 lbs of food per day, usually eaten in larger amount, up to about 20 lbs at a time. Since they weigh, on average, about 100 lbs, that means they eat their body weight in about a month or so. I wouldn't call that "short".
6) Your statistics are nearly 10 years old, and you never provided a source, so that makes it all quite questionable. Even if they *were* accurate 10 years ago, I cannot believe they're still as applicable.
7) 10% of the US is *not* in psycho wards. First off, there is no such place as a "psycho" ward. If you mean in a mental hospitals, you're still wrong. I would *love* to know where you found that load of crap out. That would mean that 30 MILLION people are in mental hospitals in the US -- I would be absolutely SHOCKED if there were 30 million people in any hospital for any reason at one time. Maybe you're in a place where people go nuts more often than where I am, but out of every 10 people I know, one of them certainly is not located in a hospital at any time.
I'm too bored to keep this going, but I think I've proved my point: I'm pretty sure that whatever arguments you're making can be safely ignored simply by looking at your track record of accuracy (currently hovering at or near 0%). When you have something to say that you can document, please come back, but until they I suggest you spend your time learning about the subjects you feel you need to talk about. You won't embarass yourself that way.
#68
75 + 22 + 6 + 1 + 1 = 105. Last I checked, the amounts of census data all ends up at 100%. Then again, that last 5% might be mental wards ;).
09/19/2006 (5:35 pm)
Lol. Well said Tim. I just noticed something too. Look at his 'sensus' data:Quote:75% of the internet is actually envoloped by Adult content, 22% gaming, 6% news, 1% education, 1% other. (Last sensus from 1997)
75 + 22 + 6 + 1 + 1 = 105. Last I checked, the amounts of census data all ends up at 100%. Then again, that last 5% might be mental wards ;).
#69
09/20/2006 (6:33 am)
@Jonathon: No, no, that's the 5% margin of stupid.
#70
09/20/2006 (7:04 am)
@Tim lol. Nice. I think Neo had it dead on:Quote:45% of all statistics are made up on the spot ;p
#71
I'm not defending him, because I agree about statistics. However, statistics usually have a margin of error, which could make for greater (or less than) 100%.
09/20/2006 (8:27 am)
Quote:75 + 22 + 6 + 1 + 1 = 105. Last I checked, the amounts of census data all ends up at 100%. Then again, that last 5% might be mental wards ;).
I'm not defending him, because I agree about statistics. However, statistics usually have a margin of error, which could make for greater (or less than) 100%.
#72
For census data? When I did heavy research of census data a few years back I remember that they either equalled 100% or were less than 100% with the remainder being considered 'unanswered'
09/20/2006 (9:14 am)
Quote:I'm not defending him, because I agree about statistics. However, statistics usually have a margin of error, which could make for greater (or less than) 100%.
For census data? When I did heavy research of census data a few years back I remember that they either equalled 100% or were less than 100% with the remainder being considered 'unanswered'
#73
09/20/2006 (11:00 am)
Hot topic guys I know, one close to the heart (and wallet) for all of us, but let's keep it civil please. 
#74
09/20/2006 (3:10 pm)
Quote:This is quite possibly the most useful information in this thread.
Goth chicks are hawt!
#75
09/20/2006 (4:13 pm)
@Pat - it's actually incorrect. Only 73% of Goth chicks are hawt, then 22% are UBER hawt, 6% are l33t h4wt, and 8% are unaccounted for.
#76
09/20/2006 (4:41 pm)
At first glance, Jonathon's post may seem statistically inaccurate. This is because you fail to consider that every girl is just a Long Island and a Rocky Horror Picture Show performance away from goth.
#77
@Jonathon, I think we should just stick to "Goth chicks are hawt!"
09/20/2006 (5:06 pm)
I dont get Stephens post, does he mean Hot Topic the store, or this thread?@Jonathon, I think we should just stick to "Goth chicks are hawt!"
#78
No, I did not say, "Don't call him an idot", indeed he was a sparatic, moron. Just because someone is "psyco", does not mean they are stupid, and what he did was really dumb.
No worries, I agree to disagree on the choice of names. And this will not turn into a religious debate unless someone wants to try to attack the religious aspect of it... Hmmm, Thinking about it, At least they are not saying,"The devil made him do it." (My purpose was fulfilled when I made someone laugh... Cause I like to make people laugh, and have fun. And each one of my posts were ment to be the "Lighter side of..." Sometimes it's the simple things that make the differance, I had to learn the hard way...)
I am sure you will notice, my posts had really been directed towards Jon, and had really not been responding to others. But since you persist, here are my responces.
***Start of flame***
@Tim- I do not have to submit anything, if you are truely interested in findout out the stats, you can look for yourself. And I have no teeth, and I still eat cooked meat, proving that you do not need insizers to tear through good meat that is properly cooked. Crackers, nuts, and the like tear up my gums, unless it's in the form of a paste. And seriously, female wolves do tend to eat more meat than male wolves, is why I singled them out. They bring food back for thier growing cubs, They are the ones you should be looking into. And doing a compairason on the stumache size/intestinal track length is only part of it, the viscosity of the wolf's stomach is more elastic than the human's, and the enzimes produced are also different, they break down the food more rapidly than in humans. Thier intestinal track is unable to handle vegitables, yet they each grass when they have an upset stomache. Why did I learn these things, and how, observing my female and male wolves when I was younger. You should learn that you can learn more to observe than to disect.
* Also, goto a mental hospital, find the next closest one, travers the distance, the bigger the city, has more mental hospitals available. You can just about make a circle with them, calculate the number of beds in each, then add for hospitals, in the senile department, aka Allshimers wing (Unfortunatelly I am unsure how to spell this word, and dictionary.com did not help this go round), Then multiply the numbers by the number of cities dotted accross the USA, and you will wind up with more than 10 million strong. (this does not include the few and far between places in rural and town areas)
***End Flame***
@Neo- Statistics are not made up on the spot, unless it's someone that had not done the leg work, or read about it soemwhere. And I admit, I had not bothered to look in the past 9 years, for the basic reason, that the area I live in, are starting to get internet access, and to ask around my neihbors, the ones with internet are those that moved out here from the city within the past year. Those that have lived out here most of thier lives still do not have internet, and a few of thier children are getting dial-up. It is not as common placed as you may think it is. Sure more and more in the cities are getting, or have the internet, not so much in rural areas. Most young men are going online for just that "Adult content", and for those that do not know what I mean by Adult content, it means you are more than likely under 18, and I refuse to tell you about it, go ask your parrents about the birds and the beez, the flowers and the trees...
Jeeze I am getting old...
09/21/2006 (3:51 am)
Jonathon, I am glad you had a good laugh. And I never noticed the 105% ordeal before... However, have you never given your 110% before? So giving 105% must mean they found a few extras to compliment thier resourses?No, I did not say, "Don't call him an idot", indeed he was a sparatic, moron. Just because someone is "psyco", does not mean they are stupid, and what he did was really dumb.
No worries, I agree to disagree on the choice of names. And this will not turn into a religious debate unless someone wants to try to attack the religious aspect of it... Hmmm, Thinking about it, At least they are not saying,"The devil made him do it." (My purpose was fulfilled when I made someone laugh... Cause I like to make people laugh, and have fun. And each one of my posts were ment to be the "Lighter side of..." Sometimes it's the simple things that make the differance, I had to learn the hard way...)
I am sure you will notice, my posts had really been directed towards Jon, and had really not been responding to others. But since you persist, here are my responces.
***Start of flame***
@Tim- I do not have to submit anything, if you are truely interested in findout out the stats, you can look for yourself. And I have no teeth, and I still eat cooked meat, proving that you do not need insizers to tear through good meat that is properly cooked. Crackers, nuts, and the like tear up my gums, unless it's in the form of a paste. And seriously, female wolves do tend to eat more meat than male wolves, is why I singled them out. They bring food back for thier growing cubs, They are the ones you should be looking into. And doing a compairason on the stumache size/intestinal track length is only part of it, the viscosity of the wolf's stomach is more elastic than the human's, and the enzimes produced are also different, they break down the food more rapidly than in humans. Thier intestinal track is unable to handle vegitables, yet they each grass when they have an upset stomache. Why did I learn these things, and how, observing my female and male wolves when I was younger. You should learn that you can learn more to observe than to disect.
* Also, goto a mental hospital, find the next closest one, travers the distance, the bigger the city, has more mental hospitals available. You can just about make a circle with them, calculate the number of beds in each, then add for hospitals, in the senile department, aka Allshimers wing (Unfortunatelly I am unsure how to spell this word, and dictionary.com did not help this go round), Then multiply the numbers by the number of cities dotted accross the USA, and you will wind up with more than 10 million strong. (this does not include the few and far between places in rural and town areas)
***End Flame***
@Neo- Statistics are not made up on the spot, unless it's someone that had not done the leg work, or read about it soemwhere. And I admit, I had not bothered to look in the past 9 years, for the basic reason, that the area I live in, are starting to get internet access, and to ask around my neihbors, the ones with internet are those that moved out here from the city within the past year. Those that have lived out here most of thier lives still do not have internet, and a few of thier children are getting dial-up. It is not as common placed as you may think it is. Sure more and more in the cities are getting, or have the internet, not so much in rural areas. Most young men are going online for just that "Adult content", and for those that do not know what I mean by Adult content, it means you are more than likely under 18, and I refuse to tell you about it, go ask your parrents about the birds and the beez, the flowers and the trees...
Jeeze I am getting old...
#79
09/21/2006 (7:17 am)
@Morgatin - did you read that site I sent you on the comparisons of the human vs wolf vs sheep? Why are you still arguing a fact that you haven't done research on? Just because you watched some wolves when you were growing up doesn't make you an expert on how their digestive system works. Since there seems to be no talking to you, I'm going to end my replies at this point. My suggestion to you is to do the same as you are not improving your image.
#80
1) I am not going to research your claims. Either prove they're not lies, or expect everyone to ignore them.
2) You completely missed my point about the wolves. You're arguing the wrong thing, here. I merely pointed out to you that what you wrote was false, and I provided documentation for that *fact*.
3) You've just changed your numbers with your claims about mental hospitals. More that 10 million strong does not equal 10% -- that equals 3.3%, and that number is also ridiculously high. Additionally, your method of coming to that number isn't very practical. I mean, are you telling me that you surveyed the "psycho" hospitals in your area, and then did all the math to apply it to the USA on the whole, just for us? That's pretty committed (ha ha ha). Again, please don't ask us to do your grunt work. You're making the claim, so either back it up or shut it up.
The biggest irony is that you made these claims with under the heading "reality check", and yet you're steadfastly refusing to face reality. Sorry, no dice, I still can't take any argument you might have about media effects on youth personality because you've been shown to be an unreliable source.
09/21/2006 (7:51 am)
@Mogartin: Just because you say something doesn't make it true. Your arguments are ridiculous and without any source to back you up everyone is going to continue to assume that you're making shit up.1) I am not going to research your claims. Either prove they're not lies, or expect everyone to ignore them.
2) You completely missed my point about the wolves. You're arguing the wrong thing, here. I merely pointed out to you that what you wrote was false, and I provided documentation for that *fact*.
3) You've just changed your numbers with your claims about mental hospitals. More that 10 million strong does not equal 10% -- that equals 3.3%, and that number is also ridiculously high. Additionally, your method of coming to that number isn't very practical. I mean, are you telling me that you surveyed the "psycho" hospitals in your area, and then did all the math to apply it to the USA on the whole, just for us? That's pretty committed (ha ha ha). Again, please don't ask us to do your grunt work. You're making the claim, so either back it up or shut it up.
The biggest irony is that you made these claims with under the heading "reality check", and yet you're steadfastly refusing to face reality. Sorry, no dice, I still can't take any argument you might have about media effects on youth personality because you've been shown to be an unreliable source.
Torque 3D Owner iHugMedia