RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals?

RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

thompsonx -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 3:21:27 PM)
quote: Since maarijuana is not a food crop the mbuti are in fact exclusively hunter/gatherers. It would appear that your time at university was not well spent. The growing of any crop still constitutes farming, Please validate and it is a substance that has numerous uses. Ancient hunter-gatherer societies exclusively relied on hunting and gathering. cite please

dcnovice -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 3:28:08 PM)
<fr> What do the Mbuti have to do with food stamps?

Anaxagoras -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 6:07:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: When you start validating your opinions I will stop asking you to validate your opinions. Yet another misrepresentation of what you do. You frequently respond to myself and others with a "thats like YOUR opinion" response by way of dismissal. It is not an innocent request to validate opinions. If you cannot validate your opinion it remains opinion. The fact that you cannot speaks directly to your credibility. LOL another volley of your messages. I do "validate" my opinions. You have not done so. That however was not the point here when I made that remark. Let me reiterate since you have difficulty understanding. You proffer views such as "Thats YOUR opinion" repeatedly, not in an attempt to seek validation but by way of dismissing other viewpoints. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: I asked you for a link NOT an isbn number for a book which you know very well none would bother wasting time to track down. You seek to engage me in discussion but refuse to educate yourself with the specifics of the discussion...why??? I don't seek to engage you in any sort of discussion because I know discussion with you is next to impossible. I am educated on the specifics of the discussion with regard to pre-Stone Age technology because I clearly know far more about archaeology than you. I merely requested a source that was accessible. You could easily provide such a thing if you bothered. In fact another provided a source that referred to Turnbull's work and quoted a sentence where he said "pre-Stone Age" technology, to which I linked to a source that quoted Turnbull as stating the Mbuti have a stone age economy. Once again you are very much behind the discussion. quote: There are numerous archaeological/anthropological resources online so it should be extremely easy to cite and link a source that clearly states the Mbuti are pre-Stone Age. They are not pre-Stone Age. The last pre-Stone Age creatures to which there may have been a link in human evolution were the Australopithecines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecine who were effectively apes that evolved into the homo species about three million years ago. I suggest you make some effort to understand the basics on a given topic before pronouncing on it like a professor. I would suggest that you fail to understand the difference between "the stone age" and a pre stone age culture. The professor has spoken... so please go do your homework and your reading assignment before any more of your post fill this discussion board with ignorance. Ah so you are the "professor" - quite a testiment to an extraordinary ego. Provide a link to legitimise your assertion or you have been shown to talk more nonsense. It is waffle to suggest I don't understand the difference "understand "between "the stone age" and a pre stone age culture". Clarify exactly what you mean by the two terms and why I misunderstand them. I suspect you can't as otherwise you would have done so already.

Anaxagoras -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 6:45:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: Since maarijuana is not a food crop the mbuti are in fact exclusively hunter/gatherers. It would appear that your time at university was not well spent. The growing of any crop still constitutes farming, Please validate OMG are you not familiar with the word "farming"? Here is a definition http://www.thefreedictionary.com/farming "To cultivate or produce a crop on." quote: and it is a substance that has numerous uses. Ancient hunter-gatherer societies exclusively relied on hunting and gathering. cite please Here you go http://science.howstuffworks.com/marijuana1.htm quote: The marijuana plant has many uses. Its stiff, fibrous stalk can be used to make lots of products, from food to ship sails. The stalk is comprised of two parts -- the hurd and the bast. The bast provides fibers that can be woven into many fabrics. These fibers (also called hemp) are woven to create canvas, which has been used to make ship sails for centuries. The hurd provides pulp to make paper, oil to make paints and varnishes, and seed for food. Marijuana plants produce a high-protein, high-carbohydrate seed that is used in granola and cereals. Hemp oil and seed contain only trace amounts of psychoactive chemicals. and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer - the point that ancient hunter-gatherers exclusively relied on hunting and gathering should be obvious: quote: Hunting and gathering was the ancestral subsistence mode of Homo, and all modern humans were hunter-gatherers until around 10,000 years ago. Only a few contemporary societies are classified as hunter-gatherers, and many supplement, sometimes extensively, their foraging activity with farming and/or keeping animals. …the "pure hunter-gatherer" disappeared not long after colonial (or even agricultural) contact began, nothing meaningful can be learned about prehistoric hunter-gatherers from studies of modern ones (Kelly,[26] 24-29; see Wilmsen[27])

Anaxagoras -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 6:50:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Collin turnbull is the primary source. His book the forrest people which I even gave you the isbn. BTW I wondered why I hadn't heard of Colin Turnbull. He is hardly a source par excellence for you to cite, and it explains why you have such a romanticised view of the Mbuti: I have no romanticised view of anyone. What on earth would give you that idea? Your "discussion" with fucktoyprincess. quote: quote: Turnbull was an unconventional scholar who rejected neutrality. He idealized the BaMbuti and reviled the Ik, and described the latter as lacking any sense of altruism, in that they force their children out of their homes at the age of three, and gorge on whatever occasional excesses of food they might find until they became sick, rather than save or share. However, several anthropologists have since argued that a particularly serious famine suffered by the Ik during the period of Turnbull's visit may have distorted their normal behavior and customs, and some passages in his book make it clear that the behavior and customs of the Ik during the period he describes were drastically different from what was normal for them before they were uprooted from their original way of life. Bernd Heine quite thoroughly refutes Turnbull's evaluation of the Ik in a 1985 article in Africa, The Mountain People: Some Notes on the Ik of North-Eastern Uganda. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Turnbull quote: His is a peer review of turnbull's work. Have you read the peer reviews of heine's work? Have you read turnbull's work? Have you read heine's total review.? I have and if you would like to discuss it we can do it here or in a seperate thread. But: Since you would need to read turnbull's work for heine's work to be interpreted properly it is unlikely that you would do so since you have already stated that if it is not in a link to something on the net you are incapable of being troubled to actually read a book about the subject which you wish to argue about. Note I said argue because so far you have shown no interest in discussion. I have not read Heine's review but he is a highly regarded anthropologist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernd_Heine whilst Turnbull's work is tainted to say the very last. I find it quite difficult to believe you read Heine's peer review at all because you have displayed a profound ignorance of the issues appertaining to a pre-Stone Age definition. Of course you will blather about how I cannot discuss the matter because I have not read the text but that is another nonsense. The assertions and counter assertions can be reiterated. You can lay out the arguments here, and any refutations of Heine's you wish to make, if you wish to discuss the matter. I suggest you do so and I will address your opinions in depth. If you do not I will take it as a given you have not read the texts, and are using this assertion as a tactic to avoid discussion as is obviously the case thus far.

Anaxagoras -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 7:14:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras I asked you for a link NOT an ISBN number which you know very well that few would bother taking the time to track down. No, you asked for a link to a creditable source. Collin turnbull is the primary source. His book the forrest people which I even gave you the isbn. If you cannot trouble yourself to consult the primary source then why are you in this discussion? Do not tell me what I asked you for. This is the Internet and I asked you for a link. It is as simple as that. Colin Turnbull is just one of a number of primary sources on the Mbuti. quote: Now you are trying to be clever by playing with words. I did not say link me to a credible source. I stated: quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras You are the one who made the claim so you provide a link to a reputable source that states Mbuti are a pre-Stone Age society. Good luck finding one... [:D] "providing a link to a reputable source" can only mean one thing especially on an internet forum. Once again that is your opinion. If facts,for you, only exist on the net then those of us who know how to use a library will always be at an advantage in intellectual discussion with those who limit themselves so. No it is a fact based on reading what I wrote properly rather than opportunistically trying to mangle it to suit an agenda. I had stated quote: ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras You are the one who made the claim so you provide a link to a reputable source that states Mbuti are a pre-Stone Age society. Good luck finding one... [:D] when you had already referred to the book by Turnbull. Thus I could not have meant anything other than an Internet link. Facts do not exist on the internet or in the books found in libraries. They merely recount facts. I also go to libraries but they are inherently finite resources. Thus I request a link as anyone else would when requesting some back up of a contentious assertion. If you genuinely misunderstood my initial request, which is unlikely, I nonetheless clarified it but once again you have failed to carry out such a modest request. By contrast you requested I backup some assertions I made, to which I provided links without causing any fuss. quote: It would be all too easy for you to wiggle out of this by saying seek out a book. What a joke. Post up a link to verify your assertion and I will read it. This from someone who will not read a book[8\|] As I already stated, it is not the reading of such a book but the time and perhaps cost involved in seeking it out. The onus is on you to provide a reasonably accessible verification. quote: It would be extremely easy for you to justify your assertion that either pre-Stone Age people exist today as they would constitute a classification or that the Mbuti are pre-Stone Age. Either that or scan in the relevant section or page of the book and post it up on the forum. I am not interested in holding your hand and leading you from point a to point b. If you are not an adult and capable of finding a book and reading it then I can be of no help to you. Ah yes, here is a good illustration of your hypocrisy. You demand verification for all manner of arguments but flatly refuse to provide what would be an extremely easy link to find with a moment of Googling. Yet you expect me and others to waste a good deal of time seeking out old discredited works to verify your assertions. How very absurd. [:D]

JulianVanPatten -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 7:18:59 PM)
Woah when did people become so sensitive? This gal was making an analogy to illustrate a serious point about the dangers of the disadvantaged becoming dependent on the government and using a little levity in order to do so. Maybe if everybody getting upset about this would volunteer a little time to teach a poor person some marketable skills instead of being self-righteous and ineffectual American society would start to get up to speed and ready to compete in the global marketplace where we seem to be getting our butts kicked by the Asians!

Raiikun -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 7:23:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx I cannot be wrong about what you choose to see because you have posted what you choose to see. Wrong. What I've posted is the conclusions that arose from what I see. quote: When you wish to have a serious discussion please come back. Says the person whose response was "You're wrong" with no substance; just an ad hominem logical fallacy. Go back and read what you wrote. When you are interested in serious discucssion please come back. If you are only interested in telling us how big your dick is I am one of those who is not interested. Now an ad hominem and a strawman. The fallacies are multiplying. :p

tazzygirl -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 7:23:48 PM)
Whoa... new poster alert! Honey, not many here are going to buy what you are selling. The unemployment rate is 15%. You do the math. [;)] But climb down off the high horse. Not everyone getting benefits at this point and time are unskilled or stupid. Honestly, the stereotypes people like you come up with is something else.

JulianVanPatten -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 7:29:09 PM)
Hey you know what Ronald Reagan said, "Capitalism is the cruelest system in the world except for all the others." Back in business school they taught us that America has always and always will run according to boom and bust cycles. Sure, some people go through some discomfort in the bust cycles but let's face it, the people who saved their money and worked hard are going to weather the current cycle just fine. As for the people who didn't plan ahead for the lean times...it's sad but capitalism needs cautionary tales. The important thing is to get to work rebuilding the economy and just quit whining. Being poor is supposed to be uncomfortable, that's what encourages people to work hard and escape poverty. Have we really forgotten that? quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Whoa... new poster alert! Honey, not many here are going to buy what you are selling. The unemployment rate is 15%. You do the math. [;)] But climb down off the high horse. Not everyone getting benefits at this point and time are unskilled or stupid. Honestly, the stereotypes people like you come up with is something else.

Lucylastic -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 7:33:23 PM)
I smell socks, or a comedian I havent decided yet

dcnovice -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 7:42:53 PM)
quote: Hey you know what Ronald Reagan said, "Capitalism is the cruelest system in the world except for all the others." Wasn't that Churchill on democracy? quote: Sure, some people go through some discomfort in the bust cycles but let's face it, the people who saved their money and worked hard are going to weather the current cycle just fine. "Discomfort" seems a rather mild term for losing one's livelihood and perhaps one's home. I've read stories of folks who worked plenty hard, saved as much as they could, and are still in dire straits today, thanks to lengthy unemployment, You seem remarkably glib about other people's suffering, I can see why Reagan is a hero of yours.

JulianVanPatten -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 7:50:19 PM)
Listen, buddy, I'm not going to try to snow a snowman here. I am playing catchup trying to understand this whole financial collapse dealie, but I've been reading through Forbes and Business Week and some graphs at the Economist and to be candid I don't see why I am supposed to feel too bad for a bunch of people who bought houses they couldn't afford and then discovered a few years later that nothing in this world is free. I'm not happy about the collapse but it really seems like one of those hiccups in the system, like a painful correction and the people who got hurt the worst were the ones trying to ride the farthest on the gravy train. I don't want to sound heartless, but nothing in this world is free and maybe some of the people who are trying to crawl out of holes they've dug for themselves have learned a valuable lesson. Maybe our whole society has.

tazzygirl -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/10/2012 8:09:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic I smell socks, or a comedian I havent decided yet Definitely not funny.. if you get my meaning.

thompsonx -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/14/2012 7:09:12 PM)
quote: Now an ad hominem and a strawman. The fallacies are multiplying. :p You clearly have no clue what those words mean.

thompsonx -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/14/2012 7:10:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice <fr> What do the Mbuti have to do with food stamps? They do not get them nor need them. They help one another instead of trying to see how much money they can acquire.

SternSkipper -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/14/2012 7:14:32 PM)
quote: They do not get them nor need them. They help one another instead of trying to see how much money they can acquire. Do you think food pantries and banks are an effort to kind of replicate that behavior? Not that I'm saying either is based on or knows about the other. Just wondering if you think a similar principal is in play.

erieangel -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/14/2012 8:43:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JulianVanPatten Woah when did people become so sensitive? This gal was making an analogy to illustrate a serious point about the dangers of the disadvantaged becoming dependent on the government and using a little levity in order to do so. Maybe if everybody getting upset about this would volunteer a little time to teach a poor person some marketable skills instead of being self-righteous and ineffectual American society would start to get up to speed and ready to compete in the global marketplace where we seem to be getting our butts kicked by the Asians! I used to be on food stamps. If my health takes a relapse I will be again. As for "saving" for the lean times, honey, I barely earn enough to support myself, but I wouldn't change my job for anything because I actually help people. The satisfaction I get from my job is far more important than all the wealth you could imagine.

SternSkipper -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/14/2012 8:57:51 PM)
I am so sick of this "It's an opiate" approach. I doubt even ONE of the people bitching have ever had to avail themselves of help past the PET ENTITLEMENTS they would defend as 'earned. I had to for a while, and I am goddamned glad they were there.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Food Stamp Recipients = Animals? (3/14/2012 9:12:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JulianVanPatten Hey you know what Ronald Reagan said, How would you know what Reagan said? You're 35. That means you were in Kindergarten/grade school when Reagan was giving speeches. You know what people TOLD you Reagan said.

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 [6] 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875