I Just Want To Say I Told You So. RE: LGBT

a reply to: Dfairlite

OK for one we are finding Trans animals who lI've near water supplies with hormones from medication that are too small to be filtered.

Two, a survey is never a truly scientific approach to anything. Especially one like this.

a reply to: luthier

OK so do you have a better way to analyze it? Better data to base your analysis on?

a reply to: Dfairlite

Provide evidence we are over populated?

Give me a break.

We are overpopulated because of our consumption problems and foil fuel use. If we could learn to Co sum less and manage food supplies better by not making monoculture we could have more people.

The number of people vs their consumption of resources and destruction of habitat rates the population problem.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Analysis for what? First you need to declare what your analysis is? What are you looking for and what is your level of comfirmation bias and how do you keep it in check.

a reply to: luthier

We should be experiencing mass shortages then. Where are they?

a reply to: luthier

LOL you don't even know the subject? And you're busy telling me that I'm obviously wrong and biased. Wow.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: sooth

I know right, the propagation of the species is only the most minor of concerns. The creation of human life is meaningless.

There is literally zero chance that gay people existing or even increasing in number will result in our species dying out from too few babies. The math isn't even CLOSE.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Edit: I misread your post. You're reframing the argument into something I never contended. My contention was that our way of life was quite literally at stake.

a reply to: Kettu

Stop conflating love and lust. Two different things. You may lust after a person of the same sex, but that's not the same as loving them. Very rarely do the two emotions actually find their object in the same person.

a reply to: Dfairlite

well what is your conclusion , why in your opinion are the media / government doing this ?

I have heard many say its the drive to bring about transhumanism in society, the emergence of man machine interfaces and this whole trans , gender identity is just another small step in that direction.

However I dont believe that is the case.

I think it's just we are being given everything we can possibly want , and that includes the right to change your sex

Why ? well why not ?

However in my opinion if we are talking long game, we are going to need to come to terms with the fact we have a duty to ensure the survival of our species , this maybe the one of the depopulation methods , either manufactured by man or manufactured by nature in order to keep our species in check. But the numbers dont add up so that leads me to believe its just the freedom to choose no conspiracy

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Edit: I misread your post. You're reframing the argument into something I never contended. My contention was that our way of life was quite literally at stake.

Whose way of life? My way of life isn't jeopardized by gay people.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Kettu

Stop conflating love and lust. Two different things. You may lust after a person of the same sex, but that's not the same as loving them. Very rarely do the two emotions actually find their object in the same person.

This is an awfully arrogant thing to say.

a reply to: Dfairlite

I fail to understand your point.

In times past, those born different were more prone to being murdered, driven to suicide, or kept it in the dark, marrying women, but meeting men in secret for decades, saying nothing to anyone. So in actual fact, there are no reliable statistics, because a great many people from the boomer generation, and for that matter, those previous to that generation, who were born different in that manner, never made it.

I very much doubt the survey even tries to account for that facet of the matter, and without that facet being present, its damned difficult to say with any certainty, what the actual percentages are, not that it matters a damn.

a reply to: Dfairlite

I don't know what your subject is. It's very broad and impossible to conform anything your trying to.

a reply to: Dfairlite

We are in some countries.

And it's a very basic mathematical formula to figure out if a person consumes x natural un renewable resources it will no longer exist.

If population grows the strain over the course of decades increases if the global population reaches higher levels of consumption.

Ie. China and India

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The United States. And if you enjoy the way life has been in the US for the last 50 years, compared to other parts of the world, then normalization does pose a threat to your way of life.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Kettu

Stop conflating love and lust. Two different things. You may lust after a person of the same sex, but that's not the same as loving them. Very rarely do the two emotions actually find their object in the same person.

The rank ignorance of this comment, not to mention, insufferable arrogance, is utterly amazing.

Unsurprising though.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Kettu

Stop conflating love and lust. Two different things. You may lust after a person of the same sex, but that's not the same as loving them. Very rarely do the two emotions actually find their object in the same person.

This is an awfully arrogant thing to say.

People can say whatever they want proving it is another thing.

It must be scary to some people. Stay inside and close the curtains.

How does "from 3.5% to 4.1%" become an increase of 17%?

a reply to: luthier

But those models have been broken many times already.