Ironworks Gaming Forum - View Single Post

Thorfinn · 03-28-2003, 01:47 PM

I guess we are on opposite sides, here. Love Canal happened when people used the best scientific knowledge about chemical disposal available. To fault Hooker(?) for doing what all the scientists in the entire world though was safe is little different than saying that a person in an auto accident should never have gotten into his car that morning. What exactly happened at Three Mile Island? Answer: Virtually nothing. The radiation Ziroc gets each day from the sun is worse than if you were living right next to the TMI cooling tower. That is fact. I am not too well versed on Zebra Mussels, kudzu or other introduced species. I do know ecosystems can be thrown out of whack if you introduce a new species into it, and I know that they can be thrown out of whack if you leave them alone. That is the nature of chaos theory. I am well versed on the ozone hole, though, yet another trumped up scare.

No, I am not arguing that people should be able to harm others nilly-willy. Quite the opposite. I believe you should hold people personally accountable for whatever damage they inflict upon others, no exceptions. I have said it now 4-5 times, and it is the basis for all my arguments in this thread. I'm not advocating killing people to get a few more bucks. I'm saying that regardless of my intentions, good or bad, if I harm another, he is entitled to restitution.

I'm not trying to be a pain, but I gave several examples of quantum leaps in technology that came about through risk-taking. I say it again, without some people assuming risks, we would not have most of our medical technology, we would not have the amazing mobility we have today, we would not even have this medium of exchange if the scientists at AT&T Bell Labs had to prove that EMF from monitors was totally safe. Indeed, we would still be living in caves without judicious risk taking.

Mesothelioma, no, since it is very rare, but I have watched and held hands as several hundred people died. Just a part of paying my way through college as an orderly at a hospice and a no-resucitate nursing home. I am not being callous towards cancer, and to portray my argument that way is very unfair.

Just for the record, I think our positions are not really that far apart, except you seem to prefer using government guns to force people not to hurt others, while I would prefer to just set the rules so that it is in people's best interests not to do so.

[ 03-28-2003, 02:07 PM: Message edited by: Thorfinn ]

03-28-2003, 01:47 PM	#86
Thorfinn Zhentarim Guard Join Date: February 24, 2003 Location: Indiana Age: 61 Posts: 358	I guess we are on opposite sides, here. Love Canal happened when people used the best scientific knowledge about chemical disposal available. To fault Hooker(?) for doing what all the scientists in the entire world though was safe is little different than saying that a person in an auto accident should never have gotten into his car that morning. What exactly happened at Three Mile Island? Answer: Virtually nothing. The radiation Ziroc gets each day from the sun is worse than if you were living right next to the TMI cooling tower. That is fact. I am not too well versed on Zebra Mussels, kudzu or other introduced species. I do know ecosystems can be thrown out of whack if you introduce a new species into it, and I know that they can be thrown out of whack if you leave them alone. That is the nature of chaos theory. I am well versed on the ozone hole, though, yet another trumped up scare. No, I am not arguing that people should be able to harm others nilly-willy. Quite the opposite. I believe you should hold people personally accountable for whatever damage they inflict upon others, no exceptions. I have said it now 4-5 times, and it is the basis for all my arguments in this thread. I'm not advocating killing people to get a few more bucks. I'm saying that regardless of my intentions, good or bad, if I harm another, he is entitled to restitution. I'm not trying to be a pain, but I gave several examples of quantum leaps in technology that came about through risk-taking. I say it again, without some people assuming risks, we would not have most of our medical technology, we would not have the amazing mobility we have today, we would not even have this medium of exchange if the scientists at AT&T Bell Labs had to prove that EMF from monitors was totally safe. Indeed, we would still be living in caves without judicious risk taking. Mesothelioma, no, since it is very rare, but I have watched and held hands as several hundred people died. Just a part of paying my way through college as an orderly at a hospice and a no-resucitate nursing home. I am not being callous towards cancer, and to portray my argument that way is very unfair. Just for the record, I think our positions are not really that far apart, except you seem to prefer using government guns to force people not to hurt others, while I would prefer to just set the rules so that it is in people's best interests not to do so. [ 03-28-2003, 02:07 PM: Message edited by: Thorfinn ]