'Hot Water Challenge' is sending children to hospital

[captaincranky]

@captaincranky besides, if I did come down there, you'd probably yell something at me like "I'll show you how bad it is" and then I would be wearing one of your bullets.

Yeah right. Go sit on you thumb and try to figure out how hard core drug addiction and the people who promote it are different from someone who buys his own liquor and has an ounce or so on the weekend You don't seem to be able to resolve that distinction. You sound like a 12 year old, "but you drink, why can't I shoot heroine".Oh well, it's probably out of convenience, or the pretense of winning your own argument.

I do have one small satisfaction though. Donald Trump's sh!t is rolling downhill and hitting you first!

The trouble, is you're too aloof to realize, "I don't live like the other half, I live like the other 9/10 ths.

And by the way, certainly wouldn't shoot you if you came down here. The chances are, I might not have to. Last year's death toll was two ethnics, one dog, and all the windows in my car. The two dead "humans", were actually the only joy I got out of last summer.

I had been hoping, they'd sell enough crack to be able to stop squatting here, and move in next door to you. But, I'll take two dead as a provisional win. It is truly a pity the neighbor's dog had to die though. because the two animals having the gunfight couldn't hit one another.

Always a chore, later.

 

[wiyosaya]

Yeah right. Go sit on you thumb and try to figure out how hard core drug addiction and the people who promote it are different from someone who buys his own liquor and has an ounce or so on the weekend You don't seem to be able to resolve that distinction. You sound like a 12 year old, "but you drink, why can't I shoot heroine".Oh well, it's probably out of convenience, or the pretense of winning your own argument.

I do have one small satisfaction though. Donald Trump's sh!t is rolling downhill and hitting you first!

The trouble, is you're too aloof to realize, "I don't live like the other half, I live like the other 9/10 ths.

And by the way, certainly wouldn't shoot you if you came down here. The chances are, I might not have to. Last year's death toll was two ethnics, one dog, and all the windows in my car. The two dead "humans", were actually the only joy I got out of last summer.

I had been hoping, they'd sell enough crack to be able to stop squatting here, and move in next door to you. But, I'll take two dead as a provisional win. It is truly a pity the neighbor's dog had to die though. because the two animals having the gunfight couldn't hit one another.

Always a chore, later.

Have it your way. You win! Happy?

 

[Bubbajim]

I didn't state a single opinion in that response. Everything I said was pulled straight from college psychology classes, relevant statistics, and world history. If you're going to dispute something, demonstrate where its wrong. "You're just mixing fact with opinion" isn't an argument.

Why did you cut out the next part of what I wrote, which was doing exactly what you've just said I didn't do? As I said:

The bit about intelligence correlating with delayed gratification is right, and the stuff around peer pressure and influence in your first paragraph are kind of half right, but then you just go off piste with "when cultures become self-destructive (as American culture has become", or by suggesting that things like the tide pod challenge or hot water challenge are or will become mainstream.

In case that's not clear again, the delayed gratification stuff and peer pressure bit are factually based. The America has become self-destructive and "t hings like the tidepod challenge [...] become mainstream", are both opinions. If you can let me know what you mean by "mainstream" and then show me some "things like" the YouTube crazes actually permeating American culture, I might change my mind.

I'm saying the environment is selecting for lower intelligence, which is a bad thing for advanced civilizations.

Lower intelligence doesn't mean a population disappears. It means it can't sustain high-IQ norms.

Right:
(a) Our civilisation is only advanced relative to how it used to be, suggesting development has happened and continues to happen, counter to your claim. We got this far with dumber human beings.
(b) IQs have been consistently going up every decade and every generation since the test were implemented. It's the Flynn effect. So actually our civilisation would suffer because of our older people, not our younger ones, if IQ were the primary characteristic of note in society (it's not though, it's only one factor).
(c) How in any way is the environment 'selecting' for lower intelligence? Selection pressures are at an all time low thanks for huge advances in healthcare over the last two centuries, so you could feasibly argue that by keeping more people alive, statistically speaking we must be keeping some stupid people in the gene pool. But one could easily counter that we're also statistically likely to keep geniuses alive too, and thanks to advances in pretty much every facet of human knowledge, healthcare and technological prowess, the geniuses of tomorrow are likely (overall) to be more productive and contribute more over their lifetimes than the geniuses of the past.
(d) What's a "high-IQ norm"?

Also, @captaincranky I'd love to watch the footage if you wore a GoPro or something for a day in your life. The Government Sponsored Dystopia you seem to inhabit sounds like a blast. Have you considered selling the rights to your worldview to Netflix?

 

[wiyosaya]

Why did you cut out the next part of what I wrote, which was doing exactly what you've just said I didn't do? As I said:


In case that's not clear again, the delayed gratification stuff and peer pressure bit are factually based. The America has become self-destructive and "t hings like the tidepod challenge [...] become mainstream", are both opinions. If you can let me know what you mean by "mainstream" and then show me some "things like" the YouTube crazes actually permeating American culture, I might change my mind.





Right:
(a) Our civilisation is only advanced relative to how it used to be, suggesting development has happened and continues to happen, counter to your claim. We got this far with dumber human beings.
(b) IQs have been consistently going up every decade and every generation since the test were implemented. It's the Flynn effect. So actually our civilisation would suffer because of our older people, not our younger ones, if IQ were the primary characteristic of note in society (it's not though, it's only one factor).
(c) How in any way is the environment 'selecting' for lower intelligence? Selection pressures are at an all time low thanks for huge advances in healthcare over the last two centuries, so you could feasibly argue that by keeping more people alive, statistically speaking we must be keeping some stupid people in the gene pool. But one could easily counter that we're also statistically likely to keep geniuses alive too, and thanks to advances in pretty much every facet of human knowledge, healthcare and technological prowess, the geniuses of tomorrow are likely (overall) to be more productive and contribute more over their lifetimes than the geniuses of the past.
(d) What's a "high-IQ norm"?

Also, @captaincranky I'd love to watch the footage if you wore a GoPro or something for a day in your life. The Government Sponsored Dystopia you seem to inhabit sounds like a blast. Have you considered selling the rights to your worldview to Netflix?

Davis likes to spout a lot of crap. You should read his justification of his anti-immigration stance sometime. Then again, if you did, you might think he is from another planet in another galaxy far, far away.