Oscar Pistorius

[Trubie]

I don't think anyone could debate it if you were actually able to post times of these "better 400m runners"

 

u been on the hub long enough to know that not even facts can counter any argument/debate

much like the newspapers not allowing facts to stand in the way of a good story

[Azonic]

u been on the hub long enough to know that not even facts can counter any argument/debate

much like the newspapers not allowing facts to stand in the way of a good story

 

Good reply. Seems facts and research can't trump touch/feely emotions either. Wow.

[dracs]

u been on the hub long enough to know that not even facts can counter any argument/debate

much like the newspapers not allowing facts to stand in the way of a good story

haha well yes - and it looks like you are living proof of that, right here right now

[dracs]

Good reply. Seems facts and research can't trump touch/feely emotions either. Wow.

where's the facepalm emoticon?

[scotty]

And the Oscar for best original hubplay goes to...scotty!

Thank you , i would like to thank....fast forward 20 pages later

Edited September 4, 2012 by scotty

[Agteros]

<rambling rant>

Referring back to my tongue in the cheek comment of the various Olympic games...

 

Oscar gained an entrance to the Olympic games based on false science, and playing an emotional game.

Where is the line drawn of what is humanly possible? Caster with her gender issues (100% real human being!)? Oscar with his mechanically augmented legs?

 

If the world stage for athletics is a showcase of what is humanly possible, surely it is implied that it should be 100% human?

 

Allowing technology added/inserted(in) to the bodies of athletes detracts from the human performance aspect of things. Once again, where should the line be drawn?

 

Answer is easy, really. If you are not 100% naturally, human (as born!) you should not participate! It gets even murkier in a case like Caster's. Who decide what the normal definition of 'woman' is? How to proof this?

 

A really, really slippery slope. Easier to just stick to the 100% rule: NO mechanical add-ons, NO enhancers (doping), NO transgenders in female categories.

 

The latter two are down a slippery slope already. Who knows, and who defines what "normal" hormone levels are etc!

 

Human emotion always cloud the issues at hand. Yes it is admirable of Oscar to have overcome adversy, but if human performance was the real issue, why where other, faster (apparently there are) able bodied athletes overlooked for him? There can be only one answer: Emotion, playing the feel good card, etc etc

 

As stated, he should compete, but against similair athletes.

 

By allowing tech into/on the human body we are opening pandora's box (my opinion!) - the beginning of a cyborg show in plain language! YES, electronics in artificial limbs is a reality already. It might not have reached the sporting fields yet, but it does exist!

</rambling rant>

[Azonic]

where's the facepalm emoticon?

 

http://filesmelt.com/dl/facepalm1.jpg

[4u2nv]

Gif avatar bro

jack parow at 85

[Wyatt Earp]

 

Answer is easy, really. If you are not 100% naturally, human (as born!) you should not participate! It gets even murkier in a case like Caster's. Who decide what the normal definition of 'woman' is? How to proof this?

 

Ok peeps.

This is where I draw the line tottie ,en nie meer verder nie

[Azonic]

Ok peeps.

This is where I draw the line tottie ,en nie meer verder nie

 

Beslis, klaar.

[RooiWillie]

http://filesmelt.com/dl/facepalm1.jpg

 

Seems that you may have facepalmed before thinking of some of your replies... No more hot chock boet... Just good old water...

[RooiWillie]

Ok peeps.

This is where I draw the line tottie ,en nie meer verder nie

 

Haha!

[Agteros]

Ok peeps. This is where I draw the line tottie ,en nie meer verder nie

having had the 'benefit' of a tottie, surely there has been some spill over to her performance as a wimmin?

 

Please ignore all the puns?

[RooiWillie]

Here I go again. Every time I don't have a response? Bwahahaha. I have a pretty decent response every time, and unfortunatelly every time its to try and knock the cup of hot choc out of your hand but you seem to cling pretty tightly to it.

 

...and pretty consistent yourself, you every time you don't have a reply you can't reply without throwing "childish" somewhere in there. Childish, isn't it?

 

Seems you have your own page on Wikipedia? http://en.wikipedia....roll_(Internet)

 

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,^[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (...as in "give the guy a break", such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response^[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.^[4]

 

Haha, so You and I, we are both Trolls, the passion was aroused with your very first post...

 

[RooiWillie]

O ja... Isn't name calling also a little childish?

[Showtime]

<rambling rant>

Referring back to my tongue in the cheek comment of the various Olympic games...

 

Oscar gained an entrance to the Olympic games based on false science, and playing an emotional game.

Where is the line drawn of what is humanly possible? Caster with her gender issues (100% real human being!)? Oscar with his mechanically augmented legs?

 

If the world stage for athletics is a showcase of what is humanly possible, surely it is implied that it should be 100% human?

 

Allowing technology added/inserted(in) to the bodies of athletes detracts from the human performance aspect of things. Once again, where should the line be drawn?

 

Answer is easy, really. If you are not 100% naturally, human (as born!) you should not participate! It gets even murkier in a case like Caster's. Who decide what the normal definition of 'woman' is? How to proof this?

 

A really, really slippery slope. Easier to just stick to the 100% rule: NO mechanical add-ons, NO enhancers (doping), NO transgenders in female categories.

 

The latter two are down a slippery slope already. Who knows, and who defines what "normal" hormone levels are etc!

 

Human emotion always cloud the issues at hand. Yes it is admirable of Oscar to have overcome adversy, but if human performance was the real issue, why where other, faster (apparently there are) able bodied athletes overlooked for him? There can be only one answer: Emotion, playing the feel good card, etc etc

 

As stated, he should compete, but against similair athletes.

 

By allowing tech into/on the human body we are opening pandora's box (my opinion!) - the beginning of a cyborg show in plain language! YES, electronics in artificial limbs is a reality already. It might not have reached the sporting fields yet, but it does exist!

</rambling rant>

 

Excellent post. But the correct and logical answer in this case is a philosophical one which is why I find it amusing that people are throwing around terms like 'scientific' and 'fact' as though they have derived every equation for every movement in the human body with and without blades.

 

Back to your post. The next thing someone with a robotic hand wants to prove they have no advantage in the shooting events. If the line is not clear cut there will be chaos.