Trubie Posted September 4, 2012 Share 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/debatemuch like the newspapers not allowing facts to stand in the way of a good story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azonic Posted September 4, 2012 Share u been on the hub long enough to know that not even facts can counter any argument/debatemuch 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dracs Posted September 4, 2012 Share u been on the hub long enough to know that not even facts can counter any argument/debatemuch like the newspapers not allowing facts to stand in the way of a good storyhaha well yes - and it looks like you are living proof of that, right here right now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dracs Posted September 4, 2012 Share Good reply. Seems facts and research can't trump touch/feely emotions either. Wow.where's the facepalm emoticon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted September 4, 2012 Share 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agteros Posted September 4, 2012 Share <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> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azonic Posted September 4, 2012 Share where's the facepalm emoticon? http://filesmelt.com/dl/facepalm1.jpg dracs 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4u2nv Posted September 4, 2012 Share Gif avatar bro jack parow at 85 Escapee.. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted September 4, 2012 Share 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azonic Posted September 4, 2012 Share Ok peeps.This is where I draw the line tottie ,en nie meer verder nie Beslis, klaar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RooiWillie Posted September 4, 2012 Share 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... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RooiWillie Posted September 4, 2012 Share Ok peeps.This is where I draw the line tottie ,en nie meer verder nie Haha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agteros Posted September 4, 2012 Share 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? Wyatt Earp 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RooiWillie Posted September 4, 2012 Share 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... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RooiWillie Posted September 4, 2012 Share O ja... Isn't name calling also a little childish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Showtime Posted September 4, 2012 Share <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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now