"I Couldn't Disagree More!"

[Smoke_U_24/7]

Speaking of communicating and thinking, please go back and read the first post of this thread.

 

[Duke]

Good rebuttal, though! I forgot to mention that before.

 

[Famine]

I couldn't disagree more with you.

Well done. Not the point of the thread. The point is to disagree with perfectly reasonable statements set by the nominated member. It's meant to be a game of Devil's Advocate - putting forward an argument for a position you don't actually necessarily believe in - with potential for some humour in there.

Nonetheless:

The Evolution theory states that the Homo Sapien is the highest evolution of species in the animal kingdom.

Nup. ALL life on Earth currently is the highest evolution of species. Each is at the tip of its own particular branch.

Back to the actual topic now please.

 

[Smoke_U_24/7]

Well done. Not the point of the thread. The point is to disagree with perfectly reasonable statements set by the nominated member. It's meant to be a game of Devil's Advocate - putting forward an argument for a position you don't actually necessarily believe in - with potential for some humour in there.

Alright, i'll admit i've made a mistake, but I just couldn't resist replying to duke's argument, Even though I already knew the rules, (hence my last post) and the rules state that we have to present a counter-Argument know matter how reasonable it is. I didn't want to disagree with danoff's topic because I refuse to believe that humans are the least intelligent species on earth, even though if it is a game.

Nup. ALL life on Earth currently is the highest evolution of species. Each is at the tip of its own particular branch.


Back to the actual topic now please.

Yeah, I must not have been thinking straight yesterday.
I'll abide by the rules from now on.

 

[PS]

Alright, i'll admit i've made a mistake, but I just couldn't resist replying to duke's argument, Even though I already knew the rules, (hence my last post) and the rules state that we have to present a counter-Argument know matter how reasonable it is. I didn't want to disagree with danoff's topic because I refuse to believe that humans are the least intelligent species on earth, even though if it is a game.

I couldn't dissagree more.

If we're the most intelligent species, how come we destroy the environment, destroy each other, destroy ourselves, and destroy pretty much everything else? We overpopulate, mame, kill, rape, pillage, start wars, create biological diseases, eat other people, eat other animals to appear classy (caviar, escargot etc.), cut down forests, create and perfect weapons, and just about everything else under the sun. By comparison, any other animal should be considered Einstein.

 

[Danoff]

We overpopulate, mame, kill, rape, pillage, start wars, create biological diseases, eat other people, eat other animals to appear classy (caviar, escargot etc.), cut down forests, create and perfect weapons, and just about everything else under the sun.

Other animals overpopulate, mame, kill, rape, and eat other animals and people also.

 

[Famine]

I didn't want to disagree with danoff's topic because I refuse to believe that humans are the least intelligent species on earth, even though if it is a game.

You don't have to argue that - OR believe it. danoff's phrase was "Humans are the most intelligent species". You just have to put a point across which would hint that at least one species is more intelligent.

Think about how to do this - can you redefine "intelligent"? Could you point out that a wasp's nest is infinitely more intricately constructed than a drifter's post at GTP?

That's part of the game - and part of the sport of debating. Argue FOR a position you may not believe in.

 

[Blake]

“Human beings are the most intelligent species on the planet Earth.”

I couldn't disagree more.

Human beings, as a species, are clearly not the most intelligent species on the planet earth. We destroy our environment - our means of survival. We opress our own species so individuals can live a more comfortable life at the expense of 80% of the species. We have developed clearly impossible stories with apparent "morals" for us to live by, and call it religion, this was intended for good, but has clearly created evil. In fact, once I explore these points, I'm sure you will all agree that as a whole, human beings are really very stupid

Humans have more of a negative impact on their environment than any other species on the planet, the only species that comes close to altering it's environment like we do is the beaver, and what it does doesn't really harm the species chances of long term survival. We are killing the future of our species because we want to exploit the environment for everything it's got right now, we are not even considerring the heratige value of our environment, we cut down trees, burn coal, use oil, overfish and generally pollute almost every corner of this entire planet, not only destrpying our chances of long term survival, but every living thing on this planets.

The cities at the top of the urban hierachy oppress the cities below them, using "mega cities" as a source of cheap labour, so tha TNCs can increase proffit while destroying the livelihood and future of other human beings, we're destroying ourselves for a quick buck, now is that intellegent Mr. Speaker, I think not!

Now we look at the "long long ago", when people created this great way to explain this great mystery called earth, "religion". That's right, we're the only species on this planet dumb enough to believe these completely impossible stories about "rainbow snakes", men parting the sea and a man rising from the dead ...yes, that is clever thinking. Who would have thunk a man could die, then suddenly be alive after 3 days of rotting and decaying, then push a huge motha of a boulder out of way so he could exit a cave...Sure....Now, not only are the ideas of religion completely stupid, they're probably the biggest causes of war today, and probably in the history of the human race....Now it's stupid enough to believe these stories, but who the hell would fight over them?

As you can see, we've done, and are continuing to do some pretty stupud stuff to ourselves, and we probably don't deserve to be the caretakers of this planet, ever since we've been put in charge we've done nothing but kill the planet and ourselves....great job "human race"!

Blake

 

[PS]

Other animals overpopulate, mame, kill, rape, and eat other animals and people also.

But not out of spite or revenge. Out of either survival, or not knowing the difference between good and bad. If humans truly were the most intelligent species, then we would have had a plan to save ourselves.

 

[Danoff]

Perhaps this will be a contraversial decision, but I declare Duke the winner of this "week's" I couldn't disagree more contest. That means it's up to him to come up with a new statement for us to disagree with.

 

[Duke]

Thanks, danoff! I have one in mind but I don't want to make it too much of a retread. This will take some consideration, but I'll try to post something up later.

 

[Duke]

Here's the next topic for disagreement. I'm sorry for the slip to an automotive topic but I just can't resist. Go to it, folks!

American cars are outdated, ugly, ill-handling, poorly-built lumps of low technology. They are only good for driving fast in a straight line... right off the nearest cliff. And even then it's shameful that they require 6 litres of displacement to develop a mere 400 horsepower.

 

[Ev0]

I couldn't disagree more. Today's American cars are excellent achivements of automotive engineering. American cars are dominating the niche of affordable performance cars. The Dodge SRT-4 is one of the best handling FWD cars on the market (it's rapidly becoming the ride of choce for many autocrossers; not exactly a place where poor handling is overlookable), has excellent acceleration (0-60 in well under 6 seconds for 2005 models), and is very, very affordable.

Also in the same category is the new Ford Mustang. 300hp, rear wheel drive, the most refined handling of any mustang yet, and it has an excellent interior. It's also one of the sweetest looking cars of the decade, and is arguably the most attractive retro styled car ever built. All for less than $26,000. That still too much? Then get a V6 powered model for under $20,000 base price. You'll still get 210hp and be able to hit 60 easily in under nine seconds without asking too much from the engine.

Americans are also dominating in the world of high end sports cars. The new Corvette is making higher priced cars like the Porsche 911 Carerra S seem like a waste of money, as it offers a similar, if not superior level of performance, all for thousands less. And just wait until the new 500hp Z06 model comes out. It should be able to give exotics like the Ferrari F430 and the Lamborghini Gallardo a very good race, not only in the straights, but also in the corners.

And who gives a rat's ass if it takes 6 liters to make 400hp? You're never going to get good fuel economy with that sort of power. And with plenty size, it should offer superior tuning potential compared to a smaller engine.

 

[xcsti]

I couldn't disagree with you more. Efficiency of displacement is really irrelevant. Efficiency of weight and engine reliability are more important. So what if it takes your aluminum pushrod V8 six liters to make 400hp if it weighs less than a japanese turbo 2.0L that makes 280hp and is prone to blow up. Would you rather pay 60K for a merc that handles good, or 30K for a 300c (estimated figures) with a more powerful engine, similar interior and acceptable handleing.

The main question is how to define an american car? Is a car designed for US roads but built in japan, germany, mexico, or even canada any different from a car designed by europeans but built in the US? The fact that an increasing number of supposedly american cars are being built elsewhere while many foreign manufacturors are opening up shop in the US. I believe the Acura my dad drives was built in kentucky by americans. Does this negate the fact that the brand it wears on its hood is an off shoot of a japanese power house?

The GTO, an american classic is now an import. Many of the cars we see today share universal platforms with european cars.

Basically my way of retorting to your statement is by negating the ability to answer it.

Oh an I could also claim that US cars are designed for straight flat highway stretches, making it unfair to comment on the handleing as they were never designed to do much of it in the first place.

I could also talk about differing perspectives, and the innability of europeans to try many american cars and vice versa, as reasons why the misconception of bad handling american cars formed.

 

[Max_DC]

I couldn't disagree more. Today's American cars are excellent achivements of automotive engineering.

American cars are dominating the niche of affordable performance cars.

Hmm well... not really... let's say Japan...

The Dodge SRT-4 is one of the best handling FWD cars on the market (it's rapidly becoming the ride of choce for many autocrossers; not exactly a place where poor handling is overlookable), has excellent acceleration (0-60 in well under 6 seconds for 2005 models), and is very, very affordable.

hello ? WRX, WRX STi, Evo ... better handling...
The acceleration is impressive though....

Also in the same category is the new Ford Mustang. 300hp, rear wheel drive, the most refined handling of any mustang yet, and it has an excellent interior. It's also one of the sweetest looking cars of the decade, and is arguably the most attractive retro styled car ever built. All for less than $26,000. That still too much? Then get a V6 powered model for under $20,000 base price. You'll still get 210hp and be able to hit 60 easily in under nine seconds without asking too much from the engine.

Maybe a good handling for a Mustang, but....
Some like the looks, others don't ...
It's cheap, has a good sound, but it is thirsty and not really a sports car... ok perhaps it doesn't want to be one... nice car I like it....

Americans are also dominating in the world of high end sports cars. The new Corvette is making higher priced cars like the Porsche 911 Carerra S seem like a waste of money, as it offers a similar, if not superior level of performance, all for thousands less. And just wait until the new 500hp Z06 model comes out. It should be able to give exotics like the Ferrari F430 and the Lamborghini Gallardo a very good race, not only in the straights, but also in the corners.

Uuuuuu NO.... The Viper and the Corvette are true sports cars, but dominating?
The car is not superior to Porsche & Co...
But OK...nevertheless the Corvette is on the right way...

And who gives a rat's ass if it takes 6 liters to make 400hp? You're never going to get good fuel economy with that sort of power. And with plenty size, it should offer superior tuning potential compared to a smaller engine.

I personally think that American cars are not as bad as their image is...
In the end it is always a emotional decision and a question of car philosphy...
Based on pure facts, japanese sports cars might be the winners...

 

[xcsti]

Hmm well... not really... let's say Japan...




hello ? WRX, WRX STi, Evo ... better handling...
The acceleration is impressive though....




Maybe a good handling for a Mustang, but....
Some like the looks, others don't ...
It's cheap, has a good sound, but it is thirsty and not really a sports car... ok perhaps it doesn't want to be one... nice car I like it....



Uuuuuu NO.... The Viper and the Corvette are true sports cars, but dominating?
The car is not superior to Porsche & Co...
But OK...nevertheless the Corvette is on the right way...



I personally think that American cars are not as bad as their image is...
In the end it is always a emotional decision and a question of car philosphy...
Based on pure facts, japanese sports cars might be the winners...

Uhhh, Max did you read the first post? The point is to argue against a wideheld thought, no matter what your position is on it. I may agree that American cars are not great but I'm arguing for them for the sake of competition.

I also have another point I wanted to add in. It is that America really doesn't have many sports car only companies, like porsche. GM produces 4 sports cars, the corvette, cobalt ss, cts V, XLR (Im not counting the GTO) and will produce a few more in the future (SKY, solstice). The American end of diamler chrystler produces 2.5 sports cars, the viper, the srt-4(which is probably more sport compact but oh well) and about half the crossfire. Im not counting the prowler because it isnt a sports car. Ford has the mustang and the GT. Other than the big three there are only two companies I can think of that make sports cars (well maybe supercars) that arent based on another car, Saleen and Mosler. 10.5 American sports cars. TVR alone has 5 sports/supercars. I believe that it isn't fair to compare a handful of american sports cars to the multitude of unique vehicles that come from small manufacturors who specialize in sports cars. Think about how much better of a bargain american sports cars are compared to their european counterparts.

 

[Delirious]

American cars are outdated, ugly, ill-handling, poorly-built lumps of low technology. They are only good for driving fast in a straight line... right off the nearest cliff. And even then it's shameful that they require 6 litres of displacement to develop a mere 400 horsepower. (Duke)

I couldn't disagree more...

american cars dont need turbochargers or superchargers to get to the 400 horsepower (NA that is)

we are more supporting american workers by buying american cars than if we bought a foreign car

just the idea of buying an american car gives you a little feeling of american pride (usually)

corvette, anyone?

 

[Max_DC]

Uhhh, Max did you read the first post? The point is to argue against a wideheld thought, no matter what your position is on it. I may agree that American cars are not great but I'm arguing for them for the sake of competition.

Sorry, your're right... I flew over the first post long time ago, came back yesterday and thought that I remembered it correctly, wasn't the case....

 

[Goomba]

Here's the next topic for disagreement. I'm sorry for the slip to an automotive topic but I just can't resist. Go to it, folks!

American cars are outdated, ugly, ill-handling, poorly-built lumps of low technology. They are only good for driving fast in a straight line... right off the nearest cliff. And even then it's shameful that they require 6 litres of displacement to develop a mere 400 horsepower.

I couldn't disagree more.

Outdated and ugly? You've got to be kidding me! I stop, point, look and drool whenever I see a Chevrolet Corvette (old and new school), Dodge Viper, Trans Am, Chrysler Crossfire SRT-6, Dodge Magnum, Chrysler 300 or an array of nice, new looking American cars. Styling for American performance machines seem far more aggressive than any other market. Also, I'll have to say the Neon SRT-4 pulled off a far more aggressive bug eye look than any silly ol' VW or Subaru.

Whats that you say? Malibu, Aveo (which isn't half-bad lookin'), Sunfire, Neon, other-generic-commuter-car styling not doing it for ya'?

I hate to say it, but every normal, commuter car, regardless of the makers nationality, looks pretty lame when compared to performance machines. You don't buy an Impala or Civic to look wesome.

Ill handling? Yeah, the Corvette does handle as well as say a Lotus Elise, Mazda Miata (maybe), or Porshce. However compared to most everything else out there, its pretty damn smooth. The same goes for a number of other American cars. However, buying a car is a game of give-and-take. You give up some handling, to gain another hundred horses. Seems fair.

If I were racing in a straight line, it would be off a cliff. At least going off the cliff would be fun.

Whats that? I couldn't hear your peasly little argument about engine efficiency. I passed your 230hp, two liter car a long while ago. Although I'm sure you have graphs, charts and TPS reports to prove it, only other idiots like yourself will care. Engine effeciency* is something to worry about when you're driving economy cars, not gas-guzzling, performance, street machines.

* Don't bring WRC or any racing engine size regulations into this, we're not in those.

 

[ash6660]

American Cars are a sluggish pile of poo. It takes a 7 litre engine for them to pump out a mere 350bhp, yet people in Japan, in the Lancer Evo 8 have a 2.5 litre engine that pumps out nearly 400bhp.

Or Ferrari, the enzo has a 6 litre engine (I think), that produces 617bhp.

so, these cars aren't economical, but they are only good for a straight line and have the turning circle of a Train. They weigh as much as a pregnant concrete Elephant on Steroids, and plus, they are American. now, I have nothing against americans, just GW Bush.Twit...


American cars are the crapest crap of crapville, which is a provence of crapstone in craptown in crapland on planet crap-eddie crap.

Even the beautiful Saleen S7 is crap, it is as comfortable as a small emotionally abused child in the care of Michael Jackson

 

[xcsti]

American Cars are a sluggish pile of poo. It takes a 7 litre engine for them to pump out a mere 350bhp, yet people in Japan, in the Lancer Evo 8 have a 2.5 litre engine that pumps out nearly 400bhp.

Or Ferrari, the enzo has a 6 litre engine (I think), that produces 617bhp.

so, these cars aren't economical, but they are only good for a straight line and have the turning circle of a Train. They weigh as much as a pregnant concrete Elephant on Steroids, and plus, they are American. now, I have nothing against americans, just GW Bush.Twit...


American cars are the crapest crap of crapville, which is a provence of crapstone in craptown in crapland on planet crap-eddie crap.

Even the beautiful Saleen S7 is crap, it is as comfortable as a small emotionally abused child in the care of Michael Jackson

Again read the first post! The evo FQ400 is a 2 liter. The S7 rocks.

 

[Smoke_U_24/7]

Here's the next topic for disagreement. I'm sorry for the slip to an automotive topic but I just can't resist. Go to it, folks!

American cars are outdated, ugly, ill-handling, poorly-built lumps of low technology. They are only good for driving fast in a straight line... right off the nearest cliff. And even then it's shameful that they require 6 litres of displacement to develop a mere 400 horsepower.

That's a big pile of Bull-Poo!
At least we don't need to have anxiety attacks about turbo-lag every time
we're speeding down the mulsanne straight.
American cars aren't ugly, but they're not beautiful, also. They're decent looking, but there are plenty of things we can do to a Ford Mustang, for example to pretty it up.
As for Performance; WAAAA WAAA WAA. Quit your complaining and go purchase modifiable racing suspensions and get rid of the handling Woes that plauqe our american cars. Anyone that has alot of money and experience can modify there own car.
Point in case: The handling and performance problems in the american cars can be easily repaired, all we need is a little time.

 

[Thealosia]

I couldn't disagree more because, too many people already associate the word "peace" with the definitions of 'Universal' agreement which is essentially impossible because no two people have the same precise virtues, morals, and ethics. Regardless if they are in the same religion, race, or community. I think it is when everyone has their freedom to be their individual selves that we will not even need peace!

Hitler wanted "world peace" too did he not?

 

[Thealosia]

Hey this is fun! How about TWO new questions, and don't disagree with me on that:
People should take care of themselves, both physically, and mentally.
Thealosia should use the edit button

I couldn't dissagree more on the second one because I like my responses to have more impact, thus I 'post' again. Once it goes away, it comes back....twice. you guessed it!

 

[Thealosia]

This game will be great, for practicing lawyers on how to improve their arguements.
I'll use for my Catogian sorority party!

 

[Duke]

Hey this would be fun, except that the first two topics have been argued and decided already. They're closed. And please DO use the Edit button since multiple posting is frowned upon.

 

[xcsti]

Its been a week right? So tell us who won, duke.

 

[Duke]

Its been a week right? So tell us who won, duke.

Well, it was a tough call among three good contenders, but Ev0 takes the honors this week. It was a very tough choice and I'm going to say that if Ev0 doesn't show up in 48 hours to claim his prize, then you (xcsti) will assume the mantle and post the next topic.

Special (Ed) Mention goes to ash6660 for so spectacularly failing to grasp the point of this thread.

 

[xcsti]

Alright its been a few days and no evo so ill take up the spot.

George bush is an illiterate fool. He will, over the long term, hurt the country. He looks funny and is easy to parody. His foreign policy and knowledge of the rest of the world is on par with a fifth grader (not that fifth graders have foreign policies but you know what I mean). He is the king spin doctor. His main goal for the war in Iraq was to gain a cheap source of oil. He is leaving Afghanistan to the side even thought it is the center of 9/11. Only ignorant southern rednecks voted for him.

(Note this is not my opinion, just an issue which I think is good for this thread.