Jump to content


Photo

Ken Ham Doing What Obama Has Not Been Able To


  • Please log in to reply
88 replies to this topic

#81 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 02 August 2017 - 05:16 PM

Income distribution in America is truly sad--and shows the greed of those who know how to make money and hoard it. ......

Mike,  I fully agree.

 

I respectfully suggest this is off-topic for a discussion of the Ark Encounter.  This may be more appropriate to the "Trumpcare" topic (which already has some mention of this matter) or a new one on wealth distribution.  It would be a pleasure to discuss this further.... but not here. 



#82 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 02 August 2017 - 10:41 PM

 

Proof of what, specifically? That Ken Ham done everything within the rules he could, to get the best deal for the AE? I don't necessarily conclude there is something immoral at play just because of a toying with the rules or because some technicality was not obeyed. legalities really, over money.Piasan: The proof is a matter of record and has already been documented in previous posts.

Proof that everything that has been said about Ham's actions is factual.  What is legal is not necessarily moral or ethical. 

 

But I'm not arguing the morality.  My issue what is legal under the Constitution of the United States of America.

 

What you call "toying with the rules," I call "a series of broken promises."

 

 

If you read your own link to what Ken Ham says, it was expected that AE was to pay for the services.

If you read my posts, you'll see I said in post #73 that Ham asked for the tax to be capped at $500,000.  In that same post, I also provided a link to Ham's full statement.

 

In post #78, I pointed out:

1)  AE has been collecting the tax since July 1 as an add-on fee.

2)  Ham asked for a cap on the tax of $350,000, then raised that to $500,000.

3)  That I agreed with Ham that his estimate of the actual impact was likely much more in line with the true cost.

 

Frankly, I don't see any justification for a cap on the amount.  It's like saying 1 million visitors would have the same impact as 2 million.  He should have approached at as a cost-per-visitor issue and argued for $0.25.  But he didn't ask for my opinion .......

 

The dispute was more about the amount of the tax than whether or not there should be a contribution by AE for the expenses they cause the local community.

 

Like I said in #78.  Ham tried to use the "nuclear option" by changing the tax status of AE.  The state of Kentucky exercised their own nuclear option and pulled AE's tax rebate incentive.  Ham restored AE to its previous status within a grace period offered by Kentucky.  I expect within the next few days, Kentucky will restore the tax rebate.

 

All is as it was before.  The Constitution prevailed.

 

Let's look at what Goku said first;

 

"The AE was also built in a small town, and the tourist traffic from the AE consistently amounted to two to three times the population of that town every day. Just use your imagination and you should be able to understand how this could negatively impact various emergency services which the town needs to provide"

 

Now let's look at what Ham says in your link; 

 

"In a long statement released Tuesday, ark owners put the responsibility for this back on Williamstown, saying the safety fee ordinance was unfair. 

"It makes the Ark Encounter bear almost the entire load for the increased funding to cover Williamstown's budget for police, fire and EMS," Mark Looy, co-founder of the ark’s parent Answers in Genesis, said in the statement.  "

OK.... as I read it, you quote a senior AIG official as complaining AE is bearing "almost the entire load" for the expenses they create. 

 

I'm sorry, why is that unfair?

 

Piasan, it seems to me from all of these complicated legalities, Ham is just trying to stretch the rules to get the best deal for his project. Money-wranglings aren't always matters of morality really, we all know that sometimes rules and red-tape and bureaucratic pedantics don't always amount to a hill of beans.

Well, this time he stretched too far and it snapped back in his face.

 

This has nothing at all to do with morality.

 

If Ken Ham has some ideas for that money like spreading the gospel or feeding the poor, somehow I don't think if it transpired those were his motives, you would update us, would you?

I thought you knew AIG stands for "AnswersInGenesis" a Christian Ministry dedicated to spreading a literal Genesis.

 

From the AIG mission statement:

 

Goal:  To support the church in fulfilling its commission

 

Vision:  Answers in Genesis is a catalyst to bring reformation by reclaiming the foundations of our faith which are found in the Bible, from the very first verse.

 

Mission: 

  • We proclaim the absolute truth and authority of the Bible with boldness.
  • We relate the relevance of a literal Genesis to the church and the world today with creativity.
  • We obey God’s call to deliver the message of the gospel, individually and collectively.

I have no reason to doubt Ham is acting in his official capacity as the head of AIG toward fulfilling the declared objectives of the ministry.

 

 

Piasan: Now that one was offensive

 

It offends me that when the pope ...

Bigotry noted.

 

All I see here, is you picking on a creationist when the stinking, frankly VILE level of excessive and unnecessary wealth we see coming from evos, would make Ham look like Oliver; "please sir, can I have some more".

Another rant irrelevant to the topic at hand.

 

How much money Ham (or AIG) may or may not have is meaningless.

 

The issue was the direct transfer of government tax money to a Christian ministry in direct violation of the constitutions of both the United States and Kentucky.

 

It's the heart that counts to God, and the motive. "For the Lord looks at the heart". Are you saying these figures mean you know Ham's motives?

Can I know Ham's motives with certainty?  No.  Nor can you.  I can form an opinion of his behavior which is a matter of record.



#83 Mike Summers

Mike Summers

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,507 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Information theory, electronics, videography, writing, human psychology, psychotherapy
  • Age: 61
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Detroit Michigan area

Posted 03 August 2017 - 06:43 AM

I think there are positive benefits from all the people that now visit the town. I am sure local buisneses have reaped the benefits from increased traffic. Yes, there are disadvantages to lots more folks. It's a case of acieving balance.

In the meantime Han has built an Ark that demonstrates the plausibility of what the Bible says happened is indeed possible. Moreover, I am sure AIG and the town can reach an equitable agreement.



#84 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,742 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 03 August 2017 - 11:41 PM

 

I think there are positive benefits from all the people that now visit the town. I am sure local buisneses have reaped the benefits from increased traffic. Yes, there are disadvantages to lots more folks. It's a case of acieving balance.

Apparently the businesses of Williamstown aren't benefiting much.  Williamstown is a mile or so across the interstate from AE.  So far as I can tell, it has few tourist oriented businesses.  About 4 miles north on I-75 is the town of Dry Ridge.  Dry Ridge has a number of eateries and lodging establishments right on the interstate.  From what I've been able to find out, Dry Ridge is getting most of the off-site AE tourist business.

 

Ham has suggested to leaders in Williamstown that they should try to "recruit" more tourist businesses to the area.

 

There is also a TIF district of about 900 acres around AE.  I couldn't find the exact location, but anyone working within that area is charged a 2% tax on their gross income which is also paid to AE.  This means if you work 40 hours for $10 per hour, you would pay AE $8 in taxes.  In other words, there are people working near AE who are being taxed to support AE even though their religious beliefs disqualify them from employment.  I have a problem with that.

 

In the meantime Han has built an Ark that demonstrates the plausibility of what the Bible says happened is indeed possible.

All Ham has shown is that a wood structure with the dimensions of the Ark can be built.  I don't think anyone disputes that.  There's a big difference between building a structure and building one that is seaworthy.

 

 

Moreover, I am sure AIG and the town can reach an equitable agreement.

Yeah, I think Ham has decided to collect the safety tax for the town.  Remember, not one cent of this tax comes from AE income.



#85 Mike Summers

Mike Summers

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,507 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Information theory, electronics, videography, writing, human psychology, psychotherapy
  • Age: 61
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Detroit Michigan area

Posted 05 August 2017 - 09:43 AM

Piasan

In reading your prose about AE there is an obvious bias against Ham. Why? Why not play up the positive side of both groups? People can work together and there is room on earth for different points of view. Ham has the right to bring his point of view into existence by creative methods. And he did! I am sure you realize if he waited for evo to do it, it would never get done.

Here is my thinking: if a space station is possible then making a sea worthy vessel with the help of God wouldn't be unrealistic.

Design brought on by intelligence allows feedback that can correct small design problems (one of the great advantages of intelligence as opposed to evo). Besides aren't you claiming God used evolution to create the plants and animals? Why couldn't Ham and others use their God given intelligence to recreate the ark?

How improbable is life (biological life)? But, it exists?

Intelligence has made so many improbable things possible--things not caused by nature but only born of intelligence. Intelligence is what you use. Why are you so down on it? Try not using your intelligence and see how far you get? Inntelligence rules.

You and I  have observed creative events bring things into existence. But never have we observed an animal change body types even though evo's claim it has happened.


  • mike the wiz likes this

#86 Goku

Goku

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,059 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 25
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • USA

Posted 05 August 2017 - 01:13 PM

 

Goku said:

 

My takeaway is twofold: 1) AE is in financial trouble, and 2) AE is run by morally unscrupulous people.

So which rules are you using to determine "morally unscupolous}?  Doen't sound like   survival of the fittest to me? Are you using a double standard?

 

 

Well they lied about who they were going to hire in order to get permission to build their Ark as well as maximize tax breaks.

 

Then when their tourist attraction puts strain on the town's emergency services prompting the town to enact a new ticket tax, AE responds the next day by changing their for-profit to non-profit in order to get out of paying that tax. Piasan may or may not have a point about the 50 cent tax being too high with a 25 cent tax being more reasonable, but I highly doubt anyone that is planning to go to AE will not go to AE because their $40.00 ticket will now cost $40.50.
 

As for survival of the fittest, as has been said innumerable times on EFF, ToE is descriptive not prescriptive. Besides, I like to think of fitness not just in terms of individuals, but in terms of populations and even ecosystems. We are a social species; in the grand scheme of things much of our fitness derives from our social bonds. There is a reason why the best militaries emphasize group cohesion and cooperation along with individual fitness going all the way back to the Spartans. What AE is doing is erecting walls of mistrust which can serve to weaken the group and thus individuals as well.



#87 Mike Summers

Mike Summers

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,507 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Information theory, electronics, videography, writing, human psychology, psychotherapy
  • Age: 61
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Detroit Michigan area

Posted 05 August 2017 - 03:46 PM

[
Goku said:

Goku said:

Well they lied about who they were going to hire in order to get permission to build their Ark as well as maximize tax breaks.

I am sure you know the belief system of everyone that works for AE. Calling someone a liar is a bit rash I would think. At least my mom taught me. She said it was dangerous to impute motive.

Moreover, would you expect the KKK to hire blacks & Jews to work in their front office and be their leaders?


Then when their tourist attraction puts strain on the town's emergency services prompting the town to enact a new ticket tax, AE responds the next day by changing their for-profit to non-profit in order to get out of paying that tax.


It's an American custom to take care of people. If you or I had an accident in any town in America, we would expect humane and congenial treatment. No matter where an accident happens on any of our streets it would most of us would think it unconionable to leave a person untreated on the side of the road whether they have insurance or not.

Moeover, could we not expect an individual's insurance to pay for their emergency treatrment. Is AE the one responsible for the accidents across the country? Perhaps we need a more equitable insurance program for Americans. Why should AE have to pay for Americas unfairly distributed insurance program?

Once again you impute motive from a jaded cynical mind. It's been said that negotiation and compromise is the grease that oils the wheel of life. Even God says, "Come let us reason together..." Humans can an d need learn to work together and so that is what is going on here. There is no need to jump to conclusions, impute motive and disrespect the process of neotiations.

Piasan may or may not have a point about the 50 cent tax being too high with a 25 cent tax being more reasonable, but I highly doubt anyone that is planning to go to AE will not go to AE because their $40.00 ticket will now cost $40.50.


All things being considered this may be an equitable compromise. On the other hand why is AE responsible for us as individuals having accidents and getting sick (something that happens all over the country). So if you have an accident tomorrow are you going to think AE is responsible to reimburse you?

 
As for survival of the fittest, as has been said innumerable times on EFF, ToE is descriptive not prescriptive.

Once again we are treated to your dillusion of there actually being something called subjective morality (an oxymoron). The proof they say is in the eating of the pudding. Behavior is indicative of cognition.

Besides, I like to think of fitness not just in terms of individuals, but in terms of populations and even ecosystems.

There amagalmation is your doinng. There is no universal mind to control populations--a term of concience not function. All of us are individuals and merit treatment as such! That's why I don't claim to "belong" to a "group"!

We are a social species; in the grand scheme of things much of our fitness derives from our social bonds. There is a reason why the best militaries emphasize group cohesion and cooperation along with individual fitness going all the way back to the Spartans. What AE is doing is erecting walls of mistrust which can serve to weaken the group and thus individuals as well.

Sorry, divisions are caused by the barriers we individuals erect. For example I have erected no barrier between you and me. I just don't see atheism and evo as valid\ ideas. But that's only a couple of ideas we don't share and we probably totally agree on numerous others.

You seem to have a unilateral point of view as if the towns side has not bias. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." I suggest both sides are intelligent and will ultimately reach an agreement!

#88 Goku

Goku

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,059 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 25
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • USA

Posted 05 August 2017 - 08:09 PM

 

Well they lied about who they were going to hire in order to get permission to build their Ark as well as maximize tax breaks.

I am sure you know the belief system of everyone that works for AE. Calling someone a liar is a bit rash I would think. At least my mom taught me. She said it was dangerous to impute motive.

Moreover, would you expect the KKK to hire blacks & Jews to work in their front office and be their leaders?

 

AE told the town during the negotiation process when they were getting their permit that they would not discriminate employees based on religious beliefs. They lied. Plain and simple. Any other explanation would be wildly far fetched.

 

It's an American custom to take care of people. If you or I had an accident in any town in America, we would expect humane and congenial treatment. No matter where an accident happens on any of our streets it would most of us would think it unconionable to leave a person untreated on the side of the road whether they have insurance or not.

Moeover, could we not expect an individual's insurance to pay for their emergency treatrment. Is AE the one responsible for the accidents across the country? Perhaps we need a more equitable insurance program for Americans. Why should AE have to pay for Americas unfairly distributed insurance program?

Once again you impute motive from a jaded cynical mind. It's been said that negotiation and compromise is the grease that oils the wheel of life. Even God says, "Come let us reason together..." Humans can an d need learn to work together and so that is what is going on here. There is no need to jump to conclusions, impute motive and disrespect the process of neotiations.

 

All things being considered this may be an equitable compromise. On the other hand why is AE responsible for us as individuals having accidents and getting sick (something that happens all over the country). So if you have an accident tomorrow are you going to think AE is responsible to reimburse you?

I agree we need a better health care system, but the fact remains that AE itself places a strain on the local emergency services. Imagine the town of Mayberry from the Andy Griffith Show. If a tourist location was set up right outside of town that attracted twice the number of tourists each day as the entire population of Mayberry, do you really think Andy and Barney would be able to address any and all police calls from both the town and the tourist attraction without hiring more people? Same with the local doctor?

 

Why should the town absorb the entire additional cost to the local emergency services when the giant influx is caused by AE? A ticket tax does seem like a reasonable measure. I don't think it is particularly cynical to ascribe with high likelihood that AE specifically tried to dodge this tax when they changed their for-profit status to non-profit the very next day after this new tax was announced. In addition the fact that they switched back to for-profit status indicates to me that the original change was done hastily before they fully vetted the consequences, making it less likely that it was a miraculous coincidence.

 

Another way to look at it would be this: AE being in that town's boarders uses the emergency services, so why should AE be exempt from paying their fair share?

 

Once again we are treated to your dillusion of there actually being something called subjective morality (an oxymoron). The proof they say is in the eating of the pudding. Behavior is indicative of cognition.

 

How is subjective morality an oxymoron? That's like saying having a favorite color is an oxymoron.

 

In any case this doesn't address the fact that ToE is descriptive, not prescriptive. IOW ToE is making no claims about morality or how things ought to be.
 

There amagalmation is your doinng. There is no universal mind to control populations--a term of concience not function. All of us are individuals and merit treatment as such! That's why I don't claim to "belong" to a "group"!

 

No one ever said that belonging to a group means there is a universal mind controlling that group. You have a very twisted conception of what a group is. Besides, you are in at least one group: the members of EFF. Do you feel that there is a universal mind controlling everyone on EFF?

 

In any case you asked how it is possible to be against AE's actions while simultaneously accepting ToE (survival of the fittest). As stated before ToE is descriptive, not prescriptive, yet I have also noticed that it is often more insightful to view fitness through the lens of group fitness rather than solely individual fitness. As a social species we rely on trust to develop and mature bonds, and thus increase group fitness. Actions which erode that trust can have negative consequences on such fitness, and AE's actions certainly have the potential to erode trust.



#89 Mike Summers

Mike Summers

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,507 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Information theory, electronics, videography, writing, human psychology, psychotherapy
  • Age: 61
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Detroit Michigan area

Posted 06 August 2017 - 03:20 PM

Goku said:

Mike Summers, on 05 Aug 2017 - 5:46 PM, said:
Goku said: Well they lied about who they were going to hire in order to get permission to build their Ark as well as maximize tax breaks.

Mike Said: You don't know this unless you can read minds. There are other explanations.

Perhaps the comment was in reference to the construction workers that would build the ARK? Or perhaps they changed their minds.

Mike said: I am sure you know the belief system of everyone that works for AE. Calling someone a liar is a bit rash I would think. At least my mom taught me that. She said it was dangerous to impute motive.

Moreover, would you expect the KKK to hire blacks & Jews to work in their front office and be their leaders?

 

AE told the town during the negotiation process when they were getting their permit that they would not discriminate employees based on religious beliefs. They lied.

Before the ark was built it was wideely known that AIG required its emplyees to be Christian.

Unless you can read minds, you don't know this to be the case. Would you expect me to say that people that believe in evo are liars? I have never called you a liar.
I think you believe evo is true.

Let's face it you come acoss as an adversary of AE and don't even feign neutrality. Few people are ever as bad as their enemies say they are.

Plain and simple. Any other explanation would be wildly far fetched.

 
Mike: This is called dichotomous reasoning. Either this or that when there can be any number of explanations. Any other explanation could be the truth! What happend to inocent until proven guilty? Instead of being objective, you take sides and AE is automatically guilty. Try to be a little more objective. Your bias is showing!

Mike Said: It's an American custom to take care of people. If you or I had an accident in any town in America, we would expect humane and congenial treatment. No matter where an accident happens on any of our streets most of us would think it unconionable to leave a person untreated on the side of the road whether they have insurance or not.

Moeover, could we not expect an individual's insurance to pay for their emergency treatrment? Is AE the one responsible for the accidents across the country? Perhaps we need a more equitable insurance program for Americans. Why should AE have to pay for Americas unfairly distributed insurance programs?

Once again you impute motive from a jaded cynical mind. It's been said that negotiation and compromise is the grease that oils the wheel of life. Even God says, "Come let us reason together..." Humans can an do need learn to work together. That is what is going on here. There is no need to jump to conclusions, impute motive and disrespect the process of neotiations.
 
Mike Said: All things being considered this may be an equitable compromise. On the other hand why is AE responsible for us as individuals having accidents and getting sick (something that happens all over the country). So, if you have an accident tomorrow are you going to think AE is responsible to reimburse you?

Goku said: I agree we need a better health care system, but the fact remains that AE itself places a strain on the local emergency services.

One of the great things about this country is that we can get on our interstate and go any place we wish without having to ask permission from the government. I personally have traveled though many states. Nobody is waiting at any state border to check if you have the rights to travel anywhere you choose. How is it that that AIG contols who comes to the ARK? They don't! We call it free choice.

Goku said: Imagine the town of Mayberry from the Andy Griffith Show. If a tourist location was set up right outside of town that attracted twice the number of tourists each day as the entire population of Mayberry, do you really think Andy and Barney would be able to address any and all police calls from both the town and the tourist attraction without hiring more people? Same with the local doctor?

No doubt they they would enlist the help of the state police. If you have medical insurance, insurance is inforce anywhere in the United states. An extra doctor would be suppored by a nationwide functional insurance program.

 
Goku said: Why should the town absorb the entire additional cost to the local emergency services when the giant influx is caused by AE?

Indeed why should any one "group" have to absorb the responsibility for others.

The responsibility of traveling to the Ark is individual. That's one of the costs of being a free country. Besides AE did agree to collect a tax fee. They just wanted to negotiate how much it would be.

Mike said: A ticket tax does seem like a reasonable measure. I don't think it is particularly cynical to ascribe with high likelihood that AE specifically tried to dodge this tax when they changed their for-profit status to non-profit the very next day after this new tax was announced.

A ticket tax is one solution of many. I think the best solution would be for everyone to be covered under a national insurance policy like the other civilized nations have for their people.

Goku said: In addition the fact that they switched back to for-profit status indicates to me that the original change was done hastily before they fully vetted the consequences, making it less likely that it was a miraculous coincidence.

So you inor the fact that the city didn't realize that they were going to have an increas on public services and need a tax to pay for it?

Boy you are cynical, for such a young man.
Moreover, AIG was probably following the advice of their lawyers. It was tit for tat! Who knows wheter the officials of the town cconsulted with AIG and explained their plight or just made a unilateral decision without input from AIG. AIG responded in kind!

Goku said: Another way to look at it would be this: AE being in that town's boarders uses the emergency services, so why should AE be exempt from paying their fair share?


This problem could also be solved by a natoinal insurance program where everyone would be covered where ever

Mike Said: Once again we are treated to your dillusion of there actually being something called subjective morality (an oxymoron). The proof they say is in the eating of the pudding. Behavior is indicative of cognition.
 
Goku said: How is subjective morality an oxymoron? That's like saying having a favorite color is an oxymoron.

I guess I have a different point of view. All 20 or so million colors are my favorites. Morality is morality from the individuals point of view. It is not subjective from the individual applying it. In my mind
God has the last say on what is moral. In your mind I would guess you have the last say?

Goku: In any case this doesn't address the fact that ToE is descriptive, not prescriptive. IOW ToE is making no claims about morality or how things ought to be.

There you go again personifying the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution is a theory created by an intelligent being. I never said it made any claims about morality. Humans do that! But you do claim that evolution created us so somehow (I admit I don't know how) it is responsible for all we are. Maybe you can explain how that works? Right now evo seems so magical. It's responsible for everything and it's not responsible for anything! Sounds like a bunch of double talk!

Mike said: This amagalmation is your doinng. There is no universal mind to control populations--a term of convience not function. All of us are individuals and merit treatment as such! That's why I don't claim to "belong" to a "group"!

No one ever said that belonging to a group means there is a universal mind controlling that group.

They do that in a different way such as believing you and the group are one!
Part of what I mean is that the group can not own us. Nor are we somehow responsible for what the other individuals associated to the group may do or say.

Goku: You have a very twisted conception of what a group is.

Or you do. So explain to me what a group is and then what an individual is?

Goku said: Besides, you are in at least one group: the members of EFF. Do you feel that there is a universal mind controlling everyone on EFF?

No I don't. In the sense I belong to the EFF group I share many of the same beliefs others that associate themselves with the group share. But you belong" to EFF too! Don't you? I wouldn't claim you share my beliefs! Would you? Group is a term that is widely misused.
 

Goku said: In any case you asked how it is possible to be against AE's actions while simultaneously accepting ToE (survival of the fittest). As stated before ToE is descriptive, not prescriptive, yet I have also noticed that it is often more insightful to view fitness through the lens of group fitness rather than solely individual fitness.


"I am not saying what I am saying!" LOL
There is no method to do what you say because we are all individuals. Our individuality is paramount. Our body's condition determines how well we are as an individual. There is no group mind or body. A group is a concept or anlogy not an entity.

Goku said: As a social species we rely on trust to develop and mature bonds, and thus increase group fitness.

Double talk. There is no group fitness as we are individuals.

Actions which erode that trust can have negative consequences on such fitness, and AE's actions certainly have the potential to erode trust.

It takes two to tnago. AE is not an entity. It probably was an individual (Ham) that made the final decisions. The town's spokemen could be guilty of the same erosion of trust. You need to try and be more objective. Why not want the best for everyone instead of your constant adversary position of us vs them--good guy bad guy?
 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users