and it already displaces the amount of water it contains more or less

https://youtu.be/uuW0a8rtX1w

Here's a great debate on Guns and their effects in the US

well

you see, mach

More Guns = Less Crime

you fucking moron

there's a tiny little sliver of land

CALLED GREENLAND

which is close enough that it has glaciers and shit on it

then there's also antarctica

which is mostly land

yeah but antarctic isn't melting much

it's actually growing iirc

the thing with greenland is it will be sudden

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/31052016/why-antarctica-sea-ice-level-growing-while-arctic-glaciers-melts-climate-change-global-warming

there are colossal meltwater lakes that would go all at once

they would also potentially disrupt the ocean's currents but that's another story

just did the math

if all the ice in greenland melted and went into the ocean the total amount in there would go up by 30%

so it really is no joke

🇫

>Destiny getting ass-fucked in a debate

@Monstrous Moonshine that isn't news, he gets slapped around by anyone with an even-remotely cogent argument

He is strong on some issues

And this is the first time he lost in a gun debate

He did well against some others in gun debates

He got fucked by Metokur pretty hard tbh

>imagine thinking you won't do crime if you realize you can get away with it

on Sargon's three arrows video:
I'm regularly making this statement:
"it's been 100 years since our monarchy ended and since then, we managed to have three murderous ideologies in charge of our country and society, accepted and embodied by the majority of Germans." each of those times, it was the opposite of another murderous ideology, which Germans tried to distance themselves from...
so, I am simply not sure if Germany CAN ever fully adopt that which isn't radical...
Germans might just be the most maniacal people in existence... and exactly that mania drives them to unbelievable heights, but also to the deepest pits of hell. balancing it would likely mean having to go back to monarchy. to establish someone/something to keep the most radical tendencies in check, something no republican/democratic system seems to be able to do.
I currently see no other way to do it, even though I would like to...
little bit of trivia: there was more freedom of speech under the Kaiser, than there is in Germany today.

not sure if I am correct, but I cannot find another possible solution...
what I am nearly certain of is: we need a decent relationship with the British. as soon as the British broke with tradition (marrying a German and having their honeymoon in paris... at the head of an army, ofc), it all went to shits.

Germans just need to drop their idiotic meta-narrative

they arent responsible for anything their ancestors did, no one is, period

@Cesare Anasazi
at the same time, things like where they live and their born-into wealth isn't random, but inherited from their ancestors. so wouldn't the question then be: "how much of the blood tied to this wealth, this land, this knowledge is inherited?"
saying it is random would de-value the achievements of their ancestors. AND it is used to justify the horrendous immigration policy.

You would need to elaborate or rephrase question, I dont get what you are asking.

Please dont write a whole novella here

I mean: it is quite clear, that it is NOT luck, that you were born where you were born and into the living standards into which you are born, as that is the direct consequence of the actions of your direct ancestors...
so, they reap the rewards for what their ancestors did, inheriting the consequences of their positive actions.
I know it sounds stupid, but shouldn't they then also inherit the consequences of their ancestors' negative actions?
that is the question that is being asked in a lot of cases in Germany... most of the time indirectly.
I personally have to disagree with the notion, but if you want to stay completely consistent, it is a viable question to ask.

there's one other statement made in this specific context, actually even more frequently but the entire premise is incorrect:
1." it is luck to be born into Germany, others couldn't choose to be born into other circumstances, so it's not actually our wealth, it is randomly inherited" (completely disregarding the contributions of ancestry to wealth or poverty, usually while giving responsibility for negative actions)

nah I was just thinking of how to phrase it and if there's another statement on the topic which is frequently being made.

No one owes anyone anything just cause they were born in different places

agreed.

If my parents worked a lot and gave me their wealth as inheritance that's between me and them