What he describes is EXACTLY what AGW deniers do. Over and over and over again.

Testing multi-thousand dollar battery pack is a given. As is the factory's need of stored energy. The speculation that these two will go together is well worth making.

I know that everything "green" upsets you, and hurts your world view. But try not to be so grumpy.

I've already answered about 2 dozen responses on this topic. I'll just say here, that with the cop example you've gone further than even other people on your side will support. Reductio ad absurdum.

If you do, then you are the stupid one.

Reasons in the other post.

You blamed the victim right there. You THINK the distinction you make makes it OK, but it doesn't. Even if she were stupid, IQ is not morality. You aren't a better person for being clever and a worse person for being stupid. There is no guilt on the victim here. You are just wrong.

Tell me, in your opinion would she still be guilty of stupidity if she went to a party and wasn't raped? What penalty should she pay for this guilt of stupidity where no one was hurt and everyone had a great time?

I see what you did there was wrong. There are other uses of quote marks, for example in code, or to indicated invented speech in works of fiction. But in prose, you are claiming someone said something. And in both cases you've done it no one did. If you've see someone else do what you're doing then they are wrong too.

Enough.

This isn't complicated. The link gives an appropriate format for everybody. webm is only useful to some. Hence the link is more useful.

The Flash comment was just wrong and irrelevant, as you may be getting webm and I'm getting H.264. Neither of us is getting flash. Although those for whom that is an acceptable format might be. Which again makes the link more useful.

No they didn't. It's built into the OS. It's asked about when first setting up the phone, but you can't blame people for following the recommended options. Most people are not geeks and don't know the implications of everything they do, and should be able to rely on the recommended options from a reputable company. Indeed, despite this news story backing up *IS* the best thing.

It's a nuanced thing. Doing so at the time of the news of the crime in 99% of cases comes across as blaming the victim, and most of those cases, intentionally so. It's no different from saying a rape victim shouldn't have worn a short skirt. And I would hope you wouldn't do that.

Insurance companies are no different from bookmakers. They accept bets. And via the insurance contract they get to set the rules by which the bets are settled. Their rules and morality are not at all in line.

That particular angle you described is bizarre though. If you'd left the lock at home, or had it in your backpack, you could remove the key and show them. Or you could simply buy another lock to get the keys. It sounds like it's simply a matter of trying to make it more of a pain in the ass to claim.

Certainly not. It was simply a quick way of making the OP see that his point was ridiculous. No victim is ever to blame for the crime done to them.

I was beginning to think I was on my own with the this. Thanks for opening your mouth in the end!

I'd certainly expect to be paid out if it were parked in a "bad part of town". But the keys part is simply a part of the contract between you. You are still not in any way to blame for the crime you are a victim of.

Furthermore, your example shows how you have to move the goalposts. The celebrities did not leave their passwords somewhere.

But that's not the limits of what you previously said. You previously both said that victims were at fault, and you also sanctioned them for that fault by saying "you do not feel sorry for them", which is an indirect way of saying they deserved it.

I'm afraid you're miscomprehending. In computer terms you're confusing the if statement with the contents of the optional block. Saying responsibility implies fault if you do the wrong thing is NOT saying responsibility = fault. I did not say they were a single thing.

Since for ever. If I chose coffee rather than tea, it's not a case of responsibility. I don't have to answer to anyone for it. There is no right or wrong.

For sure some choices do include responsibility. In this case the choice of the criminal to do the crime.