What are your unpopular opinions?

[V8RX7]

peterperkins said:

StevieBee said:

Linked to a post someone made a few pages back regarding the Hybrid Vigour being the beneficial outcome of inter-racial breeding, there are several theories that the breeding across races will become increasingly profound to a point where there will be a common skin colour. The evolutionary outcome of this is an abundance of super-smart people that recognise the abstract notion of politics, borders and the like, removing such hindrances to human progression.

These theories suggest that a critical mass will be arrived at where the entire human species will work together as a single mass and not as individuals or individual groups. At this point, the rise in scientific endeavour and discovery will become exponential and unlimited to levels that we are unable to currently comprehend.

Obviously only a theory and one that's unlikely to be proven any time soon......but I rather like the idea.

As above. As travel becomes easier and easier so will intermarriage and racial mixing.
It's only a matter of time before we are all light brown/off white with slightly asian eyes.
It like school plasticine nice lovely seperate colours in a new packet but then after a few weeks in the hands of the hordes it's looks like poo. .

So that means NO MORE GINGERS - I'm all for it

[StevieBee]

LimaDelta said:

singlecoil said:

StevieBee said:

Linked to a post someone made a few pages back regarding the Hybrid Vigour being the beneficial outcome of inter-racial breeding, there are several theories that the breeding across races will become increasingly profound to a point where there will be a common skin colour.

"Take a pinch of white man
Wrap him up in black skin
Add a touch of blue blood
And a little bitty bit of red Indian boy
Oh like a Curly Latin kinkies
Oh Lordy, Lordy, mixed with yellow ees, yeah
You know you lump it all together
And you got a recipe for a get along scene
Oh what a beautiful dream"

All well and good but humans are tribal by nature, and more than willing to hate even those who look just like us as easily as those who look different. Even if we end up a homogeneous race of tall beige beings we will still fight over football teams/phone operating systems/feline or canine superiority/religion/politics/etc.

At the moment, yes. The theory is that this behaviour becomes increasing recognised as counter productive and over time becomes less and less.

[RacerMDR]

peterperkins said:

StevieBee said:

Linked to a post someone made a few pages back regarding the Hybrid Vigour being the beneficial outcome of inter-racial breeding, there are several theories that the breeding across races will become increasingly profound to a point where there will be a common skin colour. The evolutionary outcome of this is an abundance of super-smart people that recognise the abstract notion of politics, borders and the like, removing such hindrances to human progression.

These theories suggest that a critical mass will be arrived at where the entire human species will work together as a single mass and not as individuals or individual groups. At this point, the rise in scientific endeavour and discovery will become exponential and unlimited to levels that we are unable to currently comprehend.

Obviously only a theory and one that's unlikely to be proven any time soon......but I rather like the idea.

As above. As travel becomes easier and easier so will intermarriage and racial mixing.
It's only a matter of time before we are all light brown/off white with slightly asian eyes.
It like school plasticine nice lovely seperate colours in a new packet but then after a few weeks in the hands of the hordes it's looks like poo. .

and hopefully killing off all religions as we know them at the same time. Utopia..........1000s of years away

[grumbledoak]

StevieBee said:

Linked to a post someone made a few pages back regarding the Hybrid Vigour being the beneficial outcome of inter-racial breeding, there are several theories that the breeding across races will become increasingly profound to a point where there will be a common skin colour. The evolutionary outcome of this is an abundance of super-smart people that recognise the abstract notion of politics, borders and the like, removing such hindrances to human progression.

These theories suggest that a critical mass will be arrived at where the entire human species will work together as a single mass and not as individuals or individual groups. At this point, the rise in scientific endeavour and discovery will become exponential and unlimited to levels that we are unable to currently comprehend.

Obviously only a theory and one that's unlikely to be proven any time soon......but I rather like the idea.

Just another re-hash of Marx. In case you didn't learn anything from previous attempts, the Socialists will say anything to gain power, and it never turns out how they promised. There will be no point at which we all become "one glorious whole" as beings, no matter how homogenous our skin colour gets. And if - or when - a one world political structure is forced upon us it is likely to be hell on earth with no escape, much as the USSR was for decades, only spherical.

[anonymous-user]

Antony Moxey said:

Haha - I think exactly the same about over protective parents and their screaming brats. If you can’t cope with a dog running around the beach causing no harm to anyone, especially ‘your babies’ as it runs past them almost coming within ten feet of them as it chases a ball into the sea then fk off back home to your nice insulated bubble so you can all rock back and forth together while your GP organises counseling for you and your demon spawn.

Dogs on a beach, fk off. That’s what rip tides were made for

[Antony Moxey]

DRFC1879 said:

Vandenberg said:

DRFC1879 said:

No, not intentional just not particularly well-written I suppose! They both run the risk of losing grip and falling imminently.

FWIW I expect some people would write that they'd save the dog to stick to their guns in the argument but would save the child in reality. Which opens up a whole other debate about the polarity of online opinion and why people behave the way they do on the internet but I'm not going there!

I answered dog the first time I read it, now I think my answer would be: it depends which mate I apply the scenario to.

Of the 5 friends I know who have produced a kid, to be brutally honest i would only save one of them over a dog, the other four not a chance.

Really?

I know the thread is for unpopular opinions but I'm struggling to get my head around this.

Let's say the average dog lives to be ~15 years old. Maybe 20. I don't know how old you are or how old your dog is which could be relevant. If you're 70 and you've got a one-year-old dog, chances are you'll go before it. A bit irresponsible to leave someone else burdened with the animal when you're gone but you may be lonely and all that so I'll let it go.

However, let's say you're 50 and your dog is seven. There's a strong probability that it'll die well before you. And you'll be sad, and miss it for a few months. Then you'll probably get another one because you're a "dog person" and that's what dog people do.

And you value the life of the animal that you've bought and because you're a functioning adult you knew at the time will die at some point in the next few years over the child of a friend?

Maybe you do. But I find it very hard to believe.

What’s age got to do with anything - does that mean you’d save a turtle over a child? As it is, I suspect I’d assess the situation to see which was easiest to get to - the last thing I’m going to do is fall off myself and get myself killed, however all things being equal I’d probably still save my dog. I can live with a friend not being a friend any more if his child pegged it because I didn’t save him.

As for finding things hard to believe, why should it be assumed that humans should value human life over any other? Just because we’re the same species, why should we care about that species more than another?

[Antony Moxey]

DRFC1879 said:

I'm a big football fan (not unpopular opinion except on here it would seem).

I don't really want my team to get into the Premier League (that's probably a rather unpopular opinion amongst football fans).

I love watching honest pros grafting week-in, week-out with the odd moment of individual brilliance (for the last decade or so mostly from a player by the name of James Coppinger). I love the camaraderie of going for a few beers with a group of really good friends, some of whom I would never have met without football.

I love the fact that whenever I go to a match I stop numerous times to say hello or have a quick chat with people who fee l like family to me because they've been part of the same close-knit group following a mainly ste football team the length and breadth of the country for the last 25 years.

I love the fact that because my team is usually a bit crap and we've (yeah, I automatically used the personal pronoun, get over it) been on the brink of extinction, the odd occasions on which we've won anything actually mean something.

Any tool can stick a pin in the top half of the Premier League and decide to "support" one of those teams then spend their life crowing about how "we" beat "you" to the latest ninety gazillion pound German full-back. If that's what football is, I hate football too.

Yep, go along with most of this - I’d hate my fourth division also runs to get to the top division. When I go to a match I can have a beer outside the main stand with away fans and then have a chat with numerous directors and the chairman all of whom I’m on first name terms with.

During the week I can pop along to the training ground and speak to the grounds man if I need any advice on looking after our 3G pitch (I’m a school caretaker), and while I’m there the first team manager will pop over for a chat to see how things are. In the past I’ve had club officials ask my opinion on players (I’m just a long term season ticket holder - I have no professional experience within the game) and for a number of years the club gave me the access codes to the official club website so I could post up match reports that for about ten years appeared completely unedited because they trusted me not write anything that would embarrass the club or show it or the players in a bad light.

I can’t see any of that happening if my team ever got to the top division and just love us being where we are plodding along in the bottom two divisions. And in the spirit of th3 thread I couldn’t care less whether anyone thinks I’m waffling on.

[bloomen]

Shakespeare is irrelevant indecipherable bks.

[Antony Moxey]

yonex said:

Dogs on a beach, fk off. That’s what rip tides were made for

People on a beach, fk off. All those stupid disposable barbecues left, litter, buried nappies, baby wipes, takeaway wrappers and broken windbreaks. Plus the idiot who always insist on loud music, and the one with a stunt kite the size of a tent, and the jet skiers blocking access to the sea. Just let the dogs run free and be happy.

[AppleJuice]

The Spruce goose said:

Apple are the only company that can use a talking st in its advert and people still buy it.

Rather reflects on the customer Apple is looking for...

[StevieBee]

grumbledoak said:

StevieBee said:

Linked to a post someone made a few pages back regarding the Hybrid Vigour being the beneficial outcome of inter-racial breeding, there are several theories that the breeding across races will become increasingly profound to a point where there will be a common skin colour. The evolutionary outcome of this is an abundance of super-smart people that recognise the abstract notion of politics, borders and the like, removing such hindrances to human progression.

These theories suggest that a critical mass will be arrived at where the entire human species will work together as a single mass and not as individuals or individual groups. At this point, the rise in scientific endeavour and discovery will become exponential and unlimited to levels that we are unable to currently comprehend.

Obviously only a theory and one that's unlikely to be proven any time soon......but I rather like the idea.

Just another re-hash of Marx. In case you didn't learn anything from previous attempts, the Socialists will say anything to gain power, and it never turns out how they promised. There will be no point at which we all become "one glorious whole" as beings, no matter how homogenous our skin colour gets. And if - or when - a one world political structure is forced upon us it is likely to be hell on earth with no escape, much as the USSR was for decades, only spherical.

I'll have to try and find a reference to the theory.

As I recall, the concept is nothing to do with an evening out of skin colour but the rapid rise in cognitive excellence and genetic strength that mixed-race offspring tend to attain. People get smarter to levels and in numbers that mean a political structure is not required because individuals accumulate the ability to self govern.

So earth becomes one country - other worlds become the new countries - humans begin to breed with aliens -and on it goes.

But its only a theory and not mine but one that seems to have a smattering of logic IMO.

[singlecoil]

StevieBee said:

grumbledoak said:

StevieBee said:

Linked to a post someone made a few pages back regarding the Hybrid Vigour being the beneficial outcome of inter-racial breeding, there are several theories that the breeding across races will become increasingly profound to a point where there will be a common skin colour. The evolutionary outcome of this is an abundance of super-smart people that recognise the abstract notion of politics, borders and the like, removing such hindrances to human progression.

These theories suggest that a critical mass will be arrived at where the entire human species will work together as a single mass and not as individuals or individual groups. At this point, the rise in scientific endeavour and discovery will become exponential and unlimited to levels that we are unable to currently comprehend.

Obviously only a theory and one that's unlikely to be proven any time soon......but I rather like the idea.

Just another re-hash of Marx. In case you didn't learn anything from previous attempts, the Socialists will say anything to gain power, and it never turns out how they promised. There will be no point at which we all become "one glorious whole" as beings, no matter how homogenous our skin colour gets. And if - or when - a one world political structure is forced upon us it is likely to be hell on earth with no escape, much as the USSR was for decades, only spherical.

I'll have to try and find a reference to the theory.

As I recall, the concept is nothing to do with an evening out of skin colour but the rapid rise in cognitive excellence and genetic strength that mixed-race offspring tend to attain. People get smarter to levels and in numbers that mean a political structure is not required because individuals accumulate the ability to self govern.

So earth becomes one country - other worlds become the new countries - humans begin to breed with aliens -and on it goes.

But its only a theory and not mine but one that seems to have a smattering of logic IMO.

But it's based on a theory that isn't necessarily correct. One could only expect mixed race offspring to do better if they were the product of two populations too small to be sufficiently diverse. But all the races have large populations so there is plenty of genetic diversity within each one.

[glazbagun]

Additionally breeding with aliens sounds impossible by definition. If birds can become so isolated as to be incompatible for mating with each other, what hope have we got with hyperintelligent space lettuce.

[anonymous-user]

glazbagun said:

Additionally breeding with aliens sounds impossible by definition. If birds can become so isolated as to be incompatible for mating with each other, what hope have we got with hyperintelligent space lettuce.

Gene splicing

[jimPH]

singlecoil said:

StevieBee said:

grumbledoak said:

StevieBee said:

Linked to a post someone made a few pages back regarding the Hybrid Vigour being the beneficial outcome of inter-racial breeding, there are several theories that the breeding across races will become increasingly profound to a point where there will be a common skin colour. The evolutionary outcome of this is an abundance of super-smart people that recognise the abstract notion of politics, borders and the like, removing such hindrances to human progression.

These theories suggest that a critical mass will be arrived at where the entire human species will work together as a single mass and not as individuals or individual groups. At this point, the rise in scientific endeavour and discovery will become exponential and unlimited to levels that we are unable to currently comprehend.

Obviously only a theory and one that's unlikely to be proven any time soon......but I rather like the idea.

Just another re-hash of Marx. In case you didn't learn anything from previous attempts, the Socialists will say anything to gain power, and it never turns out how they promised. There will be no point at which we all become "one glorious whole" as beings, no matter how homogenous our skin colour gets. And if - or when - a one world political structure is forced upon us it is likely to be hell on earth with no escape, much as the USSR was for decades, only spherical.

I'll have to try and find a reference to the theory.

As I recall, the concept is nothing to do with an evening out of skin colour but the rapid rise in cognitive excellence and genetic strength that mixed-race offspring tend to attain. People get smarter to levels and in numbers that mean a political structure is not required because individuals accumulate the ability to self govern.

So earth becomes one country - other worlds become the new countries - humans begin to breed with aliens -and on it goes.

But its only a theory and not mine but one that seems to have a smattering of logic IMO.

But it's based on a theory that isn't necessarily correct. One could only expect mixed race offspring to do better if they were the product of two populations too small to be sufficiently diverse. But all the races have large populations so there is plenty of genetic diversity within each one.

It doesn't quite work like that either due to dominance. For instance, my wife is black, 1st generation Nigerian, both our daughters are white with blue eyes. To the point where people ask who/where's the mother.

My cousin's father is half cast, but she is also white, you wouldn't be able to tell, she doesn't even tan that well.

Obviously, for the most part, children take characteristics from both, but depending on who they end up with, the genes tend to get rediluted. For instance, a half cast friend from uni married a white girl, so their children are dominantly white, though one has dark eyes and hair, the other is blonde.

I doubt we'd all end up the same colour.

[p1esk]

Pothole said:

p1esk said:

...and who the hell decided it should be described as 'the beautiful game'? I see nothing beautiful about it.

I am quite clearly a grumpy old git. (That, by the way, will not be an unpopular opinion; many will agree with that!)

A sporting legend or a legendary paedo...you choose

wikipedia said:

The Beautiful Game (Portuguese: o jogo bonito) is a nickname for association football popularised by the Brazilian professional footballer Pelé. Although the exact origin of the phrase is disputed, football commentator Stuart Hall used it in 1958.

Well that's something I didn't know, so thanks for that.

BTW, was Pele the guy who (so it was claimed) once scored a goal using his hand? Maybe it was somebody else, in which case ignore that.

[DurianIceCream]

Antony Moxey said:

As it is, I suspect I’d assess the situation to see which was easiest to get to - the last thing I’m going to do is fall off myself and get myself killed, however all things being equal I’d probably still save my dog. I can live with a friend not being a friend any more if his child pegged it because I didn’t save him.

Quoted for posterity.

[Fastchas]

I've posted this before in PH and got a good-ish reception but outside of PH I'm vilified;

Maggie Thatcher introducing the Poll Tax was a good idea. It was spoilt by scum who wanted other people to pay more than them for the same service.

[Frank7]

p1esk said:

Well that's something I didn't know, so thanks for that.

BTW, was Pele the guy who (so it was claimed) once scored a goal using his hand? Maybe it was somebody else, in which case ignore that.

Maybe Pele did, but I doubt it, he always came across as a stand-up guy, a Brazilian Bobby Moore if you will, you're probably thinking of the Argentine, Diego Maradona, but as that was against England, and I have a soupçon of French blood, I don't care.
Thierry Henry of France also allegedly used his hand to score a goal against Ireland in 2009, and although I think that Ireland is a great place, and the Irish are mostly nice people, Thierry is also French, so I was not unduly upset about that either, in fact I gave him the benefit of the doubt.
However, when the extremely talented and all round nice French guy, Zinedine Zidane, gently brushed the Italian Marco Materazzi's chest with his head in the 2006 World Cup Final, and got sent off, with Italy winning on penalties, that was a travesty of gargantuan proportions.

[FiF]

Unpopular with some, the natural enemy of the British is the French.