Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
Maybe we should rename this thread "How in the fuck do you talk to Hybris about anything?"
Maybe you should rename the thread "A primer in internet argument", with subtext "with minor instruction in agreeing with anything that has a vagina".
Isn't that sort of a personal thing? I think it's fairly obvious that it will be enough to sway me when there are significant facts in support that can't be refuted or dismissed, just like with any other argument in the history of the world. What a pointless, asinine question.
so to you, scientific proof is a personal thing?
wow
do you also believe that vaccines are causing autism?
It would seem now that you are unable to offer up some "significant facts" to support your opinions, I will therefore have to assume that your OPINIONS are pointless and asinine.
Wayward_Woman, when you next see Hybris, please give him a big hug from everyone in this thread. He seems to need it.
And please pass the gravy.
I'm not a fake person. I'm a real person along with everyone else here. If you choose not to see that and instead get frothing-at-the-mouth defensive and deny discussion, that's your loss. And your right, I guess. But this spewing of hostility is weird and unhealthy and it diminishes the actual discussion the rest of these fake internet losers are trying to engage in, and it's not the first time it's come from you. Am I wrong here?
Right, so we turn it into a link war, where I get slammed for using "RIGHT WING PROPAGANDA" sources while being hammered with stuff from the other side. Here's a pro-tip: if you weren't a bunch of "me too" assholes from the start, people would be more inclined to converse with you and not get defensive.
so, you admit to using "Right Wing Propaganda" to justify your beliefs.....
Here's a pro-tip: if you weren't a bunch of "me too" assholes from the start, people would be more inclined to converse with you and not get defensive.
Here's your first post in this thread:
Eat me, shithead.
No offense.
Yeah, I want to have a reasonable debate with that.
Yeah, you're wrong. If you can't see how it pisses someone off to be immediately dismissed because they haven't been tugging the dick of a big-name poster here since 2002, I don't know what to tell you.
I'm not frothing at the mouth. At best, I'm irritated that on the internet, people always find a way to turn something back on you. People were hostile and insulting to me before I even got into the thread, I responded with irritation.. and now somehow the hostility is my fault? I got called an idiot before I even got here. And you're all acting like this is some knock-down, drag out thing, when really... she was just using you for validation. Cool, I guess.
Anyway, it's pointless. It's a community. In a community, there are going to be people that don't agree with you. I don't respond as well as I could to blind condescension and insults. I don't know if anyone does. No doubt there are people that do so better than me. But it's easy to see nobody in here is interested in discussion. Look at the posts. I was shoehorned into the teacher-hating idiot Republican category so you could hang me up and throw darts at me. I'm not even a fucking Republican! I just don't think global warming is a hair-pulling crisis. I think we can afford to wait and see a little bit more before we start diverting all kinds of resources to repairing it and "making it right". That was my line. I think some people saw a way to net some cash by playing on people's fears. Wouldn't be the first time in history.
Look at the responses. "You're dumb." "You're dumb." "You're really dating this guy? *condescending remark about the relationship*" Yeah, it's clear everyone in this thread was just looking to have a clearheaded discussion, and not launch into a diatribe of "I hate my conservative parents", with "Let's barbecue this global warming guy" by proxy.
Here's your first post in this thread:
Yeah, I want to have a reasonable debate with that.
Why did you leave out the part where the guy called me an idiot before I even got here? Weird.
I kind of look at it this way. I consider myself a libertarian, but I am not deluded enough to think that a libertarian society would work in the US. If you are arguing with someone who is so set in their beliefs that they will not even look at the other side, as another poster put it, the only way to win is not to play.
For example, I have friends who are hardcore Christians. I know better than to get into a discussion on atheism and homosexuality with them, and we have an agreement, as adults, not to discuss it with each other.
I also have friends who are quite socialist who post all kinds of fun stuff on facebook. I ignore those as well, and when I see them, we don't talk about it.
Wayward_Woman, watching this might give you a better understanding of where Hybris is coming from:
Why did you leave out the part where the guy called me an idiot before I even got here? Weird.
To which level you promptly sank the ... ah the hell with it.
Do you not see the hypocrisy in this? They all agree, really? All of them? You've read every study and finding and bit of information regarding global warming that has ever existed, and there have never been any educated, dissenting opinions?
Hybris, here's a chart showing a visual representation of dissenting opinions among publishing scientists:
There's a difference between donating money to polar bears and accepting the gravity of the consequences of global climate change. It's impossible for a layman to "do research" and "compare facts" when you have no basis for interpreting what you're reading and facts can be cherry-picked to support a given side. When that side has more money, influence and power than just about any industry, there's no limit to what those people can pay for. In fact, the Koch brothers recently bankrolled a scientist who went into his study a climate skeptic and came out in support of what 90% of scientists agree to be catastrophic climate change. He did not look into whether it's man-made but believes "Greenhouse gases could have a disastrous impact on the world." This is after being paid $150k from epic polluters the Koch brothers to say the opposite. My interpretation of that is that the data was just too scary.
You don't live in sub-Saharan Africa so you don't see that the deserts are spreading. There is a massive drought in the Horn of Africa. The permafrost is melting. Spin and duration of hurricanes have doubled. These are things you can see with your own eyes.
The way I look at is is, if a doctor told me I had high cholesteral and was on a crash course for heart attack country, and it could be genetic or it could be my lifestyle, I'd change my lifestyle just to be on the safe side. In a situation like this, you can't do anything about your genetic makeup, but you can make adjustments to your lifestyle given even the possibility of staving off death.
Also, that comic Stelios posted is exactly correct. China, India, parts of Europe, Israel know where the demand is and are investing heavily in order to meet it. The demand isn't for a dead, dirty technology that has kept this country locked in the past because those profiting don't want the money train to ever stop (though it will eventually have to, because oil and even coal are limited resources). The demand is for the energy of the future, solar, wind, geothermal, biomass.
Barry Woodward, link-spamming is the opposite of conversation.
LOL How did I know Barry Woodward would show up?
Hybris, the funny thing is I agree with you on global warming. Not that it's not real, I think it's absolutely real, but I agree that it's not a hair-pulling crisis. I believe we'll sort it all out before it becomes a life-threatening issue via giant leaps in technological progress. I am a futurist, after all. But I do think you have a persecution complex. I also think you are being persecuted. I don't which came first. I do know you're putting me off by insinuating I'm some internet hyena. Nobody puts Blacky in a corner.
Don't we have a thread devoted to climate change? I think we've derailed poor W_W's thread enough as it is. Even though it did get sorta meta...
I'm reading about the Koch Bros. right now, given this information. I'm sure it will make for an interesting read, and I will most certainly go through it with an open mind. It still seems like people don't understand that I don't necessarily disagree with the fact there is climate change... just the fact that it is, in fact, catastrophic.
LOL How did I know Barry Woodward would show up?
Hybris, the funny thing is I agree with you on global warming. Not that it's not real, I think it's absolutely real, but I agree that it's not a hair-pulling crisis. I believe we'll sort it all out before it becomes a life-threatening issue via giant leaps in technological progress. I am a futurist, after all. But I do think you have a persecution complex. I also think you are being persecuted. I don't which came first. I do know you're putting me off by insinuating I'm some internet hyena. Nobody puts Blacky in a corner.
I've certainly had a persecution complex since the Thread-That-Will-Not-Be-Named. Maybe more than is justified. In fact, almost certainly more than is justified. But I don't like to be pushed into a corner either.
One YouTube embed is not spamming. I just came across this documentary in a search and thought it was worth sharing. Give it a watch.
Hybris, it's really kinda your girlfriend's fault, you know. She brought you into this thread, after all.
< rubs hands together, giggles maniacally to himself, twirls mustache... >
Hybris, it's really kinda your girlfriend's fault, you know. She brought you into this thread, after all.
< rubs hands together, giggles maniacally to himself, twirls mustache... >
I already smacked her around and threw her down some stairs while wearing a flannel shirt and drinking 5-Star Whiskey out of a plastic bottle.
Says the guy who doesn't believe in global warming.
I don't believe in Global Warming. It's 40 degrees outside so how can it be? Come May or June I'll hear what you have to say cause it'll be not so cold. My belief system is relative to my environment at this exact moment in time.
Is there a reason you're being such a cunt, Hybris? It is possible to disagree with people and not coming across as hostile and rude. I've had many reasonable and rational conversations with my conservative friends about this topic. If you really are looking to have a intellectual debate about climate change in this thread, you went about it in a strange way.
As I stated... she came where she knew people would agree with her. Fake people. Words on a computer screen. No risk. Blind validation as a reward. I'd be perfectly willing to sit down and discuss this. I have. I've swayed people. People have swayed me. We've gone back and forth. But you think I'm going to seriously give you any of my time when it STARTS OUT as a head-bashing party? Fucking please.
Of course not. You're not going to give it any of your time, just make a dozen profanity laden posts about how everyone on the internet is a bunch of bullies and sheep.
I'm just going to be blunt here. The aggressiveness and the name-calling is making you come off as an asshole, and the refusal to provide support for your own arguments is making you come off as a pussy. Yes, you're in somewhat hostile territory here. Convincing this crowd that global warming is a hoax is going to be an uphill battle, no doubt about it. But people are trying to engage you directly in order to understand your position, so you need to either make the effort to explain it or just call everyone fuckheads and actually move on. Don't use the assumption that no one is going to listen to you as an excuse to avoid defending your position. Once you've made your argument and been shouted down, then gripe about what a useless echo chamber this place is. Doing it the other way is lazy at best. That you're knocking your girlfriend for seeking "blind validation" from the like-minded in the same breath that you're refusing to engage the other side on the grounds that you don't anticipate any validation for your views doesn't help.
And this all ties back to the thread topic, which I'm surprised to see so many people respond to with "don't even bother." I understand you have to pick your battles, and I will often avoid hot button topics myself unless I have just the right combination of energy and liquor in me at that given moment, but I'm not going to advocate that anyone else be a lazy pussy just because I am. Be civil. Be calm. Try to mix in one joke that isn't at the expense of the opposing side for every one that is. Try to keep the focus narrowed to a particular issue. If you start talking about taxes, don't let it spiral off into abortion, etc. If you're trying to convince each other to switch sides on global warming, abortion, terrorism, immigration, taxation, collective bargaining and the NFL moving kickoff to the 35 yard line all at once, then neither of you is going to change your mind on anything. People are more inclined to admit that they aren't an expert on a single issue than to acknowledge that their entire view of the world is fucked from the ground up. Plus scrutiny is anathema to simplified talking points, so if one side is relying to heavily on those they will be forced to start actively thinking about the implications of their views, which is great as long as it's not your side (shit's exhausting).
Edit: posted while somehow missing the entire second page of the thread. Amateur hour here
I'm lucky in that, in my family, everyone knows where I stand, and we mostly all just joke with one another about politics and religion. It also helps that my family were Southern Republicans long before the Civil Rights era and Johnston "losing the South for a generation", so they're actually pretty thoughtfully conservative (well, at least the older ones -- weird that), and not the neocons of today.
I still have to send Snopes rebuttals to one nephew, though, who is far more gullible concerning internet nonsense than he should be at his age.
I'm reading about the Koch Bros. right now, given this information. I'm sure it will make for an interesting read, and I will most certainly go through it with an open mind. It still seems like people don't understand that I don't necessarily disagree with the fact there is climate change... just the fact that it is, in fact, catastrophic.
what is, or is not "catastrophic" is relative....
climate change might not directly affect you or I, but I think the people that live in Bangladesh, Venice, New Orleans, et al. might have a differing opinion.
Is there a reason you're being such a cunt, Hybris? It is possible to disagree with people and not coming across as hostile and rude. I've had many reasonable and rational conversations with my conservative friends about this topic. If you really are looking to have a intellectual debate about climate change in this thread, you went about it in a strange way.
Already addressed, you're a hypocrite, etc etc, move on.
Edit: If you can't see how "You're a cunt because you call people names when they don't agree with you, and I don't agree with that" is hypocritical, I don't even know what to tell you.
I don't necessarily agree with Hybris's stance on how critical this global warming malarky is but, to be fair, he was being insulted before he even posted in here. I'm pretty sure I insinuated he was a loon for disagreeing with NASA. I have no idea if he really is a cunt or not, but fair enough if he came in swinging from the get go.
It's like how Michael Bisping flipped off the crowd and told them to fuck off at the weigh-ins for the UFC TUF finale last week. Sure that's acting like an asshole, but he was being booed and taunted before he even took the stage.
My dad is nuts. I've posted on this briefly before (AKA the guy thinks that Michelle Bachmann would make a GREAT Attorney General. President? Not so much). And well, outright called Obama a "piece of shit nigger who has disgrace our country. Also, his wife spends millions on travel and wears ugly clothes"
Oh, and my boyfriend doesn't believe in global warming. Love you babe!
To the matter at hand, how do you talk about politics with family members of opposing viewpoints without degenerating into...You know. Fights and separations?
Now, my father is employed by a wealthy man. His friends are boat captains who are or were employed by wealthy men (And currently beached). Part of our difference, I believe, is that his employers' benefits are his benefits. Granted, my father's boss made his fortune in selling fish to the Japanese rather than investment banking.
Now his latest diatribe is that FDR's New Deal prolonged the Depression and actually made things worse, the tea-party all had jobs and were hard workers standing up for their rights, and the "Occupy Wall-streeters" were filthy layabouts who were about 10% people who actually wanted sensible reform and 90% partiers, dopeheads, and kids who wanted nothing more than someone else to pay off their student debts on their go no-where degrees that the mainstream media has deified as angelic do-gooders.
Oh, and most folks on welfare do nothing. My sister and I, we're different of course, we earned As and worked hard to get scholarships, whereas everyone else, or most people just go 'gimme gimme gimme"
/facepalm
The key to this, he says, is to read. To do research, to 'look between the lines'. I can't help but feel most of his news comes from very....slanted, biased sources. Even if I were to find a counterpoint article to every single argument, I have a distint feeling it's all in vain.
So, what the hell do I tell my father? Do I need to devote all my free time to looking up articles and arguments that contradict his own (and prove global warming) at the expense of my free time, because I can't provide a point by point rebuttal off the top of my head?
Obviously this is a terrible situation to be in and my heart goes out to you, but my honest advice? Or rather, what I would do were I in your shoes? I'd cut my father off, and not speak to him again until he was willing to change his views of the world. Again, this is your dad so I don't want to hurt your feelings, but racist _____ (fill in the blank with the adjective of your choice) like that are what's wrong with the world, and I'd feel ashamed to be related to one
Also I can't imagine dating a climate change denier. It would be a betrayal of everything I believe in and stand for
Obviously this is a terrible situation to be in and my heart goes out to you, but my honest advice? Or rather, what I would do were I in your shoes? I'd cut my father off, and not speak to him again until he was willing to change his views of the world. Again, this is your dad so I don't want to hurt your feelings, but racist _____ (fill in the blank with the adjective of your choice) like that are what's wrong with the world, and I'd feel ashamed to be related to one
Also I can't imagine dating a climate change denier. It would be a betrayal of everything I believe in and stand for
Kate, im all for cutting assholes out of your life but this is her dad. If he treated her right and loved her then she would be the asshole for cutting him off. And not to make excuses for him but they are his world views. I imagine you can't just change those with the snap of a finger.
Already addressed, you're a hypocrite, etc etc, move on.
Edit: If you can't see how "You're a cunt because you call people names when they don't agree with you, and I don't agree with that" is hypocritical, I don't even know what to tell you.
I said you're acting like cunt, which I believe you were/are, but, good sir, did not call you a cunt! One can act cuntish without being a cunt to the core.
All kidding aside, within your first 3 sentences you called someone a shithead and called liberals and conservatives "retards". Were your feelings hurt when someone called you a fool? That hardly warrants you're attitude, nor does spewing insults back at everyone else validate your opinions. This is a pretty easy going place, and there are conservatives here that interact without hurling insults.
So in summation, you are not a cunt, but were acting "cunty".
Also your argument is absurd, in your second post you said left wing extremists are retards..... I believe someone had just the made the point that NASA supports fully the idea the Earth is getting warmer. Are you saying Nasa are a bunch of liberal extremists.... or are they retards?
Please fill us in.
Sorry for the derail.
Why did you leave out the part where the guy called me an idiot before I even got here? Weird.
To be fair, I did attack you first. But that was only because you decided to attack some good people in this thread http://www.chud.com/community/t/140047/gonna-try-something-until-the-end-of-the-year-all-members-read without knowing what the hell is going on and it rubbed me the wrong way.
Bisping also brings it on himself.
This thread needs Snaike.
Yes, it does.
"And THAT'S why you never discuss politics with relatives!"
He Who Shall Not Be Named usually only shows up to gloat about percieved conservative victories, Obama failures, or when he thinks he's got a GOTCHA moment.
He's still sort of entertaining, though. And he does like BOSS on Starz (though I wonder if that's just a Kelsey Grammer love-in).
I've tried to talk politics with right leaning people. It can't be done. They just yell louder. Its just a waste of energy.
It can be done but first and foremost you need to find common ground. The goal shouldn't be to "win" an argument but to try to see things from their perspective. If you can connect with them on a deeper level you'll have a better shot at persuading them.
I'll just leave this here:
http://news.yahoo.com/rapid-retreat-chile-glacier-captured-images-201458053.html
The photos where faked by the liberal media. Its not hard to get into that mind set. I know what I just wrote is stupid, by when said stupid statement is repeated, with increasing volume, its hard to get a word in edge wise.
Seconded, whatever the politics of the relatives you're disagreeing with. Although when this happens in my immediate family I'm usually not quick enough to avoid getting angry rantspray - something on TV will spark my Dad off and suddenly Mum's off making a cup of tea and my brother's "checking something on the computer".
Greetings! Long time reader, first time poster (I actually tried to join the old boards a couple of times, but I think new memberships weren't being allowed just when I was trying).
Anyway I couldn't really let the appearance of the Great Global Warming Swindle go by without answer. It's one of the most slimy bags of lies this side of Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
This video is a good place to start.
Yeah, his low key V/O style takes some getting used to, but it's worth it. There's plenty more about what's wrong with it around too.
What's most disturbing about the whole climate denial movement is it's not just about environmentalism or political gamesmanship any more. They are actually making an orchestrated effort to destroy modern knowledge itself. I don't think that's their stated goal mind you. But that's what they are doing. Quibbling over stats, cherry picking quotes out of people's emails, character assassination, undermining the notion of expertise everywhere. Miring the discourse in these tiny things on such a scale and turning everything into a politicised slanging match can be done to every single thing we know once you start doing it, until what information you accept is determined solely by whatever your political affiliation dictates.
Yeah, maybe it'll never get all the way down that road (and actually I think the tide is already turning, so to speak). But the more I look at it it becomes disturbingly clear what kind of people they must be. This isn't just regular lies and spin. They're willing to throw everything under the bus in order to win. Everything. I don't know what to do with people like that. It's like looking at pure nihilism.
By now most of their leading lights have been shown to be full of it though (they chose their champions so badly. I mean, Monckton? wow). Just have to spread the word.
Anyway, I'm lucky and most of my madly "conservative" relatives live on the other side of the country. So it's only every few years I have to explain to them that boat people aren't terrorists and we aren't being swoamped boi Oyseans (although it's Muslims that are everywhere now). The trick is generally that to counter every stupid thing people say you actually have to go along with it for some way until you get to how they got that idea in the first place. Which is invariably incorrect. You get an insight into how they got there though, which is interesting. It's a fairly emotionally taxing effort though, so it's not something you want to do a lot of I guess.
cheers
Great first post, Muzman.
Agree. Muzman, thanks for taking the time to put that in perspective. I'm afraid I agree with you about the nihilism. It's evident everywhere.
Hey, peeps who don't believe in global warming, what do y'all make of the just-as-scary prospect of ocean acidification?
Dad's side of the family is a bunch of unruly New Jersey Jews. Fun times all around. Mom's side is mostly sad, uptight Republicans. So I get the best of both worlds every holiday season!
Dad's side of the family is a bunch of unruly New Jersey Jews. Fun times all around. Mom's side is mostly sad, uptight Republicans. So I get the best of both worlds every holiday season!
That totally reminds me of that scene in Annie Hall:
Mrs. Hall: How do you plan to spend the holidays, Mrs. Singer?
Mrs. Singer: We fast.
Mr. Hall: Fast?
Mr. Singer: No food. You know, to atone for our sins.
Mrs. Hall: What sins? I don't understand.
Mr. Singer: To tell you the truth, neither do we.
Ahh politics.
For Global Warming, I believe that it would be the height of arrogance (or maybe the inverse?) to believe that pumping chemicals into the atmosphere isn't going to do any damage. (Ice age millions of years ago that the planet recovered from? fine. I wonder if all the organisms that froze along with it thawed out and were fine. I know I could use a long rest like that). I would rather be on the side of the environment and be wrong about climate change, then the alternative.
Abortion - I always ask Anti-Abortion types if they are going to start arresting the millions of women who's bodys decide to abort mid-carriage on its own. I mean, its against Gods will for a fetus to die..right?
Politic with family = this thread. From intelligent, to name calling in only 2 pages. Just think if this were real life and we could punch each other?
Originally posted by Muzman
Anyway I couldn't really let the appearance of the Great Global Warming Swindle go by without answer. It's one of the most slimy bags of lies this side of Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
This video is a good place to start.
Just to clarify, I'm not a climate change denier nor am I a true believer. This thread sparked my interest in the topic and I came across the film in a YouTube search. Regardless of its accuracy, I do think it's well put together and entertaining. The video you posted calls into question certain elements of the film but I don't know that it invalidates the entire piece.
Greetings! Long time reader, first time poster (I actually tried to join the old boards a couple of times, but I think new memberships weren't being allowed just when I was trying).
Anyway I couldn't really let the appearance of the Great Global Warming Swindle go by without answer. It's one of the most slimy bags of lies this side of Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
This video is a good place to start.
Yeah, his low key V/O style takes some getting used to, but it's worth it. There's plenty more about what's wrong with it around too.
What's most disturbing about the whole climate denial movement is it's not just about environmentalism or political gamesmanship any more. They are actually making an orchestrated effort to destroy modern knowledge itself. I don't think that's their stated goal mind you. But that's what they are doing. Quibbling over stats, cherry picking quotes out of people's emails, character assassination, undermining the notion of expertise everywhere. Miring the discourse in these tiny things on such a scale and turning everything into a politicised slanging match can be done to every single thing we know once you start doing it, until what information you accept is determined solely by whatever your political affiliation dictates.
Yeah, maybe it'll never get all the way down that road (and actually I think the tide is already turning, so to speak). But the more I look at it it becomes disturbingly clear what kind of people they must be. This isn't just regular lies and spin. They're willing to throw everything under the bus in order to win. Everything. I don't know what to do with people like that. It's like looking at pure nihilism.
By now most of their leading lights have been shown to be full of it though (they chose their champions so badly. I mean, Monckton? wow). Just have to spread the word.
Anyway, I'm lucky and most of my madly "conservative" relatives live on the other side of the country. So it's only every few years I have to explain to them that boat people aren't terrorists and we aren't being swoamped boi Oyseans (although it's Muslims that are everywhere now). The trick is generally that to counter every stupid thing people say you actually have to go along with it for some way until you get to how they got that idea in the first place. Which is invariably incorrect. You get an insight into how they got there though, which is interesting. It's a fairly emotionally taxing effort though, so it's not something you want to do a lot of I guess.
cheers
Have you seen the SBS Series "Go Back to Where You Came From?", I missed it the first time but I'm catching the replays on Tuesday at 8:30am.
Quote:
See, and I get this. I'm waiting for this. A good answer, rather than "we think so" or "we're pretty sure". I've read studies from both sides of the spectrum, and I'm not prepared to hang my hat on the side of "this 1-degree rise in global temperature over 50 years is cause for widespread panic and rioting", because I'm not entirely sure that's true, and there are educated, notable members of the scientific community who agree.
It's a nice, warm glow in here, though. I'm enjoying the notion that it's batshit, bugnuts insane to not agree that global climate change is going to destroy the world without seeing relevant facts presented without any "buts"... but it's perfectly logical and acceptable to arm-chair quarterback my political affiliations and intelligence, gang up and insult me for them, based on one single tidbit of information regarding my decision to wait and see.
Ahhh, the internet.
Here's where finding out as quickly as possible is critical, places like Bangladesh. Even if there weren't one iota of man made influence on the climate, as it is the country routinely floods and lots of people die. It's a terrible fact of life there. Even a marginal change which may not affect us greatly elsewhere that much could potentially displace millions of people. Things there are precarious enough there as it is. So, a determination of what is going on and appropriate action as a result is quickly is essential and that's why things have to worked out as quickly as possible.
I mean, if it all turns out to be no great impact, that's great but what if that's wrong? The stakes are very high and it's not us who are going to find out the hard way first, it's actually people with the least ability to do anything about it?
