Yeah, I've made the same mistake by debating with him before. Never again.

Repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome is a mark of insanity.

Welcome to the internet. We hope you'll enjoy your stay.

Repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome is a mark of insanity.

Welcome to the internet. We hope you'll enjoy your stay.

:thumbsup:

'Nuf said.

Wow, that's a lot of construction workers in comparison to the jobs around here. Also, working non-stop is another huge difference. They must have an enormous staff to be able to work non-stop like that without marginal increase in human error risk.

Repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome is a mark of insanity.

 

 

No it isn't. I think you'll find that, that definition only serves a purpose in movies.

 

 

And besides, if no one counters my points ...?

 

 

This forum is bonkers.

Repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome is a mark of insanity.

 

 

No it isn't. I think you'll find that, that definition only serves a purpose in movies.

 

 

And besides, if no one counters my points ...?

 

 

This forum is bonkers.

 

I think that so far it has only been your opinion that none of your points have been countered.

 

Some of the refutations provided seemed quite accurate to me.

Repeating the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome is a mark of insanity.

 

 

No it isn't. I think you'll find that, that definition only serves a purpose in movies.

 

 

And besides, if no one counters my points ...?

 

 

This forum is bonkers.

 

I think that so far it has only been your opinion that none of your points have been countered.

 

Some of the refutations provided seemed quite accurate to me.

 

 

So asking for proof that standardized material being shipped to America is decent.... And getting a link to the Forbidden city is accurate? I think that you just don't like me, and thus everyone will always be correct, when correcting me.

Yes, bonkers will think you are wrong even if you're right. Which is why I suggest you don't continue to try to reason with him.

If this is the same building I just read about, it just fell over.

 

LINK

If this is the same building I just read about, it just fell over.

 

LINK

The first sentence says it's a different building. Not even built the same way. For future reference, it might be a good idea to read it before you say something.

If this is the same building I just read about, it just fell over.

 

LINK

The first sentence says it's a different building. Not even built the same way. For future reference, it might be a good idea to read it before you say something.

 

I apologize for being busy and having a life. Don't have a ton of time to type lately at the near-end of the Semester Still, it does warrant worry for the current building that was built.

 

Anyway, got some stuff to do.

Yes, bonkers will think you are wrong even if you're right. Which is why I suggest you don't continue to try to reason with him.

 

Yup, never again.

This forum is bonkers.

I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE!

 

[hide=answer]His name is Bonkers[/hide]

Yes, bonkers will think you are wrong even if you're right. Which is why I suggest you don't continue to try to reason with him.

 

Yup, never again.

 

 

And yet you still haven't provided any evidence whatsoever. So I won. Thanks.

 

 

And btw, Pasta, I will think you are wrong, until you prove you are right. If you cannot prove you are right, you are wrong.

 

 

The only part that is an opinion, is the amount of material that one may be considered enough to validate said claim.

 

However Pasta, I rarely have any debates with you that aren't opinion based, by their very nature. So naturally, right and wrong are terms not to be used. Examples? Religion, Politics, and Economics are the main things we debate upon. These are all opinionated, and I am debating a simple fact. Chinese materials are not built to the same standards as western countries, and All Is Semi Great has shown nothing to prove me wrong. All I am asking for is a few links. Can he not even provide that?

[spoiler=DO NOT CLICK@]What Saru is trying to say is that the average quality of building materials in China is poorer than in the US. Since we all love links, here are the top few from a Google search:

 

Despite the huge output of China’s building materials, the quality of these materials is usually well below international standards.

http://www.buyusa.gov/china/en/ace2.html

 

However, the quality of Chinese materials is rapidly improving, especially in areas of energy efficiency.

http://www.buyusa.gov/china/en/housing.html

 

Chinese buildings have an average lifespan of 30 years.

http://www.chinarealestatenews.com/news/2010-04-06/69878/

 

The majority of residential buildings in China are built with low-quality materials, have a short lifespan, are energy-intensive and extremely wasteful of resources.

In the UK, the average lifespan of a building is 132 years.

...the current average lifespan of [Chinese] buildings at 30 years

http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/1453

If you read any of the links, make it this^ one.

 

Now, that took me about ten minutes. Any of you could have done that without much effort.

http://www.google.com/search?q=average+quality+of+chinese+building+materials&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=&oe=

 

Take this link, and go forth better men and women, for you have an infinite source of information at your fingertips. You'll thank me when you're old and wise.

 

E: Hidden for his holiness. Those bums will never find the links now.

wat. We were not supposed to provide links. They are not even going to read them. *sigh*

 

 

I appreciate you Dupin, however, I do not approve.

 

 

If I do not feel like links should be shown, they will not be shown.

 

 

Edit: I re-approve. :D

 

 

No but for real, am I missing someting? When I say:

 

"I believe to be true that Chinese materials, are not help up to as high quality guidelines, as American. I also believe to be true, that this will cause many structures built with a combination/majority of these products to collapse. I also believe there is proof for these claims. "

 

What else can I mean, but what you just said?

"I believe to be true that Chinese materials, are not help up to as high quality guidelines, as American. I also believe to be true, that this will cause many structures built with a combination/majority of these products to collapse. I also believe there is proof for these claims. "

tldr

 

Plz use word less than 5 lette

I don't see buildings in China collapsing left and right.

I don't see buildings in China collapsing left and right.

I see what you did there.

 

@Bonkers:

 

ok.

So in a nutshell, this issue is about Saru being insensitive about China's architectural incompetence?

I don't see buildings in China collapsing left and right.

 

 

You've provided no evidence that states otherwise, so based upon our evidence we have seen here; it can be concluded that that is a definite possibility.

 

So in a nutshell, this issue is about Saru being insensitive about China's architectural incompetence?

 

 

Mhmmm.

 

 

 

@ Pasta: Nice avoidance.

And I'm still waiting for a response.

 

 

 

So glad I didn't waste my time getting links, now I feel bad for Dupin.

 

 

 

#-o

 

Obama says china is wooping out asses in the infrastructure area. It's Obama though...

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peterfoster/100063812/chinas-crumbling-buildings-not-built-to-last/

 

I proved both points. It just goes to show arguments on tif cannot be settled with random links from the interwebz.

Our infrastructure sucks and no one better disagree with that fact. Fortunately for us, Chinese infrasture is only better because its new. They're going to have the same problem as maintaining it as we do, if not worse.

Our infrastructure sucks and no one better disagree with that fact. Fortunately for us, Chinese infrasture is only better because its new. They're going to have the same problem as maintaining it as we do, if not worse.

 

Probably, but they can also more easily direct government funds towards where it is required, instead of having to pander to groups like the Teabaggers, although I'm not sure how much of those dollars actually end up with the government, and not just in the pocket of the corporations, or corrupt officials. Hopefully Democracy will reach them quickly, but it's always interesting to see what a country would be like it if was run by engineers. (Stole that point from Adams)