Debate/Discussion Topic

[animalguy888]

How about the 2012 doom thingy? Anyone have any thoughts on that one?

I think that its all in our head. It all started out that the mayan calander ended on dec 21 2012. But there are many reasons why this could of happened. They could have died out. Or just not made the calander longer. Just because it ends on a certain date doesnt mean its the end of the world. Well thats what i think anyways.

That is very true I hear some scintist are even thinking the same thing. What they also consider is some storys in the bible of what signs to look for. Its the world state itself that feeds this 2012 thing. We have got many large huricans,tsunamis earthquaks and other natral disasters. The many diasters are said to be one of the signs and we have already got quite a few. Such us plenty of tornados in the past recent times more than ever recorded in parts of the untied states,We also had the large march 11, 2011 tsunami/earthquake in japan and it seems we got more war going on in the world as well. I myself am a half believer in the 2012 scenario. In other words I am open to the possibility but I do not really think we can truly ever know for sure on these doomsday scenarios.

[Quagga]

Debate this.

The video is about banning dihydrogen-monoxide; a chemical used by various companies, is found in pesticides, and causes excessive sweating, urination...

However, with a bit of learning, you find out that dihydrogen-monoxide is H2O. AKA, water.

So, I'm not asking to debate about the video itself, so much as how this very thing - this deceit, the careful wording used to appeal to a person, only half of the truth given to sway someone over to their side and their beliefs - is occurring and affecting us today.

[Alexander]

I don't get it. If this is water, why would anyone say to ban it?
Kind of funny how you learn that just about everyone will join in on something without even asking what it is. I know that if someone asked me to sign it, I'd want to know exactly what DHMO is first. xD
Omg DHMO is found in reservoirs and lakes. |:
That's terrifying.

[SouthernStar]

Absolutely hilarious.

[Alexander]

So I saw this somewhere, and I'd like to know your opinions. Is Photography art?

[Quagga]

I feel that photography is art, yes. I just can't give anymore input as to why I think so...
Do you disagree? I want to hear opinions as to why it isn't. I haven't yet, I've always heard people insisting that art is anything visual or spoken that expresses one's emotion, feeling, and so on. I haven't heard an opposing argument yet, I would really like to.

Although there's a point where I feel that some things just can't be art - and this is where I think it gets confusing with me. My history teacher gave an example of someone taking a urinal, placing it on its side, and calling that art. I would have to agree with my teacher - I can't consider that art. To me, that's just... a bit... ridiculous, honestly. Maybe it's because of the object that person used, I'm sure that's a possibility as to why it's so ridiculous to me, but I just can't view that as art.

However, according to my current opinion, photography is art. So if someone would take a picture of the sideways urinal, it would technically be art - according to that thought. So it's the picture itself that is art, not the object? I'm not sure... I'm confused over this. x.x

Leave it to me to come up with something possibly contradictory... xD

[SouthernStar]

Tap dancing is an art.

Music is an art.

Photography is an art.

Trolling is an art.


Anything which takes creativity would be called art, I'd like to think.


Define art:

1. The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

2. Works produced by such skill and imagination.

[WhiteFang]

I iknow this debate has ended and everything, I just want to say what I think quickly.
About 2012:
I don't believe it will be the end of the world either, but the Mayan calendar has predicted alot of big things.
Many years ago there was this "prophet", or "fourtune teller" that even predicted this thing about fasion. She said "...women will dress as men and cut all their locks of hair...." meaning women will have short hair, which they do, and wear trousers, which they do. They also predicted something happening on December 25th 2012. I'm not sure what her exact words, but she spoke of blood and such. This could be about terrorist attacks, it could be about anything, but people for some reason think it means the end of the world. Though, in the book in which she wrote her predictions, she had writen a number, 366.
Now, the devil's supposed number is not 333, but 366. It would be funny if it were not so creepy, but the authoritys told everyone it was 333 because it was more "round", so anything with 333, bus numbers and such, was changed through fear, some even being changed to 366!
366 can't be found anywhere today; researchers have searched for it hoping for evidence pointing to 2012. But these searches where not completely fruitless. Evidence has been found that this number is a reference to recent terrorist attacks. 366 could be about something that has already happened.
so, 366 has nothing whatsoever to do with 2012, but something else, closer to "world destruction" than a number, does.
Scientists have found evidence that aproximately every 12,000 years or so the Earth's gravitational force is altered, meaning the Pole physicly moves, the next occurence should be on the 25th December 2012. This would lead to rapid climate change and freak storms (including things such as tidal waves, hurricanes and earthquakes).
So, to conclude, I believe the world will not end in the year 2012, but the pole shall move so many degrees. Not very high hopes, but better than thinking the world'll end.


And about art:
I personnaly think of photography as an art, as you have to be creative and imagenative, just as in other arts such as music.

[Alexander]

I was asking because I too don't understand why people wouldn't think that Photography is art.

When I think of photography, I compare it to a painter. The camera is the photographer's brush, and their canvas is the world around them.

There are so many things you need to know about Photography. To make it beautiful, you can't simply just walk outside and take a random picture of something. Sometimes to make something beautiful or unique you need to value light settings. Should it be dark and mysterious, should it be very light? Sometimes even mathematics occur. In fact, I'll be taking a Photography this year, so hopefully I'll know more about what it takes to be a good photographer.

However, I have found this article giving 10 main reasons why he/she does not think Photography is art. I'm not stating that I agree or disagree with it, and he/she may have some good points to tell.

1. Anyone can do it. While we’ve not proven the infinite monkey theorem for reproducing Shakespeare’s Hamlet, surely a monkey could take a good, interesting photo. In fact, with today’s auto-focusing, auto-metering, easy-to-use cameras, I have no doubt that a monkey, with some practice, could take a photo as good as Sunrays or The Red-Brick House. Do you like doing the job of a monkey?

2. No talent involved. You’re in a good place, you take a good picture. You’re in a bad place; you get nothing. It doesn’t matter if you have passion or willpower. If someone else is in the right place at the right time, they can easily capture the moment just as well, even if they’ve been handed a camera for the first time. You can’t say the same about any real art form, like playing the piano, or drawing, or sculpting, which require years of experience and practice.

3. No creativity. When you take a photo, you’re using a tool to save a copy of a scene. You’re creating nothing and the camera’s creating nothing. If the camera does create something, it isn’t art—it’s a defect. The more you protest that your badly-composed, out-of-focus pictures bear your unique artistic sensibilities, the more you satisfy your own delusions. Photography is about as creative as mowing the lawn (and if you think that’s creative, then you have my sympathy).

4. It doesn’t help you to look at the world differently, no more than painting, or sketching, or kayaking, or any other hobby. If anything, your view of the world narrows, because you’re stuck looking at it through your narrow viewfinder.

5. It’s an art that’s not a science, and a science that’s not an art. If my five-year-old sister can cover my job on our vacation to Disney world, then what kind of science is that? Normal scientific processes are torturous and difficult to master, like constructing a high-rise bridge or installing an Olympic-size swimming pool. Scientific arts like performing a complex piano piece or crocheting a beautiful sweater require years of expertise and practice. Not photography. Photography is for dummies. Then on the other end, we have b.s. science touted by the “artists,” like megapixels, lens optics, and sensor reflectivity. They have no idea what this stuff means, nor do they need any understanding of it to take pretty pictures, but they pretend it makes the craft complex, and their jobs, difficult and valuable. Kudos to the engineers, sure, but I’m not scientific as a mere photographer, any more than I’d be an auto mechanic for driving a car.

6. No future. You can’t make money taking pictures. If you do, you’re not an artist, you’re a businessman. Nothing more.

7. Life as a technician. You can’t get a good photo unless you Photoshop the heck out of it, like going from this awful thing to Leafy Droplets 4. Is that creative? My 10-year-old cousin can add some contrast, sharpen, darken the corners, and shift the colors with ease. If you put yourself through hours of this drudgery, you’re no more of an artist than the lab operator at Wal-Mart. A computer can easily replace you. How does it feel wasting your talent?

8. Strokes of luck. If you do capture a great photo that needs no editing, it’s because of reason #3. No talent whatsoever; you were just lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time, and disciplined enough to have your camera ready. So basically, your dependent on fate to bring you pretty pictures to photograph. Don’t you want to be in control of what you create, and when you create it? Do you like doing work that relies on luck, discipline, and drudgery, that you’re not even getting paid for? You may as well be digging ditches. At least then you’d be doing something useful for the world.

9. Join a community of morons. Maybe your smart and join a “camera club.” Then, you get to hear a dozen other people complain about the delay of Nikon’s latest DSLR and make excuses why they can never be a good photographer until they have *insert lens here*. Then they’ll complain about how they can’t attract any money. Maybe if they’d add something real to the world, they’d have the money to buy their toys. If you’re a photographer, you may as well be playing the latest World of Warcraft game.

Or perhaps you’re particularly dedicated and follow your passion to a photography university. Then you get to spend four years and thousands of dollars on the dead art of film, while hearing old codgers whining that the youngsters have it too easy nowadays. You may as well learn Latin. If you want to be a professional photographer, take a business class. But you’re condemning yourself to a lifetime of slave labor. If we had today’s photography before Lincoln’s time, then slaves would be photographing our children’s birthdays and recording our weddings. Why? Because slaves were forced to do tedious, boring, uncreative work.

10. You’re a dime a dozen. You’re building no legacy, you can’t pass your business on to your children, you work on assignment for pennies, and anyone can replace you at anytime. In what other artistic field can anyone do exactly the same work you do, with no talent nor experience? Read rubbish like Is Color Photography an Art? with any spirit of inquiry, and you can see what fools we are.

[LunaWolf]

Actually this: http://richardxthripp.thripp.com/2008/0 ... -art-form/ Is the original article that came from, and the guy that wrote it admitted it was just satire, and he doesn't really think photography isn't an artform. He wrote it to see how many angry comments he could get on it. (A lot.)
The art of trolling, it seems.

[Alexander]

Actually this: http://richardxthripp.thripp.com/2008/0 ... -art-form/ Is the original article that came from, and the guy that wrote it admitted it was just satire, and he doesn't really think photography isn't an artform. He wrote it to see how many angry comments he could get on it. (A lot.)
The art of trolling, it seems.

Oh good, because that was the ONLY article I could find that would explain why photography was not art. xD

[WhiteFang]

So, we all agree that photography is art? Do we!? DO WE!?!?
...Ahem...

[Scarikas]

Isn't this kinda like the Rant topic?

[Quagga]

Nope. It's best if you don't get all upset and rant here. The rant topic is more for venting about things you're upset over, and typically negative feelings. Here you're debating various topics and sharing your opinion on them, such as... Your opinion on younger kids (<16) dating, zoos, owning exotic pets, why you should be (or not be) a vegetarian... And so on.

Not sure how well I worded that. XD They're very different topics, though.

[Alexander]

Debating definitely does not mean ranting. Ranting is not allowed on this topic, however, discussions fits the term 'debate' much more than ranting.
I view ranting as something that is highly opinionated and only to fume out the rest of someone's built up emotions for the sake of being heard by someone else. As a debate I see it as something where people discuss a subject with one another to see the same or opposite point of view. There is no ranting, no getting mad, no drama, it's just discussions.