Fire hawks. Hominids. I ordinarily am refusing to respond to you but I really like fire hawks. Don’t act like this is an argument it’s not I just like fire hawks and felt bad you didn’t know about them.
3 Likes
That’s 3 species of raptor and a genus of monkey. It’s not exactly what I’d call numerous
It doesn’t need to be numerous, it just needs to be possible. Also, your whataboutism is useless, tiring, and doesn’t help prove underwater civilizations in any way.
6 Likes
I mean there are over 7 billion fire users in just human, if that’s not numerous, I don’t know what is
5 Likes
EIGHT HOUR TIMER NYRGHVTFBGHG IM SO HAPPY!!!
anyways i have an idea. floating forges. reed raft and/or bladder based lifting mechanisms would probably be common in stone age kingdoms for carting stuff around when whales are expensive (like imagine the indus valley people going “lets make a house someone go grab the elephant and drag rocks that weigh thousands of kilos kilometetrs”) and fishes wont do. say one of the things carried is flammable. doesnt matter what. fats burn on the surface of water, kelps and stuff might be purposefully dried, driftwood might be a luxury and dried cause idk. anyways storm happens, fire happens, water happens fire goes out. this becomes a common occurrence, people learn that fire ruins your stuff but only when its dry or oilly. people carry around liquids on floating rocks to avoid mixing them with water. liquids like oils. soon, letting lighting set on fire incenses or oils becomes a common miracle priests perform, or maybe a funeral tradition i dont care. this convoluted mess is just to get the people familiar with fire. floating stones on fire would be refined until coal is discovered, dried and burned. long-burning coal and hardwood could let fire be controlled in the absence of lightning by just leaving floating fires around that last for months. eventually native gold or copper could be cooked and melted cause the player made them or someone thought they were eatable if you cooked them (cooking meat would prolly be know of by now) and now we have metal. iron could be developed later by using higher temperatures. not expecting this to magically work. assuming the critters involved are moluskiod so the have tentacles long enough to work metal out of water also i like squids.im not assuming this to be possible it’s highly improbable but I want to know what everyone thinks.
So should the tech tree be optimized around flying creatures, seeing as flight is possible? What about electroreception?
What ‘whataboutism’? There’s quite literally nothing even approaching that in this thread
Is each individual human a separate, unrelated species?
1 Like
Why should that be the determining factor? Population size also show how successful the Species is. I can’t believe this is a question, even with the 8 hour time out do you question what you are saying instead of what others are saying?How useful a trait is should be determined by the size of how many individuals there are who use it not how many fricking species can use it. There are over 7,400 existing species of frogs and only one species of human that is still persisting. Which one would you say is more widespread? And mind you, there were many humans before us, many of which also had access to fire
Flight is possible, aeroplanes exist. Also this doesn’t make any sense or relate to the conversation in anyway. I imagine there will be tech trees for certain traits of course, it depends on the species
Whataboutism - Wikipedia(as%20in,refuting%20or%20disproving%20the%20argument.
It’s a real word you know that? Did you try using Google? And something tells me you don’t actually know what it means or just refuse to compare yourself to it.
And you are literally doing it right now. All of the Flanders you said we’re walloning questions and not actual evidence or detailed statements on why the things you said were right or what we said was wrong. You won’t get anywhere if you just ask these questions and you won’t convince anyone with questions, you need evidence to convince them. So I have a question for you to answer, do you understand what I am saying and do you understand what you are saying?
6 Likes
The success of a species is not the same concept as the frequency of a trait
So if fire use is the cause of human success, where are the rest of those 20 billion fire-hawks hiding?
It was claimed that the mere existence of fire use is enough to assume all sapient animals will have fire. I’m simply showing where this thinking breaks down
Whataboutism is where instead of dealing with an argument, you instead accuse the other person of hypocrisy for bringing the issue up. Can you give any examples of me doing this?
Please provide a quote of the hypocrisy accusation
What sort of evidence do I need to say that 4 is not a large number? Or that possibility and necessity aren’t the same thing?
Very simple, they don’t have the same degree of fire mastery as we do, is not like it is something that either is one way or the other, is a spectrum, just like most other things in natural evolution.
If this is true, then that would work AGAINST underwater civilizations too, didn’t think this thoroughly, did you?
Whataboutism can also mean " The technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counter-accusation or raising a different issue."
Which is exactly what you are doing right now.
“I can’t prove that underwater civilizations can advance, therefore, I will try to disprove terrestrial civilizations.”
This is litterally you.
6 Likes
I used to think this conversation was a tragedy, but now I realize… It’s a comedy 
9 Likes
I finally have the word I’ve been looking for about Burgeons arguments…
‘Whataboutism’, describes their ‘counterarguments’ perfectly
2 Likes
In what way is our fire mastery so superior? How are the piles of fuel we make so much more elaborate than the targeted torch attacks of the fire hawks?
But it isn’t true. You can’t just assume every sapient creature will have the traits you like because those traits aren’t wholly impossible. And you’ve given absolutely no reason to say why fire mastery is so special
If you came across a thread about how species with spleens would construct spacecraft, would you stick to the topic of spleened shipwrights? Think about how your answer would apply to my arguments
Serious? Is this the only thing that came into your mind?
Not like litteral furnaces? Cooking? Usage of fire for light, warmth and protection from predators?
-
You have to define “spleens”
-
I would continue discussing something relevant, not starting talking about a species without spleens wouldnt be able to do it.
This disproves in no way what I said, another case of your whataboutism. Also, do I really have to explain to you why fire mastery is important when that is your whole argument?
1 Like
Yes. I would. I would say “spleens as I know them don’t affect shipwrighting” wait for someone to point out something minorly wrong about my point or redefine spleens and reply to them or decide this was a topic full of crazy people and leave. you see this, responding to people’s actual arguments,with well thought out responses, instead of changing the topic and saying “wElL I DoNt sEe WhY liVinG UnDErwAtEr WoUld AfFecT yOuR aBilITy To UsE fIrE” (reminder: water puts out fire and sparks and waterlogs fuel) when people point out your previous ideas didn’t work.
2 Likes
I agree that humans have elaborate technology involved with fire. Do you think that is the cause of our spread. If so, why can’t it just be the technology?
Yes, you do have to give reasoning to your points, at least if you want to convince people
So how is this so different and more acceptable than what I’m doing?
Please provide a quote
i’d say you’re a hypocrite but i just realized you arent actually trying to convince anyone, as you are so obviously smart enough to take your own advice if you were.
actually, i was mistaken. that you for forcing me to evaluate my sources. in actuality you said that being underwater makes it easier to smelt metal which makes less sense.
4 Likes
@BurgeonBlas so let me get this straight, you think underwater civilizations have an easier time creating fire?
I do and I’m tired of pretending I don’t
2 Likes
alright let me join this discussion
for humans, fire gave them the ability to cook meat, which made it easier to chew. this allowed their brains to grow and they became more intelligent. you probably know the rest.
so yea fire was kinda important for us.
3 Likes