Fun with Billboards

On my way to work today, I noticed that one of the billboards I drove past had been changed.  I couldn't get a good shot of it because I had to keep moving, but I found the same image online:





The version I saw also has the name and info of the local Unitarian Church, which is about a mile from the sign, but .  There are a LOT of implications there.  I strongly suspect this is their attempt to win an argument about a particular ecological issue.  If so, it seems like a rather underhanded method of debate to me to just throw out snappy, meme-able witticisms that don't directly address the issue.  (And then, when your opponent outright names the things you're hinting at, you can accuse him of misunderstanding you, or even deliberately twisting your words.  <sarc> Great fun.  </sarc>)  But even if it's not, it still carries a crud ton of (I think) mistaken assumptions about what science is for, and conflation of different types of belief.  Thoughts, guys?

Yeah, this reminds me of that "Coexist" bumper sticker, where I want to say "What do you mean by coexist?"

It feels almost passive aggressive and doesn't seem to do anything to move the conversation forward.

In this case, I want to say: "Okay. I believe science exists. I also believe that it's a very useful tool in the discovery of truth. Are we on the same page now? Or is there actually something more specific you'd like me to affirm?"

Do you mean, "Believe the computer models that are constantly being tweaked?"

I don't doubt there are changes to our climate. I doubt what people are concluding from the computer models that are constantly being modified.

Reminds me of something a classmate said back in my university days. He said he wanted to put a sign in his yard that read, "Thank God for evolution." It's just a snarky thing to say to poke both sides of a debate, either to confound them or rile them up more. If the goal is the latter, it's just trolling. If the goal is the former, it seems like a way to say, "I'm smarter than both of you!"

Either way, I don't think it does much to depolarize the issue, but if you really want to do that, you're going to need more than six words.

Reed Benson wrote:
Either way, I don't think it does much to depolarize the issue, but if you really want to do that, you're going to need more than six words.

Which takes my mind back to a common dysfunction of our day: inability to communicate. Social media has given us the readily available option of expressing ourselves outside of a full, relational context. So our communication experiences, the ones that establish how we express ourselves, perpetuate our natural tendency for a lack of thoughtfulness toward others. And from e-mail, to forums, to facebook, to twitter, the number of words we can use becomes more limited, causing further lack of clarity and elimination of simple grace and courtesy toward others, in exchange for shotgun blasts of blunt expression.

So signs like this, social media or short jabbing bumper stickers, it all seems to be feeding the same monster inside of us.

Paeter wrote:

Reed Benson wrote:
Either way, I don't think it does much to depolarize the issue, but if you really want to do that, you're going to need more than six words.

Which takes my mind back to a common dysfunction of our day: inability to communicate. Social media has given us the readily available option of expressing ourselves outside of a full, relational context. So our communication experiences, the ones that establish how we express ourselves, perpetuate our natural tendency for a lack of thoughtfulness toward others. And from e-mail, to forums, to facebook, to twitter, the number of words we can use becomes more limited, causing further lack of clarity and elimination of simple grace and courtesy toward others, in exchange for shotgun blasts of blunt expression.

So signs like this, social media or short jabbing bumper stickers, it all seems to be feeding the same monster inside of us.
So signs like this, social media or short jabbing bumper stickers, it all seems to be feeding the same monster inside of us.

Nailed it for me Reed and Paeter. Seeing a sign like this, I immediately move to a posture of eye-roll and "how can I come come up with a pithy/trolly come-back" as opposed to anything like, "tell me about why you made this sign, what does it mean to/for you? etc". Certainly revealing my own lack of compassion.

But in the spirit of promoting an opportunity for us to share thoughts and beliefs in a more relational, albeit still virtual way, I am going to plug the Summer of Free Movie Club here . I imagine we all have a unique take on our next movie 1984, so come discuss it Saturday at 10am Pacific (I know that's still Midnight for you Reed but hoping that might work a bit better than 2am)

[quote="fxruizx"][quote="Paeter"]

Reed Benson wrote:
Saturday at 10am Pacific (I know that's still Midnight for you Reed but hoping that might work a bit better than 2am)

3 AM here
Looking forward to watching the recording of the discussion (which reminds me, I still need to watch the last one)

Reed Benson wrote:Either way, I don't think it does much to depolarize the issue, but if you really want to do that, you're going to need more than six words.

Well said Reed (and also the replies by Paeter and Francisco.

The billboard that started this thread is so vague I have no idea what it's about. Debates these days seem to be "won" by those whose slogan gets the most applause.

AdamCollings wrote:3 AM here 
Looking forward to watching the recording of the discussion (which reminds me, I still need to watch the last one)

Oh man - if you watch the film, by all means send me a question that you would like me to ask everyone, that you would ask if you could be there.

And here is the Last Action Hero discussion, not sure I have it in any playlists yet on YT