Cowboys' indoor facility collapses during practice

[sports fan Matt]

The afternoon practice ended in horrifying fashion when the Cowboys' indoor facility collapsed.

While a violent thunderstorm pounded rain down on the roof, the lights started shaking back and forth. Then chaos broke out, as the facility collapsed and players, coaches, reporters and team personnel scrambled for safety.

Several people were trapped under the wreckage. Police and emergency personnel have arrived on the scene.

More to come.

UPDATE: According to a Cowboys spokesman, at least four members of the team's support staff are being taken to the hospital. All players and coaches are believed to be safe. Rescue personnel is still searching through the debris.

From DallasNews.com

[Tipped OuT]

:lolflag:

[MaxIBoy]

Next time they should just build it underground.

[sports fan Matt]

Ironically enough on the radio KRLD 1080 am out of Dallas is doing live coverage

[cariboo]

What kind of cowboys? Were they bull riders, bronco buster or steer ropers? Not all of us know what type of cowboys you have in Texas. :)

[myusername]

NFL Football team (american football)

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

Ironically enough on the radio KRLD 1080 am out of Dallas is doing live coverage

Online at http://player.play.it/player/player.html?v=4.5.23&id=85&onestat=krld-am

If you use NoScript you will have to allow the site.

[pwnst*r]

:lolflag:

hilarious when people get hurt!

[myusername]

yeah someone could have died. not cool man

[MaxIBoy]

Well, what if, someday, one of the survivors kills me and 40 other people in a mad rampage brought on by his trauma? That's not cool either.


It's a common fallacy to assume that more survivors = better and that fewer survivors = worse. Not everyone benefits society. Especially not these athlete people.

[SunnyRabbiera]

Well, what if, someday, one of the survivors kills me and 40 other people in a mad rampage brought on by his trauma? That's not cool either.


It's a common fallacy to assume that more survivors = better and that fewer survivors = worse. Not everyone benefits society. Especially not these athlete people.

But what if therer would have been a lot of people and a lot of people died, would we cheer then?

[Kareeser]

Well, what if, someday, one of the survivors kills me and 40 other people in a mad rampage brought on by his trauma? That's not cool either.


It's a common fallacy to assume that more survivors = better and that fewer survivors = worse. Not everyone benefits society. Especially not these athlete people.

You better be joking.

What gives you the right to decide on the value of a life? You don't know that these people won't help others... just like I won't know that they won't end up harming others.

Assuming they're evil is akin to assuming a defendant is guilty...

[SunnyRabbiera]

You better be joking.

What gives you the right to decide on the value of a life? You don't know that these people won't help others... just like I won't know that they won't end up harming others.

Assuming they're evil is akin to assuming a defendant is guilty...

Indeed, I might not be a fan of the team but if someone died that would totally suck.

[pwnst*r]

Well, what if, someday, one of the survivors kills me and 40 other people in a mad rampage brought on by his trauma? That's not cool either.


It's a common fallacy to assume that more survivors = better and that fewer survivors = worse. Not everyone benefits society. Especially not these athlete people.

maxiboy.


yep, that fits.

[MaxIBoy]

I wasn't joking, per se, it's just that I don't take things seriously the way some people do. Maybe I'm screwed up, or maybe I'm the only sane person I know; it makes no difference to me.

When you're not emotionally invested in something, you see all kinds of alternative interpretations that you wouldn't otherwise notice. One must evaluate every possible interpretation of a situation before arriving at a decision. Restricting yourself to only the "socially acceptable" interpretations is a major handicap.

I find that humor and disinterested observation helps me make more rational decisions, whereas sympathy, horror, sadness, joy, and so on, introduce irrationality.



Yeah, it does suck that people were injured and might have died, but picture this:

A man recklessly drives home, putting people in danger. On his way, he passes three homeless guys without noticing, runs over a squirrel, and rubbernecks at an accident, preventing an ambulance from arriving in a timely fashion. He barges through the door of his house, yells at his wife, yells at his son to leave him alone, logs into his computer, pulls up a web browser, and reads about how the Dallas Cowboys almost died. He then posts on a forum about how horrible the news is.

Doesn't this strike you as just a little bit... wrong? Hopefully, you will agree with me that this hypothetical person needs to re-evaluate his priorities. How are these athletes more important than the drivers, the homeless people, the accident victims, the man's family, or even the squirrel? Maybe the athletes are more important, but in order to be sure, you have to consider the possibility that they are not.



For every good thing, there is a bad thing; for every bad thing, there is a good thing. I'm a cynic, more so than anyone else I know, but I'm just as much of an optimist, because I see this duality. I believe that the bad elements happen first, and then the good or humorous elements arise from the bad ones. I choose to be amused, to see the inherent humor in the symbolism of a stadium collapsing on its own athletes. Others choose to be sad, to focus on the tragic element. Your grief does nothing helpful.





And your indignant responses are hilarious.

[days_of_ruin]

I'm out of hard drugs man and it looks like you got plenty.
Share?

[Paqman]

Restricting yourself to only the "socially acceptable" interpretations is a major handicap.


Sure, that'd work dandy if were planning to live your days alone in a cave in the mountains. Not such a "major handicap" if you planned to have any rewarding human interactions at some point in your life though.

[MaxIBoy]

Sure, that'd work dandy if were planning to live your days alone in a cave in the mountains. Not such a "major handicap" if you planned to have any rewarding human interactions at some point in your life though.Many fields of expertise have arrived at the same conclusions as I have.

Here's an example. In hospitals, there are doctors who divide patients into three categories:


Minor injuries/illnesses (such as a broken leg.)
Moderate injuries/illnesses (such as a bullet wound in the arm.)
Severe injuries/illnesses (think "freight train to the face.")

The emotionally-motivated response would be to treat patients from category 3 first, then category 2, then category 1. It might seem like the logical choice, but it's an illogical choice.

Patients from category 2 are treated first. Patients from category 1 are treated second. Patients from category 3 are treated with the lowest priority. Why? Because patients from the first two categories are the most likely to survive, whereas patients from the third category are likely to die no matter what you do. If you ignore emotions, this option makes the most sense. And this conclusion was only made when people put aside their emotions and considered the possibility that the gentlemen with liver cancer and five bullet wounds might not be worth operating on. A "socially unacceptable" choice, to be sure, but in the end it makes the most sense.




Of course, you are perfectly entitled to arrive at your own conclusions, but between you and me, I take comfort in the fact that the statistical probability of you being in charge of my local hospital is very, very low.

[days_of_ruin]

Many fields of expertise have arrived at the same conclusions as I have.

Here's an example. In hospitals, there are doctors who divide patients into three categories:


Minor injuries/illnesses
Moderate injuries/illnesses
Severe injuries/illnesses

The emotionally-motivated response would be to treat patients from category 3 first, then category 2, then category 1. It might seem like the logical choice, but it's an illogical choice.

Patients from category 2 are treated first. Patients from category 1 are treated second. Patients from category 3 are treated with the lowest priority. Why? Because patients from the first two categories are the most likely to survive, whereas patients from the third category are likely to die no matter what you do. If you ignore emotions, this option makes the most sense. And this conclusion was only made when people put aside their emotions and considered the possibility that the gentlemen with liver cancer and five bullet wounds might not be worth operating on. A "socially unacceptable" choice, to be sure, but in the end it makes the most sense.




Of course, you are perfectly entitled to arrive at your own conclusions, but between you and me, I take comfort in the fact that the statistical probability of you being in charge of my local hospital is very, very low.

Why do you post this which actually has logic and then 5 minutes ago
post some nonsense about a crazy man and squirrels which frankly sounded
like an accusation against posters in this thread?

[MaxIBoy]

Why do you post this which actually has logic and then 5 minutes ago post some nonsense about a crazy man and squirrelsThere is more craziness than logic in the world, and there are more bad drivers than there are doctors. Also, I wanted an example that included the Dallas Cowboys in the story. Finally, I really liked the part about comparing the squirrel with the Dallas Cowboys in terms if which is more important.
which frankly sounded like an accusation against posters in this thread?I deeply apologize if it came off like an accusation, thanks for pointing that out. I'll go tune my phrasing a little. (EDIT: Better now?)

[myusername]

maxiboy whether your emotionally detached/cynic/insane or not i really don't see a reason in you posting the way you did. there was no need to do that. it was rude. I believe you need to be checked out by a physician and refrain from posting on topics like this. could a mod please lock this thread so it doesn't start a flame war? thank you.

[overdrank]

Closed for review