Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/09/17 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    Since there is no science that claims that life came about by random chance*, this is moot. Which leaves us with a question: can God make a straw-man so big he can't move it? *the outcomes of chemistry are not random
  2. 3 points
    Ironically, under the title “time does not exist” it says “posted three hours ago”.
  3. 3 points
    Note that you mention harassment while the quote was about sexual assault. In these cases women are ~10 times more frequently victims than men in most statistics. Notably, most males are victims of other males, perhaps for obvious reasons. Now harassment is quite a different issue, and the gender difference is lower (women experience it ca. 3x more often). A typical lifetime statistic in the USA shows something like 50% of women experience harassment and about 15% of men. The rate goes up for both genders in male-dominated environments (e.g. according to DOD data 2014 ~79% of women and 35% of men), again pointing to a leading role of men as perpetrators. I am not sure where you are going with this, though.
  4. 3 points
    No. Instead say, "Want quick-read threads? Vote YES!" l personally dislike the idea. Forcing science discussions to be short goes against the nuanced and layered information structure of most explanations of natural phenomena. This is exactly why pop-sci articles cause as much trouble as they do to spur interest in the sciences. An explanation or argument should take as long as it takes. I think we already have a Quick Question thread for simple answers. I'm not sure what the objective is for a whole subforum of it, but if it attracts those who can't be bothered to read details, it sounds like it will mostly be good for dragging our reputation down as a serious science discussion site.
  5. 2 points
    If you click the "Share this post" button at the top right corner of a post (the three dots linked by two lines), you'll get a direct link to the post, which you could use to refer to a specific post.
  6. 2 points
    "Unlikely" is probabilistic terminology. Indeed, the so-called Fermi Paradox is said to be based on probabilistic argument: Drake equation - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation Lets have a look how the probability in question is calculated. From wiki: We can see immediately, or we can read it in wiki, that number of parameters are speculative with ranges varying greatly. Then the question to me is, how useful such estimation of probability is and if its possible to base any sound argument, the so-called Fermi Paradox in particular, on it.
  7. 2 points
    In the last few years we've quietly disproved most of these things. Almost everyone in the western world and many people in the world in general now all carry acceptable quality cameras with them all the time. Yet good photos just hasn't appeared.
  8. 2 points
    Delusion? Self-deceit? Communities of likeminded lemmings? Simply saying “goddidit” explains nothing, except (of course) the human proclivity for accepting simple inaccurate answers instead of facing hard truths and existing contentedly with uncertainties about challenging questions. Define “god.”
  9. 2 points
    These days, I give green to people who do their best to facilitate a reasoned discussion. I also reward clever, funny, and of course, really great mainstream science explanations. Too many people are so interested in "winning" an argument that they'll use really poor and obviously fallacious reasoning, so they get red from me. I give red to those who seem willful in their ignorance, asking for but then rejecting good science in favor of some pet idea. I give red to folks who don't understand the difference between critical analysis and personal attacks, and get rude about it. I give red to those who start with a decent question about science and then spend the rest of the thread trolling about how others treated their question. I don't give red for wrong answers. I don't give red because someone disagrees with me. I don't give red usually unless the behavior was pretty blatant. I give green to counteract someone else's red if I think it was done in retaliation for not agreeing with them. Those are always easy to spot,.
  10. 2 points
    And yet movement and velocity themselves are undefined without time. How can one exist, but not the other?
  11. 2 points
    Sexual harassment is against the law. Sexual assault is a crime. So let's dispense with the fiction that unlawful behavior is not in play here. We've talked to our daughters for generations. Maybe we should be talking to our sons, since they are the ones exhibiting the objectionable behavior. Women get talked to about how to avoid putting themselves in vulnerable situations, but men do not get the same institutional dialogue on not assaulting or harassing women. You are painting this with a very broad brush. Have you considered that women who seek out power (in your terms) are not the ones coming forth with harassment claims? Have you considered that the reason some women might go to some lengths to improve their appearance is because that's the only way they can advance with men in power? Because they have no power to do so on merit alone? Do you really think men kept their hands to themselves back when "women wore hats"? Far more many women have been assaulted and/or harassed. The straw man here is couching this as "playing the victim" which implies that there was no inappropriate behavior in the first place. Anyone who has been harassed or assaulted is not "playing the victim". The situations under discussion are not treated the same way as most other crimes. If someone is burgled, the reaction of bystanders is not "Why do you own such fancy stuff? You were asking for it to be taken!" The police generally do not dissuade you from trying to press charges. People don't rush to the defense of the burglar, saying how he's such a nice guy, and why are you trying to ruin his reputation? So this is not so simple as "innocent until proven guilty" and should not be cast as such.
  12. 2 points
    No his and our and the DNC's actions speak louder than the words. Its never a bad time to do the right thing. Well I hope so it resonates highly with me and I doubt I am alone in this. However me and many others see the DNC as corrupt and it will take a lot more than this to change that perception. Also the DNC did drag their feet early on and it does look as if their decisions were guided more by public opinion and less by internal virtue. Forcing these resignations is a good first step. But it will take many of these steps for me to see them as reformed. BTW the GOP needs to do the same thing.
  13. 2 points
    I can only assume, then, that you don't know what the words "objective" and "subjective" mean. You are making a purely subjective guess at intelligence, possibly influenced by the known date of birth of the person, and think that people should take you seriously for some reason. This is a science forum. Unless you can produce some objective (i.e. independently measurable) data instead of your guesses, no-one is going to take you seriously.
  14. 2 points
    None, thank you alien friend. We'll never learn for ourselves otherwise. How about comparing notes on maths and art?
  15. 1 point
    Now please read the following extract from my Handbook of Inorganic Chemistry This couldn't be clearer. HYDROGEN AND ITS ISOTOPES DEUTERIUM AND TRITIUM HAS ONLY ONE PROTON A AND ONLY ONE ELECTRON If you insist on publishing diagrams of atoms of other elements and calling them hydrogen or one of its isotopes there is no point our continuing this discussion.
  16. 1 point
    He puts all his weight on his ankles first though. So whatever your ankles can take without breaking. As a side note it is much safer to fall onto your back or front and roll as that maximises the surface area and reduces the risk of you breaking an ankle or hand.
  17. 1 point
    That ranks right up there with one of the dumbest statements I have ever heard on any forum I've ever come across. Sorry but it is precisely the same thing. By the literal definition of the term superppsition.
  18. 1 point
    Yes. The right sequence is to start by learning some science. If you can also learn how to stop your text appearing like this it will be a step forward too
  19. 1 point
    Because we are not that technologically advanced yet and have only been looking a very short while? In my lifetime alone we have seen incredible advances in being able to look further away and to be able to tell more about what is going on. 30 years ago we had never detected other earth like planets before and though that we would have no means of doing so or that it might not even be possible as we were a goldilocks planet just right for life. Now we know of many. Give it a century or 2 Moontan and I'm sure we'll know more.... Give a 3 year old boy a snorkel and tell him to find an octopus. Chances are he will fail.
  20. 1 point
    Maybe. He looks a bit like my Granddad, who introduced me to religion. I loved him very much. I understand how people get taken in by it. Times are progressing though and you have to be true to yourself, the whole of Christianity is based on the bible... which is provably wrong in many places and full of errors and contradictions... all of which you make excuses for and explain away when questioned about - I am done defending god and his bullshit in the bible. All it would reasonably take to disprove that the Christian god is infallible would be to find a single error in the bible. - the errors and contradictions are many. The whole lot is clearly a work of fiction, based on some very thin actual history passed on by hearsay rather than recorded text. I do, however, like the general idea of looking to something greater than ones self, practicing love, forgiveness, mercy, etc.. trying to be humble and going about life with a sense of humility and gratefulness. I have never gotten this right - but I am not sure it is possible - although I have met some lovely people that are fair 'better' than me with their love and compassion for mankind and animals and their peaceful natures.
  21. 1 point
    I understand your confusion. maybe this will help
  22. 1 point
    I am not going to waste any more time on your redefining the wheel as a cog. I will be happy to help when you are ready to use well established words conventionally.
  23. 1 point
    If the ball is charged, he charges on the plate will feel a force. Like charges attract, opposites repel. Why use such a large probe? Every probe I've seen has been small. Your oscilloscope doesn't have a ground input? You are measuring a voltage, not a current. The current through the probe is supposed to be small. And if it's AC, the electrons don't move very far anyway.
  24. 1 point
    I don't know if you are talking about the ill fated attempt to replace 'conventional current' with 'electron current' in electric threory. That was a really bad idea and lead to much confusion in the 1990s. The plain fact is that currents can be the flow of either positive or negative charges or both. It is difficult to say which is more common. The issue was resolved by choosing a convention many years ago, now called 'conventional current'. This was neither the right nor wrong way round, but it did allow the whole of electric theory to develop to what we have today. Whatever convention you choose you have to actually choose not one but two sign conventions and you cannot avoid the situation where some quantity seems 'the wrong way round'. Therefore there is no point changing current direction conventions and I strongly recommend you stick with conventional current. Thanks for the vote of confidence expressed about my posts.
  25. 1 point
    Read the material my support is there as stated before I deal with physics and teaching it. Doesn't matter to me what you choose to believe in. I don't do useless metaphysics or disbelief arguments. ( a good metaphysics argument I have yet to see from this thread) good visual aid here the reference for how this works with constructive/destructive interference. You won't accept this either.... https://ocw.mit.edu/high-school/physics/exam-prep/physical-optics/interference-diffraction/8_02_spring_2007_ch14_inter_diffr.pdf
  26. 1 point
    Thanks: John; & Tuco, that guy is excellent. Could you expain a bit (which secondaries)? Btw, doesn't the metal Pt have the ability to absorb hydrogen &/or oxygen gas? (~20 times its volume?) Constant environment (low humidity) might degas (it)? Otherwise, I can only suspect Hubble's expanding universe & its matter (=material, atoms) expanding with it (=the universe) (due to the surrounding=outer_space vacuum. E.g. Osmosis: the high concentration tends to go to low concentration. Thus high density migrates to the low(er) density; & the (previously) higher becomes less; while the (previously) lower becomes more; so both will (finally) become similar (=almost equal). Cosmically that ((homeostasis) result from Hubbles (non_linear?) (volume) expansion_constant) might take billions of years; if not more?)
  27. 1 point
    The fact that women no longer feel alone or isolated in these exchanges. The fact that they're finally being treated seriously and not dismissed or shamed or victim blamed. The fact that people are tired of "ugly" men having all the power, and... to be clear... I'm not referring here to physical traits or indicators of fertility. There are other reasons, but those are some. Completely tangential and irrelevant to the points I actually made, to the point of being an outright strawman. If my point was unclear, please request I clarify it and I will happily do so. In return, please don't assume that I hold such remedial concepts about the need for equality across the sexes.
  28. 1 point
    yes like two sine waves both simulatneous.
  29. 1 point
  30. 1 point
    Neither can I. It might show weakness. BTW - OT, but AP just called the election for Jones
  31. 1 point
    I used to hire off-duty Denver cops during Christmas to wander around an urban mall area to cut down on shoplifting, and I learned how tightly-knit the legal system is. The police and the prosecutors need to be tight to make sure they get it all right and put the bad guys away. They protect each other from scrutiny because they want to be effective at their jobs, and don't always see sexual assault as a crime with a victim. The straw for me was all the stories from the time of Moore's alleged assaults, and how all the cops knew to keep ol' Roy away from the high school girls. It was common knowledge at the time he was 30 that he dated high school girls. And the topper for me was how his wife resorted to posting fake news to deflect from the accusations. Moore wants to stay in the game with a bad hand, and that means he's bluffing. He comes from the Trump mold of power and privilege, and he's just as used to lying as Trump is.
  32. 1 point
    Our perceptions of wealth have been shaped to allow for this behavior, I think. The smallfolk have always had to bow to the will of the upper class, allowing them their depredations in order to not upset the status quo. It's more acute now because the disparity is more acute. I wish we could see an overall shift in attitude that would value more than financial strength or your ability to make money as the worth of a person. I think extreme capitalism spawns the attitude that everything the underclasses have is cheap, and everything the upper class has is valuable. That includes your body, your self-worth, and your integrity. And there is also the persistent and contrary myth that men just can't help themselves. I blame the biblical story of Sampson and Delilah for a lot of it. The man/hero is so strong and virile and powerful, except when it comes to women, then he can't help himself and is undone. If the story had ended with him being killed for his weakness and stupidity, we probably wouldn't have so many Christians going along with the idea of a strong, famous man who can't keep his pants on. But the writers have Sampson regain his strength and defeat his enemies in the end, so we're left with an image of heroic virility tinged by a weakness even God will forgive eventually. Women are portrayed as openly conniving and treacherous in this story, while Sampson is a justifiable idiot who got the girl and became an icon of strength instead of gullibility.
  33. 1 point
  34. 1 point
    An alleged conversation at the Royal Astonomical Society conference November 6th 1919. Silberstein "Professor Eddington, you must be one of the three persons in the world who understand General Relativity" Whilst waiting for a reply as Eddington thinks, Silberstein "Don't be modest, Eddington" Finally Eddington "On the contrary, I'm trying to think who the third person is."
  35. 1 point
    I'm not complaining about the BBC science programmes in general, some are absolutely brilliant and I have linked to them here myself. The Earth Science ones are especially good as was the one on Electricity a couple of years back. But my comments on the JAK style are twofold. 1) Asking questions the audience (or anyone else) can't answer and then handwaving when things get difficult. 2) Presenting explanations as though they were cut and dried Physics, not the subjects of considerable modern debate. Here is an interesting two pages from a Roger Penrose book covering much of the same ground. RP has the guts to admit when we just don't know and offers an evently balanced presentation of different speculations by world class scientists. #The Large, the Small and the Human Mind
  36. 1 point
    I think there have been great improvements in that area (in the UK, at least). Although the subtle/unconscious biases do still persist. But the real problems exist before cases even get to that stage. And in the discussions in the press / social media once it becomes public.
  37. 1 point
    I was talking about the way the police and the courts treat cases. am not sure there is a huge problem overall -account taken of the fact that members obviously come from the community and are susceptible to the same unconscious assumptions as the public in general.. On the other hand ,when a woman (or anyone obviously) is treated inappropriately by the system it is another injury ,and on a different level.
  38. 1 point
    Yes. And I think the fact that many people don't even realise this is part of the problem. So many times, the victims of such assaults are told not to make a fuss (perhaps because it will cause problems for the accused, or the accused will make problems for them). Or they are just not believed ("I can't believe he would do such a thing"). Or people talk about the victim's behaviour or the way they were dressed or how much they had to drink. These things may be changing now, with the publicity generated by Weinstein and others. And there is, of course, a danger of it swinging too far the other way, where there accused is assumed to be guilty. I'm not sure that is too big a problem (once the hysteria of the scummier end of journalism has died down). But, anyway, wouldn't that bring it in to line with most other crimes? I think most people assume that if someone is accused, arrested, brought to court, etc, that they are guilty. It is often thought to be some sort of miscarriage of justice if they are acquitted.
  39. 1 point
    They should be each treated with the same objectivity and dispassion until the evidence is concluded and guilt established, or not.
  40. 1 point
    Thank you all! It's a topic i am interested in. In my opinion,intelligence is an ability of mind to notice,analyze and link together the complex data for creating some making decisions tools. But it's not fixed for ages. It changes with time, efforts to improve it or special medical treatment as psychostimulants. In this sense measurement of intelligence is important not only for realising my current status but my potential mostly. IQ test, for example, have an index of age. Which means a 10 years old kid who is solving the problems as he is 15, has bigger result as a more intelligent person then that one. Am not sure, it is not a sign of agism,by the way,but is another story. I would like to use such a proper test i believe in to measure my progress in keeping my "brain fit" as i do regularly check my body condition.
  41. 1 point
    Couple of recent interesting articles related to this: https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-bacteria-help-regulate-blood-pressure-20171130/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/what-bacteria-can-tell-us-about-human-evolution-20171205/
  42. 1 point
    Playing the victim is power in itself. Many men have experienced times when a woman playing the victim is always right regardless of the truth.
  43. 1 point
    Sure it does. What is punished under the law is not consistent between cultures.
  44. 1 point
    To put that another way, they could explain it in 5 minutes but you wouldn't really understand what a derivative was. At best you might have grasped some useful (but not completely accurate) analogies and have a rough idea of why it is useful. If you did an introductory course (over several weeks or months) you would understand a lot more (you wouldn't need 500 books, just one good one). But you still wouldn't understand everything.You could take several years doing a PhD and then do a decade of post-doc research and I suspect you still wouldn't understand it completely.
  45. 1 point
    Wrong, actually. The expert could explain it to another expert (or someone with a fairly solid mathematical education) in 5 minutes. If they gave the same explanation to someone without the requisite knowledge, it would take the same 5 minutes, plus an indeterminate amount of time for each question the expert explanation creates in the mind of the math neophyte. Does that make sense, that you need a certain amount of knowledge to be able to follow a more sophisticated argument?
  46. 1 point
    The interactive model can be found at: Action Dynamics of the Local Supercluster Interactive Model Source: Action Dynamics of the Local Supercluster - The Astrophysical Journal, Volume 850, Number 2, December 2017 (free preprint)
  47. 1 point
    Well... it was predictably posted in the political section of this forum, by a hyper-partisan contributor who earned a little holiday right around that time. Republican or Democrat has everything to do with OP and their agenda. It has everything to do with practicing what is preached (or the pervasive lack of same) I agree wholeheartedly, you are correct in the sense it shouldn't be about politics, do you need a notarized letter from my lawyer or a biplane to tow it across the sky of your town? Yet made it about politics nonetheless. This after telling me I can't raise political parties in a political thread about a politician on a board you don't moderate.Does that seem a little authoritarian in your view? Okay some rules, your rules. With that, I have to ask the authoritarian thingy question, again.
  48. 1 point
    And I'm sure there are people (whether Republican or Democrat ) who don't have to take responsibility for their bad actions because they never behaved badly towards women. So what if he takes responsibility for his actions ??? He did commit them ! I ( and his victims ) don't care if he's a good or bad Politician, Democrat or Republican. He's a flawed human being who happens to be in a position of power, and preys on women. Why do you insist on getting down in the mud with waitforufo, and making this a discussion about which politics is more 'honorable' ? I don't remember politics being mentioned at all in the OP ( although we all knew ), so why take the bait ?
  49. 1 point
    "The British began their Sinai and Palestine Campaign in 1915.[88] The war reached southern Palestine in 1917, progressing to Gaza and around Jerusalem by the end of the year.[88] The British secured Jerusalem in December 1917.[89] They moved into the Jordan valley in 1918 and a campaign by the Entente into northern Palestine led to victory at Megiddo in September. The British were formally awarded the mandate to govern the region in 1922.[90] The non-Jewish Palestinians revolted in 1920, 1929, and 1936.[91] In 1947, following World War II and The Holocaust, the British Government announced its desire to terminate the Mandate, and the United Nations General Assembly adopted in November 1947 a Resolution 181(II) recommending partition into an Arab state, a Jewish state and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem.[92] The Jewish leadership accepted the proposal, but the Arab Higher Committee rejected it; a civil war began immediately after the Resolution's adoption. The State of Israel was declared in May 1948." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine_(region) "After a period of stalemate in Southern Palestine from April to October 1917, General Edmund Allenby captured Beershebafrom the III Corps. Having weakened the Ottoman defences, which had stretched almost continually from Gaza to Beersheba, they were finally captured by 8 November, after the Battle of Tel el Khuweilfe, the Battle of Hareira and Sheria and the Third Battle of Gaza, when the pursuit began. During the subsequent operations, about 50 miles (80 km) of formerly Ottoman territory was captured as a result of the EEF victories at the Battle of Mughar Ridge, fought between 10 and 14 November, and the Battle of Jerusalem, fought between 17 November and 30 December. Serious losses on the Western Front in March 1918, " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinai_and_Palestine_Campaign What has accorded since is obviously problematic but I think it is important to address how the region became so destabilized to begin with. I think a lot of people in the West just accept that the region has been constantly disputed and at conflict since biblical times without any real appreciation for what has happened to the region over just the last hundred years. "In World War I, the Ottoman Empire sided with Germany. As a result, it was embroiled in a conflict with Great Britain. Under the secret Sykes–Picot Agreement of 1916, it was envisioned that most of Palestine, when freed from Ottoman control, would become an international zone not under direct French or British colonial control. Shortly thereafter, British foreign minister Arthur Balfour issued the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which promised to establish a "Jewish national home" in Palestine[293]but appeared to contradict the 1915–16 Hussein-McMahon Correspondence, which contained an undertaking to form a united Arab state in exchange for the Great Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Empire in World War I. McMahon's promises could have been seen by Arab nationalists as a pledge of immediate Arab independence, an undertaking violated by the region's subsequent partition into British and French League of Nations mandates under the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement of May 1916, which became the real cornerstone of the geopolitics structuring the entire region. The Balfour Declaration, likewise, was seen by Jewish nationalists as the cornerstone of a future Jewish homeland." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Palestine Israel was created in 1948 however the British had been working on the territory for decades prior. To say Palestine was a few Nomadic tribes isn't accurate. It had formerly been part of the Ottoman Empire and wrestled away during WW1 by the British and the territory purposely segregated to make way for the future creation of a Jewish state.
  50. 1 point
    That’s a... how do I put this charitably?... an “uncommon” position. Happy to agree with you on the nutter comment, but find your suggestion of Trump being a religious man to be misguided, at best. Seems painfully obvious to me he’s simply stoking tribalism and using religion to magnify social wedges while in parallel conning and hoodwinking the theists in his base, but YMMV. Again, we agree here.