Leaderboard

The whole premises of this thread is based on the 2016 Asimov debate, where the conclusion, of us being simulated, ended up way below 50%. In that debate Tyson was acting as a host, and only commented on the statements made. He was being funny and tried to entertain the audience. We need people like him in science, if we want the public to engage. And we do!

Reasoning like this is painful to see. Your critical thinking skills are a dumpster fire. I don't mean to offend, and I'm not attacking you personally. Your arguments are silly and you're ignorant about a LOT of science that you openly criticize. Sorry. Really very sorry.

Reparations is a corner stone of our civil legal system. If you steal from someone, you make amends. If you slander a restaurant and they lose business because of it, you are required to pay them damages. Wrongful death? Reparations. Fell off a faulty ladder and can't work? Ladder manufacturer pays. And it doesn't matter if the faulty ladder was an ignorant mistake or done maliciously. Is it you position that none of these reparations should be made either? If not, then why aren't blacks also entitled to reparations for harm they've suffered?

No, it is not right. No, it is not right. That is not an excuse for using invalid statements about relativity. Lack of rigour regarding the frames of reference can and will lead to contradictions regarding the math of Special Relativity. Personally I am not moving on without addressing that properly: Some readers might interpret such contradictions as problems with the theory of relativity itself* rather than issues with the descriptions and examples in this thread. That would be unfortunate, especially in the mainstream section of the forum. If multiple frames of reference are used the only way I know of, that gives correct results within Special Relativity, is to use Lorentz Transform or derive Lorentz Transform to be able to move between the frames of reference. So let's try another approach: Even if we are not allowed to use Lorentz Transform for argumentation yet we still have Einstein's postulates, and simply adding distances in one frame of reference to get a distance in another frame of reference is not compatible with Einstein's postulates. Question: what postulates are we going to use? Can we for instance state that the speed of light is invariant? Are we starting from other postulates?

You lost me at Michio Kaku ...

It's only peripherally supportive of extraterrestrials, like saying sonar evidence that could be whales is really aliens. It's much more likely to be whales. Similarly, it's much more likely that these UFOs have an earthly origin. Some country testing unusual aircraft. Ignorance and fear. When you mix them, as you have, it produces stupidity, hate, and unreasonableness. Critical thought on vacation, if you will.

! Moderator Note Polinski, you are being obtuse and dragging this thread off topic. Please stop. If you have nothing relevant to contribute here, you are welcome to either find a more appropriate thread or create your own.

Polinski has been suspended for a week. Thread hijacking and an inability to stay on topic do not mix well with general cluelessness.

! Moderator Note Enough of this crap

Did you want to discuss the science, or did you just want to attack Tyson? Because I don't see anything beyond ad hominem and emotional rant here. This is the Astronomy and Cosmology section.

Of course I do. But there are at least three other mundane explanations that have far greater probability of being correct than aliens. If we even had one alien artifact to test, I'd bump aliens up a notch or two. But alas, all those pesky government coverups grabbed every single one of them. Sure. That's why most of the arguments I see for aliens fall short. There's almost always a normal reason for what gets reported. It's about sensory sightings, or abnormalities, or one-off situations that can't be tested or debunked. That's why checking for non-terrestrial biosignatures would be better. It removes ALL the mundane reasons when you find some. What about these encounters goes above and beyond what secret government budgeting is capable of? I would be pretty shocked to find out our government (or Russia's, or China's, or any wealthy nation's) didn't have some secret weapons they've been working on. Landing on the White House lawn wouldn't convince me. Again, if it's terrestrial tech, I'm sure it could be made to look very convincing. We HAVE to be able to study something and determine beyond doubt its non-Earth origins. We can tell what part of the planet various organic and inorganic material is from, so we should be able to identify something not from here.

The radar signatures mentioned in that thread displaying non-standard/unrecognized behavior are only evidence in support of UFOs. They don't support alien existence any more than they support the existence of flying reindeer. I would accept evidence suggesting some kind of non-terrestrial biosignature as being supportive of alien involvement. Do we currently have the technology to detect matter in our atmosphere that may have been introduced by travelers from offplanet (discounting anything prebiotic)? If we can rule out any mundane reasons why such biological material is present, that might suggest support for alien visitors.

Extraterrestrial intelligent life forms on the Earth, are like humans in the jungle exploring it. Biologists who want to learn about species in their natural environment. Biologists do everything to cover against being noticed by animals under observation, as it scares them, and changes natural behavior. Humans also tries to keep the last South America tribes unaware about the world.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontacted_peoples

And you’re probably right. I understand your position and agree it’s relevant, but avoiding discussions because some people might use it as an opportunity to wedge us away from our common humanity is a massive mistake. Discussions of ending slavery caused further polarization and resentment, civil unrest, and widened divides. Discussions of ending Jim Crow caused further polarization and resentment, civil unrest, and widened divides. Discussions of ending segregated schools and separated water fountains caused further polarization and resentment, civil unrest, and widened divides. Discussions of equal civil rights for all, regardless of the melanin content in one’s skin, caused further polarization and resentment, civil unrest, and widened divides. These were still the right things to discuss. These were still the right things to do. Those truths remain even while acknowledging the likely growth of resentment and unrest you reference. Suggesting we shouldn’t even talk about reparations for risk that some uptight asshats panties might get twisted advocates only entitlement and the selective application of our shared values. That approach does not, however, champion the very equity you just advocated in your own post and which I happen to stand steadfastly and firmly by your side in supporting. “We’d better not talk about this. It might make masta angry. Just carry on now w your chores and just keep your head down.” No. Enough. That’s all done now. It’s unfortunate, but it’s probably bc so many are uncomfortable with where they’ll land on the ledger... though sunshine is often the best disinfectant.

This is a non-issue. The bill and what Coates are proposing are to look into the damages that folks right now right here have suffered. It seems that you are implying that these damages to black folks were done a long time ago and no one suffering from them are alive today. But rather obviously the hardships for black folks did not evaporate, it continues through the Jim Crow era with forced segregation, it continued via soft segregation and through the 80s, it continued with decriminalization in the 90s. And again, the case is not how much and to whom money should be paid, we are still stuck in figuring out the damages. And it is indeed mindblowing that folks would rather be ignorant on that matter and block measures that would provide data on that matter.

This is the difference you display ( sometimes ) from CharonY's responses, INow. Germany pays money to survivors of the Holocaust. Will they be paying their great-grandchildren, 100 yrs from now, reparations for hereditary economic disadvantages ? You claim to want 'a discussion', yet when people post viewpoints contrary to yours, you label it 'push-back', laughable, and a common tactic. My questioning of the further contents of the article was in the same response where I apologised and gave my reason for not having read the article. YET ! Sometimes you stretch quite far to criticize those presenting opposing views. It would be great ( for you ) if everyone had the same views as you. But then, you wouldn't have much of a discussion, would you ?

Why not? I’d fire you for listening to that

There is also an insidious undertone to the whole thing that many folks are not aware of (which makes it so insidious). The rhetoric goes that Jews are, despite all the adversity they face, as a whole seemingly more successful than black folks. As such, the fault must lie with them. This then deliberately ignores the specific measures black folks were subject to, such as redlining, targeted predatory lending tactics, exclusion from GI bill etc etc. While Jews continued to face discrimination the nature was quite different was and is quite different to what black folks face resulting in very different trajectories (which, as mentioned, includes recognition for their suffering, reparations and so on). Ignoring the ongoing wealth transfer away from black folks, assisted in disproportionately criminalizing them often via unfair mandatory sentencing laws (the difference between crack and cocaine comes to mind). It is then easy to turn around and talk about "personal responsibility" and point toward these horrendous statistics whilst ignoring why they actually exist. And create a vicious circle of blame unfair laws and failure of policies to address them. The intention of HR40 is to look into these specifics and try to explore why African-Americans fare so badly and to go away from the context-free personal responsibility shtick in which the external forces are traditionally ignored.

To add to this: we can agree that an event happened. It can't happen in some frames but not others. What we can't do is agree on when and where, and sometimes even the order of multiple events will not be agreed upon.

For metal heads who have girlfriends or wives who listen to pop: Leo is amazing!!! Check out his other songs:

BTW, UFOs have always been real, Unidentified doesn't mean not real, it means unidentified. I think the visual sightings made by two other pilots hours before the ones in 2004 along with radar contact are a lot more interesting than the radar plots with no visuals..

! Moderator Note DON'T. You popped up in this thread, which had not been active in more than 10 weeks, to split some hairs regarding aerodynamics vs hydrodynamics. Don't you dare try and pass the buck for people responding to your pedantry as if you hadn't instigated the whole thing. Modnotes are not an invitation to a debate.

This quote by Richard Feynman explains it straight forward: ”The reason for this unexpected behavior is that when the atoms in contact are all of the same kind, there is no way for the atoms to “know” that they are in different pieces of copper. When there are other atoms, in the oxides and greases and more complicated thin surface layers of contaminants in between, the atoms “know” when they are not on the same part. — Richard Feynman, The Feynman Lectures, 12–2 Friction”

Does the carbonate dissolve when you add it to the reaction? I am not familiar with its solubility in DMA or DMF. If not, perhaps you could consider adding crown ether or switching to Cs2CO3? The latter is reasonably expensive, but if you have it on hand it might be useful.

UFO's are real. Around 5% of sightings remain as UFO's...that is Unidentified and not readily explained by atmospheric conditions etc. Please note that the U in UFO means unidentified, and gives no cause to extrapolate that to of alien origins.

! Moderator Note Since the OP hasn't come back with anything to back up their wild claims, I am closing this.

PervPhysProf has been banned for after a stream of incoherent and also some weirdly racist nonsense.

I was raised a Jehovah's Witness but never baptised. To them, baptism means a life-long commitment to the Watchtower and Tract Society, the official name of their business. They condemn free thinking1 and refuse to budge on their positions. This is all fine for those who would prefer a life laid out for them, but I feel that their discouragement of higher education2 is the main reason that chldren raised within the organization become fully indoctrinated adults. The religion is not well known for its tribalist views and practice of shunning. I was lucky enough to have my father leave the organization when I was three years of age. This allowed my family to get used to divergence when I decided to stop attending "meetings" at the age of fourteen. Many young Jehovah's Witnesses, however, are not so lucky. Some are thrown into the streets and abandoned for leaving "the truth" behind. Overall the religion is extremely dogmatic and believes that the inevitable armageddon will claim the lives of all non-Witnesses within the next few decades3 if they do not hear "the truth" before the coming of their paradise. Many of their propoganda videos (the Become Jehovah's Friend series can be found on JW.org) teach their followers to fear authority and scorn education. One video depicts a girl answering a question incorrectly on a test to intentionally lower her grade so that she wouldn't be top of the class. I could not find the exact video but it is a part of the Become Jehovah's Friend series available on Youtub and JW.org. In conclusion, the Jehovah's Witnesses are a dangerous organization attempting to control you and your thoughts. Have a nice day and remember not to laugh at Jehovah's Witnesses who happen to knock at your door but to pity them. SOURCES: 1. https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-study-november-2018/making-gods-thoughts-your-own/ 2. https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/w20051001/Parents-What-Future-Do-You-Want-for-Your-Children/#?insight[search_id]=7789837c-0d27-4943-bbab-386a0020ba3c&insight[search_result_index]=11 3. https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1958767?q=end+times&p=par

I am surprised with one certainly, the other is just par for the course and his usual methodology, and bias towards myself. Just done some more research and found other movies made about the Chernobyl Incident https://www.inverse.com/article/14834-5-powerful-films-about-chernobyl 1. The Russian Woodpecker (2015) 2. Chernobyl Heart (2003) 3. White Horse (2008) 4. The Battle of Chernobyl (2006 5. Chernobyl 3828 (2011) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Sadly I have not seen any of them, but will certainly make an effort to at least get what I can and compare to the latest excellent movie that certainly aligns pretty close to the events that transpired. Anyone else seen any of them? Again, my main concern and motive with the current movie being discussed, is how close it is to the events that transpired, and of course the science that is concerned with nuclear fission and what can happen when short cuts are taken, or unsafe operational procedures are performed, and obviously the after effects. Sadly for at least two interesting parties, those issues have escaped them.

Seems like people want to troll you rather than talk to you. Very strange.

No, I was replying to the fact he said it was nonsense. And I have noted that its cost them. One needs to to learn to discuss behaviours in non-judgemental terms sometimes i.e. take ones heart off ones sleeve and just discuss dispassionately, otherwise it just descends into an emotional morass. I don't want words putting in my mouth. I don't put them in yours.

The first Sunday after I moved into my current home, two ladies knocked at my door. I answered, and as is usual whenever someone sees me for the first time, they had a lot of questions about why I wear strange ‘Stormtrooper’ boots and use crutches. They wanted to know what happened and I still experience this whenever I go out anywhere. So I told them what happened to me and told them the likely future of my injuries. They were shocked but sympathetic, left me with a Watchtower, and promised to return next week. They have NEVER returned. That was 18 months ago... These are the boots...

[math]\pi[/math] =[math]\pi[/math]

Yes, and the people who made those records can judge how realistic the programme is. I didn't make them. I still really can't judge. It's not complicated. It's like asking you if a picture looks like my brother, then saying

When I describe a physical phenomenon, make a mathematical model of it, presents my ideas, arguments, then I do not want to deviate from the main track. It's not possible! I present something, ask if I am right or wrong, then I want either an approval, Yes, or a No, but then you have to counter-argument. It should not be more difficult than that!

If dna has a purpose, it is to reproduce itself. That said from a genetic standpoint homosexuality is like a bank running ads that this bank leaves their vault doors open. All the money is stolen and the bank goes extinct. There are also zero children produced by homosexuality.

I disparage the selling of children to the highest bidder..... you should too

Look you used the flightless penguin as an example of flight, not me. I am only responding to post that are directed to me, it would be rude not to answer. I always try to be both accurate and polite to all. Never as the qualities needed for aerodynamics and the qualities needed for hydrodynamics are different in Earth gravity which is the constant. Penguins do not fly thru the air and gulls do not fly thru the water they use their wings for limited motion, in fact they use flight to generate the speed to dive, then waddle slowly back to the surface where they take the air again.

According to Tyson there is no reality to measure, because what we perceive as real is simulated. I think he watched one of those Star Trek Next Gen episodes with the Holodeck

Wrong again, mantas do not fly. They swim with wings, do you really think a 3000lb ray would be able to fly

So the Navy is briefing Congress on the Unidentified objects toying with F15's Might be ball lightning huh, or swamp gas over the Ocean. If you think you know it all, you are not thinking

Radar recordings are evidence What are you afraid of?

No it was said that there is zero evidence that the crafts are alien. Without the proper clearance this can not be claimed with authority. There is a reason that we know of this and another reason that only security clearance holders were briefed. The Navy is claiming that they have evidence. Of what we do not know. He most certainly does not have SAP clearance. Furthermore this clown also says that we are computer programs in a virtual reality simulated universe Daffy Duck made more sense

Tyson is a lost pup looking for attention, he should use some physics to plot the stock market then he would have less free playtime

If Tyson is a brilliant educator, then you are a computer simulation that was formed in Darwin's pond. Oh wait the pond is a simulation too so that can't be correct. Tyson seems to be leaning to God is the simulation creator...………. Yea brilliant Are those your thoughts or the simulated thoughts from the simulation Nonsense taught in our schools