Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 08/07/20 in Posts

  1. 1 point
    Since the gauge-covariant tensor contraction of magnetic self-interacting dipoles is inversely proportional to the third power of geodesic divisiveness, and in any case Maxwell's equations do not actually allow for any prediction of force-induced oscillatory processes, magnetic field lines must be devoid of sources. This being the case, and due to the fact that gravity cannot be reduced to any Poynting invariants of the twice-summed Riemann tensor, as is clearly evident using simple Kac-Moody algebras, EM cannot logically be related to gravity. So you are wrong.
  2. 1 point
    Someone in another forum made a comment about farts and how you could light one with a match & it would burn. This got me thinking so I looked into it and found some interesting things. Chemical Composition of Farts The exact chemical composition of human flatulence varies from one person to another, based on his or her biochemistry, the bacteria inhabiting the colon, and the foods that were eaten. If the gas results from ingesting air, the chemical composition will approximate that of air. If the fart arises from digestion or bacterial production, the chemistry may be more exotic. Farts consist primarily of nitrogen, the principal gas in air, along with a significant amount of carbon dioxide. A typical breakdown of the chemical composition of farts is: Nitrogen: 20-90% Hydrogen: 0-50% (flammable) Carbon dioxide: 10-30% Oxygen: 0-10% Methane: 0-10% (flammable) Human flatus may contain hydrogen gas and/or methane, which are flammable. If sufficient amounts of these gases are present, it's possible to light the fart on fire. EXXON Mobile is spending millions to improve the yeast output of alcohol. I wish them the best in their ind-ever but I think they would have better results using the hundreds of thousands of sewer treatment plants, converting this waste into useful energy. Anybody care to comment, pro or con--?
  3. 1 point
    What happens at N=6, a hexagon? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexagonal_tiling
  4. 1 point
    It was counter intuitive to me, too. Where I landed as I worked through that in my own mind was that they want “effective” police presence and “appropriate” police presence and “just” police presence, while in parallel not just wanting more of the “current” or “bad” or “asymmetric” police presence. Just because the umpires in a baseball game aren’t calling balls and strikes fairly doesn’t mean we can’t still want to play or attend a game. I suspect that sentiment largely applies here on the policing question.
  5. 1 point
    You know me better than that, MigL. We’re now on page 7 of this thread. My position should be clear and has been articulate. Summarized: Defund the police is stupid branding for a set of otherwise good ideas. The idea is to focus dollars into approaches which are more effective and which more efficiently help us improve. Throwing the mentally handicapped and drug addicted and poverty stricken into cells and fining the poor forcing them to pay into a system thousands of dollars they simply don’t have doesn’t achieve that. The idea is to increase social and anti-poverty programs and reduce asymmetric punishment; to reduce the way black communities are more heavily punished for the exact same crimes committed by white communities. The idea is to eliminate qualified immunity so police can still be held accountable for their actions when they do something wrong; so police are no longer treated as above the law in the US just because they’re a key part of the apparatus which enforces it. Specifically to the survey, of course people want their communities to be safe. Of course they want help from the police when things go wrong. Of course they want bad actors removed from their environment. Those facts are not mutually exclusive with being tired of getting targeted by police or being treated asymmetrically by the justice system at large due solely to the color of ones skin. Yes, defund the police is a dumb slogan. It’s ignorant marketing and bad branding for a set of otherwise good ideas which would almost certainly help us to realize and achieve a massively improved ROI if we actually implemented them. Also yes, of course people want the police to be more respectful. We all surely agree there, and that respect is critical. More than that, it’s foundational, but also currently lacking. Good policing is about trust and community, and respect is the glue which binds those things together. We need to reduce the funding for those who can’t be respectful and who fail to EARN that trust. So I sigh because so many of us keep focusing on HOW people are protesting and by doing so we keep ignoring the reasons WHY. Focusing on the HOW is a distraction. See also: The focus on Kapernick kneeling at football games instead of the focus on black families consistently being torn apart when US police officers keep murdering (or locking up for eye rolling reasons) key members of them. So what if the slogan is dumb? It’s not as dumb as the tea party morons who said “keep the governments hands off my Medicare!” When we focus on the slogan we forget the reason it’s being chanted or supported in the first place and we make it more likely that we’ll all simply continue on with the current unacceptable status quo. There is merit worth discussing on this topic, but we never will if we keep getting triggered when we hear/read the word “defund” and keep short circuiting the conversation any time that word gets introduced. Abolish. Defund. Whatever. We need to fundamentally improve how policing happens in the United States, and we need to transfer a significant amount of the revenues they receive instead into social, rehabilitation, and anti-poverty programs. It makes me sigh because even people I very much like, enjoy, and respect seem to keep doing it... to keep focusing on HOW the protests are happening instead of WHY. But sure... this is clearly all about me ignoring points which don’t conform to my personal narrative because I’m incapable of having a mature discussion on an online discussion forum. 🙄
  6. 1 point
    My understanding (which is admittedly limited) is that legally a non-profits assets can only be allocated to another non-profit, here. I think those assets would all have to be transferred away if its status were changed. Those assets legally couldn't be part of a new for profit vs of the NRA less of course the NRA purchased them all back with money acquired post being a non-profit. Dissolution is a State managed process. Where as Tax Exemption is both State and Federal. Far as I can tell from light reading the IRS doesn't distinguish between Dissolution and other ways an organization loses its Tax Exempt Status, here. So I think dissolution and removing their tax exempt status are functionally the same thing. Seems dissolving the organization is the route a state would go vs the federal govt. As an organization the NRA is very political. However that doesn't mean holding them to legal standard is political. If the charges could be shown in court to be purely politically motivated that would be cause dismissal. I assume you know this which is why this thread is in Ethics and not Politics. You seek a discussion of the cases specifics and not an opinion on the NRA as a whole. NY's AG is saying that the NRA misused over $60 million dollars worth of charitable funds on this link vacations, non-board member approved contacts to allies, gifts, etc. Per NY law all charitable moneys must go towards the organizations stated charitable mission. The NRA's stated charitable missions is (Summary): Defend the Constitutions, promote law & order nationally, train firearm safety nationally, promote firearm sports nationally, promote hunting nationally. We is the complete suit file, here. Because of the domestic nature of the NRA's stated mission I think they will have a difficult time explaining how expensive African Safaris and private chartered jet flights to the Bahamas support their mission. It is an interesting chase. I personally think it too a lot of courage to file the suit. Because the NRA is such an established politically juggernaut there will absolutely be criticism. Many will feverishly defend the NRA purely out of political loyalty. It would be unethical to withhold a suit for fear of political optics though.
  7. 1 point
  8. 1 point
  9. 1 point
    Memory is very unreliable and easy to manipulate. Elizabeth Loftus on "Radiolab": https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/episodes/91569-memory-and-forgetting The thing is that once people have these false memories they will be absolutely certain they are true because the only referent they have to confirm it is ... there memory. And as Ten oz points out, even if you "know" intellectually that you are wrong your memory is still just as real as it was before you knew that. This is relevant to understanding the Mandela Effect, UFO sightings, and many other things that depend only on eye witness accounts.
  10. -1 points
    Have you checked the closet, or maybe a drawer full of random stuff? I often find things I’ve lost in those. Try retracing you’re steps
  11. -1 points
    Phi, I'm not running away. How am i being lazy when it's everyone else who is refusing to investigate the information and do the experiments for verification? The ball is in your court. I've done the studies, i'm the one presenting the theory, due diligence is YOUR obligation, not mine. Review, test and then refute (if you can). You do understand the scientific method, don't you? Well then DEMONSTRATE IT instead of avoiding the issue like some deranged politician, like i said you all would. Thanks for proving me correct on that thus far. Here, i will even provide further evidence and experiments for you, and entire curriculum of it. Start with video 1, go through them all and finish with video 112. Then do the experiments for yourself, they are inexpensive and there is no excuse not to verify this firsthand. VIDEO DELETED Stop making excuses like a coward and just do the work. You have no right to comment on it if you don't do the experiments and bother to understand the theory. "Condemnation prior to investigation is the height of ignorance" - You know who said that, don't you? Hop to it.
  12. -2 points
    Lol. I see plenty of dismissal, ridicule and condemnation but not a sign of any intellectual, scientific refutation of the information AND observational/experimental evidence provided and included in the article. Such as, the ferrocell device revealing that masses and magnets do NOT mutually accelerate towards each other, contrary to your academically endorsed and over popularized conventional theories of EM and gravitation. You may think it's all pseudoscientific technobabble, but i am merely reiterating the works of scientific greats such as Tesla, Faraday, Maxwell, Heaviside, Steinmetz, and others. It is their terminology which i use. It would be unwise to accuse their collective work as pseudoscience merely because you are unfamiliar with their terminology. Without these people we wouldn't even be having this discussion, as we owe to them our entire electrical grid and modern communications system, not excluding the internet. Instead of dismissing new information which challenges your world view as a "conspiracy theory" or "waste of time", why don't you actually try learning something new? It's OK to be wrong sometimes. Accepting that your universities failed you may be the only way science will ever progress from this point, to be fair. Paroxysm, props to your family member, they clearly have an open mind and are seeking the truth, you could probably learn quite a lot from them. "The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane. Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality. Einstein’s relativity work is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king… its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists." - N. Tesla Have a blessed day, Everyone. Wishing you all the best in your journey towards discovery. Just remember that the real obstacle to discovery is not ignorance, but rather the illusion of knowledge. Romans 1:22
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.