Jump to content

mistermack

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    1508
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by mistermack

  1. If intelligent design could be shown to be legitimate, would that destroy the concept of evolution? Not one bit. The evidence for evolution is all over the place, in the rocks, in the genes, in the development of resistance to antibiotics and weedkillers, it's never ending. So the proponents either have to disprove every bit of evidence for evolution, which just cannot happen, there is too much of it, OR, to somehow merge intelligent design with evolution, and accept that evolution happened. But if you accept evolution, then the process is there to be seen, all the way back to the earliest of fossils. So you can forget Adam and Eve, and the garden of Eden. All your designer did was to kick start some slime into action, and gave it the gift of the odd imperfection of reproduction, such that evolutionary change could follow. And if you are arguing for a more "hands on" designer, then you have to explain what an evil son-of-a-bitch it was, to design diseases and parasites, and every form of life living off the remains of others, when you could have designed anything you felt like.
  2. You can't see what's wrong with that statement? Climate science is based on informed guesswork, it's all about projections that go many decades into the future, when there are complete unknowns involved, like future volcanic and solar activity, among many many others. And yet, you regard any difference of opinion as "denying the science". Well, the science isn't done. There are many poorly understood factors, like clouds. I'm disagreeing with the guesswork, not the science. Projection of climate for the future IS a best guess. Climate models are tools, to help people with their guesswork. They don't remove the guesswork element. No, because firstly, it doesn't involve guesswork about unknown unpredictable elements, and secondly, it's been tested experimentally hundreds of thousands of times, and always got the same result. Also, if anyone disagrees, it is perfectly open and easy for them to show why the inverse square law is wrong, and collect their Nobel Prize. So the consensus doesn't involve a leap of faith.
  3. The point is that by using terms like deniers, people are treating the subject like a religion. And constantly talking about the belief, rather than the evidence for it, is much the same. Even the so-called "consensus" is religion-like. I'm sure there is near 100% consensus that Jesus was god, among Catholic clergy. Although to their credit, they don't quote that as some kind of evidence. If you want to be regarded as a science, act like scientists, and not like adherents.
  4. I found it a bit ambiguous when I first read the reference, but it arises out of a translation from Hebrew to Greek. Apparently, at the time, the Jews were outraged by the terrible quality of the translation of the Hebrew Bible in general, considering it changing the word of God, and this is just one example. Wikipedia says this about the matter : Matthew uses Isaiah 7:14 to support his narrative, but scholars agree that the Hebrew word used in Isaiah, "almah", signifies a girl of childbearing age without reference to virginity, and was aimed at Isaiah's own immediate circumstances.[17][18] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus
  5. I don't deny any religion. I'm just waiting for decent evidence. And the burden of proof is on the believers.
  6. Well none of it's my fault. I have the heater and air conditioner on full blast all the time in my Humvee, and I give off methane everywhere I go. If the planet freezes over, I will have a clear conscience.
  7. Meanwhile, it's bloody freezing here. I've lived through nearly seventy Novembers, and I can tell you that this one is bloody cold. Is there any way we can get some of those baking arctic temperatures here, in the UK ? They seem to keep sidestepping us. Even a little would be nice.
  8. It's stating the bleedin obvious really. Nobody in their right mind could believe his daddy's position had nothing to do with it. Proving it is another matter, you can be sure that the Bidens got the story straight, before they ran the scam. What Trump wanted was the investigation. The result didn't really matter as long as the mud sticks. I can't see the US floating voter buying the story that Hunter Biden was some sort of hot shot whose words of wisdom were worth millions to Ukrainians, with his daddy being vice president just being a coincidental detail. So long as Trump doesn't actually get kicked out, he'll probably come out ahead.
  9. I think what's been described as a feeling, is more to do with memories than calculations. The mind uses similar events in the past to project what might be happening in the present. There's a bit of calculation involved, but you are really assessing how similar this event is to a range of previous ones. I have had mistaken feelings when dealing with problems, on rare occasions. You can make a mental picture of what you think is going on, and get fixated on it so that you become convinced that your mental picture is real, and you block out the actual real-life explanation.
  10. While strictly speaking we don't have free will, as far as I'm concerned it changes nothing. The notion that that means we can't be held accountable for our actions certainly does not follow. If a stray dog kills my child, it's easy to see that it doesn't have the ability to rationalise it's actions. It's not it's fault that it's a stray. It's probably had a hard violent life, just surviving. I still want it put down. I don't care if there is a facility available that could care for it and ensure that it never hurt another being. I still want it put down. The same applies to people. We are just more advanced dogs. I wouldn't have people put down, but only because of the possible doubt, and peoples lives mean more to me than dogs. Most people regard the concept of free will as having a choice, and having the intellect to make a choice. And that's good enough reason to hold people accountable for me. You pay for the choices you made. What made you the person you were, when you made that choice, is a very minor factor that could be used as a slight mitigating factor.
  11. Maybe it will end up that they are all controlled by motion detectors, so they only light what's necessary. Or with driverless cars, there will be no need for street lights or headlights.
  12. mistermack

    Paramotor

    It's surprising that there's nothing better than the two stroke motor, in this day and age, but that's how it is. Everything else suffers from the weight problem. Maybe someone will eventually make jet engines that fit the bill. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-sussex-50415991/jet-suit-inventor-breaks-speed-record-off-brighton-beach https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/32718293/sky-s-the-limit-for-new-jet-pack-pals
  13. I find the story of our dna just as amazing as the story of our atoms. To think that your dna was once chased by dinosaurs, and crawled onto land from the ocean, and before that lived as slimy goo in the depths, but always got lucky enough to reproduce before it died, just so that you could be here today. It's a stunning picture.
  14. I'm pretty sure that's right. Trump was never loved or respected or even wanted by the Republican establishment. But I do think it's important that votes are made public. The politicians were put there by the public, they are paid for by the public, and voting is one of the most important things that they are paid to do. So the public should be able to scrutinise the votes of the people they are electing and paying. Even if there are times when it might seem better if they couldn't.
  15. I've noticed that if you shine an LED torch on a rotating object, like a fan, you get the common effect you see in the movies, where a planes propeller can look like its stationary, or starting to go backwards, or just going very slow. The torches flicker at high rates, and that's how you can dim or brighten them, by reducing or increasing the frequency. It was quite confusing, the first time I saw it. I can imagine somebody putting their hand on a rotating fan, under unlikely but possible conditions, thinking it had stopped.
  16. There's nothing stopping you.
  17. I personally would opt for daylight white every time. I find it a huge improvement over the old sodium lights, or incandescent light bulbs. The old orange sodium colour is unnatural, the only time you get anything like it, is just before a thunderstorm, or maybe in a sandstorm. It gives off an ominous feeling, to me. The health effects should be rated against the health effects of normal bright daylight in my opinion. If it's worse, it needs looking at. If it's better, then I can't see the problem.
  18. Noble sentiments I'm sure. But surely you're not blind to the voting record on impeachment hearings? Can it really be that Democrats genuinely see it one way, and Republicans see it another, after hearing the SAME evidence? That's the real world of politics, not the innocent one that you are imagining.
  19. I like to take things one step at a time.
  20. What happens when you have a pair of quantum entangle particles? What I read is that it's looking likely that any change of state happens instantaneously to both particles, so maybe there will one day be a way to establish what real contemporaneity looks like.
  21. I think impeachment will eventually become the norm. I don't think this would ever be happening, but for the attempt on Bill Clinton. If I was a Democrat, that would be all the motivation I would need to impeach Trump. And Trump didn't help himself with his "jail Hillary" slogan in the election. Although maybe it helped him get elected in the first place. I thought the action to impeach Bill Clinton was a disgrace to America, and this is the same. But in this case, the revenge element makes it understandable. That element of revenge will always be there now, between the parties, and I think the slightest thing will lead to impeachment in the future, which can only be bad for the country. If I was in power in the US, I would make a law that a move to impeach would have to go first to the supreme court, who would have to rule on whether it can go ahead in the first place. A bit like the District Attorneys Office does for everyday crimes.
  22. If I had discovered a substance like the requested one in the OP, would I a) Patent it and become a billionaire, or b) Post it for all to see for free in an internet chat forum. It's a tricky choice. I need to think about it.
  23. I wasn't really making that point. What I meant was, if you know that A=10 x B , then if you measure A, then you are in effect measuring B as well. So if you have a formula for how the time on the surface of Jupiter is related to the time on Earth, then when you measure time on Earth, you are also measuring time on Jupiter. And the same principle would apply to anywhere in the Universe.
×
×
  • 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.