Jump to content

Sicarii

Senior Members
  • Posts

    51
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sicarii

  1. From the little information given in the OP, we know: -OP received a revealing photo and a video of woman removing her bikini from a married friend of hers. -OP feels annoyed/embarrassed by this action. To me personally, I don't feel that is harassment yet. If you inform your friend that you do not approve of him sending you this kind of images or videos, and he does not stop, then it becomes harassment. Furthermore, it's your friend! If you did not click on some level, you would not be friends. Before you are quick to end your friendship, find out the facts.
  2. Good question, but I am afraid there is no simple answer. There are two "official" representatives of the Syrian people -- the Syrian regime and the Syrian National Council (SNC, based in Turkey). Neither draw their legitimacy from the people, but they are the decision makers. Well, Syrian regime is the decision maker, and SNC pretends to make decisions. So, what does the Syrian population want? The answer is: Whatever the Syrian regime decides. The international community needs to call for elections in the immediate aftermath of a ceasefire agreement. In fact, that should be a clause inserted into the agreement. But knowing the history of the Syrian regime, agreements or clauses mean nothing to them.
  3. To respond to your points, 1 - The refugee crisis seems to have peaked. I would argue that this action would facilitate return of refugees to areas controlled by Syrian regime, especially those far away from the front lines. 2 - The decentralized nature of the rebels in Syria makes it harder to defeat them. They are comprised of many localized groups. Without US help, they will not be able to mount successful offensives to overthrow Assad, nor will they be able to influence the future of Syria. If the Syrian regime decides to uphold a US-Russia brokered cease fire in the southwest and north, then these areas will effectively become 'stateless'. 3 - At the risk of sounding arrogant, it is Russia who should be showing us a token of friendship, considering we are the superpower. Last time the US took a step to improve relations with Russia, Putin responded by invading Ukraine. 4 - France, UK, and US all seem to have dropped the "Assad must go" mantra. The entire Syria policy has been a mess from the start. None of these countries were committed to disposing of Assad, unlike what happened in Libya, and one reason for that is Russia's veto in UNSC. Nevertheless, Russia interfered without a UN mandate and so could these three, had they been committed to do so. Direct engagement with Russia is not necessary, but targeting regime forces would no doubt have helped the rebels. I think part of the reason why there was no commitment was due to the nature of the rebels. Let's face it, there's no such thing as "moderate" rebels -- they are mostly extremist, or are being led by extremists, and supporting them is barely different from supporting ISIL. Lastly, one thing is for sure: Syria will never be the same as prewar Syria. Its map is forever changed -- the Kurds won't surrender, the rebels won't surrender, Turkey won't withdraw if the Kurds do not surrender (they won't risk a continuous Kurdish de facto state on the Turkish borders). How the Syrian regime responds to all three remains to be seen. The underlying grievances that ignited the Syrian revolution and later civil war have not been addressed in the fighting, and they likely won't be addressed in a final ceasefire agreement. The fighting should decrease significantly after ISIL is routed from Raqqa. The militants will continue their insurgency, but it will be small-scale and limited in extent, geography, and impact.
  4. Meaning of life is constantly changing -- it is part of growth and development. As such, I have had different answers in the past, and will probably have different answers in the future. Since I believe in the goodwill of humans, the butterfly effect, the continuing change and unity within the universe, I tend to think that this world is about balance that exists as a spiral affected by my relationship and connection with myself, the people, the creatures, the nature, and the universe. Thus, within that spiral of balance, I want to contribute -- by joining efforts with others -- to maintaining and improving the good conditions and achievements that those before us left for us, and that we in turn will be leaving for those who will come after us. The above is determined by my will and attempts to understand, love, respect, accept, and forgive myself which will also help and allow me to understand, love, respect, accept, and forgive others.
  5. Midi Chlorians are fictional microscopic life forms that are present in Star Wars universe. They live inside an organism's cells and if present in sufficient numbers, they allow their host to detect the Force. Jedi Warriors and Sith Lords host large numbers of them, with Darth Vader having the highest count in the history of the galaxy, which allows them to use the Force's powers. This neuroscientists is demonstrating the fact that which journal a study is published in matters.
  6. How do you insert a spoiler?
  7. I'd say we are a long way from 'if' .
  8. I am not sure if this is the correct section, as this topic isn't about medical science. Nevertheless, it's about bacteria and this is the microbiology subsection. Please move if otherwise. In wastewater treatment plants, nitrifying bacteria are used to convert ammonia to nitrite and then to nitrate, the first step of Nitrogen removal process. There are other physical/chemical treatment systems that are used for the same purpose as well. As far as I know, desalination relies on physical/chemical systems to remove salt and minerals from saline water, and desalination methods have thus far been energy intensive (thus expensive), without providing an effective solution for resulting brine or salt. Some microorganisms exist and survive in the dead sea, for example, but they do not remove salt from their environment in any significant degree to impact salinity of the entire water body. Are there microorganisms that remove salt from their environment? Can such a microorganism even exist? What's the status of research into biological desalination methods?
  9. I can't help with respect to experience in Biotechnology industry, but I can give you a general tip to consider as you begin your career. It is rare that you will begin your career at a job you are happy and comfortable with. It is a gradual process that starts with a job you may dislike, and as you gain experience your prospects for finding the dream job you are looking for become much better. I don't know much about Biotech industry to really help you, but if you enjoy Biotech and see it as your career in the future, then it's essential you get your foot in the door. Others may have better, more relevant input.
  10. The climate models have accurately predicted past trends when compared to empirical data. They do discuss that on the following page: https://skepticalscience.com/climate-models.htm I suspect your quote came from there as well, as I have not seen it in the links Raider5678 cited. From the link: "Where models have been running for sufficient time, they have also been proved to make accurate predictions. For example, the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo allowed modellers to test the accuracy of models by feeding in the data about the eruption. The models successfully predicted the climatic response after the eruption. Models also correctly predicted other effects subsequently confirmed by observation, including greater warming in the Arctic and over land, greater warming at night, and stratospheric cooling." The following graph from the link compares climate models to actual observations: EDIT: The following link also has several graphs comparing climate model projections to observations: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/climate-model-projections-compared-to-observations/
  11. Latest news from Trump administration on Syria: Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/19/world/middleeast/cia-arming-syrian-rebels.html Cutting aid off to the rebels will heavily skew the balance of power in Syria towards the regime forces and their Russian/Iranian backers. Syrian regime forces have been making headway into vast swaths of land controlled by ISIL, but virtually have only devoted just enough manpower to force a standstill at rebel frontlines. This action will heavily reduce capabilities of rebels in such areas. This purports to be a live map of Syrian war: http://syria.liveuamap.com/en/time/20.07.2017. Not sure of how credible it is (have not done independent investigation to verify it with other sources, so use it at your own discretion). However, it does show what I have said previously, if you compare map situation between January and July for example; rebels have gained territory from ISIL and even expanded into some regime-controlled areas, if anything. The US still supports the Kurds in Northern Syria, with training, weapons, and air support. I believe we have several US bases there as well. In my opinion, the Trump administration has not established a clear strategy in the Syrian theater beyond 'defeating ISIL'. But that is not a strategy per se; it's a tactical objective. It says nothing about who we want to rule in Syria in the aftermath of the Syrian war, which normally would have to be US-friendly government; and, more importantly, it says nothing about how we are going to achieve that. The Syrian war itself is part ideological and part strategic. The pawns fight the ideological fight, but the geopolitical actors exploit them and use them for their own strategic interests. Qatar has a vested interest in constructing a natural gas pipeline extending to Europe, and Russia, which is top supplier of natural gas to Europe, has a vested interest in stopping that from happening. Iran has a vested interest in creating a Shiite crescent encompassing Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon in order to advance its regional interests, and Saudi Arabia has a vested interest in preventing that from happening (also to export Wahhabi ideology to Islamic and Western countries). Israel has a vested interest in preventing the Iranian Shiite crescent, in preventing arms shipments to Iranian proxies in Lebanon and Gaza, and preventing war from erupting at its borders near the Golan Heights, in Lebanon, and in Gaza. The US has a vested interest in preventing Iranian Shiite crescent, preventing or minimizing Russia's presence on the Mediterranean, and promoting an alternative supplier of natural gas to Europe. Knowing that natural gas requires pipelines for economical transport, a Qatar-Turkey pipeline (with connections into Europe) works in favor of US interests (we cannot expect to compete with Russia by selling liquefied natural gas to Europe). Absent a clear strategy that promotes US interests in Syria, Trump is handing Syria to Russia and Iran without receiving anything in return, neither in Syria nor in Ukraine. Overall, what do you think of this action, and how will this lead to a resolution of the Syrian conflict? What does this action mean with respect to the overall US strategy in Syria? How does this action advance US interests, or vice versa? What went wrong in US strategy (or lack thereof, perhaps) that led to such action?
  12. Winter is Coming, so climate change is not real! Source: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2017/07/red-teamblue-team-day-1/
  13. Not only climate deniers do it -- it's become some sort of new norm for right-wing tabloids to recycle isolated incidents, falsehoods, or straight out lies in order to push a particular political agenda. [American] left-wing tabloids do it too, but in general they are more receptive to facts, and thus are more likely to back up their claims in their articles. Some members hinted at not reading certain publications. My approach towards the media is the following: learn how to filter out biases and falsehoods. I wouldn't consciously go to Breitbart or Alex Jones, because they have a history of regurgitating lies and falsehoods, but if someone linked me to an article on there I will read it, and I will verify the information with other sources. The media has been biased since the dawn of history, and will continue to be, so the onus is on the reader/viewer to verify the information being conveyed to them. I do not think I am qualified enough to determine "most reputable" -- I leave that up to you. But I think http://skepticalscience.com is way up there as far as quality of content. All of the science is linked back to its original peer-reviewed source. Other good sources include: NASA's climate portal https://climate.nasa.gov/ The Guardian: Environment. They offer well-rounded news about the environment in general, and they cover a great deal of climate change news. https://www.theguardian.com/us/environment RealClimate - a commentary site by working climate scientists http://www.realclimate.org/ Government organizations, climate science journals, or science news publications (like ScientificAmerican or ScienceNews) are all good resources as well.
  14. I would use almond milk-based shake for breakfast, and get rid of croutons/crackers/cheese (or any bread or dairy products, basically; or at least keep them to a minimum). But, in your case, I think it's probably noise, like others have mentioned. It's more important to look at the trend. Also, you could be replacing fat with muscle, so your weight won't reflect that. Lastly, it's important not to be discouraged, and to keep going at it in order to reach the goals you set out for. If after like a month or two you are not noticing any positive changes, it may be time to discuss with a nutritionist and get some advice from them.
  15. Sicarii

    Eczema

    To add to what koti said, another option would be to "license" your idea/product, i.e. rent your idea to a company, which takes care of R&D, production, marketing, sales, accounting, distribution, and everything else you cannot or simply do not want to do. This creates a steady flow of income with little financial risk. More information on what licensing is: https://www.inventright.com/help/what-is-a-licensing You will definitely need to demonstrate your idea/product works, if you expect anyone to pay for it.
  16. I have a related question about humidity. Looking at current weather forecast on Google, I see that % humidity in following three places is: Houston, TX - 47% humidity, 93dF temperature Jacksonville, FL - 55% humidity, 92dF temperature Los Angeles, CA - 48% humidity, 82dF temperature Is this saying LA is more humid than Houston? If so, why does it feel like Houston is more humid, generally speaking?
  17. I wouldn't give much credence to tabloids. They are well-known inflame and distort truth in order to drive an agenda and increase viewership. Controversy sells. The story is two years old and have since been debunked. See below: No Data Manipulation in 2015 Climate Study, Researchers Say https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/science/2015-climate-study-data.html Bates: "The issue here is not an issue of tampering with data, but rather really of timing of a release of a paper that had not properly disclosed everything it was." https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060049630 Bates: "I knew people would misuse this. But you can't control other people." http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/02/how-culture-clash-noaa-led-flap-over-high-profile-warming-pause-study No climate conspiracy: NOAA temperature adjustments bring data closer to pristine https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2016/feb/08/no-climate-conspiracy-noaa-temperature-adjustments-bring-data-closer-to-pristine This is why conservative media outlets like the Daily Mail are 'unreliable' https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/feb/13/this-is-why-conservative-media-outlets-like-the-daily-mail-are-unreliable?CMP=share_btn_tw As the planet warms, doubters launch a new attack on a famous climate change study https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/02/07/as-the-planet-warms-doubters-launch-a-new-attack-on-a-famous-climate-change-study/?utm_term=.95f78139c795 Factcheck: Mail on Sunday’s ‘astonishing evidence’ about global temperature rise https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-mail-sundays-astonishing-evidence-global-temperature-rise
  18. This is not risk -- this is suicide. Risk is when you know there is a chance to survive. Doing nothing about climate change ultimately ensures we do not have a chance to survive.
  19. "warming paused for 17 years": https://skepticalscience.com/ipcc-global-warming-pause.htm Content of this thread reminded me of the content of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69TOuqaqXI. You've challenged climate change on this forum, and you were not attacked. You'd be hard-pressed to produce evidence of these "attacks". This is science, not politics. In politics you can argue whether raising taxes or lowering them is better for the economy, and both positions can be equally right, given the right conditions. In science, the only position that is right is that which is supported by data. As you have been shown time and again, the data leans heavily towards anthropogenic causes of climate change, and that data has been reproduced by 97% or more of the scientists, along various disciplines, while looking at the subject from different angles. If you are easily offended that people are calling out your wrong views on this subject, views that go against mainstream scientific consensus, then perhaps you should not be debating. We must always bear witness to the truth, as Jesus said, and that's exactly what people are doing here. Why are you going against the word of Jesus, since you're claiming to be godfull and all? The most important "value" of science is skepticism; it is part of the scientific method. That is why reproduction of data is so important, and why we do not give credence to random people claiming to be scientists and publishing results in obscure journals.
  20. You can think of it this way, which was also covered by others: Total # of people you start with = 500 # of people you add to those 500 = 120 What % of 500 people do 120 people make? (120/500)*100 = 24% To get 50%, you would need to add 250 people instead of 120. If it's not obvious to you just looking at it, then work it backwards: 50 = (x/500)*100 ; where x is # of people you need to add in order to get 50% x = (50/100)*500 = 250 (Sorry I could not figure out how to write Math equations using text editor -- mod can feel free to edit my post so it looks nicer and is easier to read)
  21. Sicarii

    Taxation

    True, the market will control the prices via competition, provided we were all machines and not humans. In practice, corporations will amass as much power, and wield it to create monopolies that preserve, protect, and expand that power. Human greed knows no bound. The US and Canada both spend different dollar amounts for the same service. The problem here isn't with taxation, the problem is with cost. Your proposal would most likely exacerbate this problem, rather than solve it. People don't like paying taxes, yet they want the same services. That is common knowledge, and it is the job of legislators to find a balance they feel comfortable with. It seems from the above that the problem is not taxation, or who manages them; rather, it is how taxes are managed. Spending less is not a solution, especially when coupled with public policy that rewards ever-increasing costs (like GOP policies). Higher education is not funded through taxes in the United States, so how can you blame educational system on "lousy" system of taxation? If you're calling public K-12 education "lousy" for not helping people get a job, then I am not sure what kind of skills you expect a high school graduate to possess that would enable him/her to find a job. It seems what you are advocating for works to the contrary of what you want. In the instance of education, in effect you are calling for more taxes that would be used to pay for higher education, which would make finding a job easier (and which, in turn, would produce more tax payers). In other words, if you are well-educated you will always find a job, but you won't be well-educated without taxes to fund said education (if you cannot afford it).
  22. Hi all. I am a junior civil engineer, my specialty is in traffic and transportation engineering. I also work on drainage, utilities, and structural (Soundwall / parking structure PS&E). I am fortunate to have a well-rounded work environment. I have always been passionate about the environment in general, and I always think about the environmental impact of my design, even though I have an expert coworker with over 30 years of experience assessing environmental impact of our designs. I live in southern California, so I think about water conservation, capture, retention, treatment, and reuse. I also think about material, although I am constrained by having to balance budget with environmental impact; I can only get away with so much. And, ultimately, the final decision is up to my boss. Luckily, my boss and I have a solid work relationship and have the same mindset with respect to the environment. Obviously he has more constraints, but we always do the max we can get away with. The question is; how can civil engineers help combat climate change?
  23. It's peculiar, is it not? That's precisely the point I wanted to make. They do not hold their party accountable, because the party panders to them at least in rhetoric and speech -- though never in content of legislation. I'll take example of 'family values', a key issue for majority of GOP electorate, so-called "values voters". While GOP spends most of its time painting itself as the promoter and defender of family values, a critical review of the far-reaching impacts of GOP-sponsored legislation will almost certainly yield a diametrically opposed result. Health care and welfare are two issues that most impact families far than any topic revolving around abortion and gay rights, yet political candidates from school board to President of the United States are divided by their views on those two latter topics in local newspapers of one of the poorest rural areas in the United States, in Iowa (where a friend of mine happens to originate from). I really have no solid answer as to why that is. I doubt anyone has.
  24. 85% of GOP electorate are (White) Christian, most are Evangelical. I suspect that has something to do with it.
  25. Thank you for your responses. While infanticide provides evolutionary advantage to the killer male (or female), could it not harm evolutionary prospect of entire species if, for example, not enough young offspring survive to reproduce? That example assumes infanticide is common, consistent occurrence, which I do not think is factual. It's a huge problem in India (highly patriarchal society with caste system) and China (exacerbated by one-child policy), but those seem to be economic and legal issues, respectively, as opposed to survival.
×
×
  • 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.