Scott of the Antares

28 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Entire neighborhoods and sections of various towns are said to be "refugee communities" and saying such typically associates those communities with crime. It is no secret refugees were used as a prop to scare up votes for Brexit. 

There may have been a hint of this by bigoted campaigners, but us Brits are not easily swayed by racist arguments.

I think the true motives of voters in favour of Brexit is the fact that we are small country that is a highly attractive place to live. The problem is that there has been no investment to increase the demand that our infra-structure requires; There are not enough houses being built so prices have Sky-rocketed; the same for hospitals and doctor’s surgeries and health care service has fallen; class sizes in schools have increased from ~20 to ~30 and in some desperate cases ~50! It is fine to have an open door immigration policy, but there has to be the infra-structure to support it and successive governments have failed to address this.

Another big factor is that the EU is undemocratic; it fails to adapt or allow concessions to its member state’s needs, and it is highly corrupt; it has never published independently audited accounts. It has also undermined member states democratic process’ by installing leaders in those countries that igonored the EU’s austerity policy, despite the population of those countries voting against austerity measures.

It is a complicated mess for sure, but I think that these are the reasons Brexit won the vote, but portraying it as primarily racist decision is a way to undermine the British democratic process perpetuated by the losing side. As I mentioned earlier, there is a lot of fake news surrounding this topic.

5 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Yes, it's not labelled a 'black problem'. because, at the end of the day, they are British and it is therefore a British problem.

Agreed, If anyone wanted to be more specific, I would say it is an economic problem.

10 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Just look at gun violence: ethnic minority shooters are animals & criminals, Muslims shooters extremists/terrorists, and white shooters lack any specific name at all but rather a total shift in topic to mental health.

We don’t have access to guns, so murderous atrocities in the U.K. have been by bomb, sword or vehicle. But the many cases of Muslims attacks in the U.K. have all been ideological based whereas other ethnicities are generally motivated by personal reasons. There have been white people in court on terror offences though where their motivational was ideological (I.e. idiot supremacist). I think the U.K. courts determine the intent behind the act and include that in the case. 

Here there is unfortunately a lot of crime in the poorest inner city areas at the moment with lots of people of all ethnicities involved in knife crimes, especially in London. A large proportion of these offenders are black. Thankfully we do not label them as animals/terrorists/extremists as you say elements of American society does.

I would say that they are all criminals though and find it surprising that white perpetrators in the USA are not classed as criminals!

That may be the case in American conservatism the term ‘animal’ is associated with dark-skinned, I was saying that in the UK it isn’t.

And regarding the use of animal in Brexit canvassing, I think that might be a case of fake news as it wasn’t  mentioned here during the lead up to the referendum. And again, it has not been used to reference dark-skinned people in our country:)

Trump and some American media outlets have made some right gaffes by saying thing like parts of Birmingham are no-go zones due to Muslims; that is compete hogwash! 

Things must be different in the USA as in the UK animal is not a racist term but is a general insult implying sub-human/ uncivilised traits. These may incidentally include bigots but is never associated with them in particular.

1 hour ago, swansont said:

Are they considered canon? I've never watched any of the episodes myself.

I think Disney cut a whole load (if not the entirety) of the expanded universe.

The only series I watched was the Genndy Tartakovsky animated series which was pretty good (I say series, each episode was only a few minutes long so a series is about a movie in length).

58 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

There's nothing wrong with calling out intolerance, nothing wrong with wanting better when people's lives are affected, and nothing wrong with saying "This is wrong!". To call it "complaining" demeans the intent, which is to stop discrimination when you find it.

I agree with this statement 100%. I should more clear as I said ultra liberal in my first post when it might have been better to say ultra left, although I am not sure that is right either.  An example in the media recently was when a white person was called a racist for complementing a black persons dreadlocks. There was no racist intent, but it was perceived as one. And then the person who was being nice is portrayed as ignorant. This is the kind of  complaining I was on about. Actual genuine intolerance as you mention? I am with you on that:)

5 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Exploring the legality of these issues is therefore far more than merely a complaint. 

Yep, in an earlier post I mentioned two similar cases that I can think of in England over the last five years; in both of those cases the couples won over the service provider. So our legal processes are coming down on the side of tolerance which is good news:)

44 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I think you should be aware that this is not a simply issue of business decision. The bigger question is in case of competing laws (anti-discrimination vs artistic freedom). While the service in this case is relatively inconsequential, it raises the larger question whether services can be denied on that ground. This can have significant impact on numerous levels, if e.g. medical professionals or other semi-essential services  can limit access to certain groups. Even not having access to an affordable supermarket within a certain radius can have massive impact, especially for low-income folks. Remember that much of the US is a huge, relatively empty space and it can be difficult simply to go somewhere else.

Yep I agree with you on medical services . And if I did experience that, then I certainly would complain!

Just to be clear, I think it is wrong that these folks couldn’t get their cake; people should be able to go anywhere and get good, polite equal service. End of. For any service.

25 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Now look who is saying "‘I’m offended so stop doing what you are doing and start doing what I tell you". You point about the complaining liberals is undermined by your own "it upsets me" complaining. 

I am not offended, I am setting the record straight! Or do you think it is good practice to make a statement based on opinion, that turns out to be incorrect, and when you are corrected continue to perpetuate your fabricated statement? Especially when that opinion is formed form one post on an Internet forum? Sorry, I can’t see that. And regarding complaining, & I quote;

40 minutes ago, Scott of the Antares said:

 

Complaining is fine if people want to; that is down to them and I have no problem with it at all

I already said I had no problem with complaining! And yes, I did complain when you (incorrectly) inferred my stance on left/right. I think I am entitled to defend wrong statements about myself, in a polite and friendly manner. I assure you I am not at the extreme in the left or the right, I prefer the middle! And I strongly believe that tolerance is the best path for all humans to conduct their interactions with others.

Sorry of I have overstepped the mark or upset anyone here, but I have to set the record straight when assumptions about myself are incorrectly stated in case others believe it as true. I am sure you understand that and I apologise again. I enjoy this forum as there are a good bunch of clever people here and I like to hear what they have to say. I don’t want any Endercreeper01 type dramas thank you very much!

Sincerley,

Scott

46 minutes ago, YaDinghus said:

Where's the fairness in that?

Over here in England there has been a sharp increase in the liberal left becoming ‘offended’ by others freedom of speeches. By using the trope ‘in all fairness’, I was referring to the fact that our news hardly ever mentions these ‘religious bakery’ type cases (I can remember two over the last ~5 years), but our media is awash with the ‘offended snowflake’ types of case. So by using ‘in all fairness’, I was reflected that in the U.K. today, you are far more likely to hear of the liberals complaining than any religious types (I’m not sure we have many religious types here, it certainly seems to have taken a back seat recently). Hopefully that makes sense to you:)

32 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Seems that in your view complaining is weak and shameful when it comes from the left but justified and grounded in principle when it comes from the Right. 

‘Seems’? Respectfully that probably says more about you than me as it appears you have inferred understanding about me that I never stated. I never passed any judgement or statement of affinity for the right! Far right or far left are both intolerant in my opinion. In fact I likened far left intolerance to far right intolerance in my post; why would I have done that if I thought one was more acceptable than the other?!? I equated the two! It upsets me that a well respected member of a science forum can read a post and detect tones that were not present. Again, respectfully, I think that show your own bias sir.

Complaining is fine if people want to; that is down to them and I have no problem with it at all.

Personally, if that bakery didn’t want to bake a cake for me and my same sex partner, I would have gone to another bakery and not bothered wasting my time with a court case.

29 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Can you imagine the outrage which would exist if a Halal bakery refused to serve Christians? 

In all fairness, I think in today’s world the ultra-liberals are the most likely to complain. Their ‘I’m offended so stop doing what you are doing and start doing what I tell you’ mantra is so far left it has come full circle and is now mandates a far right response (ie they are intolerant of perceived intolerances).

1 hour ago, Endercreeper01 said:

blacks have been shown to be less intelligent than whites overall, with an average IQ of 86, compared to the white IQ of 100.

Going to have to lob in a ‘citation needed’ please.

2 hours ago, YaDinghus said:

It makes more sense to read that you don't think he made any references to superiority. That is very magnanimous of you. When it comes to @Endercreeper01, my good will is nearly depleted

Thank you, my proof reading skills need sharpening up!

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

There is genetic diversity even within immediate family members. All Ethiopian's are not long distance runners nor are all born with a higher than average potential to be. One shouldn't treat such things as absolutes because they are not. 

Yes you are correct, that is why I used the word ‘generally’ three times in my post, so that those reading could understand that I am not dealing in absolutes. Of course all Ethiopians are not great long distance runners but Ethiopia produces more world class long distance runners than the average country. I am glad we are on the same page.

1 hour ago, YaDinghus said:

It's also true that the Irish are the best at producing Vitamin D via their skin because they are genetically inclined to be the whitest people on earth. I'm not saying there aren't adaptations to life style and environment, just that it doesn't make any group systematically inferior or superior.

You are correct here, but I do not think Endercreeper01 made any reference to superiority; I think he simply said that one can’t override a racial truth in case it offends somebody as racist. Obviously racism is not acceptable, but perceiving racism where honest impartial truths between genetics/racial differences is not acceptable either.

A power sprinter would recognise that his frame is not as well suited to long distance running, unless he is deluded and not confronting manifest truths.

6 hours ago, YaDinghus said:

So if I offhandedly called you a Nazi, you wouldn't take offense to t

 

I suppose this depends on whether he is a nazi; if not you minds as well call him any non-related slur.

6 hours ago, YaDinghus said:

Which truth are you referring to? The superiority of the Master Race?

 

I had an discussion about racism with some of my friends. One of them said it was racist to mention any racial differences, which we generally thought was rubbish. It is a general truth that Ethiopian genetics create better long distance runners and Central African genetics generally favour powerful quick sprint runners. This is general truth based on racial/genetic realities, but to call this racist is just wrong.

From a shuttle mission apparently. If it isn’t fake, then it is certainly interesting.

Whilst we are talking UFOs, what did you folks make of the STS-48 footage?

On 09/05/2018 at 6:05 PM, Ten oz said:

Our (human) spacecraft leave behind boosters, exhaust, scorched launch pads, and etc. Loads of trash from our spacecraft are orbiting earth at this moment.  On the moon our astronauts have left behind a flag, trash, and various pieces of equipment used to take measurements. It is impossible for me to know what form physical evidence from aliens would take but I can't think of any known flying objects which leave behind nothing. Birds leave poop & feathers. Meteorites crash and can be studied. 

Just because you/we can’t think of an example of a flying craft that doesn’t leave physical evidence doesn’t mean they don’t/can’t exist. If they have visited us, I doubt they used internal combustion engines! 

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Some speculate tardigrades exist similar to this. 

Like the new Star Trek on Netflix?!

1 hour ago, studiot said:

Scott, I hope you realise this comment was not addressed at you, but at the OP, who keeps avoiding my question.

 

How can something that is shapeless (as in the title of this thread) be constantly changing its shape?

 

 

 Thanks Studiot, I need to pay more attention to the fine details of the threads on these boards! Your last sentence makes sense:)

Good job I put in my disclaimer about me being a thicko!

On 29/05/2018 at 10:38 AM, studiot said:

Unfortunately you have also said that whatever exists is also constantly changing.

 

How are these two apparantly opposing statements compatible?

 

 

Sorry for being a thicko but how is that an opposing statement? Is it not the case that everything in the universe is in constant flux, so everything is constantly changing? Whether that is position or composition, it is always changing.

So therefore is it not reasonable to say that A; something exists, & B; it is constantly changing/moving?

Cheers:)

On 05/04/2018 at 9:27 AM, koti said:

I find this video explaining the OP question very clearly. They even constructed a mechanical device visualizing the Lorentz transforms:

 

Thanks for posting that video Koti; it was amazing! Such a good example:)

Hey thanks for the info on the shape of the universe Studiot:) some interesting reading right there.

2 hours ago, studiot said:

I'd say that straight lines parabolas, hyperbolas and their surface equavalents etc go on to infinity, yet we can fully describe their shape everywhere.

If you could bear with me whilst I catch up:)! So we can describe these shapes but can we actually make one? I know that sounds silly but if we can push a straight line parallel to itself infinitely, what context are we using to connect this to the shape of the universe, or is it a purely mathematical model?

22 minutes ago, studiot said:

Did you look at Gabriel's Horn?

This is interesting:) Is it possible to make Gabriel’s Horn as a real 3D object?

I’m trying to understand the relationship between these concepts of 1D/2D and there bearing on the shape (or lack of shape) of the universe. It might be unknowable and doomed to failure from a human perspective, but it is a fascinating subject that I am sure we have all wondered about since we were children. Some of us never stopped wondering! Sorry to slightly derail the thread.

1 hour ago, studiot said:

I'd say that straight lines parabolas, hyperbolas and their surface equavalents etc go on to infinity, yet we can fully describe their shape everywhere.

Please forgive my ignorance; are these 2D shapes?

1 minute ago, Strange said:

The thing about GR is that there is no need for a higher dimensional space to embed the geometry/topology of the universe in. This is because the curvature of space-time is intrinsic. I'm not going to attempt to explain this, and I don't know a good way of visualising it!

Ok so no need to invoke more complexities to explain our universe, that is always a good thing!