Jump to content

Curious layman

Senior Members
  • Posts

    634
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by Curious layman

  1. 2 minutes ago, iNow said:

    You suggested both a commonness and an unfairness, neither of which exist at a scale relevant enough to mention. 

     

    And nothing I’ve said contradicts this. 

    Utter bollocks 

    I have heard this several times, were talking about rape. It can be a controversial subject so it tends to make the news, hence people talk about it. Why is it so hard to believe that there are people who believe in what the OP said, and these people have rang in to radio talk shows or been in the audience of a talk show and panel members have then discussed it. What's so unbelievably out there about this statement.

    You don't think going to prison for rape you didn't commit unfair. Okey dokey.

    Your still making out that I think most women are liars and that the stats prove it. I've said nothing of the sort. I've made no statements and taken no stance.

  2. 7 minutes ago, iNow said:

    What I hear you saying is that our default position here should be to assume you’re telling the truth. Sounds reasonable.

    Doesn’t feel very good to have your stance rejected, dismissed, and belittled based on biased assumptions, yeah?

     

    Also from your own link:

     

    What stance? What's being belittled?

    This is the problem, I've got no idea what stance you think I'm taking.

    I made a comment about having heard the same thing in the op, and now I'm being accused of all sorts of shit. I've taken no stance.

  3. 4 minutes ago, iNow said:

    From your link:

    No offense bud, but you’re really making this too easy for me. 

    Making what easy, what the fuck you going on about? What am I being accused of here?

     Once again you're making out like I'm accusing victims of being liars. You can f^^k off, you're pissing me off now. You're making all sorts of wild assumptions about me. 🖕🏻

    Quote

    Research for the Home Office suggests that only 4% of cases of sexual violence reported to the UK police are found or suspected to be false. Studies carried out in Europe and in the US indicate rates of between 2% and 6%.

     

  4. 18 minutes ago, iNow said:

    Why are you conflating rape with sexual harassment and assault?

    I'm not. The OP is about rape.

    there about the same anyway. 2-6%

    http://www.open.ac.uk/research/news/false-accusations-sexual-violence

     

    18 minutes ago, iNow said:

    Why are you conflating rape with sexual harassment and assault?

    So what... like 2 in a million? Maybe 10? 1,604? Maybe 292,153 in a million?

    I really don’t know what you think because you’re being extremely unclear and quickly retreating from essentially all of your posts when even gently challenged to support them with anything more than scat from a bull. 

    Between 2-6% of a million, what the experts say, what's the problem here?

    I've retreated from none of my posts. Why would I need to retreat. From what? 

  5. Everyday feminism said it. 

    Heres are better more reliable link which has about the same, 2-10%

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape

     

    1 hour ago, iNow said:

     

    Out of every million times a woman comes forward about being sexually harassed, abused, or assaulted, precisely how many of those million are you saying represent contrived accusations, lies, and falsehoods?

    Edited 1 hour ago by iNow

    You're coming across like you think I believe the number is really high. I don't and haven't said I do. I just said that I've heard people discussing this in various forms and mentioned something about a football player. That's it. 

     

  6. 1 hour ago, iNow said:

    Plz note my edit made while you were composing your reply 

    I believe what the experts say, about 2-7%.

    Maybe I'm wrong, but I get the impression you think my view is this,

    'You can't assume the woman is automatically innocent because of how many of them are lying'

    It's not, the footballer story was just the same type of story that others had mentioned, so I mentioned one. 

  7. 15 minutes ago, iNow said:

    Still awaiting even a single citation which confirms your premise as valid. 

    To be fair, it says "some people"

    I think the problem is that the 'some people' are members of the general public or the extreme part of the me too movement. That's my experience.

    There probably having there views published to sell papers or make the debate more lively. 

    In the U.K. The serious discussion is about removing jurors, and allowing the accuser to remain anonymous.

  8. 17 minutes ago, zapatos said:

    When they said should be automatically 100% believed without doubt.” did you laugh and tell them that was an asinine position?

    Um, no. 

    I've had conversations about and heard on radio about how rape victims are treated in court by over aggressive barristers. Part of the conversation on several occasions has discussed whether it would be better, for the women, to be presumed to be telling the truth instead of being a liar, which seems to be the current approach by the police.

    Theres always someone who rings in or posts an opinion favouring the extreme point of view. Nobody's saying this is an official line or something thats being discussed by politicians, it isn't, it's just a topic that rears it head now and again.

  9. 2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

     

    Believing everything I'm told by anonymous strangers on the internet is not my modus operandi. Even when they give me their personal assurances.

    Please explain how the f**k I'm supposed to get a citation from a discussion on talk radio, or a day time t.v. Show.

    What do you want me to do, secretly film my work colleagues talking about it, then post it here.

  10. 1 minute ago, zapatos said:

    Well then there is no reason to believe such an outlandish assertion, is there?

    "Believe such an outlandish assertion"

    I not gonna lie, that's really pissed me off.

    How do you know what we talk about over here? it's no assertion, it's a fact.

    And what do you mean believe, this isn't something I've been told. This is something I've come across in my day to day life. At work, at home, out with friends. I'm not sure why you think I'm a liar, I can assure you I'm not.

     

  11. 16 minutes ago, zapatos said:

    Can you please provide a citation?

    Not from me you can't.

    These are things that I see discussed on daytime t.v., radio shows and the like. It was the story's of victims committing suicide that prompted it. There was one in particular that was on the news. These are the things they were discussing.

    It was the barristers behaviour that was the talking point rather than the victim/accused. It's one of those things that pops up in the news every now and again, presumably because they never actually do anything about it.

    There was a high profile one 5 minutes from where I live not long ago. Footballer Ched Evans was accused of rape, sentenced to prison. He spent 2+ years in prison before being found not guilty.

     

  12. 2 hours ago, iNow said:

    This is the part to which I’m referring: “should be automatically 100% believed without doubt.”

    I've heard this said several times now in the U.K.

    Over here though, there have been several cases of rape victims committing suicide after giving evidence in court. There was some questions about how aggressively barristers where questioning witnesses, calling them liars and blaming/shaming etc...

    I was under the impression the 'automatically believed' was more to do with protecting the victims from over aggressive barristers.

    The problem was what beecee and tim.tdj pointed out, the false accusations. If you're innocent then you should be able to defend yourself, having restraints on what your barrister can do puts you at a disadvantage.

     

  13. 26 minutes ago, Hans de Vries said:

    What brain regions/network are involved in disgust recognition? 

     

    Like, the ones that make you feel revulsion while touching one's poop or any other similarily disgusting stuff?

    Wild ass guess, 

    IMG_7797.JPG.954c0f5f3a479e288ae2242f562108a1.JPG

    Some people like touching poop, and find 'disgusting stuff' interesting. So I think it's more learned behaviour than an actual thing in our brain.

    Going of the picture, that would suggest, to me anyway, the Sensory cortex, the Frontal lobe and the Temporal lobe is responsible. 

    Complete guess of course. 

  14. 15 minutes ago, SergUpstart said:

    MOND is the only theory that has succeeded in this way,” McGaugh told  NBC. “It is the only theory that has routinely had all predictions come true"

    Not all predictions.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics#Outstanding_problems_for_MOND

    Quote

    The most serious problem facing Milgrom's law (MOND theory) is that it cannot completely eliminate the need for dark matter in all astrophysical systems: galaxy clusters show a residual mass discrepancy even when analysed using MOND.

     

  15. Great vid. Thanks for sharing.

    Best bit- 12 mins in, talking about using reactor grade uranium to get to Alpha Centauri in 120 years. We could explore the whole solar system with an engine like that. 

    Imagine waking up on a spaceship orbiting Jupiter, or Saturn, breathtaking. 🖖🏻

  16. Jellyfish wall of water.

    I was going to post the video, but quality of the picture seemed to drop, so just a link.

     

    5 hours ago, joigus said:

    Very interesting.

    The gif didn't work for me. I've found it here, and you can really see the vortices pushing against each other:

    https://phys.org/news/2021-01-reveals-jellyfish-virtual-wall.html

    I couldn't find it of your link, found it on YouTube.

  17. Quote

    Locomotion through the seas can be arduous. Water is more viscous than air, and so underwater creatures must overcome strong frictional resistance as they swim.

    To make things more difficult, liquid water provides nothing solid to push off against.

    But lowly jellyfish, which have swum in the world’s oceans for half a billion years, have come up with an elegant, efficient means of propulsion.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/07/science/jellyfish-swimming-vortex.html

    contains cool gif at the top of a jellyfish swimming through laser sheet with tracer particles.

    https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2020.2494

  18. 3 hours ago, studiot said:

    An electric jet ???

    :eek:

    Whatever next.

     

    Just reading the intro calls into question the credibility of the source.

    No offence meant CL, you sometimes post some very interesting finds.

    Haha, non taken. 

    Is it really a that far fetched?

    I've read loads about Airbus and Boeing talk about electric jets. Hybrid will be first, but they always say their working towards full electric.

    Maybe not for the big long haul flights, but what about local short haul flights?

     

    All the best,

    Zhur. 🙂

  19. 29 minutes ago, iNow said:

    That's a great big gigantic humongous "IF" in that statement. Cool work, but I'll withhold enthusiasm until I see this working at-scale and creating a volume of fuel sufficient for jet powered flight. 

    I was thinking maybe they could apply its use in stages. So maybe just a 20 % reduction at first, then 30 and so on. 

    I think small, lighter aircraft would be better. Like a powered glider type.

  20. Quote

    The start of electric aviation is upon us, but it's going to take many more years before the average environmentalist can fly guilt free on a fully electric long haul jet.

    In the meantime, scientists are trying to make the commercial planes we already have more sustainable, and one of the best ways to do that is to change the fuel they consume.

    https://www.sciencealert.com/researchers-find-way-to-pull-carbon-out-of-the-air-and-make-it-jet-fuel

  21. 16 minutes ago, Geoffrey Carr said:

    ARE WE GOING ABOUT COVID-19 THE WRONG WAY

    Should we not be developing a vaccine that tells our immune systems to ignore the virus, not fight it.

    Is that possible? How do you do that?

    This would be better placed in the covid 19 thread. 

×
×
  • 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.