TheVat

I think there's a semantic gap here in using the term fear. One can have a rational fear without being fearful. If a black neighbor of mine, who happens to be from St Louis, moves back to his old neighborhood there he plans to have a gun, on the basis @zapatos outlined. He's not fearful, but has solid intel that reports police service in that area is spotty, slow, and sometimes notably lacking in rapport with black people. And so he's doing what a rancher would do living on a range with multiple mountain lions and coyotes and a very distant sheriff. Few question the rancher's reasoned choice of protective tools, but anyone who buys a gun for urban protection their decision is often interrogated as if they might turn into Travis Bickle or they are at least questioned on their rationality and fearfulness. And I can see why the stakes of gun misuse are indeed higher in a crowded urban setting than in the middle of stixville. I think the problem for my neighbor, and many other Americans, is that we personally didn't create the world. We would love to get rid of all the guns, convert police into compassionate social workers and conflict resolvers, and take walks at midnight wherever our fancy took us. But not everyone is on that same page (how I envy the Japanese). If I were stuck, by circumstances, in a dangerous neighborhood, I might choose differently than I have, and arm myself. I would be sorry to do so, but at some point I might be asking why I should let myself be mugged or raped (if female) so that I can embody the ideals and virtues of gun-free life. Many people are not very fit, or large, or fast runners or adept in martial arts, so carrying that burden of moral purity is difficult for them.

Your choice of words, "crossed over," gave me an eerie visual of a horned ferryman and a three-headed dog.

Yes, the missus and I both had a good laugh at this. Not being a fan of KFC myself, I may have enjoyed this a little too much. As I recall, the Germans have the perfect word for my pleasure: schadenfreude.

Frontline has some good in-depth features. And they often partner with excellent investigative news organizations, like ProPublica. I can tell this episode will be hard to watch. Not sure I quite grasp what Koti's (now trashed) reply was about. If he can regain some equilibrium I would be okay with having a civil chat about it.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/10/kfc-apologises-for-kristallnacht-chicken-and-cheese-promotion

I read his easily googled (jakub poland wow signal) tale: scary dream when he was small child, like a memory of a WW2 soldier being shot, quite vivid. He wonders if the WOW signal relates to this. Or perhaps a military experiment with mind manipulation. Warning: may contain traces of nut.

INow, did your state go and elect an 89 year old to six more years in the Senate meanwhile gobbling up an endless litany from the Right about how 80 year old Joe Biden is just too damn old to serve? Looks like the Senate might retain its Dem majority. Glad to see Dr. Snake Oil get beaten in Pennsylvania. Now he can go home to his mansion in New Jersey.

I just thought the pronoun thing wasn't very funny. We are allowed to react to the jokes, right? For example, my SpaceX/SpaceY joke was tasteless and crude, and I would support anyone's right to say so, or reject it any other way. Personally I find the pronoun choice for nonbinary folks a poor one that's kind of been forced on them by the fact that people are unable to adapt to new pronouns which would surely work better and without ambiguity. Instead of she and her, why not assign a new NB set of pronouns like de and der? This would eliminate what would seem to be a chronic source of confusion with they/their/them.

Even if he were only poking linguistic fun at the confusion of plural and singular, it's still a feeble and witless joke. Ok, to keep this thread relevant, here are two Musk jokes: Did you hear Musk and Bill Gates collaborated on a drug for erectile dysfunction? It's called ElonGates. Why did Elon Musk choose SpaceX as a name for a company to land on Mars? Because if he chose SpaceY he'd land on 14 year old boys.

I tend to view Americans as somewhat prone to loose and aggressive talk, a style that can certainly impact unhinged minds out there when it comes from public officials at any level of government. Unfortunately, that style seems to be endemic in much of America, and I'm not sure how much difference it makes to castigate every politician who has a hot mic moment, or drops a violent metaphor while speaking to a rally or an assemblage of donors. One reason this happens, and it was a problem before Trump came along and further debased the national discourse, is that a lot of people who run for office here are not really the brightest people or have the best impulse control. Americans are just besotted with charisma and may overlook the deficiencies of some new and shiny thing that's dangled in front of them. My sense is that we can worry about everything that a Kevin McCarthy or Marjorie Taylor Green or Louie Gohmert says when they feel like venting, or just focus on how to get them voted out of office. The media has too much substantial material to keep in front of the public, it's irresponsible journalism to expend too many column-inches on the mouthfarts of the cognitively impaired.

Looks like a couple of threads touching on this. Also started by Kenny. https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/127556-microplastics/#comment-1213965 https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/127707-microwaving-plastic-container-and-leaching/#comment-1215888 Seems like a united thread on plastic nanoparticles might be handy, but I'm not really pushing on this. I agree with Charon that exposures like PFAS, PM 2.5 pollution (both urban and from forest fires) and diesel soot present a more immediate danger to public health. Some of the effects of plastic nanoparticles may be shown to relate to where you are in the food chain. For example, I've seen research indicating that more plastic is turning up in seafood than some other meats. How much of that passes through the walls of intestinal villi, and how much of that makes trouble in our tissues, is an important area of research. If I were Japanese, or some other group whose main animal protein intake is seafood, I would especially want to know more about the possible longterm effects and what sorts of extrapolation could be made - as Charon noted, more data is needed. @CharonY (forgot to tag earlier in post)

I wish you a very pleasant conversation with a licensed and board certified doctor of dermatology!

Vitamin D has value for mental health, but avoid taking it in the evening. Some studies have findings that suggest it may interfere with melatonin production and cause sleeplessness. (This was my experience with D supplements.) Best at breakfast, and with some fats - e.g. a handful of walnuts on your cereal. (walnuts are also a good brain food). Also blueberries which contain flavonoids linked with improved memory.

Meanwhile, as American politicians seek new ways to break wind, the GOP has a strategy for nullifying more Democrat votes... https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/2022/11/07/gop-sues-reject-mail-ballots/ You know your party's policies suck when you have to cheat to get elected. Watching returns tomorrow...between slightly parted fingers over my face.

Me too. https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/01/politics/donald-trump-paul-pelosi-reaction/index.html This is Trump keeping the base motivated to vote in the midterms. Also interesting that the Pelosi attack is also being framed as part of the Dangerous Immigrant narrative, which is usually reserved for brown people crossing the southern border, not white Canadian Trump/QAnon fans. Perhaps we need a wall along the 49th parallel? Canadians are a menace. I mean, what does it tell you that they named their dolar coin a loonie?

Great typo. Yes, the Maidan uprising, or Euromaidan, was an outstanding movement against corruption and for democracy. I watched a couple episodes of the Ukraine political satire, Servant of the People, that made Zelenskii famous, in which he plays the history teacher who runs for president on an anti-corruption platform. Funny stuff. Putin is trying to break the will of Ukrainian people by destroying their power plants now. I do not think Ukrainians are easily broken.

Hi. My name is Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus Lamar III. Your science appears to be word salad. What is "foreign gas"? What is the diamagnetic shell - bismuth? graphite? Why? What is an artificial gravitational field? And why would a plasma discharge generate it?

This is such a common mistake. All missiles were removed from South Dakota, 1992-1994. They were Minuteman II missiles and my wife and I saw one being carted off down a highway. The adjacent states of ND and WY still have some, and I agree with your pointed question there. One of the silos was two miles from her family land, and we drove past a couple times. A rancher bought the property and used the surface blockhouse for a residence.

Seagrass has commercial value in maintaining fisheries and generally helping keep intact ecosystems that coastal economies depend on. And they can also stabilize coastal sediment, mitigate wave action, and thereby protect shorelines. So I think it might pay its own way, especially in the fisheries aspect. Here's a site that summarizes the benefits: https://www.seagrasswatch.org/seagrassimportance/

I've heard a bit about seagrass, which is that it forms stable communities and root systems that can trap and hold carbon longterm, just as climax communities do on land. I remain skeptical about carbon credits where the worst emitters can keep doing so but greenwash their polluting business-as-usual. We likely need both seagrass communities and the cessation of emissions.

Dis, I was speaking broadly of the enlightened consciousness that can end human suffering, AKA the "Buddha nature." My reference would be mainly to Chan Buddhism (and the Japanese sect that also derived from that, Zen), where there is the practice of avoiding conceptual thought and the awakening of mind which transcends, as it recognizes the illusions of the mundane world. Here's a clip from the Stanford encyclopedia again...

This thread is hobbled a bit by the incoherence of the OP question. It's not only a leading question (presuming an inability that isn't established in the OP) but it doesn't define "sense" or "god." Which is understandable given how vague those words are. Plenty of people report sensing god, in either a western guise (a personal presence) or a more Buddhist way (transcendence of personal ego, loss of boundaries between self and universe, cessation of ordinary passage of time ). These are experiences that, by their very nature, cannot be objectively verified or induced in someone else (like, say, showing them a bowling ball or a cordless drill). Some, as others note, are powerfully influenced by culture and folk tales and aspects of our personality, some not so much. Guess I'd trust the latter more, if I were experiencing such a state.

First, please read the link on global v local atheism. Second, please understand no one is saying you reject theism with other gods but rather you reject the definition of theism used by other religions. This is a significant distinction. For example, I am not a metaphysical atheist (universe is just matter and energy, plus physical laws) but am open to a Buddhist notion of a consciousness that transcends individual brains. So, with respect to a western definition of theism (omnipotent omniscient personal being), I'm atheistic. I.e. local atheism. But with respect to a Buddhist definition of divinity (transcendent consciousness permeating all spacetime and perhaps beyond, with some possible karmic mechanism) I'm agnostic and open to epiphanies, aha! moments, or whatever might present itself. So I don't embrace global atheism. Local v global, this is key to defining any position on the nature of the divine.

Very helpful SEP entry, thanks. That's section 3, if anyone wants to delve in there. And if we allow this distinction into this chat, then the dispute goes away. And it does seem a fair point that most who call themselves atheist are local atheists, i.e. they deem a specific framing of deity as wrong rather than make a sweeping rejection of any and all overarching consciousness. On this matter, we could say that Buddhists espouse a local atheism - they reject an omnipotent personal being (the traditional western definition) but not the notion of a consciousness that has a transcendent aspect that permeates all of nature. To a Lutheran, they are atheists. But that is because the Buddhist definition of divinity seems incoherent to a Lutheran, not because Buddhists are scientific materialists.

Not that I think anyone is achieving clarity in this swamp of a chat, but I would have to lean towards @Dis n Dat on the definitional argument here. An atheist is, by definition, atheist with regards to any form of divine entity. I agree with you that in common parlance people can loosely say "when it comes to ancient pantheons I'm atheistic," but that's a casual and imprecise usage. Where philosophic rigor is needed to get off "square one," we would have to define anyone who believes in at least one divine personage as a theist. When such a believer says "Xmucane and Mbutu and Ben-Adrill are silly fantasies, but Jehovah lives!" they are simply saying those beings are not the real supreme being, not that they reject theism in its essential postulate. I didn't therefore feel "forced" to accept DisnDats definition. Because he's looking for precise definitions here, a perfectly legitimate quest in a philosophic chat.