swansont

Mechanical devices getting stuck violate NO principles of known science.

What thermodynamic principle does an engine getting stuck demonstrate? No, it was for re-introducing material from a locked thread.

It reminds me of the UFO=aliens crowd. Improper extrapolation from the data, cherry-picking, and of course the “it must be aliens” conclusion when the phenomena are unidentified.

That would make you one of his sockpuppets.

If you had an irrational fear that it’s somehow a contagious condition, or that its mere presence is harmful, amped up by certain societal pressures, you might. There are men that blame attraction to (and sometimes the resulting assault on) women on the women. This seems to be under a similar umbrella

An obvious candidate is cultural pressure to conform to some “normal” behavior that is defined by the majority. (Which cuts down on challenges to authority, so it’s often perpetuated by that authority, even if they behave “abnormally” in private)

Since you apparently need this spelled out (and I really shouldn’t have to): you have shared a link saying that seafood is necessary for proper evolutionary brain development ca. 2mya. If we provisionally accept this (others have challenged it), it’s separate from the claim that we’ve lost 100cc of brain volume 40k years ago. Your assertion is that this loss is because “we” no longer have the same diet Where is the evidence that all humans stopped eating seafood? Your position requires this. If this loss of volume is an evolutionary disadvantage and is diet-related, why did the humans who lived on the coast and ate seafood suffer this loss? Shouldn’t people who eat a lot of seafood have bigger brains? You presented evidence that surfer’s ear is present in ~half of 23 Neandertal fossils and an indeterminate number of others (only one is uniquely identified in your link) You didn’t show that it “disappears” from the fossil record.

What’s the evidence that the diet has changed? Did all humans stop eating seafood? Is there evidence that populations that eat a lot of seafood have bigger brains? The abundant presence of fish bones and shellfish remains in many African hominid fossil sites dating to 2 million years ago implies human ancestors commonly inhabited the shores, Is this any different in the last 40k years?

Ever notice how people who had previous incarnations were always someone of note?

They aren’t http://research.atmos.ucla.edu/weather/C110/Documents/tmp/basic_wxradar/navmenu.php_tab_1_page_3_4_2_type_text.htm Consider a situation in which an intense thunderstorm is close to the radar. Attenuation occurring in the heavy precipitation core of the closest storm can cause precipitating areas downrange to appear less intense. In severe cases of attenuation, some precipitation occurring downrange may not be displayed in the image at all.

But you’ve presented no evidence of this. You presented other evidence that has no bearing on this claim.

Perhaps if you actually employed the scientific method… It’s not enough to show that some features could have arisen from an aquatic existence. You need to show that they must have, and it has to cover all features. The math says that bipedalism arose before that. “the discovery of “Lucy” (Johanson et al. 1982), a 3.2-million-year-old (Ma) Australopithecus afarensis skeleton that was very ape-like above the neck but possessed a suite of characters related to bipedalism throughout the rest of the skeleton. Then came the 3.7-Ma Laetoli footprint trail—an exquisitely preserved moment in time when two or more hominins walked bipedally across an ash-covered landscape” https://evolution-outreach.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1007/s12052-010-0257-6

Shouting doesn’t actually help your case. AAH is rather more than ancestors spending some time in the water; it’s that this is responsible for evolutionary changes to our physiology. Showing that they spent some time in the water is insufficient to show this. Put another way, given that humans need access to fresh water, it’s not all that surprising that hominids would live nearby and bathe or swim. Noting that Neandertals got swimmer’s ear and thus may have fished is irrelevant; AAH claims that bipedalism was a result of life in the water, and human ancestors were bipedal far earlier. It’s not evidence that any features evolved as a result

From your source: They found that the length of time that individuals spent surfing was proportional to the presence and severity of the exostoses. In surfers with external ear canal exostoses, 61.1% had surfed for ten years or less but in surfers who had surfed for more than ten years, 82.4% had severe exostoses. Mann further noticed in his study that the severity of external auditory canal exostoses was also influenced by the frequency of water exposure and he found an incidence of 64% in individuals swimming three times a week. You only have to go swimming three times a week to get the rate discovered in the fossil record. Surfing > 10 years gave a greater rate. No, since semiaquatic ≠ aquatic and the topic is the aquatic ape hypothesis, not the semiaquatic ape hypothesis

If that’s all you know, does that mean all the rest is made up by you (i.e. you don’t know it?) Maybe you could answer instead of dodging the question.

Is it your position that surfers/swimmers who develop this condition are aquatic mammals?

! Moderator Note Split; questions not connected to the topic under discussion should be in separate threads

We’re six pages into a discussion of heat engines and you don’t know what the cold reservoir is? It’s whatever connects with the plate opposite the hot reservoir.

Yes, I said no ice. This seems to be confusing to you. If you measure how much the temperature goes up, you can see how much heat has flowed in. You do this just with ambient air, to see what its contribution is. Then you do it with the engine.

I did. YOU said ice water. I explained why that’s not a good idea. After you said it. Then you come up with a way to track the heat flow into the cold reservoir.

0 is easy to replicate. The goal is to change only one parameter at a time, e.g. doing work vs not doing work Having ice water means tracking how much energy goes into melting the ice

There are. The lab description, and the writeup done by the students. But you’d have to take the class to have access. I’m sure someone will get right on that, right after you publish the torque values for every bolt you’ve tightened. Go take a physics class.

Why would we do this? It’s an analog to the light clock, and the photon does not have an inertial frame of reference. The light clock is used to show the difference between someone at rest with respect to the photon launcher and an inertial frame where there is relative motion. Anything else is a distraction. The ball itself is not in an inertial frame, so this is pointless..

College students do similar experiments every year in introductory physics classes. It’s not noteworthy, so nobody is going to publish these results.

Which is why you do a control experiment, which measures the effect of the surroundings.