zapatos

And like with baboons, threat gesturing is what keeps people from coming to actual blows. It is a reminder that if you attack me you will get severly hurt too, even if you are 100x my size. Can you expand on this please? I am trying to understand why it is an illusion. As a rather small scale example, I knew a guy in college who was a bit of a dork, small and kind of funny looking. He also had a black belt in karate. As much as the bullies might have wanted to pick on him they never did, given that they knew prior to defeating him they were going to absorb an unacceptable level of damage themselves. If 10 guys decide to beat up one fellow outside a bar, if that guy pulls a knife the bullies are likely to back off. Not because they couldn't win, but because the risk to themselves was too extreme. Why isn't the same kind of risk analysis done by nations that is done by individuals? Why won't the threat of a nuclear bomb lobbed into your backyard be enough to keep a bigger nation from invading a smaller nation?

So you agree with @mistermack those countries would be safer without them? If so, why do you think they don't get rid of them to increase their security?

Do you have any thoughts on why NK and Israel do not get rid of the nuclear weapons if they are safer without them?

So it is your opinion that North Korea and Israel, would be safer without nuclear weapons than with them?

Sure. Everyone with a nuclear weapon or who may get a nuclear weapon in the future is a candidate to vaporize you. Of course. But how does that make it more or less likely that we can ban nuclear weapons globally? I think most people agree nuclear weapons can be bad for people and the earth. But just being 'bad' does not necessarily mean there is a way to ban them.

Can you please provide some evidence that they are going to vaporize you? The question was "who is going to vaporize you", not "who has or could potentially have a nuclear weapons". I mean, technically some gal in Thailand is a possible candidate for stabbing me in the heart, but unless there is some reason to believe it is going to happen it seems more like fear mongering rather than a reasonable discussion about whether or not we can negotiate our way into a nuclear free world. I'm really curious how you know Moon didn't read that somewhere.

Nuclear weapons don't make the world safer. They make the little guy safer. If there were no nuclear weapons then the US could attack NK with impunity, just as they have so many other countries. Since NK has nuclear weapons the US cannot attack them. The price would be too high. The little guys are not stupid. It is one of the reasons Israel joined the nuclear club, and the reason Iran may soon join too.

Who is going to vaporize you? Russia? North Korea? What leads you to believe you are going to be vaporized? I don't see the connection. Finland did not add or delete nuclear weapons.

Distrust. If I don't trust you I would have to be mentally impaired to give up the one, single thing I have that guarantees my safety. North Korea is not a province of China. North Korea does as it pleases. I don't understand how being able to negotiate is a problem. Giving up landmines does not put you at risk of being annihilated. Please make the argument then. I'd like to hear how the US is going to persuade North Korea that their risk from the US goes DOWN after giving up their nukes. The US and Russia have been at odds since WWII. Why do you think we've not had Americans shooting directly at Russians all that time?

I think he was quoting Genady when he asked about the train of ships.

I'm only going on what Einstein said: "Space-time does not claim existence in its own right, but only as a structural quality of the [gravitational] field". Not to be rude, but you should look up the definition of "inevitable".

Well damn. That's what I get for jumping to conclusions. 🤣

"Spacetime fabric" is not a physical thing. We are. My wife and I are married. We exist as a team. Does that mean our partnership was inevitable?

I can't comprehend your thinking on this one. Are you talking about God, Mod, or your mother?

Damn. My colleagues and I have been found out... Unfortunately, much like with god, finding evidence that a conspiracy is NOT true is often a tall order. While I have no evidence that @TheVat's conspiracy is false, I still feel pretty comfortable dismissing it. I was particularly amused/horrified by Canada's development of a Gaydar machine. 😁

https://www.sciencefocus.com/news/conspiracy-theory-review/?utm_content=FOC2&utm_campaign=Thursday 6 April 2023_2506954_Focus_Newsletters_24748918&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=Adestra

Har! 😁

Is there some threshold above which gravitational waves will be created? Or do small objects, say a couple of asteroids colliding, create gravitational waves that are just too minuscule to measure?

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/take-a-virtual-tour-of-the-doomsday-seed-vault-180981815/?utm_source=smithsoniandaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=editorial&spMailingID=48101346&spUserID=MTI5NTk5ODgyMTA1NAS2&spJobID=2421910402&spReportId=MjQyMTkxMDQwMgS2

Thanks for the additional detail!!

Papua New Guinea has the highest rural population in the world (86%). I suspect that makes it difficult to surveil the population.

The US has 51 constitutions, 51 sets of laws, and their 51 corresponding judicial systems. One for each of the 50 states plus one for the entire country (the Federal system). Violations of state laws are tried in state courts with the state supreme court having the final say. Violations of federal laws are tried in federal courts with the US Supreme Court having the final say. Cases that start in State courts only move to Federal courts when there is a question of whether or not the state law in question is in violation of the US constitution. There may be some specifics I missed in this summary and am happy to be corrected if someone else knows better. Washington D.C. is a special case but I'm not clear on how that works.

If I were down to my last cup of coffee as I was starving on the side of the road and some stranger stopped by to give me some pithy unsolicited advice, I think I'd go ahead and pour the coffee on them.

I'd start with a thorough understanding of the person in question.

Depending on what is meant by "...isn't going to work...", it will also work for those who don't want to recover. If the goal is to get a roof over the head of an addict and keep them off the main thoroughfare, then having them in a tiny home may work just fine.