geordief

I had to run that one through AI ... You obviously had a dirty (or a guilty) mind.He must certainly have said "No,this is mine", meaning his stop. (I wonder what the Alzheimer's mortality rate would have been for taxi passengers if they had thought to include it in their survey)

Was that supposed beneficial effect of more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere used to poo poo the dangers of an its consequenti increased greenhouse effect ? Is that talking point more or less put to bed or will they not be bothered to read the fine print and keep assuring us that it will be good for agriculture?

Ghee wiz.

" I didn't expect the brand name "Flora" would be known in America.Apparently it is branded as"I can't believe it is not butter" over there. I think its marketing of its supposed indistiguishability from butter goes back a long way over here-way before the internet ,so I can't find any of the old ads to post.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flora_MacDonald (Butter wouldn't melt in her mouth -sure you won't get that!)

. He could teach us a bit about slipping out of hostlile territories disguised as a container. We are still stuck with woman's clothing in a boat to France. He has Melanie to welcome him home with open arms where our Bonny Prince only had Flora Macdonald to sweeten his dreams.

Richard Attenburgh starred in Rillington Place. Thought "gravitas" was a bit of a double tumble. With a name like that his family may have had previous experience with Madame Guillotine.

Would that imply that thrill seekers or people with an appetite for new experiences in general might tolerate a partner's interest in other people more easily(ie not be prone to jealousy)? Stick in the muds and dullards addicted to routine more so inclined? Too many variables to say?

A river across a pond?

Even the continents migrate. In human relationships,I think jealousy is (can be?) a function of insecurity. It is a pitiful emotion when it feeds on itself but that is where we are.God help us.(Elon won't)

That is how I think I had been using "thought" -as a "disturbance" in the nervous system.An idea being something of a refined or processed "thought" I do not know if this is correct or if I was using the terminology correctly-but it was something I had been ruminating on a while back. (an emotion being a "thought" that was processed in a different way) Emotions don't come out of the blue,do they? They have to have an initial stimulus,although I guess they (like ideas) can "feed off" themselves.

Well,maybe I was just spouting but we don't know what we might learn in the future . Of course any "unpredictability at the heart" would have to also encompass the statistical predictability (if that is the correct term) you refer to and which is apparently well observed.

Do you think we can even hazard a guess as to whether such an achievement is likely or unlikely? It might transpire that discoveries are made that are so fundamental that it might seem that everything that we have observed could be explained on that basis into the finest generality (if that is not an oxymoron) whereas we might arrive at similarly fundamental discoveries that lead to an assessment that no such applicability pertains. I think we have no way of knowing whether the workings of Nature are simple or completely unpredicable and complicated at heart. I don't even know which outcome is the more to be wished for.(the journey is said to be as interesting as the destination)

No,I don't watch much TV or films these days. I do have a friend who does security for some of the films in Ireland (one had Jennifer Aniston in it and I got bit of gossip on another famous actor ,Owen Wilson but I don't watch them much) "We" also provided on site catering for Richard Harris and ,I think Tom "the Yank" Berenger in "The Field". Harris specifically requested "no onions" but chef knew best. Is it just facetious to ask whether a "human construct" is a "fact " or a "truth"? Can it be either (or even both)? As an example of a "human construct" General Relativity might be a "fact" in that it was actually published as a theorem(theory?) but is it a "truth" in that it accounts for gravity more completely than antecedent theories? (A bit of trouble posting and editing this time-lost the first reply to @StringJunky ,couldn't recover any saved draft and see that I have quoted him 3 times,which I cannot edit either)

TIL we are seemingly going to need passwords to communicate with each other in Real Life. The secret codewords that scammers hateDeepfake scams might use your voice, but they don't know what's in your head. Five minutes of preparation could save your loved ones from falling for fraud.Words fail me.

You were lucky.Our hovercraft was only full of jellyfish.

When you argue for a statement to be accepted as an "absolute truth" you have set a very ,very high bar and have to accept any and all picking holes in it -and rebut them one by tedious one. There is no need for there to be any "absolute truth".It does not advance anything since we can be ,as I think you already mentioned "completely confident" about any one particular thing-is that not good enough? Apparently the Uncertainty Theorem posits that there are limits on what we can measure with full accuracy. Perhaps that finding applies to abstract thought as well (this is a philosophical question,I see and one thing many might agree upon wrt philosophical questions could be that there is no one correct answer.)

I don't want to argue against that as my heart would not be in it. But I would also hesitate to argue for anything being "absolutely true" and that would apply to your statement (I can see a possible contradiction in my argument but don't think it matters .What do they say "let not the perfect be the enemy of the good", or words to that effect)

I think that is true statistically . Your description is couched in the form of a linguistic(correct term?) expression which can be interpreted in many (imperfect)ways. Logic ,too is a tool imo and not absolute. So I claim that any proposition can be taken as "true" if we accept the possibility that it may not be completely so. It is also ,completely acceptable to accept it as bring "true" if we admit that the acceptance is not without an element of "faith" We accept things on faith because it is useful and we don't tie ourselves up in knots debating whether or not it could possibly not be true. The Normany landings were held off by the weather until a final weather forecast on the West Coast of Ireland. It turned out to be true (enough) but perhaps fingers and other bodily parts were crossed as the order to proceed was given.

Interesting. I wonder how @Gees emotion in the Harry Potter stories relates to real emotion in people's lives. It is obviously a facsimile based on the author's own experiences and reinterpreted by the audience according to their own. Is that real? Or just "realer" than if the author was just following a stale template and not applying their lived experiences or if the audience was only paying cursory attention (more interested in getting a snog from the date,perhaps) Is it possible for a literary or communicator to transmit their lived experiences across the medium of their work or might that be an illusion? I may be convinced in my own mind that I "get" the feeling of,say Piaf's "je ne regrette rien" but is that an illusion that only works with simple emotions that can be easily reassembled in the audience's mind or is there more to it than that ?(can we be so similar in our "wiring" that some emotions can be transported in their entirety without "loss of signal" between receptive individuals?)

Just on that point ,I had been ruminating recently a bit on the difference between a "thought" and an "idea". It seemed to me that anything could be classed a "thought" and that an idea was a refined kind of "thought". So ,if that holds an emotion could also be called a "thought" but not an "idea" I agree that there can be truth layered into fiction. Don't they say the best cover stories are based on a truth?

Solar Energy (Renewables generally,I think) I think costs have reduced 20% for each doubling of capacity over the past 40(?) years Following something called Wright's Law ,it says here Our World in DataSolar panel prices have fallen by around 20% every time g...One of the most transformative changes in technology over the last few decades has been the massive drop in the cost of clean energy. Solar photovoltaic costs have fallen by 90% in the last decade, on

Would the relationship between the physical world and the world of ideas bear any relation to the debuncted notion of "action at a distance" that "explained" Newtonian Gravity ? (Is Localism the theory that took its place-and which Bell has again ,apparently upended with his infernal statistical analysis?) There seems (to me) to be no obvious chain of causality -and certainly nothing reliably predictable between the thought and the consequence but consequences there surely are. Or might that be just another analogy? Edit:I see I did mangle that Delphic prophesy story. Croesus of Lydia it was (more famous than Darius,too now)

How does that fiction differ from simple miscalculations/misdirections?- eg the Persian King Darius(?) and the "You will destroy a great empire" prophesy at Delphi

Thanks.I did look at your link. It seems an inexhaustible subject -and why I am relieved I never studied philosophy. Could we equally ask "why do people think these categories of experiences are valid?" Do these enquiries do any more than scratch an itch? When I say I am relieved not to have gone down this path,it is not to demean those that do or did but just to acknowledge that my comparative dullness of spirit has unwittingly spared me from a waste of my limited talents (albeit a loss of interesting and demanding conversations) Is it any different ,I wonder from my lack of athletic ability has spared me from what I perceive as the mainly waste of time involved in following or practicing sport? That would apply to most activities I suppose.Are we all here "killing time" in some sense and trying to find our own particular expertise where we can try to kill it most satisfyingly? (Unless ,eg we are in Ukraine where they are just trying to survive -and prevail) Btw I don't think I went off topic there;I think maybe I wandered off any topic 🙂