Phi for All

IOW, "I don't know what I'm talking about, but if YOU do, I would appreciate it if you'd stop making my argument look bad."

If this is a function of high intelligence, it's most definitely affected by the evolutionary process. But you also claim the association is due to subconscious memory, which is subjective to an individual, and evolution is about change within a whole population over time. I found a study through Google Scholar that may offer some insight, but it's more of a psychological treatment than an evolutionary one. I haven't read it myself, but the abstract seemed relevant: https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115035

I'd be very careful about overgeneralizing your thoughts on color. Do you have evidence from a study showing that light blue makes us all creative, or that we all associate red with danger? I've always considered color as one aspect of our pattern-recognition abilities. We make sense of the world around us by comparing it with things we already know, things we've experienced in the past that allow us to predict successful patterns in situations that are new to us. If you look at a green ball, you already recognize enough of its pattern to know several things about it, including whether or not it would fit in your hand, and that if tossed it will roll better than a cube, and that it will be hard to see in the grass because it's green. Do you have any studies that suggest consistent emotions are triggered by certain colors? I can easily imagine a sort of pleasure that's felt when one recognizes a particular pattern, but other than that I'm having a hard time thinking of any color that evokes a consistent emotion from people. Again, is there any evidence that emotions associated with color aren't subjective to each individual?

These are personal issues, and I have no problem with Moreno attempting them on their own, wherever they may find themselves. Where I think they need help is with those areas where their personal behavior overlaps with the expectations of a society. It's pretty clear they have no interest in being inclusive wrt the way groups of people interact with them, and still hold on to a very primitive, tribal mentality when it comes to those who look different.

Too many words with no science in them frustrates, not confuses. You're not saying anything testable, you're not giving us any information we can use to predict an outcome. You're just blathering on, and on, and on, about everything BUT the science. You don't address the specific points people are making about your concept, but keep insisting it's probably too hard for us to understand. Stop ignoring the calls for science and tell us about something we can apply some methodology to.

There's been recent success with curing the mosquitoes so they don't infect people with malaria, rather than trying to prevent people catching it. I would hope this moves the various species from the lethal category into the nuisance category, where eradication isn't an option.

In the absence of any science, I'm left to focus on the constant mention of other forums and other discussions and other people. I find it profoundly uninteresting, since the science behind your idea is the topic of this thread. Sorry, but screw Phil. We don't know Phil, he's not a member, he's not part of this conversation. You need to stop trying to massage your audience before the actual discussion takes place. We're only interested in the science. If you want anyone to discuss this with you, the idea should be sound enough on its own without you having to "sell" it. Please don't let this go to multiple pages without actually presenting your concept.

Quite similar to my rubber turtleneck sweater idea, to prevent being assassinated by garrote. That'll teach those bugs! They'll never have the guts to do THAT again.

His MO is to kick you, then scream to his base about how unreasonably angry you are about it, and how you should really get some help for that. We need reform NOW! Every day, as an older white male in the western US, I go through my life with certain expectations. I know if I walk confidently into any situation, and do the things I'm supposed to do (smile, make small talk, stay within the lines, speak up but not TOO loudly, act nice, don't be or say anything awkward, fill out the form, drive on the right, nod with respect, keep it clean, please and thank you), my society will reward me with successful outcomes to my endeavors. The whole system gives me big kiss on the lips every time I do things right. I put in a quarter, and the machine give me candy. But the system doesn't work that way if you aren't a white man. Imagine doing all the right things, but you get glares instead of smiles, distrust instead of doors thrown wide, and sneers instead of any sense of community. Imagine having to always do more than some others to get the same or worse results. Imagine pushing the buttons in the proper sequence just like the white guy in front of you, but you don't get the same access he did. You put in your quarter, the machine keeps it, and you get squat. I think we need to skip the seeds somehow this time. We need a single big tree with lots of room for branches maybe, and a much broader, healthier system for the roots.

It's a successful tactic, because it took your focus off what's important. Stop falling for distractions! I think it's a mistake to assume it doesn't make sense. I think a lot of his supporters commiserate with the way he struggles for words sometimes, and his train of thought rambles are like throwing candy in the air. People can grab their favorites and let the rest fall to the ground. He speaks the way a LOT of people think, disjointed and reactive and often surprisingly weird. Her expressions and gestures are hilarious. I'd honestly love to know if a Trump supporter would think differently about his words when they hear them together with Cooper's expressions and gestures. I'd like to hope they'd see the inanity starkly revealed.

In the US at least, those wrong reasons became the blueprint for a flawed process that skews the way the system is applied. And I think the wrong foot was placed with the assumption that the native Americans, the poor immigrants, and the freed slaves held a LOT of resentment over unfair treatment at white hands. Leadership at the time reacted like oppressors, rather than like people interested in forming community.

In the US, police forces were established before the Civil War (Boston was the first, in 1838) mainly to handle perceived native and immigrant problems. After slavery was abolished, the model was expanded to include perceived threats from free black men.

The whole "bad apple" argument is also a distraction. In the US, it's used by the far right the way they use "lone gunman" to describe a white terrorist. People who espouse this concept are helping bad programs and policies continue. The focus should be on methodology and practice, not on individual police officers. This is a systemic problem.

If you don't focus on the distraction of the medium, there is a great deal to discuss about the warped way this "leader" speaks. He seems to blather, and his supporters have each learned to glean what they want from the mess, and ignore the vast majority of the rest of it. Watching someone lip-sync to the nonsense helps highlight it's most bizarre qualities.

I think science is ONLY interested in the best explanations. Truth is too subjective to be a scientific pursuit, so I don't see how using it as a bridge to religious claims can be either defensible or valid.