Phi for All

It matters if you're speaking onager mane topic.

! Moderator Note Unless you have some evidence of this, it's conspiracy, and it's against the rules. Science discussion forum, remember? Evidence is the key.

It's no yoke when one of the donkeys dies. The other one just moves in a circle, and because of Newton's 1st Law, it might just burro right into the ground.

Newton kept his donkeys in the house because their knowledge of the law was unstable.

The donkey will kick you back, and that's what we call "stable" equilibrium.

I don't know why so many people get this idea that we'll become or be superseded by an artificial superintelligence by this century. We'll probably go on for thousands of years as the same, limited biological species in a civilization "a la star wars/trek".

But this thread is about inevitability, which implies non-life to start. A seed is already alive, so you're just moving through a process, an existing cycle.

This is why there are so many victims of predation worldwide, because they're blamed along with the perpetrators by folks like you, folks who could make a difference if they'd give up their Iron Age righteousness. These pigs are wolves and are often dressed like sheep, legitimized by those in power so you can't possibly recognize them. Having lots of money gives advantages you aren't acknowledging in your arguments. It's not just the buying power, it's the ability to financially change any given market in ways those without extreme wealth can't. It's sad that you seem to hold victims equally to blame when the field is far from even.

! Moderator Note This is NOT your blog, it's a science discussion forum. This has NOTHING to do with Engineering. Opening posts need to set the tone for conversation. They're not the beginnings of your lectures. Thread closed, do better next time.

I disagree. There are other existing factors you're ignoring. If I'm sitting on boatloads of cash, and you're in bad financial straights and can't afford to keep your house, my offer to you of fifty cents on the dollar might be the best you can get right now. You may be forced to accept my offer, but I don't think that makes you complicit in this shitty deal. I could also be using my money to make sure you don't get other offers, or make you even more desperate to sell. There are plenty of predatory practices, and I think there are times when one side has ALL the blame. What are you supposed to do, refuse the deal and starve in a home you can't afford?

To clarify, you're saying so many Muslims are poor because they don't follow the basics of Islam closely enough? What basic parts are not being followed that would make these countries, in general, more wealthy if they were followed?

Isn't it ironic that this argument is about as nuanced as you'd expect from Iron Age minds? While I don't disagree with your assessment of the death penalty, your presentation makes me want to push back against your many generalizations, assumptions, and insulting manner.

But those things can be explained without resorting to supernatural circumstances. People hear things and swear later they actually saw them as well, but it turns out their brains just filled in a sensory gap. All natural, no need to resort to magic. I watch videos for entertainment. For learning, I find too much bad information can slip past me when it comes in a video format. I'm too used to suspending my disbelief when watching videos. Reading is MUCH more trustworthy for me, and gives me a greater power to question.

The taser is a non-lethal weapon, though some underlying medical conditions can make it deadly in certain cases. This sounds like something from a Hollywood movie, where the good guy tases the bad guy from five stories up because he was touching the metal handrail.

Being your own judge is VERY convenient, but highly subjective and can't be counted as evidential support. So what? It's one thing to recount experiences, but something else completely to claim some of those are more valid than others based on nothing but how believable you think their doctors are. Tell me how you or this doctor is assigning importance to the experiences, and I can tell you more about how subjective you're being. How does it give meaning to life if it's a subjective hallucination, except randomly? I think your "fear of change" argument is garbage. Change is required for improvement, but jumping at NDEs without more objective reasoning has NOTHING to do with being afraid. It's about reason, and critical thinking, not fear.

That's a strawman, because Prometheus didn't say anything about belief. The question is, why is YOUR version/Moody's version of NDEs more valid than the versions where people saw elves?

! Moderator Note Moved from Astronomy and Cosmology to Engineering.

Have you noticed any benefits?

60% of Republicans don't believe in evolution, and call it a liberal conspiracy. Republican leadership mocks the scientific approach to evidence (they regularly call her "Professor" Warren in a sneering tone), and it's easy to see why, since they so often get called out by proper evidence. Belief in an inerrant Bible has also caused many on the right to view all liberal actions as assaults on their entire lifestyles. But mostly I think the majority of GOP leadership is interested in shutting down science because it restricts profit from activities that are harming the planet. It's corporate self-interest trying to keep from paying out for mistakes and dragging their feet against change.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-antiscience-movement-is-escalating-going-global-and-killing-thousands/ They're down to just a few members that trust intellectual experts.

It's difficult to be tactful around "believers" in general these days. Try to make a point about a single, specific aspect and it's perceived as an attack on their whole belief system. I think they realize on a gut level that a house of cards only falls all the way down. Explanations you trust, even though you had to dig to get them, don't suffer from that all-or-nothing perspective. By digging further, if you find better a more refined explanation, it's not a problem changing your mind about that aspect alone. Trust is a better tool than faith when it comes to analyzing what you believe is true.

"Hey Titian, could you paint me some figures from mythology, but make them naked? If they become masterpieces, remember it was my idea!" It's also the way horoscopes work. Except for the technical details, I know what's going to happen to each and every one of you this week.

Are you asking why we don't have a History/Military History subsection? Here's a thread where you can ask that. Did you want to talk about a specific bit of history? Please open a thread in either the Lounge, Politics, or Other Sciences, depending on the angle you'd prefer to talk about. Be as specific as you can and you'll get specific responses. Also, "except" is the wrong preposition to use in this instance, since I assume you're including yourself with the set of history/military enthusiasts. "Except me" EXCLUDES you. If you're including yourself, you use "besides". "Any history/military enthusiasts out there, besides me?" You could also use the more clumsy "apart from" if you prefer. Note that I'm also assuming you're a grammar/language enthusiast as well.

People who are "pretty new to the actual workings" of science often eschew rigorous study in favor of the less intense intuition and imagination path. Until you understand the actual workings a bit better, it can seem intuitive that science should be intuitive. Rigor is often misunderstood as being hidebound.

I would imagine the influences are myriad. How does it help to determine where someone is on the novelty detection spectrum? Aren't we more influenced by how positively or negatively we associate with various stimuli? If your experience with meeting new people has been overall positive, you're more likely to experience less anxiety about such novelty, but if your experience has been mostly negative, meeting new people is not a pleasant prospect and is often actively avoided.