Phi for All

This is my stance as well, on all points. I've gone out of my way to do things I didn't even want to do just because someone told me I couldn't. Orneriness should be taken into consideration. The only way I quit smoking was to remind myself daily how much better off I was. Saving money, no more stink, better stamina, less cleaning up, and a better overall feeling were reasonable outcomes to quitting. If the gov had passed a law, It would have taken me a LOT longer to quit.

If you click on someone's rep score for a single post, does it break it down into + and - scores, but without names?

It would probably make Genady feel better informed, and with less condescension. I'm not sure the software can display both votes, but I think it would be interesting to know how the + and - breaks down (without knowing who voted which way). Seeing a post that has a +2 score doesn't tell you the interesting fact that 16 people voted it down and 18 voted it up.

JohnPBailey has been banned for abusive posts and PMs, soapboxing, and bad faith arguments.

! Moderator Note There's nothing medical about this stance. Perhaps you need to go somewhere you can blog about what you misunderstand. Thread closed.

I think changing the mindset is crucial no matter what we decide to do. So much of the trash generated is convenience-oriented packaging that has to go from manufacturer to distributor to supplier to consumer, then sit on our shelves for a short amount of time. Nobody but the consumer is interested in making products last in the package once you've gotten it home and opened it (see any Ziplock bags inside a cereal box?). I reuse all good plastic and glass containers, over and over if I can. I have a whole collection downstairs that I use to store other stuff, mix a small amount of paint or oil in, fill with water to use as a weight, or any other job where you need a jug or can with a cap or lid. And I keep hoping the laws will change and I can start taking my old containers to fill them up with bulk rice or flour or sugar. Didn't I see a headline a while back about a bacteria that eats plastic and poops out something better for the environment? I'd seriously be willing to get rid of my back yard and turn it into a mulch for little plastic piranha bugs. I'm so sick of wasting resources on a lawn in a high altitude desert. I agree, there's no single fix. It has to be a compound effort. I'm sure the US campaign from the 60s was accompanied by stiff fines for littering, but the message got to me. My family was big on camping when I was growing up, and we always packed out our trash. Keep America Beautiful resonated with me, and as an adult, if there's no trash can I stuff my refuse in a pocket and throw it away later. I know if I toss something on the ground, I'm creating both an eyesore and extra work for someone. Taking care of my own litter taught me not to take my problems and make them other people's problems.

! Moderator Note This stinker is closed!

JustJoe has been banned for bad faith arguments designed to waste the time of any who bother trying to correct his horrible science.

! Moderator Note Thanks, it would be my pleasure! Merry Christmas, everybody else!

Lady Byrd Johnson used her platform as FLOTUS to support the Keep America Beautiful campaign back in the 60's, and that worked exceedingly well to place trash bins in many places, and more importantly call attention to the need to be responsible with our trash. That ad of the Native American crying at the pollution of the time had a real impact (I'm seriously not sure if I could ever throw trash on the ground to this day). So I would say do something similar but modern, like get all the social media influencers to help show that you have to be a moron to trash your own environment.

This should have priority, imo. In the US, Capitalists want workers to revere working hard, not reaching their intellectual potential. I can't even imagine the money that's been poured over the years into campaigns and laws that emphasize this bootstrap mentality where sweating is preferable to thinking. There were an awful lot of free colleges and universities in the US before Ronald Reagan (as gov of CA) started charging for tuition in California, to keep out "undesirables". Much of the reason why there are so many poorly educated white people is because folks like Reagan didn't want smart black people taking over. Perhaps forty years later we can overlook our fear of PoC and decide smarter is better.

! Moderator Note From now on, if your post contains one of these famously ignorant assertions that force the rest of the members to correct you, or wonder why you aren't reading the supporting material, I'm tossing it to the Trash Can. We tried to give you some leeway, but you really are wasting everyone's time.

It's a FOX News perspective that ignores the centuries when those folks were being actively suppressed. It focuses instead on how unfair it seems to do more than simply remove the suppression. This perspective complains that "extra privilege" to correct the problem is unfair. I've never understood the stance. I've been on enough boats to know that if you're off course, it's not enough to simply return to center. You need to overcompensate, steer hard to port for a while before coming back to center, because you were headed too far to starboard.

! Moderator Note We're a science discussion forum. Don't abuse the site by promoting commercial books.

! Moderator Note Do you want to discuss non-existent science as a Speculation, or do you want to examine how current theories in QM might be used in the future? We can't discuss fictional Star Trek tech in mainstream science sections.

! Moderator Note Sorry, but this is outside our purview. We're a science discussion forum, not a commercial translation service.

Our skulls wouldn't have had the room if our jaws hadn't shrunk due to eating cooked meat. You'd have to define "smart" and "keen" first. Also carnivore usually refers to obligate carnivores, which are different from animals that can eat meat. Humans are omnivores, not carnivores, and we can be pretty smart and keen, by my definitions.

Except when they don't, which is most of the Gospels and Letters. Those accounts are all over the place.

No, I think it's weird that being naked was evil, since they were supposedly created that way. I'm saying that the only evidence to work with is your bible, and what's written there suggests that God was OK with nudity. However, when Adam & Eve gained knowledge of good and evil, the first thing they did was make belts to cover their groins, which would seem to suggest that flashing your genitals is evil. So God created humans with an evil nakedness, then bore false witness long before he made it part of the 10 Commandments.

I always thought the real sin committed in that story was God lying to Adam and Eve about dying on the day they ate from the tree. How could being naked be evil if God created them that way, and how is it more evil than an outright lie? "In the day that you eat of it, surely shall you die" didn't happen, never would have happened, yet God threatened them with it. You can interpret the lie out of it if you try, but the Hebrew in Genesis 2 seems pretty clear.

I thought it read more like Adam and Eve, after gaining the knowledge by eating the apple, knew that showing off their genitals was evil, so they made belts out of fig leaves. This was before God's judgement, right?

Research is important, always, and the study of our own bodies is critical, imo. "As much knowledge of the human body as humanly possible" is an ongoing project, and we certainly need those who can add to that accumulated knowledge. In this scenario, you'd need to study several disciplines and apply the knowledge gained across multiple fields of study. The other way to add to our current knowledge is to specialize in a specific field. Pick an organ or system that is interesting to you, and focus your study on learning everything you can about it. Is there any part of our physiology that interests you more than others?

I completely agree. It's not any single organ. It's the fact that we started cooking our food with fire, which shrank our guts, which shrank our jaws, which made room for bigger brains, but at the same time made it easier to walk upright, which led to using our opposable thumbs to make tools and discover even more things (to oversimplify). The evolution of our body is an amazing story.

! Moderator Note But this isn't true, is it? You aren't making suggestions, you're making assertions, and those are being challenged with observations and known science. And you keep using arguments that have been shown to be false, from threads that were closed because your assertions were shown to be false. I'm not sure why you think any meaningful argument can be based on a false foundation; would you continue to build the house if you knew the concrete in the foundation was rotten? Most ideas in science are wrong, and we use specific methodology to make sure we find the bad parts before investing more in the idea. You seem to be asking people to continue to invest time and effort discussing something they know won't work. THAT is why you're getting so much pushback.

! Moderator Note This is a valid assumption. And you should think about this before insisting someone's response to you "can't be correct". This style is very reminiscent of the time-wasters you claim not to be. Either knock it off now or I see some suspensions headed your way. Nobody has the time to correct your hand-waving insistence. This modnote is for you to take under consideration. Don't waste anyone's time responding to it.