Phi for All

Spammers used to start two accounts and sockpuppet each other. I think this one is a bot that will come back soon, quote their own OP and then reply, slipping a commercial link to their business in the quote, hoping we won't notice.

Gosh no, GregA. It's rich white men that have failed these People (as in We, the People). They've set up a vertical system that reaps them hoards of benefits at the expense of everybody else. They want us to compete like animals instead of cooperating like intelligent humans. The solutions we already know would be adequate if they weren't hobbled, manipulated, and leeched off of by wealthy white men. And as swansont points out, your older brother was mistaken. The real problem here is that you're NOT going to admit that, or let it shift opinions you've held since the 80s, yet they're based on wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong that you'll just keep repeating because it fits with your mindset. A liberal mind would accept that they're mistaken and take another look at their worldview in hopes of improving it. Your perception is that we ignore men dying in battle? I know that Trump was highly disparaging of the rank and file military, but since when does the USA not acknowledge its fallen soldiers? What source did this come from (hopefully not your older brother)? If any of this is true, it sounds like the natural way to correct a problem. If my shower gets too cold, I favor turning up the hot water. What's your problem with this solution? It's used in all kinds of physical systems. You're really mixing up the goalposts here. Again, we don't have that kind of Left in the US. The right had to make up the name "Antifa" to make it seem like our leftist radicals were united, but being against fascism is about the only thing these groups totally agree on. The US Civil War was about destroying white males? GregA, that argument is the stupidest I've ever heard. Let's be clear about this: I don't think YOU are stupid! In my opinion, this argument you wrote here, on this site, for all to see, is stupid because it ignores historical reality, attempts to paint white men as real victims in a situation involving kidnap and enslavement, and because it takes a kind of delusional mental gymnastics to unpack, which makes me believe you're just repeating someone else's Bannonized shit-flood of misinformation. Do you think we need somebody really good in charge to decide if The People are being responsible enough? More likely? I know that's not true. I had choices when my life was happening around me. Those instances happened, but I was the one who shaped my responses to them. Life might have limited my palette, but I chose which colors to use out of the ones available. Also, I have a huge family, including some very Blue relatives in Indiana. Half of those aren't religious at all. Soft outlook, that sounds like something you really believe in strongly but you won't be able to adequately define it for me. It's whatever negative aspect you want to assign to someone, right? Again, you're wrong. In Eisenhower's day, he taxed the upper end of earnings with a marginal rate to encourage investment instead of hoarding. One of the worst things about the economy in the US right now is that the tax rates favor sitting on large piles of liquid assets like cash. The uber-wealthy (and yes, they DO have lots of money, in cash) can sit like vultures and wait for desperate sellers. They can make short term investments that don't help the market or the economy, but divert billions from where they should be going. Sure, capitalism isn't "in charge", but that's because it's a system. It's one way to determine ownership in a democracy. It's a system that's designed to favor wealthy resource owners over workers who produce goods and services using those resources. Unfortunately, for the last several decades, those in charge have pushed more and more "favor" towards the wealthy, taking it from everyone less wealthy. I don't call myself one thing or another. I wear conservative clothes. I believe in the rule of law, but only if it supports the equality of all citizens before the law. I also believe access to clean water and air are human rights. Same with food and shelter. And if we started investing in The People and show them they matter, I believe a ton of problems will just cease to be. Labels are easy prejudices we often pay a heavy price to wear.

This fantasy probably makes you feel better, but it's not the way it works here. Your post/thread was reported and reviewed, and because I hadn't been an active participant, it fell to me to close the thread. My reaction was to the poor job you did trying to persuade the other members of your points versus the adamancy with which you made them. You have a horrible signal-to-noise ratio as a discussion participant. Your posts are very blog-like, as if you don't expect your science to be challenged by reasoning people. The rest of your comment made me yawn. I don't find you interesting, sorry. I wouldn't need to if you made sense or did anything to help me dispel my own ignorance, but you don't. So far, big PITA to the volunteer staff, nothing interesting to me as a member.

! Moderator Note The Sandbox is for testing LaTex and other visual techniques. Angry? About your baloney? It would have to be interesting first.

! Moderator Note Moved from The Sandbox to The Lounge.

#1 - The bigger outside coil should be pushing more refrigerant to the smaller indoor unit than it can handle, which makes me wonder if your brother has this right. The inside unit should be bigger, but if it's smaller by a ton there would be some problems. Some of these units give a range (it can push 2-3 tons), so have him double check the size. #2 - Carrier systems pushed R410A through the EPA, and it's caused compatibility issues. I'm told R410A operates under much higher pressure than R22, but as long as the system is tightly sealed you should be OK.

! Moderator Note Please don't EVER stink up this site with garbage like this again. You've shown us you can't force yourself to make sense or be civil, so you should contain your postings to mainstream science or nothing at all.

I know there's a lot to learn about the color of the metal, since different processes require different temperatures. I could probably watch a bladesmith in a video and get most of it, but colors are often different in videos under varying lights. Even veteran master smiths have trouble forging outside in sunlight. It just seems like I could learn more faster by apprenticing, in this particular case. I just saw an episode where this color-blind smith used table salt to tell him when his blade reached the proper temperature for quenching, since he has trouble seeing reds. All of the judges seemed like they'd never seen this done before, and were amazed. I get the feeling the learning under talented smiths is endless. "It will cut!"

I agree politics should be left out, and medical science should help us decide parameters. And in that case, I still believe the woman should have complete rights to the medical treatments she and her doctor approve. Which decisions about YOUR body are you willing to hand over to the government? Remember, if it's not a right, it can be taken away by partisan whim. Well, studies actually show that Democrats, overall since the end of WWII, have improved the economy by an average of 4.4% each year, while Republicans by the same standards improved the economy by 2.5% each year. National Bureau of Economic Research, https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w20324/w20324.pdf Sorry, but you built this argument on a faulty foundation, and I hope you can see that now. Why do we need a patriarchy? Why do you think it's important? If you're talking about natural order, the animal kingdom is full of matriarchies and all sorts of leadership combinations. Why would you pigeonhole modern humans as only fit if led by the male of the species? Be ready to face mountains of evidence that show how suited women are to leadership and innovation.

Didn't you just make a decision based on the situation and the skills of the people right around you (you obviously asked about employment)? That's horizontal morality. You didn't decide based on what you think their appearances makes them capable of. You didn't rank them based on "Asian woman in a wheelchair" and "6' 3" white man".

I've made knives, but I've never forged my own blade. That part seems like I'd need a teacher, a ton of materials, and a lot of trial and error. It looks like a whole bunch of fun, sweat, and tears.

Not sure about a spring, but I've seen blacksmiths use the spark test to check carbon content on Forged in Fire.

Gender pronouns come to mind. Vertically, I'm ranking your choice based on what I think it should be, horizontally I find out your preferences because our encounters are more productive when you're comfortable.

! Moderator Note Copy from your original Word doc, drawings and all, then Paste it here. Do everyone a favor and Paste two or three pages at a time, so comments can be made before we move on to the next. There's a LOT to comment on.

This shows how you're thinking, assigning an above/below hierarchy instead of looking at efficacy and impact on those around you. It's more akin to choosing the tools you work with for specific parts of your job. A hammer isn't a ranked choice if you're trying to calibrate gas mixtures on a sensitive machine, it's just not right at all. The hammer isn't a poor tool, it's simply not a choice in this instance. Trapped in an elevator with five other people and no outside communication, some folks make vertical judgements about how to organize their rescue. They might immediately dismiss the idea that women could help beyond screaming for help. They might think a foreigner knows nothing about this country's elevators. They might consider anyone in a wheelchair to be useless in this situation. They probably look for whoever among the six is the strongest. Horizontal thinkers in the same situation might get everyone's ideas and input, and assess the situation based on that. They might get rescued by an idea the foreigner had, or by having a smaller woman stand on the arms of a wheelchair to reach the escape hatch in the roof. It seems to me that this way of approaching problems has a higher degree of correctly valuing the people involved. There are situations where vertical ranking is appropriate, but I think it's being applied incorrectly when used as a general rule. I think it does get me somewhere to avoid vertical ranking. And again, horizontal morality is absolutely NOT about feeling superior to others. Horizontal morality is saying nobody is better than anybody else, we all just make choices based on who's around us in the situation we find ourselves in. My religious aunt thinks sitting naked in a hot tub is immoral, period, every time, all the time. I think it depends on who's with me, if anyone. That vertical, ranked thinking is hard to get away from, isn't it?! Actually, the way horizontal morality works is that seeing you loving your family shows me how I should interact with you. I immediately know some behavior choices that would be appropriate, and some that would be inappropriate. I don't have to judge the way you love your family, I just have to smile, use appropriate language around your spouse and kids, respect that you're here with them, and let you all find your own joys with each other. My interaction with you and your family is then free to change depending on circumstances, and isn't rooted in some vertical hierarchy that can't change and often makes incorrect objective judgements.

I'm quoting this to increase the odds it gets read. Greg A, when we ask someone to support their ideas somewhat as rigorously as mainstream science does, it's so we're not wasting our time discussing unphysical/wishful/mistaken explanations for various phenomena. If you can't support an idea with at least some evidence (certainly more than your repeated insistence), then we reasonably prefer the mainstream explanation that DO have mountains of such evidence. We would love to examine the evidence that drives your trust in your belief, but if you can't give us any, we'll stick with what we know works. I hope that makes sense to you. It's not censorship, it's setting standards.

Just to clarify, do you mean matriarchs and patriarchs, or are you talking just about women who support your patriarchy?

I wonder if this is a mis-read of the latest trend of meals with just a handful of ingredients. That's done for convenience and simplicity, NOT for nutrition.

That's twice you misspelled "Putin".

! Moderator Note MavricheAdrian, you need to copy whatever you want us to look at (COPY), and then paste it here on the forum (PASTE). The members don't want to have to open documents or visit links they don't trust, so it's a rule we have. We've been all over this before, like three times. Can you do whatever you did before (perhaps read the whole thread again). It makes it much easier to address specific sections if it's posted HERE.

So you think white males are discriminated against under the law?! Again, I'm going to look at some studies that have actual numbers so you can stop waving your hands. Did you know that, if you take a sample of 100,000 white people in the US, 450 of them are in prison? A sample of 100,000 indigenous people (native American or Alaskan native) shows that 1291 are in prison. Out of 100,000 black people, 2306 are in prison. Source: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/graphs/raceinc.html?gclid=CjwKCAjw3K2XBhAzEiwAmmgrAqX1ByZOv00NNSKl-1_yiUB7xdgvJ1rfsxrzRPuaZHsns98Bq0lWnBoCz0oQAvD_BwE Yeah, the US has nothing like that kind of Left. Remember, liberals in the US like democracy. Since the civil war was all about kidnapping and enslaving black humans, are you in favor of bringing it back? Do you feel that the kidnap and enslavement of black people was justified by your Right? Voting age is certainly open for interpretation, but what's the deal with "not encouraged"? That sounds a LOT like you think some people aren't worthy to vote. Is that true? What?! I'm 65 this year, I've been shaping my worldview my whole life. I think about it with every thought. I don't view others as above or below me. We're all living side by side, we're all stronger side by side, and I think the uber wealthy have spent a LOT of money making sure you stay uneducated, uninformed, and pointing the finger at everybody but THEM. I've seen wages decouple from productivity, forcing average people to work two jobs to make ends meet. I've watched medical insurance go from being actuarial based and affordable to this horrorshow worldwide laughingstock we call managed healthcare. I was born an Eisenhower Republican, and I first voted after the Nixon years. I embraced the Democrats until Bernie Sanders came along, and now I'm an Independent. I don't know why you think you know my life well enough to presume what I think, but so far you've been wrong on every count. Perhaps you should read what I write, and reason it out for yourself? You have a great many prejudices, my friend. So maybe you aren't a Christian Nationalist? What form of government would you prefer to democracy, and why? Thanks very much for the replies btw, this feels much more like a good-faith discussion. I look forward to more substance and meaningfulness.

Huh, that's interesting, because the most recent studies show that when welfare is removed (for example, when an 18-year-old no longer gets Social Security supplements from a parent on SS), crime goes up. Source: https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/BFI_WP_2022-28.pdf Employment can be with a private company that pays a fraction of the worth of a good or service to its workers, or it can be through social cooperatives where each worker is paid closer to the actual value, and the owner is compensated fairly for providing resources. Employment can also be through the state, where goods and services are distributed and performed to all who want to deal. In this case, the emphasis is on making sure people have good products and services, and no emphasis is placed on falsely marking up the value as profit. Capitalism, socialism, and communism ALL use employment, so your distinctions need to be further defined.

No they don't, but men historically have ignored their part in procreation and leave it all to women. One of the problems I have with your stance is that you consider an unborn fetus to be a citizen that needs protecting, but you won't let me claim it on my taxes until it's born, and you won't give it any other protections citizens get, like the right to vote. You give more worth to a glob of cells than you do to a living woman. You insist that a heartbeat is life to an embryo, but when I'm old and dying you move the goalposts and insist it's the cessation of my brain activity that signals death. Why won't you even consider abortions before six weeks, before there's brain activity? Obviously, you aren't a small-government conservative who believes the government should intrude in citizen's lives as little as possible. I don't see how you could believe that AND believe that the government should step in to protect citizens from themselves. Do you approve of fascism as a mechanism for exercising this government protection? Kick in their doors if they don't approve of what you're doing?

Without insurance? That would be great, wouldn't it? Liberals think we already are wealthy enough to afford medical insurance, as long as it's universal and supported by everyone. I want you to have it, because your health matters to all of us.

This would be a good stance to flesh out an argument from, so we understand why you feel the way you do. Exactly why is "the Left" society's #1 enemy? What specifically have they done to earn them this distinction? I'm looking for clear evidence, not FOX News talking points. It's easy to say "liberals are the root of all evil" but it doesn't tell me why you think that way. Does that make sense? Give me specific examples of why you hate liberals and feel like they're the enemy of humankind.