MigL

It would be nice to have women participating in this discussion to get their take on the matter. Especially any women in professional competitive sports. Unfortunately, they don't seem to frequent science forums ( any lurkers please speak up ). As for my opinions, I can only think of two obvious examples where they may have; in weightlifting and swimming, so not a particularly big issue at the moment. However, as it becomes more accepted ( there is still a degree of pushback from the public ) I can see more problems cropping up, and it would be wise if sporting bodies got ahead of these potential problems, keeping in mind that the public is the final arbitrer as it is spectator driven. If the public perceives the situation as unfair, they stop watching, and that could diminish, or even,end some women's sports.

I only jumped back in this thread because I did not like the way Beecee was getting treated. I would like to see trans kids participate in recreational sports and be accepted. I also want to see them participate professionally, but balk at the idea of setting cis women's participation back 100 years; that was my original objection. I would think you've had your ass kicked by women quite a few times 😄 .

Why, though... if they meet ALL other criteria and show the same prowess on those other metrics? Well for ditch digging it'smoot, because even though I may have that opinion, there are laws that prevent that kind of discrimination ( and I am a law abiding citizen ). As for competitive spectator sports, it is market driven. IOW, if nobody wants to watch, you have no expectation of equal pay, or even participation.

You''re gonna have to explain that one better, because in this thread you are opposing those who claim that urinary/sexual plumbing has nothing to do with performance, while in the other, you did not raise any such objections to those who did. You should strive to be more consistant. Would you mind if I quoted that next time the shoe is on the other foot, and some of us are the recipients of nasty labelling, direct or implied ?

Or maybe, you just want to beat up on women 🙂 .

The legislation of recreational sports for kids seems to be a problem with your elected officials; choose better Governments, and when you do, make sure they enact proper/appropriate laws. As for professional/hi-level sports, you and others are forgetting that these are largely spectator events, and people will choose to see what they want to watch. IOW if the national women's soccer team does not draw any spectators, or TV rights ( although that is certainly not the case ), they should have no claims for equal pay ( actually for the US, the men should be paid less, as they are the lesser draw ) And why do you claim thatwhen your, or a viewpoint you supported, is contradicted, and others point it out, that it's a personal attack ? My apologies if you wern't one of the ones who claimed J Biden had every right to call for a 'black woman' SCJ, after years of old white males, but you did not raise any objections in that case as you are in this one. In the case of skills, such as ability to interpret the Constitution or ride a horse,gender need not, and should not, be considered, but in the case of physical prowess, like ditch digging or Am. football at a professional level, my opinion ( for what it's worth ) is that gender should remain a consideration. ( IIRC, women's football was not much of a spectator/TV draw, even when the ladies were playing in lingere )

I chuckled upon reading this ... That would have been good advice to give J Biden when making his Supreme Court selection criteria announcement. Oh wait ... you were all for selection based on how people urinate in that case. And even the color of their genitals.

INow has often said we agree on 99%, and disagree on 1%, yet we are very critical of each other's opinions; sometimes much more so than we are of extreme 'right' opinions. This came to mind ... And I like Elton John.

Many participants in this thread have repeated themselves, as is likely to happen after 40 odd pages; to single out one person as repetitive is hypocritical. And some in this, and similar threads, have been called way worse than 'Social Justice Warrior', or 'PC Brigade'. Just sayin'.

TThis is becoming sad, shameful and ridiculous. I guess Americans have decided they would rather protect their 2nd Amendment rights than their kid's lives.

Hypersonic is a classification for speed in the atmosphere, and usually means >M5, or 5 times the speed of sound in air at that density. There were certainly rockets which exceeded this speed previous to hypersonic missiles, but they mostly did so in very rarefied ( hi altitude ) atmosphere, or what is considered space. The main problem is having enough fuel, or burning it slowly enough, to be able to accelerate to M5, in a small enough package. But for big rockets the technology has been available since the end of WW2.

No way ! Then someone sees your history and you get accused of looking at weird porn. ( Just kidding 😄 )

At this level your idea is certainly workable, and, as far as I know, is common practice in most developed countries. I have to ask, why is the arguably most developed country in the world, the US, legislating recreational sports at the middle/hi school level ? Why don't they concentrate on implementing proper laws, for important issues, so that the Supreme Court doesn't have to ? Why is your bloated Government so disfunctional ? ( sorry for veering wildly off-topic )

I did say not specifically you, Peterkin. There have been others in this discussion. The ruling lineage was once Anglo-Saxon. The present lineage is actually German, of the houses of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. That all changed to 'Windsor' in 1917, because of anti-German sentiment. ( I do know a little history ) No. I believe we were both part of the previous discussion concerning J Peterson's views, some of which I consider valid. Some of his other views ... well ... lets just say he has found his niche, and is milking it for all the profit he can.

Ahhh, but you left out the most important part, Beecee ...

The classification methods for nuclear incidents are based on thenumber of people evacuated, so while TMI was classified as a 5 and Fukushima also initially a 5, because of the earthquake/tsunami contributions more people were evacuated, and it became a 7 like Chernobyl. . Chernobyl was only a 7 since the Russians were reluctant to release information about the incident, and did not want to suggest the severity by massive evacuations. Of the three Chernobyl released the most radiation/contamination, but I think that was even less than the explosion at the Mayak facility in 1957, where only 10000 people were evacuated ( it was classified ). Three Mile Island was shut down and necessitated clean up for a couple of years, and Fukushima had the tsunami to contend with, that shut down its back up power to the cooling pumps, but Chernobyl will be encased in concrete for thousands of years.

Cute. But that was originally brought up because Stringy said the difference between 'Anglo-Saxon' and 'Native American' is that one is ancient/extinct while the other is current. And our buddy, Pierre, did not claim to be Anglo-Saxon, but use the Anglo-Saxon language. Would you have objected if he had said he used 'the King's English' ? There hasn't been a King since Feb 6/52. Why not just admit that P Poilievre is a Conservative, a 'weasel', and not very likeable ( and on a podcast with J peterson ), so some of you naturally assume he is also a racist, and hear everything he says in that context ? Almost 'prejudicial', isn't it ?

Unlike Eise ( and some others who have passed through ), I know very little, if any, Philosophy, but I like to pretend I know some science, and I'm very appreciative of the insights Eise has shared with us. The way I see it ( IOW, opinion, so I could be totally out to lunch ) both Philosophy and Physics try to answer fundamental questtions about the behaviour of nature. Physics asks questions whose answers can be tested, while Philosophy asks questions with untestable answers. At some point, before testing methodology is devised, or possible, for a Physics questiion, it is in effect, a Philosophy question. All Physics started off as Philosophy, and while the realm of Physics seems to expands as we are able to test what used to be Philosophical questions, it seem that the Philosophical realm shrinks. But not to worry, every question that has a testable answer gives rise to many more questions whose answer is yet untestable. That would make Philosophy essential for Physicists as it gives them insight into developing testable answers.

I didn't say he's not a jackass, and I certainly wouldn't vote for him. I said jumping to conclusions about his character and motives based on superficial information is the very definition of what some are accusing him of. So who are all these guys ? Category:Extinct Native American tribes - Wikipedia And is the heading of the Wiki article racist ?

Congratulations on your new Labor Government Beecee. i understand you helped out canvassing and spreading the word. I hope you will still criticise any mistakes they make. How else will they learn to do better yet.

This is what a quick search shows for deSitter precession "The geodetic effect (also known as geodetic precession, de Sitter precession or de Sitter effect) represents the effect of the curvature of spacetime, predicted by general relativity, on a vector carried along with an orbiting body. For example, the vector could be the angular momentum of a gyroscope orbiting the Earth, as carried out by the Gravity Probe B experiment. The geodetic effect was first predicted by Willem de Sitter in 1916, who provided relativistic corrections to the Earth–Moon system's motion. De Sitter's work was extended in 1918 by Jan Schouten and in 1920 by Adriaan Fokker.[1] It can also be applied to a particular secular precession of astronomical orbits, equivalent to the rotation of the Laplace–Runge–Lenz vector.[2] The term geodetic effect has two slightly different meanings as the moving body may be spinning or non-spinning. Non-spinning bodies move in geodesics, whereas spinning bodies move in slightly different orbits.[3]From The difference between de Sitter precession and Lense–Thirring precession (frame dragging) is that the de Sitter effect is due simply to the presence of a central mass, whereas Lense–Thirring precession is due to the rotation of the central mass. The total precession is calculated by combining the de Sitter precession with the Lense–Thirring precession." From Geodetic effect - Wikipedia So even if Mercury's orbital precession is not deSitter precession, it should still exibit some form of deSitter precession in the deeply curved Solar gravity well.

Other than countries like Germany, that consider nuclear power bad and fossil fuels good ( green anyway ), I think we've only had Chernobyl as a major incident. Three Mile Island and Fukushima both reacted the way they were supposed to. I would like to see proceeds from carbon/gasoline taxes, and subsidies given to big oil used for research into Fusion reactors, and not go into general coffers to be used for politicians' pet projects/re-election bribes, as Fusion is the ultimate, and safest, goal.

Now don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with 'progressivism' and the betterment of the human condition. The problems are in how we go about implementing the 'betterment', and while I don't need to point out the ways in which most Republicans go about it the wrong way because everyone is aware of it, trying to point out the ways Democrats are going about it wrong immediately brings out incriminations of racism. Take this perfectly valid point Yet 20 years ago, the common opinion amongst so-called progressives was that non-race blind analysis of things like crime, family abandonment, employment, and other factors which most consider nimportant for the 'health' of a society, were considered discriminatory. Maybe these statistics were being used for the wrong reasons, but in the long run, they would have identifiedthe root causes of the resultant conditions. I am not prepard to excuse Republicans for their many wrong-doings, but I will also not excuse Democrats ( who label themselves 'progressives' ) for their few, simply because they are the better choice. So the difference being an older culture versus a contemporary one ? But still a culture nonetheless. ( you have really long arms to reach that far 🙂 ) But it's much asier to simply jump to conclusions and throw out 'racist' accusations. Not saying you specifically did, but many find it easier to believe the worst about people based on superficial information. ( the very definition of bigotry and prejudice )

Is the precession of Mercury's orbit an example of deSitter precession, or geodetic effect, as it involves a spinning, orbiting body ?

You mean like 'indigenous' or 'native North American' ?