iNow

Now seems like as good a time as any to repeat this post from the last time we spoke of this nomination: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/126564-the-next-supreme-court-judge/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-1198820 Facts which add this whole thing to the “give me a break” category for me: Dwight Eisenhower expressly sought to appoint a Catholic to the seat of retiring Justice Sherman Minton in 1956 and then named William Brennan (yep, a Catholic) to the bench. Recordings from Lyndon Johnson show he deliberately chose to make history with the appointment of the first Black justice and later nominated Thurgood Marshall. Ronald Reagan, October 14, 1980. He said “one of the first Supreme Court vacancies in my administration will be filled” by a woman. Reagan also chose Antonin Scalia for the court specifically because he was “of Italian extraction” as confirmed by several of his direct staff. In 1991, George H.W. Bush pledged to replace retiring Justice Marshall with another Black jurist and later nominated Clarence Thomas (yep, a black man just like he said). Donald Trump, September 19, 2020 (a day after Justice Ginsburg died). Donald Trump declared he would limit his search for her replacement to ONLY female candidates. "It will be a woman … we have numerous women on the list." Stop listening to the shit stirrers and propagandists.

If you’re not intentionally misrepresenting me, then it’s possible this relates to reading comprehension challenges (as I didn’t do that). Don’t worry. You’ve succeeded in this. I’m sorry to hear that, but (for now) nobody is saying you aren’t welcome. No need to be melodramatic. This community, like all others, has a culture or a gestalt and some of the feedback you’ve received is intended to help clarify for you what that is. Maybe you’d prefer being ignored?

I reject your premise, as well as your font choice.

It also involves hijacking threads to take them off-topic, much like you’re doing here.

The very best jokes are always those we have to explain and clarify that it was a joke

You assume no invasion would happen if surrender came first. You have a valid opinion there, but as repeatedly explained to you already, you cannot validly assert it as fact.

Is that why Russia with a targeted ballistic missile strike blew up a train station full of innocent women and children trying to flee today? There were 4,000 people on that platform. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/world/russia-denies-responsibility-for-missile-that-killed-dozens-of-ukrainians-at-train-station

It sure sounds like Serge's "Upstart" is a small business trying to gain notice from the Russian cyber disinformation army and their oligarchic funders. Propaganda for profit, as it were.

Nobody cares. You’re off-topic, and seemingly taking pleasure in posting incomprehensibly. Your original comment added nothing of value to the thread. It’s past time for this tangent to terminate.

Autocorrect murder of facetious

He can announce whatever silly damned thing he wants, but as soon as he attempts to move against a NATO ally or enter NATO territory, the NATO members would respond together in retaliation. Strength comes in numbers, not hollow words.

Well, it's not a single query then end program, if that's what you're asking? It's a dynamic pattern recognition search, with fuzzy matches and the whole 9-yards

Depends on who you ask.

Of course, but irrelevant. It's as if my town is currently flooding during a massive hurricane, we're trying to evacuate my family and prevent my children from drowning, but instead of talking about sending boats and helicopters and life vests, you're choosing to discuss the implementation of new nuclear power plants 15 years down the line to mitigate climate change. Related, but quite obviously separate. The US punished the people responsible and removed them QUICKLY from the ranks. This is a false equivalence on nearly all fronts.

Weird. Misleading title then: Is it rational (for an athiest) to believe in religion?

Religion obviously exists. No belief required.

Maybe a better question is for how much longer before they’re expelled

Sure, but long term projects don’t solve immediate term urgencies

IMO, the answer here will be similar to the answer "where / what is the seat of consciousness?" While photons come in through the retina and stimulate receptor cells, and while those receptor cells send impulses back to the occipital lobe via the optic nerves, the actual concept of "sight" is extraordinarily complex once those signals arrive. There's a bit of a "Fourier analysis" happening unconsciously where the different signal strengths and locations are first sorted and that gives a baseline of data for interpretation, and it's this interpretation part after signals arrive where things get interesting. The parts of our brain associated with memory are sort of queried first... "Have I seen this before? Do I have an existing category bucket into which I can fit this?" The process of recognition saves energy from other brain areas. If we don't recognize it, we then engage the narration and creative parts of our brain... "I've seen something similar to this, but this is clearly different. Could it be X, could it by Y, or is this entirely different and may it's Z?" This all happens faster than the blink of an eye, until a signal is sent to our higher cortical areas and we become aware of it. This awareness is then "colored" by our mental state... are we tired? are we sad? are we angry? are we blissful? Those deeper underlying feelings all shade what we see in the conscious parts of our mind... and it's this conscious part of the mind that one might equate with a "mind's eye." It's just not a single place like a gas station on the corner of two streets. It's instead a town, or a neighborhood, a rhetorical symphony where no single instrument or note makes the music, but all together matter for the end experience being explored.

You can control your response to those urges, but not the urges themselves /pedantic /topic-derail

Correct

We wouldn't be lobbing missiles at Mexican hospitals, rolling tanks against Mexican villages and destroying the residential buildings of non-combatants while people were still inside, having our soldiers rape Mexican women with hands bound in zip ties, nor would we be murdering them and leaving their bodies and the bodies of their children to rot in the streets.

I'd rather imagine an internet where people don't make such ridiculous and false claims.

I also liked todays APOD. The ripples in our magnetosphere from the solar eruption made it an especially cool shot.

Dufuq? I’m super curious to learn about what On second thought… I don’t take you seriously enough to care.