iNow

She’s struggling to get men to vote for her and endorsements from Taylor Swift won’t help that gap. https://www.npr.org/2024/09/10/nx-s1-5106660/election-poll-harris-trump-debate

Yeah, but in context of modern media diets being consumed by the the MAGA cult, Fox News is considered downright woke. Another liberal rag with a liberal woke agenda. RINOs. Fox News according to the faithful is equivalent to MSNBC now.

Boom What the last debate did to Joe Biden, tonight’s debate did to Trump. She picked up voters. He convinced more of his to stay home.

What she did do is alienate herself from the republican base that liked her for being willing to speak truth about Trump. She basically told her own supporters to go to hell, all while trumps supporters will never forgive her for being against him in the first place. While those risks are clearly present in todays heated political environment, I seriously doubt that former President Bush based his decision on fears over his personal safety. In fact, I doubt it to the point of finding it absurd.

Where do bad rainbows go? 🌈 To prism. It’s a light sentence, but gives them time to reflect. 💡🪞

Another hard habit to break is apparently political self-interest, specifically looking at how Nikki Haley has become so supportive of Trump. She is on-deck and ready to campaign for him and despite presenting herself as a strong person with principles and backbone has instead chosen to bend the knee and kiss the ring. Am more frustrated with her than GWB, but he certainly needs to heed John Stuart Mill: “Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion. Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed.”

Don't want to derail the thread, Luc, but do want to thank you for using the quote function more effectively... selecting the text to which you're specifically responding, replying, then selecting the next section for the next response. It makes a huge difference in the ability to follow the discussion, so genuine massive kudos there. Very much appreciated

I said nothing about mathematical relationships. I intentionally did not mention that.

He’s being weak and uncourageous. Saying he’s “too old for presidential politics” instead of doing the hard thing and voting for Harris on principle over party.

I think you’d have been better served to select a different character or made one up, perhaps a friend of Einsteins cousin who wasn’t as well studied or known

I just found it odd, that’s all. Then was reacting to your newsflash comment. Was thinking “yeah, no shit. Opinions on the internet. Gee golly. Super insightful.” No worries, though. Can move along.

Thanks, professor. So glad you’re here to pass along these gems of wisdom I’m obviously new to this whole Internet forum thing and welcome your continued guidance.

Yes. Science takes measurements. Of light. Of sound. Of pressure. Of temperature. Of reaction times. Of satellites and planetary orbits. Of the path a baseball will take given a specific air resistance, gravitational intensity, and vector. These measurements and the countless many others are ALL objective. Of course objectivity exists in science, in much the same way that of course bias exists in your interpretation of it.

It’s extremely odd to me that you would use evil as a descriptor given how mere minutes before making this post you said this about that word in another thread: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/134580-defining-evil/?do=findComment&comment=1274803

Your gregarious approach is a huge part of the problem, though. As I’ve pointed out previously, you’ve begun with a preferred conclusion then cherry-pick individual narratives which support it. You then further ignore larger understandings which suggest your idea may not have merit. Dimreepr isn’t wrong by suggesting it’s akin to religion. With LQG, however, researchers have said, here’s one possible set of math which may explain what we see, they then seek evidence which supports or refutes the hypothesis. They start with the data and the let it decide the conclusion. That’s different from you starting with the conclusion first. In the example you shared, the scientists found LQG is unlikely to be true, showed why, and maturely said “well, so much for that… time to move on.” Beyond that, there’s an element of falsifiability and having data available to objectively measure which isn’t the same across both topics. We can take measurements of how gravity and the cosmos behave and see how the model aligns with that. Tell me then… How are you similarly measuring ant intelligence without a bunch of assumptions and subjectivity? Are they taking online ant IQ tests? I don’t dismiss that colonies of ants display organized behavior that can be described as intelligent, but that’s because I have a loose definition of intelligence which allows for it. It’s treated differently bc one question is akin to asking whether 2+2=4 whereas your question is akin to asking how happy the color purple is. The questions are in different categories.

While I’m sorry to see LQG further minimized as an idea, I appreciate the threads reference to what is IMO the best Beatles album 🎶 (homonym jokes work better verbally than in text 😂)

Saw that. Not exactly a RINO. Them doing this provides a bit of a permission structure for others to do the same… folks maybe on the fence, or simply planning not to vote (as opposed to actively voting for Harris). Lots of generals and high ranking folks in the military and intelligence community may see this as freeing their hands to do the same. I’ve got more than my fair share of disagreements and issues with the Cheney family, but on this topic specifically I applaud their patriotism and bravery and strength of character.

That’s not how this works. Chance alone using a coin flip would be exactly as good as him about 3x out of every 100 tries. Get a couple thousand people flipping coins and something like 15% of them would have equally good predictions. Forgive me, but I find his prediction “abilities” far less impressive than you do. He’s capitalizing on people who are bad at statistics.

Thanks for sharing such an insightful post, GPT.

Nerd 🤓 Not really

This is what’s known in the industry as “a distinction without a difference.”

Using AI technology for the power of good, a former Google employee made all of the 900 some odd pages of Project 2025 searchable and filterable by topic area. Not all heroes wear capes. https://www.25and.me/?topics=

He already knows

Even if the model is garbage and is based on the number of eyes on a potato spud or on how many ears of corn Tonya can fit into a record player box, it STILL has a 50/50 chance of being correct

See also (your thread):