dedo

If the agenda is science, can you show where? Specifically: Science is defined as the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of natural phenomena. I don't consider pushing an agenda, talking down to people, or distorting facts to be science. Teaching the known facts is a small part of science but the important part is to explain the natural world through investigation. So you have remarked on pathology in Australia. I submit that the same kind of pathology brought the right wing to power in the US. Who does it more, or who is worse, is tribal arguing that may or may not even qualify as debate. So you have noted a natural phenomenon and have even brought in a moral / spiritual measure for that behavior as evil. So do you have an idea or an opinion for the theoretical explanation for the behavior pathology you noted in Australia, or any similar pathology? If you are able to theorize that, then you have done actual science especially if you can combine your hypothesis with anyone else's. Personally have not seen it occur on the internet, so am curious what it takes to enable that, meaning real science, or investigating the unknown, to occur on the internet where the other techniques of science (experimentation, observation etc.) can't be used & all you really can do is to combine data toward some goal. So if you have a theory of this behavior pathology you observed, let us know.

Just put DEI on your post, or on your mirror, reread it periodically, & maybe you will start to understand the results of the election. Had I known more people like yourself, I might have voted for Maga too. However, congratulations, your POV & deity wannabe desire to bully others, that people like you stamped all over Dem policies including DEI, drove anyone near the middle right into the Rep voting booth

Pass on the proctoring. What DEI should mean is what I described in the way we did it. What I believe it actually became, was it got morphed into part of the political ideology of the Democratic Party enraging voters & played a major role in getting the current administration elected. Look at who ran LA. Do you really believe those people were hired on merit? The article I linked to also describes the flaws. My proctoring, I mean the ideology of derision against the current administration is celebrated, and anyone not goose stepping to that faces interrogation, straw man arguments & repeated tribal bias. So pass on answering more questions until, you state what you believe / support, or phrase a problem to solve. It is almost impossible to convince a tribe that their ideology is flawed, but there are examples of the most extreme ideologies cooperating to solve a hard problem. So if you like the latter, will try to add something. If you want to decline to answer anything & just proctor, hard pass as convincing you of anything is impossible. The desire to proctor / be a deity is part of the pathology infecting the world from my POV. It drives people like Putin to invade, & fuels the issues DEI was originally planned to resist like discrimination. But that is outside the scope of this thread. I have studied it for decades.

Maybe you could try explaining exactly what you are for as we seem to be talking past each other. I believe I gave 2 huge examples to support DEI failure including the LA fires, & the election of the current administration. Here is one more of a more general analysis of it's poor implementation: https://eric-sandosham.medium.com/the-problem-with-dei-cb81d1053543 I believe I likely support and have practiced DEI, the way it should work likely more than anyone here meaning hiring totally done on merit, without regard to race or sexual preference. Furthermore, what is practiced here the majority of the time, meaning talking down to people was rare, and was punished if it was a chronic problem. Saw two highly competent people hounded into forced retirement for that, one shown the door the next day after derision to staff on a night shift. In our work place a simple question from anyone, even the person that mopped the floor, was answered on the spot, with respect. That is a foreign concept for many if not most people. Thus, if you don't believe I supplied enough evidence for poor DEI implementation, say what you do believe. Personally, I don't think supplying even 100 examples matters to people with tribal agendas. Your agenda & the agenda of most here, is the Democratic Party. Mine, as an independent, is to solve problems & I believe the last admin. did a good job in difficult circumstances. So say what you believe, & maybe I will agree with you. Otherwise, I've said enough here & more examples won't matter. One lady on X was trying to argue a subject with me she clearly never practiced or even watched a single event, yet she just had a tribal narrative she wanted to push. More examples or evidence in that situation won't change POV. What might work, is to make the subject "how can this problem be solved", not who is right and who is wrong.

Then be clearer on what "specifics" you want. Answer: Review initial post about LA govt. hiring related to recent fires, salaries paid etc. Rep allegations all over the place for the same, including pro-crime prosecutors, but personally don't have time to track down all of them. Cannot help you if you cannot grasp my hypothesis of why DEI was done, because the Democrats correctly sensed a problem, and incorrectly attributed it to racism to be solved by DEI. Most genocides are the same race. Thus, analysis of the problem by Dems, and the solution was utterly lacking in scholarship, and driven by a political agenda. Since you sound like a Dem supporter, then the greatest harm is if this admin. / Maga, turns out to be as bad as you believe, because DEI got it elected causing Dems to force policies on US that millions considered to be abhorrent. And so just as the Weimar was replace by Nazis, Dems replaced by Maga. We can only hope this is not a repeat of history.

There is a lot of evidence that "something is wrong", and in some cases, even without evidence, intuition can sense it. Evidentiary examples include the setting of the Doomsday Clock, nuclear threats pouring out of Russia, conflicts in Ukraine & Gaza with scores of people justifying genocidal actors in these conflicts including those in the general public with no personal affiliation to a side. Getting into "what is wrong" crosses into another thread in politics meaning "War is a Disease". There is evidence in the international relations literature, almost ignored, that there is a cumulative process behind group on group conflict called the power law data, or Richardson's Law. This means the world is infected with a cumulative disease, like coronary disease, and the above examples are like angina, warning of a system approaching explosion. Power law systems are often modeled with a sandpile computer model. Sand pours onto the sandpile until avalanches (wars) occur that are small and frequent, or rare and huge. This means that the longer the period of relative peace, the worse will be the next global war. The world is in one of the most peaceful periods in history since the end of WWII, maybe the most peaceful period in history. This means the next global war will be the worst war in history. The public can sense it coming, in my opinion. So the liberals, correctly sensed danger coming, but came up with DEI as the answer. That would be like a politician trying to solve an extremely complex problem like guiding a catheter through the heart to prevent a heart attack. A problem this hard, that defied the totality of world scholars for generations, does not get solved by a small group of politicians. It requires a Manhattan project level of input.

Don't know for sure. As I said, what got my attention may not get yours. My guess is it was the utter bizarreness of the situation. I worked where the SHTF was expected, but this was so unusual it was one of those "once in your life if you're unlucky situations". Maybe that is why it made an impression. The near death experiences I believe I was saved from were the same variety. I used to blow off a friend's concern about sharks, until I got double bumped at 50 degrees (white shark). That 75 meters of praying, paddling, + the bizarre situation got my attention. Maybe you are not afraid of sharks. Who knows.

I hadn't thought of that until you mentioned it, but it reminded me of a time we were in DC seeing monuments & there was a possibility of rain that did not occur. So I wore a long black raincoat on what turned out to be a sunny day, & a cop on a horse road up to ask us questions. At first I thought he was concerned about weapons, but maybe he was concerned I would cause it to rain. Good thinking. Will consider an umbrella the next time the plants are too dry.

I don't, in a way that could convince someone else. It convinced me. My hypothesis is God wants to meet each person where we are. So what works for me, may have little meaning for you. Maybe for you, finding a new quantum theory would do it.

Not all religious invent conflicts between belief and science. I never did. In fact science is part of what lead me to religion from intense curiosity which fuels science. So I wanted to see if God was "real" by seeking God. Many people also seek religion from a personal need. That can include fear or hardship & religion helps them get through it. Studies on soldiers in combat (according to Google AI) show that soldiers who have experienced combat are more likely to practice religion. People who seek religion & have an experience they attribute to the Divine, often strengthen their faith. If you believe the Divine saved your life, that is something you never forget. I had a couple of those. Never was a soldier, but the science I studied was tested every day. We expected to have minutes or even seconds to resolve a situation weekly & on a bad day, more than once. That type of situation leads people to do whatever is necessary, anything & everything, from extreme education and training, to praying. Once I saw a looming catastrophe resolve so fast with one prayer at the end of a 12h shift, I included that in my report to the relief. The next morning when I came back on & asked if it unraveled again & the SHTF, the night guy said "no your prayer worked". Those kinds of experiences outweigh a whole mountain range of argument from anyone regardless of credentials, who spout philosophy like "confirmation bias", but who have never walked on one of those life and death roads themselves.

I think the motivation behind DEI was originally good, meaning people sensed "something is wrong" & tried to fix it. However, the solution of DEI & how it was implemented likely accomplished little & may have made things worse because it was not well researched. DEI would be like someone seeing "something is wrong" with a relative with angina, so the person stays at the Holiday Inn & prescribes supplements, instead of sending his relative to a cardiologist. Republicans like to claim DEI was just used to advance liberal ideology and cronyism. Look at the people in charge of the LA govt. & the salaries they gave each other & see an example of what Rep complain about. Of course Rep could have an even worse tribalism that DEI helped bring to power. Historically, when one party has a toxic tribal agenda, the public can choose an even worse tribe as a result. So the Weimar was replaced with the Nazis.

A bar fight becomes a war when it becomes one small influence, combined with many others, that turns someone who might have otherwise been normal into a killer. Of course the person would have to rise to a political position where he could act on his predisposition. Yes, a pacifist or even a priest can accumulate aggression. A nun has been convicted of assisting genocide in African genocides. No one is immune.

Don't know if this administration will cripple science, or not. The OP's original claim if still in effect, is alarming. This video discusses the opposite view with Rand Paul, who I rarely agree with, discusses RFK nomination. There is a tribalism that can creep into any group including science and medicine such that internal change becomes difficult if not impossible. So will this admin. including RFK just create a disaster, or will they at least in some isolated cases provide stimulus for reform. Anyone's guess. However, the point RP makes about bias in science is true. Recently watched a YT video from an epidemiologist scholar who claims 500 scientific publications which is amazing. When I listened to this guy discuss the pandemic he attacked everything, all best practices, with some of "his version" of science. I felt like I was listening to a FOX News pundit. Then he said that scholars like himself, that understand literature (but have never treated a single covid patient) should be the ones to make policy. Think about that. Someone who believes a person who reads a lot, but never did something even once, should be in charge of those who both read and do. In my book it is pathology & alerts us that something is wrong. Will this admin. make some progress or make it worse? We shall see.

Not sure if this helps with your ? but here goes: It might be more than politics, but a poorly understood psychopathology in society that can infect groups, including religions, that leads to tribalism or an "us & them" mindset, that helps fuel human conflict & impairs "love for others" which is supposed to mean "will the best for another". Just examine rhetoric in people that have strong group / tribal identity, & it is common to see people overlook almost any moral violation in their tribe. Achieving the ability to "will the best for others", especially other groups, that Christianity exhorts is a life long endeavor. Religions may have an important part to play in it though, especially if accompanied by science. For example, religious visions during WWI in Fatima, Portugal, predicted future world wars that could be prevented or mitigated if enough Catholic Christians exercised "love one another" by saying certain prayers in reparation for the world. Sadly few do those prayers. Maybe if religions understood scientifically, the peril the world is in, they would make more of an effort to "love one another", at least for their own survival. So whatever your belief system, survival of humanity may depend on progress in that arena, meaning "love one another" specifically related to overcoming group on group conflict. The Fermi paradox may be a filter that prevents intelligent life that fails to progress in that area from reaching the stars. Violent intelligent cultures destroy themselves, most likely in the nuclear age.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK207245/ It is important in knowing how to combat it because it provides a framework to guide efforts. Without the framework, interventions often are a hodgepodge of efforts with a much lower chance of being effective. Cumulative diseases behave in certain ways. There is an input process that should be interrupted if possible, and there usually is a treatment or "antidote". There are also elusive "super antidotes" (my term) where just one intervention can have a dramatic effect. A super antidote for obesity is semaglutide, for coronary disease a stent, and more than one high hazard industry has discovered that rarely, one intervention can dramatically lower risk. On the other hand, cumulative diseases and processes almost always end in sudden failure if not defused. If the response is uncoordinated, then it is like someone with coronary disease having broccoli with his fried chicken. It is not going to work, which is the world's current state of affairs. An example from the international relations field of an uncoordinated intervention is the belief that trade and travel prevents war. In his book, "The Psychology of War", LeShan notes that trade and travel were at an all time high in 1914, and people wrote articles claiming war was a thing of the past, just before the onset of the greatest war in history up to that time. Thus, if the model is valid, then it either gets a coordinated intervention ideally from a multi-disciplinary task force, with international input, or the world should explode sometime before 2050. You don't understand the model. A cumulative process has an input process that builds up over the course of years. So a "bar fight" is not a relevant example except that participation in a bar fight could be part of the input process. In a non-linear system, the input and output are often far apart. If you don't understand models of conflict google "The Cause of War" and there are usually chapters that can be downloaded for free to review current theories. Jack Levy has an easy to understand one. If you don't understand a cumulative disease, google coronary disease & read about that. If you have never studied a cumulative social system, study the "Swiss Cheese Model" for organizational accidents.

There is literature that claims that all violence is a contagious disease, transmitted from person to person. This point of view gives primary weight to nurture, or learned behavior as opposed to genetic predisposition. Unfortunately, this discussion has not begun in the international relations literature, that I have seen, where there is an important caveat. In this literature, there is data that suggests that human conflict is related to a cumulative process, called power law data discovered by Lewis Richardson in 1949. A power law is a relationship between frequency and intensity such that wars are either small and frequent, or rare and huge. Forest fires and earthquakes also work this way. Thus, the longer a period of relative peace, the worse will be the next war. This discovery gets little attention in the IR literature where the "cause of war" is unknown. This is important because cumulative processes usually end with sudden failure if not defused or treated, like a person with coronary disease who never sees a cardiologist. Systems that accumulate tension to failure emit symptoms when the accumulation reaches toxic levels like angina in a patient with coronary disease or near misses in a high hazard system that has accumulated safety hazards warning of impending sudden failure. The evidence seems to be overwhelming that the international system is now emitting these kinds of symptoms including the setting of the Doomsday Clock, conflicts in Ukraine & Gaza, rising authoritarianism, and political strife. Thus, if the world fails to respond to current symptoms, sudden failure or world war should not be far off.

Are you aware if the apparent superluminal velocities observed with relativistic jets from quasars is a settled issue as being caused by the angle of observation? I have heard that this explanation is disputed, but that was some time ago. Is it settled now?

Do you have a favorite warp drive theory / direction? and / or Are you aware of a mechanism to measure bending spacetime in a laboratory? This question is based on the idea that there is not enough known information to construct a testable theory of faster than light travel, so a better path may be to see if spacetime can be bent in a laboratory, & construct theory if something works. In the movie, "Oppenheimer" the scientists working on the atomic bomb discussed advancing with both a theoretical & empirical strategy. So if there is not enough information to construct a viable theory, then maybe empirical options can lead to a breakthrough.