dimreepr

No, he's not. He's trying to belittle, both the people who feel compelled to face surgery (with all the risks) to become themselves (which is essentially a cosmetic surgery) and the many governments around the world, that has deemed this procedure ethically acceptable.

WTF are you talking about? Let me fix that for you. Now that the sentence makes sense, the answer is... easily.

Why shouldn't they? You can only beat hate with love, so... I still love you.

Is there a point to this rant?

Mine was a username I used in a game called Strike Force, given by a friend, because of my tendency to run around like an idiot and still manage to shoot my fair share, it's also quite an apt name for poker, the avatar is an original I commissioned for my Triumph.

In the context of this thread, I suppose you're correct, but philosophically, where are the goal-posts?

Still works for Roman and many other civilisations, since they used water to power their machines.

That'll learn me to read the entire thread, apologies, but that means the speculation is falsifiable as explained above. We've mapped the tree of life (mostly) and there's plenty of room for a type of industry that's not human, just not our type of industry.

So far the replies assume industry as equivalent to what we see now, why should it be? Weren't the Romans, Egyptians etc. industrious?

One way is to dismiss evidence because it doesn't agree with you, another way is to dismiss an argument because you don't agree, the third way is, none of the above.

Is irony a foreign concept? Or do I need to recalibrate my meter?

You really don't seem to get philosophy at all, or indeed the point of a/this forum, it's not a competition (It's a meeting of minds, not a beating of minds). Arrogance can only block (your) understanding because as long as you think you're right you'll always miss the nuggets of wisdom that almost everyone has in their locker, true intelligence recognises there are many versions of clever. Dunning and Kruger have a lot to say on the subject but no doubt you'll reject their findings because they're scientists (spit).

Food for thought, the caveat being, the point at which the interpretation occurs.

But isn't that just a matter of interpretation?

There is a third way, one that doesn't depend on God, faith or trust, being honest with oneself. I do understand that this is closer to science than religion but both sides are capable of this epiphany, the proximity of either side has little value without the final step.

Except we kinda do and we accept we don't need it, so it really doesn't matter either way. Seems to be yet another double-edged sword just because it has become so polarised, there's a degree of blame on both sides if the argument is G/god.

I think the majority here would agree with this:

I think it's just different ways to describe yin and yang, light and dark, good and evil etc. Knowledge is a double-edged sword, it can confuse people, cause worry and anxiety if that knowledge seems to suggest there's something in the future to be frightened of, a bringer of light, for me suggests a teacher, someone to explain why a knowledge of the future is just an illusion (knowledge can only ever exist in the past) and it doesn't matter how certain one is of that future worrying about it won't change a thing. OTOH, knowledge can also improve our present. The problem we have today is, there's very little that is beyond our ken, but again that is a double-edged sword. We know God can't exist, well those of us that can think critically, and that knowledge can dismiss what's been written because of all the contradictions, that only exist because we know it wasn't written by God/s. Seems a shame that that basic concept was chosen to diffuse and evolve instead of the Piraha and their concept.

I have to agree with this, a valve amp has much more clarity and warmth and base; speakers, on the other hand, is more prone to hype and marketing. Sorry, it seems closer to speakers for me, I honestly couldn't tell the difference when I was on a track day.

Yes, essentially with anyone who disagrees with you, as opposed to your response to those that agree. No, but that seems to be a case in point, ie. did you though? Or did you just write more than anyone wanted to read? I miss Tar, at least he didn't resort to insults and abuse.

Use a pillar drill clamp horizontally, held in a vice you can also hold a steadying platform in the same vice, works a treat.

You seem to be mistaking me for someone who gives a shit...

Well just to nitpick... https://www.seeker.com/waters-ultimate-freezing-point-1765534898.html

Doesn't really answer my question, though; what's the point?