CharonY

Moderators
  • Content Count

    8751
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by CharonY

  1. Could you quote where she said that? You mean it is a pattern of action? Any articles that highlight that which you could share? I fail to see it. Her error is to assume that 21T were available. Would it be different if she said that we could fund something else with it? Which math does not add up on the medicare aspect? And is it worse than actually passing a tax cut and claiming that it will somehow pay for itself (while in truth it increases the deficit as predicted)? I.e. I am uncertain what the precise issue is and here the overall baseline claim is here.
  2. The release of nitrogen is caused by denitrification but that is usually not a direct balance with available N2. Denitrification is inhibited by O2, for example. Then there is the balance between denitrifiers and nitrate reducers. While in most soils under anoxic conditions the former dominate, in the hypothetical scenario there may as well be a balancing reaction with dissimilatory nitrate reducers (who would convert nitrate to ammonia).
  3. I am not sure what you are trying to say. She was wrong in assuming that the money just vanished and could have been used for something else. How does the latter assumption (which hinges on the wrong one) make it worse (if that is what you are implying).
  4. I think the inexperience could be a political weakness, i.e. it may be harder for her to navigate the power structures. However, considering how much basic things members of congress and senate gets wrong (snowball as a rebuttal to climate change? rape cannot cause pregnancies? how marginal tax rates work? Steve King?) it would be hypocritical to call her out specifically. Just skimming to fact checks the only thing I found is a claim regarding Pentagon spending that was wrong. There is still some ways to build the mountain of lies that are part of the regular political broth, though.
  5. CharonY

    Thinkpieces about “narrow-minded STEM nerds”

    I always wondered how much of that is just down to effects like stereotype threat.
  6. CharonY

    Thinkpieces about “narrow-minded STEM nerds”

    Well, I see the quest for knowledge as a multifaceted endeavour of which natural sciences are only one part (and of note, there is a lot of snobbery between engineering and "pure" sciences, too). I always felt that the dichotomy painted by Snow is (unfortunately) compelling yet ultimately meaningless and counter-productive.
  7. I said "quoted" instead of "quotes", didn't I? Yeah, not my first language, either.
  8. Well, I don't know the author of the article, but even if it was his second language, there is usually some level of editing. As such I assume it was deliberate. Edit: Or do you mean OP? The content is directly lifted from the article (probably easier to spot if quoted had been used).
  9. CharonY

    Thinkpieces about “narrow-minded STEM nerds”

    I was always a bit partial to Gould's view on that matter. Edit: I probably should say I became partial to Gould's view eventually. The always is a bit of an overstatement if I think back to my youth...
  10. CharonY

    Thinkpieces about “narrow-minded STEM nerds”

    I am not sure whether that would a good characterization of the majority of students outside a class setting. I think it really only becomes more visible (often in a negative way) if folks learn a little and think they figured everything out and hence are absolutely correct in what they say. I.e. a hefty dose of Dunning-Kruger before they learn enough to realize their mistake.
  11. CharonY

    Thinkpieces about “narrow-minded STEM nerds”

    Not sure whether there are articles but one thing that seems to appear is that especially certain STEM students come with the assumption that non-STEM education is worthless. Typically that is more common in early-semester students and/or those that (erroneously) view higher education predominantly as vocational training. That particular attitude is viewed by folks from other disciplines as close-minded. Lack of empathy and social skills may also be a stereotype, but from what I have seen it seems to be one thrown at each other fairly liberally. Though it is usually more about social skills rather than empathy (I mean there is sometimes the odd kid claiming to be pure logical or something but usually they grow out of it eventually).
  12. CharonY

    Today I Learned

    ! Moderator Note Discussion about the geometry of graphene has been split here.
  13. It is an unusual use of the word, for sure.
  14. I suspect that you mean well, but read the sentence carefully and think about what a careless declaration such as this entails.
  15. It is willful overinterpretation of faulty data by someone without training on the subject. On top he his opinion have been around for quite a while, he is just using the said overinterpretation to justify his views (or perhaps they happened in parallel, he said a lot of things over time).
  16. He had indeed a long history of racist and sexist remarks/behaviour and there are stories abound. He was just too influential to have any consequences (even if he made those statements publicly). Note that he was not simply referring to data, but engaged in selective overinterpretation in an area outside of his expertise. Moreover, he also made a number of racist statements (the infamous "melanin increases libido" claim) which simply has no basis whatsoever. Taken together with the consistency of it, it is rather obvious that he comes from a racist (and sexist) mindset and selectively utilizes (or makes up) data/observations to justify them.
  17. CharonY

    Collusion with Russia

    It is a but cryptic and it is not clear what is being disputed. The push back is notable in itself.
  18. CharonY

    The Border Wall or Fence

    Right, but I wonder about that. So it appears that you think it is important to provide data for one side of the claim (i.e. neutral effect or even decrease on crime) to be taken seriously, whereas worries have to be taken at face value. While I do understand that a politician need to address it, I do wonder about the double standard.
  19. CharonY

    The Border Wall or Fence

    As it seems I misunderstood you, could you clarify which one is the one and which one is the other? My rant is mostly because in similar discussions on this board, I do see quite often that provided data is often brushed away which does cause some annoyance. As it does not seem what you mean, I apologize for that. However, it would help if you contextualize what you mean. One example would be the quoted sentence that I obviously misunderstood another one is perhaps what you mean with properly address. What would you consider a proper approach? If showing data that e.g. they commit less crime does not help, what does?
  20. CharonY

    Collusion with Russia

    And there is a report indicating that Trump may have directed Cohen to lie to congress, which would be obstruction of justice:
  21. Holy cow that is bad: I mean, one should not be surprised about the mindset but wanting to deprive US citizens from relief after a disaster of that magnitude is still shocking.
  22. CharonY

    The Border Wall or Fence

    Not sure what you mean. Could you elaborate? Edit: do you mean the "bring crime" argument? If so, you are being silly here unless you really think that folks that state the immigrants bring crime are talking about lower than average baseline. If that is what you are saying then you are implying that folks like me need to add dozens of statistics and be super careful with semantics. Whereas folks who justify cruel behaviour to children only need buzzwords and are just misunderstood. In a way it is clever. Exhaust folks who actually try to be factual, then slide in some doubt and a heavy dose of buzzwords. Voila, a fresh serving of alternate reality. Why isn't it the other why round. Why shouldn't folks wanting a multi-billion dollar investment in concrete and land acquisition use data to justify it? Why should we assume that folks demonizing immigrants have a good point if they do not even inform themselves regarding immigration levels and trends?
  23. Depends on application. Short PCRs, for example, are generally fine, they are fairly robust. Longer amplification tends to suffer.
  24. CharonY

    The Border Wall or Fence

    I just assume that you argue in good faith here, as this is a common talking point. What is meant here is of course the underlying assumption that will affect crime rates and hence their influx should be limited. However studies using a variety of measures have shown that either directly immigrants have lower crime rates than native born Americans as well as that increasing percentages of undocumented immigrants is inversely correlated with violent crimes (recent paper by Light and Miller. 2018, Criminology 56:2). I.e. if anything it appears that more (undocumented) immigrants resulted in less violent crimes. But even a neutral assumption shows that worries about crime should be the primary guide to change immigration policies. If it was, there should be calls for more immigration.
  25. CharonY

    The Border Wall or Fence

    What other action do you think should be made to address these concerns aside from informing folks about the actual situation? When have folks been here called racist for valid concerns? The big issue, of course is that among folks that are concerned there are misinformed folks (where informing them could help) but also a spectrum of people that feel their identity being eroded by the others. While most would object being called racists (and it would be counter intuitive to do so except in the extreme cases), there is the issue that the concerns do have a xenophobic root. I.e. folks feel less secure in their identity if folks show up that talk differently or appear differently. While language and other outward aspects can be changed, looks cannot to appease these fears. At the end of the day, certain folks need to get comfortable with the fact that we are not insular societies anymore. Even Germany, which for decades, despite a rising population of foreigners claimed and behave that they were not an immigration country (and having no obvious paths of immigration, compared to Canada and USA) is now slowly coming face the new reality (which, historically comes with a rise of far right attitudes). In that regard, despite all the issues we discuss here, as a whole far larger proportion of the US and also Canadian population have an easier time to embrace immigrants, leading to better integration outcomes than for certain visible minorities in Germany. I.e. what we are discussing in the US/Canada are less representative of broad fears, but rather those of a subset of the population. It is unfortunate that it is getting tainted and co-opted with certain elements that like to focus on culture wars regardless of the actual situation. The fact that a major party also plays this game is not helping. For example, despite the push of the administration to curb all immigration (illegal or not) over 75% of the US population according to a Gallup poll sees it as a net positive and while it is lower for Reps, it is still at 65%. Only 29% think it should be curbed, the lowest rate since the 60s. Unfortunately, it is aloud minority, and sees support from the government. Are they all racists? Not necessarily, but studies do have shown that perhaps unsurprisingly there is a significant overlap between folks who score strongly in racialized attitudes and those critical of immigration. As such I do not think it is wrong to request more detailed explanation on the reasons of opposition so that one can calibrate it against facts. For example, if one believes that (illegal) immigrants bring crime, the question is how do they change their attitude when confronted with the fact that they don't? If they keep believing it, what would you suggest to do? Increased crack down on folks who are actually less likely to commit violent crimes in order to appease and enforce unfounded attitudes?