Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/05/21 in all areas

  1. Emotions are often a source of trouble in forums. Andrew, you made a small spelling error, this was raised, nothing more was said, it was just brought to your attention. How did you respond? Why did you not just say "Thank you" or something?
    2 points
  2. Except perhaps for cold fusion and homosexuality, these are not Science-- they are applications of science coupled with engineering, management, and in some cases marketing decisions. It is the applications of science (among other things), sometimes poorly conceived, that lead to disasters. Science not applied generally does not hurt anybody. As for homosexuality, It is merely one facet of the normal range of human behaviors. Not my thing but I don't think it needs a cure.
    2 points
  3. Yes, you're quite right actually, I accept that and retract the statement.
    1 point
  4. Now THAT'S a straw man!
    1 point
  5. This types of comments just indicate ignorance. Have you read the article I posted earlier? If you are not willing to educate yourself at least slightly on the matter and you basically keep trying to discuss form a position where the strength of the opinion far outweighs knowledge and only serves to derail the discussion. The weak attempt to ridicule the situation really just makes it worse. If someone says they prefer women as sexual partners, do you doubt that? If someone says that they prefer men, do you doubt that? What do you think is the basis of that? If you are not willing to accept the basic biology underlying these issues, I do not see a meaningful way to engage on that matter as you are discussing issues based on your personal reality. Or try to answer answer my question before. What do you think makes you identify yourself as a man. Because someone told you so? Or is there something else. And if so, what could the something else be?
    1 point
  6. As iNow mentioned, the way you feel is determined to a large degree by your biology. The way your body produces and responds to hormones, the number and variations of receptors and so on all influence why you feel like a man for example. But there is a spectrum, i.e. not all men are equally attracted (or at all) to women, for example. Most of the spectrum finds a range in two broad categories, but quite a few (around 1% of the population cluster more in the middle of the area, where the various biological inputs in aggregate do not fall into one of those neat categories. To put it bluntly, you do not need to check what type your gonads are to feel a certain way. It all happens beyond the consciousness, which is why one cannot simply erase it. One can have separate discussion regarding how that impacts free will (and if Eise is around, it will be very interesting discussion), but I think you do realize that quite a few associated traits are quite hardwired (such as sexual preferences) and cannot be altered at will.
    1 point
  7. We do this in science by removing human perception and using instrumentation where appropriate
    1 point
  8. I wanted to mention this Radio show that's been running for quite some time now and is available on the BBC site with all previous episodes accessible. It's format is a chairman and two, sometimes three guests who are usually from academia. The approach is to explain to the unschooled listener why some subject, person, belief etc is regarded as important and overall it does a very good job. Consensus is not always present but generally the panel do not get contentious. The material is broken down into categories like Science, History, Philosophy, Religion etc. These show are often thought provoking and often highly informative to a layman who wants to get some insights into the subject. For example the episode on The Black Death is fascinating, learning how society handled some 40% of people dying back then, how this affected land ownership, art and so on. Likewise the episode on The Fire of London is also informative (records of land ownership were burnt so disputes arose after the fire and so on). For Physics there are some superb subject, just take a look and see for yourselves.
    1 point
  9. I am now going to go off on a tangent ... When you decide to have your gender reassigned from male to female, I'm sure it is explained to you that there are some things you previously did, that you won't be able to do anymore. Like peeing standing up ! What is this obsession we have that everyone should be able to do whatever they wish, no matter their life choices ? If it is an aspect of survival, like a crippled person entering a grocery store to buy food using a ramp, then we as a compassionate society need to make it happen. And certainly, if competition is your livelyhood then trans athletes need to be able to compete, but if it is just for fum ( or games for Dimreepr ) then that is not required and cannot be considered a 'human right'. I had the same problem as Studiot; always wanted to fly jets, yet my vision sucks. Is it a 'human right' that I be able to fly jets ? Or do I suck it up and live my life without that thrill ? Of course Zap. I consider myself 'compassionate'. But, as to wether it is a 'rght', human or otherwise, I'm not so sure.
    1 point
  10. Question to the thread: Tell me again why setting qualification thresholds for divisions and classes in sports can’t be achieved using metrics which ignore gender…whatever they may be?
    1 point
  11. The hiberfil.sys file is used by Windows to store the current state of your computer (memory contents, open applications and documents, etc.) during hibernation. If you are not using hibernation, you can turn it off so that you can delete the hiberfil.sys file and reclaim all the space it was using. Note that the classic standby will then still be usable. To deactivate and delete the file in command prompt (admin) type: powercfg.exe /hibernate off To re-activate hibernation type: powercfg.exe /hibernate on
    1 point
  12. No one can answer this accurately enough to judge which transgenders should be allowed to compete in CY's suggested "Women's" category at competitive levels. The baseline is elusive enough prior to judging on a case by case basis as described. You think anything suggested here is fair to trans athletes? Do you thinks it's fair to have someone judge whether they are "women enough" to compete? How about allowing them to compete...and then telling them they are no longer eligible after realizing the maintained more "biological advantage" than previously judged? How about making sure they are handicapped so onerously they cannot win? Would that be any better? Do you think it's fair to ask a transgender athlete to alter their body chemistry if they wish to compete? I can see no path to success on this. I can see it failing and all the so called "experts" abandoning it like rats off a sinking ship...I mean they meant well...hoped it would work out...and the athletes getting pointed at are adults and did choose to subject themselves to the drug regimes required to compete ...so not their fault. Except it would be.
    1 point
  13. Why not use an actual example instead of making something up?
    1 point
  14. The phrase “become transgender” is problematic. I’m not sure it’s something you “become” Is that how trans people describe it? Are you presenting a scenario where someone who is not trans pretends to be? i.e. they are trying to cheat? No, that’s not a true statement. Men, on average, are stronger. But that statement is assuming there are just the two gender categories. Anyway https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbt-rights/four-myths-about-trans-athletes-debunked/
    1 point
  15. I understand your position, and I imagine you’ll eventually come around when the rest of the world finally accepts trans humans as equally deserving and finally treats these assertions of disadvantage as the relics and well intentioned examples of misguided thinking that they are. Note also I’m not much of a fisherman either, and for the same reasons. You and I may have to stay behind to sip some whiskey and laugh together while everyone else puts their lines into the water, competitively or otherwise ✌️
    0 points
  16. FFS, how is that relevant? I think you're full of shit; for instance, in a same sex marriage, who wears the trousers?
    -1 points
  17. The process that produced biological lifeforms on earth (Abiogenesis) remains unknown however we can logically presume the process was not instantaneous but was incremental in time and subject to the initial available elements and compounds afforded by our solar systems birth which again was subject to the available ingredients of the nebula that produced it ..and that too was the product of the unique galaxy it came from ... Prebiotic material's So ,as of yet a undetermined, mixture of various chemical compounds was subject to it's own chemical reactions with each other and physically brought together and kept apart by physical mechanisms and circumstance of its enviroment ...radiation ,gravity water etc...Each vital part of the process in cumulative steps on it's way to become biological...! ,..but because it's a unintentional process and has no pre deterministic abbilty we can view the process from the other end ..from biology to gas,rock,and metal It was not prebiotic material until it became Abiogenesis,Abiogenesis could not be Abiogenesis until it produced biology ... We can can conclude that a despite a goldilocks exoplanet ( earth 2) having the similar prebiotic materials at the right times the physical forces of circumstance of its enviroment are unreatable due to the unique process of it's own solar system . The idea of non biolgical non carbon lifeforms immediately hits the problem of what biolgical trait are we to place on a alternative lifeform that dertmines it to be so without that trait been a product of evolved biology ...Intellgence is often quoted as a trait that would determine or define a lifeform but again intellgence is an evolved biological product ! Why not a beer belly or the ability to take a shit ?..a digestive system is more of a requirement of biology than intellgence is !.The intellgence afforded to humans was reliant on plants evolving into trees as well as other happenings ....our degree of intellgence is not a requirement of biology it's just the same as the Falcons wing or the Hares heart ..they are niched evolved biological traits It is also said that early biology must be easy to make, as it happened relatively fast so its construction must be somewhat basic ...fast from what point ? If we use the formation of earth as the starting point...??What would we define as its formation the next bank holiday after it became ball shaped ??? Why would that be considered as the starting point of the process an important one I agree but not as important as the nebula it came from ..there is nothing basic about the first biology it did all the work it takes more time and consequence for rock,gas,and metal to become a prokaryotic microbe for the evolved prokaryotic to become a giraffe ! The first biology was far from basic in every way its subsequent evolution into various body models is irelvant because the next evolved biolgical model immediately after the prokaryotic organism is as biolgical as a giraffe is biolgical ! A giraffe can be seen to be a over coveluted body model that achives nothing more than a prokaryotic organism achieves ! The process that formed biology can only be a a product of earth its process like any other process in nature when open to circumstantial pressure over time can not produce the ' same ' thing twice not just biology twice but the process of biology twice and if it's not biology it's not life , it's just another unique chemical reaction in a universe where uniqueness is the norm rather than the exception ..are we that arrogant to think anything could resemble been biological without at first been biology.....are we looking for non biolgical flowers or hairy legs or spudders ( cross between a potato and a spider) .. why would a similar prokaryotic organism if found on a distant planet have any predeterminstic intent or physical means to become biologicalistic ???? In shape or action ... Nothing in nature repeats itself to that degree of similarity it can not happen again the same ...the permutation of circumstantial events in time that could not shape chemical compounds into anything resembling biology is un repeatable, we can not use probability without the intersection of intent natural or design of which we see no evidence or reason for ...we are alone 🐌
    -1 points
  18. How so? how is a person who voluntarily elects to become a trans-woman disadvantaged relative to a woman?
    -1 points
  19. What a pile of horse shit. What a pile of horse shit
    -2 points
  20. But people are struggling to define "Woman" so I do not see how we can define "Feminine" by reference to Women other than as a recourse to history. If we are willing to define things based on history and tradition then Women have vaginas, XX chromosome and allowing a person who is not a woman to compete in a women's team is therefore a contradictory act that prejudices women. That is why my question is relevant. Yes and that distinction is based wholly on the historic fact that there are men and women. I agree with you, but you must accept surely, that we need solid definitions for Man and Woman if we are to define Feminine and Masculine. Again you are forced to base your explanation on the assumption there's a definition for Women but there is not. I think Man and Woman are objective, XY and XX chromosomes is a scientific fact based way to define these classes of individuals.
    -2 points
  21. This is the strawman tactic at work, clearly you can't control this habit and is the reason you've lost the privilege of engaging in conversation with me,
    -2 points
  22. Life exsits because it exsits here .. it's not special so it must happen every other week in the universe ..there is that many blinking planets out there it just must exsit by maths and science to think it can not exsit is not worthy of question or reason..they would not have made close encounters of the third kind if there was not something to it ...are they suggesting Spielberg is daft ...?
    -2 points
  23. That's not an answer to my question, its another question. So if I said I feel like an owl feels, you'd believe me?
    -2 points
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.