Leaderboard

Yeah, we've never seen anything like that before... 🙄

It sounds like they “withheld” evidence after he stopped working for them, which is…unexpected behavior? My former workplace has not shared information with me since I stopped working there. There is information that would be illegal for them to share with me. It also sounds like your beef is with the Air Force. They are a military organization. But the paradigm here is that “aliens” is not a scientific answer until there is evidence to support that conclusion. The null hypothesis is that aliens do not exist. This is no different than elsewhere in science. So charging someone with finding an explanation that fits with mainstream science is perfectly reasonable, since the default assumption is that these phenomena are not of alien origin. You can only entertain that possibility after all other explanations have been eliminated. Again - just as with the rest of science; experiments have to rule out all confounding effects that might be responsible for a result The real question is why folks who claim aliens (or bigfoot, whatever) exist think that these rules don’t apply to them. (I think lack of awareness of the rules is a likely suspect)

I look at voting from the perspective of collective action. Which works when people believe in it. My individual vote doesn't probably make a difference but the votes of everyone like me do. So it's something one could view as an expression of confidence in yourself as part of a larger whole that is a democracy. It has a psychological value, overcoming stasis and apathy and cynicism, which ripples causally through the rest of your life. And who knows it might encourage someone else you know to vote. So there's a sort of chain reaction possibilty there, maybe. I'd encourage all you butterflies to flap the wings a bit.

To me, First is survival. Secondly do something good for your inner soul and for others Third is to contribute in human race running. And finaly die. What others think about it?

That's not the way I'd put it. If WWIII is going to happen, I'd say it's already started. Most countries are attacked daily by foreign intelligence services via multiple media, and that will be viewed in hindsight as a precursor if this becomes a global conflict. OTOH, I have different reasons to hope for a better outcome than I did two years ago. The threat from Iran has changed now that the regime there is being challenged internally. Turkey is in a different situation currently than it was two years ago. I honestly can't imagine what will happen between the US and China. Both are highly dependent on technology, and neither wants to risk damaging their own capabilities. I think Russia allowed their leaders to risk too much, and I hope its people are as tired of this authoritarian regime as Iranians are of theirs. I hope Putin continues to be vilified by most of the world, at least enough to keep China from teaming up with him. China doesn't want leaders who take over old territories to be criticized.

You're absolutely right. There was no call for my response. I've no idea why I wrote it. Can we put it down to a senior moment?

I believe that much of what we have a distaste for is simply a vestige of our past. Some people won't eat peas because they remember them being gross when they were a kid. I about gag when I think about Wild Turkey because it gave me a two day hangover after my 21st birthday. Some people don't like thinking about gay sex because of how it was talked about when they were young. Unless you are outwardly displaying these distastes and causing issues for others I see no reason to be obliged to make an effort to reverse those distastes. They are like a singe mark on a piece of furniture from a long ago fire. I could certainly make the effort to erase it completely, but it doesn't mean much to me and I have other things occupying my time. I'm more concerned about people's actions than their thoughts. I don't deny that everyone making an effort to eliminate such thoughts would have an overall positive impact on society due to the fact that some will otherwise let their feelings show through. Similarly we should probably all limit salt intake due to the fact that some of us will otherwise develop high blood pressure because of it. But it seems to me to be a relatively small issue and a small risk. After all, those who are truly bigots wouldn't try anyway.

TheCosmologist has been banned for sockpuppetry. We’re convinced he was Gareth. (which they basically confirmed)

I see you contributing quite frequently on climate change issues. Maybe it's a generalisation, but the impression that I get from your posts is that every little bit that we can do to reverse the current trend counts. No matter how insignificant our personal efforts may seem at the time. I guess I've a tendency to vote with my feet. I may not have much impact at the ballot box, but transferring my economic activity to a different country is probably more significant overall.

I meant sociopaths and psychopaths don't care about the casualties of their actions..

I think the problem here is that you do not understand how a particle can be it's own anti-particle. So you say, "this is what it really means". What you should say is, "How can a particle be it's own anti-particle?" Then other members can help you learn instead of them just telling you that your ideas are wrong. That seems like a more fruitful discussion.

https://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/claims-about-pentagon-ufo-program-how-much-is-true/ (from the SWR section of article) Supposedly haunted and filled with all kinds of cryptids and paranormal phenomena, it was purchased in 1996 by Robert Bigelow to study its alleged phenomena. Members of Bigelow’s National Institute for Discovery Science (NIDS) stayed on the ranch to do a careful first hand study. One of them was Colm Kelleher, Ph.D., co-author of the 2005 book Hunt for the Skinwalker. Another was Dr. Eric Davis, an astronomer who now works at Dr. Hal Puthoff’s Institute for Advanced Studies in Austin, Texas, studying weird physics. Despite Bigelow’s funding and the investigators’ unfettered access to the alleged phenomena, So, all the King’s Horses and all the King’s Men and all the King’s cameras and electronic recording devices could not document anything paranormal occurring at the Skinwalker Ranch, in spite of scientists spending several years onsite trying to do so. NIDS never did document anything much happening anywhere, so Bigelow shut down NIDS in 2004. In 2016 he sold the ranch to Adamantium Real Estate, LLC, whose once-anonymous owner has just revealed himself to be Brandon Fugal, a wealthy real estate investor from Salt Lake City. Fugal had previously been involved in weird science projects, like “an attempt to create a gravitational reduction device that could produce clean energy”. (....) Not only was the yearslong monitoring of “Skinwalker” by NIDS unable to obtain proof of anything unusual happening, but the people who owned the property prior to the Shermans, a family whose members lived there 60 years, deny that any mysterious “phenomena” of any kind occurred there. The parsimonious explanation is that the supernatural claims about the ranch were made up by the Sherman family prior to selling it to the gullible Bigelow. Many of the really bizarre alleged incidents described in Hunt for the Skinwalker were witnessed only by Terry Sherman, who stayed on the ranch as a caretaker after it was sold to Bigelow.

My hovercraft is full of eels.

Also known as 'intersubjective consensus'.

How do we know what is better? Better for whom or for what?

Yes, agreed. But the argument and actually the purpose of this thread was to discuss whether certain feelings if you may are nature (genetic programming) or nurture (learned behaviour). I was arguing that my personal feelings or rather in this case tastes whether be nature or nurture have no bearing on my feelings towards the person/s engaging in activities to which I personally have no desire to watch or engage in. It also appears that some are arguing that my personal tastes are learned and I should change my tastes inline with cultural trends. I'm interested in whether they are learned or innate and I'm open to explore the possibilities around this. However I see no valid reason why I should change (even if I could) my personal tastes and why I should not be free to express this. My personal tastes, in this context, causes no tangible harm to anyone. The only argument provided so far is that my tastes are archaic, outdated, out of trend and somehow offensive in that my attitude towards people who I don't share tastes within is skewed so such that it automatically makes me negatively bias towards them. I find this all rather absurd and don't see the logic behind it, other than they are conflating my feelings towards a person with my feelings towards an act they may engage in.

The thing is, who one wishes to make a nest with is intrinsic to the person, to any organism actually, i.e. it's not a choice. Wouldn't you say it was unfair/counter-productive to openly criticise something they are hard-wired to feel and do, if it causes no tangible harms to how a society functions?

Am I asking you? I didn't even know you exist, and your "wife and children". That I am asking questions here is none of your business.

What "major points" are you referring to? I thought I responded to your main argument already with my counter points. The points I received from your argument are: the eye witnesses can't be trusted because they're either stupid or lying (for financial reasons) the creator of the documentary or any material on UFOs is an opportunistic huckster merely out for financial gain Brian Dunning has the real facts on what happened eye witness testimony isn't real evidence (due in large part to point number 1) What did I miss? (genuine question)

Bullcrap, INow. You have a dislike for the guns that plague your society, and you want to get rid of those guns. Yet you don't want to get rid of, or incarcerate, all the people who use guns, as you'd have to double the number of jails you have. So it is possible to distinguish something from the person doing, or using, it.

Maybe you can tell us how it is that somebody called Gareth Meredith wrote the paper at this link: https://www.academia.edu/24475326/The_Larmor_Phenomenon_around_Quasars_as_an_Extension_to_Hawking_Radiation From your comments on the other thread, I'm not to call you Gareth, apparently. 😁

You are reframing my question. I was asking why personal tastes, not shared and not fueling bigoted conduct, should be discarded in this case. I didn't form the impression from @Intoscience that his distaste was driving epithets, prejudicial behavior, or advocacy of discrimination towards anyone. How does distaste, in this restricted sense, harm others? Why hope to eliminate it, especially when it's unclear that such a retrofit of personal tastes is achievable? Can I be made to like gangsta rap, and is that needed so that members of some hip-hop subculture won't feel bad? What about SMBD play? Should I discard all sentiments I might have regarding those practices lest someone somewhere feel oppressed? (it helps me if you can quote the entire paragraph here, btw, so context of questions is clear)

Our goal is to have goals. Our purpose, to have purpose. May I also point out that there is such a thing as too much reproduction... 🤷‍♂️

Putting this first makes the rest fairly meaningless. If survival is Job #1, it could come at the cost of your second and third choices. If it comes down to a choice between you getting food or the rest of us getting food, you'll feed your belly before your "inner soul", and doing something good for others takes a back seat to your survival. As for contributing to human race running, you'll have to clarify what you're talking about. Does your survival contribute to the human race running?

I'm in general agreement but would say it differently. Life is consciousness and the first demand of consciousness is survival and the second reproduction. Second is to have fun to both feed your soul but also to maintain your desire to survive. Third, and most importantly, is to try to leave the world a better place than you found it. In every way you want to leave it better. Fourth, fight death with every living breath. You can age gracefully as you seek the fountain of youth. If you find it just hope you're still young enough to enjoy it.

When you strip it back there seems to be only one purpose/function - to procreate - (survival of the species). Everything else is an appeal to emotion.

This has become an escape clause - used too lightly. "Something" is defined as occupying space.

"I'm willing to be educated," is not a question. "How does the mathematics of an electron divergence stand up?" Is however. I can see you are not fond of me so I will ask directly - do you want to be educated on how the divergence comes about? I'll assume on a preliminary basis, based on your previous reply, it's a yes then?

This is also widely misunderstood. The muon experiences the same amount of time as the observer. The muon *does not* experience different time than the observer, even though I see that term written everywhere. If you look at it in a spacetime diagram, the muon cheats; it takes a different angle through spacetime. It takes a "shortcut" even though we were always taught that the fastest way to get from point A to point B is a straight line. It turns out the fastest way to get from point A to point B is to go really fast. No, that is wrong. This is a perfect example of why I brought this up with martillo.

Good luck.

No you're not to call me Gareth at all. We are not friends and therefore not on first term name calling, understand?

You are right. There is no actual time dilation or length contraction for anything. They are only perceptions/observations. This might cause a stir here, but it's true.

I lile these products. As do my wife and children. Why should we answer to you about our personal preferences? None of your business I think.

Spin polarisation is how the angular momentum is aligned to a given direction. We have a fancy name to talk about the spin of particles, it's called its chirality. Literally it means handedness. Do I mean to be cheeky here? Of course I do, are there any polite posters here at all? You slander my knowledge of physics when in reality I don't see much physics being argued. Some answers I've read since being here, have been either straight out wrong or highly questionable. I'm becoming bipolar 😐 Well you were not aware that Einstein was so involved with QM's, so forgive me if I point out that a lot of his work actually centered round it.