Leaderboard

You seem to be shifting the goal posts. https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2005/03/28/1332458.htm#:~:text=Australian marsupials can see in,from primates to do so. Nobody is saying "blue makes kangaroos sad", or "red makes kangaroos angry", or that they have a special word for their favourite green, when their food is most edible. But you started out saying colour only exists in human minds. It's been pointed out that light has different measurable frequencies and it can be show that different animals can perceive them. Just look at the green plants that make yellow (etc) flowers to help the pollinators find them (sometimes more about UV light) - even many insects can see some kind of difference. If your point is just that we shouldn't anthropomorphise animal colour vision, that's fine but it's NOT anthropomorphic to study (and show) their colour vision exists.

"More than lack of food" implies lack of food and other factors, which I don't think is what you mean. I think you mean something other than lack of food. Because it seems obvious to me that lack of food there was not, at least for the general population before the situation got to the dramatic point it has. And I didn't. But I admit was somewhat lazy with my criterion. So here's some analysis taking your definition as the starting point. This doesn't seem to be the case for Gaza/Israel. Unless you're willing to accept several million people of the same ethnic and/or religious minority have met a very different fate for absolutely no identifiable reason. Some of those people of exactly the same ethnic and religious group seem to have made their way to the Supreme Court, the Knesset or the IDF. They are Israeli citizens: These data are from Israel only, not Gaza or the West Bank. More: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arab_members_of_the_Knesset For 20 years Gaza has been under the rule of Hamas. I'm not sure that Palestinians have been forcibly retained in Gaza for all that time. But I do get from testimonies that leaving is considerably difficult, and it must go through special permission, and ridiculously elaborate security measures, including digital cards and such. Nevertheless, here's a screenshot from the World Bank data webpage corresponding to Gaza+West Bank Which seems to imply that some people seem to have managed to trickle out, in spite of all those guards watching them from the turrets. Let's see about life expectancy Similar to Albania, considerably higher than Rwanda, about the same as Tunicia. All of those well-known concentration camps? https://data.worldbank.org/country/west-bank-and-gaza Population growth of only Gaza: Population of Gaza in 2005: 1,299,000 people. Population of Gaza in 2023: 2,300,000 people. Although I can imagine that it must not have been easy for many of them to leave due to the economic conditions --and that in spite of the large amounts of money thrown at them that could have been invested otherwise, as @MigL has observed before. Moreover, it is apparent that no Arab countries are willing to take regugees from Gaza, or no Arabs from Gaza are willing to go to other Arab countries, or both. They seem to like to go to NY or London, for some reason. Prisoners in their territory? Quite a number of them enjoyed work permits and crossed the border on a daily basis to work in the kibbutzim with their socialist benefactors. An opportunity to collect intelligence for the attacks that Hamas couldn't and didn't miss. So no, Gazans were not under guard when the attacks of October 7th happened. Frankly I find it impossible to recognize any condition from the definition you presented that applies here. What about the bit "those deemed political enemies" in your definition? Well, the logistics of the map of the West Bank doesn't look to me as the places where part of the population is divided according to what they think. It looks more like the logistics of urban guerrilla: Isolating places where the chances of getting shot from a window are more than so-and-so percent. And that's what they are. So there's nothing political about it. But of course the main issue is not political, in spite of many people trying to make it political. It's mostly that thing that shall not be named. It's that thing that shall not be named what gives it the character of an unsolvable problem. If you misdiagnose an illness you guarantee that it will never get better. If tomorrow all the Muslims of Palestine converted at once to, say, the Ahmadi Muslim faith --which are now a tiny, tiny minority there, the problem would be solved in a matter of months. Unfortunately, they are mostly Sunni followed by a minor amount of Shia, and the rest of the Muslims consider the Ahmadi heretics. So no, it won't work. And it never will. It takes a religious component for a problem to become so vicious, so stagnant, so irredeemably impossible as this one. It will never get better. Not for as long as the religious component of it survives. I grew up seeing the buildings of Beirut smashed to smitherines on the TV, and I'm pretty sure I'll leave this world with a similar scenery from the Middle East. Only this time on YT. Etc, etc. The situation is a tragedy for everyone involved, and it breaks my heart seeing Palestinian kids used as cannon fodder by Hamas, but pretending that the State of Israel is some kind of Khmer Rouge of the Middle East is just ridiculous. And no, it's not going to solve the problem either. It's going to make it worse and worse. This kind of hiperbolic discourse (like those morons saying "apartheid", "genocide", etc in the campuses) only weakens the arguments coming from any kind of progressive thinking. And if you ask me, they only make the Trumps and the Wilders and the far-right extremists more likely to seize power, not less. They're biding their time, make no mistake about it. Sorry for the lengthy diatribe. I will probably shut up pretty soon. It's a pain to participate in these debates, because the fog of propaganda makes the main arguments almost invisible.

Just in case you don't, an operator [math]L()[/math] is linear if and only if it satisfies: [math]L(\psi + \phi) = L(\psi) + L(\phi)[/math] Linearity is essential to QM because quantum superposition demands it.

This article says that humans decide for animals what they(animals) feel. Everything we know about animals is from the observation of their behavior. And this observation is based on a human nature. We are restricted with our human nature, if it is correct to say this. For me kingdom of animals is some sacred place where we humans are not allowed to step in without correct instruments, such as going through the process, and not observing it. The same thing with religion. Scientific method doesn't work in these areas. And also I'm saying about subjectivity. Humans observe animals being humans, and not animals. To understand animals you have to BE an animal. And you don't know what is color for animals, not for you, but for animals, is there time for animals. And isn't it arrogance to say that there's no sunrise, while there's astronomical definition of the sunrise.

Persistently obtuse? Well, thank you. But I didn't do anything bad for this. Not couldn't. I didn't want to. I found an article. You criticize everyone, but you don't want to accept critics, very reasonable. Not you personally. You can ban me forever, I don't care. if you are so ARROGANT. here it is https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/14/picture-kangaroo-empathy-sexual-exploitation-human-anthropomorphise "Both of these interpretations reveal far more about us than about the kangaroos. The extensive press coverage, and the accompanying comments criticising scientists for explaining what was really going on, are classic examples of the way we want wild creatures to be like us – a fallacy known as anthropomorphism. It is, of course, perfectly natural to expect the rest of the animal kingdom to share the same ways of thinking and feeling about the world as we do. Since human beings first observed their fellow creatures we have endowed them with our own emotions – and we continue to do so today." So NO, animals don't distinguish "colours". And the don't know what is time.