swansont

You should include a link when providing a quote. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7040264/#R3 The SLEP program assumes ideal storage conditions, and the article points out that “The bathroom and medicine cabinet are not ideal places to store medications due to heat and humidity”

How often do they change?

No, cherry-picking cannot be used to counter the argument. News often focuses on the unusual, so these become stories precisely because the are a small minority.

There is no guarantee that a system with multiple variables can have all of them optimized. Some variables are not independent, so optimizing one means another can’t be.

You’re the one that broached this, so how about you provide it? An op-ed does not add context.

Then what are you suggesting? And what evidence supports it?

An hypothesis you’ve made but not supported with evidence. But why shouldn’t the default be that prevailing paradigms are sufficient, since it’s actually quite rare that a new paradigm is needed? Paradigms are paradigms because of the massive amount of evidence that supports them. When your neutrino signal seems to exceed the speed of light, why wouldn’t you hypothesize an error with the signal in favor of immediately dumping a hugely successful theory?

The positive or negative aspects are separate from what it is.

Or you can use the standard general definition and recognize that there are different implementations of it, since there are many types.

An op-ed from a conservative columnist has to be taken with a fairly large grain of salt. It’s not exactly credible evidence. The US dept of Labor, for example, gives a different answer https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/WB/equalpay/WB_issuebrief-undstg-wage-gap-v1.pdf “Using more detailed and expansive data than was previously available, the analysis shows that about a third of the gap between full-time, year-round working men and women’s wages can be explained by worker characteristics, such as age, education, industry, occupation, or work hours. However, roughly 70% cannot be attributed to measurable differences between workers. At least some of this unexplained portion of the wage gap is the result of discrimination, which is difficult to fully capture in a statistical mode”

Science is rife with experiments that saw unexpected things. Alpha particles bouncing back off of atoms. Quantized deflection of atoms in a magnetic field. Even seeing different masses fall at the same rate was unexpected. And this doesn’t include just observations that had no explanation at the time. How is that bias?

Quantum computers exist in the lab and there are allegedly commercial products available (D-Wave started selling one more than a decade ago, though I attended a talk from Bill Phillips, a Nobel prize-winner, who was dubious of their claims)

Design? I see no design or technical details.

IOW people who don’t know what they’re talking about say this. Not much of a basis for discussion. There is a biological imperative - a species will die out if there’s no procreation - but that’s not a “purpose” If it was the purpose, then there would be no need for women live past menopause, or for impotent people to live at all.

Is that the conventional wisdom? I don’t think your premise is true. There may be a few who believe this, but I don’t think it has widespread acceptance

It’s only subjective for precision beyond what the method/instrument can provide, and personal interpretation is used.

When we close threads it’s because the OP has failed to follow the rules in some way(s), and we try to be clear as to the reasons. This does not preclude anyone else from opening a thread on a similar topic that does not violate the rules (e.g. closed for lack of rigor or posting just a video? Go ahead and make a rigorous post in a new thread. Dangerous activity? No, since that would still violate the rules)

! Moderator Note Not even close to the amount of detail needed. Plus, posting videos without supporting material violates rule 2.7

Just the fact that planes can shoot bullets without much problem should tell you that this isn’t an issue.

How is that subjective? I mean, if I rub diamond and quartz together does the scratch appear on one if I look at it, but on the other if someone else does?

How is this subjective? One surface of a diamond being slightly harder than another is still an objective observation.

You’ve never addressed studiot’s point about Moh’s scale of hardness. In what way is that subjective?

It’s just a matter of figuring out how to make measurements. What can be objectively quantified. That does not follow. At best you can say some elements of science are not “pure” A lack of objectivity in one area does not invalidate areas where the objectivity exists. You need to find the way to make objective measurements, whether it’s direct or indirect.

Please show a calculation showing when this becomes a problem.

Two major difference since 2016 are the Dobbs decision (and Trump’s role and endorsement of it), and Trump being legally found to be a rapist.