swansont

It’s OK to say “we don’t know” Science finds stuff out, but there’s still stuff out there we don’t know. It’s why scientists still have jobs “Science can’t (yet) explain it, therefore God” is the god-of-the-gaps. As Neil deGrasse Tyson put it (paraphrasing) it makes God an ever-shrinking pocket of scientific ignorance. I.e. the more we learn, the more God diminishes. Not very omnipotent.

There are species that could be genetically closer to Homo sapiens that are not classified as such. Any of our Homo predecessors, and perhaps even Australopithecines. They have human genes that chimpanzees lack.

Attack ideas/arguments, not people. This crosses a line.

Because some people want simple answers to questions they don’t want to think about very much. Others are uncomfortable with the notion that there isn’t some grand plan - probably the same set that proclaim that without a supreme deity life can have no purpose. ID is just an offshoot that tries to leverage the credibility of science and get past any gatekeepers trying to keep religion separate.

I refer you to the item I quoted: “would a chimpanzee with 20 gene edits be human?”

Unlike people in the Monty Python sketch, Mrs. Tilly like both woody and tinny words

I’s hard to understand what motivates people, but I imagine they get some kind of a thrill. Similar to how trolls enjoy stirring things up by saying outrageous things, perhaps.

Like I said, he’s fictional. Meant as a generic example in a request for more information. i.e. someone that you might identify

No, she likes Sally the saloonkeeper.

Reasons for banning are rules violations. Less serious violations will get you warnings and then a suspension, which allows an opportunity to modify the offending behavior. But if the pattern is not broken it ends in a ban. Multiple moderators typically concur before this happens, which means there might be a lag in time between an infraction and mod action. Serious infractions can mean an instant ban - posting porn, bigoted and/or profanity-laced diatribes or attacks, spamming, making a second account to avoid a suspension or ban. These do not necessarily require a second opinion. The mechanics? A moderator clicks a few things. Spam-banning usually includes the hiding of the offending threads. I will note that being wrong is not a rules violation, but ignoring correction/feedback or reasonable requests for corroboration (valid research citations) quickly becomes soapboxing, which is.

Which one do you want? Joe’s a fictitious example

Answered, to some extent, in the thread. In any event, I doubt you’re going to get clarification at this point.

He’s of African descent, so he has a very low neanderthal composition.

The OP specified “common ancestry with the rest of the apes” so it’s hominin.

Moderator NoteAsking about downvotes is OT. Deal with it. It’s sad that anyone has to nitpick at this level. Bored, are we? Accusation about anyone being deliberately obtuse is an overreach, since you can’t possibly know. Misunderstanding and misinterpretation happens all the time. People are not mind readers. Don’t create a standard you can’t live up to. Accusations of sockpuppetry in the thread are OT - they should be reported - but by itself is unhelpful. Mods can sniff out sockpuppets but we’re not going to match a posting style against all the other people who have posted here.

Moderator NoteFile removed. Please review the rules. Material for discussion must be posted here, and not be any AI content.

Yes. And if dark matter is a result of curvature, doesn’t this mean a modification of the equations of GR?

Higher or lower than what? Than average? Than Joe the bartender? When using a comparative you need a reference.

The necrophilia comment is in reference to the thread being long dead (usually referred to as necromancy, but probably changed given the sexual tone of the thread) Expecting statistics from people giving uninformed opinion is rather optimistic, as is expecting a response to a 15-yo post froma member whi hasn’t been here for 5 years

And one that’s really unnecessary to point out since it’s OT, and something the mods wish people would stop doing. That’s a discussion for another thread.

I think the context here has been lost. The OP asked if getting a shot from a person on the street should give you a shot, which already assumes that the vaccine is available. If you can’t afford healthcare, that’s a separate, and much bigger problem, and not solved by Jo or Joe Random having a syringe in their hand.

Clocks don’t measure coordinate time, they measure proper time. TCB corresponds a particular frame - the barycenter of the solar system, with an offset for gravitational time dilation. Similar to how we offset clocks when calculating UTC.

Clocks that contribute to UTC are in different gravitational potentials. How is that different? There are efforts to come up with a timescale to use on the moon, and for time in arbitrary locations in space (DSAC) Kinda like the Hafele-Keating experiment, only more complicated. Like how clocks in UTC must make elevation corrections. Because you keep arguing points that imply or say so, such as: If it measures time, it’s a clock.

Moderator Note…and this is where you took a sharp turn into WAG nonsense that is in no way compliant with speculations. (not to imply the veracity of anything else). Don’t post such nonsense here again.

A clock located at the appropriate location will give you that time, or something that could be converted to it. (e.g. adjust for the gravitational time dilation, which we do for UTC) You can do a similar conversion for any other location and frame.