zapatos

Good point! The conspiracy theorists are making money off this, why can't we?

On the other hand it doesn't really bother me to let the willfully ignorant wallow in their fears.

Is your world different than the one Marx envisioned when he said "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"?

Then don't deny you said something. Just say you are changing the rule. That way we can avoid wasted effort.

My cousin is 6' 3" and probably 240 pounds. My niece is about 5' 1" and I doubt she tops 105 pounds. Neither have kids. If she works and he doesn't, you said she will get more food according to you. ("if he doesn't he will take a lot less than those who does") You are changing the rules as you go.

That's not what you said earlier. You directly tied how much you get to how hard you worked.

Exactly. The way it works for me is I'm allocated a certain quantity of 'numbers' from my employer; the harder I work the more numbers I get. When I go to breakfast they check to see if I have enough 'numbers' for the amount of food I'm taking. If I don't have enough numbers, the restaurant receives the following message from the place they checked my numbers: "Insufficient Funds".

Agree with both of you. How science works, and the up-front fuzziness of the future benefits, makes it a relatively hard sell for the average citizen. Road repair on the other hand is well understood. If you are trying to put together a sales pitch for public funding of a science project, you need to get people to understand long term benefits. If the people think you are trying to create jobs so that highly educated people can do stuff like examine the mating habits of dung beetles, then you are not going to get much support. But if you want funding that will make sure your neighbor gets off unemployment and you no longer ruin your tires on that crappy road, people will be all for that.

If your goal is to create more jobs you should aim a bit lower than the LHC. A billion dollars devoted to growing and harvesting potatoes, or road repair, will generate a lot more jobs than a highly complex science experiment.

I do. I just don't remember this part...

I don't remember this from the Bible. It sounds more like you are asking us to interpret your interpretation of a metaphor. Where is that going to lead us?

Dig in your heels. Never give in. Never concede a point. It will make you look weak.

How is that not fair? It will look exactly the same to observers from any of those other billions of galaxies as it looks to us.

No, I do not disagree with the cosmological principle. It does however appear that you don't understand the cosmological principle. The cosmological principle does not state that everyone will see the same thing at all times. Which should be obvious to anyone who recognizes that things change over time.

You're right. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. I just couldn't believe you presented another straw man right after the notes from Phi. Sorry. I should have stayed out of it.

Why do you think that?

Either you've misunderstood a simple concept, or you are hanging onto the concept of "preferred position" like a dog on a bone to the extent that common sense and reason cannot get you to realize its limited use.

Looking at it from a very simple perspective, the universe has a fixed amount of matter/energy. Things are made and break down all the time; planets, mountains, people, molecules. Since there is a fixed amount of stuff in the universe, you are made of up what was once something else, and in the future parts of your body will go into the construction of other things. Every breath you take is likely to have molecules in it from the very last breath of Caesar.

They are NOT the exact same things. You are confusing the word "special" with the word "preferred". We don't laugh at the the idea of the Earth being in a special place, we laugh at the idea that the Earth might be in a preferred place. When you were but a wee child and your mother said you were "her special boy", she simply meant you held some significance for her. You were 'neat', or 'cool'. She wasn't implying that the universe was centered on you. Similarly, we live in a special time and place. We witnessed the first time humans detected gravity waves and the invention of the autostereogram. If we weren't at this location (on Earth) at this time, we could not have seen that with our own eyes. Unfortunately we did not exist at that special time when the four fundamental forces were combined, but we are lucky to live at the special time when all these superclusters can be detected. And that is really neat.

And don't forget the TikTok users and the K-pop fans! https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-trump-tiktok-users-k-140409817.html

Yes, I'm wondering if that is part of the disconnect. You suggest that we prejudge, while it seems to me that you fail to post-judge. And we didn't pre-judge Essereio btw. It wasn't until after he spoke that he was judged. In my opinion, no, not all opinions should be tolerated. That is pretty much what this whole thread is about.

Sorry, but like with most of life's subtleties, racists don't wear scarlet "R"'s on their sleeves. We are required to listen to their dog whistles and innuendo, what they complain about and what they don't, to understand them. For most of us, we do not need to hear a person say "black Americans are less than human" to know what they think about black Americans.

No thank you. I don't buy it when Trump pretends he didn't mean what he said, I didn't engage with Essereio when he tried to obfuscate his words, and I don't intend to to get bogged down in the minutia with you as you defend him. You suggesting he is not racist if I cannot find a specific quote from him is not a compelling argument. Possibly we're all wrong about him and you are right, but it is also possible you cannot see what the rest of us can because knowingly or not, you have bought into some aspects of racism. I've done it myself in the past.

Do you think that is what we are doing here?

There is no question in my mind that the term "racist" has been misused in some cases. As more and more racists no longer feel the need to keep their racist thoughts to themselves, more and more people are responding by calling them out. This is bound to lead to some mislabeling. But that is the nature of words and people. Not everyone thinks through what they are saying, not everyone distinguishes between racism and bigotry. But if used correctly there is no reason to avoid the use that word. Can you show where someone in this thread called a person a racist with the intent to "hurt"? Unfortunately meaningful discussions about race with racists is a fool's errand. As is said so often on this site, you cannot reason someone out of a belief that they did not reason themselves into. Frankly I don't care if someone is a racist or not, just as I don't care if someone believes in god or not. But I draw the line if that person hurts another, either through speech or action. There should be consequences for mistreating your fellow human beings, whether through job loss, public shaming, or banning. Edit: Sorry, I was in mid-edit and didn't see the split.