Phi for All

! Moderator Note The format of this OP asks for a diagnosis, and the site owners have asked that we not play internet doctor. Please continue seeking professional health care. If you have specific questions about medicine, please post them in a different thread.

Which really makes it seem like you're only here to promote your site. If you posted it everywhere but here, good luck with the discussion.

What sort of changes do you mean, and what kind of abuse? Would developing calluses where one was beaten often count as a positive physiological change? Or since this is genetics, are you talking about something positive you could pass along to an offspring?

Probably not. Like any organization, a union is subject to pressures from within and without. The ideal goal, imo, should be stability and safety wrt the workplace and its compensation. In the US, union workers were able to participate in the economy more robustly than the rest of the working class. Sometimes I wonder if some union leaders went too far left on purpose in order to help facilitate union busting. Many modern practices mask efforts to keep workforces from unionizing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_busting

One thing to look for: whenever a publicly-funded program gets an injection of "competitiveness" from a private vendor, they almost always have to kneecap the public program to get an even playing field so the private group can "compete". Private funding has to do everything public funding does PLUS make a profit. Or... OR... since the efficiency experts of the 60s and 70s ran out of ways to reduce the bottom line, in the 80s and 90s the intense desire for cheaper labor and automation led many industrialists to invest in breaking up unions that demanded consistent compensation and beneficial workplace protocols. In the US, this led famously to the decoupling of productivity and middle class wages, which has caused so many of the problems we see today.

Actually, I just came up with a salve (made from... um, lizard oil) that will grow big, hairy breasts on your willie. It's not cheap, though.

If you've got politicians banging on about how some good old-fashioned business techniques are needed to get the NHS shipshape, just line them up against the wall and shoot them now. It will save you 60 years of bloodsucking corruption.

Eat healthy and don't overstress your hair. There's no evidence you can increase growth rate significantly beyond that with products.

It's a real red flag to me when a social program is in trouble because they've spent funds unwisely, and the only political recourse is to give them more money. "Desperate" measures often reap profit for those suggest the need for them. Qverstocking equipment or trying to make a one-size-fits-all-for-convenience kit doesn't sound like a group focused on efficient healthcare, but rather a group looking to funnel more public funds to private vendors who equate "better" with "more". Still, I wish the US had your system. Your corruptions are tiny by comparison. I think involving private business heavily in publicly funded programs without heavy regulation is a mistake many democracies make.

! Moderator Note Also OP, decide if you want to include your god in this argument or not. If you go with the supernatural, this can't stay in mainstream Physics. Let me know and I'll move it to Religion.

As long as this doesn't mean, "If you don't agree with me, stay out!", all will be well. Learning isn't always pleasant, but it's always good.

Wow, talk about an over-reaction! You'll need thicker skin if you start science discussions with "Einstein was WRONG!!!" arguments. You'll also need more supportive evidence. There's mounds of it that says you're the one who's wrong. Btw, nobody is mocking you, or even your idea. Your argument in support of aether needs to be better supported, and that's what we're discussing, if you'll stop acting wounded.

Because you're trusting in your car's ability to start reliably, based on a variety of factors, not the least of which is that you recently had it serviced and tanked, it's summer so it isn't too cold for the battery, it has a history of starting with no problems, and it's only three years old. I'd probably be about 95% sure that car will start. But... if you borrow a friend's car without knowing anything about it, and you believe that car is going to start in the morning, you're using faith. You can't possibly know it will start, so you can either hope it will start (but keep your Uber app handy), or you can truly, 100% believe it will start right up using faith.

Why does dependency on a perspective change the way we believe in it? I depend on critical thought, which is data gathered as information using reason, tested rigorously so I can trust it to accurately represent what we observe in nature, so I can make informed choices that reflect the value of my identity. I would no more call that faith than I would call a hammer a saw or a drill. I depend on science as the most accurate, objective way to derive such information, and I see no value in listening to any individual perspective that doesn't agree with natural observation and experiment. I know why you think it's important, but I also know you can't understand why science is based on trust and not faith if you don't bother to study it rigorously. It's intellectually dishonest to discount scientific principles if you haven't studied them. This is a common claim from those facing rigorous pushback from sceptics. Since science ALWAYS looks for the best supported explanations, and uses them as a test for other explanations (Can your TOE match the accuracy of Relativity?), it can seem hidebound, especially since you may not understand the whole theory (which is probably why you might think it's wrong and needs fixing). Science perspective isn't fixed at all. In fact, that's one of the big differences between trusted beliefs and faithful beliefs; trusted beliefs are capable of figuring out when they're wrong or incomplete.

There are a great deal of money addicts who've started whole industries preying on the working class, especially those in vulnerable positions. Like folks who get in legal trouble and have to pay bonds at usurious rates to stay out of jail (even though they haven't been proven guilty at that point) so they don't lose their jobs. There are money vultures who lease cars to folks with bad credit, and they install lo-jack and kill the engine if you miss a payment, then they keep your deposits and lease the car to another desperate person just trying to get to work. These desperate folks try many different things to alter this reality, often settling for something temporary. These folks have had a conservative foot on their throat since the Nixon days, making sure only the "deserving" get a break. These folks are constantly faced with poor economic choices, like processes the banks use to keep them in debt with minimum credit payments. They represent a commodity to those who profit from privatized prisons, and the legal system that should protect them is more aimed at profiting from mistakes they've been almost engineered to make. They're so desperate they'd believe a madman who finally recognized they weren't being heard. These folks have been in a lot of pain long before the liar-in-chief discovered how manipulable they were.

Then you mean rational. Logic is for maths and philosophy. Forget what Spock said, Mr Scott. Don't like religion, don't feel like studying formal science? Both are full of hidebound folks who don't have your unique understanding?

https://www.npr.org/2016/12/17/505965420/study-communities-most-affected-by-opioid-epidemic-also-voted-for-trump It seems clear that folks hurting financially have been turning to opioid use, and were desperate enough to idolize someone wealthy who promised to fix it. We all know how difficult it is to talk to someone rationally who came to a conclusion emotionally, and these folks have to be absolutely wrung out by a system that leeches from them far more than it helps. How did this get to be a case of the pain of poverty and opioid addiction versus the ruthlessness of extreme wealth and money addiction? How frustrating is it that they support him so fervently?

If "most logical" meant "makes the most sense to me".

Very well put. And every week they do more to whittle away at the regulations that are in place to keep just such from happening. If Americans were ever asked straight out if they want to remove more regulations that allow extremist wealthy folks to get away with murder, the vast majority would say no. And that's not how our leadership votes.

We're making progress if conservatives are launching instead of lynching. It wasn't that long ago....

There are bacteria that have a reddish hue which thrive close enough to the surface to get sunlight. You can see it from shore, and don't have to be that high above it. I don't know if that's how the Red Sea got it's name. That's historically been a pretty bloody part of the world.

This is what it looks like when the only people being represented are those wealthy enough to skew results unnaturally and force their viewpoint on the rest of the population. Enough wealth buys you tailor-made news coverage (since the news no longer is required to truthfully inform), social media storms painting whatever picture suits your agenda, and lobbyists who will actually make your illicit gains legal. This country is NOT made up of moderate conservatives and extreme conservatives, but that's the way our representatives vote, compared to the rest of the major nations. That should tell us we have no representation that isn't bought with extreme wealth.

Charlottesville has nothing on Coeur d'Alene.

Your reasoning is fallacious. It's an Argument from Incredulity. You're saying, "I don't understand how it could be possible, therefore it isn't." Events and phenomena that happen all by themselves are still governed by the physics that seems to work everywhere we look. It can seem managed and mechanized, but you could say the same thing about how the ocean regularly and mechanically manages to wear down mountains.

You toggled your checker from "spelling" to "irony" again, didn't you? And that's why it's hard to argue with faith. When something you've dreamt up makes such perfect sense to you, the emotional emphasis makes the idea SEEM tangible. You become convinced you're right, and you're sure there's a good way to explain it but you can never come up with the reasoning, it always seems just out of reach.