MigL

Are you saying what D Chauvin did, wasn't criminal ??? Tell that to the cops in Atlanta at the Wendy's drive-through. They were firedupon by their own taser, shot the suspect, and are now being charged. Stop bailing straw, and rebut the argument being made. Well, it certainly cleared that factor, in my mind. Sure. Or if the union is too strong and protects the bad cops. Or, even if there is no psychological assessment after the violent behaviour. See, I can do that too. Rebut ( or even dismiss ) individual sentences, instead of the whole opinion. We seem to agree, though, that the system, especially in the US, is failing, and people are suffering for it.

Your whole post. Please elaborate.

you're gonna have to elaborate, Dim. ( do you have an aversion to typing full sentnces and ideas )

No one who is that arrogant and so sure of himself, that he would kneel on a person's neck for 4 minutes AFTER that person had died, would be able to pass a psychological screening, and subsequent re-assessments after his numerous 'excessive force' incidents. How long was this guy's assessment before he became a police officer ? How long was his training before they handed him a gun, and a position of authority ? Why did the police union allow this guy to keep his job after so many incidents ? And no, I'm not trying to 'spread' the blame, D Chauvin is responsible for his own actions. ( You should know that I'm a believer in personal responsibility, by now ) But the system is failing all of us, not just Black Americans; they are, however, the ones who suffer most from it.

Well, since we are sharing perspectives, this is my opinion on the matter. Removing monuments which are offensive to our modern sensibilities ( yes, history is VERY offensive ), is about as effective in combatting/mediating racism, as tweeting their support for a cause is for the hash-tag generation. IOW, next to useless.

Leaving the Big Bang singularity aside, and considering Black Holes for the moment. Wiki has this to say about Einstein-Cartan geometries "According to general relativity, the gravitational collapse of a sufficiently compact mass forms a singular black hole. In the Einstein–Cartan theory, instead, the collapse reaches a bounce and forms a regular Einstein–Rosen bridge (wormhole) to a new, growing universe on the other side of the event horizon." From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein–Cartan_theory I have always thought universes growing out of a wormhole, or white hole, did not fit observational evidence. X-posted with Mordred

Sure. Let's apply that to all criminal activity. You steal a loaf of bread because you're hungry, zero tolerance, you go to jail. You've been oppressed for a couple of hundred years and you cause some damage while protesting, zero tolerance, you go to jail. Someone is trying to kill you and instead of just disabling them, you use excessive force and kill them, zero tolerance, you go too jail. Or is zero tolerance only applicable to the 'causes' you deem important ? If you mean he didn't use a gun, but his knee instead, I would think that if a jackass who displays such disregard for human life, had been 'screened out' and never become a police officer, G Floyd might still be alive. Or even if D Chauvin had been re-evaluated after any of his many previous excessive force complaints.

I thought you were gonna say all those who don't want one, get shot. Watched an old movie, that I hadn't watched for quite some time, again last night. In the Heat of the Night with Sydney Poitier and Rod Steiger; Great movie, and appropriate to this discussion. Makes you realize how far we've come, and how far we still need to go

I don't know what the procedure is in the US, but in Canada, a cop is given a thorough background check ( including family members ) and a psychological screening, in an attempt to weed out the nutcases before handing them a gun. Then again, it seems you guys will give a gun to anyone who wants one ( as per your Constitution )

You mean a system that doesn't screen police officers for white supremacist or racist beliefs before handing them a gun ?

Yes, I may have suspected he was a white supremacist. Whose doubts are you questioning ? Of course motivation matters. How do you stop a problem from reoccurring unless you understand its origins.

I gave a fairly clear explanation of how greenhouse gases work. But you totally ignored my reply... I tried to engage in an informative discussion; no-one else seems to be willing.

It was a statement, not a rebuttal to any allegations. Make a difference to what ?

Did not know this... https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/us/backlash-against-asian-american-woman-married-to-ex-cop-in-george-floyd-case-reveals-disturbing-truth/ar-BB15PqZJ?ocid=msedgntp Turns out D Chauvin's ( G Floyd's killer ) was an Oriental refugee, previously in an abusive arranged marriage. That could still mean D Chauvin is racist with regard to Black Americans, or possibly just an idiot, but would cast doubts on his being a 'white supremacist'.

Air travel has been even more impacted by Covid-19. I wish we had a better ( cheaper ? ) rail system in North America, similar to European systems. I love taking the train in Europe.

If you understood the way 'greenhouse' gases work you'd know why this is. Temperatures during daytime are primarily due to radiation from the Sun, at a characteristic 'black body' ( temp of approx. 4000 deg ) frequency/wavelength such that only a minute portion of the energy is in the proper range to excite the CO2 intermolecular bonds. Night-time or low sunlight temperatures are more affected by re-radiation of heat by the Earth, at a much lower 'black body' temperature ( 20 deg ), so it is mostly in the infrared/microwave range, easily absorbed by CO2 ( and water vapor ), and a large portion of it is re-re-radiated back towards the Earth. IOW, Heat accumulated during the day, Cannot be fully re-radiated at night, and average temps increase. There is absolutely no question regarding the science of GH gases.

I am aware that Einstein-Cartan torsion, to accommodate intrinsic angular momentum, the modified Dirac equation then implies fermions have 'spatial extension'. This means that BHs smaller than 10^16 kg are not possible, and the energy required to produce such a BH, is 39 orders of magnitude greater than available at the LHC ( see my post in this thread, on June 15, 1st page ). But Einstein-Cartan GR, while it seems to be the right path forward, does have some difficulties and is awaiting observational evidence, as opposed to 'regular' GR, sans torsion ( torsion 'walls' and rotating universe; Mordred may have more info regarding observations ) I'm also aware that electron degeneracy ( Pauli exclusion ) stops further collapse in a white dwarf star, and neutron degeneracy stops further collapse in a neutron star. But, what exactly, would be the mechanism in Einstein-Cartan GR that stops gravitational collapse of a BH to a singular point ? Just the fact that E-C GR doesn't support singularities, doesn't really clarify the matter

He might mean 'Quantum Gravity' … "is anticipated to resolve any mathematical singularity issues at the center of black holes"

One or two centuries BC, a vast store house of information, hoarded by Ptolemaic kings, supposedly burned to the ground **. This accumulated ancient knowledge was lost for over a thousand years, due to an accident of nature, and only began rediscovery during the Renaissance, 1500 years later. Was that nature being unfair ? Knowledge is conclusions drawn from observational evidence. If one type of evidence is unavailable, you look for another, or you make do without. In the 'Krauss' future, there may be no more distant receding galaxies, but every once in a while, one of the galaxies in our local group ( or even individual stars ) will wander far enough to lose gravitational cohesion and will experience expansion. It will certainly be harder to formulate a Big Bang model, but it will be possible. **The Library of Alexandria didn't actually burn to the ground, that is a myth. It actually started declining with a purge of intellectuals about the 1st century BC.

Apparently D Trump's planned events in Tulsa fizzled. I'm sure he'll still brag about the 'large' attendance.

While Markus' instincts advocate 'following the math', one must also realize that sometimes the math leads to unphysical solutions, because of limitations with the model. One such is obviously the singularity, which our current theory cannot handle. Solutions such as the Schwarzschild, are unphysical because no BH is expected to be non-rotating; even the slightest rotation will be greatly increased as it collapses. The Reissner-Nordstrum solution is also nonphysical; since the accretion disc consists of ionized plasma, any charge the BH has will quickly be neutralized by infalling opposing charges, and repulsion of like charges. Another non-physical aspects of both the Kerr ( rotating ) and Reissner-Nordstrum solutions are that for certain rotation speeds, and charge, their dual Event Horizons can disappear leaving 'naked singularity' ( which is as un-physical as you can get ).

You have to stop eating fried foods, or drinking coffee, before bedtime, Strange; you have some pretty disturbing dreams. ( I still dream about women )

Why would it be insufficient to explain which is the causal factor ? ( I imagine that is what SergUpstart was alluding to ) Please explain. Or don't, as that belongs in a thread about climate change, not a thread about optimal CO2 concentrations for plant growth.

I stand corrected. Thank you Janus.

And again, Ken brings the argument back to global warming and climate change. So why did we split off this thread ??? And Swansont asks for CO2 solubility data relative to temperature, but what he's obviously after is the 'chicken or the egg' scenario posed by SergUpstart, as to which comes first. I simply gave solubility data as you requested. The real answer to your real question would be a temperature plot of the last 500 years, superimposed over a CO2 level plot during the same period, and note which leads and which trails. Strange is unequivocal in his disdain for this thread, and can't be bothered as he considers it 'junk' ! There are plenty of scientific articles ( if you can be bothered to look ) that relate plant growth rates to CO2 levels. None of them have anything to do with you guys getting so 'stressed' about what it means for climate change science. Addendum: I note that my consideration of these scientists' opinions were labelled 'arguments from authority', previously by Strange. Yet John ( not the Baptist, Studiot ) previously dismissed W Happer's opinions because of his association with D Trump. Also note that Swansont works for the Navy, whose Commander in Chief happens to also be D Trump. I may have disagreements with Swansont's opinion on occasion but I always consider it; and I would never even think of dismissing his science. What makes me wrong for giving W Happer the same consideration ? As to our previous 'confrontation', Strange, forgive my forceful language. You caught me at a bad time.