MigL

So, who's taking bets ? I'll put $20 on Clay being gone within 10 posts or less. ( mind you that's 20 Canadian, so only about $15 US )

I'm not laboring under any impression, Dim. I just thought it was an interesting case with a 'twist' on the part of the brother. Although I find what he did admirable, if I was in his situation and my brother was killed, I could not do that ( nor would I want to ). Is it wrong to admire a quality that you don't aspire to ?

Don't have a problem with self-driving cars. As long as Boeing doesn't write the MCAS code for them...

So Dim, what do you think of the recent sentencing of the American female police officer who shot her neighbor, thinking he was an intruder into her apartment, when evidence ( doormats, locking doors, furniture ) should have easily led her to realize she was in HIS apartment ? Apparently the younger brother of the slain victim hugged and forgave the woman, who only got 10 yrs. Evidence not presented in court indicates she may have been racist, and she may have had previous issues with the black victim.

Maybe he'll have a mental breakdown, and his Presidency will end with him being carted off in a straight-jacket. ( I assure you I'm not trying to be insensitive to the plight of the mentally ill ) Did anyone notice how he lost control during the press conference with the Finnish President? "That he would unleash a blizzard of lies is by now to be expected, but perhaps more important was how angry, aggrieved and petulant he was, lashing out at his opponents and the assembled reporters alike." ( MSN news feed description ) And his response for the impending impeachment, for his abuse of the Office's power to have a political opponent investigated, is to ask another foreign state ( China ) to also investigate the Bidens. I think he's starting to come undone. ( wait, did I say 'starting' ? )

I remember reading about the collisionless Boltzmann equation and the Jeans analysis in some MIT lecture notes a while back https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/physics/8-902-astrophysics-ii-fall-2004/lecture-notes/ Unfortunately only the first 11 lectures are available, and the omitted ones probably contain the 'good stuff'. Maybe you can recommend some 'light' reading Mordred.

I suppose a lot depends on the mass of DM particles and the 'curvature' of the geodesics they are constrained to follow. Even if massless ( moving at c ), any contact with an event horizon ( actually even larger ) will constrain them along inescapable geodesics ( as Sensei/Janus mention ). But DM particle motion at sub-light speed will allow them to be captured by sufficiently massive objects, as evidenced by the concentrations about galaxies. Not necessarily interacting with anything, just following curved trajectories which keep them localized. This may be a way to determine a lower bound on the mass of DM particles, as they need to be captured in considerable quantities by galaxies.

Exactly ! And the reason is because the message is delivered in a way that involves our emotion, not our critical thinking. This thread is not about AGW, and nobody ( on this forum at least ) contests the problems caused already, and that will be caused in the future, by AGW. As INow mentions above, appeal to emotion resulted in Brexit. Appeal to emotion resulted in support/election of D Trump. Appeal to emotion caused Nationalism/Fascism and continues to cause anti-Semitism/racism. How long do you want me to make this list ? We might all agree with the message, but I thought we were supposed to value critical thinking above all else on a Science Forum.

No, Zap. Her age is an emotional 'hook' to most people. Most feel the need, instinctively, to 'protect' young people. And her voting ineligibility means she shouldn't be able to affect her Government. Unless you want to change voting rights. But what does any of that have to do with the veracity of her argument ? Did it put any doubt in your mind about AGW ? I don't think it did to anyone else. I don't expect she is offended by anyone stating her age. Why are you offended for her ?

I seem to recall you often saying that thinking emotionally is usually a bad idea, Phi, and we should do more critical thinking. The fact that she is so passionate about AGW while still a teenager, is what affects us emotionally, Zapatos. I didn't think mentioning her age ( and getting it wrong ) would be seen as a personal attack. And while I realize that INow's assholes are out there ( as evidenced by Dimreepr's links ), I really don't think anyone on this forum has attacked her personally.

Actually Dimreepr's OP was exactly about G Thunberg and the way she's been treated on social media, with some examples linked by Dimreepr. We have proceeded to go off topic and have discussed aspects of the message which are intended to appeal to our emotions rather than presenting evidence/information. No-one on this forum has attacked G Thunberg, and very few have even mentioned her; just aspects of her message. We are a science site, and aspects of her message are open for discussion. Let's not shut down debate because we confuse the message with the messenger.

"You (and Sensei) are ignoring the fact that most people are moved by emotion but left cold by facts." Isn't that what got you guys in the Brexit mess ? ( wrong thread, but seems quite appropriate ) "We can discuss “oughts” all we want, but reality demands we focus on what is " And gave you D Trump for President ? ( again wrong thread, but also appropriate )

I see some others have recognized the 'problem' that I mentioned earlier. Thousands of scientists and other informed people have been presenting factual evidence and advising Governments for years about GW, but Governments tend to think 4 yrs at a time, instead of long term ( but that's another 'problem' for another thread ) and have been mostly ignored. Yet a young person makes a plea for action on GW that tugs at emotion, and she becomes the 'face' of GW activism. Emotion is a bad precursor to Government policy because it is usually countered by emotion from the opposing side ( as Daniel, Sensei and others have mentioned ). We strive to be scientists on this Forum, and should rely on facts and evidence, not emotion. And so should Governments.

Just to splash some cold water on everyone's face. I agree that AGW is a serious issue, BUT... What if she had come out and said "I'm sick and tired of all you old white men, living high off the hog and spending money that you don't have on social programs, pensions, health care,the arts, etc. This is all borrowed money, which you won't have to pay back ( because you'll be dead ), and it'll be my, and my generation's, debt; which I'll either have to repay at a considerable financial burden, or live my life without the benefits which you had." This is also something which will affect her generation much more adversely than it does ours. Who would be rushing to praise her in such a situation ? It is not the fact that she is a girl, or supports a righteous cause that is problematic. It is the fact that she is 15 yrs old and not even of voting age, and she is telling democratically elected world leaders what to do. Let's keep a perspective, people.

I had never heard of her either, and it is certainly interesting. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

Looks like she is the only one trending up of the top five. The other four are trending down, and the rest are holding steady in the basement. Bu it's still early, can she keep climbing ( and take the lead ) until next February to June ? Or will the rest turn on her like they did with J Biden ?

Whether they want to be or not, the UK will always be linked to Europe in some way or other. If they leave the EU, the best they can hope for is a comprehensive trade deal, similar to our North American USMCA/NAFTA. But, even if they could manage to negotiate a deal, they would still have to abide by trade regulations imposed by foreign nationals. Would it not be less painful to stay in the EU and have some measure of control/authority over those trade regulations ? Have another referendum already. ( or, at least, a referendum on whether to have another referendum )

That is the case of a victim claiming damages from an 'assailant' who enslaved her. I would suggest the outcome of the lawsuit would have differed had it been brought by a descendant of H Wood. As an example, if I were to get assaulted, and lose the ability to work for a period of time, I could sue the assailant for damages. If this resulted in my not being able to make investments which generate wealth for my children, do you think my children could possibly win a lawsuit to reclaim that 'lost' wealth ? Note that this is not an argument against reparations, but a question as to the suitability of your example and its application to future generations. Reparations for ancestral victimization is still in uncharted waters, and will require careful navigation, or it may cause more problems than it fixes.

I guess when you've gotten away with so much sh*t during the last three years, you think you can get away with anything. The buffoon was finally done in by the 'perfect' phone call. Is it too early to have an impeachment party ?

It's the same argument you used when you said "Is it your choice to be in the high risk category?"

You would then think a lot more people would be moving to Finland. Yet, approximately 18000 people left Finland last year, and 16800 moved there. Maybe they don't take that many immigrants. How is that justice; Is it their choice not to be born in Finland ?

She's beautiful, Moon. No wonder you're so proud.

And, if you are hungry, most people will give you food. Why would you need to steal ( embarrassment maybe ) when all you need do is ask ?

People don't steal when they're about to die, Dimreepr, as they would be too weak; They might steal when they are hungry ( or need a fix, or just want your property ). My wanting to keep my possessions is not killing you, or everyone who you don't steal from is also killing you, because they're not giving you any food either. So this has nothing to do with your right to live, or my right to kill you, and I don't know what tunnel you're heading down. It comes down to, either everyone has equal rights. Or some people's rights are more important than others. Or no-one has any rights, we all do as we please and damn the other guy. So stop the hyperbole ( you can be hungry for a month without dying ) and pick one

Exocet was certainly not cheap by sea-skimming anti-warship missiles of the time. Neither was it a weapon system, rather, part of a system. The other part consisted of D-B Super Etendard jets, which were being forced to operate at the extremities of their operational range along with A-4 Skyhawks, having to take off from mainland airfields. That is one reason Royal Navy Harrier jump jets dominated the airspace This was planned by the Royal forces, and is the reason for the long range strikes by re-commissioned Vulcan bombers on the island runways, denying Argentine forces a local base to defend from. Considering the distance involved, it was actually a well planned operation by the Brits. And planning is the most important aspect of force projection, not weapons.