Dark matter doesn't interact visibily with light or matter. Comets or "random space debris" will not cause consistent 20% dimming.
And yet it's still equally likely, since as the original article, and several posters have pointed out, the whole "it was aliens! Dyson sphere!" thing would be causing large emissions in the IR area, which are not present.
Also, the term "dark matter" is not just applied to exotic invisible space matter, but also to clouds of gas and dust that are just too cold to emit any light (hence, dark). Random space debris in large enough concentrations, oort cloud distortions from another star (the small red dwarf about 130 billion km out that the article mentions) are again a possible cause.
The problems with the majority of these ideas (including the dyson sphere/swarm/...) is that most of them would be showing additional signs like glowing brightly in IR, which is just not present.
Also, the dimming is not a consistent 20% - it's changing frequently, and not in a smooth or repeating pattern. (which would suggest a planet or other orbital body) If anything, what makes it interesting is that it's not consistent, but it keeps happening.
Well, since it's 1500 light years away, that means what we're seeing is from 1500 years ago. Yes, more than likely, if there was anyone alive at that location when what we're seeing happened, they're probably dead by now. Of course, it's just as possible that we're seeing the star in question being blocked off by comets, clouds of dark matter, or other random space debris.
Seems a bit condescending, why wouldn't a girl be able to do this?
Er... the last sentence was "What's of particular interest is the study's author is a 17-year-old high school student from Ohio." - the "interesting" part is that they're a highschool student and 17 years old, with a published scientific paper to their name. The summary doesn't even mention that they're a girl, you'd have to go and read the article to find that out.
Reading the article... what kind of first post-er are you?
Unfortunately, as that pool shrinks, they also seem to be gravitating towards public office and legislative positions, which allow them to yell even louder, and pretend that everyone else is just like them.
What I'd do in that case is fail the ones who were (by his admission) already failing anyways. In a room with only a bit over 30 students (which is what this guy had), if you can't get people to settle down and shut up during class, that's your own fault. After the first midterm, you should be able to call each and every one of them by name. This is from experience. The classes I taught varied between 38 and 275 students, and in the 38 student class, I knew who each and every one of them was by mid-semester, including the two who only showed up for midterms. Saying things like "Dave, if you turned off the video game and payed attention in class, you might actually pass the next midterm" gets the laptop switched off fast in a room that small. In the 275 student class, I knew the names of all of the top students, and all of the problem students, and when kicking someone out for being disruptive, always used their name to do so - it points out to them that they're not anonymous, and they're not getting away with anything.
"Investigated and overturned as without merit" doesn't mean cheating didn't occur in that instance.
Very true, but back when I was teaching, every instance of cheating that I bothered reporting was upheld by the administration, and in one case resulted in a deportation. The ones I didn't bother reporting were because their cheating led to them failing anyways. (In one case, five times, with two mandatory one-year academic suspensions in-between. The sixth time he was in the class, I forced him to sit where he couldn't see any other students during the exams, and took his phone away - he got 80%. He knew the answers, he just wasn't willing to read his own @#%* test paper.) Well designed and set up exams and assignments tend to make cheating range between "more difficult than it's worth", and "likely to cause you to fail". And even then, failing a whole class, including students you've admitted don't deserve it, as revenge against a few (or even several) cheaters is inappropriate.
Well, we can eliminate possibility two right off the bat, since the prof admitted in an interview that some of the students in the class were actually good students and doing well academically, and he failed them all anyways.
Also, other details skipped in the top-linked article: The class size is somewhere just above 30 (likely less than 40), the prof is non-tenured, at least one of his cheating accusations was already investigated and overturned as without merit, and there apparently multiple complaints about him from past students already.
From the articles I've read about it, the prof even admits that some of the class were honest, hard working, and doing well academically in the class. He threw a temper tantrum because some of the other students were mean to him, and failed all of them, good and bad.
Also, at least one of his cheating allegations was investigated and overturned by their university's administration. This sounds mostly like sour grapes.
I taught at a university for about ten years before moving off to private industry (sessional prof jobs pay poorly) and I've run into almost every behavior he complained about in the article and more, but never even once would I have considered punishing the students who were actually showing up and doing the work for the behavior of the ones who don't.
This guy picked the wrong way to deal with his problems, and the university administration is right to overturn his grading. Especially since he even admits that not all of the students deserved it. The USA is full of lawyer-happy lawsuit maniacs, and this is a situation where the university would be absolutely buried in litigation, which it would rightfully lose, if they didn't overturn it and assign grades based on academic performance.
1. Just tell them you only have Linux, they'll hang up immediately.
I tried that when they called me many years ago (back when windows XP was new... and they had the same recorded opening message back then) and the guy on the phone told me that no I didn't, my computer was a Microsoft Windows Computer, because that is what everyone has. He literally would not believe me that I wasn't using Windows. He actually got angry with me. It was kinda funny really.
Another good trick to use is to pretend you're trying to follow their instructions, and that it's just not working.
Tell them your virus scanner is giving you alerts, they'll think you're a really good target. If your phone has a 'mute' option, ask them to hold on for a second because you've got another call. Come back within a minute or two, and if they're still there, lead them on again. Never let on that you aren't actually following their instructions, never let on that you know it's a scam. As long as they think they've got you hooked, they'll keep trying. As soon as you reveal that you're not buying into their lines, they'll cut bait and look for someone else to scam.
That's the big difference between the major scammers like this, and the ordinary telemarketers who just want to sell you things you don't need while you're trying to eat dinner - the scammers are allowed to hang up. The regular telemarketers aren't, and you can spend an hour telling them all about the coffee cup sitting on your desk.
First, your math is way off if you've got your comment/threat numbers that far backwards.
Second, if you actually watch her videos, instead of just the clips of them interspersed through thunderf00t's angry ranting, you'll find that yes, she actually does debunk them, and covers the "numbers game" you're taking about with your "a million male characters die for every female character" thing. "Random ninja being shot/chopped down in a fight" is not the same thing as "mostly naked woman splayed out on a bed with a knife in her as a prop". Those random ninjas? They're wearing masks and could just as easily be very flat chested women. Yes, that's sarcasm. I'm not suggesting that anyone actually believes that they're female, but really, there's no way of knowing, and their gender isn't related to why they're being killed, and the game would be the same if they were male, female, or genderless robots in costumes. The sad part? If they were intended to be female ninjas that you're mowing through? Instead of the full ninja armor/pajamas they're wearing, they'd be mostly naked.
Now take that nude female corpse on the bed, not even killed by the player - killed by the antagonist as a "see how evil he is?" prop. How many male victims are portrayed in the same way? No, the answer isn't "millions", it's "nearly never".
Your constant claims that she won't address these points are sounding like Fox News complaining that Obama won't fight the ISIS groups that he's currently bombing the shit out of.
In a large number of jurisdictions, "uttering a threat" and "uttering a death threat" are capital crimes completely separate from harassment, and as capital crimes, charges can only be filed by the authorities, and not by the affected target. This was a major case in the city I used to live in, as someone was given death threats repeatedly from the same source, reported it to the authorities, who ignored it, and then the person making the threats followed through on them. (cue rapid ass-covering on behalf of law enforcement and the psych ward of the hospital that had certified the threat-maker as stable and not a threat to anyone, even after they knew about the threats)
Who are you to judge someone else's lifestyle choices or sexual orientations?
A sane, rational, non sociopathic human being with the capacity to feel empathy for others? Don't pull the "YOU CAN'T JUDGE ME!!!!111one1!" crap, it's pointless, and stupid. Every human being judges every other human being they encounter, every time they encounter them. You're judging the person you're responding to by trying to claim they aren't suited to make judgements about others. And yes, if you get off on looking at mutilated, naked, dead women, I'm judging you to be unsuited to belong in civilized society. So will any other sane, rational, non sociopath. Deal with it.
Those games are perfectly legal.
There are plenty of "perfectly legal" actions which are flat out disgusting and immoral. If the only defense you can come up with for disgusting hateful behavior is that "it isn't specifically illegal!", then you're admitting that you've already lost the argument.
It's arguable whether having five million flyers is a safe thing
It's not even arguable - it's absolutely not a safe thing. The street I used to live on was littered with bits of cars that fell off, and then the owner didn't even bother going back to get. Hub caps, mirrors, door handles, mufflers, once a whole rear fender. Basic maintenance, or even "taking care not to run into things" is an alien concept to a lot of drivers, most of whom will be the first one to get angry and confrontational if you suggest that maybe they need to take better care of things.
And the Flying Car advocates want these people flying over top of my house?
No thank you. There's enough things to worry about dying from than some idiot's fender falling on me while I'm walking down the street.
Also, sea levels were much higher - like, over a hundred meters higher. Higher enough to sell ocean-front property in Kansas - here's a neat toy to visualize sea level increases with current geography: http://merkel.zoneo.net/Topo/Applet/
Sadly, it's a Java Applet, meaning you'll have to fight through permissions and version updates and crap, but if you can get past that, it's a good demonstration of why melting the ice caps is a bad idea, especially if you live in Florida or Louisiana.
Not only no livestock and huge predators, but also much higher sea levels, with most of inland North America (and probably Australia) flooded year-round and under water. That'll be great for farming!
Stick your head in a smoke stack and see how long that idea holds up for, or even just hanging out in some of the worse areas of China.
While technically many people would suffocate in an atmosphere which contained zero carbon dioxide (it triggers the breathing reflex when enough builds up in the lungs. You can breathe deliberately, but not while asleep.) excessive carbon dioxide is not breathable. Additionally, the majority of the producers of carbon dioxide are also pumping out hundreds of other pollutants into the atmosphere at the same time, the vast majority of which are very much not breathable. This is why people can die from being closed into a car where the exhaust system is leaking into the passenger cabin.
Slashdot Mirror
Dark matter doesn't interact visibily with light or matter. Comets or "random space debris" will not cause consistent 20% dimming.
And yet it's still equally likely, since as the original article, and several posters have pointed out, the whole "it was aliens! Dyson sphere!" thing would be causing large emissions in the IR area, which are not present.
Also, the term "dark matter" is not just applied to exotic invisible space matter, but also to clouds of gas and dust that are just too cold to emit any light (hence, dark). Random space debris in large enough concentrations, oort cloud distortions from another star (the small red dwarf about 130 billion km out that the article mentions) are again a possible cause.
The problems with the majority of these ideas (including the dyson sphere/swarm/...) is that most of them would be showing additional signs like glowing brightly in IR, which is just not present.
Also, the dimming is not a consistent 20% - it's changing frequently, and not in a smooth or repeating pattern. (which would suggest a planet or other orbital body) If anything, what makes it interesting is that it's not consistent, but it keeps happening.
Well, since it's 1500 light years away, that means what we're seeing is from 1500 years ago. Yes, more than likely, if there was anyone alive at that location when what we're seeing happened, they're probably dead by now. Of course, it's just as possible that we're seeing the star in question being blocked off by comets, clouds of dark matter, or other random space debris.
Seems a bit condescending, why wouldn't a girl be able to do this?
Er... the last sentence was "What's of particular interest is the study's author is a 17-year-old high school student from Ohio." - the "interesting" part is that they're a highschool student and 17 years old, with a published scientific paper to their name. The summary doesn't even mention that they're a girl, you'd have to go and read the article to find that out.
Reading the article... what kind of first post-er are you?
Unfortunately, as that pool shrinks, they also seem to be gravitating towards public office and legislative positions, which allow them to yell even louder, and pretend that everyone else is just like them.
What I'd do in that case is fail the ones who were (by his admission) already failing anyways. In a room with only a bit over 30 students (which is what this guy had), if you can't get people to settle down and shut up during class, that's your own fault. After the first midterm, you should be able to call each and every one of them by name. This is from experience. The classes I taught varied between 38 and 275 students, and in the 38 student class, I knew who each and every one of them was by mid-semester, including the two who only showed up for midterms. Saying things like "Dave, if you turned off the video game and payed attention in class, you might actually pass the next midterm" gets the laptop switched off fast in a room that small. In the 275 student class, I knew the names of all of the top students, and all of the problem students, and when kicking someone out for being disruptive, always used their name to do so - it points out to them that they're not anonymous, and they're not getting away with anything.
"Investigated and overturned as without merit" doesn't mean cheating didn't occur in that instance.
Very true, but back when I was teaching, every instance of cheating that I bothered reporting was upheld by the administration, and in one case resulted in a deportation. The ones I didn't bother reporting were because their cheating led to them failing anyways. (In one case, five times, with two mandatory one-year academic suspensions in-between. The sixth time he was in the class, I forced him to sit where he couldn't see any other students during the exams, and took his phone away - he got 80%. He knew the answers, he just wasn't willing to read his own @#%* test paper.) Well designed and set up exams and assignments tend to make cheating range between "more difficult than it's worth", and "likely to cause you to fail". And even then, failing a whole class, including students you've admitted don't deserve it, as revenge against a few (or even several) cheaters is inappropriate.
Well, we can eliminate possibility two right off the bat, since the prof admitted in an interview that some of the students in the class were actually good students and doing well academically, and he failed them all anyways.
Also, other details skipped in the top-linked article: The class size is somewhere just above 30 (likely less than 40), the prof is non-tenured, at least one of his cheating accusations was already investigated and overturned as without merit, and there apparently multiple complaints about him from past students already.
He's not even in a tenured position - in this case, he's more likely looking at a permanent leave of absence. Here's an article with more details: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/04/27/professor-fails-his-entire-class-and-his-university-intervenes
From the articles I've read about it, the prof even admits that some of the class were honest, hard working, and doing well academically in the class. He threw a temper tantrum because some of the other students were mean to him, and failed all of them, good and bad.
Also, at least one of his cheating allegations was investigated and overturned by their university's administration. This sounds mostly like sour grapes.
I taught at a university for about ten years before moving off to private industry (sessional prof jobs pay poorly) and I've run into almost every behavior he complained about in the article and more, but never even once would I have considered punishing the students who were actually showing up and doing the work for the behavior of the ones who don't.
This guy picked the wrong way to deal with his problems, and the university administration is right to overturn his grading. Especially since he even admits that not all of the students deserved it. The USA is full of lawyer-happy lawsuit maniacs, and this is a situation where the university would be absolutely buried in litigation, which it would rightfully lose, if they didn't overturn it and assign grades based on academic performance.
No.... Jellyfish are carnivores. They eat plankton, crustaceans, and small fish, which will be among the things that die off due to acidification
Well, the plural of Ox (the big smelly cow-like animal) is Oxen.
Perhaps this is a hint that something about this whole thing stinks?
I tried that when they called me many years ago (back when windows XP was new... and they had the same recorded opening message back then) and the guy on the phone told me that no I didn't, my computer was a Microsoft Windows Computer, because that is what everyone has. He literally would not believe me that I wasn't using Windows. He actually got angry with me. It was kinda funny really.
Another good trick to use is to pretend you're trying to follow their instructions, and that it's just not working.
Tell them your virus scanner is giving you alerts, they'll think you're a really good target. If your phone has a 'mute' option, ask them to hold on for a second because you've got another call. Come back within a minute or two, and if they're still there, lead them on again. Never let on that you aren't actually following their instructions, never let on that you know it's a scam. As long as they think they've got you hooked, they'll keep trying. As soon as you reveal that you're not buying into their lines, they'll cut bait and look for someone else to scam.
That's the big difference between the major scammers like this, and the ordinary telemarketers who just want to sell you things you don't need while you're trying to eat dinner - the scammers are allowed to hang up. The regular telemarketers aren't, and you can spend an hour telling them all about the coffee cup sitting on your desk.
I suspect you've edited that transcript, as it appears to be missing the five minutes straight of laughing.
First, your math is way off if you've got your comment/threat numbers that far backwards.
Second, if you actually watch her videos, instead of just the clips of them interspersed through thunderf00t's angry ranting, you'll find that yes, she actually does debunk them, and covers the "numbers game" you're taking about with your "a million male characters die for every female character" thing. "Random ninja being shot/chopped down in a fight" is not the same thing as "mostly naked woman splayed out on a bed with a knife in her as a prop". Those random ninjas? They're wearing masks and could just as easily be very flat chested women. Yes, that's sarcasm. I'm not suggesting that anyone actually believes that they're female, but really, there's no way of knowing, and their gender isn't related to why they're being killed, and the game would be the same if they were male, female, or genderless robots in costumes. The sad part? If they were intended to be female ninjas that you're mowing through? Instead of the full ninja armor/pajamas they're wearing, they'd be mostly naked.
Now take that nude female corpse on the bed, not even killed by the player - killed by the antagonist as a "see how evil he is?" prop. How many male victims are portrayed in the same way? No, the answer isn't "millions", it's "nearly never".
Your constant claims that she won't address these points are sounding like Fox News complaining that Obama won't fight the ISIS groups that he's currently bombing the shit out of.
In a large number of jurisdictions, "uttering a threat" and "uttering a death threat" are capital crimes completely separate from harassment, and as capital crimes, charges can only be filed by the authorities, and not by the affected target. This was a major case in the city I used to live in, as someone was given death threats repeatedly from the same source, reported it to the authorities, who ignored it, and then the person making the threats followed through on them. (cue rapid ass-covering on behalf of law enforcement and the psych ward of the hospital that had certified the threat-maker as stable and not a threat to anyone, even after they knew about the threats)
Who are you to judge someone else's lifestyle choices or sexual orientations?
A sane, rational, non sociopathic human being with the capacity to feel empathy for others? Don't pull the " YOU CAN'T JUDGE ME!!!!111one1! " crap, it's pointless, and stupid. Every human being judges every other human being they encounter, every time they encounter them. You're judging the person you're responding to by trying to claim they aren't suited to make judgements about others. And yes, if you get off on looking at mutilated, naked, dead women, I'm judging you to be unsuited to belong in civilized society. So will any other sane, rational, non sociopath. Deal with it.
Those games are perfectly legal.
There are plenty of "perfectly legal" actions which are flat out disgusting and immoral. If the only defense you can come up with for disgusting hateful behavior is that "it isn't specifically illegal!", then you're admitting that you've already lost the argument.
It's arguable whether having five million flyers is a safe thing
It's not even arguable - it's absolutely not a safe thing. The street I used to live on was littered with bits of cars that fell off, and then the owner didn't even bother going back to get. Hub caps, mirrors, door handles, mufflers, once a whole rear fender. Basic maintenance, or even "taking care not to run into things" is an alien concept to a lot of drivers, most of whom will be the first one to get angry and confrontational if you suggest that maybe they need to take better care of things.
And the Flying Car advocates want these people flying over top of my house?
No thank you. There's enough things to worry about dying from than some idiot's fender falling on me while I'm walking down the street.
Well, I hear Kelp is pretty popular these days among the health-food crowd.
Also, sea levels were much higher - like, over a hundred meters higher. Higher enough to sell ocean-front property in Kansas - here's a neat toy to visualize sea level increases with current geography:
http://merkel.zoneo.net/Topo/Applet/
Sadly, it's a Java Applet, meaning you'll have to fight through permissions and version updates and crap, but if you can get past that, it's a good demonstration of why melting the ice caps is a bad idea, especially if you live in Florida or Louisiana.
By that definition, you can also breath Soviet V-gas, but most people who aren't trying to prop up a failed nitpick wouldn't call it "breathing".
Not only no livestock and huge predators, but also much higher sea levels, with most of inland North America (and probably Australia) flooded year-round and under water. That'll be great for farming!
you can and do breath carbon gases
Stick your head in a smoke stack and see how long that idea holds up for, or even just hanging out in some of the worse areas of China.
While technically many people would suffocate in an atmosphere which contained zero carbon dioxide (it triggers the breathing reflex when enough builds up in the lungs. You can breathe deliberately, but not while asleep.) excessive carbon dioxide is not breathable. Additionally, the majority of the producers of carbon dioxide are also pumping out hundreds of other pollutants into the atmosphere at the same time, the vast majority of which are very much not breathable. This is why people can die from being closed into a car where the exhaust system is leaking into the passenger cabin.
they're one of the few groups untainted by the widespread liberal pro-warming bias
Well, reality does indeed have a well known liberal bias.
Actually, they're taxing the air we can't breathe.