Scientific Consensus isn't either. Science isn't based on consensus, and consensus isn't always based on science. There are a lot of butthurt feelings whenever I cover this exact point, almost like feeling matter more than facts.
Consensus is often a blockage that prevents additional understanding, because the new understanding might have difficulty because it is contrary to the current consensus. Real Science tries to avoid consensus, largely because it has been wrong so often in the past.
The weird thing is now, because there is so much emphasis in consensus building in politically sensitive "Sciency" areas. It is almost like nobody has learned from history that consensus might actually be harmful.
Not all logical fallacies are false, simply because they are a fallacy.
Slippery Slope is a logical fallacy, not because it isn't sometimes true, because it is sometimes true. Slippery slope is a logical fallacy because one cannot assert it as a truth, because it might be false. Dismissing a Slippery slope argument as "false" is also a logical fallacy, because it can be true. The point is, it isn't definitive either way, which also makes it a logical fallacy.
I have never read a more misinformed bigoted post that was trying to be honest.
The fact is, IQ (Intelligence Tests) are so well studied that they have all but eliminated cultural biases, and are generally applicable to everyone world wide.
In trying to dispel stereotypes, you only succeeded in making a fucking huge one.
The only thing we can do with group identity and genetics is to show that humans fall within varied distributions that roughly occur along a bell shape curve. Most people, in most groups, overlap to such a degree that there is no "group" conclusion anyone can make.
THE only conclusion one can make is that we should treat people as individuals and not members of some stereotypical "Group", because no such group exists.
Racism dressed up in progressive clothing is just as ugly as the KKK and Nazis.
Don't need a trial for the court of public opinion. Just ask yourself, is Russian Collusion proven in court yet?
Yet the media and sycophants in congress all keep spewing that story. Or are we gonna need to quote Nazi Propagandists about repeating lies till they become truth ?
Writing the canary in the first place is an act of contempt.
Do we acquiesce simply because threat of government is too great? Wouldn't this be prima facie evidence that we already live in a tyranny?
Think about what we all are saying here, that government can compel you to say things, a violation of 1st and 5th Amendment rights, all so the government can spy on us, its citizens, undetected.
And if that is the case, we've already lost our Republic.
I'm pretty sure that the sneakers were given to the program by Nike, or at least at a VERY steep discount from Retail. They are Promotional Items for Nike.
Flawless Jesus would not necessarily be boring, or preachy. In fact, you could make him very real human emotions.
Imagine the struggle of always being perfect. It would be tiresome to everyone around him, and he'd probably be very lonely during large stretches of life.
And he wouldn't be "preachy" because that has a definitive negative connotation. To come across as not "preachy", he'd have to have perfect execution in whatever he did.
Writing such a character would be nearly impossible long term, as contradictions would appear and cause failures, which would indicate less than perfect Jesus.
And for the record, the Jesus in the bible did kick ass, with a scourge (whip, with nail bits) that one time.;)
Subsidies don't make it "fairer" for anyone. Fair is people paying for what they actually use, not a few paying less, and passing the costs onto everyone else.
Subsidies always incur a cost of unintended consequences. Arbitrage is one of those unintended consequences, as the airlines have found out.
I don't have a problem with pricing being higher at Brick n Mortar, as convenience is key there. Sometimes it is worth paying extra to have it today, rather than save a buck and wait for it from Amazon Prime in two-three days.
Many of the people complaining about paying $1 an LED are the same ones drinking $5 Coffees.
Science says some of the water is warming, some of it is cooling. That is all science says.It suggests causes, but can't prove them. Models suggesting particular warming/cooling trends don't support measured reading in any reliable way. Models are constantly adjusted for differences between predicted and actual numbers is evidence that the models are in fact not accurate enough to make ANY long term predictions.
Further, models predicting weather and climate changes based on the models has been proven even more elusive. Hurricanes were supposed to be more and worse a long long time ago haven't panned out. The Greening of Africa was not predicted at all. Major failures like these cause skepticism about reliability of predictive models. But we are supposed to drop everything because chicken little is claiming the sky is falling.
Science that has wrong, missing data, can't fulfill is predictive modeling isn't really science. Newtonian physics is wrong. However, Newtonian Physics is accurate enough that we still can use it because it is accurate enough. "The polar ice caps will be gone by 2015" isn't science. Isn't accurate. Isn't even close. AND yet we're supposed to believe it still, because it "might" happen, eventually... maybe.
Access isn't teaching or learning, anymore than access to a doctor is healthcare. If you don't apply it, it is useless. If you don't have access, you can't learn or be taught.
However, the difference between 200 years ago, and now, is there is a lesser barrier between the gatekeepers and those needing access. 200 years ago, you needed to go to school to get access and the professors/teachers were largely the gatekeepers to knowledge. Those barriers are largely gone now, and one can get access to the information, teach themselves, and learn to apply that knowledge. It is becoming less necessary to go to law school to become a lawyer, because the information needed to pass the bar is largely available without having to go to a gatekeeper.
Don't get me wrong, educators are still going to be needed, as they can help facilitate knowledge acquisition. They just aren't as required as they once were. Going to law school is still a good option because it facilitates learning.
Here's your problem with "gender equality". There is no such thing as Gender or there is, and it is unequal. And when it is unequal, people only tend to look at one side of the equation, not realizing the application of the logic that they use for one side, when applied to the other side is absolutely horrifying in comparison.
Men, are the VAST majority of those held in prison. It isn't even close. How does Gender Equality sound now? Should we start locking up women more often? Men occupy the most dangerous jobs and experience workplace death in significant greater numbers, should we force women into those jobs for "Gender equality"? Men suffer in family court because of the intentional bias against them.
I could go on. Gender Studies rarely if ever covers disparities that don't favor men which is not Gender Studies; it is Sciency sounding neo-marxism. The Pseudo science that has no reproducible outcomes isn't science, but is just humanities pretending to be scientific in order to gain legitimacy that hasn't been earned.
All one has to do is listen to Camille Paglia talk about it for a few minutes to realize that even some feminists don't think it is anything real. And she is hardly a right wing nut job.
Any study that shuns the grotesque introspection required by academia and rests its existence on slogans and placards should be kicked off campus.
If anyone does come along and thinks to post such drivel, they can't, because it would prove my point. They can't have that now, can they.
That being said, you're being equally dismissive by suggesting I need therapy. I might have to add this to my future posts: "But don't worry, someone will come along telling you why I need therapy". But that would be some sort of "persecution" delusion, wouldn't it?
Slashdot Mirror
Scientific Consensus isn't either. Science isn't based on consensus, and consensus isn't always based on science. There are a lot of butthurt feelings whenever I cover this exact point, almost like feeling matter more than facts.
Consensus is often a blockage that prevents additional understanding, because the new understanding might have difficulty because it is contrary to the current consensus. Real Science tries to avoid consensus, largely because it has been wrong so often in the past.
The weird thing is now, because there is so much emphasis in consensus building in politically sensitive "Sciency" areas. It is almost like nobody has learned from history that consensus might actually be harmful.
Not all logical fallacies are false, simply because they are a fallacy.
Slippery Slope is a logical fallacy, not because it isn't sometimes true, because it is sometimes true. Slippery slope is a logical fallacy because one cannot assert it as a truth, because it might be false. Dismissing a Slippery slope argument as "false" is also a logical fallacy, because it can be true. The point is, it isn't definitive either way, which also makes it a logical fallacy.
Consensus isn't science. People claiming it is don't understand what science is and that it isn't a popular vote. ;)
You forgot Cheeto and Oompah Loompah references.
I have never read a more misinformed bigoted post that was trying to be honest.
The fact is, IQ (Intelligence Tests) are so well studied that they have all but eliminated cultural biases, and are generally applicable to everyone world wide.
In trying to dispel stereotypes, you only succeeded in making a fucking huge one.
The only thing we can do with group identity and genetics is to show that humans fall within varied distributions that roughly occur along a bell shape curve. Most people, in most groups, overlap to such a degree that there is no "group" conclusion anyone can make.
THE only conclusion one can make is that we should treat people as individuals and not members of some stereotypical "Group", because no such group exists.
Racism dressed up in progressive clothing is just as ugly as the KKK and Nazis.
Don't need a trial for the court of public opinion. Just ask yourself, is Russian Collusion proven in court yet?
Yet the media and sycophants in congress all keep spewing that story. Or are we gonna need to quote Nazi Propagandists about repeating lies till they become truth ?
There is a difference between two lies, one that has consequences to a few, and one that has consequences for millions.
Most of Trumps lies are ego based, and only affect him. Crowd size, penis size lies.
Obama's biggest lie was "If you like your insurance, you can keep it.
I don't really care about most of Trumps lies, because they have little to no consequence. Obama's lies, are disastrous.
And this is how Nazis come to power.
Who are the rightful masters of the Government?
Writing the canary in the first place is an act of contempt.
Do we acquiesce simply because threat of government is too great? Wouldn't this be prima facie evidence that we already live in a tyranny?
Think about what we all are saying here, that government can compel you to say things, a violation of 1st and 5th Amendment rights, all so the government can spy on us, its citizens, undetected.
And if that is the case, we've already lost our Republic.
I'm pretty sure that the sneakers were given to the program by Nike, or at least at a VERY steep discount from Retail. They are Promotional Items for Nike.
Hey Wiretap, what is a good recipe for Chocolate Cake?
Add in Pi-Hole to the mix, and you'll be even better off.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Flawless Jesus would not necessarily be boring, or preachy. In fact, you could make him very real human emotions.
Imagine the struggle of always being perfect. It would be tiresome to everyone around him, and he'd probably be very lonely during large stretches of life.
And he wouldn't be "preachy" because that has a definitive negative connotation. To come across as not "preachy", he'd have to have perfect execution in whatever he did.
Writing such a character would be nearly impossible long term, as contradictions would appear and cause failures, which would indicate less than perfect Jesus.
And for the record, the Jesus in the bible did kick ass, with a scourge (whip, with nail bits) that one time. ;)
A swipe isn't easier. Is the swipe right to left, left to right? Does it flip depending on RTL languages or not? Which direction is back again?
Subsidies don't make it "fairer" for anyone. Fair is people paying for what they actually use, not a few paying less, and passing the costs onto everyone else.
Subsidies always incur a cost of unintended consequences. Arbitrage is one of those unintended consequences, as the airlines have found out.
I don't have a problem with pricing being higher at Brick n Mortar, as convenience is key there. Sometimes it is worth paying extra to have it today, rather than save a buck and wait for it from Amazon Prime in two-three days.
Many of the people complaining about paying $1 an LED are the same ones drinking $5 Coffees.
Put in a safe and drop it in the Mariana trench
What's in the safe? When someone wants to use it, how convenient is it to retrieve for use?
Given enough resources, even that is not secure enough.
Sarcastic reply indicating I didn't even read the thread.
It is, and it would break every VOIP system out there which can set its own Caller ID.
Double edge swords cut both ways.
Science says some of the water is warming, some of it is cooling. That is all science says.It suggests causes, but can't prove them. Models suggesting particular warming/cooling trends don't support measured reading in any reliable way. Models are constantly adjusted for differences between predicted and actual numbers is evidence that the models are in fact not accurate enough to make ANY long term predictions.
Further, models predicting weather and climate changes based on the models has been proven even more elusive. Hurricanes were supposed to be more and worse a long long time ago haven't panned out. The Greening of Africa was not predicted at all. Major failures like these cause skepticism about reliability of predictive models. But we are supposed to drop everything because chicken little is claiming the sky is falling.
Science that has wrong, missing data, can't fulfill is predictive modeling isn't really science. Newtonian physics is wrong. However, Newtonian Physics is accurate enough that we still can use it because it is accurate enough. "The polar ice caps will be gone by 2015" isn't science. Isn't accurate. Isn't even close. AND yet we're supposed to believe it still, because it "might" happen, eventually ... maybe.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/j...
Access isn't teaching or learning, anymore than access to a doctor is healthcare. If you don't apply it, it is useless. If you don't have access, you can't learn or be taught.
However, the difference between 200 years ago, and now, is there is a lesser barrier between the gatekeepers and those needing access. 200 years ago, you needed to go to school to get access and the professors/teachers were largely the gatekeepers to knowledge. Those barriers are largely gone now, and one can get access to the information, teach themselves, and learn to apply that knowledge. It is becoming less necessary to go to law school to become a lawyer, because the information needed to pass the bar is largely available without having to go to a gatekeeper.
Don't get me wrong, educators are still going to be needed, as they can help facilitate knowledge acquisition. They just aren't as required as they once were. Going to law school is still a good option because it facilitates learning.
Here's your problem with "gender equality". There is no such thing as Gender or there is, and it is unequal. And when it is unequal, people only tend to look at one side of the equation, not realizing the application of the logic that they use for one side, when applied to the other side is absolutely horrifying in comparison.
Men, are the VAST majority of those held in prison. It isn't even close. How does Gender Equality sound now? Should we start locking up women more often?
Men occupy the most dangerous jobs and experience workplace death in significant greater numbers, should we force women into those jobs for "Gender equality"?
Men suffer in family court because of the intentional bias against them.
I could go on. Gender Studies rarely if ever covers disparities that don't favor men which is not Gender Studies; it is Sciency sounding neo-marxism. The Pseudo science that has no reproducible outcomes isn't science, but is just humanities pretending to be scientific in order to gain legitimacy that hasn't been earned.
All one has to do is listen to Camille Paglia talk about it for a few minutes to realize that even some feminists don't think it is anything real. And she is hardly a right wing nut job.
Any study that shuns the grotesque introspection required by academia and rests its existence on slogans and placards should be kicked off campus.
And reading comprehension of complex topics eludes you. Sorry about that.
If anyone does come along and thinks to post such drivel, they can't, because it would prove my point. They can't have that now, can they.
That being said, you're being equally dismissive by suggesting I need therapy. I might have to add this to my future posts: "But don't worry, someone will come along telling you why I need therapy". But that would be some sort of "persecution" delusion, wouldn't it?