Okay, so you open with a silly attempt to browbeat me on the grounds that my posts are often not grammatically correct... on an internet forum.
And on the that basis you attempt to justify the statement that I am out of my depth in all issues... I mean, you say I don't proofread but you need to think over your arguments a bit more, sport. This crap is sad.
And then you say I am emotionally breaking down? On what basis? I assume your mind reading powers.
Your post was either logically unsustainable such as your first two statements or was likely projection on your last point.
Either way... You've abandoned any attempt to remain on topic and have fallen entirely into insults.
That's a win for me. You say "I" broke down... if you abandoned any attempt to sustain your point and have fallen to calling me a poopy head... I win.
As to whether I think women are incapable of holding biases, I do not think women are systematically bigoted against women... no.
Your argument would require that women are systematically... not a woman... but most women... are biased against women.
And not only that, but you're saying female scientists managing research departments in universities are biased against women.
We're told all the time about how hard it is for women to get ahead in STEM. One would think that women if anything would look out for the interests of other women and try to help them out knowing that it is harder for them? Right?
But far from that, your study suggests that women are intentionally short changing and sabotaging women in academic research.
I mean... Really? The study itself is likely suspect. I don't know how but it doesn't make any sense. Its like saying that fish flew to the moon or something.
As to difference in wages? I only concede that the Academic Gender Wage Hire Gap appears to be real. Your study is highly contextual and you can't associate that study with the wider society absent those variables.
It is in academia.
It is only referring to what people are paid at hire.
And it does not in any way reflect what anyone is paid even a week after they take the job.
So. Sure. You can have that.
As to you being a jackass, my statements made contextual sense when I used them. I don't think you can literally use the same thing verbatim in a different context.
Regardless, I'm happy to cite the statistics if you like. I'm just not going to bother if your mind is closed on the issue. There's no point in me bothering to cite anything if you're not actually listening. I feel like this is almost entirely an ideological issue for you. And that's sad. But I can't rationally argue against a belief system.
They do contribute back... they pay your wage. That is their contribution.
They also pay taxes etc.
Once they've done that, their debt to society is paid in full.
Your crypto-communistic claptrap has grown tiresome. Companies are not obligated to take care of you literally from the cradle to the grave.
If they were then they would inherent all associated rights with those responsibilities. The only institutions that have traditionally assumed that much responsibility for people are totalitarian states. Under your logic, corporations would be responsible for as much as a totalitarian state.... and they can't really live up to those responsibilities unless you give them the same rights as a totalitarian state. So... you'd be a slave.
That's pretty much the price of any institution offering you cradle to grave responsibility for all your life's needs.
If you don't have to do anything and the company has to hire you, has to pay you, has to take care of you, can't ever fire you, has to take care of all the members of your family that aren't even pretending to work for the company... then the only way to make that work is if you're a slave of the company.
Obviously you don't like that idea. You want something for nothing. I understand that. That would be nice. Reality requires some sort of profit on the part of the company otherwise they can't stay in business.
And that means not paying the employees more than they are worth TO THE COMPANY. The value of those people to society is another matter and not the company's responsibility.
Just jack your tax rate up to 200 percent and expand your welfare system until you're happy.
You can't ask the company to do these things and expect them to actually hire anyone.
My comment was in response to nation wide multi industry surveys that were addressing what REAL people doing REAL jobs were ACTUALLY being paid. Your study focused on academia exclusively, did not include anyone actually getting the job, did not include any real people, and did not include anything besides what male AND FEMALE managers were offering job applicants AT point of hire.
That's a completely different situation.
You want to argue Academic gender wage hire gap?
Okay, I'll give that to you for the sake of argument. You win that.
I will admit to the Academic Gender Wage Hire Gap.
That is all that gets you though.
As to this: "Only if they've been "audited using contextually relevant factors"."... I can't parse your meaning here. I can't tell whether I'm just not getting your criteria or if you're being a jackass. Clarify that for me please.
Increase the amount of rat poison in your daily diet.
What I was saying is that we are producing so many of them that the means of auditing them used in the 19th century might not be applicable in the 21st.
An AC throws out some meaningless insults? Shocking.
I read your whole post and didn't find a coherent argument in it anywhere.
You say you didn't like my post... but don't say why.
You then presume to "know" me despite openly admitting to not reading my post. Which means you're literally prejudiced... that is pre-justice... what happens when you judge things without bothering to looking into it.
And then you cap it all off with some more dumb insults.
*golf clap for the AC*
If there is anything that would improve this community it would be removing the ability to make anonymous posts. It isn't as if you're writing under your own name as it is... but to be such a cowardly POS that do such under a fake fake name? And it is thus no wonder that the ACs are the most likely to not make any effort to constructively contribute and just troll.
You guys are so fucking dumb it is literally painful talking to you.
For your illumination, I was complaining about the ad hominems and the posts that had NOTHING in them but insults.
I don't really care about insults. What I care about is when insults are used INSTEAD of arguments.
If I say "you made this mistake and because you made this mistake, you are an idiot"... that is one thing. I don't mind that. That's reasonable.
If you instead say "You are an idiot, therefore whatever you said is wrong" that is an ad hominem. Which I do have a problem with.
If you say "You're a bad person, you're wrong about something I won't actually explain or define, and here are a bunch of insults" that is also a problem because no where in there is there anything remotely rational that anyone could pick apart to find an argument. So I have a problem with that too.
Do you get it now, shit for brains?
See how that works? I make a logical argument AND I insult you. Then its okay.
As to the companies being responsible for children because of the law... sure... by that logic, companies could be responsible for your providing you with hookers and booze if the laws were written that way.
This is tautology. Circular logic. You're saying companies are responsible because you said they were responsible.
But reality is that under the law, they're not responsible.
So, yeah... COULD write a law that made them responsible but no such law has been written. So no.
As to your continuing attempt to say women should have demanding high paying careers because that is how we get more babies... Look at countries where women have no economic opportunities.
Do they have more babies or less babies?
They have more.
Also, removing birth control helps increase the birth rate as well.
Do you really want to make the "do this because you'll get more babies" argument? Because if we wanted more babies, we'd deny women opportunities, remove birth control, etc.
We are giving women financial opportunities for two reasons.
1. Because we think it is morally right for women to have those rights as individuals.
2. Because we want the economic value of those women in the labor force.
If we wanted the babies, we'd deny those things in favor of the babies.
That is not insane. That is logical. If you can't handle that then you're too irrational to have this discussion.
WHICH generalization, you complete fucking retard?
You accuse me of being vague and yet despite being challenged to be specific in your accusations for DAYS you still have completely failed to be specific.
Just fuck off and die.
I am so fucking tired of the brain dead ACs.
Are all the stupid ACs just the same fucking guy? Because it seems like it.
As to lumping people together... this is possibly the most idiotic and obtuse comment I've seen all day. Good work.
I am obviously referring to the Russian government. If I call the North Koreans stupid, I'm not referring to every single fucking one of them you complete fucking idiot. That is directed at you by the way. You are a fucking idiot. But when one references a nation, one is generally referring to the government or official policy of that nation... ESPECIALLY when talking about foreign policy.
Anyone that wasn't a complete asshat would know that. Since you didn't... *shrugs*
As to me being full of myself, well... all things are relative. Compared to you, I am a God King of the universe. Compared to someone else, I might just be another jerk. All things are relative, chum.
As to no nation wanting to be friends with the US?
So, Europe does, Eastern Europe does, about half of the middle east does, Egypt does, Japan does, South Korea does, China does most of the time... I could go on.
Friends means what I said... friends. Russia has no friends. The US has lots.
Countries invest in the US all the time and feel their investments are secure. Investment in Russia is minimal because no one trusts their fucking stupid government.
Happy there? I said there government and not their people? Even though, their government is only in power because their people put it there and like it. Putin isn't pushing Russians into work camps from what I can see, so the average Russian has to take some responsibility for this bullshit.
Okay, then what is propelling GALAXIES away from each other? Do you have any fucking idea how much energy we're talking about with that?
What could possibly be the source of that kind of energy? Fucking unicorn magic?
Simply labeling it dark energy "aka energy we can't find and don't know anything about" isn't actually helpful. You don't in fact know whether any energy is being expended. All you know is that there is an apparent effect and given your other knowledge that effect would require insane amounts of energy.
The thing is you don't know. They don't know.
And all your pathetic attempts to browbeat me on logic are covering over like a bad topee is that YOU DO NOT KNOW.
And that's all I'm asking for here, you complete waste of oxygen. An admission that people don't know what the fuck is going on. And they don't. And that's okay.
Keep investigating it. Keep coming up with theories. Keep doing the experiments. Keep doing the math. But don't tell me about your fucking hobbit energy or your wizard matter or any other shit you just made up to cover for the fact that there are things going on that you do not understand.
Are you seriously going to hang your entire position on that one paper or can we have a rational discussion?
Because that one paper isn't enough for you to do anything but justify further investigation.
As to the rest, as I said, I have noted your surrender of various tactics common to people defending your position. While you have not as yet used all of them, I am merely noting that should you attempt it... it will be instantly labeled as hypocrisy.
At this point, what is our disagreement? Beyond the stupid insults that are not relevant... where are we? What is your position and what do you think you have established in regards to the discussion?
I'm not going to credit the notion that experience is of no value in labor. It is demonstrably idiotic and I feel it is a waste of my time to even indulge it.
As to your admittance that this is not a gender issue...
Then in so far as I am concerned, the argument is concluded.
What you seem to be saying is that any old bullshit is viable in the absence of something better.
The claims of dark matter/energy are misstatements of what has actually been detected.
They have detected neither matter nor energy. What they have detected are effects that so far as we know can only be caused by matter and energy... which we cannot detect and don't especially understand.
That is not the same thing.
I would be much happier with the whole thing if rather then referring to this stuff as dark matter they simply referred to it as the gravitational anomaly.
Or if you prefer... call it dark gravity and dark acceleration.
To imply that the gravity must be caused by matter and the acceleration must be caused by energy is an assumption.
The dark energy for example could be the expansion of the universe or something. No acceleration but rather the universe just expanding. Space increasing between galaxies rather than galaxies moving away from each other.
And as to dark gravity... when you say that your mass calculations are off by 70 percent which is what all this dark matter stuff says, it means your estimates as to what you can actually see and not see is not reliable.
It could be as simple as there just being more matter in those galaxies than people believed... normal matter. Not dark matter. Just more of it than anyone had guessed. Perhaps 70 percent more.
Where did the US go to war because a given country allied with another country?
Cite an example or not only can I believe that but I am right and you are wrong.
I await you admission of error.
As to the possible alliance between Russian Europe, that could only have happened if Russia were willing to act in the best interests of both parties. Given that Russia is a largely parasitic power that does not profit allies... your alliance with Europe was not going to happen with or without the US.
You have confused the willingness of the West to forgive your transgressions in the cold war and integrate you into the world economy with some possibility that you can spin some oil wealth into global domination.
You are deluded. And your consistent hostility to people that really just wanted to live in peace with you damns your country to poverty, decline, and humiliation.
We wanted to be your friends. We wanted you to be rich and powerful and happy. But you have proven too barbaric, treacherous, and stupid to be worthy of it.
I pray those that come after you are wiser and that something is left of your country before people like you have destroyed it.
Slashdot Mirror
So youtube doesn't pay 2 cents per view.
Okay, so you open with a silly attempt to browbeat me on the grounds that my posts are often not grammatically correct... on an internet forum.
And on the that basis you attempt to justify the statement that I am out of my depth in all issues... I mean, you say I don't proofread but you need to think over your arguments a bit more, sport. This crap is sad.
And then you say I am emotionally breaking down? On what basis? I assume your mind reading powers.
Your post was either logically unsustainable such as your first two statements or was likely projection on your last point.
Either way... You've abandoned any attempt to remain on topic and have fallen entirely into insults.
That's a win for me. You say "I" broke down... if you abandoned any attempt to sustain your point and have fallen to calling me a poopy head... I win.
Good game.
So you're now saying that I know nothing about psychology because I didn't cite sources for my opinions?
You're getting closer to making a rational argument but you're not quite there yet.
As to whether I think women are incapable of holding biases, I do not think women are systematically bigoted against women... no.
Your argument would require that women are systematically... not a woman... but most women... are biased against women.
And not only that, but you're saying female scientists managing research departments in universities are biased against women.
We're told all the time about how hard it is for women to get ahead in STEM. One would think that women if anything would look out for the interests of other women and try to help them out knowing that it is harder for them? Right?
But far from that, your study suggests that women are intentionally short changing and sabotaging women in academic research.
I mean... Really? The study itself is likely suspect. I don't know how but it doesn't make any sense. Its like saying that fish flew to the moon or something.
As to difference in wages? I only concede that the Academic Gender Wage Hire Gap appears to be real. Your study is highly contextual and you can't associate that study with the wider society absent those variables.
It is in academia.
It is only referring to what people are paid at hire.
And it does not in any way reflect what anyone is paid even a week after they take the job.
So. Sure. You can have that.
As to you being a jackass, my statements made contextual sense when I used them. I don't think you can literally use the same thing verbatim in a different context.
Regardless, I'm happy to cite the statistics if you like. I'm just not going to bother if your mind is closed on the issue. There's no point in me bothering to cite anything if you're not actually listening. I feel like this is almost entirely an ideological issue for you. And that's sad. But I can't rationally argue against a belief system.
*shrugs*
They do contribute back... they pay your wage. That is their contribution.
They also pay taxes etc.
Once they've done that, their debt to society is paid in full.
Your crypto-communistic claptrap has grown tiresome. Companies are not obligated to take care of you literally from the cradle to the grave.
If they were then they would inherent all associated rights with those responsibilities. The only institutions that have traditionally assumed that much responsibility for people are totalitarian states. Under your logic, corporations would be responsible for as much as a totalitarian state.... and they can't really live up to those responsibilities unless you give them the same rights as a totalitarian state. So... you'd be a slave.
That's pretty much the price of any institution offering you cradle to grave responsibility for all your life's needs.
If you don't have to do anything and the company has to hire you, has to pay you, has to take care of you, can't ever fire you, has to take care of all the members of your family that aren't even pretending to work for the company... then the only way to make that work is if you're a slave of the company.
Obviously you don't like that idea. You want something for nothing. I understand that. That would be nice. Reality requires some sort of profit on the part of the company otherwise they can't stay in business.
And that means not paying the employees more than they are worth TO THE COMPANY. The value of those people to society is another matter and not the company's responsibility.
Just jack your tax rate up to 200 percent and expand your welfare system until you're happy.
You can't ask the company to do these things and expect them to actually hire anyone.
In what way does my statement trivialize the process?
BE SPECIFIC. SAY "WHY".
Then you say something is 100 percent bullshit but don't say why that is either.
Absent "why" you have no argument and therefore your post is a NULL statement.
Why am I wrong?
Why do people have such a fundamental difficulty with making a rational statement? It is baffling to me.
As to your example, false equliviency.
My comment was in response to nation wide multi industry surveys that were addressing what REAL people doing REAL jobs were ACTUALLY being paid. Your study focused on academia exclusively, did not include anyone actually getting the job, did not include any real people, and did not include anything besides what male AND FEMALE managers were offering job applicants AT point of hire.
That's a completely different situation.
You want to argue Academic gender wage hire gap?
Okay, I'll give that to you for the sake of argument. You win that.
I will admit to the Academic Gender Wage Hire Gap.
That is all that gets you though.
As to this: ... I can't parse your meaning here. I can't tell whether I'm just not getting your criteria or if you're being a jackass. Clarify that for me please.
"Only if they've been "audited using contextually relevant factors"."
At no point did I trivialize a PhD.
Increase the amount of rat poison in your daily diet.
What I was saying is that we are producing so many of them that the means of auditing them used in the 19th century might not be applicable in the 21st.
Seriously... rat poison.
An AC throws out some meaningless insults? Shocking.
I read your whole post and didn't find a coherent argument in it anywhere.
You say you didn't like my post... but don't say why.
You then presume to "know" me despite openly admitting to not reading my post. Which means you're literally prejudiced... that is pre-justice... what happens when you judge things without bothering to looking into it.
And then you cap it all off with some more dumb insults.
*golf clap for the AC*
If there is anything that would improve this community it would be removing the ability to make anonymous posts. It isn't as if you're writing under your own name as it is... but to be such a cowardly POS that do such under a fake fake name? And it is thus no wonder that the ACs are the most likely to not make any effort to constructively contribute and just troll.
Garbage.
You guys are so fucking dumb it is literally painful talking to you.
For your illumination, I was complaining about the ad hominems and the posts that had NOTHING in them but insults.
I don't really care about insults. What I care about is when insults are used INSTEAD of arguments.
If I say "you made this mistake and because you made this mistake, you are an idiot"... that is one thing. I don't mind that. That's reasonable.
If you instead say "You are an idiot, therefore whatever you said is wrong" that is an ad hominem. Which I do have a problem with.
If you say "You're a bad person, you're wrong about something I won't actually explain or define, and here are a bunch of insults" that is also a problem because no where in there is there anything remotely rational that anyone could pick apart to find an argument. So I have a problem with that too.
Do you get it now, shit for brains?
See how that works? I make a logical argument AND I insult you. Then its okay.
This discussion is tedious. I've led a mule to water and you are far too stubborn to drink it.
So I'm done. Whatever dude.
As to the companies being responsible for children because of the law... sure... by that logic, companies could be responsible for your providing you with hookers and booze if the laws were written that way.
This is tautology. Circular logic. You're saying companies are responsible because you said they were responsible.
But reality is that under the law, they're not responsible.
So, yeah... COULD write a law that made them responsible but no such law has been written. So no.
As to your continuing attempt to say women should have demanding high paying careers because that is how we get more babies... Look at countries where women have no economic opportunities.
Do they have more babies or less babies?
They have more.
Also, removing birth control helps increase the birth rate as well.
Do you really want to make the "do this because you'll get more babies" argument? Because if we wanted more babies, we'd deny women opportunities, remove birth control, etc.
We are giving women financial opportunities for two reasons.
1. Because we think it is morally right for women to have those rights as individuals.
2. Because we want the economic value of those women in the labor force.
If we wanted the babies, we'd deny those things in favor of the babies.
That is not insane. That is logical. If you can't handle that then you're too irrational to have this discussion.
As to who hung what on what, I was referring to the "wage gap" statistics which respond in the manner I stated to the variable I cited.
You are citing a different study which is unrelated to what I was saying.
That study, just as any study, is going to have to be audited using the contextually relevant factors relevant to that specific study.
As to my claim being crap? Which claim? Do you want me to show you wage gap statistics that are filtered for child birth?
Because that's my argument and those statistics exist and have existed for decades.
WHICH generalization, you complete fucking retard?
You accuse me of being vague and yet despite being challenged to be specific in your accusations for DAYS you still have completely failed to be specific.
Just fuck off and die.
I am so fucking tired of the brain dead ACs.
Are all the stupid ACs just the same fucking guy? Because it seems like it.
As to lumping people together... this is possibly the most idiotic and obtuse comment I've seen all day. Good work.
I am obviously referring to the Russian government. If I call the North Koreans stupid, I'm not referring to every single fucking one of them you complete fucking idiot. That is directed at you by the way. You are a fucking idiot. But when one references a nation, one is generally referring to the government or official policy of that nation... ESPECIALLY when talking about foreign policy.
Anyone that wasn't a complete asshat would know that. Since you didn't... *shrugs*
As to me being full of myself, well... all things are relative. Compared to you, I am a God King of the universe. Compared to someone else, I might just be another jerk. All things are relative, chum.
As to no nation wanting to be friends with the US?
So, Europe does, Eastern Europe does, about half of the middle east does, Egypt does, Japan does, South Korea does, China does most of the time... I could go on.
Friends means what I said... friends. Russia has no friends. The US has lots.
Countries invest in the US all the time and feel their investments are secure. Investment in Russia is minimal because no one trusts their fucking stupid government.
Happy there? I said there government and not their people? Even though, their government is only in power because their people put it there and like it. Putin isn't pushing Russians into work camps from what I can see, so the average Russian has to take some responsibility for this bullshit.
I await your rebuttal. :)
Okay, then what is propelling GALAXIES away from each other? Do you have any fucking idea how much energy we're talking about with that?
What could possibly be the source of that kind of energy? Fucking unicorn magic?
Simply labeling it dark energy "aka energy we can't find and don't know anything about" isn't actually helpful. You don't in fact know whether any energy is being expended. All you know is that there is an apparent effect and given your other knowledge that effect would require insane amounts of energy.
The thing is you don't know. They don't know.
And all your pathetic attempts to browbeat me on logic are covering over like a bad topee is that YOU DO NOT KNOW.
And that's all I'm asking for here, you complete waste of oxygen. An admission that people don't know what the fuck is going on. And they don't. And that's okay.
Keep investigating it. Keep coming up with theories. Keep doing the experiments. Keep doing the math. But don't tell me about your fucking hobbit energy or your wizard matter or any other shit you just made up to cover for the fact that there are things going on that you do not understand.
Are you seriously going to hang your entire position on that one paper or can we have a rational discussion?
Because that one paper isn't enough for you to do anything but justify further investigation.
As to the rest, as I said, I have noted your surrender of various tactics common to people defending your position. While you have not as yet used all of them, I am merely noting that should you attempt it... it will be instantly labeled as hypocrisy.
At this point, what is our disagreement? Beyond the stupid insults that are not relevant... where are we? What is your position and what do you think you have established in regards to the discussion?
Don't be silly, every smartphone comes with a built in mail client.
This is a stupid conversation. You're not being honest and I have no patience for incompetent deceit.
When did the US skyrocket the price of something they had a monopoly on?
I'm getting kind of tired of the retarded accusations in this thread. People keep saying intensely stupid things.
Be specific with your accusation and have it be contextually relevant to the discussion.
I mean, we're not even talking about prices or monopolies? So what the fuck are you talking about? We're talking about war.
I can't respond to vague accusations.
Be specific please.
What did I say that proved I didn't know anything about psychology.
Don't just link to something, explain your position with logic.
Why is this complicated for you?
This is basic reasoning skills I'm asking from you.
Explain your position with LOGIC.
Say "you proved you didn't know anything about psychology when you said THIS and because everyone knows that psychology works THAT way instead."
This is not rocket science, sport. Do better.
I'm not going to credit the notion that experience is of no value in labor. It is demonstrably idiotic and I feel it is a waste of my time to even indulge it.
As to your admittance that this is not a gender issue...
Then in so far as I am concerned, the argument is concluded.
It is not a gender issue.
Case closed.
Without defining what you're talking about I can't comment or process your statement.
Vague references are not constructive. Please be direct and rational.
I prefer honesty.
What you seem to be saying is that any old bullshit is viable in the absence of something better.
The claims of dark matter/energy are misstatements of what has actually been detected.
They have detected neither matter nor energy. What they have detected are effects that so far as we know can only be caused by matter and energy... which we cannot detect and don't especially understand.
That is not the same thing.
I would be much happier with the whole thing if rather then referring to this stuff as dark matter they simply referred to it as the gravitational anomaly.
Or if you prefer... call it dark gravity and dark acceleration.
To imply that the gravity must be caused by matter and the acceleration must be caused by energy is an assumption.
The dark energy for example could be the expansion of the universe or something. No acceleration but rather the universe just expanding. Space increasing between galaxies rather than galaxies moving away from each other.
And as to dark gravity... when you say that your mass calculations are off by 70 percent which is what all this dark matter stuff says, it means your estimates as to what you can actually see and not see is not reliable.
It could be as simple as there just being more matter in those galaxies than people believed... normal matter. Not dark matter. Just more of it than anyone had guessed. Perhaps 70 percent more.
Stop.
Where did the US go to war because a given country allied with another country?
Cite an example or not only can I believe that but I am right and you are wrong.
I await you admission of error.
As to the possible alliance between Russian Europe, that could only have happened if Russia were willing to act in the best interests of both parties. Given that Russia is a largely parasitic power that does not profit allies... your alliance with Europe was not going to happen with or without the US.
You have confused the willingness of the West to forgive your transgressions in the cold war and integrate you into the world economy with some possibility that you can spin some oil wealth into global domination.
You are deluded. And your consistent hostility to people that really just wanted to live in peace with you damns your country to poverty, decline, and humiliation.
We wanted to be your friends. We wanted you to be rich and powerful and happy. But you have proven too barbaric, treacherous, and stupid to be worthy of it.
I pray those that come after you are wiser and that something is left of your country before people like you have destroyed it.