Of course, this is not to say that scientists are without their own prejudices or agendas; reading the history of chemistry has shown how sometimes a leading scientists' personal agenda stymied progress just because they were perceived as an authority. Everyone, regardless of training, is subject to this bias
What you're basically doing is saying, somehow people are mentally and emotionally unstable because they're failing at a relatively new human construct of economic independence. You might as well point to Henry Ford and call him mentally and emotionally unstable because his brain doesn't quite get this thing we call reading and writing.
You're just reframing nucrash's argument. Hawking was a bad example under his argument.
There are some cases, like with Stephen Hawking, where an individual wants so much to contribute to the world that they want to exist.
Hawkings was ready to give up his studies against the urging of his doctors and friends. There wasn't an inner yearning to continue to contribute and exist. No I'd say the reason he wanted to continue to exist, and pardon the bluntness, was because he found someone to bone. I'll give the example one thing, you could say he wanted to contribute to the population.
Stephen Hawking is a bad example, he was diagnosed with his disease at 21 and doctors said he had two years to live. He went into a depression and felt continuing is studies was pointless. It took him meeting a woman for him to have "something to live for."
Seems like the stereotypical use case is: put RFID on keys, send robot to find lost keys. The little paranoid person in me says, great now some smart techno-burglar can find where I keep my keys and steal my car. That's of course assuming that my key-less entry car isn't easily hackable.
Your comment was all fine and dandy until you started talking about religion. You answered the why question with a how answer. Why do humans have appendices? Because God made them? No. A religious person would say, God made them because we need them to survive. They might be knowledgeable enough to say, God made them because after we get sick, we need it to make our digestive tract healthy again.
When you put yourself out there in the public eye, espousing a set of beliefs, be prepared to have your neck cut up a little. You should be celebrating that we live in a world were people can be critiqued and argued against.
Heroes and authorities in relation to what makes them such are infallible. Otherwise they wouldn't be heroes and authorities, particularly for the latter. Heroes by definition are worse, as they're purpose is to be worshiped or revered. Which leads to dogmatic belief that what they said or did is infallible. How rare is it, in a discussion about Newton, that people don't discuss how he was a wildly religious and spent much of his career trying to predict the Armageddon.
...clearly some people don't get the fact that "no" doesn't mean "try again later".
Popular culture certainly doesn't help this. I'm willing to bet that if you look at the rom-coms that came out in the last few years, you'd see at least half of them have a suitor continue even after the love interest has said or expressed what effectively means "no."
None the less... "The Ig Nobel Prizes are a parody of the Nobel Prizes and are given each year in early October for ten unusual or trivial achievements in scientific research. The stated aim of the prizes is to "honor achievements that first make people laugh, and then make them think." The awards are sometimes veiled criticism (or gentle satire), but are also used to point out that even the most absurd-sounding avenues of research can yield useful knowledge."
Well I agree for the most part, in fact I said this, "the world has an efficiency and logistics problem when it comes to food production." To me waste is a combination of bad use of resources and shortcomings in the distribution of food. Hell, look at some food shelters in some states. Panera likes to give away its day old bread to local food shelters. But some states, maybe correctly, do not allow food to be redistributed if it's not packaged. So what do the food shelters do when they get Panera's bread? They throw it out, because legally they can't give it to people.
No there's plenty of land to grow food for the current population. There is enough food created in the world to feed everyone well. The problem is there is so much waste. Tons of food goes rotten in the fields and has to be thrown out. Even more is thrown out in the trash. Your food prices remark is irrelevant. The reason food prices are up are not related demand due to faces to feed. Corn prices have been rising because of ethanol usage. The world has an efficiency and logistics problem when it comes to food production. When you consider that everyone in the world could fit inside Texas with a population density of Paris, it becomes pretty apparent.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, this is not to say that scientists are without their own prejudices or agendas; reading the history of chemistry has shown how sometimes a leading scientists' personal agenda stymied progress just because they were perceived as an authority. Everyone, regardless of training, is subject to this bias
Or Tyson's Cosmos series.
Any day now, we may find that it is a lie. That's how science works. The proven always has the potential to be disproven.
Denying AGW is not denying science. This is not a religion...
I'm sorry you said basic.
What you're basically doing is saying, somehow people are mentally and emotionally unstable because they're failing at a relatively new human construct of economic independence. You might as well point to Henry Ford and call him mentally and emotionally unstable because his brain doesn't quite get this thing we call reading and writing.
You're just reframing nucrash's argument. Hawking was a bad example under his argument.
There are some cases, like with Stephen Hawking, where an individual wants so much to contribute to the world that they want to exist.
Hawkings was ready to give up his studies against the urging of his doctors and friends. There wasn't an inner yearning to continue to contribute and exist. No I'd say the reason he wanted to continue to exist, and pardon the bluntness, was because he found someone to bone. I'll give the example one thing, you could say he wanted to contribute to the population.
Oh my God! And then, when I go looking for my keys, he eggs me! :O
Stephen Hawking is a bad example, he was diagnosed with his disease at 21 and doctors said he had two years to live. He went into a depression and felt continuing is studies was pointless. It took him meeting a woman for him to have "something to live for."
I feel like you inverted the science fiction book that was the basis of Aryan propaganda of the early 20th century.
Apparently, you know very little about Catholicism.
Seems like the stereotypical use case is: put RFID on keys, send robot to find lost keys. The little paranoid person in me says, great now some smart techno-burglar can find where I keep my keys and steal my car. That's of course assuming that my key-less entry car isn't easily hackable.
Your comment was all fine and dandy until you started talking about religion. You answered the why question with a how answer. Why do humans have appendices? Because God made them? No. A religious person would say, God made them because we need them to survive. They might be knowledgeable enough to say, God made them because after we get sick, we need it to make our digestive tract healthy again.
When you put yourself out there in the public eye, espousing a set of beliefs, be prepared to have your neck cut up a little. You should be celebrating that we live in a world were people can be critiqued and argued against.
Curse you heathens of the Atheist Allied Alliance, your science is flawed and illogical. Our science is the true science!
Heroes and authorities in relation to what makes them such are infallible. Otherwise they wouldn't be heroes and authorities, particularly for the latter. Heroes by definition are worse, as they're purpose is to be worshiped or revered. Which leads to dogmatic belief that what they said or did is infallible. How rare is it, in a discussion about Newton, that people don't discuss how he was a wildly religious and spent much of his career trying to predict the Armageddon.
Reading comprehension fail, probably due to some form of confirmation bias.
Oh my God, my idol Tyson is being bashed! Oh noes!
Ignorance must be bliss for you.
Basic day to day is: work, eat, sleep and shit; not necessarily in that order. Managing your budget is not a basic day to day responsibility.
In case of war. Cut access to the internet and cyber attacks from enemy nations becomes harder.
...clearly some people don't get the fact that "no" doesn't mean "try again later".
Popular culture certainly doesn't help this. I'm willing to bet that if you look at the rom-coms that came out in the last few years, you'd see at least half of them have a suitor continue even after the love interest has said or expressed what effectively means "no."
Because there is actually nothing logical about Vulcans.
Can't tell if trolling...
None the less...
"The Ig Nobel Prizes are a parody of the Nobel Prizes and are given each year in early October for ten unusual or trivial achievements in scientific research. The stated aim of the prizes is to "honor achievements that first make people laugh, and then make them think." The awards are sometimes veiled criticism (or gentle satire), but are also used to point out that even the most absurd-sounding avenues of research can yield useful knowledge."
Well I agree for the most part, in fact I said this, "the world has an efficiency and logistics problem when it comes to food production." To me waste is a combination of bad use of resources and shortcomings in the distribution of food. Hell, look at some food shelters in some states. Panera likes to give away its day old bread to local food shelters. But some states, maybe correctly, do not allow food to be redistributed if it's not packaged. So what do the food shelters do when they get Panera's bread? They throw it out, because legally they can't give it to people.
I think they need some sleep. They're obviously suffering from sleep deprivation.
No there's plenty of land to grow food for the current population. There is enough food created in the world to feed everyone well. The problem is there is so much waste. Tons of food goes rotten in the fields and has to be thrown out. Even more is thrown out in the trash. Your food prices remark is irrelevant. The reason food prices are up are not related demand due to faces to feed. Corn prices have been rising because of ethanol usage. The world has an efficiency and logistics problem when it comes to food production. When you consider that everyone in the world could fit inside Texas with a population density of Paris, it becomes pretty apparent.