No, it is not. It may be genetically correct, but genetics is not the only factor to the definition of race.
Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation. [wikipedia.org]
Maybe you think genetics is the only thing that matters, but...
There are various paradigms used to discuss race, including biological and social views. Definitions have changed throughout history to yield a modern understanding of race that is complex and fluid. Moreover, there is no one definition that stands, as there are many competing and interlocking ways to look at race. The terms race, genetic population, ethnicity, geographic population, and ancestry are used interchangeably in everyday discourse involving race. [wikipedia.org]
Biological definitions of race encompass Essentialist and Anti-Essentialist views. The scientific community does not universally accept a single definition of race.... the scientific community disagrees with you.
There's no way I can praise this post without seeming like I'm just trying to reinforce my own argument, but it's so damn relevant whenever someone says "X isn't racist because Y isn't a race".
Oh, yeah, you're the gigantic motherfucking hypocrite from before. I remember you.
Calling you an idiot because you were making dumb-as-fuck arguments, and you pretending that's the same as an ad-hominem, then going to the next fucking thread and doing the exact same thing you whined about.
You are the worst sort of person.
FYI: I call racists racist. I call you a useless hypocritical moron.
The thing about viruses is that they depend on cells to reproduce. They're life that's outsourced all the hard work of living: gathering energy, producing proteins, duplicating DNA.
Discovering viruses is functionally equivalent to discovering bacteria, since they need the bacteria to exist.
Alien bacteria would be an amazing reinforcement of cell theory. All life on earth is made of cells, but it's easy to dismiss that as saying that any other suddenly emergent kinds of life couldn't compete against the already evolving cells that happened to come first.
Finding truly alien bacteria would basically cement the idea that cells and life are synonymous.
What I'm trying to say, haphazardly, is that any kind of alien life would have tremendously informative side effects for biology in general.
I say allegation because my own information regarding international battery production capacity is limited, and I wasn't in any position to deny the GP's suggestion of a marketing agenda.
The point, at least according to Musk, is that no one was actually competeting on economies of scale with respect to batteries. His allegation is that his cars need it, and everyone else dependent on rechargables can benefit too.
As to the truth of the matter, the number of people both qualified to understand the question properly(industrial engineers with expertise in battery manufacture) and the time to investigate the situation, probably already work for one of the companies.
None are journalists. So we get to eat our press releases and like it.
It's nice that you have data. Not having data is worse.
But you have a one-subject unaligned, uncontrolled collection of data. The line between inference and magical thinking is narrower than you think, and just because the skinner box gave you food when you crooked your neck doesn't mean crooking your neck causes food to come out.
That being said, if we can't hold Israelis responsible for the reprehensible actions of Israel, who can we hold responsible?
Unfortunately, this kind of question never has an easy answer. Those in the government who make policy decisions are responsible beyond a shadow of a doubt, but they're among the most protected people in that nation.
Did we really blame all Germans for Hitler? Most German citizens didn't even know the holocaust was happening. Do we really blame all Americans for the NSA's bullshit, considering a majority of us are opposed to it?
Collective punishment has one major effect: making people hate those doing it.
There have been relatively few wars where the increased risk of disease wasn't the primary killer. WWII, Korea, Iraq I, maybe Vietnam(I don't know much about the stats on the Vietcong side).
Even recent wars like Iraq II has a lot of evidence that this kind of infrastructure damage killed hundreds of thousands.
Slashdot Mirror
Wikipedia keeps version history, dog
Whatever will we do with this incorrect fictional character biography?
They'd discover the same thing phone companies did in the 1990s. Direct calling your customers for an upsell is a good way to create a cancellation.
Allowing for other self-replicating, for lack of a better word, constructs as life is being open minded.
Cell theory is dominant in science because nothing else that has been seen really meets that rather basic criteria.
No, it is not. It may be genetically correct, but genetics is not the only factor to the definition of race.
Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation. [wikipedia.org]
Maybe you think genetics is the only thing that matters, but...
There are various paradigms used to discuss race, including biological and social views. Definitions have changed throughout history to yield a modern understanding of race that is complex and fluid. Moreover, there is no one definition that stands, as there are many competing and interlocking ways to look at race. The terms race, genetic population, ethnicity, geographic population, and ancestry are used interchangeably in everyday discourse involving race. [wikipedia.org]
Biological definitions of race encompass Essentialist and Anti-Essentialist views. The scientific community does not universally accept a single definition of race. ... the scientific community disagrees with you.
There's no way I can praise this post without seeming like I'm just trying to reinforce my own argument, but it's so damn relevant whenever someone says "X isn't racist because Y isn't a race".
Okay, I totally wasn't being fair. I didn't have that as a main priority. Articulating things perfectly is quite hard.
Surprised you didn't call me a racist, too.
Oh, yeah, you're the gigantic motherfucking hypocrite from before. I remember you.
Calling you an idiot because you were making dumb-as-fuck arguments, and you pretending that's the same as an ad-hominem, then going to the next fucking thread and doing the exact same thing you whined about.
You are the worst sort of person.
FYI: I call racists racist. I call you a useless hypocritical moron.
The thing about viruses is that they depend on cells to reproduce. They're life that's outsourced all the hard work of living: gathering energy, producing proteins, duplicating DNA.
Discovering viruses is functionally equivalent to discovering bacteria, since they need the bacteria to exist.
Oh, so he's impotent this week, not a tyrant. Thanks for the clarification.
Alien bacteria would be an amazing reinforcement of cell theory. All life on earth is made of cells, but it's easy to dismiss that as saying that any other suddenly emergent kinds of life couldn't compete against the already evolving cells that happened to come first.
Finding truly alien bacteria would basically cement the idea that cells and life are synonymous.
What I'm trying to say, haphazardly, is that any kind of alien life would have tremendously informative side effects for biology in general.
Do you even know what you're trying to say, exactly?
It's not a matter of neutrality, so much as personal ignorance. I hate pretending to know things that I don't.
As someone who is generally an Obama supporter, the executive hasn't been on board the last few times this question came up.
I will cheer for you all the way until the first anonymous hold prevents you from advancing to a vote!
I say allegation because my own information regarding international battery production capacity is limited, and I wasn't in any position to deny the GP's suggestion of a marketing agenda.
The point, at least according to Musk, is that no one was actually competeting on economies of scale with respect to batteries. His allegation is that his cars need it, and everyone else dependent on rechargables can benefit too.
As to the truth of the matter, the number of people both qualified to understand the question properly(industrial engineers with expertise in battery manufacture) and the time to investigate the situation, probably already work for one of the companies.
None are journalists. So we get to eat our press releases and like it.
Hey, look, RailGunner makes it entirely clear that they're just a racist moron, and all their opinions can be completely disregarded.
Thanks for the clarification.
It's nice that you have data. Not having data is worse.
But you have a one-subject unaligned, uncontrolled collection of data. The line between inference and magical thinking is narrower than you think, and just because the skinner box gave you food when you crooked your neck doesn't mean crooking your neck causes food to come out.
Oh, so it's a separate nation that Israel recognizes? Not a territory they claim?
Here we go, a discussion about who "fired the first shot" in a Israel-Palestine argument. This is totally something with an objective answer, right?
That being said, if we can't hold Israelis responsible for the reprehensible actions of Israel, who can we hold responsible?
Unfortunately, this kind of question never has an easy answer. Those in the government who make policy decisions are responsible beyond a shadow of a doubt, but they're among the most protected people in that nation.
Did we really blame all Germans for Hitler? Most German citizens didn't even know the holocaust was happening.
Do we really blame all Americans for the NSA's bullshit, considering a majority of us are opposed to it?
Collective punishment has one major effect: making people hate those doing it.
No.
I'm saying your actual reasoning is both specious and stupid.
You're saying a strawman argument you're mindlessly attributing to me that absolutely no one in this thread has made is stupid. Good job.
"Hey this risk to the lives of tens of thousands of people is okay, because we don't think Hamas terrorists have access to flashlights"
Don't want to call people living in their territorial boundaries their whole lives "their own citizens"? Fine.
Their enslaved subjects then.
There have been relatively few wars where the increased risk of disease wasn't the primary killer. WWII, Korea, Iraq I, maybe Vietnam(I don't know much about the stats on the Vietcong side).
Even recent wars like Iraq II has a lot of evidence that this kind of infrastructure damage killed hundreds of thousands.