Ok, I went back and looked at what she was saying about the Coma galaxy cluster again. The dark matter was in the center, but the galaxies did not collide like I thought she was saying. They are just swirling around each other.
This isn't just a handwavy argument - when you put dark matter and baryons into detailed physical simulations
You do realize they decide what dark matter must do, then put it into the simulation that way. Of course it will act in the exact way they said it should. That is quite obvious. The question is whether there is actually matter or something else causing these observations.
It seems like you know something about the math used to find the time dilation caused by gravity. How are you calculating this? What does the Schwartzchild radius have to do with it?
The other thing I don't quite get is how they think they know the amount of matter there is in the galaxies. Plenty of scientists talk about how hard it is to find brown dwarfs. We can't even find all the earth impacting asteroids in our solar system, much less the small ones out there just floating about. How can they be so sure they have an accurate count for the amount of mass when they are just trying to count the visible stuff.
The other thing that seems like it does not make sense is the way they say the dark matter just streams right through the earth. If it has gravity, and reacts to gravity, then why does it not react to the earth's gravity or even the gravity of the sun. Shouldn't the dark matter clump up in a ball in the center of the sun making the mass of the sun greater? First they say it feel gravity, then they say it doesn't.
You also act like this is known stuff. You do realize that nobody knows what is going on and dark matter is just a place holder for the lack of knowledge about what is happening at large scales in the universe, don't you?
And it clumps together forming the scaffolding for the galaxies, but it also somehow separates out to only show up as a halo around the outer edge of the galaxies. I was just watching this video yesterday to understand what they think this stuff is and many of the things she says contradict themselves. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Plus, nowhere do they ever say they account for time dilation in the galactic rotation speed. If gravity is more intense in the center of the galaxies, then time there will be slower. Which will appear as the outer edge of the galaxy rotating faster than it should. Time is moving faster for the matter there, so it moves further from our viewpoint. Our most accurate clock shows a difference from moving the clock from the floor to putting it up on the wall, I think there would be somewhat more of a difference when you move towards the center of a galaxy.
She also says how it passes through when two galaxies collide without interacting, but in some cases it collides and stays in the middle while the galaxies pass through and are on opposite sides. It seems to be some magical stuff that can do whatever the physicist wants it to do at the moment.
She said her group of two people was not diverse because she was the only black person. She plainly stated that she wanted her whole group to be just like her. That is not an example of diversity, no matter how much you try to claim otherwise.
Unfortunately, your vote will not be counted. Generally the mail in and other specially done votes are not counted at all. Perhaps if the decision was close they might break them out and count them, but normally they are not counted.
You make it sound like scientists are just randomly throwing genes into plants to make them produce cyanide when this couldn't be farther from the truth. Lots of FUD here, as usual.
No, they test it. But the people who test it are the same ones that sell it. I'm sure we should have listened to what the tobacco companies said all those years about it being completely safe, huh? They already said there would be no detectable levels of roundup to make it through the digestive tract into the bloodstream. Well it has been detected in the bloodstream of pretty much every person alive. So if they are lying about that, what else are they lying about.
I wonder if the basic formation of a planetary system can occur without the center mass becoming large enough to be a star. Could you have a system of only unlit planets orbiting around each other. If the gas and dust is swirling around and clumping together, it could conceivably do that even though the mass at the center never gets big enough to ignite. Perhaps something about the way the center star is supposed to push the lighter elements out further away would cause something to not work out right, but to me it seems like it should still work in a similar fashion.
However, ignorance is also the domain of the ignorant.
It's okay not to be aware that someone has investigated an area before, or even to ignore people because you have a hint they may be wrong because of some anomaly. But ignorance of the in-depth side of what you're ignoring is dangerous.
There has rarely (I would state never but I'm a scientist in my mind, so I can't without proof that's true) been a time in history when someone has found something that everyone else had totally ignored
I am not saying your statements are wrong, merely giving one example I have learned of that it the contrary to the norm. The inventor of the Frazier lens wanted to make a lens that could have infinite depth of field. He wanted the closest things and the furthest thing to all be in focus at the same time. He was an amateur in the field and didn't know the physics or math of how lenses work. When he went around to universities asking about how to do what he wanted he was told over and over that it was impossible and that it could never work. So instead he spent many years in his garage making his own lens systems (walking into the woods) and experimenting. He ended up creating a new lens system that accomplishes what he wanted. This is how he described his invention in a documentary when it was first created. Wikipedia now says that some of the things he uses to get the infinite DoF have been around before, so perhaps it was more of a rediscovery or a combining multiple things into one system to get the effect desired. Still, the experts in the field said it was impossible to do, but he did it anyway.
You are trying to say I am spreading FUD, but it is quite apparant you are straight up lying. It is a well known fact that the amount of glyphosate being used has gone up very dramatically. It is also a quite well known fact that weeds are becomming resistant. Even Monsanto knows this, but they have the next thing in the line up, so they aren't too worried. And you are somehow implying that the creation of the GM corn was completely unnessary as the corn can beat out the weeds anyway. You are obviouly a paid shill. It is apparant that you are very bad at your job though and should be fired from it. I guess I would rather have bad shills out there spreading obvious lies than to have someone more effective at it, so keep it up. This will be my last reply, I am finding this to be a waste of time.
Sure, and they don't use way more than has ever been used before. That is the whole point of the genetically modified corn afterall. And with the weeds becoming resistant they keepeusing more.
Not doing well would be things like higher rates of miscarriage and more premature death of the animals. Monsanto says the Gly-(however the herbacide is spelled) will not make it through the digestion, but it is found in the animals and humans blood. We depend on a myriad of little critters living in our gut. How can eating a bunch of poison not affect them and us.
That is exactly what the cigarette / GMO companies would say. You just outted yourself as a shill. And I'm not talking about a study, I'm talking about the farmers raising the animals.
That scheme has already been in use from back when credit cards were first introduced. Gas stations used to have a lower cash price. It is against the ToS to charge more for credit card use, but it is not a problem to give discount for cash purchase.
Speaking personally, I have little problem with this type of GM food. I would still think we should be allowed to know what we are eating, but this does not bother me. It is the GM creations where more poisons can be used or the plant creates it's own poison that bother me. And mostly it comes down to not trusting the company to tell me it is safe to eat. The tobacco companies tried that for many years but we eventually learned the truth. I see some studies that show animals are not doing so great on this new corn, so I have some concerns. I still eat Doritos, so I know I am getting it, but it still worries me. And the weeds are just getting resistant anyway, so it will just lead to a post-herbicide end game much like the medical community is worried about our upcoming post-antibiotic time that seems to be coming.
Most people who have been around would say tomatoes tasted much better before. Now they have very little flavor, but they have that nice red color that everyone wants no badly.
Has anyone been arrested of the crime of warrant-less mass surveillance?
Yes! The TLAs and police even have a name for what they need to do when they want to arrest someone but their information has been gotten through their illegal means. Perhaps you have heard the term "Parallel Construction".
So what tangible benefit, in light of the detriments, has it resulted in? Nothing I can see.
It can be hard to see when doing something may help prevent things from getting worse. It is easy to see that the government is abusing power more now than before as it didn't have the ability to record every phone call made before. Preventing this from continuing, or preventing things from going even further and getting worse can be hard for some to see.
Running seed through an X-ray machine will cause huge numbers of all sorts of random mutations (as opposed to a single, controlled insertion), and they don't get tested nearly as thoroughly.
And then the one harmful change of these huge number of all sorts of random mutations becomes predominant in 90% of the wheat out there? Yeah, I don't see that happening as easily as when the GMO company selects the gene they want and put it into 100% of the seeds.
It would be illegal for another company to get a hold of the seeds if they don't intend to use them as the contract states. You are not allowed to study the plants in any way. You are not allowed to study the animals that eat the plants either. You can only plant them and sell the resulting crops. Anything else is against their contracts and will get you sued.
The same company that made thalidomide also made penicillin. You're saying that Monsanto can never have any good product again?
Also, I had wrongly thought your "killed more people" actually related to *food related* products. It doesn't, so it's even more tangential to the discussion of GMOs.
The only reason they sell the *food related* products is to get the farmers to buy more of the poisonous killing products. They sell weed killer and insecticides. The seeds are only there to get you to buy more chemicals.
But no GMO companies are interested in making something more nutritious. They want farmers to buy more chemicals. They are chemical companies after all. Chemical is even in Dow Chemicals name and I'm pretty sure Monsanto cares more about selling the weed killers than they would ever care about selling crops that might be more nutritious.
it's still just DNA. who cares where it came from, what's important it what it does!
This is a very important point about the genetic modifications that seems to be ignored most of the time. The companies that make the GE food crops are not food companies, they are chemical companies. They don't make food that grows better or has more nutrients or uses less water. They make crops that allow the use of more pesticides, insecticides, and weed killers. So the food crops that are genetically modified are more poisonous from all the stuff sprayed all over them. That's not even counting the crops that make their own poisons. If a crop was bred through natural means to be poisonous, it would be just as bad. But somehow we find having poison in our food supply to be a good thing!
Like insurgents who hide their weapons behind children hoping to vilify their attackers, it seems quite strange someone would place a baby's crib blocking their own front door.
You have presumably been lucky enough not to have any dealings with serious drug dealers. They'd use their dear old mum and new born baby as human shields if necessary.
But that is somehow better than cops that use other people's children as bullet catchers? I see many more cops in my day to day life. I am sure they are much more of a danger to me than the few drug dealers out there that I don't have any dealings with.
caught criminals when it was the most opportunistic and safest for EVERYONE! Today, the only people who has their safety discussed is that of the Law enforcement agents. Which is completely contrary to what a Law enforcement officer's job is supposed to be, which is "Protect and Server the Public".
Yep! I would gladly watch 100 cops die at the hands of homicidal maniacs to save the life of one child. Cops choose their profession. They should not be out there shooting first and asking questions of the dead bodies.
There is plenty of evidence that the horizon exists also. I can see it and measure how far away it is. But for some strange reason, no matter how fast you travel, you can never reach it.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, I went back and looked at what she was saying about the Coma galaxy cluster again. The dark matter was in the center, but the galaxies did not collide like I thought she was saying. They are just swirling around each other.
This isn't just a handwavy argument - when you put dark matter and baryons into detailed physical simulations
You do realize they decide what dark matter must do, then put it into the simulation that way. Of course it will act in the exact way they said it should. That is quite obvious. The question is whether there is actually matter or something else causing these observations.
It seems like you know something about the math used to find the time dilation caused by gravity. How are you calculating this? What does the Schwartzchild radius have to do with it?
The other thing I don't quite get is how they think they know the amount of matter there is in the galaxies. Plenty of scientists talk about how hard it is to find brown dwarfs. We can't even find all the earth impacting asteroids in our solar system, much less the small ones out there just floating about. How can they be so sure they have an accurate count for the amount of mass when they are just trying to count the visible stuff.
The other thing that seems like it does not make sense is the way they say the dark matter just streams right through the earth. If it has gravity, and reacts to gravity, then why does it not react to the earth's gravity or even the gravity of the sun. Shouldn't the dark matter clump up in a ball in the center of the sun making the mass of the sun greater? First they say it feel gravity, then they say it doesn't.
You also act like this is known stuff. You do realize that nobody knows what is going on and dark matter is just a place holder for the lack of knowledge about what is happening at large scales in the universe, don't you?
And it clumps together forming the scaffolding for the galaxies, but it also somehow separates out to only show up as a halo around the outer edge of the galaxies. I was just watching this video yesterday to understand what they think this stuff is and many of the things she says contradict themselves. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Plus, nowhere do they ever say they account for time dilation in the galactic rotation speed. If gravity is more intense in the center of the galaxies, then time there will be slower. Which will appear as the outer edge of the galaxy rotating faster than it should. Time is moving faster for the matter there, so it moves further from our viewpoint. Our most accurate clock shows a difference from moving the clock from the floor to putting it up on the wall, I think there would be somewhat more of a difference when you move towards the center of a galaxy.
She also says how it passes through when two galaxies collide without interacting, but in some cases it collides and stays in the middle while the galaxies pass through and are on opposite sides. It seems to be some magical stuff that can do whatever the physicist wants it to do at the moment.
She said her group of two people was not diverse because she was the only black person. She plainly stated that she wanted her whole group to be just like her. That is not an example of diversity, no matter how much you try to claim otherwise.
Except for that one job where everyone was just like her. Then it was "diversity lightning" and everything was great.
Unfortunately, your vote will not be counted. Generally the mail in and other specially done votes are not counted at all. Perhaps if the decision was close they might break them out and count them, but normally they are not counted.
You make it sound like scientists are just randomly throwing genes into plants to make them produce cyanide when this couldn't be farther from the truth. Lots of FUD here, as usual.
No, they test it. But the people who test it are the same ones that sell it. I'm sure we should have listened to what the tobacco companies said all those years about it being completely safe, huh? They already said there would be no detectable levels of roundup to make it through the digestive tract into the bloodstream. Well it has been detected in the bloodstream of pretty much every person alive. So if they are lying about that, what else are they lying about.
I wonder if the basic formation of a planetary system can occur without the center mass becoming large enough to be a star. Could you have a system of only unlit planets orbiting around each other. If the gas and dust is swirling around and clumping together, it could conceivably do that even though the mass at the center never gets big enough to ignite. Perhaps something about the way the center star is supposed to push the lighter elements out further away would cause something to not work out right, but to me it seems like it should still work in a similar fashion.
However, ignorance is also the domain of the ignorant.
It's okay not to be aware that someone has investigated an area before, or even to ignore people because you have a hint they may be wrong because of some anomaly. But ignorance of the in-depth side of what you're ignoring is dangerous.
There has rarely (I would state never but I'm a scientist in my mind, so I can't without proof that's true) been a time in history when someone has found something that everyone else had totally ignored
I am not saying your statements are wrong, merely giving one example I have learned of that it the contrary to the norm. The inventor of the Frazier lens wanted to make a lens that could have infinite depth of field. He wanted the closest things and the furthest thing to all be in focus at the same time. He was an amateur in the field and didn't know the physics or math of how lenses work. When he went around to universities asking about how to do what he wanted he was told over and over that it was impossible and that it could never work. So instead he spent many years in his garage making his own lens systems (walking into the woods) and experimenting. He ended up creating a new lens system that accomplishes what he wanted. This is how he described his invention in a documentary when it was first created. Wikipedia now says that some of the things he uses to get the infinite DoF have been around before, so perhaps it was more of a rediscovery or a combining multiple things into one system to get the effect desired. Still, the experts in the field said it was impossible to do, but he did it anyway.
You are trying to say I am spreading FUD, but it is quite apparant you are straight up lying. It is a well known fact that the amount of glyphosate being used has gone up very dramatically. It is also a quite well known fact that weeds are becomming resistant. Even Monsanto knows this, but they have the next thing in the line up, so they aren't too worried. And you are somehow implying that the creation of the GM corn was completely unnessary as the corn can beat out the weeds anyway. You are obviouly a paid shill. It is apparant that you are very bad at your job though and should be fired from it. I guess I would rather have bad shills out there spreading obvious lies than to have someone more effective at it, so keep it up. This will be my last reply, I am finding this to be a waste of time.
Sure, and they don't use way more than has ever been used before. That is the whole point of the genetically modified corn afterall. And with the weeds becoming resistant they keepeusing more.
Not doing well would be things like higher rates of miscarriage and more premature death of the animals. Monsanto says the Gly-(however the herbacide is spelled) will not make it through the digestion, but it is found in the animals and humans blood. We depend on a myriad of little critters living in our gut. How can eating a bunch of poison not affect them and us.
That is exactly what the cigarette / GMO companies would say. You just outted yourself as a shill. And I'm not talking about a study, I'm talking about the farmers raising the animals.
That scheme has already been in use from back when credit cards were first introduced. Gas stations used to have a lower cash price. It is against the ToS to charge more for credit card use, but it is not a problem to give discount for cash purchase.
Speaking personally, I have little problem with this type of GM food. I would still think we should be allowed to know what we are eating, but this does not bother me. It is the GM creations where more poisons can be used or the plant creates it's own poison that bother me. And mostly it comes down to not trusting the company to tell me it is safe to eat. The tobacco companies tried that for many years but we eventually learned the truth. I see some studies that show animals are not doing so great on this new corn, so I have some concerns. I still eat Doritos, so I know I am getting it, but it still worries me. And the weeds are just getting resistant anyway, so it will just lead to a post-herbicide end game much like the medical community is worried about our upcoming post-antibiotic time that seems to be coming.
Most people who have been around would say tomatoes tasted much better before. Now they have very little flavor, but they have that nice red color that everyone wants no badly.
Has anyone been arrested of the crime of warrant-less mass surveillance?
Yes! The TLAs and police even have a name for what they need to do when they want to arrest someone but their information has been gotten through their illegal means. Perhaps you have heard the term "Parallel Construction".
So what tangible benefit, in light of the detriments, has it resulted in? Nothing I can see.
It can be hard to see when doing something may help prevent things from getting worse. It is easy to see that the government is abusing power more now than before as it didn't have the ability to record every phone call made before. Preventing this from continuing, or preventing things from going even further and getting worse can be hard for some to see.
Running seed through an X-ray machine will cause huge numbers of all sorts of random mutations (as opposed to a single, controlled insertion), and they don't get tested nearly as thoroughly.
And then the one harmful change of these huge number of all sorts of random mutations becomes predominant in 90% of the wheat out there? Yeah, I don't see that happening as easily as when the GMO company selects the gene they want and put it into 100% of the seeds.
It would be illegal for another company to get a hold of the seeds if they don't intend to use them as the contract states. You are not allowed to study the plants in any way. You are not allowed to study the animals that eat the plants either. You can only plant them and sell the resulting crops. Anything else is against their contracts and will get you sued.
I find the choice of what the GMO companies do to the plants more worrisome than how they do it.
The same company that made thalidomide also made penicillin. You're saying that Monsanto can never have any good product again?
Also, I had wrongly thought your "killed more people" actually related to *food related* products. It doesn't, so it's even more tangential to the discussion of GMOs.
The only reason they sell the *food related* products is to get the farmers to buy more of the poisonous killing products. They sell weed killer and insecticides. The seeds are only there to get you to buy more chemicals.
But no GMO companies are interested in making something more nutritious. They want farmers to buy more chemicals. They are chemical companies after all. Chemical is even in Dow Chemicals name and I'm pretty sure Monsanto cares more about selling the weed killers than they would ever care about selling crops that might be more nutritious.
it's still just DNA. who cares where it came from, what's important it what it does!
This is a very important point about the genetic modifications that seems to be ignored most of the time. The companies that make the GE food crops are not food companies, they are chemical companies. They don't make food that grows better or has more nutrients or uses less water. They make crops that allow the use of more pesticides, insecticides, and weed killers. So the food crops that are genetically modified are more poisonous from all the stuff sprayed all over them. That's not even counting the crops that make their own poisons. If a crop was bred through natural means to be poisonous, it would be just as bad. But somehow we find having poison in our food supply to be a good thing!
Like insurgents who hide their weapons behind children hoping to vilify their attackers, it seems quite strange someone would place a baby's crib blocking their own front door.
You have presumably been lucky enough not to have any dealings with serious drug dealers. They'd use their dear old mum and new born baby as human shields if necessary.
But that is somehow better than cops that use other people's children as bullet catchers? I see many more cops in my day to day life. I am sure they are much more of a danger to me than the few drug dealers out there that I don't have any dealings with.
caught criminals when it was the most opportunistic and safest for EVERYONE! Today, the only people who has their safety discussed is that of the Law enforcement agents. Which is completely contrary to what a Law enforcement officer's job is supposed to be, which is "Protect and Server the Public".
Yep! I would gladly watch 100 cops die at the hands of homicidal maniacs to save the life of one child. Cops choose their profession. They should not be out there shooting first and asking questions of the dead bodies.
There is plenty of evidence that the horizon exists also. I can see it and measure how far away it is. But for some strange reason, no matter how fast you travel, you can never reach it.