The argument that the Constitution doesn't specifically mention the right to travel is bullshit, according to the Ninth Amendment. Anyone who holds a diploma from a US high school should know that. A Federal judge who actually supports that bullshit argument is, in my opinion, incompetent. Parent's "jackbooted apologist" label would also fit such a judge.
"NSA America" or "fascist America" would be better. Some people get justifiably offended when one throws around causal references to the Nazis. It desensitizes people to the Holocaust and their mass murders of Roma, Slavs, homosexuals, etc.
The Nazis were a special breed, much worse than anything that exists in our privileged world today, except perhaps in Syria and a few other places. To compare modern states to theirs is disingenuous.
Yes, I have intentionally used very inflammatory language about religion because you persist in believing that religious beliefs are somehow special. They are not.
You seem to believe they merit especially vicious attack.
Yeah, because you disagree with him on animal rights, there's no possible way he could understand human psychology. Thanks for explaining that to us all!
I'd be interested to see a comparison of the costs of nuclear waste storage with those of carbon sequestration. Nuclear energy would perhaps look more competitive then.
The first gaping hole I see in the study is that the scientist did not also have a group of participants who fill out questionnaires and do word scrambles and whatnot using non-scientific words and concepts, and see if that also makes a difference in how the groups respond to the date-rape case.
So they've only found evidence for half of their claim. They present no evidence that thinking about science, specifically, affects the subjects' morality more or less than does thinking about anything else.
The more scientific papers I read, or read about, the more I despair that a great many scientists don't understand scientific rigor.
He partially recreated the work of Copernicus... but then stopped about 3/4 of the way and filled the rest with evidence-free assertions
The scientific method was in its infancy when Galileo did his research. The fact that he didn't uphold what we'd call an acceptable standard of scientific integrity does not detract from the importance of his methods. He helped get off the ground the idea that experiment, rather than preconceptions (what his contemporaries called "reason") is the way to establish scientific fact.
And yes, from what I know of his life, he does seem like an asshole. So what? Lots of assholes have done good in the world.
What does someone thinking someone else is an asshole have anything to do with their actual science?
It can lead to confirmation bias -- looking only for evidence that proves the other guy wrong, instead of maintaining scientific integrity.
In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.
Not having a Facebook account will likely never be illegal, as such. It's just that failing to provide your Facebook data will be grounds for a lender or an electric company to deny you service. Kind of like Social Security Numbers -- you're not "required" to provide it to a phone company, but the company is free to deny you service if you don't.
That crossed my mind, but to understand why that is funny requires you to know who the character is, doesn't it? I thought I'd throw in a link for the benefit of people not familiar with 1980's American television programs.
You're misinterpreting my motives, willfully or otherwise. For the sake of discussion -- why do you feel that the question of gender equality is so different from that of racial equality that it's inappropriate to mention one in a discussion of the other?
You don't see a lot of black people in the US Senate, either, but it would be erroneous to conclude that African-Americans don't want political careers. Which analogy, garbage trucks or US Senate, is the one that fits?
Unlike others, I never wrote that the Wallop's Island facility was new. That was you, reading into my post text a message I never put in. All I said, in a pithy way, was that I suspect political factors could explain the choice of launch site. A launch operation is a big, expensive endeavor, that provides {pork, jobs} for the state where it occurs.
Yeah, Wikipedia says a moon shot is specifically a manned mission, but it says that on a short disambiguation page without any citations. Wikipedia is pretty reliable -- most of the time. Not when the article is without citations and has a short edit history.
At first I thought cloning a human at would be extremely cruel because of what happened to Dolly the sheep, but then I used teh Googlz and found that scientist have subsequently cloned Rhesus monkeys with success. So now I only think it would be totally reckless to clone a human, given how limited our understanding of its long-term consequences are.
Possibly off-topic, but thank you to the editor for including the warning about graphic images. I for one don't want to see that kind of thing, and thanks to you, I didn't.
Sorry, but I've lived around too many fat people. They eat. They eat a lot.
So you find your anecdotes more convincing than a broad survey of years of peer-reviewed research. (The number of studies cited in TFA makes this a lot more than the author's "pet topic", as you say.) I hope you'll understand when I lean toward the scientists' side.
It seems to me that if obesity is primarily influenced by environmental factors rather than behavioral ones, thin people are no longer entitled to feel superior. That's obviously intolerable to some, so they reject the science.
I am not really qualified to evaluate the security of Freenet. I would like to think it works, but I am painfully aware that security is much, much harder than it sounds. So my impulse is skepticism.
Feel free to suggest it to PJ, though. Maybe she wasn't aware of Freemail -- I wasn't, until your post.
Slashdot Mirror
From a government that now assassinates citizens without trial, not being allowed to fly is a pretty mild punishment.
The argument that the Constitution doesn't specifically mention the right to travel is bullshit, according to the Ninth Amendment. Anyone who holds a diploma from a US high school should know that. A Federal judge who actually supports that bullshit argument is, in my opinion, incompetent. Parent's "jackbooted apologist" label would also fit such a judge.
"NSA America" or "fascist America" would be better. Some people get justifiably offended when one throws around causal references to the Nazis. It desensitizes people to the Holocaust and their mass murders of Roma, Slavs, homosexuals, etc.
The Nazis were a special breed, much worse than anything that exists in our privileged world today, except perhaps in Syria and a few other places. To compare modern states to theirs is disingenuous.
Spoofing someone's user ID is not brilliant, but finding and exfiltrating 20,000 documents without getting caught may have been harder than it sounds.
You seem to believe they merit especially vicious attack.
Agnostics do not know whether they are supposed to wear funny hats or not.
I believe TFA mentioned natural gas as a competing energy source ... though it did not say those plants were being built in Vermont.
Yeah, because you disagree with him on animal rights, there's no possible way he could understand human psychology. Thanks for explaining that to us all!
I'd be interested to see a comparison of the costs of nuclear waste storage with those of carbon sequestration. Nuclear energy would perhaps look more competitive then.
The first gaping hole I see in the study is that the scientist did not also have a group of participants who fill out questionnaires and do word scrambles and whatnot using non-scientific words and concepts, and see if that also makes a difference in how the groups respond to the date-rape case.
So they've only found evidence for half of their claim. They present no evidence that thinking about science, specifically, affects the subjects' morality more or less than does thinking about anything else.
The more scientific papers I read, or read about, the more I despair that a great many scientists don't understand scientific rigor.
The scientific method was in its infancy when Galileo did his research. The fact that he didn't uphold what we'd call an acceptable standard of scientific integrity does not detract from the importance of his methods. He helped get off the ground the idea that experiment, rather than preconceptions (what his contemporaries called "reason") is the way to establish scientific fact.
And yes, from what I know of his life, he does seem like an asshole. So what? Lots of assholes have done good in the world.
It can lead to confirmation bias -- looking only for evidence that proves the other guy wrong, instead of maintaining scientific integrity.
(Emphasis added)
Not having a Facebook account will likely never be illegal, as such. It's just that failing to provide your Facebook data will be grounds for a lender or an electric company to deny you service. Kind of like Social Security Numbers -- you're not "required" to provide it to a phone company, but the company is free to deny you service if you don't.
That crossed my mind, but to understand why that is funny requires you to know who the character is, doesn't it? I thought I'd throw in a link for the benefit of people not familiar with 1980's American television programs.
Rosco P. Coltrane is a fictional character.
You're misinterpreting my motives, willfully or otherwise. For the sake of discussion -- why do you feel that the question of gender equality is so different from that of racial equality that it's inappropriate to mention one in a discussion of the other?
You don't see a lot of black people in the US Senate, either, but it would be erroneous to conclude that African-Americans don't want political careers. Which analogy, garbage trucks or US Senate, is the one that fits?
Unlike others, I never wrote that the Wallop's Island facility was new. That was you, reading into my post text a message I never put in. All I said, in a pithy way, was that I suspect political factors could explain the choice of launch site. A launch operation is a big, expensive endeavor, that provides {pork, jobs} for the state where it occurs.
Because the senator from Virginia wants you to.
Says who? According to Mirriam-Webster, a moon shot (TWO WORDS) is "a spacecraft mission to the moon". Dictionary.com says the same.
Yeah, Wikipedia says a moon shot is specifically a manned mission, but it says that on a short disambiguation page without any citations. Wikipedia is pretty reliable -- most of the time. Not when the article is without citations and has a short edit history.
At first I thought cloning a human at would be extremely cruel because of what happened to Dolly the sheep, but then I used teh Googlz and found that scientist have subsequently cloned Rhesus monkeys with success. So now I only think it would be totally reckless to clone a human, given how limited our understanding of its long-term consequences are.
Possibly off-topic, but thank you to the editor for including the warning about graphic images. I for one don't want to see that kind of thing, and thanks to you, I didn't.
So you find your anecdotes more convincing than a broad survey of years of peer-reviewed research. (The number of studies cited in TFA makes this a lot more than the author's "pet topic", as you say.) I hope you'll understand when I lean toward the scientists' side.
It seems to me that if obesity is primarily influenced by environmental factors rather than behavioral ones, thin people are no longer entitled to feel superior. That's obviously intolerable to some, so they reject the science.
I am not really qualified to evaluate the security of Freenet. I would like to think it works, but I am painfully aware that security is much, much harder than it sounds. So my impulse is skepticism.
Feel free to suggest it to PJ, though. Maybe she wasn't aware of Freemail -- I wasn't, until your post.