-
Not exactly. Yes, obvious misidentifications dropped (but certain ones, like reflections increased), but there still are recurring interesting phenomena out there. For an example, see Hessdalen in Norway.I'm actually more interested in the phenomena on the basic research level.
Me too. I don't dismiss the idea entirely. But I can't imagine actual methodology. We have cameras, there is no need to develop them. That's actually the whole issue. As our cameras get better, the fewer UFOs we observe. Same with Yeti/Bigfoot. Once cameras became very good and virtually everyone has one, sightings dropped quite a bit.So, instead of low level details, I'd like to see a high level plan and study actual feasibility.
I'm not a suitable person to lead such research, but I'd start with an actual initial feasilibity study as an experiment, somewhere like Hessdalen (except in my case, somewhere in Finland; there are a few candidate sites), with a cluster of networked full-sky fisheye cameras. Here in the North, the best time for observations is during the winter, which does pose quite a few limitations for the actual devices, pushing up the price of the devices (and therefore the risk of vandalism and theft, too).
(Remember, this is an example of research that many physicists et al. would be interested in doing, but won't touch even with a long pole, because they know it would ruin their reputation; not something I suggested I would like to submit a research proposal for.) -
Yes, like the women who believe gender is a social construct. Well that's nice until you're in hospital being raped by a 6' 6" man who was placed on a female ward because he identifies a woman.
You're talking about two mutually exclusive subjects here. Whether or not you believe in the complexities of gender identity or not is neither here nor there. Rape is rape, regardless of the gender of the victim or the accused. -
Edit: just realized UFO's don't have to be alien and therefore might not show up in outer space. But then it just another man (sorry women, it is just the standard expression) made object and not really that interesting
No, there are actually quite a few possible natural candidates, like ball lightning (some kind of self-contained plasma phenomena).
A particularly interesting one would be to catalog all the visual effects caused by insects. These often fly relatively close to the camera, quite fast, and the visual signature can be difficult to classify. (In some cases, they can even have relatively sharp edges, making it difficult to show that it is a small object close to the camera and not a large object far away. There is even a "rod" community, believing that such images are not caused by insects, but by "impossibly fast" extraterrestrial exploration devices or something...)
Since multiple cameras with overlapping fields of view (fisheye lenses with full sky coverage) can triangulate all objects except those that are too close (to a single camera), it would be rather easy to distinguish these cases, by the simple fact that they are too close to be triangulated. You cannot do that with a single camera, and it can be difficult with two cameras (depending on the location and orientation of the insect), but with three (cameras in a triangle), it becomes much simpler.
Similarly, combining multiple full-sky visual and infrared images could be very useful for meteor and meteoroid tracking. It might even be useful for atmospheric research (if simultaneous local temperature, wind speed, etc. information is available).
It does annoy me a bit that people immediately jump to "so you're looking for aliens". No, it's much more than that; that's just a side effect, and more likely would result in excluding extraterrestrial craft than anything else. But really, it is just basic research about our environment.
Thanks for this insight. It shows how narrow my look on the topic UFO's is. Guess focus is also controlled by media
The insect option is a problem where unmanned camera's are used, but I guess not when someone is filming an actual phenomena that he or she can perceive as being distant with their own eyes. (I mean a real thing not some made up attention seeking BS)
The ball lightning I know exists but have never seen it in real life. Read about it entering via a window and roaming through the room a long time ago. Can't remember if it did damage. (Before internet) Interesting phenomena as is lightning itself.Here in the North, the best time for observations is during the winter, which does pose quite a few limitations for the actual devices, pushing up the price of the devices (and therefore the risk of vandalism and theft, too).
Unfortunately that is the world we live in know. Theft to some extend can be understood as a way of life support, but vandalism is just crazy. -
What one watches at Youtube is a bit more complex, though, because the interaction is often one-way. For myself, there are many completely secondary details that affect me way, way more than the opinions of the presenter. Like the fact that I don't like watching a talking head at all.
For me it is voices and overly expressive "fake" behavior, but that most likely has to do with the fact that I'm introvert. -
The ball lightning I know exists but have never seen it in real life. Read about it entering via a window and roaming through the room a long time ago. Can't remember if it did damage. (Before internet) Interesting phenomena as is lightning itself.
Yep; lots of anecdotal evidence, but darned hard to replicate (except in microwave environments).
Fortunately, in the last two decades, it has become a serious research subject. Before that, it too had the stigma of "no sensible physicist would touch that subject". As far as I know, in 2014, some Chinese researchers happened to catch the spectrum of one during ordinary lightning research. The article on it was published in Physical Review Letters, one of the most prestigious physics journals.
Advances in ball lightning research by Schmatov and Stephan, 2019, would be an interesting read on the subject, if one had access.Theft to some extend can be understood as a way of life support, but vandalism is just crazy.
No, it's just kids roaming around and poking stuff; they don't know any better.
Such devices are best placed in hard to reach places – and high up anyway, to maximize the solid angle of visible sky. And that in turn requires official contacts and wide official support. The money isn't that big of an issue, Linux SBCs and good camera modules don't cost that much, it's the general support for such projects. Shielded Ethernet landlines to a central box also providing PoE (enough to use small fans and heaters to keep snow and ice off the fisheye lenses too) and an upstream connection.
All you need is a national news deciding the project is laughable (without zero understanding of the various benefits), and it'd be dead due to politics and face-saving.
I mean, look at the Hessdalen EMBLA 2000 mission two decades ago. It's leading research institutions were Østfold University College (hiof.no, which does not even have a Faculty of Science, only a Faculty of Computer Science and Faculty of Engineering; but otherwise a reputable university: ranked 5th in Norway and 900th in the world) and Italian CNdR. But really, Project Hessdalen is just a municipality-supported volunteer and student project. -
Theft to some extend can be understood as a way of life support, but vandalism is just crazy.
No, it's just kids roaming around and poking stuff; they don't know any better.
Already mentioned in this thread I think, the bad behavior of youth, but it would not be bad if more attention was payed to teaching these youngsters some responsibility and value.
For a large part I blame this on the parents and looking at the difference between how it is in the Netherlands compared to here in rural France I think I'm right. Here kids tend to be more behaved as parent are far more corrective of bad behavior. Also in school it is more strict. The children here are still capable of entertaining themselves without drawing to much attention or having to demolish things. -
No, because rape as stated by UK law, can only be committed by a man. Women can commit other serious sexual assaults, but not rape. They don't have the equipment to do so.Yes, like the women who believe gender is a social construct. Well that's nice until you're in hospital being raped by a 6' 6" man who was placed on a female ward because he identifies a woman.
You're talking about two mutually exclusive subjects here. Whether or not you believe in the complexities of gender identity or not is neither here nor there. Rape is rape, regardless of the gender of the victim or the accused.
No one said all trans people are criminals. That was your interpretation. What I said was, it's fine believing in dangerous gender ideology, until it comes to seriously harm you, or a loved one.QuoteBTW, Zero999's is not trans panic but a fact (here, here, here and many others).
See, it's not that those people are doing that. It's the way you are describing it.
I will show you the correct way to describe it:
Rapists are criminals.
Doesn't matter if they're trans or cis, straight or gay. Anyone can be a criminal. Not all trans people are criminals.
No, that wasn't precisely said. It's implied. It's implied by repeating the lie so often it gets lodged into your mind as a given truth.
And if you were really concerned about people being raped in prison, surely you would be screaming from the hills about this and this and this?
And you can fuck right outta here with this shit,Way to go to prove Dave's point. Let's all cancel and cast away someone that is talking about what someone else dislikes.
I have enough respect for people here, to call attention to something, and allow them to correct the wrong.
You're the only one jumping to "cancel culture".
Tim
You're missing the point: the policy of simply believing someone when they declare they're a women and putting them into a female hospital ward/prison stems from gender theory and has to stop. It's a misguided and dangerous policy. The same is true for allowing males to compete in women's sports. People should be treated for those purposes based on their biological sex i.e. a DNA test, if there's any ambiguity.
It's true those with gender dysphoria are more vulnerable and are at increased risk of rape when placed in male prison, but the same can be said about other vulnerable people with mental health disorders such as autism. The solution is to treat people on a case by case basis and always err on the side of caution, when consideration is made to putting them with more vulnerable people. -
No, because rape as stated by UK law, can only be committed by a man. Women can commit other serious sexual assaults, but not rape. They don't have the equipment to do so.
Yes, I hear about this antiquated law recently.
Reminds me to some laws in parts of USA where the law states that they have to keep hay in taxis, in case the horse pulling it would become hungry.Yep. Regarding “trans panic”, a good friend of mine is trans (post op) and she’s worried about it as well. Both from the perspective of being lumped in the same bucket as that lot and being the target of the abuse. It’s definitely a problem.
I'm not familiar with the term. Could you define it and what makes one “trans panic”?
Some humans are shitty regardless of their software or hardware configuration. However I think we should just lump shitty people in the same bucket and ignore all the other bits. -
Worth reading the following to see how shitty humans can be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_panic_defense
-
Why do you think the law should be changed?No, because rape as stated by UK law, can only be committed by a man. Women can commit other serious sexual assaults, but not rape. They don't have the equipment to do so.
Yes, I hear about this antiquated law recently.
Reminds me to some laws in parts of USA where the law states that they have to keep hay in taxis, in case the horse pulling it would become hungry.
Worth reading the following to see how shitty humans can be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_panic_defense
Thanks. I didn't know about that. I took it as a woke slur. I suppose it was when used in that context.
I'm sure you've heard of gender dysphoria, being listed as the main reason for men transitioning. Ever heard of autogynephilia?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blanchard%27s_transsexualism_typology#Autogynephilia
For those who don't have the time to read the entire article, it's basically those who want to become the object of their sexual desire i.e. a woman.
A big problem is many people conflate transgenderism with homosexuality, but they are not the same. To be homosexual is to simply be attracted to someone of the same sex. Transgenderism is being in denial of one's own reality. I have no problem with either, but it's important to note the difference. -
Worth reading the following to see how shitty humans can be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_panic_defense
Thanks for the clarification.
I've seen this study recently, which seems to bring up some data about the issue to be very deeply embedded into people.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19419899.2017.1328459?cookieSet=1
I would like to point out the very high confidence factor in the study.
I am one of those people who accept the fact that we are a product of evolution, and evolution has resulted some programming that is against the current leftist push. You cannot really teach a fish to fly by shaming it publicly, or constantly showing it pictures of birds now, can you? -
That doesn't surprise me. Disgust is hardwired. Witnessing a sexual encounter which doesn't match with one's own preferences is going to invoke disgust. It's perfectly normal and natural. No amount of brainwashing is going to change it.Worth reading the following to see how shitty humans can be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_panic_defense
Thanks for the clarification.
I've seen this study recently, which seems to bring up some data about the issue to be very deeply embedded into people.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19419899.2017.1328459?cookieSet=1
I would like to point out the very high confidence factor in the study.
I am one of those people who accept the fact that we are a product of evolution, and evolution has resulted some programming that is against the current leftist push. You cannot really teach a fish to fly by shaming it publicly, or constantly showing it pictures of birds now, can you?
The practice of putting children through conversion therapy has recently been banned in the UK, because there's no evidence to support it's possible to change someone's sexual preferences, which are probably hardwired. The study you've given there just confirms this i.e. it's not possible to make heterosexual men homosexual, or even not turned off by witnessing two men kissing. -
I see lots of polarising left vs right in this thread, absolute assignment of attributes and lots of poor assumptions about consistency of people's beliefs based on political spectral alignment. On top of that lots of poorly derived assumptions about other people's views on things.
I prefer to take the subgenius position because there's bananas self-serving dickheads on the left, on the right and in the middle
Regarding sexual preferences, you are what you are but may not be what you were and the only worry is if you regret what you have become. What you do as a person is entirely separate be that good or bad. -
I see lots of polarising left vs right in this thread, absolute assignment of attributes and lots of poor assumptions about consistency of people's beliefs based on political spectral alignment. On top of that lots of poorly derived assumptions about other people's views on things.
Honestly, I dont know how did it happen, that all the political views have been reduced to a 1D line.
I prefer to take the subgenius position because there's bananas self-serving dickheads on the left, on the right and in the middle
Regarding sexual preferences, you are what you are but may not be what you were and the only worry is if you regret what you have become. What you do as a person is entirely separate be that good or bad.
It baffles me that we made necessary to make this choice in most democracies on a single line, and completely binary in the USA? There is only an extreme leftist and a ultranationalist party in the USA now? What if someone is eg pro guns, gay rights and not a climate change or science denialist? (which may or may not be my view) If I would need to vote there, I would seriously just vote with my feet. Same goes to the UK now. -
Polarising people is cheap and easy. All it becomes is an exercise in retaining market share which is easily measured. It’s attention metrics again as per my original comment in this thread.
Note I was previously responsible for some of this shit as I worked for one of the companies who were manipulating it. Until I worked out what was going on and quit on the spot. Our current chancellor was my boss to give you an idea how tied together this all is.
Since this I decided I will have no political alignment preferring only independent considerations rather than a polarising ideology. -
@bd139: That "SubGenius" depiction is basically a depiction of all good salesmen.. And you have to be a good salesperson, in order to run your business successfully.. Btw., is Dave running a successful business here? Yes, I think he does..
-
Exactly that
-
I see lots of polarising left vs right in this thread, absolute assignment of attributes and lots of poor assumptions about consistency of people's beliefs based on political spectral alignment. On top of that lots of poorly derived assumptions about other people's views on things.
I don't get the left vs right thing. Some of the things on that poster are inconsistent. "Don't kill anything" is on the left, many in that camp are pro-choice when it comes to abortion, right up to 9 months and many on the right want to abolish it. "Don't knuckle to anyone!" is also the sentiment given off by some left wing groups such as BLM.
I prefer to take the subgenius position because there's bananas self-serving dickheads on the left, on the right and in the middle
I suppose I admit, I'm right wing in many respects, but don't agree with all of it. I certainly support women's rights, public healthcare and education, which are left wing positions. I'm all for gay rights too. The trans thing is more complicated and I support their rights, where they don't conflict with those of women.QuoteRegarding sexual preferences, you are what you are but may not be what you were and the only worry is if you regret what you have become. What you do as a person is entirely separate be that good or bad.
All the more reason to worry about chopping bits off and medications with lasting effects.Honestly, I dont know how did it happen, that all the political views have been reduced to a 1D line.
That's always been a problem. It's easier to have two parties than many.
It baffles me that we made necessary to make this choice in most democracies on a single line, and completely binary in the USA? There is only an extreme leftist and a ultranationalist party in the USA now? What if someone is eg pro guns, gay rights and not a climate change or science denialist? (which may or may not be my view) If I would need to vote there, I would seriously just vote with my feet. Same goes to the UK now. -
All those "movements" and "initiatives" we encounter last 30 years and which you have mentioned above are results of an increased push for new markets, more sales, more revenues, better profits (lower costs)..
Think about for a while - the more diversified markets, more diversified audiences/customers, more diversified life styles, more diversified political views, more diversified employees, more genders, more diversified managements, more diversified needs and products, the more space for achieving the goals in all areas above..
.. Be a good salesperson..
-
All those "movements" and "initiatives" we encounter last 30 years and which you have mentioned above are results of an increased push for new markets, more sales, more revenues, better profits (lower costs)..
I don't see the more diversified political views. Those which support big business are the ones which are accepted over others. Take immigration for example. It results in increased population, more demand for goods and services, higher property prices and cheap labour. These are things large companies like. Anyone who expresses concerns over immigration gets branded a Nazi by the mainstream media.
Think about for a while - the more diversified markets, more diversified audiences/customers, more diversified life styles, more diversified political views, more diversified employees, more genders, more diversified managements, more diversified needs and products, the more space for achieving the goals in all areas above.. -
I'm going to seek a border here and also respond to a couple of posts back.
You are talking about "not liking to be the gender you are born with" and "being attracted to the same sex" and stating it is nature, which I agree on. Yes you are born with it, is what I believe, but is this not also true for pedophiles and psychopaths.
So should we let them have their way too?
Don't get me wrong, just playing the advocate of the devil here
-
Exactly, but mind the companies (aka big business) are the moderators/operators of the markets and mainstream media, not you as a single person.. So somebody be the only Nazi does not influence the markets, moreover the finger pointing at him in the media increases the media revenues in turn..All those "movements" and "initiatives" we encounter last 30 years and which you have mentioned above are results of an increased push for new markets, more sales, more revenues, better profits (lower costs)..
I don't see the more diversified political views. Those which support big business are the ones which are accepted over others. Take immigration for example. It results in increased population, more demand for goods and services, higher property prices and cheap labour. These are things large companies like. Anyone who expresses concerns over immigration gets branded a Nazi by the mainstream media.
Think about for a while - the more diversified markets, more diversified audiences/customers, more diversified life styles, more diversified political views, more diversified employees, more genders, more diversified managements, more diversified needs and products, the more space for achieving the goals in all areas above.. -
It is hard for the common person to follow all the nuances and ambiguities of society - daily concerns of much greater importance (food, education, etc.) take precedence, thus it becomes much easier to put people in buckets for control. Not only that, but the left vs right brings a lot of money - the guy in the middle can be the depicted capitalist or the government (with its politicians and actors) that will use their power (both political and monetary) to maintain the status among the crowd. Many of those cultural discussions that happen nowadays in the US (and sadly trickle down to the rest of the world) are panis et circensis for much more lucrative ventures such as the constant flood of money and equipment to Ukraine, for example (which was taken off the eyes of the US public by Will Smith's slap at the Oscars).I see lots of polarising left vs right in this thread, absolute assignment of attributes and lots of poor assumptions about consistency of people's beliefs based on political spectral alignment. On top of that lots of poorly derived assumptions about other people's views on things.
I don't get the left vs right thing.
I prefer to take the subgenius position because there's bananas self-serving dickheads on the left, on the right and in the middleI suppose I admit, I'm right wing in many respects, but don't agree with all of it. I certainly support women's rights, public healthcare and education, which are left wing positions. I'm all for gay rights too. The trans thing is more complicated and I support their rights, where they don't conflict with those of women.
I am of a similar vein and I personally don't care for the gender proclivities of parts of the population - they can coexist in society as well. What it does not sit well is the extremism and the current shaming tactic to gain acceptance, especially if it affects the less powerful than you. -
I see ideologies such as gender identity and critical race theory as American cultural imperialism. It's true they have their roots in Europe, but they've morphed into something completely different.
It is hard for the common person to follow all the nuances and ambiguities of society - daily concerns of much greater importance (food, education, etc.) take precedence, thus it becomes much easier to put people in buckets for control. Not only that, but the left vs right brings a lot of money - the guy in the middle can be the depicted capitalist or the government (with its politicians and actors) that will use their power (both political and monetary) to maintain the status among the crowd. Many of those cultural discussions that happen nowadays in the US (and sadly trickle down to the rest of the world) are panis et circensis for much more lucrative ventures such as the constant flood of money and equipment to Ukraine, for example (which was taken off the eyes of the US public by Will Smith's slap at the Oscars).I see lots of polarising left vs right in this thread, absolute assignment of attributes and lots of poor assumptions about consistency of people's beliefs based on political spectral alignment. On top of that lots of poorly derived assumptions about other people's views on things.
I don't get the left vs right thing.
I prefer to take the subgenius position because there's bananas self-serving dickheads on the left, on the right and in the middleI suppose I admit, I'm right wing in many respects, but don't agree with all of it. I certainly support women's rights, public healthcare and education, which are left wing positions. I'm all for gay rights too. The trans thing is more complicated and I support their rights, where they don't conflict with those of women.
I am of a similar vein and I personally don't care for the gender proclivities of parts of the population - they can coexist in society as well. What it does not sit well is the extremism and the current shaming tactic to gain acceptance, especially if it affects the less powerful than you.I'm going to seek a border here and also respond to a couple of posts back.
Gender dysphoria is poorly understood, so I don't know if I agree with that part. It's possible it's a result of trauma, just as much as nature. All I know is there many people who've gone through transition and regretted it. The fact it's not fully understood, means we should take a more conservative approach when it comes to dealing with it and no I'm not talking about politics here: the first rule of the Hippocratic oath is do no harm.
You are talking about "not liking to be the gender you are born with"Quoteand "being attracted to the same sex" and stating it is nature, which I agree on. Yes you are born with it, is what I believe, but is this not also true for pedophiles and psychopaths.
Unfortunately there's a group of people who want to destigmatise paedophilia. There are academics who want to use the term MAP (Minor Attracted Persons) because they feel the word paedophile carries negative connotations. Some of them such as PIE (Paedophiles' Information Exchange) have infiltrated some LGBT rights groups. It is a big problem.
So should we let them have their way too?
Don't get me wrong, just playing the advocate of the devil here
Some social stigmas and taboos exist for a reason and should be preserved because eliminating them has negative consequences for society as a whole. There are valid reasons when incest, paedophilia, rape and murder are universally considered to be bad. Let's keep it that way. -
I'm going to seek a border here and also respond to a couple of posts back.
Gender dysphoria is poorly understood, so I don't know if I agree with that part. It's possible it's a result of trauma, just as much as nature. All I know is there many people who've gone through transition and regretted it. The fact it's not fully understood, means we should take a more conservative approach when it comes to dealing with it and no I'm not talking about politics here: the first rule of the Hippocratic oath is do no harm.
You are talking about "not liking to be the gender you are born with"
Guess you are right on that, but I think it is very difficult for medical professionals to see through if it is really needed to perform the surgery or not, but not doing it can also be harmful. Checking DNA like mentioned before to see what gender someone is might not bring the correct result either. When it is in your head, born with or grown due to trauma, can take you down if not dealt with properly. One can then ask what is "properly" here. Very difficult stuff all together.
I like to throw in a saying I like. "If the human brain was so simple that we could understand it, we would be so simple that we couldn't"
The human psychology is not easy to understand and there are many points of view, be it Freudian, Jungian or whatever streams there are.
Nice to have a discussion about it though.Quoteand "being attracted to the same sex" and stating it is nature, which I agree on. Yes you are born with it, is what I believe, but is this not also true for pedophiles and psychopaths.
So should we let them have their way too?
Don't get me wrong, just playing the advocate of the devil here
Unfortunately there's a group of people who want to destigmatise paedophilia. There are academics who want to use the term MAP (Minor Attracted Persons) because they feel the word paedophile carries negative connotations. Some of them such as PIE (Paedophiles' Information Exchange) have infiltrated some LGBT rights groups. It is a big problem.
Some social stigmas and taboos exist for a reason and should be preserved because eliminating them has negative consequences for society as a whole. There are valid reasons when incest, paedophilia, rape and murder are universally considered to be bad. Let's keep it that way.
Certainly agree with you on that, and society should do it's best to keep these bad things in check. Unfortunately it goes wrong from time to time when someone basically known to be bad is released on society and does what he did again.