BobbyJo

38 ms·

661.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> So, what stops the US government from making this an elaborate Psyops activity. Why should it be aliens _only_? That just depends on what evidence you do, or do not believe. Depending on your selection, and number of explanations may m
662.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> The objects captured from fighter jet IR cameras discussed in the past have also had explanation of lens flares and focal aberrations One is a potential flare/focal aberration. The other two have no such explanation, and one of th
663.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
That argument would be "where is the indisputable evidence", and I would point out that no evidence is indisputable, especially when it concerns something as ridiculous as UFOs. I'll point out 2 things: 1) The videos released
664.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> And as we know they're the only countries with radar and observation abilities. They're not? Are you implying that by pointing out one event I'm explicitly excluding the possibility of others? Not sure that follows. >
665.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> how is that alien ingress have never been noticed? The US and the USSR had to collaborate on filtering out UAPs from radar early warning systems so we didn't nuke each other. Two of the people testifying in front of Congress are e
666.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
The timespan is just a more easily digested framing of the odds. It's meant to be easier for a layman to understand, and doesn't actually have anything to do with what things would look like over 7.5 million years. That would take
667.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
I am personally ok with someone believing in astrology provided they are aware that it is hooey. It's fine to want some magic in the world, and to choose to believe in something that is obvious nonsense for the fun of it. I personally
668.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
One would expect the richest Man in the world to also be the luckiest. The latter is simply not possible without the former. I do think he's also pretty smart, and very hardworking, but let's not pretend that lucky isn't 99.9
669.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
It is very likely that costs would scale sub-linearly. So that 5x is likely dramatically overestimating the increase in capital requirements.
670.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
Also of note: the previous record that's being shattered was last year.
671.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> Such criminals are depraved and don't respond to normal incentives and punishments. I think this has less to do with them being irrational and "depraved" and more to do with them being so poorly informed that their perc
672.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
As someone who lucid dreams frequently, and has done a good deal of experimentation in that state, the fundamental difference between your sleeping state and your awake state is that some of your brain is just 'off'. The parts of
673.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> Why? I was told that using the product without paying for it was a righteous form of protest against outrageous terms. That has nothing to do with it being a good or bad analogy. > How would that not apply to shoplifting because the
674.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
The point isn't "it's ok", the point is "it's different", so drawing a line between the two is pointless. The nuances of copyright and IP in general don't apply to a bottle of Sprite on the shelf of a
675.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> If a store’s prices are too high, do you feel entitled to shoplift because it sends them a message? That's not a great comparison. The problem in this instance isn't a high price, it's a lack of access. If they offered e
676.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
Not at all. In another comment I make a similar statement to yours, I'm just pointing out that the coal:methane comparison doesn't make sense.
677.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
Not really. The reason coal was so popular was because you didn't really need any specialized infrastructure. It is a solid you can just ship using the same trains and trucks you use for TVs and apples. So you're really only givin
678.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> There's got to be tens of trillions of dollars in deployed methane infrastructure Highly doubt it is worth that much presently, so even if the investment was that large (which I doubt) we certainly aren't looking at walking a
679.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
100% agree. The more specific you get about a diet, the more specific you need to get about the person eating it. So long as most dietary advice is designed and tested at population scale, it's going to be fuzzy and inconclusive. Even
680.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
A virus can wipe out significant portions of the human population with so little complexity we don't even consider it life, and with no understanding of what it's doing. There are systems on the planet in which a single circuit ac
681.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
Are test score objective? If your school doesn't prepare you for the test doesn't that skew things just as much as schools inflating grades?
682.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> And yet the grandkids of those slave owners sure as hell still profit from their ill gotten gains. Source? I'd venture to guess most have reverted back to mean wealth given downward mobility rates [0] and the time since slavery en
683.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> While helping others out when they demonstrate need is action, it’s usually just called being a decent person and you don't have to limit it to artificial racial boundaries. 100% But back to the context: controlling for racial dis
684.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> Rather, it’s an unfortunate adversity that needs to be overcome. Well yeah, but again > ideally with awareness, empathy, and support of other people even those who do not have to face that adversity the question here is how much s
685.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> No, because this assumes that different groups have equivalent values. Values are not intrinsically tied to your race, they just correlate to some degree like income and geography. Saying we shouldn't compensate for your parents v
686.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> Just decide on household income Why not just decide on a test scores? Or just grades? Or just sports? Because there is no silver bullet measurement for "how deserving is this kid?" I'd venture to guess that if you asked
687.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> At a most naïve level, yes. But the post-modern left’s big assumption is that evolutionary, biological, and other factors can’t play a roll in those outcomes. Democracy's big assumption too btw. > At some level we have to be ok
688.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
>The underlying important question is what do you define as equality? Equality of outcomes, or equality of opportunity? On an individual level, the obvious answer is opportunity, but how do you measure that? Generally via outcomes. If tw
689.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
The intent is to factor in some unknown "racism" value. Poor White and Asian kids still beat out poor Black and Hispanic kids academically on average, so if you naively stratified by income, you'd still wind up with a mostly
690.
by BobbyJo 3y ago
> and yet sightings of UFOs (or any cryptid) have been at an all-time low. Source? I see the opposite when I Google around for reports per year. There was a dip during COVID, buts it's easy to attribute that to people not being outs

More ›