Can you name him? If you can't, then probably not.
Can you name him? If you can't, then probably not.
"Computer-memory specialist Seagate..."
"Computer storage specialist Seagate..."
Memory â Storage.
Pie â la Mode.
By George, I think you've got it.
I noticed that issue as well. Googleing for Neptune, shows it is roughly 2.8 billion miles from the sun, and this new object is stated to range from 3.1 billion to 7.5 billion.
I don't know where they get the 20 factor.
But AU isn't exactly 'sciencey', is it?
Well, one way to reply to a post calling out confirmation bias
You have a funny term to refer to what would properly be labeled as 'observation of leftists, on social media and in real life'.
Apparently I get to represent all liberals now
Only if you are unable to parse my phrase, "Should I follow suit,
(or at least the ones you don't like, with that bit of no-true-scotsman mixed in under cover of "I didn't mean everybody").
I'm not allowed to clarify my point that you have such a hard time understanding? Considering my original post was simply comparing attitudes and actions of nondescript left-wingers and right-wingers in the post I replied to. Since I wasn't the one who established the general groups under discussion, I certainly feel I have the right to make that clarification. Sorry if that upsets you.
Let's get back to your original claim, which can be distilled to 'liberals conform more than conservatives'.
Oh, wait a minute. I begin to see your problem. After writing all that above, I realize upon re-reading this line, that you simply are trying to argue the wrong claim. You think it is a discussion of whether one group or the other conforms to the expected norm. But that wasn't Ungrounded Lightning's argument, nor mine. UL said that those on the left "apply social pressure to each other to conform", and in response to (I assume) your question about right-wingers, I voiced my support of UL's argument, and provided an example.
I stand by my claim that leftists do much more to force their views on society, even on other leftists, than rightists do. That has nothing to do with whether right-wingers (AKA conservatives) by their nature want to keep things the way they are (also known as 'to conserve', funny how that is implied in the label 'conservative').
You are arguing the wrong case.
Interesting. Since I voted for Obama in 2008, and for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party in 2012, facts which I have stated repeatedly, I always wonder why people on the left insist on labeling me "conservative" off one data point, such as you just did.
Should I follow suit, and extrapolate that all people on the left are dense bigots, who think anyone who doesn't agree with them 100% of the time must be a fucking right-wing nutjob conservative?
Oh, wait a minute. That was my point I made already, or nearly so. Not everyone on the left is as stupid and bigoted as you have shown yourself to be. The liberals that just want to live their lives in peace, and think government has a role in that, aren't of the group I am pointing out. I do believe that most liberals in this country are of that mindset. Specifically, the activists and professional protesters are exactly the group I was describing in my above comment. Also the useful idiots such as yourself.
While there are right-wingers that have similar intolerances, such as the Westboro Babtist Church morons, only a useful idiot such as yourself could ignore the massive violent protests staged by the left and far-left about everything from world financial groups, to gay rights, to police shooting criminals of a particular skin color. They even protest their own protests, for not being left wing enough.
So, please reply, and give me more confirmation of my theory of how the leftists sees anyone who doesn't agree with themselves on every issue.
> Many left-wingers apply social pressure to each other to conform to certain behavioral templates. This includes agreeing with a number of ideological points, regardless of whether they are consistent with observed reality - or each other.
But only the left-wingers do this? The right wingers never do?
Not nearly to the same degree. Either in context of what is considered 'heretical action', or of the reaction and emotion involved in correcting the straying member.
A recent example was the gay pride parade in Toronto that was halted because the Black Lives Matter crowd didn't think there were enough blacks represented. Because you know that when you think of Toronto, you think of its great African Canadian population. And specifically about its gay African Canadian population.
I've had mod points several times in the last few months. Since I'm not a paid shill for anyone, I don't see how they think getting them means more than "You have the temporary ability to make comments you like more visible."
The submission said they want to move Java to the Cloud, but I already received a patent on doing Java-ey things on the Cloud. They need my permission first, and pay a hefty licensing fee if they want to put Java on the Cloud.
Thank you for a very informing post. As the OP for this thread, I do think there is more to the discussion that we usually see. I've actually bookmarked your comment here, so I can read those reports you mention, as far as I can. I'm not a scientist, I'm a computer tech, so I'm sure much will be beyond me.
My contention with the demotion of Pluto isn't that a group of scientists have (again) changed a long standing definition, and I simply don't like change. My issue was how the vote was done. A group with an agenda stayed at a IAU convention as everyone else was leaving on the last day. They called a vote when they were the only large block present, and voted their opinion into existence despite what the other IAU members may have wanted. In essence, 424 members disenfranchised 10,000 members.
If the issue had been hashed out with the full membership, and then a vote was cast, I could accept it. Even if it only passed by 1 vote, I could accept it. But to have such a small group with an agenda make such an important decision is ridiculous. Quite honestly, the issue should not have been brought to a vote at all with such a small number present. Imagine if the US Congress was able to pass laws that way; whoever held the seat of power would call midnight votes when only their five closest allies were awake. Even if it was a law I agreed with, I wouldn't want it passed that way.
Or Hackers, and thinks all data is in 3-D columns in those computer cases.
Just because you've never seen pussy
I still feel sorry for the rattlesnake that bit him. Horrible way for a creature to die.
Do you mean the FDR that sent over one hundred thousand Americans to concentration camps?
Why would you want a president like that?
"We live, in a very kooky time." -- Herb Blashtfalt