What is c99?
C99 is censoring! I'm leaving!
C99 wont censor! I'm leaving!
Welcome to my world.
Every day I bite my tongue and suppress my biases for the common good of this site. A site owners words can become gospel. I don't want that. I try to remain as neutral as possible.
Just a few short weeks ago there was a huge clamor on this site over media censorship and how corporations are doing the governments first amendment's dirty work. No fucking censorship was the war cry. It was the hill folks were willing to die on. It was very contentious and heated. I have no doubt folks left c99 because of it.
I now hear subtle pleas for censorship here at c99, and some that are not so subtle. Is censorship that subjective? Censorship for thee but not for me? I have no doubt people will leave over that as well.
Where does that leave c99?
In a world of fear, uncertainty and doubt, I hold these truths self evident:
I remember the original premise of this site. That is; everyone should be able to voice their opinions, short of insulting other users.
No one knows what the future will bring, no one. Not even science. Predictions can be made but no one knows for sure. No one.
Covid has proven to be the most valuable tool in the arsenal of those that wish to divide us.
Comments
Your words are golden
I'm sure there are many political and philosophical items that you and I strongly disagree with.
As long as we listen to each other and consider the other's arguments we can converse.
I have no desire to reside in an echo chamber. Nor do I want to live in a bear cage. Men and women of good will rationally discussing what's good for all is what I'm looking for. Certainly not "America is shit but Russia/China is perfect" nor "America is perfect, everyone else is trash". A fine line sometimes.
Once I hoped to be part of a renewal of freedom and prosperity in the USA. The last 16 years or so have beaten that out of me, Bernie Sanders capitulations most of all. It's like finding out the Jesus really did make that deal with Satan in the desert.
Still I come here to learn what is really happening in the world of politics. For self-preservation if nothing else. I haven't contributed much, neither financially nor philosophically. I'm sorry about that.
NOTE: The phrase "Men and women" above is a traditional ordering and does not imply any inequality or superiority. In a linear ordering, something must be listed first. it might be the most important. it might not.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
I can't begin to imagine
how stressful that is for you. Covid has become the new I/P religious war. As if we didn't have enough I/P IRL... And being religious in nature, the topic is now no longer subject to actual debate involving facts and the like. So we now have a yet another new third rail.
This toxic combination of religious zeal and cancel culture has certainly led to me reconsidering participation in some of the more wide-open forums out there (read- Reddit), but not here.
It does lead one to wonder just how it got so absurd so quickly, and the traces of aluminum foil still on my head lead me to suspect yet another psyop designed to generate such division as to render social media (even more) unusable. It does feel as if some very powerful and sociopathic entity or entities want everyone completely isolated and shuddered into silence. I've said many times that it feels as if the entire concept of objective truth itself is being deprecated. When truth is killed off, all that remains is opinion. Well, that and shouting.
Let's see: we now have I/P, religion in general, guns, gender, Boomers, Covid, the shape of the Earth, the moon landing, and the Boston Red Sox as topics which cannot be mentioned without incurring spleen-ventings of cosmic heft. Good thing we can still talk about food and gardening- this week, anyway.
And I'll pretty much guarantee that this post will cause several demands for my immediate banning. Sorry, JtC... Thanks once again for keeping this forum available, in which consenting adults might choose to interact.
Twice bitten, permanently shy.
One of my favorite quotes...
Thomas Paine- He who dares not offend cannot be honest.
I'm totally against any forms of censorship beyond personal attacks.
"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin
Wow JtC, I have noticed some of our prolific and fun
writers haven't shown up lately, but had no idea this was going on.
The answer is and has been: No censorship for you or me. But, stick to the topics and don't call people names or the membership, which is not a single mind on any subject so far. Maybe this is the one subject we can have a consensus on.
Wow, we need good thinking people and people with a sense of humor in these awful times. When things get as polarized as they are now, it's the moderates (notice here, not centrists, moderates) are the first to go, and the extremes get more pronounced and contentious.
Really sorry you have to make this statement. I selfishly hope some of our missing will return. I miss the many voices. I learn from everyone.
Thank you for actively participating in the moderation of this site. It keeps us on an even keel. And for the rest of us, it's good to know why someone is being talked to. Good reminders for all of us.
You have probably noticed I'm the sibling who always wants us all to get along.
I might add, that we found the French much more willing to listen carefully, take turns in a discussion, ask questions, drop thought experiments into the middle of a conversation and shocked that USians are so competitive in almost every aspect of our daily lives. It just does not resonate with them individually or in their culture.
Thank you.
A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit. Allegedly Greek, but more possibly fairly modern quote.
Consider helping by donating using the button in the upper left hand corner. Thank you.
Wow, seriously?
How do I keep missing these things? I guess I should check in more often.
If we start censoring on this site, we lose its entire reason for being.
This is an anti-censorship, pro-rationalism, pro-civility site.
If any of those things are removed, abandoned or destroyed, there will be no point in keeping the site up at all.
Those who want to advance down a slippery slope of censorship should note that there are innumerable politics and news websites all over the internet that censor based on somebody's political preferences or personal feelings. There are very few that are both anti-censorship and pro-civility.
In other words, you can find yourself a site that censors according to your political preferences or personal feelings fairly easily. On the other hand, finding a site like this is very hard.
Consider well before you shoot it in the foot. Or the head.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Could you provide me a link to the brouhaha?
Because I just paged through the site again and didn't see anything like a flamewar.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Hi CStMS, I can't answer for our honorable site host,
but there have been some strongly worded comments here and there rather than serious long TOP-like strings. But I am suspecting JtC got some personal emails from folks saying they are leaving or taking a break.
Just a guess on my part.
I want to be able to ask questions about things people here may know a lot more about than I do without feeling stupid or on the wrong side because I don't get it. This is one way I have been able to figure out how I feel about some subjects.
And I sure would like to write about some of the forbidden subjects as in some cases, I personally have a very nuanced view because of personal experience. Doesn't make my position the best or worst, but I am where I am. And open to others' personal journey of opinion.
A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit. Allegedly Greek, but more possibly fairly modern quote.
Consider helping by donating using the button in the upper left hand corner. Thank you.
Well said DM
Censorship should never prevail
I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish
"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"
Heard from Margaret Kimberley
No flame war
It’s far more subtle than that. Here’s the most recent salvo.
https://caucus99percent.com/content/sweden-now-number-33
I was waiting for the meta post about this.
Frankly, I believe that reducing this to an issue of “censorship” is mistaken. It’s about the insults. The continued generalized insults against rationalism itself. This is driving some people to the brink.
Of course, the solution to bad ideas is to refute them, not to censor them. But, people get very tired of refuting the same stuff over and over, against an onslaught that is intended to drive a particular narrative. I think almost everyone here is open to varying opinions and points of view, or we wouldn’t be here. But I for one want a discussion in good faith. What is happening here is not a discussion in good faith. It’s tiresome, and some very interesting, knowledgeable people are simply getting fed up. With good reason in my opinion. I don’t see any calls for censorship per se, but does anyone really want to spend a lot of time and and energy arguing with ideologues? Nope. So they stop refuting, stop contributing. Can’t blame them. But the loss to the site is real and unfortunate.
Thank you...
for making my case. It is quite subtle, is it not?
I would not want your job here JtC
To me, honestly, the game playing from that individual is actually fairly obvious. I think that user has repeatedly violated the DBAA rule and regularly insults "people on this site" who they repeatedly claim have said things that no one ever said. IOW, I consider them a troll who is here to stir shit, not to engage in a good faith discussions, and as such I would bounce them in a minute. But as I said during the last big brouhaha over 'censorship' I think sites have every right to limit participants to those who follow the rules laid out, and to invite those who don't to go and freely share their opinions elsewhere. Some people take advantage of your very open minded nature and your commitment to allowing all voices. My thoughts, fwiw, which ain't much.
The sad thing for me, as decisions we make may truly
affect our health, is that some of the questions raised in that thread are very interesting and could truly impact the real world (mine). But I would have liked to hear answers to questions in some of the quotes, which in some cases were speculation but from apparent smarter people than I am.
Sly name shortening, and subtle gotcha terminology stopped most discussion. It was a perfect opportunity to answer questions if they had been proffered in good faith. It certainly caused me to not only not add an opinion or question (gee I must be really stupid or on the wrong side of this one) I don't add a "thumbs up". Even to posters who are usually auto extra points from me.
I was an engineer IRL and had to evolve and solve problems sometimes in new and unique ways. Sometimes our team invented and installed solutions to very real money makers/losers without years of testing. Other times we had to use the tried and true rule book. Many times we had to know where to go or whom to talk with to elicit the best approach to a very new technology world. Fusion furnaces at 3200° F blue flame and all, magnetic radiation flowing not only over copper wire, but lead chokes on enough stuff and it would flow over a table top. Data corruption was a very real thing both in and out of machines, devices and controls.
We are now confronted daily with a planet which is sick and needs help stat and our own health down to a very present level. This requires all of those problem questioning and solving skills I have previously used.
The difference? Freedom to ask the questions. Freedom to seek unusual sources for answers. Freedom to suggest to owners something they might not quite understand, but be willing to take whatever time it takes to draw pictures, show analogues, explain the risks, show scientific papers and summarize in English, answer every single question as best we could. Freedom. Nothing should be too stupid to ask. If someone who apparently has the appropriate training and skills makes a suggestion or proposes a path forward, why can't we ask what makes this set of proposals better or worse than something else???
Someone said there is no single answer. This I believe. To life, the universe and everything.
A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit. Allegedly Greek, but more possibly fairly modern quote.
Consider helping by donating using the button in the upper left hand corner. Thank you.
God bless you.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
But of course
there is, actually, One True Answer:
42.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Truly it has been written. I wish it was so simple.
A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they know they shall never sit. Allegedly Greek, but more possibly fairly modern quote.
Consider helping by donating using the button in the upper left hand corner. Thank you.
Having read the first few paragraphs, and skimmed down a bit,
I'd say that what I dislike about that post is the tone. I refuse to become the tone police--I'm no cancel culture maven--but that doesn't mean I can't object to a tone; I just refuse to censor.
Referring to people as "team X" and "team Y" is obviously going to divide the site--if the site chooses to participate within those assumptions.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@CS in AZ and of course, the
and of course, the people who are tired of refuting "bad ideas" may themselves be the ones everyone else is tired of because they are so inflexible that their ideas may be incorrect.
The road to ruin was paved by those with good intentions and ideas.
Oh the horrors!
Someone might not like me! Poor argument. First, what others think about me is none of my business. It’s not that I don’t care, it’s that most of the time it is their opinion in ignorance and about them not me. Second, what is popular is not data useful for determining anything but... wait for it... what some people think which is none of my business if it is unsolicited.
"Ah, but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now..."
Honestly
I'm visiting and posting here less and less because people here--many of whom I respect on many things--seem to have gone off the deep end in my opinion.
Covid isn't worse than the flu. Vaccinations are a secret government conspiracy. Locking down has no effect other than crippling the economy and making us serfs, which is the secret *big plan*.
Everything is a psyop it seems. Everything is coordinated.
It's ridiculous, and frankly dangerous.
I appreciate not wanting to silence anyone, but when what is offered up as opinion blatantly goes against currently known facts, then you get into promoting false opinions that allowed people like Trump and his minions to emerge.
"Covid is done!" was proclaimed here back in mid-2020 you may recall--with at least one essay author telling people to unmask and no longer social distance. Well, as evidenced in subsequent months, that person was wrong and offering dangerous advice.
"Locking down doesn't work" was offered earlier this week with a lot of insults, despite the fact that the places that did lock down in the United States (like my location in the Bay Area which did the lock down very well and as a result is one of the best Covid situations in the entire country despite being a metro area of some 7 million people) had fewer problems. China is another inarguable example of lockdowns being effective.
"Vaccinations are . . . (whatever varying conspiracy you want--usually a pharmaceutical profit making enterprise that is actually useless in reality--use vitamin D instead)". In reality, vaccinations have been dropping Covid rates (it's pretty much statistically undeniable) and hospitalization rates.
It's depressing. Just my two cents.
So I assume then...
that you would be perfectly fine censoring the voices you disagree with?
That's Entirely Up to You
The point I'm making is that the site is now pretty much a majority of crap posts (in my opinion--but backed by tons of scientific evidence), not just on Covid (although that is an obvious example of it). This makes it not worth my while anymore.
The problem you are dealing with is that by not censoring, are you allowing the site to become crap? Everyone, of course, will have their own different opinion on that. But, if the "The End Is Nigh" posts are all that is left, what's the value of the site beyond free speech?
I don't have an answer for you, but I've always thought that if I created my own such site, I'd moderate the heck out of it to remove falsehoods and people who post blatant falsehoods. I don't like promoting falsehoods--it leads to people making bad decisions down the road and buying into narratives that really aren't aligned with reality.
Again . . . your site, your choice. But if you wanted to know why I (and probably others) don't come here all that often anymore . . .
There are plenty of echo chambers out there...
obviously that is what you are looking for.
Wowzerz
See, this is the type of comment that is just crap! Where, may I ask, did I ask for an echo chamber or no disagreement?
Oh, that's right . . . nowhere at all!
These bullshit responses are not discussion at all. Just more falsehoods. (Point to me, in detail, where I asked for an echo chamber? All I did was to ask to MODERATE flagrant falsehoods away. Not. The. Same. Thing. At. All.)
It seems YOU want to promote falsehoods--an echo chamber of falsehoods, you might say.
Have fun with that. If normal people with rational thinking can't find the value in the site because of the overwhelming number of posts that aren't worth much, then the inmates will take over the asylum, and intelligent people will leave.
You seem to have made your choice--which is entirely within your rights. But, since c99 is becoming more of a Facebook wannabe as far as quality of posts, and so many people are complaining about it (it seems, because you posted this essay in the first place), don't be surprised when your readership drops by half.
More falsehoods with your comment here . . . yet more paranoid falsehoods . . .
The moderation style you describe...
claiming yourself as the arbiter of all that is false, is the very essence of an echo chamber. No thank you. Folks came here to get away from that shit.
C99's stance as an open discussion board will stand, even if I am the last one standing. I will turn the lights out knowing that the original premise of this site was not compromised.
Well, I don't see C99 as inmates of an asylum
vs rational people.
I see a few people who don't look like good faith actors to me, and a slightly larger handful of people who *do* look like good faith actors, but wildly incorrect ones. I see a much larger group of people whose participation has dwindled because they are out of energy or out of hope. They seem to lurk, though, because they tend to pop back up after months or years. And then there's the people who try to be as correct as possible, who are acting in good faith, and simply are too stubborn or angry to give up and stop talking. Some of the people in that final group are mad at the people in some of the other groups, and threaten to walk away when they get mad.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I have a problem with that insofar as it presumes
Omniscient moderators. The ultimate, of course are/were certain priesthoods, many of which waged war on heretics, pagans & heathens and atheists such as myself for generations.
I had a friend who died recently who was one of those who, in his youth, did a lot of the hard-core legwork that led to plate tectonics being accepted and eventually mainstream, prior to that it was nonsensical falsehood, the truth was gradualism, especially in geology, which also ruled out planetary collisions and even events like that which created the chicxulub crater.
Epigenitics flies in the face of everything that was known until recently, it reeks or lamark, which was biological and evolutionary heresy.
Political conspiracies, throughout history have been a dime a dozen, and the US has been lying to its citizenry as often as not for my entire life. Who other than actual participants in specific events is competent to say This is the truth as to That. The US had absolutely nothing to do with the Bay of Pigs, until one day they copped to it. Everybody in certain left cadres knew that the Feebs were corrupt, were spying, infiltrating, planting evidence, framing people, entrapping people and engaging in lesser provocateur activities, and everybody else knew that those people were insane crazy conspiracy theorists, until the Feebs admitted to cointelpro and now everybody is sure that they stopped doing that shit and that they copped to all the did and did only what they copped to.
I could go on and on and with respect to many, many things would object that almost all statements, theories and such one sees online and in the ordinary press and most similar places as wrong because they presume a hard yes/no, true/false, or some mono-variate causality or lack of discontinuities.
Is this sequence possibly random? 3 4 9 7 7 2 1 6 6 9 2 4 0 9 3 5 6 5 3 8
Many will say no, too many repeats. They'd arguably be wrong.
Most of us have, at best, a minimal understanding of most of the sciences, often full of errors and misunderstandings, and a knowledge of history that is based on the most influential propagandists as of when we learned it.
So how, then, are we to police falsehoods? According to today's official version? Official according to the government, some other government, some group of scientists, some grouop of skeptics, or perhaps some logician in the back corner asserting that every last one of them committed the fallacy of denial of the antecedent, and while that doesn't mean that they are necessarily wrong, it does mean that their pronouncement cannot be relied upon?
be well and have a good one
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
If the site is almost entirely crap posts
I'm curious to know what posts other than COVID posts are "crap."
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
As I said elsewhere,
There are many many sites and other forms of social media where people do exactly that: moderate the hell out of things to make sure the things that get published are in line with people's political opinions and reflective of their feelings.
There are very few sites that attempt to protect both free exchange and civility.
That's why, if this site fails, it would be a shame.
Becoming exactly like all those other sites would be a failure just as much as if JtC took the site down.
As for facts--I have a lot more to say about that, but for now, let me just use an example: if somebody told me the speed of light was 5 miles per second, my only response would be to say "That's foolish," if I made a response at all.
I've made no response to the people who have said COVID isn't a big deal; it's just as obvious they're wrong as it would be if they said "The speed of light is 5 miles per second." Additionally, the nature of our political discourse is such that most people are already bifurcated into two rigid groups, and decide what they think based on which group they belong to. Therefore, they are unlikely to ever shift their views. What I'm saying is that nobody who comes here is going to believe that COVID is not a big deal unless they came here believing it--and anybody who comes here believing it will continue to believe it. Nobody will be converted, or, as the institutional "left" likes to say, "recruited" to the position of a COVID denier unless they are already part of the political faction that believes it--and if they are, it's likely that only severe experiences to the contrary in their own personal lives (like a family member dying of it) will change their views.
When you see it that way, you realize that the only harm being done by people stating that COVID isn't a big deal is a kind of annoying grating on the nerves of people who (with reason) disagree. That ain't enough of a problem to justify censorship, which, even if people want it or think it's justifiable, shouldn't be a function of *this* site. God knows there are enough sites that do it already.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Apropos:
You cannot reason a man out of a belief he was never reasoned into.
( derived from Jonathan Swift -- "Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired")
be well and have a good one
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
Holy shit!
I wrote six paragraphs, and you said the same thing in one sentence.
"I'm sorry I wrote you such a long letter, but I didn't have time to write a shorter one."
--Oscar Wilde
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Love the Wilde quote, so much truth about
writing and self-editing buried in one line.
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
Here's what I don't understand.
And I mean that genuinely, not as a way of disrespecting your point.
I have encountered that kind of COVID discourse on this site from a few people: one in particular.
There is an individual who often makes statements on here with which I absolutely disagree. Some of it has to do with opinions on COVID I think are completely unfounded.
I occasionally disagree with that person out loud. Most of the time, I don't bother. Why? Because it is, as you say, like a constant drumbeat. In other words, said person has a particular axe to grind. Most of us do; in the case of this particular person, I think their axe is grinding away at non-facts.
The nature of the internet is such that any person--and even some personalities that are just bits of software--can repeat the same points over and over again endlessly. IRL, if a person does that, other people often avoid his or her presence, choosing to hang out with people who don't endlessly repeat non-factual points. But online you can only walk away by walking away from the whole discussion. You can't just walk away from Jane because Jane is a nutball, or acting in bad faith, because Jane's comments are interwoven with everybody else's. There is no way to avoid seeing Jane's comments unless Jane is censored/banned.
Most of the time, it seems that people who want others censored are frightened by the publication of erroneous or evil information (like conspiracy theories or bigotry) because they know that if such information is available for public consumption, it could have a bad effect on people's minds and opinions. They want to protect people from forming bad or erroneous opinions, or, at the extreme, from being "recruited" online to some evil or erroneous cause.
But you cannot have a republic, a democracy, or any kind of society that offers any freedom or power to the masses, if you believe that the masses need their minds protected from bad data. The sensible thing to do about bad data is to refute it--whether once, twice, or a few times. If, after a few times, the offending person keeps pushing the same bad data after you refute it, then they are either a fanatic or a troll. Continuing to answer them back will indeed exhaust you--it's meant to. It will also produce vehement division on the site--it's meant to. Once it's clear that they are going to continue to bang the same gong over and over again, the best thing to do is walk on by, and continue to talk to the people who are capable of civil, rational discourse. If everybody does this, then the offending person will end up only talking to others who already agree with him/her--or will end up plain isolated.
It's not like we're all sitting in a room together having a political discussion. That would be much easier. Trolling doesn't work nearly as well in person, and sockpuppets, of course, can't exist in real life. The worst thing you have to deal with IRL is infiltrators, not an endless stream of invented personalities, almost certainly created for the purpose of advancing views congenial to some powerful political or economic faction, who, since they're not people, have no trouble repeating themselves endlessly. Code doesn't get tired.
Why not just walk on by, and keep the rational conversation going with everyone else?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Nutball weighs in
I feel attacked! Why did you choose violence?!
/we've secretly replaced CStMS's endtags with snarkoff, will she notice? let's watch!
CStMS, thanks for approaching so many complex issues with a nicely woven braid of compassion, wisdom, and humor. Your comments are always a pleasure even when the subject is difficult.
Since I'm in the meta I might as well say that the main reason I've not been posting here (or anywhere else either for the most part) for months has nothing to do with the voices on the blog, nor the lack thereof. It's not because one person is crazier or people in general are crazier, or more argumentative, or less pleasant, or less moderated, or any of the star-bellied sneetch reasons of the day. Now I hasten to add that it's also not because of Dr. Suess or any decisions made on behalf of Dr. Suess by his heirs, representatives, attorneys, or the administrators of his estate, which is a sentence I never thought I'd have any reason whatsoever to make, lol.
The main thing is I think the world has entered some uncharted sociopolitical territory, and this is a terrifying time for a variety of reasons. People seem to have a lot of beliefs about what's going on but I don't think many have a good handle on the truth of it. I do not mean to suggest or imply even a little bit that I DO understand some big picture truth everyone else is missing (some people really do have trouble not taking implications where they don't exist, so whenever it's important, I try to spell it all the way out), I really don't think I know shit about most things and also don't really do beliefs, so I don't feel like I have much to contribute to recent discussions. I know we're being lied to by corrupt leadership, and that's the only thing I'm certain about, but that's pretty much always true anyway.
But fwiw I continue to read the site most every day, and continue to appreciate the hell out of JtC and all the tenacious little frogs at this place who refuse to give up, who keep kicking that cream without even knowing for sure whether someday that could churn the butter we need to give us that step up out of the pot.
Keep on truckin
Jane
I just have to challenge this statement
"I appreciate not wanting to silence anyone, but when what is offered up as opinion blatantly goes against currently known facts, then you get into promoting false opinions that allowed people like Trump and his minions to emerge."
I believe that is a classic conflation that should be reconsidered. It looks like you are saying that all of the facts on covid are known, and any evidence contrary to the state narrative are opinion and should not be allowed for discourse, because ...Trump.
First, facts or evidence should be debated on their own merits, not on popularity.
Second there is a manifold of reasons why Trump emerged. We could argue till the end of the Sun, why and how.
I think those are two distinctly different situations.
"... facts or evidence should be debated on their own merits ...
"First, facts or evidence should be debated on their own merits, not on popularity."
Precisely. The popularity of an idea does not prove that it is correct. If it did then burning witches at the stake and slavery were ok, and the sun once circled the earth.
"A lot of people believe it" is not a scientific argument no matter how one spins it.
Actually, it does
The Sun circles the earth and the earth circles the Sun.
More to the point, they both circle the centroid of the Solar System which is located close to the center of the Sun.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Explain how
, "the sun circles the earth" even comes close to describing the reality of the situation. Oh, and I am not even going to nail you to the proverbial cross on the 24 hour bit you conveniently left off.
The easy answer is look in any book on orbital mechanics.
Imagine a system with (only) two sun sized stars. They will circle each other, each on a path centered between them. exactly between them if their angular momentum allows them to orbit in a circle (the same circle). Now let one of them be half the mass of each other. The center point will be closer to the larger. As you shrink the smaller sun, the orbital center (of both) the center will be inside the larger and although it is orbiting it will appear to be spinning on an axis through it's side.
This is Newtonian Physics and can't be properly explained in a forum posy. I have an entire textbook on it. "Fundamentals of Celestial Mechanics" by J.M.A. Danby, copyright 1962, third printing 1970.
Now that probably sounds like a put down, but it's not. Physics is easy, but the details are complex and require a level of mathematics I wouldn't expect most people to have. hell! Most people can't balance their checkbooks. But like Law and Medicine, it requires specialized study. Not a put down. I'm sure On the Cusp can cite equally arcane points of law. I forget, are you the biologist? I yield to your specialized knowledge there. But, honestly, I thought everyone knew that two gravitating bodies circle each other, even if they can't prove it mathematically.
As an aside and indicating inflation, the price stamped on the flyleaf by the U of Md bookstore is $9.70
Try to find a textbook for that little today! Try to find a hardcover novel that cheap!
JtC, Is this post an example of those you don't want to see? What should I have done differently?
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Lying doesn't work
Explain how the sun orbits the earth is any way makes sense.
A child 1500 miles away walks around a five foot circle. Yet you would say that child walked around me, a person standing 1500 miles away???
RIP
Lying? I take umbrage at that!
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Pretending this:
is an honest reply to the challenge is properly classified as a lie.
So, explain how
"the sun circles the earth" even comes close to describing the reality of the situation. Oh, and I am now holding you to explaining the 24 hour bit you conveniently left off. If you cannot provide an honest answer, just do us all a favor and walk on by . . .
What ???
What sort of nonsense have you learned and where have you learned it. I am sorry "student" but you have failed this exam.
University of Maryland college park Md
read the textbook cited. next you will be telling me that a particle and a wave are not the same thing.
Awaiting jtc's response before going further.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
The truth is
JtC does not want me to speak the truth about you nor will he will face the truth.
What truth may that be...
pray tell.
Excuse me
, If you are unable to discern the troll perhaps . . .
Is it your place...
to discern who or what a troll is on this site?
The Voice In the Wilderness
says something that is false. I call him out. He replies with a wall of text to pretend he actually knows something. ( The Voice In the Wilderness ) is a troll in reality. Do with that as you will.
Dr. Robert I. Price
Department of Physics, Retired
University of Nebraska, Kearney
Decide what sort of people you want on this site. If you decide to support the troll at least do me the courtesy of deleting all my content.
Have a wonderful day,
RIP
I decided 6 years ago...
when c99 was created what sort of people I wanted on this site. I want all sorts of people here. And if your parochial view can't grok that then it's on you.
There are plenty of echo chambers out there. I recommend you seek one out.
Your echo chamber
comment is out of line and you know it. So get a better line, and a better grip on reality.
Your troll spews crap, and I call him on it, and he continues to spew crap. If that, to you, is acceptable, you have a real problem.
Don't you dare accuse me of wanting an echo chamber. I have never lived in an echo chamber.
Grow Up !!! Parochial, really ? !
Shall I hang you on the cross...
that you so desire? That you are so begging for? Shall I give you the satisfaction?
Me thinks I have exposed your inner troll RIP. As you trolled this thread to get to this very point we are at right now. So, here we are RIP.
You want folks thrown out of here because you don't like what they have to say. I refuse to do that. So here we are.
I was a sys-admin
back in the day. I know what you are going through. Back then we ran unix and wrote machine code. The really neat feature is that all my users could set up their own "kill files" so that when they needed to deal with one of these lowlives they could, without bothering the sys-admin. I only quit running interactive server functions when the black hat hackers began to out number the white hat hackers and they hijacked my mail server. After that I was okay with running a web server.
I would never tell anyone like you how to run your server. But I have zero tolerance for social defectors, read "troll". So, indeed here we are.
Goodbye, and I ask you to scrag my account ...
RIP
Oh, God damn it!
Why does it always have to be like this?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Take a chill pill dude.
Take a chill pill dude.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gravitation
According to Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation, the Earth and all of the other planets would be gravitationaly influencing the Sun to some degree, even if it is infinitesimally small.
The other thing to consider is that the Sun and Solar System aren't exactly remaining in a static flat plane. It's more of a case the Sun is "falling" / travelling through space/time and the planets are spinning in it's vortex, sort of.
Here's the present leading model.
Swung from a chandelier
my planet sweet on a silver salver
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I love Echo and the Bunnymen
One of my all time favorite songs is on that album, "the Killing Moon"
It's a wonderful album.
I'm guessing you must be a Gen X-er?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Dammit, Price, I like you,
It will make me sad for you to go. Please don't go. Why are you doing this?
I don't know that Voice is precisely correct, but s/he clearly isn't a flat-earth type, or someone who believes what the Church believed in Galileo's time. What s/he believes might be incorrect, but his/her analysis has not been of the church-generated anti-reason anti-science type. So why such antipathy?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
JtC is invested in wrong theories of physics
and will die on that hill?
He's deeply invested in the idea that the Earth and Sun revolve around one another?
This seems to really come out of left field, and it looks all the more like you're trying to leave with a bang.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Read chapter four of the textbook I cited.
Do you want more citations?
I don't know what I'm taking about? I was the first person in about ten years to pass both sections of my PhD exam on my first try. I was one about half a dozen to score 800 (prefect) on my GRE exam.
Not sure where my diploma is. haven't seen it for some time. But I saved my GRE result and when I find it I'll send it to JtC, not YOU!
Nebraska? You think Nebraska compares with College Park?
I thought you were kidding, making an example of trolling. You know doodly squat about Physics because although I cited a graduate text, any SOPHOMORE knows two gravitating bodies rotate around each other.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Sorry, I should have phrased it more carefully.
Truthfully, I don't know who is right on this issue, having never been taught physics except as part of the lame-ass "Earth Sciences" (just as history, geography, sociology and anthropology were all jumbled into something called "Social Studies.") I know, of course, that what the Church believed in Galileo's time was factually wrong: the earth is not the fixed center of the universe, with a sun orbiting round it. I also would surmise that, since over 1 million earths could be fitted into the sun, that the sun does not go around the earth in the same way that the earth goes around the sun. However, I know damned well everything is in motion, and that the gravity of the earth affects the sun in addition to the gravity of the sun affecting the earth. So I see both sides and haven't enough of the right kind of education to choose between them.
My point was not to jump into the argument between you and PriceRip, but to point out how dumb it is to think that JtC is so mendacious, and so deeply invested in this issue, that he would suppress discussion of it. IMO, that was a false, almost a silly, assumption. JtC may have blind spots and may have issues that form hills he would die on, but I strongly doubt that astrophysics counts among them.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Hey everybody, let's be serious, or frivolous,
but pick one.
1) I'm sure PR understands physics quite well
2) If the cited textbook says anything remotely like "the sun orbits the earth", it needs to be rewritten. (It is often the case that scientists find english tricky)
3) Firstly, the whole oversimplified question presumes that the "centroid" of the non-existent earth-sun two body system is somehow stationary in space or stationary relative to the rest of the universe or something. This is simply false, or "not even false" depending upon your approach. The Newtonian model has the solar system as a whole, and hence the centroid of the hypothetical two body system moving through space in a direction more or less quasi perpendicular to the pseudo plane of the orbital system. In essence, both the earth and sun trace something akin to a spiral, and not a simple rotation around a fixed point.
In tracing that spiral, the sun quasi-rotates around a point near its center of mass, as does the earth. That is the standard, accepted Newtonian model that the author of the work is attempting to or would attempt to portray. The simplified statement"
" does not properly describe, in English, the orbital pattern that the two equal sized stars trace. It is even less appropriate to a system such as earth-sol where the masses are so disproportionate that the centroid is inside one of the bodies. If the sun rotates or wobbles or orbits about a point inside its own volume, it cannot, possibly simultaneously also orbit an external body that is well outside of its volume and orbiting that same point within its own mass in the standard English usage of that term. The physics is fine, but the English is terrible. This can easily be visualized using a bicycle wheel. Paint a "day-glo" flourescent red dot opposite the valve stem and use "day-glo" green paint on the valve stem itself. Turn off the lights, fire up a blacklight and slowly rotate the wheel on its axis. At no point does either glowing patch circle the other, they both circle the axis. If you fiddle the spokes to get an off center axis the rotational patterns become more quasi-cycloidal, but if you construct an artificial axis allowing the wheel to rotate about some point on or within the valve stem there is absolutely no way that it also rotates about the spot on the other side of the rim as that word or any of its synonyms is commonly used in the English language.
EDIT: added italicized phrase Re-Edit cleaned up a lot of typos
be well and have a good one
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
That comment was so rational and informed
it was like jumping into a cool, spring-fed lake.
Thank you.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Thanks
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
It makes one wonder
how many wars have been started by obfuscated nomenclature, dunnit?
Accurate, concise, and to the point.
There's nothing in the definition of the word "orbit" that precludes its use to describe the case where the line-of-apsides (the line connecting the periapsis to the apoapsis) is entirely contained within the mass of a given body. Perhaps that was an oversight on Kepler's part (or his editor, of course- we can always blame them!), but it remains true until somebody changes it. Meanwhile, the rest of us will call it a "wobble" instead of a "wreck".
Language is one hell of an ugly thing sometimes. That is one of many reasons that Gawd gave us alcohol...
Twice bitten, permanently shy.
Hola usefewer
indeed! very much so. Complicated by the fact that we learn language in a way that arguably leaves us all speaking a slightly different, individualized, dialect.
be well and have a good one.
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
Correct premise / poor analogy
The spokes example still puts the elements (ball, valve stem) at fixed locations, rotating around a central hub.
The best practical example of the Newtonian Law of Gravitational I can think of is something like a hunting Bola, where weighted balls or stones are tied together and thrown. If one had a Bola with one heavy stone, and a lighter one, tied together with cord, and threw them with some force and spin, while in the air, the heavier stone would be the primary driver of the orbit that the smaller one was spinning around, but it would definitely be effecting on the heavier central stone, making it wobble or even travel in a small circle as they both moved through the air.
That's my take on it as an amateur astronomer.
True, Bola is a better analogy. Thanks.
Actually, I visualized a decent, though exaggerated, model using a high powered smooth clock drive (smooth as in not herky jerky with an escape mechanism). Cut a 10 inch diameter disk and bore a hole 1/2 inch off center. Affix same to second hand so it rotates eccentrically once per second. Make a 4 or 5 foot rod with a ball on the end and affix it to the minute hand so it rotates once a minute. The relative distances and periods are off, but both rotate around the same point (which is unfortunately only eccentric as top the sun) and it is clear that the disk never rotates around the ball.
be well and have a good one.
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
@enhydra lutris
Will you construct that and post a .gif?
LOL.
Have a good one.
It's already been done, and much better than that, many
times. Your comment reminded me; orreries:
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
@PriceRip.the sun is
.the sun is actually travelling through space in a corkscrew manner as are all the planets.
Price rip is thinking on a 2 dimensional plane.
1.2.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.2
Please, understand this
, ( ) owes you an explanation of what the phrase "The Sun circles the Earth" means. whether you wish to engage, or not, I will press the issue to the end of time for the simple reason that the answer matters to (not me) every student I have ever taught.
Oversimplification is as bad as overcomplication
And when you consider the Earth and Sun, you're actually talking about a three-body problem, because the Moon is also involved. The math is extremely complicated and I don't pretend to begin to understand it.
The Moon goes around (appears to go around) the Earth, but since the Earth's gravitation also affects the Moon, they are actually revolving around a common center deep within the Earth, while both of them are spinning on their axes and neither one is standing still.
The Sun's gravitation is what holds the Earth/Moon system in orbit around it, but, again, there is a much fainter counter-pull from Earth/Moon, and the common center is so close to the center of the Sun as makes little difference. And the Sun is also turning on its axis, and the whole shebang is traveling through space....
You almost have to yell "Heisenberg!" and throw up your hands.
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Correct
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Oh, bless you and enhydra.
You have the knowledge to say what I couldn't formulate in my head.
Too bad, I guess, that I got educated in Florida public schools in the 70s. Not a great time for education, though mercifully free of Bush-era atrocities.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Hey Price. Voice is citing a work that uses incorrect
English. The work is deemed, by somebody somewhere to be definitive. The physics and math, in radically oversimplified non-relativistic terms are probably half-assed correct, the English is, however, terrible. Nonetheless, he is citing a putatively definitive work so the issue really lies in the author of that work's inability to properly express themselves in the English language, very possibly due to a naive attempt on their part at "simplifying" things. See my reply above
be well and have a good one
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --
If Trump said it, it can't be true
is tribalism at its ugliest.
In this case, dangerously so.
Trump mind fucked a whole planet. Now we have over zealous fact checkers who, trying to stop fake news, ban truth and/or legitimate enquiry.
@Battle of Blair Mountain
Trump said lots of things that are or were true. One quip I remember, I think was a quote in Esquire magazine (paraphrased badly) sic;[I like the uneducated, they are easily fooled, particularly the Republicans. If I ever ran for President it would be as a Republican...].
Trump mind fucked the entire world so bad that the Democrats gave him more of everything he asked for, such as 10-20 Billion more in his military budgets (I don't remember exact figure or percentage). And the Dems sure as fuck, crocodile teared up as they passed his massive tax cut in 2017. They also threw a conniption shit-fit and wouldn't let him withdraw from Afghanistan or Syria.
And Biden is retaining Trumps Russian ambassador...
It's the Dim-Reb ratchet. The Rebs move to the right when in power, and the Dims make sure it doesnt move to the left when they are in power.
Politics doesn't govern from the left to the right, it governs from the top to the bottom.
Last year many notable billionaires were clutching there pearls and fearmongering about jumping the Dim ship if Bernie became the captain/ nominee. Bill Gates proclaimed he would vote for Trump over Bernie. The rich vote for their class interests, and have an extensive propaganda apparatus making sure the rest of the populace does as well.
If one can't see that Dims and Rebs are working together to advance an agenda that benefits a very very small sector of society, they need to get their eyes checked.
Especially inquiry.
We're moving toward a world in which hypotheses don't exist.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
It's even worse than that-
we're moving towards a world where only hypotheses exist. And unfortunately, any attempt to prove or disprove any given hypothesis on the part of someone other than the initial hypothesizer (and any True Believers that sign on later) is seen as a mortal insult to the entire cadre. One need only look at the flat-earthers and moon-landing-deniers to see that, writ large.
It is a real quandary. When the tenets of religion are applied to all topics, people who are sick of religion disengage. This leaves only the people who really like to argue to hash it out, and then the people who are sick of argument disengage. And the beat, as they say, goes on.
The carefully-orchestrated effort to cancel the entire concept of objective truth is working. There must be a way to break out of that downward spiral, but I lack the wisdom to put a finger on it...
Twice bitten, permanently shy.
I wouldn't call something a hypothesis
if there is no intention to investigate it and find out if it's true.
Thus, a very great deal of the political expression of this culture doesn't seem like hypotheses to me. It seems like ill-intentioned, unfounded dreck.
I do get what you're saying though. What was it that CIA guy said so long ago? "When the American people have no idea what is true we will have won."
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
It was
CIA Director William Casey's marvelously concise statement from 1981:
But your point about the avoidance of proof/disproof is spot on, and so is the description of that approach as "dreck". Dreck-on-the-hoof! My apologies to any actual hypotheses that I've offended... (;-)
Twice bitten, permanently shy.
We're being chased by the dreckosaurus.
Take cover, tiny mammalian rationalists!
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
This:
The carefully-orchestrated effort to cancel the entire concept of objective truth is working. There must be a way to break out of that downward spiral, but I lack the wisdom to put a finger on it...
Exactly so.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@BORG_US_BORG its that "currently
its that "currently known facts" part that is the wrench. Jump to the 22m 40s mark. https://youtu.be/y6D8bQs-E8A
Thanks for that link.
I will try to watch the whole thing over the holiday weekend.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
Do you have a problem with me writing an essay
in response to this?
My response is bigger than a comment, but in the semi-culture (subculture?) of the internet, it's considered rude to "call people out" by responding in large post form to a comment, so I'm asking. No desire here to throw more gas on the fire.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
as to this:
...i remember DT having been labelled as 'anti-science'. but i'd offer that science itself evolves, as does medical science.
when covid-19 death tolls are given, do they indicate that a person died from covid-19 or while having covid, discovered later?
there are indications that some folks having the requisite jabs...still acquired covid. and how about the many variants emerging? do they/will they requite new and different jabs?
from the age of ten, i was prescribed small pox vaccines, which i gave myself every 6 weeks (for cold sores, herpes simplex). now medical science says: 'Ooopsie; that will have given you cancer!'
as a side note, lockdowns in china were accompanied by massive help for those inside, as far as i can recall.
today RT.com's up with: 'Future virus ‘more deadly’ than Covid-19 will spark new pandemic, WHO chief warns', and remember. alleged appointee by bill gates...Tedros _ _, isn't even a doctor, which fact really bothered the former heads of the
WHO.
but sure, we can wonder where it's all leading, including mandatory jabs. but as far as i know, all of the jabs are experimental, and all have included some number of bad reactions.
thanks for bringing this subject to the light, JtC. i learned the hard way early on that i know zip about the facts, starting with the covid section at the Swiss Research Project, iirc. sorry not to have time to fetch the link, but i need to get offline again, as it's still bad for my vertigo.
I didn't suggest people unmask
or stop social distancing. That was YOUR knee jerk reaction to my post pointing out that Covid deaths were trending down.
I can't help you got hysterical over good news.
I suppose you were relieved when deaths started trending back up?
Oh and irony of ironies. Covid is an aerosol. Socoal distancing and mask wearing not nearly as important as well ventilated buildings.
Pages