Jump to content
Evolution Fairytale Forum

Goku

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    1,588
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    66

Goku last won the day on July 7

Goku had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

254 Excellent

1 Follower

About Goku

  • Rank
    Veteran Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • What is your Gender?
    Male
  • How old are you?
    25
  • What is your affiliation/religion?
    no affiliation
  • What is your Worldview?
    Atheist
  • Where do you live (i.e. Denver, Colorado)
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

414 profile views
  1. Maybe I'm just ignorant (I'm not being facetious, I really don't know what the pros and cons would be), but what would be so bad about allowing government subsidized housing into the suburbs? Where did you hear that Biden is for eliminating deportation and giving every illegal citizenship? I'm not saying he didn't say those things, but it is news to me, and honestly sounds a bit far fetched. It kind of sounds like a straw man of DACA, which last time I checked even most Republicans support. I'll second Jambo's question about DC statehood: other than you don't like which political party they vote for, what objections do you have? DC has more residents than some states already and pays more in federal income taxes than many other states, yet because they are not a state they don't have representation in Congress (they have 1 representative that cannot vote) or the Senate. DC residents are literally living "taxation without representation", which if I recall we fought a war over.
  2. The decision was about contraceptives. Are you saying that using protection is murder? As for abortions themselves in relation to government funds, I do have an interesting question for all the pro-life conservative Christians (at least those in America). My understanding is that many Republicans and conservative Christians believe that the government giving money to Planned Parenthood (PP) is taxes going towards abortion. Although, technically, none of the money the government gives PP goes towards abortion, there is a legitimate argument there as it does free up other money they would have used on other services and allow them to allocate that to abortions. So, it would seem, the general consensus among this group of "pro-lifers" is that tax money going to PP is tax money going towards abortion. I assume you share this view, correct? As I'm sure you're aware, Republicans and conservative Christians strongly support Israel. Israel is the biggest benefactor of American foreign aid, and I suspect many of the "pro-lifers" would like to see an increase in that aid (they certainly don't want to see it decrease). IOW, your tax dollars are going towards Israel. Do you know how abortion works in Israel? If you want an abortion you go before a committee and they'll hear your case and make a decision. The committees approve almost everyone; abortion is effectively legal in Israel. In addition, the Israeli government will pay for the abortion in most cases. Using the PP logic above, your tax dollars are being used to perform abortions in the holy land. And so, are you willing to stop giving money to Israel? As for abortion in America, I do find it ironic that those who want to outlaw abortion also tend to be against contraceptives.
  3. I have no interest in debating this with you either (I see it as a fruitless endeavor). I just want to know where you stand on the issue out of curiosity. Is using contraceptives murder? Should anyone that uses contraceptives be given 20 years in prison? P.S. If the only reason why such action is wrong is because God exists, then there is nothing inherently wrong with the act itself; IOW, at a fundamental level, the taking of innocent life is not what is wrong with abortion in your world view, it is wrong ONLY because it goes against God's morality.
  4. Sure, but there is a big difference between just being sinful versus murder sinful. IIRC, in relation to the AIDS crisis in Africa, the Catholic Church said that while it is better to not use contraceptives, if it is the difference between getting AIDS and not getting AIDS you are permitted to use contraceptives (lesser of two evils logic). So I'm guessing that it is not considered straight up murder. But according to Blitz, Catholicism is run by Satan or something, so I don't think we can apply Catholic teachings to Blitz's beliefs.
  5. Didn't Pi say that he supported the SCOTUS decision in favor of the Little Sisters of the Poor, like, a few hours ago in the covid thread? Just to blow your mind, I am perfectly fine with the Sisters getting an exemption to the contraception mandate. I'll also point out that I think this is another case that highlights why we need universal health coverage that is not tied to the employer. This is a serious question based on your comment that using contraceptives means you hate unborn babies. Do you believe that whenever someone uses a c*ndom they are murdering unborn babies? Should someone who wears a c*ndom be convicted of murder, thrown in jail, and possibly be given the death penalty? Edit: I will say the one reservation I have with the SCOTUS decision is that I don't want it to apply to every company and business that just so happens to have a religious boss, or a boss that claims to be religious so they don't have to pay for the healthcare. I don't mind if the Sisters get an exemption because they are obviously an inherently religious organization whereby their religion is central to their organization. But when it comes to a company, like Chick-fil-A for example, which is not inherently religious but just so happens to have a religious owner, I do not think they should be exempt from the mandate. Of course, if we had universal healthcare not tied to the employer all of this becomes moot.
  6. I think the "air we breathe is racist" comment is figurative. I think what she is talking about is that the climate/environment issues we face as a nation and species disproportionately hurts minorities (because they are statistically poorer and thus don't have the money to cope with the problems as well as others).
  7. It is a Trump claim: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/18/president-trumps-claim-that-when-i-came-we-had-no-ammunition/ I'm not familiar with the terminology so I don't know where the ammunition you brought up falls into this, but according to the article, precision guided munitions (PGMs) were starting to run low in 2016 due to higher than predicted usage. Then Obama, in his never ending quest to destroy America and her military, allocated $1.8 billion to replenish the stockpile of PGMs in the 2017 budget. Since smart bombs take a few years to make and get them ready for use, the stockpiles weren't yet replenished when Trump got into office. As best I can tell someone told Trump about this, and because Trump is a very stable genius he took this to mean we were out of ammunition.
  8. You just don't get it. It has nothing to do with whether or not HCQ ultimately works or doesn't work. As your quote said, back when Trump was advocating HCQ as a near miracle drug, the scientific evidence was that it "may" be effective. I hope it is effective. In fact, I hope every potential treatment is effective (I am on team "human"), but that is not a realistic expectation. Things with promise end up not panning out all the time in medicine. As an aside, I suspect that HCQ is effective in some circumstances, but isn't for every covid case, and its use should be on a case by case basis as determined by the patient's doctor. Based on the available data at the time Trump started advocating HCQ we simply didn't know if HCQ would be good or bad, and that's the point. HCQ could just as easily have been a disaster. It was dangerous and irresponsible for Trump to advocate it the way he did.
  9. Goku

    Covid ... we blew it

    It's all a big hoax and a fake news lame-stream media lie. Trump said the virus will go away like a miracle in April. It is now July; get a grip libtards. The kung flu is a Chinese bio weapon that has been in the US for months if not years; 90% or so of the American population had already been exposed to the virus and has developed an immunity. Children cannot even get the disease. All this social distancing and face masks is a liberal plot to take away our freedoms. Masks are literally killing people! Even if this is a real pandemic, I'm sure all the old people are willing to die to ensure the economic prosperity of America. It is a great day for all those that have died from corona; looking down on America and our great economic success. (All ideas taken directly from things I've heard from conservatives, concerned citizens, or the President.) My point being, the greatest plans in the world won't help you if a significant portion of your population is living in an alternate reality, or otherwise feels that corona is an acceptable consequence to keeping the economy at full speed. Then, of course, we have the "greatest jobs President God ever created" saying we need to slow down testing so the numbers don't bruise his ego. The next year or so is going to be really interesting.
  10. Well I have no idea where these concentric rings are supposed to be. I don't recall any of your sources giving us any math or numbers. So it is kind of hard to analyze it beyond that they are using the SDSS data in which the literature says the telescope has a cataloging bias at various distances (z-values). Then you have KB pointing out the filament which doesn't make a concentric ring around Earth. So, I'm just like Perhaps I jumped the gun and didn't initially ask fundamental questions like where these supposed rings are. I don't know where you got the 20 million light years from. SDSS makes redshift measurements beyond a redshift value of z=5, and z=5 corresponds to about 12 billion light years. Your black and white picture goes up to z=0.14, which corresponds to about 1.8 billion light years, and the first "tick" is z=0.02 which is about 280 million light years. I don't think that picture is going to be helpful in finding rings 20 million light years out. I'm going to assume you are just misremembering the 20 million light years. I used this calculator to find the distances for various z-values: https://home.fnal.gov/~gnedin/cc/
  11. And as I've pointed out several times, the selection bias of the SDSS filters applies to ALL redshift data. SDSS doesn't care if the source is a regular galaxy or a quasar - why would it? (emphasis mine) "It is shown here that a periodicity of ∆ z∼0.6 is imprinted on the redshift-number distribution by this selection effect. Because this effect cannot be rigorously corrected for, astronomers need to be aware of it in any investigation that uses the SDSS N( z) distribution." - https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010Ap%26SS.326...11B/abstract Other "z" redshift values that are affected by the SDSS selection bias have been recorded in other papers as well. Again..... "Discrete Fourier analysis on the quasar number count, as a function of redshift, z, calculated from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey DR6 release appears to indicate that quasars have preferred periodic redshifts with redshift intervals of 0.258, 0.312, 0.44, 0.63, and 1.1. However the same periods are found in the mean of the zConf parameter used to flag the reliability of the spectroscopic measurements. It follows that these redshift periods must result from some selection effect, as yet undetermined. It does not signal any intrinsic (quantized) redshifts in the quasars in Sloan survey data. However this result does not rule out the possibility as found in earlier studies of other data." - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10509-009-0151-2 I know you like to say "QSO" like a mantra as if it triggers you, but actually read what they are saying. You have these redshift intervals indicating periodicies/quantization, however those same intervals are part of the known selection bias of how SDSS picks up redshift values. The instruments don't care if the signal is coming from a quasar or galaxy or whatever. One thing that I think makes this abundantly clear, is that we need to know where these concentric rings are supposed to be. I don't recall ever seeing any numbers or maths in your sources. If I missed them that's my mistake, but can you provide numbers for where these rings are? Yet the literature refutes this as clear evidence due to the way the SDSS picks up the signals. Again, to paraphrase the literature, the SDSS data cannot be used to confirm or deny redshift periodicies at various intervals. Maybe the rings are not in one of these problem areas, I have no idea because I don't know where these rings are supposed to be. What do you think all those links were the first few posts we were discussing this? All I am doing is relaying the peer reviewed literature about the topic as I understand it. As the literature says, this effect cannot be rigorously compensated for. This doesn't mean the people behind it are "lunkheads" or that the data is useless. It just means that there is an artifact in the data due to a selection bias in the equipment that makes it impossible to confirm or deny quantized redshift from the SDSS data at various z-values. If the peer reviewed literature is nothing but "baseless claims", then I don't know what else to do at this point.
  12. What you seem to be focusing on is the "Sloan Great Wall", which a filament that does NOT make a concentric ring around Earth. This particular filament is about 1 billion light years away, and is 1.38 billion light year across. If you recall the formula for the circumference of a circle, it is "2 π r". Since this structure is about 1 billion light years away, we can plug in 1 billion for the radius, and using 3.14 as pi, we get a circumference of 6.28 billion light years. That is how large the structure needs to be in order to form a ring around Earth, but the structure itself is only 1.38 billion light years across. The math doesn't work. Due to gravity you are going to get regions of space that are more dense with stuff and less dense with stuff, with filaments being the largest (known) structures in the universe comprised of clusters of galaxies. IIRC, the Sloan Great Wall is the largest filament currently known. However, the existence of such a filament is not evidence that galaxies form concentric rings around Earth.
  13. The picture provided by NASCAR is obviously closer and so it would look bigger. I don't know if it's the same noose or not, but given that such shapes are apparently not "a thing" in garage pulls at NASCAR, I don't think it is unreasonable for someone to have reported it to NASCAR based on the image NASCAR provided of the noose in question. Regardless if the employee worked for NASCAR or Wallace, my point is that he is probably familiar enough with the equipment to know a garage pull when he sees one. I assume the FBI during their investigation considered the possibility of it being a faked hate crime. I haven't heard about any such talk from the FBI. And so with the caveat that I haven't payed much attention to the news recently, I assume no such concerns panned out.
  14. The distances measured are valid. However, as I cited several times in the past few days, due to the systematic bias as described in multiple peer review articles from different people/groups the SDSS data is picking up more signals at certain distance ranges which leaves an artifact in the data resulting in an appearance of redshift quantization/periodicies or galaxies arranged in "concentric shells" around Earth as you put it. To paraphrase the literature, this doesn't mean such a property doesn't exist in our universe, only that the data presented cannot be used to confirm it. In addition, as explicitly stated in the literature, there is no way to rigorously compensate for this effect when analyzing the data. Think about it. Imagine a universe where the density of galaxies is the same throughout that universe, yet your tool for detecting galaxies has a systematic bias in picking up signals to catalog as galaxies at certain distances. What you would observe is changes in galaxy density around you in such a way as to make it appear that galaxies are arranging themselves around you in concentric rings/shells despite that galaxies are spread out evenly in this thought experiment.
×

Important Information

Our Terms