You mean a Brahma day? Close. It's around a 311+ Trillion year cycle, and hardly resembles astrophysics beyond the one hypothesis that the universe "bounces" in and out of existence, expanding then collapsing then expanding....forever....but most hypotheses disagree. Some claim the universe will not collapse but expand eternally, ending in a big freeze, some suggest collapse in 5 billion years from now. Until we understand dark matter/energy, we are in the dark on this question.

The lifespan of Brahma (creator god) lasts for 100 of his years. His 12-hour day or Kalpa (a.k.a. day of Brahma) is followed by a 12-hour night or Pralaya (a.k.a. night of Brahma) of equal length. At the start of his days, he is re-born and creates the planets and the first living entities. At the end of his days, he and his creations are unmanifest (partial dissolution). His 100-year life is called a Mahā-Kalpa, which is followed by a Mahā-Pralaya (full dissolution) of equal duration, where the bases of the universe, Prakriti, is manifest at the start and unmanifest at the end of a Mahā-Kalpa.[13][24][25]

1 day (12 hrs: Kalpa) of Brahma = 4.32 billion solar years (1,000 Mahā-Yugas) (14 Manvantaras + 15 Sandhyās)
1 Day (24 hrs: Kalpa + Pralaya) of Brahma = 8.64 billion solar years
30 Days (1 month) of Brahma = 259.2 billion solar years
12 months (1 year) of Brahma = 3.1104 trillion solar years
50 years (Parārdha) of Brahma = 155.52 trillion solar years
100 years (lifespan: 2 Parārdha) of Brahma = 311.04 trillion solar years
I see a slight similarity, but not a correlation.


Oh my god, that's what you call perfectly describing psychology? Ok, your standard of proof is clearly light years away from mine.

Good poetry outweighs crusades, dark ages, etc?! Not to me.

You can say that, it's just a tool and can be used for good or bad, but in reality it's a tool for controlling the masses and pitting different segments of the population against each other. As a whole, religion has done exponentially more damage to individuals, society, and progress than any estimation of it's real world benefits. Only by adding the infinite good of heaven can the scales be even close to balanced imo.
The same may be true of science, it's real world benefits, which are ubiquitous and undeniable, may be outweighed by it's side effects since making the planet uninhabitable clearly outweighs extending grandpa's expected lifespan by 10% and keeping his lights on.

It happened, it was halted, it's happening again. As long as lower education is so disparate between mostly white and mostly black schools, it's proper. Revamp the education system so all high school graduates have the same educational opportunities, I would support removing it again, but we are moving the opposite direction. No link required, I explained....but from the link you provided....
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/18/upshot/some-colleges-have-more-students-from-the-top-1-percent-than-the-bottom-60.html

Did you read the link you provided about the one place supporting a day of absence? Evergreen? Their "day of absence" was 100% voluntary, not enforceable and not enforced, contrary to your claim.

The reporter chased out wasn't chased out, he was confronted, and he had left the media area to interrupt the event by "interviewing" people who didn't want to be interviewed in the middle of the event. Trump's campaign has adopted this tactic and added violence, and often physically assaulted reporters even when they comply and stay in the media area. This particular event was akin to a reporter jumping on stage and insisting the speaker let him interview him then and there, disrupting the sanctioned event.

Um....this was a discussion of why people would vote for Trump, not what's happening in Canada. That said, you can't expect a university to give a platform to a person who would use it to degrade and denigrate the university and it's policies. I wouldn't expect a religious school to host atheistic pro-life lectures, and I wouldn't expect publicly funded universities to host anti inclusion lectures.

Duh...your alleged "whiteness" class was not defining whiteness as inherently negative, it was this....
CSRE 136: White Identity Politics (AFRICAAM 136B, ANTHRO 136B)
Pundits proclaim that the 2016 Presidential election marks the rise of white identity politics in the United States. Drawing from the field of whiteness studies and from contemporary writings that push whiteness studies in new directions, this upper-level seminar asks, does white identity politics exist? How is a concept like white identity to be understood in relation to white nationalism, white supremacy, white privilege, and whiteness? We will survey the field of whiteness studies, scholarship on the intersection of race, class, and geography, and writings on whiteness in the United States by contemporary public thinkers, to critically interrogate the terms used to describe whiteness and white identities. Students will consider the perils and possibilities of different political practices, including abolishing whiteness or coming to terms with white identity. What is the future of whiteness? n*Enrolled students will be contacted regarding the location of the course. And it was cancelled in 2016-17. Don't be dishonest, it will change my responses.

Not sure why you made up this falsely alleged definition of racism that appears nowhere in the definitions or class descriptions you linked, but you did. Calling bullshit....Again.

Critical Race Theory (7016): This course will consider one of the newest intellectual currents within American Legal Theory -- Critical Race Theory. Emerging during the 1980s, critical race scholars made many controversial claims about law and legal education -- among them that race and racial inequality suffused American law and society, that structural racial subordination remained endemic, and that both liberal and critical legal theories marginalized the voices of racial minorities. Course readings will be taken from both classic works of Critical Race Theory and newer interventions in the field, as well as scholarship criticizing or otherwise engaging with Critical Race Theory from outside or at the margins of the field. Meeting dates: The class will meet 7:15PM to 9:15PM on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday (January 7, 8, and 9), and the following Monday and Tuesday (January 13 and 14). Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Written Assignments.

Not anti white/pro minority/white=evil....but an examination of how laws as written and enforced may (or may not) be an example of racial injustice codified in law, whether by accident or intent. Again, you misrepresent the facts to pretend a class that examines the roll of race in law is a racist class teaching whites are bad and blacks are good.

If everyone BUT Asains do poorly because they aren't offered the same opportunities to excell, then yes, we need to step in to UPGRADE the opportunities of everyone else, that doesn't translate into downgrading the opportunities Asains are offered. Derp. This bullshit is the same racist trope the anti equality side has used for years, it's just bullshit. Asians aren't penalized for being competent at math nor for being Asian....neither were whites, which was V 1.0 of that same argument.

Identity politics are on both sides, played hard by the right too, to the detriment of society.

Affirmative action got national pushback from the racist right the day it was described as a plan, and constantly since.

It seems you may be confused by morons who would tell you racism is dead, reverse racism is out of control. When white women start being lynched by black mobs and blacks get a free pass for breaking the law, come back and try again. Until then, you sound like a bully whining about getting a time out for punching a smaller kid because they're a different race and proclaiming the whole system is unfair to white kids because you had a minor consequence forced on you.

Um....no, he isn't correct.
I'm sorry that you believe 2864974 fewer votes is a mandate by the people supporting your team. That is not what the word means. Clinton had the mandate from the people.

Because some deluded Trumpsters voted based on their belief that Trump would turn society back to the 50's based on exaggerated stories they hear about some liberal colleges doesn't make them right, that's not the job of a president, you need a dictatorial tyrant to force societal changes.

I've never even heard of most of your insane claims, like this racial "day of absence" bullshit, that's patently illegal in the U.S., so if it happened at all, it's not here.

Ok, widespread through academia, bullshit. My parents both worked for Stanford for decades, my sister is a teacher, none of what you claim happened there, most didn't happen in any schools in the U.S.. Some happened in Canada, most is bullshit right wing propaganda....like deplatforming, I'm guessing you're talking about some racist right wing agitators being denied a platform for their hate speech after massive protests at places like Berkeley, what you forget is they offered different venues and times for them when and where they could hold their events in safety and they refused, then lied and said they were just flatly denied a place to speak.

Wait, you're saying Trumptards are so delusional they claim Trump did nothing to solve these issues that enrage you and that you claim exist today, so people should vote for him again. So stupid.

You're suggesting voting to decimate America to save it from a few hundred delusional college students with no power. I hope you like the way the Chinese change things, they'll own America in a few years if we continue down this road.

Edit: People need to very seriously wake up and recognize how many of the quiet folks who openly detest Trump, are also going to silently still vote Republican because of their disgust and push back at the above ideals have been suckered, duped into believing this nonsense by liars who only want to increase their ignorance, listening to those without scruples but with agendas misrepresent the problems and never looking for themselves has created a national party incapable of thinking for themselves, incapable of the most basic investigation, incapable of even recognizing that they're being lied to constantly by their sources, even when those sources admit they lied about everything.

There Is No Art In This White House


By Elayne Griffin Baker

There’s no literature or poetry in the White House. No music. No Kennedy Center award celebrations. There are no pets in this White House. No loyal man’s best friend. No Socks the family cat. No kids’ science fairs. No times when this president takes off his blue suit-red tie uniform and becomes human, except when he puts on his white shirt-khaki pants uniform and hides from Americans to play golf. There are no images of the first family enjoying themselves together in a moment of relaxation. No Obamas on the beach in Hawaii moments, or Bushes fishing in Kennebunkport, no Reagans on horseback, no Kennedys playing touch football on the Cape.

I was thinking the other day of the summer when George H couldn’t catch a fish and all the grandkids made signs and counted the fish-less days. And somehow, even if you didn’t even like GHB, you got caught up in the joy of a family that loved each other and had fun. Where did that country go? Where did all of the fun and joy and expressions of love and happiness go?

We used to be a country that did the ice bucket challenge and raised millions for charity. We used to have a president that calmed and soothed the nation instead dividing it. And a First Lady that planted a garden instead of ripping one out. We are rudderless and joyless. We have lost the cultural aspects of society that make America great. We have lost our mojo, our fun, our happiness. The cheering on of others. Gone. The shared experiences of humanity that makes it all worth it. Gone. The challenges AND the triumphs that we shared and celebrated. The unique can-do spirit Americans have always been known for. Gone. We have lost so much in so short a time.

Vote Democratic all the way down the ballot on November 3rd.

"99% of violence last 3+ years s from the left refusal to acknowledge a peaceful transfer to power because Hillary lost."

This is an outright lie. No one questioned the transfer of power based on the election result. Many people were horrified that a self centered imbecile.. TLDR.

"With such a polarized society, why would one introduce a voting method lacking high standards of control, unless the party pushing for such is that they want to seal the election?"

Introduce? Read up about mail in and absentee ballots. You have to go state by state. They have existed for a long time, they leave a paper trail. Nothing "introduced" there. Much better than any form of electronic voting for instance.

"So this piece of fake news is taking the position that Trump will bitch / moan and fight after the election all those un-counted mail in votes."

That is the position Trump is taking, explicitly and literally, yes.

Then just so up and VOTE in person.

Exactly, why bitch about mail in ballots when you can shut up and vote in person?

As for possible mail in shenanigans that dont occur:::::

Election fraud is extremely rare. If you shut up and vote in person you dont have to be worried about your mail in vote getting lost.

Vote in person and be done with it.

There you go, just like you, personally, dont have to get an abortion, you can also, if you so wish, vote in person.

Why stop people from voting by mail, is it because you are afraid to lose?

99% of violence last 3+ years s from the left refusal to acknowledge a peaceful transfer to power because Hillary lost.


With such a polarized society, why would one introduce a voting method lacking high standards of control, unless the party pushing for such is that they want to seal the election?



So this piece of fake news is taking the position that Trump will bitch / moan and fight after the election all those un-counted mail in votes.

Then just so up and VOTE in person.


As for possible mail in shenanigans that dont occur:::::







Vote in person and be done with it.

230-page book called Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, published in 1977 by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.
Highlights:


Called for the sex-integration of prisons and reformatories so that conditions of imprisonment, security and housing could be equal. She explained, “If the grand design of such institutions is to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil society, then perpetuation of single-sex institutions should be rejected.” (Page 101)





>Called for reducing the age of consent for sexual acts to people who are “less than 12 years old.” (Page 102)


>Asserted that laws against “bigamists, persons cohabiting with more than one woman, and women cohabiting with a bigamist” are unconstitutional. (Page 195)


>Objected to laws against prostitution because “prostitution, as a consensual act between adults, is arguably within the zone of privacy protected by recent constitutional decisions.” (Page 97)
>Ginsburg wrote that the Mann Act (which punishes those who engage in interstate sex traffic of women and girls) is “offensive.” Such acts should be considered “within the zone of privacy.” (Page 98)


>Demanded that we “firmly reject draft or combat exemption for women,” stating “women must be subject to the draft if men are.” But, she added, “the need for affirmative action and for transition measures is particularly strong in the uniformed services.” (Page 218)


>An indefatigable censor, Ginsburg listed hundreds of “sexist” words that must be eliminated from all statutes. Among words she found offensive were: man, woman, manmade, mankind, husband, wife, mother, father, sister, brother, son, daughter, serviceman, longshoreman, postmaster, watchman, seamanship, and “to man” (a vessel). (Pages 15-16)


>Wanted he, she, him, her, his, and hers to be dropped down the memory hole. They must be replaced by he/she, her/him, and hers/his, and federal statutes must use the bad grammar of “plural constructions to avoid third person singular pronouns.” (Page 52-53)

>Condemned the Supreme Court’s ruling in Harris v. McRae and claimed that taxpayer-funded abortions should be a constitutional right.
http://humanevents.com/2005

Picard's final statement seems straight out of Hume, who (if second-hand memory serves) felt that, as societies became wealthier, people would spend more of their time in contemplation.

Even so, I can't see getting around at least a unit of account: at some point, Starfleet will have to make a decision about commissioning a new space ship. To do that, they'll need to know what they could be doing with those resources if they didn't build a new ship. Thus, they'll need to know what it would cost them in foregone opportunities. To answer this, it's a convenient to have a single metric.

Sorry if I wasn't clear, kir_mokum. That is exactly what I was referencing.

More to the point - while I agree that the video didn't go there, the discussion in the comments did. The impact of religious ideas on every aspect of society is very real. Luck may seem like an obvious concept, but someone discounted it in favor of their belief that god has a plan for all things in the thread. Obi-wan was a cool guy, but his universe had some very different rules from ours.

Another point – to facilitate a discussion, I think we all assume that hard work is intrinsically beneficial. It is sort of a control we have to accept to engage with the valid idea of this video.

However, all hard work is not necessarily good for society or how we define success for us individually. For me, a good example is how I went about dating and eventually finding a lasting relationship that I’m happy with. I really did work hard on myself and my communication skills, but if you took a snapshot of wherever I was over the course of probably 15 years, I think much of my hard work might have been counter-productive. But then, look at it from the “success” point, and the hard work had a clear line, giving me the experience/education I needed to get to where I am.

And then, who is to say that in another ten years my ideas of success won’t evolve revealing that this current moment is another step towards a different goal?

Forgive me if this seems like a non-sequitur, but hand-waving “God has a plan” undercuts thinking about any of this clearly. At best, it cannot matter. If you cannot know the plan god has for you, and puny mortal minds cannot possibly figure it out, then what does it matter? Taken to worse extremes, it leads to the misunderstanding the video seeks to counter. “Since god planned it, it must be okay” is a half-step away from “I earned all of this with my hard work alone”. And, inserting god in there is even more insidious because you are replacing the idea of hard work with divine intention, or at least tacking it on so that it undercuts any argument against the status quo.

Can you re-watch the video and explain who he was saying should be locked up? What crimes are concerning to him? The notion that anyone should be "warehoused" without recreational time should be appalling to any American. That's clear excessive punishment.

I don't doubt the guy honestly believes that locking away certain people would improve society. It's just that America doesn't work that way, and what he's saying goes directly against what this country is supposed to stand for. We have absolutely reached the point where you either support Trump and what he stands for (fascism, straight up and no longer even slightly disguised), or you support the Constitution and what America is supposed to be. They're not compatible.

Go there, meet the people, it will all make perfect sense. They aren't crazy or all dicks, that makes a huge difference in their society.

I was young enough that I'm not certain, but probably around 5-6 years old when I realized my parents, and society, lied to me constantly.

It could have been the realization that Santa wasn't really visiting my house, or other fantasies I realized were just that, fantasies, it might have been the realization that working hard and being "good" doesn't guarantee success like I had been told, it might have been the realization that "better living through chemistry" was more a pipe dream than reality....I'm just not sure exactly which trigger fired that gun.

6 years old was a weird year. It's when i stopped taking people's word as fact, and likely when I became a professional grade cynic.
I think that's also the year I decided having children was abusive and I didn't want to do that to someone.

Those are good points. There is definitely a slightly frightening overreaction in US society. That is unfortunately what happens when society is polarized and segregated - it can be difficult to find a way back (it was better than today in the 80s and 90s). It might help to find ways to promote mixed political platforms (instead of the "wheres my black guy?" party).

Anyhow this Uncle Tom thing looks like a biased project, trying to hang the racist sticker on democrats and being very liberal with the word "liberal".