search results matching tag: standard

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.003 seconds

    Videos (600)     Sift Talk (76)     Blogs (35)     Comments (1000)   

City of Akron responding to the shooting of Jayland Wlaker

newtboy says...

Hardly elitist at under $35k per year for a couple in California.
Not even superior overall as far as I know, (overall superiority is a complicated non standardized judgement to make without complete information about both of us, but thanks for saying you believe it.).
Just somewhat educated not even highly educated, but often more importantly I keep myself decently informed. Sorry to burst your bubble.
(Edit: this means not only learning the facts, but also the “alternative facts”. I read Tzu, and believe in his theory that if you know yourself and your enemy you will be victorious in every battle.)

It’s the smug ignorant incorrect certitude I can’t go for, and you exhibit it daily without ever admitting your mistakes or that you were w-w-w-wrong, just silently moving on to the next falsehood when it’s proven.

bobknight33 said:

Smug elitist superiority is what I don't go for.

Amish response to covid

newtboy says...

You might notice they compare apples to oranges…
Different time periods, different shot levels, grouping mixtures, no clue which vaccine or which strain of covid they looked at, they all vary widely…I would prefer more standardized methods if I’m to make sense out of their data.

I’ve read studies that had similar results, and those with completely contradictory results. Some say natural immunity is better, longer lasting, some say the exact opposite. You can prove anything with statistics….forfty percent of all people know that.

It’s better off the bat because you don’t have to get the disease for the immunity…better again because with boosters it’s better than without them, double boostered likely being better than natural immunity in the same timeframes, or if not, close….also better because you KNOW you got the shots and have a widely accepted record of them, unless you get repeatedly tested you don’t KNOW you had covid…false positives happen…and you don’t get a record to show (for travel, etc).

The science isn’t clear, but it is clear that no immunity is permanent and none is total protection. Because all immunity fades rapidly, herd immunity is a myth.

Buttle said:

That does not seem to be entirely true. It is true that immunity declines, whether from vaccination or infection. It's not true that vaccination gives better or longer lasting protection than vaccination.

From https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.04.21267114v1

Let's talk about altering the Supreme Court....

newtboy says...

The Fourth Amendment explicitly affirms the “right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.” The Fifth Amendment in its Self-Incrimination Clause enables the citizen to create a zone of privacy which government may not force him to surrender. The 14th amendment “due process clause” has been interpreted to also affirm a right to privacy.

https://www.aclu.org/other/students-your-right-privacy

Sure sounds like rights to privacy are right there in the bill of rights though, an addendum to the constitution, as explained in numerous Supreme Court rulings.

<SIGH>. I thought you said “Pedantry is tiresome. Tell your friends.” Maybe take your own advice?

Some light reading…. In January 1973, the Supreme Court issued a 7–2 decision in McCorvey's favor ruling that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides a "right to privacy" that protects a pregnant woman's right to choose whether to have an abortion. It also ruled that this right is not absolute and must be balanced against governments' interests in protecting women's health and prenatal life.[4][5] The Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the three trimesters of pregnancy: during the first trimester, governments could not prohibit abortions at all; during the second trimester, governments could require reasonable health regulations; during the third trimester, abortions could be prohibited entirely so long as the laws contained exceptions for cases when they were necessary to save the life or health of the mother.[5] The Court classified the right to choose to have an abortion as "fundamental", which required courts to evaluate challenged abortion laws under the "strict scrutiny" standard, the highest level of judicial review in the United States.

dogboy49 said:

To me, the current crop of justices seem to be less willing to deviate from the Constitution as written. Should abortion be allowed? IMO, yes. BUT, are laws banning abortion unconstitutional? According to the Constitution as written and amended, probably not. Roe v Wade was written by a court that believed that abortion and the "right to privacy" should carry the weight of constitutional law, even though the Constitution is silent on these "rights".

My suggestion: If abortion should be considered to be a "right", then so amend the Constitution. Otherwise, it will be subject to the vagaries of "interpretation" forever.

Wikipedia's Bias

newtboy says...

Um….what?!

Read what you wrote here, Bob….and then try to say you aren’t a dumb shit without grinning.

Testy? Shirley, you jest! You’ve seen me testy, that ain’t it.
Tired of your ridiculous double standards and deflection from actual crimes against America (that you completely ignore) with unprovable nonsense about a family member who isn’t part of the administration. If everything Hunter is accused of were proven 100% true, it would still be 100% irrelevant and minor crimes compared to the Trump syndicate.
Also tired of illiterate asshats who shower us with stupid right wing propaganda they clearly don’t even watch themselves….as if anyone here wants that, believes a word of it, or can’t see through the tissue thin lies they contain. Only you buddy, only you. (And your sock puppet brigade)

LMFAHS!! Real communists wouldn’t PAY for propaganda…real communists wouldn’t want to be paid! I don’t think you know what communism is.
I wish someone would pay me for my $.02, but I don’t really think I could make a profit on that transaction.

Try again Bobski….this time get your handler to at least check for lucidity since they clearly won’t check your spelling or grammar.

bobknight33 said:

Newt you, as Wikipedia most prolific spin masters, one can understand why your denial is so strong.


I'm not a dumb shit. I just buy the shit your selling.

This must cut close to home -- you are so testy on this ...

You a Commie TOOL arn't you ? You still getting those checks from the communist party for all the false information you spin?

Missouri tries to legislate reality away

newtboy says...

Right, then you go on to argue that they have good reason to exclude these people. Pretty much negated your first statement….or indicates that you agree with denying them rights, but not with using that as a political wedge (on either side?), possibly because it paints those denying others rights as evil assholes that would deny rights over ignorant and false equivalencies. Hard to tell since you won’t answer any questions.

If you believe that, why have you spent an entire day trying to get me to admit women couldn’t ever compete fairly with trans women? Because you have done exactly that.

Your position, that genetic male athletes are always better athletes than genetic women athletes …and trans women are the same as genetic males…is exactly the false and ignorant position and argument used to deny trans people their rights to participate. It’s just like you were using the old trope that black people aren’t actually humans so often used to deny them rights and opportunities….then claiming that just because you argue that doesn’t mean you think they should be denied opportunities. WHAT?!

Finally you admit males aren’t always better athletes. If genetic women can be better, there’s no reason to deny trans women their rights at all. Ms Macho Man is hyperbole, not reality. Men can’t put on a dress and claim trans status.

Pointing to two athletes that are excelling as proof that trans women will crush genetic women if allowed to compete together, to say trans women always have advantages, is also a red herring. That’s the “evidence” anti trans people use to prove that they can’t fairly compete. You may not have done that exactly, but you seem to use the same positions people who do say that use to imply it.

Really? And describe again those standards of fairness….because what I read was a ridiculous conflation between allowing trans people to compete and removing any gender separation….you pretended that’s the same thing.

Yes, because pretending trans women are the same as athletic men is hateful, malicious, and denying trans women’s rights to exist as women.

When I hear/read someone trying to give excuses for denying trans people their rights, I see a villian. How could you not?

Discussion? LMFAHS!!
Excuse me….when did you answer ANY of MY questions? You decry being called a villain, but in what way did you explain how your position isn’t dehumanizing, dismissive, and aimed at denying one group of people their right to participate in public events based on assumption and ignorance? Absolutely none. You moaned that I didn’t answer one of your questions the way you expected….but cannot answer any of mine. Try it, you might learn something.

ONE LAST TIME…HOW DO YOU EXCUSE DENYING TRANS PEOPLE THEIR RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLICLY FUNDED SPORTS? If you don’t support that, you have certainly hidden that fact with all your arguments supporting doing that, so you might want to ANSWER THE QUESTION…..unless you just love to argue, then we’re done.

Missouri tries to legislate reality away

bcglorf says...

@newtboy,

Per my very first sentence in thread, I also oppose gov using this as a wedge issue to rally their base.

Meaning, I 100% am in agreement that nobody(gov or otherwise) should be banning trans kids(and adults) from anything, competitive sports included.

I did point out a single biological fact:
-Whether a person is born with XX or XY chromosomes has a significant impact on development that impacts performance in sports.

You jump all over that observation though, like raising it is hateful, denying peoples right to exist, and on. It is not.

And your observation that the performance advantages aren’t 100% of the time favouring XY folks is the red herring. Of course there are areas were the difference is an advantage, others were it’s neutral, and yet others a disadvantage. In a large population you also always have the possibility of individuals overcoming those odds.

Pointing to those facts though like they mean specific advantages don’t exist is the red herring.

In addition to that one fact, I also proposed applying the same standards for fairness in competition equally to everyone.

And it’s on this point I am automatically decried as hateful, evil and maliciously acting against people’s right to exist….

If your only looking for a villain to demonize there’s no point attempting further discussion.

Missouri tries to legislate reality away

bcglorf says...

@newtboy,

On average you can agree…

I never said anything against any given pro/competitive female athlete probably beating out plenty of biologically male folks.

I was only pointing to advantages between equally gifted/talented and trained people.

To that point, can you agree that most standing olympic records as currently separated into mens and womens records, indicate that the historical separation based on XX and XY certainly appears to show an advantage. Would you be able to agree following from that, the existence of distinct mens and womens records is because without it, women would be “unfairly” left almost entirely unrepresented in every sprint distance, every lifting record and most other records.

For instance, the Olympic qualifying standard for the mens 100m was 10.05s, while the standing Olympic womens record time for 100m is 10.49s. AKA in absence of a separate competition for biologically female athletes, even the standing Olympic record holding female wouldn’t pass the bar to qualify to compete in the Olympics.

That is the advantage I am stating exists, and matters and I am asking if you acknowledge that distinction existing as a result of biology or not?

Three-Minute Video Explaining the Common Core State Standard

newtboy says...

When did national standardized testing stop? It’s been a thing in elementary school since the 60’s from everything I can find. If that’s really what common core is, I can’t fathom why some people get outraged over it. Without these standards, kids that switch schools will be at a distinct disadvantage even if they’re outstanding students because their new school will expect them to know things their old school hadn’t taught them.

Three-Minute Video Explaining the Common Core State Standard

BSR says...

Florida officials continued their war on education this week after rejecting more than 50 proposed math textbooks that allegedly “included references to Critical Race Theory.”

The Florida Department of Education announced Friday it would not include 54 of the 132 ― or 41% ― of math textbooks on the state’s adopted list, citing “CRT” as one of the main reasons.

“Reasons for rejecting textbooks included references to Critical Race Theory (CRT), inclusions of Common Core, and the unsolicited addition of Social Emotional Learning (SEL) in mathematics,” the statement said. “The highest number of books rejected were for grade levels K-5, where an alarming 71 percent were not appropriately aligned with Florida standards or included prohibited topics and unsolicited strategies.”

The state’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis said without evidence that the math textbooks “included indoctrinating concepts like race essentialism, especially, bizarrely, for elementary school students.”

DeSantis has been an outspoken critic of CRT, which has become a catchall term ― stripped of its original academic meaning ― for having discussions about racism in the classroom. Since last July, there have been more than 200 instances of public school districts in Florida banning books, the third highest number of incidents of any state in the U.S.

Democratic state Rep. Carlos Guillermo Smith said in a tweet that the governor “has turned our classrooms into political battlefields and this is just the beginning.” - https://www.huffpost.com/

This man is POTUS

newtboy says...

But those who itemized before lost big money. Now the standard deduction is almost always the best you get, not the case before….bait and switch is all that was, a shell game, not a give back.

Where’s my tax form I can fill out on a postcard in 5 minutes? Where’s the promised simplification so ordinary people don’t have to spend hundreds or thousands to get their taxes done? And when do those higher standard deductions run out, without the return of previously deductible offsets?

*crickets*

bobknight33 said:

its your standard deduction on you Fed tax form.
12K for singles
24K for married.

This man is POTUS

Will Smith Making Bald Jokes Doesn’t Age Well

luxintenebris says...

probably a small segment of the viewing populace understood 'g.i. jane' reference. even smaller knowing the hair loss issue. being hollywood - the joke was mild by ricky jarvis' standards - and having come out w/her problem, was it any worst than...
- richard pryor addressing his first audience after he blazed himself, "y'all did some nasty ass jokes on my ass - oh yeah y'all didn't think i saw some of these mfers..." then did the lit match joke.
- paul reubens' "Heard any good jokes lately?"
- and the numerous running jokes about letterman's marriage/relationship after the extortion revelation
...they humbled themselves and rode it out.

but whada i know about it? wouldn't likely to be hired on as a variety reporter but thought jim carrey's take was the best https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdofcQnr36A

Why I’m ALL-IN On Tesla Stock

vil says...

Yes but to converge the two sides have to acknowledge the arguments of the other side, unfortunately I am probably not arguing well enough and Im perfectly willing to just give up.

Anyway you seem to be able to research complicated topics well, you can read up about the history and end of the gold standard and about deflation for your own sake in your own time :-)

Fighting against fiat money, reserve banks, inflation and national debt is like fighting against democracy or free speech.
Sometimes democracy gives you Trump, sometimes free speech gives you porn (or worse, Fox news), sometimes the economy gets out of hand, but mostly these things work better than their alternatives and prevent or minimize crashes, based on the experience of the last 200 years. Every time someone thought better, they made things worse.

newtboy said:

No, the point of discussion to come to an understanding IMO, not to just argue.

Why I’m ALL-IN On Tesla Stock

newtboy says...

No, the point of discussion to come to an understanding IMO, not to just argue.

You KNOW this, eh? I think you just believe that, but Ok, then where do we get a well functioning reserve bank? We certainly don’t have one now, we don’t even have a fully staffed reserve board capable of doing business. The gold standard isn’t constantly relying on a functioning fed….good thing because we haven’t had one for decades and don’t seem likely to have one anytime in the near future….by design.

Coin clipping went out with edge minting. Please. Nobody was using pieces of 8 of $20 coins.

vil said:

That is the point of discussion, right?

I know a true gold standard is inferior to a well functioning reserve bank issuing paper money and an international exchange standard based on mutual trade agreements.

I am not sure I can explain it well or convince you, but I like you so I try.

Unfortunately the matter seems to be complicated.

The fact that something has, as you put it, "real" value is actually a bad thing, as clipping gold coins is as old as gold coins.

So let us assume gold coins are out and we are going to use some form of symbolic money...

Nope this will not fit in this thread.

Why I’m ALL-IN On Tesla Stock

vil says...

That is the point of discussion, right?

I know a true gold standard is inferior to a well functioning reserve bank issuing paper money and an international exchange standard based on mutual trade agreements.

I am not sure I can explain it well or convince you, but I like you so I try.

Unfortunately the matter seems to be complicated.

The fact that something has, as you put it, "real" value is actually a bad thing, as clipping gold coins is as old as gold coins.

So let us assume gold coins are out and we are going to use some form of symbolic money...

Nope this will not fit in this thread.

newtboy said:

Jesus, you just want to argue.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon