Googling about Hawking and misogynism, this is the first thing that came up relating to the discussion:
Anyone caring for a grandparent or some other loved one with severe disability will quite likely be familiar with the behaviour. Not to take anything away from his wives sufferings and how much she has sacrificed, but this is not misognynism. And either anyone who are in the condition that
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Coffee Shop
First of all, nothing to take away from you Jammer, from the deeds you mentioned.
> Hawking was a narcissist & misogynistic pig,
> just because he was brilliant doesn't excuse that
> crap. That would be like saying "Sure (some)
> surgeon is a rapist, but WHAT a fine surgeon!", or
> excusing an Olympic Coach for pedophilia because
> he's a great
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Coffee Shop
Having dreamed as a child of being a historian or something like that, I bought 'A brief history of time' when I was in high school. I read it before the break of next dawn, and decided I would aim for a career in physics instead. After quite some drawbacks with health issues and such myself, changing from cosmology to particle physics and then material physics, I have now specialized i
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Coffee Shop
Lee Olsen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jammer Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Lee
> > 2-4% of all our DNA is HN...
>
> DNA is admissible evidence in court, so yes.
>
> > Cumulatively some 40%
> > of their DNA lives on in HSS...
>
> ....for smoking addiction,
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Personal beliefs are off topic. Focus on the topic, not each other.
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
> Don't mean to be a jerk with these examples, but
> all together it seems that you are trying to force
> things to a certain conclusion, and you throw any
> possible argument you can imagine on the table and
> keep banging on it.
And to try and make sure I'm not being vague in the same way which I'm somewhat criticizing here: There are so many factors t
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
A lot I could agree with in the post, just a matter of perspective. But what I said earlier was along the lines that going to some island with extreme conditions is not a measure of intelligence, and that continuity of the species isn't either.
Just to have some consistency, is spinal cord size linked to island dwellers? Do the bacteria that have a lot of children and ensure they have ple
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Lee Olsen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tommi Huhtamaki Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Continuity of the species is not a measure
> of
> > intelligence.
>
> It is when intelligence is the only thing you
> have. Huge Pleistocene predators with long sharp
> fangs and claws wen
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Continuity of the species is not a measure of intelligence. You can be the most intelligent creature ever to live on the globe and not have children.
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
> Exactly. But never the less chimps are still
> improving finding different tools to achieve the
> same end result. In other words they have
> imagination, creativity, and insight into the
> nature of the problem and the ability to discover
> a solution. Are they mode 5 of course not. But
> they're still light years ahead of the rest of the
> animal kingdo
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Of all of the fire starting methods/tools known
> today, all would have left traces in dry caves had
> they been used continually, even if perishable
> items were used because smaller and more
> perishable items than the tools needed to kindle a
> fire have been preserved on numerous occasions.
> Rare maybe, but still there.
While there are differences between the
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
> All problematic and in dispute... I have the
> Châtelperronian site report. Maybe you will want
> to argue from your skills in mental telepathy as
> to what's in it?
From others, you demand references. For your arguments, saying you have something is sufficient.
This bizarre act is about to come to an end. Get your act together.
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Rick Baudé Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "There's 15,300 papers listed on Google Scholar
> that discuss Neanderthals and their use of fire.
> If you choose to ignore or dismiss that body of
> evidence then there's nothing I can do."
>
> And as one of the poster's on another board used
> to say..."Do yo
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Lee Olsen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tommi Huhtamaki Wrote:
>
>
> > So, just to underline it once more, Pääbo was
> not
> > talking about these results,
>
> Then how did you come up with this if he has no
> problem with the actual results?
> "Most recent" does not justify such a blanket
> dismis
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
> I don't dispute that at all, but he is doing
> exactly the same thing he is accusing willerslev
> et al. and Reich et al. of doing...appealing to
> the media or media driven peer-reviewed journals
> such as Nature and Science, rather than refuting
> their statistics in the journal Genetics or Cell,
> etc. with proof of counter-statistics to
> challenge the
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Hi Lee,
I do not have the expertise to comment on the specifics, just that 'had nothing to do' uses the kind of absolutes which don't go well with the what the level of certainty we actually know these matters, as a group.
> Where are those different conclusions published?
> IIRC, Paabo is talking about details that may
> indeed make headlines to sell copy...
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
> The statements above are in direct contradiction
> to the most recent DNA papers:
>
>
> There may be evidence for a big fire somewhere,
> but it had nothing to do with people disappearing
> or people using different spear points.
"Most recent" does not justify such a blanket dismissal, IMHO. Svante Pääbo has written about how Science and Nature tend
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Allan Shumaker Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I see the full papers are behind paywalls. Anyone
> have access?
I should have, but VPN access from home is giving me a hard time. I should be able to take a look at them at work.
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
If you seek from the net, you can always find someting to reaffirm your faith. Alternatively, you can consider the numbers.
Majority isn't necessarily right, but to think you know better than the majority of the experts is someting I find hard to fathom.
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
One example that rings bells in my head, although I do not claim any expertise in energy politics:
I see how companies that are producing energy from hydrocarbons keep advocating sustainable energy, which would seem as a 'responsible' way to behave now that the climate change is gaining public awarenss. It seems almost unselfish from them, as this would be something that takes away f
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
I will give my perspectives on this below:
WVK Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Micheal Crichton"
> Why Politicized Science is Dangerous
>
> Now we are engaged in a great new theory that once
> again has drawn the support of politicians,
> scientists, and celebrities around the world. Once
> again, the theory is promoted by
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
WVK Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A GLOBAL cool down lasting 120 years will trigger
> “more intense” winters that threaten months of
> freezing temperatures and snow “within a few
> years”, climate scientists have warned.
>
Quite a click-bait headline on the article. It didn't from a quick read give any indication that someone woul
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Khazar-khum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The return of the glaciers was settled science in
> the 1970s.
Concern peaked in the early 1970s, though "the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature even then" [1] (a cooling period began in 1945, and two decades of a cooling trend suggested a trough had been r
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Hi Jammer,
> Tommi, a question from an avowed amateur...
>
> I have seen preliminary site surveys from many
> other places in the world, is it just me or does
> certain Americas sites seem to wait forever for
> FINAL surveys?
I'm a total amateur in this field also, and don't have much of a grip on how the timetables differ from one part of the world
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
> However, if all of the evidence points to Hominid
> activity and everything else has been refuted,
> then why do people refuse to accept the evidence
> that man was here 100KYA?
Context. As an analogy, if we had one alien intervention to something that has happened on earth, the next ones would not require as much caution. But before a first contact is proven, just claimi
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Rick Baudé Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It has stood up to scrutiny for the last twenty
> years. Nobody's come up with a plausible
> explanation as to how that mammoth was scavenged
> except by humans. From the exhibit "The femur
> heads were found lying side by side in a cluster
> of fractured bones and teeth." So how
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Khazar-khum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Isn't that the entire goal of archaeology--to know
> what happened long ago?
Yes. But it is not enough that one claims to have reached the goal, it needs to stand up to scrutiny.
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Rick Baudé Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No this isn't a freak accident. I saw the
> exhibit, [...] It was done by
> humans, not monkeys, not zombies but people using
> available material to scavenge a mastodon carcass.
How can one come to such a certainty, 100,000 years later, of what really happened?
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
Rick Baudé Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Explain how the mastodon tusk was planted upright.
> I've seen the real thing Lee at the museum. You
> can see where the original soft sand that it was
> stuck in has turned into sandstone. I've seen the
> artifacts that were associated with it. The only
> explanation for the tusk being
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory
In a way, I agree that things are changing. But still we are at the present stage, if there is some groundbreaking to be published by the excavators, it would be done.
by
Tommi Huhtamaki
-
Laboratory