Support NeoGAF

[Brawndo Addict]

Are scientists not allowed to have disagreements on how scientific topics should be communicated?

Yeah, you're right, we really ought to inform people that we've only had the Measles, Mumps, and Rubella vaccines for a couple decades so there's really not enough long-term research. Sure we think it's safe, but how do we really know until we study it for an arbitrarily set period of time like one human lifetime?

 

[Orbis Tabula]

Or you could just label everything as GMO and get everybody to shut up

We should make them all have a "this is food" label as well, right? I mean, why the hell not?

 

[Aaron Strife]

so based on current projections for the remaining states in the race, the probability that Sanders wins more than 2025 pledged delegates is 0.018%. (for reference, that's lower than the probability that you'll lose a limb in a chainsaw accident.)

and that's probably overstating the chances, given that this dude's projections have pennsylvania as a 3-point race when it's probably 15.

not that any of us were unaware, but interesting to see it as an actual concrete number now

Yeah, but momentum!

RETROACTIVE momentum!

 

[eBay Huckster]

do they call it retroactive momentum because bernie's chances keep getting smaller with every passing week

 

[Veritigo_X]

What's the source for "retroactive momentum"? The first result in google is a gaf thread, haha.

 

[ivysaur12]

What's the source for "retroactive momentum"? The first result in google is a gaf thread, haha.

I think it's GAF. For some reason I was googling gay marriage gifs and I think the Penny gif came up.

GAF IS POWERFUL

 

[brainchild]

"If Americans want to pay for it, let them" is nonsense.

It assumes americans are perfectly capable of figuring out the economic trade-offs of a labeling decision, but incapable of understanding the impact of GMOs without labels.

I don't think I need to elaborate further on how likely that is to be true.

Vermonters seem to be fine with it *shrugs*

 

[Kangi]

What's the source for "retroactive momentum"? The first result in google is a gaf thread, haha.

IIRC, it was from a dumb Facebook map about a hypothetical Bernie third party run in the GE. It showed how Bernie would supposedly win 270 EVs by winning the states he's won in the primary... as well as some of the states Hillary won by way of "retroactive momentum".

We've been trying to understand what those words mean ever since.

 

[Giant Panda]

“There’s a mighty big difference between good, sound reasons
and reasons that sound good.” - Burton Hillis

Simplifying the tax code seems to apply here to me. I get wanting to do your taxes on a postcard, but the better solution is to just make the IRS do it for you, and then you pay what they say you owe (which is sort of how we do it now, it's not like they don't check to see what you've paid).

The reason isn't to reduce the tax code to a small size though. The reason is that it would get rid of a lot of inefficiencies. Simplicity would reduce compliance and enforcement costs, and get rid of many bad economic distortions.

 

[Orbis Tabula]

What's the source for "retroactive momentum"? The first result in google is a gaf thread, haha.

IIRC, it was from a dumb Facebook map about a hypothetical Bernie third party run in the GE. It showed how Bernie would supposedly win 270 EVs by winning the states he's won in the primary... as well as some of the states Hillary won by way of "retroactive momentum".

We've been trying to understand what those words mean ever since.

Yeah, this was it. As near as I could figure, the argument was that Sanders was really close when those states voted, and he's only risen in the polls since. Therefore, they assume he would have won some of these states had they voted later, and that he has majority support in them now. Retroactive momentum. Therefore, delegates should actually vote for Sanders, since he would have had been winning had election been had later.

 

[B-Dubs]

Vermonters seem to be fine with it *shrugs*

Just because one state thinks it's a good idea doesn't make it so.

 

[eBay Huckster]

I think it's GAF. For some reason I was googling gay marriage gifs and I think the Penny gif came up.

GAF IS POWERFUL

speaking of gifs, i'm glad that that ted cruz ad w/ the cartoonishly evil clinton exists

because it finally gave me another excuse to use one of the gifs i made during #cruzyourownadventure

 

[studyguy]

That Cruz ad is ridiculous.

 

[brainchild]

Better off just labeling all food that contains DNA at that point.

We should make them all have a "this is food" label as well, right? I mean, why the hell not?

The problem with this comparison is that everyone already knows this. The same cannot be said about GMOs. If labeling everything as GMO eventually informed the general public that basically everything is genetically modified, it would actually raise science literacy

Yeah, you're right, we really ought to inform people that we've only had the Measles, Mumps, and Rubella vaccines for a couple decades so there's really not enough long-term research. Sure we think it's safe, but how do we really know until we study it for an arbitrarily set period of time like one human lifetime?

Bad example. Your discharge papers from the hospital are actually very clear on potential side effects of vaccinations

Just because one state thinks it's a good idea doesn't make it so.

I didn't say that. I'm saying that I don't think most Americans would be much different in terms of making that decision.

 

[Brawndo Addict]

Bad example. Your discharge papers from the hospital are actually very clear on potential side effects of vaccinations

Are scientists not allowed to have disagreements on how scientific topics should be communicated?

 

[The Lamonster]

lol I was the one who originally posted "Retroactive Momentum"

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=198693314&postcount=12275

My delusional Bernie supporting friend shared it on FB.

 

[eBay Huckster]

wait what about retromelon momentum

 

[Orbis Tabula]

The problem with this comparison is that everyone already knows this. The same cannot be said about GMOs. If labeling everything as GMO eventually informed the general public that basically everything is genetically modified, it would actually raise science literacy

Oh, I see. You want to mandate that food be used to teach Americans scientific literacy! Well in that case, we should definitely mandate info on the electromagnetic spectrum on all popcorn bags. Our frozen food should be mandated to have a brief section on thermodynamics. Ideally, we could expand all mandatory food labelling to meet common core standards. It would certainly make more sense than trying to teach it in schools. Who cares if it's irrelevant, as long as it's technically correct, they should be forced to print it.

 

[SenorArdilla]

How many more delegates until Trump is the Republican nominee?

 

[Brawndo Addict]

Oh, I see. You want to mandate that food be used to teach Americans scientific literacy! Well in that case, we should definitely mandate info on the electromagnetic spectrum on all popcorn bags. Our frozen food should be mandated to have a brief section on thermodynamics. Ideally, we could expand all mandatory food labelling to meet common core standards. It would certainly make more sense than trying to teach it in schools. Who cares if it's irrelevant, as long as it's technically correct, they should be forced to print it.

Hold on, I'm worried there won't be any more space for the Banana-Equivalent-Dose on the nutrition label so we know how much radiation we'll be ingesting...

 

[brainchild]

Are scientists not allowed to have disagreements on how scientific topics should be communicated?

Absolutely, they're allowed to disagree! I certainly wouldn't be confounded as to how one was pro-science either way.

Oh, I see. You want to mandate that food be used to teach Americans scientific literacy! Well in that case, we should definitely mandate info on the electromagnetic spectrum on all popcorn bags. Our frozen food should be mandated to have a brief section on thermodynamics. Ideally, we could expand all mandatory food labelling to meet common core standards. It would certainly make more sense than trying to teach it in schools. Who cares if it's irrelevant, as long as it's technically correct, they should be forced to print it.

I don't personally want the mandate, but I believe that the people have a right to vote for that decision, and ultimately, I think it would do more good than harm (psychologically and educationally) if everything was labeled GMO.

 

[BotoxAgent]

lol I was the one who originally posted "Retroactive Momentum"

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=198693314&postcount=12275

My delusional Bernie supporting friend shared it on FB.

This looks like a crazy Dick Morris map lol

 

[Man w/ Glasses]

A moment of levity--Trump's speech slowed down 50%:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pex6o6f3YE

Grandpa's drunk, guys. #donalddrunk

 

[Cybit]

Trump is straight up killing it right now. However, I think his supporters aren't going to like his views on transgender individuals.

They will care zero.

Its actually weird - Trump can do anything and won't lose support with his core. So going "middle" actually isn't that risky for him.

Yep.

The people who are anti-trans are all pretty heavily tied to Cruz at this point.

On top of it, Trump supporters tend to like Trump the person more than the policies. Doubtful Trump gets any blowback from this at all. Especially because his answer invoked money and business reasons rather than straight anti-discrimination (but he did also invoke that). It was a pretty smart answer, tbh.

 

[Brawndo Addict]

Absolutely! I certainly wouldn't be confounded as to how one wasn't pro-science either way.

Okay, then how exactly is it a bad example? Unless you're arguing that science should "neutrally" present both viewpoints with equal merit in the context of policy decisions.

I don't personally want the mandate, but I believe that the people have a right to vote for that decision, and ultimately, I think it would do more good than harm (psychologically and educationally) if everything was labeled GMO.

This is some goal-post shifting. You know Bernie's proposal wasn't to label all food as GMO and you certainly weren't suggesting that either until another poster brought it up.

I would love for GMO's to be labeled.

But I want everything that has ever been modified for consumption to be labeled a GMO. When everything is GMO nothing is GMO

This would actually be awesome, lol

 

[Orbis Tabula]

Hold on, I'm worried there won't be any more space for the Banana-Equivalent-Dose on the nutrition label so we know how much radiation we'll be ingesting...

If only there were some way to make bananas that were less radioactive...maybe we could modify their genes! OH SHIT RECURSION NOOOOOOOoooooooooo

I don't personally want the mandate, but I believe that the people have a right to vote for that decision, and ultimately, I think it would do more good than harm (psychologically and educationally) if everything was labeled GMO.

I don't think anyone here is trying to argue against the right of people to vote. We're saying that it's [that is, mandatory GMO labelling] a stupid idea. A stupid idea pushed forward by people with either poor scientific literacy or ulterior motives in order to take advantage of the poor scientific literacy of the general population to end the production and sale of, and research into, GMOs.

Mandating frivolous and uncessary science lessons be labelled on our food in order to increase scientific literacy is also a silly idea.

 

[hawk2025]

This discussion has pushed the idea of labeling GMOs to its completely silly and absurd conclusion, so I'm content with where we are on this

 

[Diablos]

Kristoffer, your OP's never fail to amaze.

 

[sc0la]

This discussion has pushed the idea of labeling GMOs to its completely silly and absurd conclusion, so I'm content with where we are on this

Has it? I want to no if any DNA of arbitrary length in my food is shared in the human genome. Because I am against cannibalism

 

[Prodigal Son]

lol I was the one who originally posted "Retroactive Momentum"

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=198693314&postcount=12275

My delusional Bernie supporting friend shared it on FB.

what

 

[Veritigo_X]

lol I was the one who originally posted "Retroactive Momentum"

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=198693314&postcount=12275

My delusional Bernie supporting friend shared it on FB.

lol that's amazing. I want to see the updated map that accounts for that retroactive momentum.

 

[brainchild]

Okay, then how exactly is it a bad example? Unless you're arguing that science should "neutrally" present both viewpoints with equal merit in the context of policy decisions.



This is some goal-post shifting. You know Bernie's proposal wasn't to label all food as GMO and you certainly weren't suggesting that either until another poster brought it up.

What I'm saying is that even with disagreements about how science should be communicated, it doesn't preclude someone being pro-science. If someone is literally promoting science, it doesn't make much sense to say that they aren't just because of some specific disagreements on disclosure of information, unless that disclosure attempts to delegitimize scientific findings.

And you shouldn't conflate Bernie's stance on GMOs with my own. I sure as hell am not conflating the two.

 

[Valhelm]

I just accidentally made a girl cry by explaining why she shouldn't vote for Trump. It was bizarre.

She's originally from Ecuador, and said that her family had a tough time getting to the US. Because of this, she thought that undocumented immigrants (who "have it easy") need to be punished. For whatever reason, me insisting that mass deportation is cruel seemed to trigger some horrible memories for her.

The weirdest part was that she insisted Trump is "good for Hispanic people" because he's getting rid of the ones who make them look bad. She honestly did not believe Trump was racist, and thought his statements about Mexicans (which she insisted only applied to illegal immigrants) were reasonable.

 

[The Lamonster]

wait a minute...

“This could give Santorum exactly the kind of retroactive momentum his campaign needs.”

http://www.theonion.com/americanvoices/santorum-won-iowa-caucus-27094

It seems The Onion originally coined the term "retroactive momentum" in 2012 to make fun of delusional political supporters. Although I think when the Bernie guy used it to describe his map, it was just parallel thinking and he was serious. lol

 

[studyguy]

lol I was the one who originally posted "Retroactive Momentum"

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=198693314&postcount=12275

My delusional Bernie supporting friend shared it on FB.

Retroactive bullshit.

 

[johnsmith]

I just accidentally made a girl cry by explaining why she shouldn't vote for Trump. It was bizarre.

She's originally from Ecuador, and said that her family had a tough time getting to the US. Because of this, she thought that undocumented immigrants (who "have it easy") need to be punished. For whatever reason, me insisting that mass deportation is cruel seemed to trigger some horrible memories for her.

The weirdest part was that she insisted Trump is "good for Hispanic people" because he's getting rid of the ones who make them look bad. She honestly did not believe Trump was racist, and thought his statements about Mexicans (which she insisted only applied to illegal immigrants) were reasonable.

She sounds like the typical republican honestly. "Fuck you, I got mine. "

 

[Officerrob]

Today has been a sad day

 

[balladofwindfishes]

I just accidentally made a girl cry by explaining why she shouldn't vote for Trump. It was bizarre.

She's originally from Ecuador, and said that her family had a tough time getting to the US. Because of this, she thought that undocumented immigrants (who "have it easy") need to be punished. For whatever reason, me insisting that mass deportation is cruel seemed to trigger some horrible memories for her.

The weirdest part was that she insisted Trump is "good for Hispanic people" because he's getting rid of the ones who make them look bad. She honestly did not believe Trump was racist, and thought his statements about Mexicans (which she insisted only applied to illegal immigrants) were reasonable.

My great aunt from panama has similar feelings about Trump. She came to this country after marrying my grandpa's brother. She also comes from an extremely wealthy family, and my grandpa's brother was a high ranking commando, so they lived very well and she never had to even consider anything. She basically waltzed into the US, no questions asked, and has lived the life since then.

She's never voted in her life though. And has no plans to. She just likes Trump. My grandma even jokes her and my grandma would fight more if she could actually understand her when she starts talking quickly. My grandparents hate Trump and are very liberal.

I was actually taken aback that my grandparents were liberal. I mean, my mom is like, far left crazy town, but I never really assumed that came from my grandparents. Until I was hanging out with my grandpa watching the news, and gay marriage was being discussed and he went on a rant. Not about the evils of gay marriage or anything, but about how stupid the people who opposed it were, and what was the point in being against it, two men who want to marry and are in love aren't hurting you, and so on, and I just didn't believe it. I hadn't ever expected that to come from a 76 year old man. I asked my mom about it, and she said "oh yea, he's always been liberal, I thought you knew that?"

For my grandma, I found out when asking my mom why my grandma didn't work at a bank her entire life, since he had worked there forever, and then when I was born, she just stopped and I never knew why. It was because a close friend and colleague had gotten fired for something my grandma didn't believe was valid, and she organized a group of people in the bank and they just left in protest of the firing. I actually have a lot of respect for her for doing something like that. Over time I noticed that she too, was yelling at Fox News whenever stupid GOP nonsense would come up.

I don't know why either of them like watching Fox News if it just gets them annoyed...

I actually can't believe I come from such a liberal family. On my mom's side. My dad's side are far right religious loonies. My dad doesn't talk to them anymore. He's always been liberal as well, and being around my mom for 30 years certainly hasn't made him less liberal. I haven't heard from my dad's side in about a decade. I just ate dinner at my mom's side last week.

It's kind of nice actually. It doesn't make anything awkward when we sit around and laugh at the GOP and none of us feel weird or awkward doing it. I can never, ever discuss GMOs with my mom though. That's not a road I like going down with her.

 

[Aaron Strife]

lol I was the one who originally posted "Retroactive Momentum"

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=198693314&postcount=12275

My delusional Bernie supporting friend shared it on FB.

I just love this idea that if Bernie ran as a third party or write-in after losing the primary he would somehow still come out on top.

If the Bernie supporters outnumber the Hillary supporters wouldn't he just be winning?

 

[ivysaur12]

I just love this idea that if Bernie ran as a third party or write-in after losing the primary he would somehow still come out on top.

If the Bernie supporters outnumber the Hillary supporters wouldn't he just be winning?

Also in this scenario, Hillary would sweep much of the South

 

[Macho Madness]

You guys talking like this reminded me of the NPR segment I listened to yesterday.

It's called Obama Effect Triggers More Nuanced Conversations On Race

A really good short listen if you have the time. There's a transcript too.

 

[Armaros]

I just love this idea that if Bernie ran as a third party or write-in after losing the primary he would somehow still come out on top.

If the Bernie supporters outnumber the Hillary supporters wouldn't he just be winning?

I just noticed he has VA for Hillary but Bernie somehow wins MD.

Yes the state that exemplifies the Establishment is going to go for Bernie.

 

[Brawndo Addict]

ED: Blech, just dropping it.

 

[gutter_trash]

lol I was the one who originally posted "Retroactive Momentum"

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=198693314&postcount=12275

My delusional Bernie supporting friend shared it on FB.

Nevada, Virginia, Wisconsin, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Nebraska and North Carolina would go RED if Bernie went 3rd Party

 

[Valhelm]

She sounds like the typical republican honestly. "Fuck you, I got mine. "

Yeah, I was just surprised that she was so emotionally invested.

She also thought that the idea of minimum wage is horrible, because she found it unfair that people who take out loans to get a degree should be paid the same as McDonald's employees

 

[balladofwindfishes]

How did they come to the conclusion Bernie would win New York?

I don't believe Hillary has ever actually lost an election in New York.

 

[pigeon]

We shouldn't even talk about GMOs until we can actually agree on what it's being modified from. The idea that food came to us fully formed in some pristine genetic state and not through the same processes of evolution and genetic alterations that created us is ridiculous. Food is constantly undergoing genetic modification, just as all living things are. Whether those changes occur through random mutations, induced random mutations, or deliberate modification doesn't really matter; it's not the process we should worry about, it's the changes.

Unless there's a baseline "version" of a food's genetic code that we all agree is the starting point, there's no way to even say something is "unmodified". You can't just arbitrarily pick a point in a food's genetic development and say everything before this was "natural" and everything after was "unnatural".

This is the same argument that came up last time and it's still just as incorrect. There is in fact a meaningful difference between direct genetic modification, agricultural breeding, and evolutionary action, and that difference is timescale. It is a difference in kind as well as degree because removing timescale removes lots of processes that naturally act to prevent counterproductive mutations. That is literally how evolution works, so I am surprised that people don't seem to grasp that taking out the "survival of the fittest" part of the system actually meaningfully changes the results you may get from the system.

To me, saying that being concerned about GMOs is dumb because of evolution is approximately equivalent to saying that being concerned about climate change is dumb because winters are still cold.

I am not necessarily saying that we should be regulating GMOs, but I think it's bizarre and unfortunate that it seems like it's considered crazy or dangerous to be skeptical.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

My political wishlist:

-Massive increase in immigration to the United States.
-Decriminalize all drugs, have only the government sell them.
-Decriminalize sex work.
-More integrated America so that white people can become less racist by interacting more with non-white people and non-LGBT people can be less bigoted towards LGBT people.
-Repeal building codes that prevent housing from being built.
-Repeal payroll taxes on people over 60 years old or people making less than $50K a year, make up lost revenue with land taxes.
-Carbon tax.
-Huge amount of research money put into researching domestic violence, racism, mental health, and research into making IUDs cheaper (so every woman can easily get an IUD if they wish).
-Crushing of police unions and new system that makes courts not biased towards cops.
-Mandate that all guns must be kept in a safe at the risk of fine. Safes should have suicide hotline information and other nudges against suicide on them.
-More regulations on scientific research to avoid p-hacking bullshit.
-More foreign aid to Africa and the Indian subcontinent.

That's all I feel super-confident in.

 

[Aaron Strife]

I just noticed he has VA for Hillary but Bernie somehow wins MD.

Yes the state that exemplifies the Establishment is going to go for Bernie.

But Maryland is a blue state herp derp

 

[Fenderputty]

As has been repeated again, and again, and again, irrelevant information distorts markets and can have significant negative effects. Reducing the issue to that ignores what the actual crux of the discussion is in the first place.

If your point is along the lines of "I understand that adding this may impact markets -- I think it's worth the risk despite zero evidence of gains for consumers", by all means, defend away. But you need to acknowledge the risks, not just brush them aside.

Finally -- "The decision should be left up to the State" is a political position that lost all its diversion power decades ago.

You know what I love? When I see "Gluten Free" on my cold cuts. Makes me want to punch people.

This is the same argument that came up last time and it's still just as incorrect. There is in fact a meaningful difference between direct genetic modification, agricultural breeding, and evolutionary action, and that difference is timescale. It is a difference in kind as well as degree because removing timescale removes lots of processes that naturally act to prevent counterproductive mutations. That is literally how evolution works, so I am surprised that people don't seem to grasp that taking out the "survival of the fittest" part of the system actually meaningfully changes the results you may get from the system.

To me, saying that being concerned about GMOs is dumb because of evolution is approximately equivalent to saying that being concerned about climate change is dumb because winters are still cold.

I am not necessarily saying that we should be regulating GMOs, but I think it's bizarre and unfortunate that it seems like it's considered crazy or dangerous to be skeptical.

Natural evolution requires time because the mutations are random. If we know what a gene does why would we need this time?