This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
When we detect a difference one part in one thousand between (something like) the mass of an electron and a theoretical prediction, we put thousands of (amortized) man hours, many from the smartest people in the world, into figuring out if it's experimental error or new physics. We probe the bottoms of the ocean for new species of life smaller than a single cell of your body. We accelerate protons to within a hundred millionth of the speed of light, or build experiments the size of football fields / tanks of a billion liters of water to detect microscopic events with a frequency of one in 10^34.
And yet the evidence for UFOs remains "fuzzy pictures and videos" or "rumors from experts". Where are the international collaborations between top scientists here? Why haven't the 30cm/pixel imaging satellites gotten good images? Why aren't we blowing the UFOs out of the sky with lasers or something and putting the debris in a mass spec? Imaging technologies have improved by, maybe, ten orders of magnitude over the past century, yet modern UFO evidence is recognizable to someone familiar with UFO sightings in the 1950s.
Electrons and protons are replicable things that we control, UFOs are the equivalent of an old-timey safari. The big game might not show up when you want it too.
What do you expect, military-grade video is always grainy. Apache gunships produce only grainy black and white videos of the people they gun down. And the Nimitz footage is pretty clear:
I don't know, were they looking at the right place at the right time? 30cm/pixel imaging satellites could render the entire category of stealth aircraft obsolete, if they're looking in the right place at the right time. Yet the world's governments are investing trillions in stealth aircraft, they probably know a thing or two about the limits of our real-time satellite surveillance techniques.
Lasers are only good for short-range missile defence right now, they're an experimental technology, not even fully deployed. Whenever we tried shooting these things down (and we've been trying for decades) our interceptors disappear or the UFOs outrun them, sometimes both. Lake Superior 1953, for instance: https://www.history.com/news/ufo-fighter-jet-disappears-over-lake-superior-kinross-incident
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link