Jimizo comments

There could be the problem that Obama’s oratorical skills make Harris look at best ordinary.

Get Bush 2 out there. Trump and Bush 2 could be a duet in verbal diarrhea.

OK, so you want to talk about high-flyers in STEM, outside of academia - creative types forming the next big STEM start-ups and so on, the Zuckerbergs and the Musks

Doesn’t have to be at the stratospheric level.

Don’t necessarily need to be start-ups either.

You would trust the word of Barak Obama?

’Barak’ Obama and ‘Kamal’ Harris?

What’s this misspelling of their names thing?

I’m honestly interested if there’s any reason for it.

Anyway, I’m not sure how much Obama can rally support but he’s still one of the very best in the business in front of an audience.

Harris and Trump combined don’t have his skills in this area.

Exactly. By the same token, I have not heard demands for gender balance among coal miners, sanitation engineers or oil rig workers. Somehow, for dirty and dangerous work, imbalance is fine

Missing the point.

With all due respect to anyone who does an honest day’s work, we are taking about losing out on possible high-flyers in STEM who are quite rare.

An environment which doesn’t encourage these possible high-high flyers is a very stupid one.

Maybe it wouldn’t be a perfect balance but other countries do better than Japan on this score.

Must do better. Benefits the country.

Have you tried applying for an academic position in a STEM subject in this country? Every position advertised gets 100 applicants or more

The vast majority of people with STEM degrees (or other degrees for that matter) do not work in academia.....

Beat me to it.

Japan ranks lowest in 2022 data from the OECD group of developed countries for the number of women students enrolled in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics bachelor's programmes

What a waste.

Getting as many of your best and brightest into STEM is important. You may not achieve a 50-50 split but there is clearly a problem here. Other countries clearly do better.

If the authors of the article had any sincerity, they would have mentioned some (or at least one) of the many "conspiracy theories" that turned out to be true

On occasion, but the problem here is that what constitutes proof of a claim to a conspiracy theorist isn’t what is generally accepted by serious people. They often cite ‘proof’ of a claim from…other conspiracy theorists ( other sources fall into the bought-and-paid-for/MSM/deep state/elites/big something or other/category and can be discarded ).

Similarly, you often find ‘proof’ of a small fragment of what was claimed is blown up to be proof of the whole.

With conspiracy theorists you are often dealing with dishonesty and a very tight bubble of reference.

Take for instance the election back in 2020, one side claim it was stolen right? The other side claim that is conspiracy theory, the election was not stolen right?

There was no reasonable evidence of widespread fraud.

Trump claimed millions of illegals voted in 2016.

There was no reasonable evidence of widespread fraud

Trump claimed Ted Cruz, whose father Trump claimed was in on the JFK assassination, was falsely declared the winner in Iowa in 2016.

There was no reasonable evidence of widespread fraud.

Can you see a pattern here?

You may as well listen to David Icke on lizard people or the flat-earthers.

It does make you wonder whether some of the truly wacky stuff is made up by vested interests to discredit people who legitimately question certain narratives driven by governments and mainstream media.

The problem here is what is regarded as wacky.

Conspiracy theorists exist on a spectrum. Stolen election/scamdemic/climate change a hoax/EVs a scam is standard hymn sheet stuff for the ‘free-thinkers’.

Faked moon landing is an interesting one.

Is that one wacky?

It does make you wonder whether some of the truly wacky stuff is made up by vested interests to discredit people who legitimately question certain narratives driven by governments and mainstream media.

Reading or listening to conspiracy theorists attack other conspiracy theorists reminds you of the joke about the man who was so shocked to see someone smoking in church, he dropped his beer.

In the UK we're better at sniffing out that kind of BS, because we're basically cynics by nature

I think that’s true to a point but the surly British cynicism isn’t always a good thing.

How Tucker Carlson gets away with it is still beyond me. He was caught red-handed spouting trash which he didn’t believe to morons and is still at it now.

As for Brand, I saw an interesting phenomenon that a lot of the online grifters are failed comedians /actors/scriptwriters. Brand had a successful career until reports of his very grubby private life were released . He certainly has more charisma to sell his product to morons than most.

Brand has an excellent skill set for a grifter.

You would have to think that sites such as Breitbart, Infowars, Zerohedge, must know that they are spreading misinformation

Hard to tell.

The most transparent I’ve seen are Tucker Carlson and now Russell Brand.

Brand is probably the better grifter. His ‘conversion’ is hilarious.

Claiming he only won by less than 40,000 votes in a few states is incredibly cope.

its also……factual. 

as the “popular vote” is irrelevant to who “wins”.

Trump thought the popular vote was important.

He made up a trash conspiracy theory about millions of illegals voting in 2016 which deprived him of winning the popular vote.

It goes without saying no evidence of this was found.

A bit like 2020.

Interesting types.

Very familiar.

All very sad specimens.

“harass, or even just to get attention.”

Thankfully they are easy to identify, even when they change names multiple times.

Very true. I like the ones who get confused and reply to their own posts.

Disorganized as well as pathetic and dishonest.

Labour sometimes need to be reminded who and what this party was founded to represent. A large majority can allow them to ignore their left wing in this case.

Get your arse into gear on this disgrace. Yes, the Tories left a hell of a mess behind them but this is very high priority.

Every week I get a Line message from my pharmacist asking about the drugs I am taking and whether they have bad effects and giving me advice on what to do

Sounds like good care.

I get the sense you are smart enough to listen to professionals about medication and diet.

Indeed. But some people here insist that people without a certain piece of paper have no right to challenge certain information, which is of course complete nonsense

Depends on how you challenge it.

Challenging an idea based on actual knowledge of the area is different to dismissing it based on a general conspiracy theory principle of bought and paid for/compromised/big something or other.

The latter approach is very unimpressive. It’s very convenient and multi-purpose but is getting a bit boring now.

In my case, in addition to that, my specialty is quite closely related to diet and pharmaceuticals

What is that speciality?

I don’t get the coyness.

Suspicious…

I do actually. Materials science. but also took some biology units.

You?

Physics. Reasonable experience of mechanical and electrical engineering - certainly no authority on either.

That does not qualify me to express very strong opinions on diet, pharmaceuticals, climate science etc.

Your approach to these different issues does come across as the garden variety follow the money/bought and paid for/big something or other approach common among conspiracy theorists.

I must admit it is convenient. You can dismiss the opinions of those who don’t align with your political views without needing any expertise in the area.

It isn’t very convincing though.

Jimizo's projecting again. You do realise that the podcasts you so deeply despise regularly have well qualified experts on them to talk about things the deeply corrupted corporate/state media and institutions are censoring, right? Just because you don't like them doesn't mean they're wrong.

You have very strong and very predictable opinions on a variety of matters regarding science.

Do you have any background whatsoever in any of these very different fields you express very strong opinions on?

Anything at all? Any science background whatsoever?

It does come across as you applying a one size fits all approach to these things after watching podcasts.

I think we are dealing with garden variety conspiracy theorists watching podcasts rather than with people with any actual expertise in this area.

Climate change, stolen elections, faked moon landings, scamdemics, carnivore/keto diets etc.

So completely predictable.

Hoever, today health-conscious people are increasingly returning to eating meat

Any stats to back this up?

As a credentialed scientist with a doctorate, can you clarify your claim that those on a carnivore diet don’t fart?

I’m sorry to repeat this, but I’m honestly fascinated by this claim and whether this is healthy or even possible. I follow a balanced diet and feel okay but I do sometimes fart.

I’ll be having a check up soon and was going to ask my doctor about this but he may be bought and paid for by someone or other.

Are you the self-appointed science police? You seem to jump on any vaguely science-related article attempting to fact-check posts you don't like

You have very strong and very predictable views on a variety of issues regarding science - climate, diet, medication etc.

What are your credentials in any of these areas?

Well the world is full of surprises. That's why it needs Donald's steady hand to keep it peaceful

Talk about gush. Like a schoolgirl with a crush.

Don’t fall in love with politicians. They’ll break your heart.

He has the balls to negotiate with the likes of Kim and Putin

Putin knows Trump is a sucker for flattery. Putin has always been far smarter and not in severe mental decline.

There is no way this committee is "nonpartisan".

You display admirable non-partisanship. You avatars tell us this.

What sources would you recommend for a more balanced take on this?

You wonder if the Republicans will go back to at least talking about fiscal conservatism after MAGA.

Trump made them do screeching 180s on many core beliefs but this was arguably the most dramatic.

Yeah just bought and sold

This has to be the most convenient and time-saving expression in any discussion on so many topics.

Just dismissing it with ‘bought and sold’ ends the discussion.

Ask for an alternative source which isn’t bought and sold and you usually get greeted with silence or ‘do your own research’.

all the joy and vibes have clearly evaporated. lol have you seen Polymarket? The latest polls?

As a man extraordinarily well educated in the sciences, I’m sure you are not being selective in what sources you are using.

You aren’t cherry picking here, are you?

Rumours about Gareth Southgate being considered for the job.

I honestly can’t see it but I hope I’m wrong.

Has the potential to be worse than Ten Hag.

Very insightful. Thanks for sharing.

Congratulations on this fantastic post.

Good start for Slot. Some arguing he’s had a pretty favourable run of fixtures and hasn’t been tested but it’s still impressive.

Looks like a 3-horse race for the title again.

Gordon, who began his career at Everton before joining Newcastle last year, saw his spot kick saved by Jordan Pickford in the 35th to the delight of the home fans

That was fun.

Signs of improvement at Everton. Still an awful side to watch though.

Their priveliged opinion is worthless

Watch the bitterness. He earned his wealth. The fact that he made a success of his career and became very wealthy doesn’t invalidate his opinions or make them less worthy than the ones you express here.

The big difference is his opinion is the story and yours is the comment on it.