• 8 Posts
  • 182 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 30th, 2023

help-circle











  • He also repeats all of the bible thumper talking points around this subject, as if it’s a mystery nobody can explain and couldn’t have come to be without some kind of intelligent design at the helm.

    He literally does not say that though, he says there’s a lot of research into it and encourages people to read it.

    This whole flagella thing was an exercise of goal post moving in the first place. The ID people kept pointing out weird things and missing links. Then when science explained exactly how that thing came to be, without ID involved, they just pointed to the next thing at one point ending up at flagella.

    Yeah I agree, but I also think that you can’t exactly blame someone else who was uninvolved with the initial argument for arguing a different thing at a different time. If one person criticizes a politician for not providing enough social services and another separate person complains about taxes that’s not moving goal posts, those are just two different people.

    There is a whole Wikipedia page talking about how flagella evolved and how it came to be.

    Yes, but, did you read it? Its not exactly too resoundingly confident in any one theory.

    And keep in mind all of this was thoroughly debunked back 20 years ago.

    All of what? It is true that the flagella isn’t unique if that’s what you mean.

    I’m not even sure there is research still being done on this, the research was done decades before, there is no mystery.

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/mmi.14658

    Here’s a relatively recent study that says basically what the wikipedia says:

    Homing in on the T3SS, the exact evolutionary relation between injectisomes and flagella1 is debated. Phylogenetic analyses and functional arguments led to two models: (a) The evolution of modern flagella and injectisomes from a common ancestral protein export machinery (Gophna et al., 2003; Pallen and Gophna, 2007), or (b) The evolution of injectisomes from a flagellum-like ancestor (Abby and Rocha, 2012; Denise et al., 2020; Nguyen et al., 2000).

    But it also says:

    The T3SS is one of the most complex bacterial molecular machines, incorporating one to over a hundred copies of more than 15 different proteins into a multi-MDa transmembrane complex (Table 1). The system, especially the flagellum, has, therefore often been quoted as an example for “irreducible complexity,” based on the argument that the evolution of such a complex system with no beneficial intermediates would be exceedingly unlikely. However, it is now clear that, far from having evolved as independent entities, many secretion systems share components between each other and with other cellular machineries (Egelman, 2010; Pallen and Gophna, 2007).

    I ofc am just a layman reading this, I agree it seems better understood that how I interpreted what he was saying, but it also doesn’t seem nearly as well understood as you’re saying.






  • I have massive problems with prisons and by extension policing. I think prisons are the some of the most cruel institutions on Earth. But I am kind of disappointed that that community isn’t really proposing anything it feels like. Prisons are cruel and need reform, you don’t need to convince me there. The problem is I do think there is a legitimate need for something to protect people, and to separate people who are a serious risk to others.

    They say:

    creating lasting alternatives to punishment and imprisonment.

    But what?

    One idea I think, that is a small reform but I think would actually be very valuable in increasing prisoners quality of life: increased internet access. I think the isolation, and the feeling of being trapped within the prison culture, is very harmful. It would also be easier to bring abuse to public attention.





  • There is not a single country on this planet that has no legal consequences for free speech

    Yes.

    it would be ridiculous to claim that should be the standard.

    I mean, that’s what freedom of speech is. Otherwise its entirely meaningless.

    For one, and I feel kind of pedantic for pointing this out, but that kind of policy would preclude any obviously consequential statements made in court proceedings, for example pleading “guilty”, lying under oath,

    The consequence there would be essentially signing a contract for honesty, and breaking it. Similar to how you can choose to give up an organ, but you can’t force someone to give up an organ. You chose to sign away your freedom of speech in that instance. Now subpoenas I think there is a compelling argument they are a violation of freedom of speech.

    Less pedantically, even in a version of the US where their so-far mythical conception of free speech was actually achieved, legal consequences are assigned to direct, material threats and attempts to cause panic.

    The US does not and has never had freedom of speech. This was blatant from at least 1798. I do think the US is marginally closer than most other countries.

    You’d be pretty hard pressed to claim these exceptions are unreasonable,

    Its not about whether it is reasonable. It is whether it is factually true to call a regime in which speech is controlled as having freedom of speech.

    the United States has pursued this exact policy and it has lead to little more than them being one of the leading contemporary examples of how an advanced democracy and economy falls into fascism and mass disenfranchisement.

    That is not at all a clear cause and effect.