Wait - do they have to a) land on the surface, b) return?
Not possible in 4 years.
We can't even launch someone on a one way doomed crash landing to Mars? Damn.
If you put it that way ...
AIUI, the US don't have a man-rated heavy-lift rocket any more (in fact they don't have any man-rated rockets). The Falcon 9 Heavy, due for first flight in six months (*), will have enough oomph to launch a Dragon capsule to Mars. They're planning to do this (unmanned) in 2020, and company head Elon Musk has given it a 50/50 chance of landing successfully.
Mars is probably the hardest icy or rocky body to land on in the solar system. An appreciable gravity, with an atmosphere too tenuous for parachutes for large vehicles or for appreciable aerobraking, yet enough of an atmosphere to make rocket landings complicated.
AIUI. I am not a rocket scientist.
(*) A joke. It's been six months away from first flight for years.
Wait - do they have to a) land on the surface, b) return?
Not possible in 4 years.
Nope. They don't have a suitable rocket, capsule or tested landing mechanism, yet alone a way to return.
Aside from that (oh, and a budget) - it's a goer.
SpaceX might be able to launch a Dragon 2 capsule (Red Dragon) on Mars in 2020, but that's nohere near big enough to be manned or useful for a manned flight.
I think the next synods are July 2018 and ?October? 2020.
Well, hang on, Nasa are sending off another Mars rover, launch date mid 2020. https://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mars2020/mission/overview/ Not sure how big the max payload is for an Atlas V rocket but there's time and to spare to beef it up. So a landing in Trump's first time would be at the far right of the sanity bell curve, but not strictly speaking impossible. "Return them in safety" raises some issues though.
My guess is Donald would be taken aback if shown a to-scale diagram of the earth, the ISS in low earth orbit, the moon, and Mars.
We can get people to Mars if we massively increase NASA's budget and also cut out alot of the inefficiency.
Or he should just give SpaceX $100 billion. Musk could probably build a rocket to get there in Trumps' second term with a great wodge of cash. NASA is inefficient with alot of their spend - the bloody SLS...
This is about the Zionist lobby fighting the movement to "boycott, divest and sanction" (BDS) with any means necessary.
No. It's about racism.
If someone says something that you perceive as racist then it is racist: this is the definition of racism used in this country.
I'm not quite clear whether you support that ridiculous definition, Fysics_Teacher, or whether you are mocking it. That's not the definition of racism used by any sensible person.
Why not? How can you tell what effect your words are having? "It's just short for Pakistani, how can that be racist?" If you want to know if something is racist you ask the people or person who might be affected.
The definition I used is a paraphrasing of "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" which is the definition of a racist incident from the Macpherson report. It has been adopted by most if not all public sector institutions in Britain: we use it at the school I teach at. Do I support it? I thought it was ridiculous at first but having lived with it for nearly 20 years I would say it works.
What right do I to tell someone else that the name someone called them or the cartoon that some one has drawn in their book is not racist if they think it is?
'Quite what Labour does in the face of this impending disaster is hard to say.'
There is nothing they can do apart from brace themselves for the result. They've already tried to get rid of Corbyn and it failed miserably. I'm not sure (to quote Dan Jarvis) what the repulsive Yvette Cooper would achieve anyway. It might be an even worse result with her at the helm.
They have to take it on the chin and try again to shift Corbyn afterwards. And the only way that's even a possibility is if he resigns.
I have no sympathy whatsoever for Labour - they have brought this calamity upon themselves. The humiliation awaiting them is richly deserved.
I'd be screwed - I regularly avoid eye contact because I'm so awkward.
Making eye contact in Glasgow with the wrong person could be perceived by many as a threat - if ever you hear the phrase "who are you looking at" best ignore the Oxford guide and stop looking !!
This is about the Zionist lobby fighting the movement to "boycott, divest and sanction" (BDS) with any means necessary.
No. It's about racism.
If someone says something that you perceive as racist then it is racist: this is the definition of racism used in this country.
I'm not quite clear whether you support that ridiculous definition, Fysics_Teacher, or whether you are mocking it. That's not the definition of racism used by any sensible person.
Why not? How can you tell what effect your words are having? "It's just short for Pakistani, how can that be racist?" If you want to know if something is racist you ask the people or person who might be affected.
The definition I used is a paraphrasing of "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" which is the definition of a racist incident from the Macpherson report. It has been adopted by most if not all public sector institutions in Britain: we use it at the school I teach at. Do I support it? I thought it was ridiculous at first but having lived with it for nearly 20 years I would say it works.
What right do I to tell someone else that the name someone called them or the cartoon that some one has drawn in their book is not racist if they think it is?
There has to be a reasonableness test. I could perceive many things as racist or offensive, but it might be because I am an idiot and literally no one else would think that, and it would not be fair on society to curtail their free expression through official sanction because I am an idiot.
Paki is a good example where while the user might not think they are being insensitive or racist, it would not, in a great many contexts, be unreasonable for someone to find it so. But that does not mean any single person's perception of perceived racism should be the only qualifier when determining whether it is so.
Objectively defining racism definitively is probably impossible, life is complex, but making it entirely subjective without qualification or reason, seems a step too far in the other direction.
Wait - do they have to a) land on the surface, b) return?
Not possible in 4 years.
Nope. They don't have a suitable rocket, capsule or tested landing mechanism, yet alone a way to return.
Aside from that (oh, and a budget) - it's a goer.
SpaceX might be able to launch a Dragon 2 capsule (Red Dragon) on Mars in 2020, but that's nohere near big enough to be manned or useful for a manned flight.
I think the next synods are July 2018 and ?October? 2020.
And then theres getting off Mars? Mars' gravity is more than double that of the moon, which means you need a much more powerful rocket to get off, which you have to land safely in the first place.
Former board members of the collapsed charity Kids Company – including its founder, Camila Batmanghelidjh, and the former BBC chief Alan Yentob – face being banned from serving as company directors, according to reports.
I'd be screwed - I regularly avoid eye contact because I'm so awkward.
Making eye contact in Glasgow with the wrong person could be perceived by many as a threat - if ever you hear the phrase "who are you looking at" best ignore the Oxford guide and stop looking !!
'Not sure, the label seems to have fallen off' would be an entertaining reply. ;-)
That accounts for a lot, but is also very depressing. The young of Wales must be leaving in droves.
Or the old are moving to Wales in droves, and being old they don't produce any new kids of their own?
Forty-odd years ago I travelled a lot on the line between London & Bristol. I came to recognise that all the trains heading out of Wales were always packed, but the ones going into Wales half empty.
Do you think the train-travelling Taffs worked a shorter day than you a longer one?
No data. I travelled random days of the week, random times of day.
I'd be screwed - I regularly avoid eye contact because I'm so awkward.
Making eye contact in Glasgow with the wrong person could be perceived by many as a threat - if ever you hear the phrase "who are you looking at" best ignore the Oxford guide and stop looking !!
Former board members of the collapsed charity Kids Company – including its founder, Camila Batmanghelidjh, and the former BBC chief Alan Yentob – face being banned from serving as company directors, according to reports.
Thank goodness. Shameless, odious woman judging from the transcripts from the questioning at the time.
+1
Not just the transcripts. The BBC aired a documentary which was created by a long time friend of Batwoman, which was supposed to be a lovely soft soaper of what a great do-gooder she was, but the lady making said I just couldn't hide the stuff I witnessed. Batwoman was absolutely barking and totally disconnected from the real world.
Sounds like somebody else, I just can't think who...
This is about the Zionist lobby fighting the movement to "boycott, divest and sanction" (BDS) with any means necessary.
No. It's about racism.
If someone says something that you perceive as racist then it is racist: this is the definition of racism used in this country.
I'm not quite clear whether you support that ridiculous definition, Fysics_Teacher, or whether you are mocking it. That's not the definition of racism used by any sensible person.
Why not? How can you tell what effect your words are having? "It's just short for Pakistani, how can that be racist?" If you want to know if something is racist you ask the people or person who might be affected.
The definition I used is a paraphrasing of "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" which is the definition of a racist incident from the Macpherson report. It has been adopted by most if not all public sector institutions in Britain: we use it at the school I teach at. Do I support it? I thought it was ridiculous at first but having lived with it for nearly 20 years I would say it works.
What right do I to tell someone else that the name someone called them or the cartoon that some one has drawn in their book is not racist if they think it is?
It certainly worked in Rotherham, by ensuring that the police accepted that they had no response to the racism card in any circumstances whatever.
And consider the word "niggardly" over which a distinguished US academic lost his job. Happy about that?
Wait - do they have to a) land on the surface, b) return?
Not possible in 4 years.
Nope. They don't have a suitable rocket, capsule or tested landing mechanism, yet alone a way to return.
Aside from that (oh, and a budget) - it's a goer.
SpaceX might be able to launch a Dragon 2 capsule (Red Dragon) on Mars in 2020, but that's nohere near big enough to be manned or useful for a manned flight.
I think the next synods are July 2018 and ?October? 2020.
Well, hang on, Nasa are sending off another Mars rover, launch date mid 2020. https://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mars2020/mission/overview/ Not sure how big the max payload is for an Atlas V rocket but there's time and to spare to beef it up. So a landing in Trump's first time would be at the far right of the sanity bell curve, but not strictly speaking impossible. "Return them in safety" raises some issues though.
My guess is Donald would be taken aback if shown a to-scale diagram of the earth, the ISS in low earth orbit, the moon, and Mars.
Mars 2020 is, AIUI, a revamp of the Curiosity rover, which weighs a ton(ne?). It uses the brilliantly Heath Robinsonesque skycrane to land it.
From Wiki, Atlas V HLV, which was never built, can get nearly 30 tonnes to LEO.
But the main issue is that they don't have a capsule capable of the journey - or at least of keeping people alive within it.
As an aside, after a few years the ISS started having problems with its water reclamation system. The filters were getting clogged. It turned out to be calcium, which was coming from the astronauts' bones. They were losing bone mass in zero-g, the calcium was getting excreted, and it was clogging up the filters.
Eeewwww.
There are a thousand and one issues like this to be sorted before a capsule can be made to go to Mars - the ISS has the advantages of being large and easily resuppliable from Earth when things go wrong.
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
I don't really see what this achieves. Le Pen is the NF and the NF is Le Pen.
It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
I don't really see what this achieves. Le Pen is the NF and the NF is Le Pen.
It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
I don't really see what this achieves. Le Pen is the NF and the NF is Le Pen.
It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
She thinks she can be Marianne instead of Marine.
It might backfire if the core FN supporters think she's betrayed them.
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
I don't really see what this achieves. Le Pen is the NF and the NF is Le Pen.
It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
I don't really see what this achieves. Le Pen is the NF and the NF is Le Pen. It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
A gambit to try and win over those who share her views on many things but who recoil at the FN brand, I guess.
I have no idea whether her personal favourability polling and that of the FN diverge.
'Quite what Labour does in the face of this impending disaster is hard to say.'
There is nothing they can do apart from brace themselves for the result. They've already tried to get rid of Corbyn and it failed miserably. I'm not sure (to quote Dan Jarvis) what the repulsive Yvette Cooper would achieve anyway. It might be an even worse result with her at the helm.
They have to take it on the chin and try again to shift Corbyn afterwards. And the only way that's even a possibility is if he resigns.
I have no sympathy whatsoever for Labour - they have brought this calamity upon themselves. The humiliation awaiting them is richly deserved.
Nor me, Jason. No sympathy at all. The current crisis has its roots as far back as the Blair/Brown wars but they are by no means the only culprits.
But a democracy needs a decent opposition. The Tories went a.w.o.l. during the IDS period, and the country was all the worse for it. The Labour Government was simply not subjected to the type of scrutiny that was needed. The same is happening now with colors reversed.
And you don't have to be especially charitable to feel some sympathy for the people Labour is supposed to represent. Who will speak for them if Labour doesn't?
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
I don't really see what this achieves. Le Pen is the NF and the NF is Le Pen. It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
A gambit to try and win over those who share her views on many things but who recoil at the FN brand, I guess.
I have no idea whether her personal favourability polling and that of the FN diverge.
It might have worked if she did it a year ago, but between round one and round two....
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
I don't really see what this achieves. Le Pen is the NF and the NF is Le Pen. It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
A gambit to try and win over those who share her views on many things but who recoil at the FN brand, I guess.
I have no idea whether her personal favourability polling and that of the FN diverge.
It might have worked if she did it a year ago, but between round one and round two....
It looks a bit desperate, certainly.
Do they have any direct debates now? Just the run off candidates?
This is about the Zionist lobby fighting the movement to "boycott, divest and sanction" (BDS) with any means necessary.
No. It's about racism.
If someone says something that you perceive as racist then it is racist: this is the definition of racism used in this country.
I'm not quite clear whether you support that ridiculous definition, Fysics_Teacher, or whether you are mocking it. That's not the definition of racism used by any sensible person.
Why not? How can you tell what effect your words are having? "It's just short for Pakistani, how can that be racist?" If you want to know if something is racist you ask the people or person who might be affected.
The definition I used is a paraphrasing of "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" which is the definition of a racist incident from the Macpherson report. It has been adopted by most if not all public sector institutions in Britain: we use it at the school I teach at. Do I support it? I thought it was ridiculous at first but having lived with it for nearly 20 years I would say it works.
What right do I to tell someone else that the name someone called them or the cartoon that some one has drawn in their book is not racist if they think it is?
There has to be a reasonableness test. I could perceive many things as racist or offensive, but it might be because I am an idiot, and it would not be fair on society to curtail their free expression through official sanction because I am an idiot.
The thing is, it works. (At least it seems to well enough at school). If people start to abuse it, accusing physics teachers of racism because they were talking about black-body radiation or similar then it will break down and we will have to find another one. But that will be difficult because it will involve you telling someone who is deeply upset at what they have been called that they are wrong.
I am worried when I see stories like the one above about 'micro-aggressions' but most of those are people being offended on behalf of someone else.
Wait - do they have to a) land on the surface, b) return?
Not possible in 4 years.
Nope. They don't have a suitable rocket, capsule or tested landing mechanism, yet alone a way to return.
Aside from that (oh, and a budget) - it's a goer.
SpaceX might be able to launch a Dragon 2 capsule (Red Dragon) on Mars in 2020, but that's nohere near big enough to be manned or useful for a manned flight.
I think the next synods are July 2018 and ?October? 2020.
Well, hang on, Nasa are sending off another Mars rover, launch date mid 2020. https://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mars2020/mission/overview/ Not sure how big the max payload is for an Atlas V rocket but there's time and to spare to beef it up. So a landing in Trump's first time would be at the far right of the sanity bell curve, but not strictly speaking impossible. "Return them in safety" raises some issues though.
My guess is Donald would be taken aback if shown a to-scale diagram of the earth, the ISS in low earth orbit, the moon, and Mars.
We can get people to Mars if we massively increase NASA's budget and also cut out alot of the inefficiency.
Or he should just give SpaceX $100 billion. Musk could probably build a rocket to get there in Trumps' second term with a great wodge of cash. NASA is inefficient with alot of their spend - the bloody SLS...
Oi! The SLS project is very efficiently designing a brilliant rocket system (and it will be) that NASA can only afford to fly once a year ...
Musk couldn't do that in time: he regularly misses his timescales.
Besides, what would the mission be? Kennedy's speech was brilliant because it gave three easy-to-measure aims: 1) get man to the moon, 2) before the end of the decade, and 3) return them safely.
Any Mars shot would need equally clear aims. And getting there quickly in this manner may please Zubrin, but not Musk: it risks having the Apollo situation once more. "We've been there, why send anyone else?" Whereas Musk wants a continuing project.
There's also many, many technical issues to be solved. The larger the craft we send, the more redundancy we can have to solve those issues. And our current launchers cannot raise enough mass, even with the added complexities of construction in orbit.
I'd be screwed - I regularly avoid eye contact because I'm so awkward.
Making eye contact in Glasgow with the wrong person could be perceived by many as a threat - if ever you hear the phrase "who are you looking at" best ignore the Oxford guide and stop looking !!
Noted!
As a Scouser, "Are youse looking at me" was an invitation to a fight, the response ,if you were up for it was "So what if I am", Looking at someone in Liverpool was a serious breach of etiquette.
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
I don't really see what this achieves. Le Pen is the NF and the NF is Le Pen. It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
A gambit to try and win over those who share her views on many things but who recoil at the FN brand, I guess.
I have no idea whether her personal favourability polling and that of the FN diverge.
It might have worked if she did it a year ago, but between round one and round two....
It looks a bit desperate, certainly.
Do they have any direct debates now? Just the run off candidates?
I heard on France 24 yesterday say there would be a head to head debate.
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
I don't really see what this achieves. Le Pen is the NF and the NF is Le Pen.
It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
This is about the Zionist lobby fighting the movement to "boycott, divest and sanction" (BDS) with any means necessary.
No. It's about racism.
If someone says something that you perceive as racist then it is racist: this is the definition of racism used in this country.
I'm not quite clear whether you support that ridiculous definition, Fysics_Teacher, or whether you are mocking it. That's not the definition of racism used by any sensible person.
Why not? How can you tell what effect your words are having? "It's just short for Pakistani, how can that be racist?" If you want to know if something is racist you ask the people or person who might be affected.
The definition I used is a paraphrasing of "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" which is the definition of a racist incident from the Macpherson report. It has been adopted by most if not all public sector institutions in Britain: we use it at the school I teach at. Do I support it? I thought it was ridiculous at first but having lived with it for nearly 20 years I would say it works.
What right do I to tell someone else that the name someone called them or the cartoon that some one has drawn in their book is not racist if they think it is?
There has to be a reasonableness test. I could perceive many things as racist or offensive, but it might be because I am an idiot, and it would not be fair on society to curtail their free expression through official sanction because I am an idiot.
The thing is, it works. (At least it seems to well enough at school).
It might be ok at school level, but it seems too simplistic and a means to shut other people down once you get to adult hood
An Asian fellow I used to work with, probably the nicest person I have met in the betting game, used to say things were only racist if the intention was to be.
I'd be screwed - I regularly avoid eye contact because I'm so awkward.
I'm genuinely bemused by that one.
It's going to present difficulties for those who avoid eye-contact because the other person will interpret eye-contact as a 'challenge' or 'disrespect'.
'Quite what Labour does in the face of this impending disaster is hard to say.'
There is nothing they can do apart from brace themselves for the result. They've already tried to get rid of Corbyn and it failed miserably. I'm not sure (to quote Dan Jarvis) what the repulsive Yvette Cooper would achieve anyway. It might be an even worse result with her at the helm.
They have to take it on the chin and try again to shift Corbyn afterwards. And the only way that's even a possibility is if he resigns.
I have no sympathy whatsoever for Labour - they have brought this calamity upon themselves. The humiliation awaiting them is richly deserved.
Nor me, Jason. No sympathy at all. The current crisis has its roots as far back as the Blair/Brown wars but they are by no means the only culprits.
But a democracy needs a decent opposition. The Tories went a.w.o.l. during the IDS period, and the country was all the worse for it. The Labour Government was simply not subjected to the type of scrutiny that was needed. The same is happening now with colors reversed.
And you don't have to be especially charitable to feel some sympathy for the people Labour is supposed to represent. Who will speak for them if Labour doesn't?
I'd be screwed - I regularly avoid eye contact because I'm so awkward.
Making eye contact in Glasgow with the wrong person could be perceived by many as a threat - if ever you hear the phrase "who are you looking at" best ignore the Oxford guide and stop looking !!
Noted!
As a Scouser, "Are youse looking at me" was an invitation to a fight, the response ,if you were up for it was "So what if I am", Looking at someone in Liverpool was a serious breach of etiquette.
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
I don't really see what this achieves. Le Pen is the NF and the NF is Le Pen. It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
A gambit to try and win over those who share her views on many things but who recoil at the FN brand, I guess.
I have no idea whether her personal favourability polling and that of the FN diverge.
It might have worked if she did it a year ago, but between round one and round two....
It looks a bit desperate, certainly.
Do they have any direct debates now? Just the run off candidates?
I heard on France 24 yesterday say there would be a head to head debate.
It seems so.
May 3rd.
Melenchon has refused to endorse Macron, Hollande has.
Le Pen is learning from her father's round 2 humiliation in 2002. Very much doubt it will work, but she has to roll some dice - she can't just sit there passively and watch the nation enjoy a rare rush of unity as they put old disputes aside and come together to give the common enemy a kicking.
This is about the Zionist lobby fighting the movement to "boycott, divest and sanction" (BDS) with any means necessary.
No. It's about racism.
If someone says something that you perceive as racist then it is racist: this is the definition of racism used in this country.
I'm not quite clear whether you support that ridiculous definition, Fysics_Teacher, or whether you are mocking it. That's not the definition of racism used by any sensible person.
Why not? How can you tell what effect your words are having? "It's just short for Pakistani, how can that be racist?" If you want to know if something is racist you ask the people or person who might be affected.
The definition I used is a paraphrasing of "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" which is the definition of a racist incident from the Macpherson report. It has been adopted by most if not all public sector institutions in Britain: we use it at the school I teach at. Do I support it? I thought it was ridiculous at first but having lived with it for nearly 20 years I would say it works.
What right do I to tell someone else that the name someone called them or the cartoon that some one has drawn in their book is not racist if they think it is?
There has to be a reasonableness test. I could perceive many things as racist or offensive, but it might be because I am an idiot, and it would not be fair on society to curtail their free expression through official sanction because I am an idiot.
The thing is, it works. (At least it seems to well enough at school).
It might be ok at school level, but it seems too simplistic and a means to shut other people down once you get to adult hood
It is the yardstick in tbe NHS too.
It is only the starting point of an investigation, not its conclusion. I have been involved in a number of incidents where at least one party perceived racism as the motivator, but often the conclusions were that racism was not proven.
BTW, I spent three hours looking at photos of Macron's wife earlier.
63! Bloody hell. She looks younger than I do, and I'm the same age as Macron.
It's so weird to me that a 39 year old is with a 63 year old! Even weirder, is when they started dating....
I've recently had an advert featuring an obviously-retired bloke wind-surfing with a very young (nearly naked) woman on his back. She can't be much more than 19, never mind 39.
'Quite what Labour does in the face of this impending disaster is hard to say.'
There is nothing they can do apart from brace themselves for the result. They've already tried to get rid of Corbyn and it failed miserably. I'm not sure (to quote Dan Jarvis) what the repulsive Yvette Cooper would achieve anyway. It might be an even worse result with her at the helm.
They have to take it on the chin and try again to shift Corbyn afterwards. And the only way that's even a possibility is if he resigns.
I have no sympathy whatsoever for Labour - they have brought this calamity upon themselves. The humiliation awaiting them is richly deserved.
Nor me, Jason. No sympathy at all. The current crisis has its roots as far back as the Blair/Brown wars but they are by no means the only culprits.
But a democracy needs a decent opposition. The Tories went a.w.o.l. during the IDS period, and the country was all the worse for it. The Labour Government was simply not subjected to the type of scrutiny that was needed. The same is happening now with colors reversed.
And you don't have to be especially charitable to feel some sympathy for the people Labour is supposed to represent. Who will speak for them if Labour doesn't?
To answer your question from earlier, Peter, I thought my comment might be unwelcome from some Labour supporters, some of which still seem to think everything will be ok if Corbyn is ditched, particularly from a Tory during an election campaign.
You have the intelligence and self-awareness to recognise that he's a symptom and not the cause, but I'm not sure how many others in the Labour membership do.
I'd be screwed - I regularly avoid eye contact because I'm so awkward.
Making eye contact in Glasgow with the wrong person could be perceived by many as a threat - if ever you hear the phrase "who are you looking at" best ignore the Oxford guide and stop looking !!
Noted!
As a Scouser, "Are youse looking at me" was an invitation to a fight, the response ,if you were up for it was "So what if I am", Looking at someone in Liverpool was a serious breach of etiquette.
I'd be screwed - I regularly avoid eye contact because I'm so awkward.
Making eye contact in Glasgow with the wrong person could be perceived by many as a threat - if ever you hear the phrase "who are you looking at" best ignore the Oxford guide and stop looking !!
Noted!
As a Scouser, "Are youse looking at me" was an invitation to a fight, the response ,if you were up for it was "So what if I am", Looking at someone in Liverpool was a serious breach of etiquette.
So modelling the Tory Election Surge Panelbase Gives the Con 11 cons of
Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale -22.31% Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk -19.77% Dumfries and Galloway -11.51% West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine -8.63% Edinburgh South -6.59% Moray -5.28% East Renfrewshire -5.16% Aberdeen South -4.34% Perth and North Perthshire -3.87% East Lothian -0.85% Edinburgh South West -0.71%
With the following SNP seat under 5% majority so at risk from tactical voting
Ochil and South Perthshire -0.70% Stirling -1.21% Angus -1.77% Orkney and Shetland -1.77% Edinburgh North and Leith -1.80% Edinburgh West -2.99% North East Fife -3.61% Ayr, Carrick & Cumnock -4.11% Argyll & Bute -4.65%
Majority after the -
As you can see it's a dumb model as it's got Ed North and LEith in there
This is about the Zionist lobby fighting the movement to "boycott, divest and sanction" (BDS) with any means necessary.
No. It's about racism.
If someone says something that you perceive as racist then it is racist: this is the definition of racism used in this country.
I'm not quite clear whether you support that ridiculous definition, Fysics_Teacher, or whether you are mocking it. That's not the definition of racism used by any sensible person.
Why not? How can you tell what effect your words are having? "It's just short for Pakistani, how can that be racist?" If you want to know if something is racist you ask the people or person who might be affected.
The definition I used is a paraphrasing of "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" which is the definition of a racist incident from the Macpherson report. It has been adopted by most if not all public sector institutions in Britain: we use it at the school I teach at. Do I support it? I thought it was ridiculous at first but having lived with it for nearly 20 years I would say it works.
What right do I to tell someone else that the name someone called them or the cartoon that some one has drawn in their book is not racist if they think it is?
There has to be a reasonableness test. I could perceive many things as racist or offensive, but it might be because I am an idiot, and it would not be fair on society to curtail their free expression through official sanction because I am an idiot.
The thing is, it works. (At least it seems to well enough at school). If people start to abuse it, accusing physics teachers of racism because they were talking about black-body radiation or similar then it will break down and we will have to find another one. But that will be difficult because it will involve you telling someone who is deeply upset at what they have been called that they are wrong.
I am worried when I see stories like the one above about 'micro-aggressions' but most of those are people being offended on behalf of someone else.
It "works" in the sense that it solves 100% of the cases it is meant to solve. I think you are naive if you think it only does that, and nothing else. Rotherham police officer: I am investigating allegations about you grooming young white girls". Suspect: "I perceive what you have just said as racist". The End.
I'd be screwed - I regularly avoid eye contact because I'm so awkward.
Making eye contact in Glasgow with the wrong person could be perceived by many as a threat - if ever you hear the phrase "who are you looking at" best ignore the Oxford guide and stop looking !!
Noted!
As a Scouser, "Are youse looking at me" was an invitation to a fight, the response ,if you were up for it was "So what if I am", Looking at someone in Liverpool was a serious breach of etiquette.
This is about the Zionist lobby fighting the movement to "boycott, divest and sanction" (BDS) with any means necessary.
No. It's about racism.
If someone says something that you perceive as racist then it is racist: this is the definition of racism used in this country.
I'm not quite clear whether you support that ridiculous definition, Fysics_Teacher, or whether you are mocking it. That's not the definition of racism used by any sensible person.
Why not? k it is?
There has to be a reasonableness m an idiot.
The thing is, it works. (At least it seems to well enough at school).
It might be ok at school level, but it seems too simplistic and a means to shut other people down once you get to adult hood
It is the yardstick in tbe NHS too.
It is only the starting point of an investigation, not its conclusion. I have been involved in a number of incidents where at least one party perceived racism as the motivator, but often the conclusions were that racism was not proven.
Such a stigma for the accused though. Racism is rightly abhorrent to most people, and while people can be insensitive without meaning to especially through ignorance, we all know that human nature is to assume where there's smoke there's fire. This micro-aggression stuff indicates a mindset that you are almost certainly guilty if you are accused, no matter your intent, it outright emboldens abuse and manufactured grievance, it makes people paranoid they'll offend people through the most innocuous acts, it'll cause others to look for those minor acts in others they thought were inoffensive but are now told the kindly professor is being a micro aggressive racist. Hopefully that sort of approach is rare.
Wait - do they have to a) land on the surface, b) return?
Not possible in 4 years.
Nope. They don't have a suitable rocket, capsule or tested landing mechanism, yet alone a way to return.
Aside from that (oh, and a budget) - it's a goer.
SpaceX might be able to launch a Dragon 2 capsule (Red Dragon) on Mars in 2020, but that's nohere near big enough to be manned or useful for a manned flight.
I think the next synods are July 2018 and ?October? 2020.
Well, hang on, Nasa are sending off another Mars rover, launch date mid 2020. https://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mars2020/mission/overview/ Not sure how big the max payload is for an Atlas V rocket but there's time and to spare to beef it up. So a landing in Trump's first time would be at the far right of the sanity bell curve, but not strictly speaking impossible. "Return them in safety" raises some issues though.
My guess is Donald would be taken aback if shown a to-scale diagram of the earth, the ISS in low earth orbit, the moon, and Mars.
Mars 2020 is, AIUI, a revamp of the Curiosity rover, which weighs a ton(ne?). It uses the brilliantly Heath Robinsonesque skycrane to land it.
From Wiki, Atlas V HLV, which was never built, can get nearly 30 tonnes to LEO.
But the main issue is that they don't have a capsule capable of the journey - or at least of keeping people alive within it.
As an aside, after a few years the ISS started having problems with its water reclamation system. The filters were getting clogged. It turned out to be calcium, which was coming from the astronauts' bones. They were losing bone mass in zero-g, the calcium was getting excreted, and it was clogging up the filters.
Eeewwww.
There are a thousand and one issues like this to be sorted before a capsule can be made to go to Mars - the ISS has the advantages of being large and easily resuppliable from Earth when things go wrong.
And after that very popular film, they will certainly need to be capable of bringing any dead bodies back with them.
BTW, I spent three hours looking at photos of Macron's wife earlier.
63! Bloody hell. She looks younger than I do, and I'm the same age as Macron.
It's so weird to me that a 39 year old is with a 63 year old! Even weirder, is when they started dating....
I've recently had an advert featuring an obviously-retired bloke wind-surfing with a very young (nearly naked) woman on his back. She can't be much more than 19, never mind 39.
I thought that advert for PB featuring OGH had been scrapped ?!?
This is about the Zionist lobby fighting the movement to "boycott, divest and sanction" (BDS) with any means necessary.
No. It's about racism.
If someone says something that you perceive as racist then it is racist: this is the definition of racism used in this country.
I'm not quite clear whether you support that ridiculous definition, Fysics_Teacher, or whether you are mocking it. That's not the definition of racism used by any sensible person.
Why not? How can you tell what effect your words are having? "It's just short for Pakistani, how can that be racist?" If you want to know if something is racist you ask the people or person who might be affected.
The definition I used is a paraphrasing of "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" which is the definition of a racist incident from the Macpherson report. It has been adopted by most if not all public sector institutions in Britain: we use it at the school I teach at. Do I support it? I thought it was ridiculous at first but having lived with it for nearly 20 years I would say it works.
What right do I to tell someone else that the name someone called them or the cartoon that some one has drawn in their book is not racist if they think it is?
There has to be a reasonableness test. I could perceive many things as racist or offensive, but it might be because I am an idiot, and it would not be fair on society to curtail their free expression through official sanction because I am an idiot.
The thing is, it works. (At least it seems to well enough at school). If people start to abuse it, accusing physics teachers of racism because they were talking about black-body radiation or similar then it will break down and we will have to find another one. But that will be difficult because it will involve you telling someone who is deeply upset at what they have been called that they are wrong.
I am worried when I see stories like the one above about 'micro-aggressions' but most of those are people being offended on behalf of someone else.
It doesn't work, when it becomes "racist" to investigate child rape or electoral fraud.
Sometimes you do have to tell people that they are being unreasonable.
Apols for off-topicness and working-classness; this is not about the best bordeaux nor best restaurant to spunk 200 quid..
As there is a lot of lawyers on here I would appreciate your advice. My eldest son - under 18 - I have just been told by my ex-wife had the plod over having been caught in possession of cannabis. They either gave him a caution or a reprimand - first time with rozzer bother - so guessing a reprimand.
Questions - will this appear on an enhanced DBS check? He is keen to be an outdoors sporting instruction (sailing/canoeing) and will there be any issues with overseas visa (US/Canada especially).
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
I don't really see what this achieves. Le Pen is the NF and the NF is Le Pen.
It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
The French president is supposed to be non-partisan and usually (always?) has no party affiliation when in office.
Le Pen is not the NF. Have a look at the Rassemblement Bleu Marine. It's far less equivalent to the NF than the Countryside Alliance was to the British Field Sports Society. I'm not suggesting the RBM and its constituents such as the vile Islamophobic "SIEL", led by the Melanie Phillips-ite Karim Ouchikh, should be taken at face value, as if they discovered the FN last week and decided "hey, we share some ideas". But the FN has for a few years now nurtured a scene that's broader than a political party. Another person to mention is Michel Houellebecq. (Curiously, he is said to have attended Brigitte Macron's soirées.) Then there is the "droite hors les murs" (Philippe de Villiers etc.) Villiers is not FN but I'll be surprised if he doesn't support Le Pen against Macron. And there are people such as Alain Soral and Dieudonné M'bala M'bala, who backed Benoît Hamon in the first round. I don't envisage them not supporting Le Pen now.
The centre-left is crying out for Macron. A man actually prepare to GET OFF HIS ARSE and form a popular movement rather than sit on the back benches of a no-hope Labour party or write columns for the Grauniad.
Macron was only able to do so in the context of a presidential run off system decided on nationwide popular vote. I doubt En Marche will actually win the legislative elections even if he wins the presidency
Apols for off-topicness and working-classness; this is not about the best bordeaux nor best restaurant to spunk 200 quid..
As there is a lot of lawyers on here I would appreciate your advice. My eldest son - under 18 - I have just been told by my ex-wife had the plod over having been caught in possession of cannabis. They either gave him a caution or a reprimand - first time with rozzer bother - so guessing a reprimand.
Questions - will this appear on an enhanced DBS check? He is keen to be an outdoors sporting instruction (sailing/canoeing) and will there be any issues with overseas visa (US/Canada especially).
Any advice / thoughts greatly appreciated.
If he's accepted a caution, that's formally a conviction, so yes. If he's had a stern talking to, no.
I'd be screwed - I regularly avoid eye contact because I'm so awkward.
Making eye contact in Glasgow with the wrong person could be perceived by many as a threat - if ever you hear the phrase "who are you looking at" best ignore the Oxford guide and stop looking !!
Noted!
As a Scouser, "Are youse looking at me" was an invitation to a fight, the response ,if you were up for it was "So what if I am", Looking at someone in Liverpool was a serious breach of etiquette.
I'd be screwed - I regularly avoid eye contact because I'm so awkward.
Making eye contact in Glasgow with the wrong person could be perceived by many as a threat - if ever you hear the phrase "who are you looking at" best ignore the Oxford guide and stop looking !!
Noted!
As a Scouser, "Are youse looking at me" was an invitation to a fight, the response ,if you were up for it was "So what if I am", Looking at someone in Liverpool was a serious breach of etiquette.
Apols for off-topicness and working-classness; this is not about the best bordeaux nor best restaurant to spunk 200 quid..
As there is a lot of lawyers on here I would appreciate your advice. My eldest son - under 18 - I have just been told by my ex-wife had the plod over having been caught in possession of cannabis. They either gave him a caution or a reprimand - first time with rozzer bother - so guessing a reprimand.
Questions - will this appear on an enhanced DBS check? He is keen to be an outdoors sporting instruction (sailing/canoeing) and will there be any issues with overseas visa (US/Canada especially).
Any advice / thoughts greatly appreciated.
A caution is an acceptance that the person did the acts complained of, and should not be accepted without qualified legal advice.
Comments
AIUI, the US don't have a man-rated heavy-lift rocket any more (in fact they don't have any man-rated rockets). The Falcon 9 Heavy, due for first flight in six months (*), will have enough oomph to launch a Dragon capsule to Mars. They're planning to do this (unmanned) in 2020, and company head Elon Musk has given it a 50/50 chance of landing successfully.
Mars is probably the hardest icy or rocky body to land on in the solar system. An appreciable gravity, with an atmosphere too tenuous for parachutes for large vehicles or for appreciable aerobraking, yet enough of an atmosphere to make rocket landings complicated.
AIUI. I am not a rocket scientist.
(*) A joke. It's been six months away from first flight for years.
Or he should just give SpaceX $100 billion. Musk could probably build a rocket to get there in Trumps' second term with a great wodge of cash. NASA is inefficient with alot of their spend - the bloody SLS...
The definition I used is a paraphrasing of "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" which is the definition of a racist incident from the Macpherson report. It has been adopted by most if not all public sector institutions in Britain: we use it at the school I teach at. Do I support it? I thought it was ridiculous at first but having lived with it for nearly 20 years I would say it works.
What right do I to tell someone else that the name someone called them or the cartoon that some one has drawn in their book is not racist if they think it is?
There is nothing they can do apart from brace themselves for the result. They've already tried to get rid of Corbyn and it failed miserably. I'm not sure (to quote Dan Jarvis) what the repulsive Yvette Cooper would achieve anyway. It might be an even worse result with her at the helm.
They have to take it on the chin and try again to shift Corbyn afterwards. And the only way that's even a possibility is if he resigns.
I have no sympathy whatsoever for Labour - they have brought this calamity upon themselves. The humiliation awaiting them is richly deserved.
CON 22
LAB 13
L DEM 2
GREEN 0
UKIP 0
PLAID 3
Paki is a good example where while the user might not think they are being insensitive or racist, it would not, in a great many contexts, be unreasonable for someone to find it so. But that does not mean any single person's perception of perceived racism should be the only qualifier when determining whether it is so.
Objectively defining racism definitively is probably impossible, life is complex, but making it entirely subjective without qualification or reason, seems a step too far in the other direction.
It is a very safe Lib Dem seat.
Ceredigion forecast:
CON 17.48%
LAB 7.35%
L DEM 41.71%
GREEN 4.54%
UKIP 4.18%
PLAID 24.73%
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/0/internets-biggest-jokes-silicon-valley-funniest-show-tv/
First episode of Season 4 aired last night in US and was very funny. Is on tonight in the UK.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/24/bank-englands-staff-gym-lockers-not-accepting-new-1-coins/
Hmm
"This evening I decided to take my leave of the presidency of the National Front," she (MLP) told TV channel France 2.
"I will be above partisan considerations."
It is not clear if her decision will be permanent. She told France 2 that France is approaching a "decisive moment".
Sounds like somebody else, I just can't think who...
And consider the word "niggardly" over which a distinguished US academic lost his job. Happy about that?
From Wiki, Atlas V HLV, which was never built, can get nearly 30 tonnes to LEO.
But the main issue is that they don't have a capsule capable of the journey - or at least of keeping people alive within it.
As an aside, after a few years the ISS started having problems with its water reclamation system. The filters were getting clogged. It turned out to be calcium, which was coming from the astronauts' bones. They were losing bone mass in zero-g, the calcium was getting excreted, and it was clogging up the filters.
Eeewwww.
There are a thousand and one issues like this to be sorted before a capsule can be made to go to Mars - the ISS has the advantages of being large and easily resuppliable from Earth when things go wrong.
It is like Farage saying he will stand at the GE, but as the Nigel Farage Party. People who like him will vote for him, people who dislike UKIP policies will still not vote for him.
It might backfire if the core FN supporters think she's betrayed them.
I have no idea whether her personal favourability polling and that of the FN diverge.
But a democracy needs a decent opposition. The Tories went a.w.o.l. during the IDS period, and the country was all the worse for it. The Labour Government was simply not subjected to the type of scrutiny that was needed. The same is happening now with colors reversed.
And you don't have to be especially charitable to feel some sympathy for the people Labour is supposed to represent. Who will speak for them if Labour doesn't?
Do they have any direct debates now? Just the run off candidates?
If people start to abuse it, accusing physics teachers of racism because they were talking about black-body radiation or similar then it will break down and we will have to find another one. But that will be difficult because it will involve you telling someone who is deeply upset at what they have been called that they are wrong.
I am worried when I see stories like the one above about 'micro-aggressions' but most of those are people being offended on behalf of someone else.
Musk couldn't do that in time: he regularly misses his timescales.
Besides, what would the mission be? Kennedy's speech was brilliant because it gave three easy-to-measure aims: 1) get man to the moon, 2) before the end of the decade, and 3) return them safely.
Any Mars shot would need equally clear aims. And getting there quickly in this manner may please Zubrin, but not Musk: it risks having the Apollo situation once more. "We've been there, why send anyone else?" Whereas Musk wants a continuing project.
There's also many, many technical issues to be solved. The larger the craft we send, the more redundancy we can have to solve those issues. And our current launchers cannot raise enough mass, even with the added complexities of construction in orbit.
Looking at someone in Liverpool was a serious breach of etiquette.
Mrs JackW is 143 ....
https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/04/the-journey-to-mars-has-a-price-tag-and-it-will-give-congress-sticker-shock/
Ouch.
https://twitter.com/brexit/status/856582290352332801
https://www.ft.com/content/09a54221-3bb0-3f42-8fe2-19657f9d96f3
https://twitter.com/election_data/status/856585296787505152
How old fashioned that seems now
May 3rd.
Melenchon has refused to endorse Macron, Hollande has.
http://www.romfordrecorder.co.uk/news/politics/election-2017-upminster-mum-starts-campaign-against-candidates-unfamiliar-with-area-1-4986451?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social_Icon&utm_campaign=in_article_social_icons
It is only the starting point of an investigation, not its conclusion. I have been involved in a number of incidents where at least one party perceived racism as the motivator, but often the conclusions were that racism was not proven.
...................................................
Hope all is well in the world of PB's deputy TOTY and most revered cross dresser ?
You have the intelligence and self-awareness to recognise that he's a symptom and not the cause, but I'm not sure how many others in the Labour membership do.
This isn't good for Labour
#justasking
So modelling the Tory Election Surge Panelbase Gives the Con 11 cons of With the following SNP seat under 5% majority so at risk from tactical voting Majority after the -
As you can see it's a dumb model as it's got Ed North and LEith in there
Sometimes you do have to tell people that they are being unreasonable.
As there is a lot of lawyers on here I would appreciate your advice. My eldest son - under 18 - I have just been told by my ex-wife had the plod over having been caught in possession of cannabis. They either gave him a caution or a reprimand - first time with rozzer bother - so guessing a reprimand.
Questions - will this appear on an enhanced DBS check? He is keen to be an outdoors sporting instruction (sailing/canoeing) and will there be any issues with overseas visa (US/Canada especially).
Any advice / thoughts greatly appreciated.
Le Pen is not the NF. Have a look at the Rassemblement Bleu Marine. It's far less equivalent to the NF than the Countryside Alliance was to the British Field Sports Society. I'm not suggesting the RBM and its constituents such as the vile Islamophobic "SIEL", led by the Melanie Phillips-ite Karim Ouchikh, should be taken at face value, as if they discovered the FN last week and decided "hey, we share some ideas". But the FN has for a few years now nurtured a scene that's broader than a political party. Another person to mention is Michel Houellebecq. (Curiously, he is said to have attended Brigitte Macron's soirées.) Then there is the "droite hors les murs" (Philippe de Villiers etc.) Villiers is not FN but I'll be surprised if he doesn't support Le Pen against Macron. And there are people such as Alain Soral and Dieudonné M'bala M'bala, who backed Benoît Hamon in the first round. I don't envisage them not supporting Le Pen now.
It is no different to yesterday's ICM poll for Peston .
http://news.sky.com/story/ukip-schoolgirls-should-have-mandatory-medical-fgm-check-every-year-10849237