nerdgirl

Play the ball not the player. I'm also curious as to what your metric is for behavior that qualifies as "acting like this is the end of the world"? Again you asserted: Repeatedly, I've asked you, in what was intended to be nicely & respectfully, to provide *any* evidence to support that assertion. Substantive counter-evidence has been provided. Thank you! I do hope that you're not attempting to use your quoted assertion as a guide for determining treatment. Is that the most useful reaction when challenged? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Is this something that exists now? Yes. Wiki entry Test version of article from Natural History magazine VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Yes, you will find that here. It's a good thing, imo. I'm almost always curious regarding the epistemology -- how one thinks one knows what one thinks one knows -- and the process folks use to come to the conclusions they assert. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

To what are you referring then? You keep referring to somethingyou assert is "well-documented" with no evidence beyond what amounts to little more than “trust me.” Show us some data. Otoh, I have provided (1) literally hundreds of studies showing the need for treatment, and (2) what sounds like it was the study to which you were referring. I can also point to a 3rd set of data showing that lack of treatment doesn’t work. Can you even provide one credible expert to whom one could look to support your assertion? Prove me wrong.

Yep, that was all I was asking.

I have no idea why the US maintains to use it. The US and other states maintain WP within arsenals due to capabilities that WP affords - in terms of ability to act as an illuminant and at the same time, ability to generate smoke, better than almost anything else, especially for the cost, utility, and delivery mechanism. As Mike noted there are much more effective mechanisms for what you describe as the speculated purpose. Yes, it is one of the interpretations. One held by many nations. US policy is different. Agree with it or disagree, that is the policy. The US has also not signed the Ottawa Treaty (aka the Land Mine Ban). Again one can agree or disagree, it's still US policy. Whether and why, I personally agree or disagree with either is another discussion. When WP has been used recently, there have been (incorrect) criticisms that it is a CW and therefore should be banned (i.e., the question of why some assert it should be banned back on page 1 of this thread) ... probably more along those lines than the international law disagreements regarding discriminate v indiscriminate usage and incendiary use, e.g., Gaza (2009) "White Phosphorous: Israel Uses Chemical Weapons" "Fallujah by the Sea: Aping America, Israel Unleashes Chemical Weapons in Gaza" "White Phosphorus is considered a chemical weapon by most governments around the world" "Iran denounces Israeli use of chemical weapons in Gaza Lebanon & Gaza (2006) "Israel used chemical weapons in Lebanon and Gaza" (that one's from Canada) "As a CW, phosphorus would become a clearly illegal weapon" Fallujah/Iraq "Did the US military use chemical weapons in Iraq?" "US intelligence classified white phosphorus as 'chemical weapon'" "The US used chemical weapons in Iraq - and then lied about it" ... Once we disabuse that notional idea (which is what you seem to be missing as one of the calls for WP to be banned), then one can start addressing does use violate other international laws, e.g., the CCCW. (Btw: earlier discussions on indiscriminate weapons here and Hague Conventions here. They come up every now & then in a variety of contexts.) If I'm understanding your argument correctly (which may be a poor assumption), in order for it to be violation of CCCW, it has to be used as an intentional incendiary disproportionately impacting civilians. (Just for clarification: I can construct a robust argument either way; with which argument I concur is less relevent at the moment.) How does that connect to your earlier assertion, or is it coincidental: I'm (still) curious on what basis you make that assertion? Specific reports? Unique technical capability of WP? Tactical utility? Strategic intent? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

I'm going to concur in spirit w/Mike [Mnealtx] and [happythoughs], if not in specific verbiage or strategic reasoning. I'm curious on what basis you make your assertion? Unique technical capability of WP? Tactical utility? Strategic intent? For what purpose does the US maintain capability to employ WP? I doubt you would argue that it is for the use you described above, correct? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

< points to post above, #90 > Responding as if that was a question: yes. "Ummm ... there are areas of disagreement w/r/t most effective treatment and methods; whether to treat or not, is not one of which I am aware." The nature of a disussion forum is to discuss. If one makes an assertion, it is reasonable to request clarification or evidence of that assertions validity, especially in light of a large body of contradicting evidence. As far as making it personal, no one requested you "jump through hoops." What's the metaphor? Play the ball not the player. It means my spelling is less than perfect: disingenuous; it's also a polite way of saying your assertion was wrong. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

I think I figured out to what you’re referring …

If it is well-documented, why can't you provide a link? (I provided links to hundreds of studies.) Who did the study? How many people were in it? Where? How long? Ummm ... there are areas of disagreement w/r/t most effective treatment and methods; whether to treat or not, is not one of which I am aware. The assertion that there is "conflicting research" -- particularly in light of the lack of verifiable conflicting data -- is disengenous to put it diplomatically. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

It could also be seen as another means of selection for demanding military jobs. And perhaps more effective than certain existing methods. So in sense, I'd see it being more for the common good than bad. One can make that argument. Distilled to the core, the ethical arguments are (1) privacy issues and (2) rejection of the concept of biology (through genetics, etc) dictating destiny. whch is justice. Given, when one is a member of the uniformed military services, one abnegates (waives) certain privacy rights. DNA samples are currently collected but uses are very limited, e.g., identification of remains. The ethicals and legalities of using DNA screening for other decisional purposes is untested largely w/in the military realm. At the far end of the argument, one also encounters a GATACCA-esque ethical conuncdrum, which I fully acknowledge as a far end scenario. If there was such a hypothetical screen for a priori decisions, that implies that human capabilities are pre-determined from birth and dictates what one can do without recognition of human variability, training, and value of interdicting actions. Now there are many intermediary states between that scenario and nothing. Figuring out where effectiveness and value are maximized is just as much a scientific as an ethical, political, legal, and operational question. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Concur that would be *very* interesting. Do you have a link? What is the source? It would also be contrary to all the other experience and evidence on treatment of PTSD whether from combat, from rape, or from child abuse. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Concur. Perhaps it is an example of where lex parsimoniae creates more problems than it may be worth. [Tangent: I’ve found it curious to observe that social scientists tend to refer to the “Law of Parsimony” whereas physical and life scientists generally talk about Occam’s Razor.] Also may illustrate the power of images (image and subsequent connotation of other characteristics of a mechanical motor) that convey features that are not reflected in the structural biology. A bacteria flagellum is not a mechanical motor. Similar over-simplifications or mis-simplifications are observed commonly with nanotechnology. As Albert Einstein wrote in 1933 that “The supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience,” which is often paraphrased as “theories should be as simple as possible, but no simpler.” The notion of irreducible complexity as indicator of ‘intelligent design’ may be an example of trying push to far along the spectrum to the ‘simple’ side. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Might be ... altho tactical usage is more likely for use as an obscurant to cover troop movements. It also has been useful for decreasing effectiveness of certain guided weapons. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Yes [the 1899 & 1907 Hague Conventions ... there are other Hague Conventions that have little to do with munitions/warfare] ... & at the same time depends on what type of weapons are being considered and what is the use. Like you, in this case, I would speculate that issues being taken/posited w/r/t current events include use against civilians or claims of indiscriminate weapons use. Many parts of Hague Conventions and Laws of Land Warfare were incorporated as part of Geneva Conventions (& other documens). There's also the Geneva Protocol (not related to the Geneva Conventions) that deals with chemical (& biological) warfare. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

That argument is, however, incorrect. The "stator" of the flagellal motor is nearly identical to one type of ionic pump, one use by many cells. When the right protein is stuck into such a pump, it spins due to the action of the pump. Thus, it evolved as a pump, and evolution then adapted it for use as the motive power for the flagella. Good example of: Preconceived conclusions + scientific theory + faith ==== FACT... Would you explain your assertion? Where specifically is there indication of "preconceived conclusion" in what Bill wrote? If primary (DNA sequence), secondary (folding), and tertiary protein structures are conserved, how is that anything other than a fact? That's akin to noting the absorption band of iron porphyrin (the active molecule in hemoglobin in red blood cells); the specific nanometer (nm) wavelength of light in the UV-Vis spectrum changes depending on whether oxygen or cyanide is bonded to the iron atom not whether a Jew, Hindu, or secular humanist is observing it. Conclusions are what one makes based on conservation of structure across species. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Would you provide links to those? Is that growth rate above or below the population growth rate? For what religious sects is the observed growth? Thanks. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Max already provided the most likely answer. Unless one is privy to Israel’s current tactical munitions usage, one is not going to get a ‘more better’ answer. White phosphorus (WP) is considered an incendiary and obscurant. It is commonly used for smoke generation. Historically the US has stockpiled (& used) WP with 81mm mortars and M825 “Felt-Edge” 155mm projectiles. Use of WP specifically does not violate any international arms control agreement, e.g., it is not a chemical weapons under the CWC regardless of what some internet sites or pundits assert. There are interesting (imo) historical origins/intersections ... that don't decrease the confusion ... due to the Army's Chemical Warfare Service (before there was a Chemical Corps/74s ... iirc 74C is munitions), who were responsible historically for incendiary weapons and obscurants. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

PTSD is typically diagnosed based on symptoms, which can make it subjective (to some extent) and difficult to assign a specific underlying causal mechanism. TBI, otoh, can be physically observed, i.e., detected. If one can visually observe a case of TBI, it is often fatal, e.g., a hole in the head/crushed skull. In non-fatal cases of TBI, physical changes can (sometimes) be detected/observed using diagnostic equipment for soft tissue, e.g., something like an “Xray for the brain.” When squishy brain matters bounces off the back of the skull, there are physically observable changes such as compressed blood vessels. TBI is thought to be a causal explanation for some PTSD (not all folks with TBI manifest PTSD and not all with PTSD have TBI). Pre-emptive diagnosis is an interesting topic to me on ethical, strategic, and technical grounds. There are folks, mostly funded by the military, trying to elucidate the mechanisms that underlie cognitive deficits and other stress-induced neuropsychological consequences of combat. Part of the intent is more therapeutic, part of the intent is diagnostic, and part of the intent is development of neuropharmacological interventions to improve the cognitive performance of military personnel under combat stress, and maybe also to prevent the development of PTSD. For example, Andy Morgan at Yale is funded by the US Army (through Army Medical Command) to research cognitive changes and to identify biochemical-physiological correlates (neurochemicals, vagal tone [pronounced like “vay-gull”]) in those soldiers that respond well under stress. He and his team have also looked at the cognitive patterns and neurochemistry of soldiers who experience PTSD versus those that don’t. His long term goals are to see if treatment with DHEA or neuropeptide Y can improve cognitive resilience under combat stress and to help prevent PTSD. Few would argue that decreasing incidence of PTSD is a ‘bad thing’ or an infringement on the autonomy of personhood of soldiers, sailors, marines, or airmen. That’s a defensive, precautionary, medical application. One can also imagine less desirable implications; a potential extrapolation – which as far as I am aware no one is proposing – is using such knowledge as a screening tool. That starts to get into ethics of trying to use genetic/proteomic/metabolomic data as restrictive indicators, e.g., if your level of “X” is too low, you’re ineligible for “Y,” not unlike some of the ethical (& economic) quandaries of genetic screening. Do you want MOS to be determined by genetics (more than it already is)? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Oh my! Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Outside of the human thirst for meaning, is there any why? Good question, imo, that gets to the core of a lot of the debate and differences. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Do you mean a descriptive or physically explicative “why,” meaning, or significance? Or do you mean a motivational, intentional, or rational-acting significance? I.e., what, if I read correctly, [deibido]’s response to you is asking. I don’t understand what you mean? Do macroscale explanations extend to astronomical limits? Those “fancy theories” explain observed physical behavior of the Universe. You gave a number of examples. So, yes a lot about the Universe is explained. Historically, has the approach generally been inductive? Yes, to some extent, largely because of limitations on human and machine capabilities for processing and capacity. And what is the origin of that observation of differences between our observations and theoretical (predictive) understandings? I assert the problem is ultimately our limit of resolution and capabilities. For example, Bose-Einstein condensates (BECs) were theorized by an Indian physicist and Albert Einstein in the 1920s. Over 70 years later, Wolfgang Ketterle (MIT) and folsk at U Colorado/NIST Lab first experimentally demonstrated BECs. We didn’t change the Universe, the Universe didn’t change for us, but those theoretically-derived explanations by Bose and Einstein did describe phenomena that could not be experimentally demonstrated until long after both of their deaths. I think you’re referring to ionizing energy, yes? The general ‘why’ is electrostatics. Something like this. The specific why (on one level) is found in Schrödinger’s equations (time independent is the easiest to solve for H-atom). Depending on what you want to do (predict/explain/interpret) with that information there are other theoretical explanations (theory in the precise scientific meaning not the vernacular “speculative guess” usage) from VSEPR theory for explaining molecular geometries in covalently bonded molecules to quantum field theory (QFT) for sub-atomic behaviors. Underlying what you're asking are another couple questions that I find interesting spanning philosophy and neural science: Is it a human trait to try to find, discover, or assign meaning to things that just are? Why do we humans do that?

Yes, I think … (and very much own it as my own opinion) … that the skydiving community largely reflects the wider perspective of early 21st Century society. Yes, we lean risk-embracing relative to less risk-tolerant or outright risk-averse trends compared to the rest of the country, and we have a few other demographic leanings due to history (both of the sport & in general), which is not dissimilar to the way that West Hollywood leans pro-GLBT-embracing whereas tolerance or GLBT-averse sentiment varies across the country. But overall, the views largely reflect the wider world and the range of sentiments found therein. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

My first level analysis is that it demonstrates how domestic US politics (GOP v DEM debates/differences) are less important outside of the US. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Concur x 2. It is perhaps likely the conclusions and analysis regarding those facts to which we will differ. Why didn’t the SEC investigate? If bankers realized NINJA loans, securitizations, and other financial vehicles were problematic, does that not support the assertion that the culpability was there? The problem isn’t greed: greed is a relative ‘constant’ throughout history. The absence of oversight, the lack of tacit ability to implement, and apparent lack of consequences for those who engaged in behavior are the problem. Individual homeowners – whether a 2nd McMansion or rural poor – are experiencing consequences through loss of homes. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying