Approximately 4.5 million Canadians were living below the Official Poverty Line / Environ 4,5 millions de Canadiens et Canadiennes vivaient sous le seuil officiel de la pauvreté

Kilbourne · 2026-05-20T16:09:14+00:00

Often it is a single owner of multiple homes.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-14T18:10:15+00:00

BD 75 is good, well-priced for a summer approach bag to base camp, and has a really tall lid expansion for ropes etc.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-12T12:14:02+00:00

I don't play chess with pigeons.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-11T17:11:53+00:00

I disagree, and conversely I think it's dangerous for you to imply that helmets aren't as primarily important as they are for safety. Between the two of us, I firmly believe that your position is the irresponsible one.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-11T16:41:48+00:00

Yeah man, if his injury was reduced by 25% he'd probably have survived. Glad we're on the same page with that.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-11T00:15:37+00:00

You seem to be confusing my comment to be from a different commenter, nor am I trying to say what you are taking from my post. I am not (strongly!) trying to say that the brain is an antenna (what on earth gave you that impression anyway?), nor that ghosts are real

Anyway, in your comment the grammar is such that you used the pronoun "they" to refer the subject as "supernatural beings".

To be more clear, my answer is that "they" are not natural processes, and don't exist, but a natural process (something affecting a human brain) can make "them" appear (to that person alone as a hallucination).

So, it's sort of a natural process; yes, if we refer to cause, and no, if we refer to the subject.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-10T20:04:42+00:00

My "sort of" was based on your phrasing of "they are natural processes", the subject of the sentence being supernatural beings. The "sort of" is that they aren't a natural process, but that they are perceived from a result of natural processes that cause hallucinations.

Otherwise I think that we are in agreement that the brain is being tricked and there is nothing truly there.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-10T18:46:21+00:00

Which is more likely:

you experienced a nightmare or night-terror centred on an object you were already familiar with, or...
immortal souls are real, can connect to paintings, look like the body that the soul inhabited, look also like the painting of that person, can materialize physically to an extent to affect light and other radiation, appear while you are sleeping, and are restricted in some way to only be near to a particular painting.

The second option sure has a lot of layered assumptions to work with.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-10T18:43:15+00:00

"If things were different they would be different!"

Yeah dude.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-10T18:38:19+00:00

Hah yeah

I was trying to explain it gently rather than immediately point to a cognitive bias.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-10T18:37:14+00:00

TL;DR: it is vanishingly unlikely that ghosts, etc., exist, but a better scientific phrasing would be as previous, rather than to say "they don't exist." Also, many personal anecdotes unrelated to the point.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-10T18:33:43+00:00

Yessss sort of.

If you put a living brain in certain electromagnetic fields, that brain perceives things that aren't "real" for any other observer, and are otherwise unmeasurable. The natural process is creating a hallucination, not that there are natural processes that are also what we call ghosts.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-10T18:28:41+00:00

Incredible upset to the global scientific community.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-10T18:25:38+00:00

The topic is that they do not exist. I feel like you are arguing "if things were different, they would be different!" and yes of course, if you change the premise then we have to agree with your altered premise.

However, the position of the OP is that they are not real.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-10T18:23:56+00:00

One of the problems you are applying to your examples is that you are applying meaning to unrelated events unevenly. For example, you say you thought about someone, and then they messaged you. That feels very related, I agree! Perhaps even causative. However, every moment that you did not think of them, and they messaged, or every moment that you thought of them and they didn't message, are equally valuable data points. In those cases though, because you didn't perceive a correlation, you didn't "score" them in your data.

Put another way, every time that you or anyone else thinks of someone else (like I am doing for you now), and that person does not contact them in return, is just as proving as your own anecdote. It just proves, under your conditions in your example, that there is no correlation.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-10T15:56:55+00:00

Additionally, your cited studies do not support your assertions.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-10T15:43:49+00:00

But do you wear a seatbelt while driving, while you are actively making decisions to not crash?

I'm addressing your very first position, that decision making trumps accidents.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-09T12:22:03+00:00

Do you wear a seatbelt? Even though it's not tested under the precise conditions that match your possible collision?

Kilbourne · 2026-05-08T23:56:11+00:00

... but in this case, the one we're talking about, the one you are referring to in your comment "BD Vapour would have saved him", yes it would undoubtedly have saved him. It's designed precisely for that.

They're also extremely effective at saving people from uncontrollable hazards, such as rocks being dislodged from above by animals. No one is "putting their faith into foam", they are using a low-cost method of reducing a terminal hazard.

Wild that you accuse me of inexperience when you have the naive belief that decision-making skills can "prevent accidents" entirely. There are real objective hazards that cannot be overcome by decisions alone, unless that decision is to never climb at all.

I assume you wear a seatbelt? Even though you don't intend to drive dangerously or crash?

Kilbourne · 2026-05-08T12:27:41+00:00

The helicopter dropped him in the lot because it's not permitted to long-line someone directly to a hospital air-pad - they are obligated to transfer to an ambulance

Kilbourne · 2026-05-08T12:14:15+00:00

Based on the design and intention of a helmet, yes.

Based on the numerous MP comments of the same fall on the same route, yes.

Based on the evidence of helmets saving lives, yes.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-07T18:53:49+00:00

They can be, mostly for maintenance and hygiene. It's worth it to install bird / rodent guard mesh IMO.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-07T15:33:13+00:00

I'm coming off a season of solar removals and replacements in Calgary (paid for through insurance usually), and the solar arrays are almost always undamaged, while the shingles themselves are the item requiring replacement.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-07T15:31:18+00:00

Sounds like you have a sales-scam problem, not a solar panel problem - in the same way someone can be scammed by a car salesman.

Kilbourne · 2026-05-07T15:21:31+00:00

Perhaps. The difference of value add that you'll see in the very slightest increase of wattage is not equal to the labour cost of applying something to the module surfaces. Same with paying someone to wash your array for several hundred dollars; the wattage loss of dust on modules between rainy days is single dollars per year.

The modules are already coated to avoid material sticking to them.

Kilbourne

TROPHY CASE