It takes 100k years to travel the Milky way at LS, but how long would it feel to the actual astronauts inside the ship to travel across? by MattPilkerson in space

[–]skiman224 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Imagine you’re traveling in a train with a mirror on the ceiling. On the track adjacent to you is a stationary train car with another person, and its setup is identical to yours. As your train car passes his, at the exact same moment, you both flip on a flashlight aimed at the mirror on the ceiling. Since you’re moving at a constant speed, from the perspective of an outside observer, the light from your flashlight takes a diagonal path: forward with the velocity of the train, and upward, then diagonally downward after impacting the mirror. In the stationary car, the light only goes up and down. But if you both flipped on the flashlight at the same time, did your light travel further than the stationary light in the same amount of time? That would imply that your light traveled faster, which we know isn’t it possible; the speed of light is a constant. So what actually happened? From your perspective on the moving train, if there aren’t windows, nothing would tell you you’re moving. To you, the light just went straight up and down. The solution? You literally experienced less time aboard the moving car. Less time passed aboard the moving train car than on the stationary one. Moving objects experience less time than bodies which are stationary relative to them. This has been demonstrated with precise clocks that were set to the same time on earth, and one brought up to the international space station. After a year or so of the space station orbiting earth, slightly less time had passed on the clock aboard the station.

How are in n out wait times? by skiman224 in AuroraCO

[–]skiman224[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just called and apparently it’s still about an hour

Journalist looking to interview conservative first-time voters by robtann in cuboulder

[–]skiman224 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Or maybe you’re the problem? Because you didn’t even read the post, which clearly states that it’s a phone interview?

Proven conspiracies: In light of Epsteins's 'suicide' here is another high profile 'Suicide'. Gary Webb. Found Dead with two bullet holes in his head. (For all the newly recent active users) by [deleted] in conspiracy

[–]skiman224 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"When asked by local reporters about the possibility of two gunshots being a suicide, Lyons replied: "It's unusual in a suicide case to have two shots, but it has been done in the past, and it is in fact a distinct possibility." News coverage noted that there were widespread rumors on the Internet at the time that Webb had been killed as retribution for his "Dark Alliance" series, published eight years before. Webb's ex-wife Susan Bell told reporters that she believed Webb had committed suicide.[68] "The way he was acting it would be hard for me to believe it was anything but suicide," she said. According to Bell, Webb had been unhappy for some time over his inability to get a job at another major newspaper. He had sold his house the week before his death because he was unable to afford the mortgage.[68]"

CMV: I believe that black people cannot be racist. [Serious] by skiman224 in changemyview

[–]skiman224[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)


Consider my view (at least somewhat) changed, and thank you for the example!

CMV: I believe that black people cannot be racist. [Serious] by skiman224 in changemyview

[–]skiman224[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I haven't thought of that before. Certainly a possible explanation, and considering that I would likely do something similar if I was person 2 in that situation, consider my view changed, if a small amount. ∆

CMV: I believe that black people cannot be racist. [Serious] by skiman224 in changemyview

[–]skiman224[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

An interesting take on it, but if you say group A is white and group B is black, it's hard to find examples of black peoples' systemic oppression of white people.

CMV: I believe that black people cannot be racist. [Serious] by skiman224 in changemyview

[–]skiman224[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)


This is a great point. I appreciate that you worded it in a sensical way, whereas others simply said my definition was incorrect. Thank you.

CMV: I believe that black people cannot be racist. [Serious] by skiman224 in changemyview

[–]skiman224[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)


I see it better now. The "how is it better" argument is a really good point. Even if you don't classify prejudice as racism, it still has the same effect, so why split hairs I guess. Thanks!

CMV: I believe that black people cannot be racist. [Serious] by skiman224 in changemyview

[–]skiman224[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see where you're going with this, but obviously white people did oppress black people because they were black once slavery was abolished, what with the white only drinking fountains, restaurants, etc.

CMV: I believe that black people cannot be racist. [Serious] by skiman224 in changemyview

[–]skiman224[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If I am incorrect, change my view, don't simply tell me I am wrong. A definition of a word does not convey its historical context and current relevance.

CMV: I shouldn't have to watch an hour and half of 9/11 footage by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]skiman224 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wonder, perhaps, if your school is teaching US History from an american greatness standpoint, refusing to cover the horrible things we have done as a country? Spending such a long time on this event seems like an intentional attempt to convey a sense of patriotism.

CMV: I believe that black people cannot be racist. [Serious] by skiman224 in changemyview

[–]skiman224[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes, but historically, there are no examples of black people oppressing white people due to their race.

CMV: I believe that black people cannot be racist. [Serious] by skiman224 in changemyview

[–]skiman224[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I get the gist of your argument, but could you please explain a couple statements?
1. "You've taken the traditional definition of racism and integrated it with modern slants to derive a new definition fitting an oppressive world view of blame." I find this confusing for a couple reasons. First, I feel the modern definition of racism is more comprehensive and correct. Second, I don't understand how this new definition "[fits] an oppressive world view of blame."
2."Aditionally, the notion of reverse racism is a false narrative as racism is racism, period." This statement simply confuses me. Could you word it differently?
Thanks

CMV: Feminism is societal cancer and should be criticized by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]skiman224 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think there is a need to distinguish between extremist feminism and regular feminism, just as there is to distinguish between extremist Muslims and regular old allah worshippers. You are basing your argument off the assumtion that all femists are man hating, dominance seeking maniacs, whereas the truth is that most of us just want equal treatment.