$1,300+ monthly payment????!!!!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
We are not, which is why I said I've given up arguing with you. I believe your professor and I are talking about one thing and you took it as another and got offended.

Not my professor, and what the professor is saying I believe is about the same as saying you could sample my DNA and (aside from the clues provided by Y-DNA and mtdna) determine with any degree of accuracy where my ancestors were in the world over 1000 years ago. It's not possible.
 
Can you refresh my memory when this occured, so I can better understand your question?
The government can't do that.

My understanding is, the First Amendment protects individuals from government censorship. Social media platforms are private companies and can censor what people post on their websites as they see fit.

Weren't there certain files released about a certain higher ups working for a certain bird having direct email talks from a certain president's administration about removing posts of individuals or "dealing with them"? Would that fall under private or government censorship?
 
Weren't there certain files released about a certain higher ups working for a certain bird having direct email talks from a certain president's administration about removing posts of individuals or "dealing with them"? Would that fall under private or government censorship?

Government censorship by proxy.

About the same way you'll get a murder rap even if you hire someone to do it for you. Same logic should apply to this situation.
 
Not my professor, and what the professor is saying I believe is about the same as saying you could sample my DNA and (aside from the clues provided by Y-DNA and mtdna) determine with any degree of accuracy where my ancestors were in the world over 1000 years ago. It's not possible.
I think if you ask geneticists they will tell you to re-ask your loaded question. I will tell you Yes it is possible and already done.

Based on what I read so far from other sources. They may already assumed you agreed but I'll list them out anyways:

1) DNA mutations are random, which means mutation happens at about the same rate regardless of where an organism is
2) DNA once mutated, will stays around as long as this DNA is passed down. Its percentage of presence in a population is determined by how many offspring this original mutation carrier (founder) have, how well suited it is for the environment, how lucky, etc.
3) Once moved out of the original location, DNA mutations continue to happen yet since the 2 populations are separated, they don't interbreed so you can assume no presence of mixing afterward.
4) You can look at how "narrow" or "wide" the distribution of each individual DNA mutation within the population to determine how old or new this mutation is (statistics).
5) Migrants carry their ancestors' DNA just like people who haven't moved, but then they change on top of it.


So, you can now tell the age of which mutation, how many you carry from which area, and you look at large samples to avoid individual noise and focus only on a big population. Yes you can determine where your ancestors were in the world over 1000 years ago. It will look Something like this:

Africa:
Y

India:
Y+C/F

China:
YC + D/N/O

Siberia:
YCNO

Middle East:
YF + I/J/G/Q/R

Europe:
YF + I/R/Q

America
YFQ
 
3) Once moved out of the original location, DNA mutations continue to happen yet since the 2 populations are separated, they don't interbreed so you can assume no presence of mixing afterward.

How can you assume or know that? Especially when dealing with humans, who are well known for moving around from place to place even when seas are in the way.
 
Weren't there certain files released about a certain higher ups working for a certain bird having direct email talks from a certain president's administration about removing posts of individuals or "dealing with them"? Would that fall under private or government censorship?
If factural and true makes me wonder why it was never challenged in court?
 
Wow this thread is way off from the title. LOL

Can you refresh my memory when this occured, so I can better understand your question?

So you only pay attention to news that agrees with your world view? There's plenty of information out there for you to sift through if you cared.
The government can't do that.

In theory you are correct, however the government can do whatever it wants as long as the people are too busy watching Real Housewives and hitting refresh every second to see what their favorite celebrity is eating today. Our forefathers were chucking tea into the bay a LONG time ago compared to where we are now. The only people up in arms now are those clamoring for MORE oppression, not less. It's a crazy world.

My understanding is, the First Amendment protects individuals from government censorship. Social media platforms are private companies and can censor what people post on their websites as they see fit.

So by your logic, I can hire a hitman to kill someone and I can not be charged for murder......because I didn't do it?

Granted, the government didn't really have to do much convincing, the people in charge at the private companies wanted to do it anyway and mostly were already with practices in place already. It was more of just the government giving them targets to add to their sweeps.

Still illegal unfortunately.

I was right there with you, happy to point out that if Facebook/Twitter/etc are so bad and horrible at blocking you, why do you use them? Social media is not a requirement to life, ask me how I know. Stop supporting them (since the customer is the product) and they will change their ways cause they like money and/or competition will spring up. But when the government starts "helping" choose targets it's over the line.

BTW - We should be outraged about anyone censoring any speech. This isn't about a bookstore asking a person ranting inside their walls about how Kindle is better to leave. These are businesses who's sole purpose and design is to exchange and express opinions and ideas. For instance, would you be ok if BITOG was encouraged to ban you because you pissed off a sponsor or a more tenured member?

Whenever someone feels it necessary to silence those with differing opinions it's a clear sign that their position is weak.
 
How can you assume or know that? Especially when dealing with humans, who are well known for moving around from place to place even when seas are in the way.
You would have to know it as a fact...like before people hopped on planes and boats one population was physically isolation from another population. It used to happen all the time.
 
Weren't there certain files released about a certain higher ups working for a certain bird having direct email talks from a certain president's administration about removing posts of individuals or "dealing with them"? Would that fall under private or government censorship?
Well, I cannot say I follow. Plus, no one ever called me a Constitutional Lawyer. Above my paygrade.
 
How can you assume or know that? Especially when dealing with humans, who are well known for moving around from place to place even when seas are in the way.
I cannot assume nobody moved around, again I can assume most people don't move around based on how far apart the populations' DNA differ across natural barriers like ocean, mountain (Himalaya), etc.

Again, we are talking about a LARGE, millions in number, population. I'm sure once in a while you will find a direct 40 generation later prince of Japan in Nigeria for real, but as a whole people in Nigeria does not have DNA mutated in Japan 1000 years ago.

Does that answer your question?
 
Wow this thread is way off from the title. LOL



So you only pay attention to news that agrees with your world view? There's plenty of information out there for you to sift through if you cared.


In theory you are correct, however the government can do whatever it wants as long as the people are too busy watching Real Housewives and hitting refresh every second to see what their favorite celebrity is eating today. Our forefathers were chucking tea into the bay a LONG time ago compared to where we are now. The only people up in arms now are those clamoring for MORE oppression, not less. It's a crazy world.



So by your logic, I can hire a hitman to kill someone and I can not be charged for murder......because I didn't do it?

Granted, the government didn't really have to do much convincing, the people in charge at the private companies wanted to do it anyway and mostly were already with practices in place already. It was more of just the government giving them targets to add to their sweeps.

Still illegal unfortunately.

I was right there with you, happy to point out that if Facebook/Twitter/etc are so bad and horrible at blocking you, why do you use them? Social media is not a requirement to life, ask me how I know. Stop supporting them (since the customer is the product) and they will change their ways cause they like money and/or competition will spring up. But when the government starts "helping" choose targets it's over the line.

BTW - We should be outraged about anyone censoring any speech. This isn't about a bookstore asking a person ranting inside their walls about how Kindle is better to leave. These are businesses who's sole purpose and design is to exchange and express opinions and ideas. For instance, would you be ok if BITOG was encouraged to ban you because you ****** off a sponsor or a more tenured member?

Whenever someone feels it necessary to silence those with differing opinions it's a clear sign that their position is weak.
Ummm...there is NO free speech on BITOG. Go post a few more swear words and see how free your speech is here. It's a private plateform and if you swear, talk about politics, religion, or CV-19 they can and will restrict that speech and we ALL AGREE TO IT when we sign up. If you come to my business you have NO right to free speech in my office. That's just a fact of the Constitution and nothing about that has changed in centuries - people just became dummer and lost any concept of what the Bill of Rights actually means. Kinda like idiots who scream HIPAA at everything - it has a very specific meaning and context.
 
I cannot assume nobody moved around, again I can assume most people don't move around based on how far apart the populations' DNA differ across natural barriers like ocean, mountain (Himalaya), etc.

Again, we are talking about a LARGE, millions in number, population. I'm sure once in a while you will find a direct 40 generation later prince of Japan in Nigeria for real, but as a whole people in Nigeria does not have DNA mutated in Japan 1000 years ago.

Does that answer your question?

Sure. One more question. What are the chances that someone who had ancestors in Japan 1000 years ago, but whose more recent ancestry going back 400-500 years is mixed with various European populations, would actually still carry DNA mutated in Japan?

Also, could you give me an example of some SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms aka mutations) that are known to have originated in Japan?
 
Wow this thread is way off from the title. LOL



So you only pay attention to news that agrees with your world view? There's plenty of information out there for you to sift through if you cared.


In theory you are correct, however the government can do whatever it wants as long as the people are too busy watching Real Housewives and hitting refresh every second to see what their favorite celebrity is eating today. Our forefathers were chucking tea into the bay a LONG time ago compared to where we are now. The only people up in arms now are those clamoring for MORE oppression, not less. It's a crazy world.



So by your logic, I can hire a hitman to kill someone and I can not be charged for murder......because I didn't do it?

Granted, the government didn't really have to do much convincing, the people in charge at the private companies wanted to do it anyway and mostly were already with practices in place already. It was more of just the government giving them targets to add to their sweeps.

Still illegal unfortunately.

I was right there with you, happy to point out that if Facebook/Twitter/etc are so bad and horrible at blocking you, why do you use them? Social media is not a requirement to life, ask me how I know. Stop supporting them (since the customer is the product) and they will change their ways cause they like money and/or competition will spring up. But when the government starts "helping" choose targets it's over the line.

BTW - We should be outraged about anyone censoring any speech. This isn't about a bookstore asking a person ranting inside their walls about how Kindle is better to leave. These are businesses who's sole purpose and design is to exchange and express opinions and ideas. For instance, would you be ok if BITOG was encouraged to ban you because you ****** off a sponsor or a more tenured member?

Whenever someone feels it necessary to silence those with differing opinions it's a clear sign that their position is weak.
No, most people consider me pretty open minded and accepting of others and their beliefs, whether I agree with them or not.

Are you actually comparing murder for hire with free speech?

I do not know what your example is speaking to; I am not a mind reader.

Are you suggesting I am trying to silence someone?
 
Sure. One more question. What are the chances that someone who had ancestors in Japan 1000 years ago, but whose more recent ancestry going back 400-500 years is mixed with various European populations, would actually still carry DNA mutated in Japan?
If it is just one guy, maybe 1/(2 to the power of 40) assuming 40 generations per 1000 years.

If we are talking about a large population migration (say 1M in today's standard or maybe 10000 in thousands of years ago), then it would be 100%. We already have an example called N gene marker. Scandanavians have East / North East Asian genes and supposedly about 6% of their DNA as a whole is from Asia.

Think in terms of population, not individual
 
What's it matter to you? Why do you care? Or anyone else other than the ones attending?

Personally I think its kind of silly, both the separate events, and the reporting of it... But its none of my concern, it has no effect on your personal freedoms, you are free to dislike it but I don't know why so many people like to get into other people's personal business?

If everyone just respected everyone else's right to be who they are, and kept their opinions and judgements to themselves, these groups probably wouldn't feel the need to hold a separate event. This idea probably started when some jerk who used their free speech to heckle people at previous graduation...
So just stick your head in the sand, and keep it there until it affects you.
 
If it is just one guy, maybe 1/(2 to the power of 40) assuming 40 generations per 1000 years.

Not very likely. So unless that guy had a whole bunch of other guys in the same population to compare him with, you aren't likely going to be able to figure out where his ancestors were 1000 years ago.

And if that guy is a product of the USA melting pot with recent ancestry from different countries, you don't have others in the same population to compare him with.

If we are talking about a large population migration (say 1M in today's standard or maybe 10000 in thousands of years ago), then it would be 100%. We already have an example called N gene markers. Scandanavians have East / North East Asian genes and supposedly about 6% of their DNA is from Asia.

I read that Finns were more Asian than were Scandinavians. But Scandinavians often have Finnish ancestry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top