Comments by "Jim Mcneal" (@jimmcneal5292) on "Thoughty2" channel.

After even a brief googling this fluid/crystallized intelligence theory seems crude at best and faulty at worst
6
@kirstypollock6811 That's because that idea is faulty. You probably learned something you entire life, keeping your brain fit
4
It's nice to demonstrate people your superior intellectual abilities
3
Aside from wormholes, warp drive concept exists. And it's possible with reasonable amount of energy and technology to make negative energy density. My personal assessment is that possibility of creating working wapr drive prototype until 2500 is 80% and until 2600 is 95%. A possibility of successful interstellar program to send anaerobic bacteria to terraform closest suitable exoplanets(6 flights) that will cost not more than moon program by 2500 is 99%.
2
You all just have a wrong criteria for winning an argument. Of course you almost never gonna make opponent admit his defeat, and rarely make him change his mind. But you can make him loop(start to repeat arguments you already rebuffed) or insist on logically or factually false statements. When this happens I consider debate being won by me.
2
4-5 billions birds every year? Sounds like overstatement.
1
@ptrinch If I remember correctly at least IQ follows normal distribution, making median and average equal
1
@mainios126bobeats4 x>x is always defined in first-order logic. Its value is either "true" or "false" depending on if order is non-strict or strict respectively.
1
@mainios126bobeats4 Impossible if "<" is a strict order. True by definition if "<" is non-strict order. Strict order -- homogenous relation P on a set A that satisfies: 1)NOT a<a 2)if a<b then NOT b<a 3)if a<b and b<c then a<c Non-strict order -- homogenous relation Q on a set A that satisfies: 1)a<a 2)if a<b and b<a then b=a 3)if a<b and b<c then a<c Simple examples of strict and non-strict orders would be "<"(less) and "<="(less or equal) on a sets of natural, integer and rational numbers respectively.
1