All I see out there are gay rights, trans rights, whatever parades.
And people actually show up. like wth. given that it’s 5% population max.

Because the playbook to destroy democracies has already been written. You don’t destroy a democratic nation by attacking it, you destroy it by getting it to attack itself.

Fascist know that if they can just turn the majority against a specific minority, then they have a foot in the door. You can’t uninvite the vampire from your home, once you let them have their way with the minority, the rules have changed, and those rules will eventually be changed for everyone.

If you protect the neediest minority group that protection extends to everyone. If we ignore that need, then it’s only a matter of time before everyone needs that protection.

I’m not saying that we shouldn’t have workers rights parades. I’m saying that gay rights and trans rights are workers rights parades, because they are our fellow workers. I think a lot of modern leftist groups think of minority rights as vestigial or as a distraction. When in reality every trans rights parade should be protected by a sea of factory workers willing to stomp on some fascist for attacking the solidarity or the working class.

A little less so when the main consequence 1/20 people face is something like dry eyes.

I think you can experience some humbling events, but teaching people to be humble isn’t exactly the goal of any of the martial arts. Lots of people just end up learning how to be more effective at violence. I used to do some amateur boxing, and I wouldn’t really claim a lot of the guys I boxed with to be especially humble. Lots of contact sports has a lot of ego involved in it.

think a role model of positive masculinity is a good place to start.

Right, but what about being a judo instructor makes you automatically a positive masculine role model? Steven Seagal instructs aikido an even less aggressive martial arts and he’s a giant piece of shit.

Lol, could you imagine the type of journalist the DNC would give 20m to?

Yeah… I don’t really think anyone really cares about anyone’s education anymore, at least not past your first employer.

I have to spend a lot of time teaching people in their residencies at my job, and where they went school doesn’t really bring anything to the table. In fact, a lot of the people who went to fancy private medical schools were either overwhelmed by having to talk to our impoverished patient population, or didn’t ever develop healthy ways to mitigate interpersonal conflict.

And I imagine Joe Rogan didn’t start his career by immediately getting ripped and doing steroids.

I just don’t really think something as simple as taking judo classes is really going to do much to tackle a problem that likely started at the socioeconomic scale.

A large part of conservative propaganda is telling individuals that cleaning their room or working out will solve their problems. When in reality the problems are much more complex and likely systemic in nature.

According to what other people posted, my argument seems to be correct. The benefits of extra rotation does not overcome the negative effects of adding additional weight and drag.

"According to the British War Office, the stielhandgranate had a throwing distance of up to 27m while standing, compared to the 35m distance of the more modern and still used M67. Which weighs 30% less and take up 75% less space lengthwise. Even the Mk2( classic pineapple design) reached 30m despite weghing the same as the German one, because it was denser and more aerodynamic.

EDIT: For anyone curious, the ideal shape among those used and weight for distance and accuray is apparently round and ~300g. Reaching a distance of (38.6±6.5 m) and an accuracy of of (6.9±3.9 m).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2005.06.008"

Lol, there’s already an obsession with martial arts in America. I don’t think having more people with Joe Rogan brain running around is going to help anyone.

Eh, the extra momentum probably doesn’t overcome the extra weight and drag created by the handle. People are comparing it to an atlatl, but you’re throwing an aerodynamic object with the atlatl, not the atlatl along with the spear.

More than likely the biggest reason is just logistics, extra weight, extra space, additional steps in fabrication.

Hey, I’m a provider at a hospital who uses MyChart everyday and would like to offer perspective from the other side.

because it’s showing in MyChart as a former address but I’m not sure other places have the information. The problem is the address is associated with that psychiatric facility and may show in my chart as “Mental Health Behavior Modification Hospital,”

In Mychart I’m sure it stores previous addresses somewhere, but I have no idea where I would even find this information, and can basically guarantee no one else is going to be looking for it.

so doctors may refuse to treat me without a release of those records, leading to lots of hours billed talking about mental health instead of seeing if I have cancer.

Part of HIPPA is that we can only access information that is pertinent to your current treatment as a provider. A specialist like someone who works at a cancer clinic would have no reason to access or question you about a previous treatment in a mental health facility unless you have something like a brain tumor.

Also in MyCharts certain notes containing sensitive information like metal health treatment or sexual assault are usually automatically locked out unless additional consent is given by patients, or unless it is directly associated with the current providers treatment plan.

leading to lots of hours billed talking about mental health instead of seeing if I have cancer.

Healthcare visits are not reimbursed by time, but by visit type. It doesn’t matter if I spend 10 min or an hour with a patient. If the visit type is for a specific treatment they are reimbursed at the same rate. The affordable care act highly regulated how facilities are reimbursed for care, wether they are insured or lack coverage. And for the most part providers at hospitals have little to no control on how the hospital charges patients.

I also will refuse any mental health screenings/questionnaires, etc., and so it may result in them refusing to care for me.

I haven’t really heard of anyone refusing care because someone didn’t fill out a mental health screening. I specialize in orthopedics and rehabilitation, so that’s not exactly pertinent to my field. But we have people who refuse to fill out paperwork all the time, and i don’t really care unless it’s pertinent to my current treatment plan.

For me to refuse my services the hospital requires me to have a really good reason why, like attempting to assault me or the staff.

If someone asks you about your previous treatment at the facility and it has nothing to do with your current appointment, I would just ask them how it pertains to your current visit. If they try and make a big deal about it, I would just ask for their manager, and ask them why the provider asked about sensitive information that doesn’t have anything to do with your current treatment.

It’s polite etiquette to mention what you’re quoting.

It’s obviously a common definition of IQ… It doesn’t really matter where it’s from as it shows that general definitions of IQ claim it’s a test of generalized intellect.

Your quote doesn’t really refute my argument, or clarify what claim you are making?

An intelligence quotient (IQ) is a total score derived from a set of standardized tests or subtests designed to assess human intelligence.[1]

What exactly are you claiming? That it’s not a test to measure intellect? That IQ is pseudoscience? Or that it’s not specifically generalized intellect?

IQ is not a measurement of human intellect in general.

I don’t think there’s a scientific consensus of what IQ really measures.

Regarding correlation with success, I should have specified that the correlation still exists even when controlling for birth environment.

I would say that would be extremely difficult to definitively prove. IQ is more of a social study than a hard science, typically this kinda data is more suggestive than it is definite.

Never studied for them, they seemed like mostly simple pattern recognition and general logic questions, which I’ve never really thought you could even study for.

There are a few different tests that are supposed to clinically measure IQ. Most of them are more complex than pattern recognition and most all of them are administered by some sort of clinician, which can also influence outcomes.

But general intellect, as far as I can tell (and maybe my understanding of it is wrong), is what influences your ability to shift to a new field and gain expertise in that. Years alone don’t cut it. In my own field, I’ve seen software engineers who can’t program for shit, let alone make any architectural decisions after a decade - and ones that are pretty competent after 2-3 years.

I would say that the ability to gain expertise is generally hard to differentiate with the motivation to gain expertise. What we can empirically prove is that time spent practicing a skill is how we gain expertise in most any skill.

In fact, it’s more like ranges of aptitudes. I have great aptitude for STEM, pretty decent aptitude for languages, and absolutely none for arts. No drawing, no singing, etc. No matter how much practice I get and how much practice I got in my childhood.

It could be that you just perceive yourself being at being better at stem because you enjoy practicing the skills required for stem. People generally gain experience faster in skill sets they enjoy or skills they perceive thems to excel at.

There’s just skills I won’t learn in 10 years of practice, and skills I pick up rapidly, and it’s been that way since childhood.

Again, this could be self fulfilling process. If you don’t think you will excel at something you may not fully engage in the process, or even self sabotage the process.

think IQ in particular unfairly prioritizes understanding of language and logic, over artful skills and, e.g emotional intelligence (which is measured by EQ I guess).

I think for this to be true your claim would have to be that emotional intellect is devoid of logic or language…which seems fairly self evidently incorrect.

My main point that I wanted to make was that some people are naturally more gifted, and just faster learners, than others.

Or people are better at learning things they are self motivated to learn about, and that society influences what skills we find valuable or “intellectual”.

In short, what we can empirically prove about intellect is usually environmental in nature, and what we can only theorize about heritability cannot be differentiated from other variabilities that may correlate with that theory.

I’m not generally interested in comparing IQ results between countries or even for people of differing first language though so these don’t especially concern me so long as I can be sure a study averts the issue.

My point is the variability between test groups calls into question the reliability of IQ as a concept as a whole. If IQ is an innate measurement of intellect for humans in general, then the reliability of the test shouldn’t be culturally constrained.

for instance, it correlates well with success (level of education (eventually) reached, or $ in a capitalist society) and I’d be surprised to find any major journal publishing a paper which disputes that.

Yes, but I could make the same claim about a plethora of other correlations with more confidence like having wealthy parents.

Wait, do people actually study for IQ tests? Why?

The same reason mensa is a thing. People like to toot their own horn.

reckon general intellect does matter. In a world where your job might not exist in 5 years because lol AI, it’s best to be able to adapt fast. Specialize, yes, but one day your specialization will be useless. Best case scenario, it’s after you’ve retired.

To a certain extent yes, but no one can be an expert at everything. There just isn’t enough time, and expertise is really what society rewards people for at the end of the day.

And going back to heritability, there’s definitely some heritability there

I would say that would be incredibly hard to empirically prove due to the problems you mentioned. At best we could speculate that heritability may be an influence, but that influence is vastly overshadowed by environmental factors.

This article does a pretty decent job pointing out some of the variabilities that make IQ test unreliable. Tbh I think the concept of IQ is fruit from the poisoned tree. There are so many people that stake their positions and identities on the efficacy of IQ that the whole data pool is kinda poisoned. For every study that makes a claim, there are other studies rebutting it.

And can you link me to the language thing? When I look up language, I’m just seeing correlation between language proficiency and IQ, which shouldn’t be surprising – I would imagine that people who measure a higher IQ are better at learning languages.

I would have to search for it, i originally read about it when I was in college over a decade ago. Basically the claim was that the vast majority of the tests originate or are interpreted from English or another western language. When certain aspects of the test are interpreted to a different language the sentence structure is modified in a way where it adds an additional barrier for the test taker.

This may be somewhat solved by the different language speakers creating their own test, but that may not overcome the problem due to the need for global standardization, orit may be a barrier to language speakers who’s cultures haven’t invested the time or resources to the idea of IQ to begin with.

I mean, the validity of IQ tests in general should be questioned when the largest variability in scoring is if you’ve previously studied for an IQ test followed by what language you speak.

Philosophically I don’t really think there’s a uniform agreement on what exactly defines general intellect, or if that general intellect even matters considering were a species that relies on specialization.

As far as heritability, I imagine that would be a horribly difficult topic to actually get enough research to rule out variables like socioeconomics and cultural differences. I mean I doubt there’s that many twin studies to establish the efficacy any particular theory.

You were the one making accusations about me specifically. Now that your argument completely fell apart, you were talking about someone else? What a fucking loser, go kick rocks.