🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@deadheat

children getting hormone therapy to transition at a young age is a tricky problem. While i understand of course the concerns the other side is that if a person doesnt transition at a young age then they simply can not transition fully. Full natural breast development will only occur if you do so at the early stages of puberty, when dont later in life you are likely to not see any or very minimal breast growth.

So in a way its one of those things that if you are going to do it, and if the choice would make you happier and thus worth doing (two very big ifs) then it needs to be done at an early age.

@icedquinn @meowski @crunklord420 @fluffy @SystemSock

@icedquinn if the class is more than 15 minutes long its going to be nothing but noise.

@icedquinn

So much for "my body my choice".. if someone makes a choice they regret (and im sure thats common) that should be up to them IMO

@meowski @crunklord420 @fluffy @SystemSock

@AusOcean if you think about it because there is no need for an airspace and can be filled with any non-conductive liquid and thus be capable of any depth it really becomes rather trivial. Its only human subs where we need air pockets where depth is a challenge.

@meowski

sure

@SystemSock @icedquinn @crunklord420 @fluffy

@meowski

Great, ill put you back on mute then. Knew it was a mistake to unmute you. But hey, always happy to give someone a second, third or fourth try at making sense...

@SystemSock @icedquinn @crunklord420 @fluffy

@meowski

I see your reading comprehension is still pretty poor. the whole thing addresses exactly why he is wrong. Points i mentioned not being appeal to authority:

1) low hanging fruit fallacy
2) McNamara Fallacy
3) Fallacy of the Heap
4) Circular reasoning fallacy

All of which were addressed in my response to his write up and some addressed prior to sharing it (which we covered ad nauseum)...

Only after a mountain of logical fallacies do I rely on his **demonstrated abilities** that is not an appeal to authority, it is subtly but important in the difference. An appeal to authority relies on someone simply being in authority to weigh their argument as superior. In my case I'm using a persons demonstrated success in applying their arguments as the metric for relying on their arguments.

If a surgeon doing surgery argues for a technique and has shown by working in the field the success of that technique and i rely on their arguments more so than someone who has never done surgery a day in their life that isnt an appeal to authority, it is appealing to what has been demonstrably proven, big difference.

@SystemSock @icedquinn @crunklord420 @fluffy

@crunklord420

Sorry but giving more credibilityt o someone who has **demonstrated** they can accomplish things over someone who has demonstrated they cant is not just acceptable, its really the only sane approach.

Remember im not assigning credibility because of a degree, or letters on ones names. If someone is the fastest runner in the world im going to take their advice on how to be a good runner over someone who is the one of the slowest, to argue that isnt a good thing is absurd to say the least.

If you literally have proven your good at something then if you say something and someone who isnt good at that same thing says your wrong, you'd be a fool to not listen tot he person good at the subject they are talking about. it would demonstrate a lack of intelligence.

As for critical thinking, I already addressed critically **why** the person was wrong outside of simply never accomplishing a single thing in his field, so your still just trying to trigger people because you want everyone to be as triggered as you are all the time for some reason.

@icedquinn @meowski @fluffy @SystemSock

@meowski

I Read it, the issue isnt appeal to authority, the issue is that the hundreds if not thousands of peer reviewed studies that disagree with him were done with more rigour, more detail, and make a far more
convincing case.

I already covered this with before reading the article but for starters, as an example, he is focusing on **only** the most fringe value. Intersexed figured published are hardly consistently published at 1.7%, it caries with the metric used for intersex which has to be arbitrary because of the fact that sex is a continuous distribution and not discrete, you set. So right off the bat it goes with the lowest hanging fruit, which really does nothing to progress the argument. Just as there is no temperature that strictly draws the line between hot and not-hot there is no line where we could state something is or isnt intersex. The absurdity with this author is to think that they can even claim "that is not intersex" at al, spectrums dont work that way.

In short he literally assumes his own particular fantasy, contrary to the generally accepted science, is correct, and that sex is discrete, and then argues that backwards to show why intersex figures cant be valid.

The next thing we should do if we are even to consider his opinion at all is look at has this guy actually accomplished anything in the field. We construct these ideas because they are useful in the field, not for schmucks to argue arbitrarily why their prejudices must be true.. So biologists who have actually advanced biology in some way in the past through discovery or the creation of systems that are efficacious to an ends obviously are going to create frameworks (which is what we are really doing here) that are useful to society, people who dont are just hot air.

When reviewing Colin Wrights history he doesn't seem to actually work as a biologist at all.. he spends all his time as an arm-chair biologist.. talking, and trying to sell fringe ideas, usually around some prejudice, and doing nothing to show how they are useful in the field, applying it, or doing any research of any kind. In short, his credentials and accomplishments dont lend him much credibility compared to the existing frameworks scientist who actually apply it to doing science are coming up with. This further shows his unique w2ay of thinking is little more than mental masterbation.

@crunklord420 @SystemSock @fluffy @icedquinn

@lucifargundam I had a boss once who treated me like a son too, he beat me, talked down to me, cheated me out of paychecks, but occasionally told me I was his favorite... felt like family.

@lucifargundam fair

@IAmAWarCrime yea he has great stuff all around. A bit dated but still cool and useful.

@rebel_luddite@social.linux.pizza Lexa Doig was the doctor in later episodes of SG-1 too, she is Mike Shanks wife

@inexcode

"Block instances who defederated with good actors"

Now thats an interesting policy. I need to think about it but I might like it...

is pi ^ pi ^ pi ^ pi an integer? maybe

https://youtu.be/BdHFLfv-ThQ

Would it be inappropriate to use this video in an email to one's boss to explain why you cant go to work today?

https://youtu.be/CKjaFG4YN6g

It cannot be unheard.

https://youtu.be/-tUYvOC6nzU

@funny

@aspie4K You have to buy an addon for 100$ and your good

@mur2501

Not to sure to be honest. But I can say when i was electrocuting random things at one point I picked up a credit card and started zapping hte security chip with it. Being made of plastic i held it with my other hand not thinking it would/could zap me (not realized it had a large NFC antenna inside covering most of the size of the card.. needless to say i got a nasty jolt, indirect however thanks to the plastic and it was not mild to say the least.

when i repeated the "experiment" this time not holding the card and zapped it sparks flew out of all the sides of the credit card, so not surprising i got a nasty zap.

@trinsec