Page 320 of 334

Re: Update Update

Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 1:17 am
by Donn
It would be interesting to know what they base that on, to arrive at a definition that varies that much from the others. It's possible to imagine you could reasonably use the term if, for example, you wore a turban and someone took offense, and in that case the xenophobia would be applied to a thing and not a person. But if I claimed to hate palm trees or walruses because they're weird, it would be absurd to call that "xenophobia", even though they're strange and foreign to the area I've lived in most of my life.

In any case, that isn't "fear of the unknown." Merriam-Webster's definition is questionable, but that usage would at worst likely occur in a context where it could be understood. Use it to mean "fear of the unknown", and expect to be misunderstood.

Re: Update Update

Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 6:23 am
by Ken Herrick
Watch out - the trifids will get you.

Re: Update Update

Posted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 10:57 am
by Donn
Just trying to be helpful. Language serves us best when we use words to mean what others understand them to mean.

This is really an open and shut case. There are a couple where I'm somewhat crosswise to common usage. For example, "jealous", where it's easy to find dictionary support for usage synonymous with "envious", but the language would be more expressive if we reserved it for the meaning where it has no synonym. Where if you're jealous of your sweetie, it does not mean that you would like to enjoy the attention she's getting from that other fellow - that's envious, almost the opposite of jealous. Since envious and jealous thus have nearly opposite meanings, and we have no other word for that meaning of jealous, it seems to debase the language somewhat to use "jealous" for everything, as most people seem to.

Or "beg the question", which has a rather esoteric meaning that no one would guess from the words.

I will give MacMillan credit for a less than usually absurd definition of "espresso." Many dictionaries have a definition that talks about "forcing steam through ground coffee beans", which is absolutely false. MacMillan says "a small cup of very strong coffee, or this type of coffee", which is (like their definition of "xenophobia") too general to be correct, but not false. Espresso is the result of a brief extraction in hot water, at higher than ambient pressure. The common definition gets the "forcing" right, but misses the boat with "steam" - steam forced through is not going to give you a cup of anything. You can make coffee very strong in for example a French press, and pour it into a small cup, but whatever MacMillan says, that isn't espresso. MacMillan seems to be providing explanations that aren't really definitions, in both these cases - you could use their "definition" to understand an instance of correct usage, but as a guide to correct usage it fails. Dislike of walruses is not xenophobia.

(The "trifids" crack reminds us that xenophobia also applies to beings of extraterrestrial origin. It isn't really necessary that such a being be present in reality - a fictional extraterrestrial being can be an object of xenophobia, for the reader or viewer of the work of fiction. [edit] And perhaps should also remind us that the definition mentions "irrational", which might not apply in the "trifid" case though it has been a long time since I read that. It arguably isn't xenophobic to object to being preyed on.[/edit])

Re: Update Update

Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 12:57 pm
by gwwilk
bloke wrote:
Just trying to be helpful.
:lol: by trolling the rest of us
Language serves us best when we use words to mean what others understand them to mean.
...particularly when words are repurposed to point towards a narrative or agenda, correct?
Orwellian Newspeak vs. English completely reminds me of English vs. Americans: two countries ~separated~ by a common language. :|
This is really an open and shut case.
Yes, "open and shut" - just as with the the abuse of the words, "settled" and "consensus", as they are so often shoehorned into "science", whereas genuine/no-agenda scientists would eschew those words, as that have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the Scientific Method.

In these post-Orwellian days, "clarity" and "propaganda" have become synonyms - just as have "agree" and "or else", and "disagree with me" and "hate", haven't they?

Image
English is fortunately, and unfortunately, a living language. Therefore words are protean depending upon their usage. Unfortunately the media have co-opted our agenda(s) and terminology, so whatever they deem 'proper usage' becomes the de facto lexicon. Bloke has it right! Ignoring the constant leftist media drumbeat is the only way I can see to remain sane amidst all of the insanity they depict as 'normal'. (BTW, there is no such thing as 'Normal'. Statistically an average or mean, along with median and mode, have a precise definition. 'Average' when used as the average man in the street, is meaningless because it has no universally applicable definition and is population/place/time etc. dependent. Using the term 'Normal' contains an implicitly biased viewpoint as does using the term 'Average' in anything but a precise statistical context.)

Re: Update Update

Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2019 5:15 pm
by umlaut_kraut
Wow. Isn't it amazing what can of worms one can open by asking a seemingly simple question? :oops:

FWIW, a cousin of my mother's was a resident of Duluth, MN. Sadly, I never got to go there in his lifetime.

Re: Update Update

Posted: Fri Jul 05, 2019 10:14 pm
by TheTuba
bloke wrote:asking for a friend:
Does Allstate Insurance hire out that "Mayhem" guy for subcontract work?
No, but it never hurts to ask with an extra wad of cash!

Re: Update Update

Posted: Sun Jul 07, 2019 11:02 am
by Three Valves
gwwilk wrote: (BTW, there is no such thing as 'Normal'. Statistically an average or mean, along with median and mode, have a precise definition. 'Average' when used as the average man in the street, is meaningless because it has no universally applicable definition and is population/place/time etc. dependent. Using the term 'Normal' contains an implicitly biased viewpoint as does using the term 'Average' in anything but a precise statistical context.)
I see you are a contributor to my favorite on line resource, The Urban Dictionary!!

Normal; A word made up by this corrupt society so they could single out and attack those who are different
Normal is nothing but a word made up by society.

:lol:

Re: Update Update

Posted: Sun Jul 07, 2019 12:42 pm
by Donn
(BTW, there is no such thing as 'Normal'. Statistically an average or mean, along with median and mode, have a precise definition. 'Average' when used as the average man in the street, is meaningless because it has no universally applicable definition and is population/place/time etc. dependent. Using the term 'Normal' contains an implicitly biased viewpoint as does using the term 'Average' in anything but a precise statistical context.)
When used outside that context of statistical science, the meaning of average isn't statistically scientific, that's for sure.

The etymology is interesting - according to what I'm reading, it's from a standard used to split the liability for shipping damages, at sea, between the owner of the vessel and the owner of the goods. As I'm read it, the original owner, not the recipient. So that guy on ebay and UPS split the tuba damages according to some formula, referred to in French as "avarie".

At any rate, it isn't like this is a term invented by statistical scientists that has been smuggled into common usage, it already had other meanings by the time it acquired that definition. There's a lot of room between "not precise enough for scientific purposes" and "meaningless."

As for "normal" ... Let's say we looked through someone's tuba book, and included in there was the piccolo part for Stars and Stripes Forever. I don't have the widest exposure to all tuba repertoire, but my guess is that anyone looking at this would agree, that's not a "normal" tuba part. QED

Re: Update Update

Posted: Sun Jul 07, 2019 8:35 pm
by alfredr
Bumper sticker I saw once, "A normal person is just someone you don't know very well."

Re: Update Update

Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:24 pm
by Three Valves
H Ross Perot died today.

I didn’t vote for him, but he was right about one thing, at least.

That giant sucking sound was your job moving to Mexico!!

In the end, one Global elitist was replaced with another Global elitist.

Thanks for the heads up, Ross!!

Re: Update Update

Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2019 9:25 pm
by bort
Anyone know when the women's world cup starts?

Re: Update Update

Posted: Tue Jul 09, 2019 11:41 pm
by Ken Herrick
bort wrote:Anyone know when the women's world cup starts?
In about 4 years.

Re: Update Update

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:33 am
by humBell
Ken Herrick wrote:
bort wrote:Anyone know when the women's world cup starts?
In about 4 years.
Took a moment to look up what happened last time.

Sad i wasn't paying attention. Might have enjoyed it.

Re: Update Update

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 8:57 am
by scottw
Doubt it!

Re: Update Update

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 4:01 pm
by bisontuba
Nice!

Re: Update Update

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 5:20 pm
by bort
Minneapolis temperature is 75 degrees, feels like 73 degrees.

"Summer"

Re: Update Update

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 5:47 pm
by Donn
Actually, it's about a fairly simple physical phenomenon. From your weather experts:
WeatherWorks wrote:The heat index utilizes temperature and dewpoint (or relative humidity) to determine how hot the body perceives the environment. Because the body cools down through the evaporation of sweat, moist air will not allow evaporation as readily as dry air. So, in turn, the body will feel hotter on days with higher dewpoint values.
Image

I see Memphis weather says 92° with 78° dewpoint, which is getting into what they consider the "danger" zone - danger of heatstroke etc. Minneapolis 75° with a 68° dewpoint. Tucson is 108°, but a super dry 36° dewpoint makes it, well - "it's a dry heat." If anything less danger of heat exhaustion than Memphis, though 16° hotter on the thermometer.

Re: Update Update

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 6:08 pm
by Three Valves
Yeah, I mean, what’s the point.

Say you work outside at a REAL job.

It’s 95 but it feels like 101. Better to slow down a little and drink plenty of water.

Wait, what?? Oh, it’s 94 but feels like 103!! Better to slow down a little and drink plenty of water... :roll:

Re: Update Update

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 6:10 pm
by Three Valves
Oh, and nice tomatoes!! My GMO’d sweet white corn is ready too :tuba:

Re: Update Update

Posted: Wed Jul 10, 2019 6:41 pm
by Donn
bloke wrote:...which is why they should not make up fictitious temperatures (speaking to adults as if children)]
It isn't fictitious, it's calculated for your convenience, for warm objects that need to maintain a specific temperature and rely on evaporative surface cooling to do that. You can ignore it and rely on your own experience with temperature and dewpoint, or humidity, but I'm guessing that for every 10 people who try that, there will be 5 who get it wrong would be in trouble if they were out doing something strenuous. It will make more sense if you wait till it's cooler and then give it some thought.