I asked you to take it to a gear thread. Stop high jacking other people's threads with your need to prove yourself rants!!!
You have what basically amounts to laboratory level gear. It doesn't matter what some wanna be says about his format. But the reality is that for out and about macro, m43 does very well, and IMPORTANTLY, for some people it is appropriate. End of story...
If they continue I will ask that the irrelevant posts be shifted to the dumpster - more food for a "they are out to get me conspiracy"
My personal conspiracy theory is that MAGA is working day and night to end democracy in the US, and may have already done so in many states. Willing to be proved wrong, though. Anyone? Anyone at all? Please? Pretty please?!
Please don't get me started! That said, it's not religion, per se, that's the problem. It's people picking and choosing from their religion of choice to "justify" their prejudices and bigotry as being "supported by God". If religion were to be wiped from the planet, these same people would just find some other flag to fly.
Here's the thing, though -- there are a lot of things "legitimate science" doesn't have answers for, yet "we" still believe it. I mean, dark matter, dark energy, nonlocality/superdeterminism, etc., etc., etc.. However, there's a difference between an honest pursuit of knowledge (science -- although, of course, individual scientists, as opposed to science, itself, are not necessarily honest -- please give this a read) and the dishonest pursuit of conspiracy theories. It's this lack of [intellectual] honesty from conspiracy theorists and fact deniers that I can't stomach.
Let me give an example. In my extended family, there's a family member who holds a doctorate in mathematics -- clearly not stupid. But he's denied that Covid was real (or, at least, denied it was as lethal as it was), denies that humans are causing Global Warming, shied away from answering questions about the Holocaust, etc.. So I asked him about drunk driving. Why is it a problem? How does he know the police aren't just making it all up? I mean, it's not like the police haven't actively tampered with evidence countless times, right? So why does he believe drunk driving is a thing but Covid is a lie? He had no answer that made any sense.
The USA continues to pick winners, as always!
The trouble with mods is just like the trouble with police: they are rarely held accountable for their actions. That is, it doesn't matter if a mod is technically knowledgeable or not -- that's not their job. What does matter is that when a forum situation becomes uncivil, the mods typically take a side based on their own personal prejudices as opposed to fairly applying forum rules. You know, like the Supreme Court is now doing in the US.
I suppose I'm rather different with regards to this. I always want to be right. But to be right, that means that my beliefs must align with the facts. However, rather than change/ignore facts and data, I change my beliefs to align with the facts and data. If I cannot find an explanation that aligns with the facts and data, then I look for one with honest intent, and remain open to ideas until I can find a consistent belief that aligns with the facts and data.
In the beginning of the "Equivalence Wars", it was my belief that, if anything, larger sensors had better tech than smaller sensors, since they were in the flagship cameras for the companies. However, an anti-Equivalence person posted an example of an Equivalent photo from a compact and a FF camera, and the compact came out on top. I could not understand how. So I said, "Maybe the compact has a more efficient sensor, but it should be the exact opposite. Honestly, I don't know what's going on here -- I'll have to figure it out." He said that he didn't expect such a reply from me. He thought I would simply disregard the data rather than try to understand why the data contradicted the theory. That stung a bit, to be honest -- that someone who was far from a troll (indeed, he was quite knowledgeable and hated on Equivalence due to the disruption it caused in the forums, but he seemed to blame the "preachers" more than the deniers), who had read my posts, would think I'd be intellectually dishonest. [By the way, the resolution to the dilemma was that the sensors in compacts were, indeed, more efficient than both APS-C and FF sensors, just as the sensors in today's phones are more efficient than the sensors in dedicated cameras.]
In the end, though, it's the group that is willing to lie, cheat, and exercise violence to achieve its goals that will come out on top, especially when "all that is necessary for evil to triumph is when people of good will stand idly by".
I agree, but there is a bit more to add. Many media companies stopped bothering about that accountability. And while there was always the odd Tabloid, the proportion changed to mostly Tabloids. Look at the magazines. Even many of the respectable ones are now rest room trash.
I agree although I don't think it is the Trump Maga mob. They are pawns being manipulated by others. I mean the Project 2025 group and some of the billionare class. They saw the opportunity Trump could hand them. We aren't seeing a Presidential handover at the moment, we are watching a putsch. The whole infrastructure is being replaced by cut outs who give loyalty to Trump, not the USA Constitution. The only parallel that comes to mind is Germany, 1933.
There are studies on the subject. It's to do with a sense of personal security. Like fundamentalism. A personally secure person can find change and doubt challenging and satisfying. The insecure are threatened by it and look for certainty. Fundamentalism provides it. The fundamentalist is always looking for someone to blame. A fundamentalist Muslim/Christian/Marxist is the same person. It's just a matter of which poison got to him first to give him the rock solid certainty he needs.
It isn't all that surprising. Plenty of people with science background did courses where they never considered what is meant by proof. You can see it time and time again when they argue that there is no proof for Climate Change. Some proofs cannot be otherwise. They are of the two plus two equals four type. Other proofs are related to probability. The climate deniers usually demand the first type of proof. Science accepts the second kind as well with an important provisio. The evidence so far suggests the following course of action" Science keeps scrutinizing evidence. Should new evidence come in we may have to change the course of action. Until then, this is how we proceed.
We can't prove by the 2+2 =4 kind of proof that the sun will rise tomorrow. Statistically and taking into any other factors we know that might have a bearing, you have to be pretty dumb not to behave on the assumption that the sun will rise tomorrow.
The climate deniers et al insist that science is just a belief and we are all entitled to our beliefs so their belief is as valid as that of anyone else. Wrong. Science isn't a belief, it's a process of considering evidence. A real scientist is prepared to change the course of action if the evidence changes. The person who operates by faith doesn't require evidence. It's true that not everyone who has done some studies in a science field, operates in a scientific way.
Yep. That's the scientific position. I keep telling my one or two climate denier contacts that there is absolutely nothing that would please me more, and I really mean that, than for new evidence to emerge that showed Climate Change was all a big error. I'd be ecstatic for my kids and the planet and human culture. Meanwhile it is total madness to ignore the evidence and what it is telling us we need to do.
the barrier reef is dying, hoax. sea level is rising, hoax. ocean temps are rising, hoax. smaller 3rd world countries need money from 1st world countries due to climate change 🤣 climate change was invented to shift money around the world without the mass population knowing where the hard earnt money was going. you just need to listern to the news with an "open mind"
evidence, sorry cant help myself. Australia august 2023, BOM AND CLIMATE SCIENTISTS.quote: australia is going to be in a servere drought over the summer months ,so what did the farmers do ! sold all there cattle and live stock, did not plant vegies due to lack of natural water. outcome, we had one of the wettest summers on record and farmers lost 10s of billions of dollars 🤣 and were not happy Jan. and our food costs went through the roof 2024 so the government blaimed it on inflation 🤔😂 look at the water temps from the southern ocean current, we had no iragangy jelly fish this year because they need a sea temp of 27 deg and here at hervey bay the temps did not reach that. and btw i didnt need to google anything i just listern and remember everything 😎 ever heard of climate cycles ? tell me what sun spot cycle we are in at the moment and what year was the closest to it over the last 60 years ? Im always interested in facts.
I have no idea what you are talking about. You don't seem to understand the difference between climate and weather. The modelling for weather is much more difficult and prone to error. We didn't start to get serious about the shorter term weather change modelling that took into account climate change, until quite recently. The first climate change suggestions presumed that a hotter world would mean droughts. It was soon realized this was wrong, it was going to mean floods as well. Picking the where and when of these is difficult because the ocean currents have a big bearing. The currents are changing but doing modelling on how they will change and the weather consequences is massive. It is one of the tasks being touted as a reason for quantum computer development.
Yes, I understand that the sunspot cycles have a consequence for climate. As I understand it we don't know what causes the sunspot cycles but we know a lot about the consequences on Earth and those cycles have long been factored in by those studying Climate Change. While the sunspot cycles continue, what is happening to Earth's climate is now way outside those cycles. but the changes being observed are consistent with the increase in greenhouse gasses and the connection between greenhouse gas levels and temperature is theoretically and practically demonstrable. We know greenhouse gasses are increasing. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that temperatures will increase with them. It is therefore reasonable to do something about it because the end result if we don't is something along the path to Venus.
While we have had large changes before, they were usually associated with an impact event or something like a period of intense volcanic activity that changed the atmosphere composition. There's nothing of that scale in the last two hundred years that's consistent with the warming we are measuring. Both the level of gas release and the warming are now accelerating. As warming can be directly linked to greenhouse gas levels, anyone who wants to dispute Climate Change needs to offer a plausible, supportable alternative explanation. There's a fortune awaiting any scientist who can find it. Meanwhile, it's wiser to act on what the evidence shows.
I thought you may be... But the whole point of populism is to use social media to encourage the emotive response rather than the rational. It preys on the base instincts such as ignorance and lazyness of thought then uses grievance to promote anger. You're supposed to think emotively, and especially anger because when you do your decisions and conclusions cease to be rational but are more emotive and generally knee-jerk reactions based on common prejudice and bias. Money, in this world, allows choice and generates power. Those who have it are generally trying to consolidate their position, and they generally made that wealth through, or related to, fossil fuels. The US voted for their own wealth and prosperity on the populist model of exploiting the vulnerable. They voted for the lie because we don't want the truth... and we want the version where there are no problems... and it's not our fault... and we don't have to do anything...
I think the shock is going to be realising that they're headed back to the "Trusts". Social programs are being scrapped because money will no longer be distributed because it enables choice. Education is suffering for the general population and will be the privilege of those who can afford it, same with health care. They will exist by generating a profit rather than being a benefit for all. Also what are the results of the tariffs other than to squeeze the general population and push them into more debt for the benefit of who? It is really shifting the tax burden onto the general population.
People want an answer, they want a consistent world they understand. They tend to construct a framework which becomes immovable rather than adaptable, then the facts tend to be modified to fit and reinforce rather than be an objective hunt for the truth. People make up facts straight off the top of their heads to support a viewpoint, and those "facts" are then real truths. People really can't see obvious flaws in their logic, or their base assumptions. It really is surprising the extent to which we can almost subconsciously ignore what we do not wish to see. I think you can see the extent to how visible and blatant this manipulation is becoming, the surprise is that it is still working...
Many photo forums are simply just places where some are just reinforcing their own worldviews, creating a space where they are correct.
But then photography has always been like that. There is no objective scientific truth about what constitutes a good photo, it has always been a bell curve of biased and less than objective world views. And that curve sits in a different place on a "photo forum" than it does on "social media". I read forums to gauge opinion, see where that bell cure of popular taste is sitting with modern digital, and along the way I find opinion that makes me think and changes my understanding. Which is a lot rarer than I would like.
Don't waste your time, or the time of anyone else, by using non-equitable images to form comparisons. If you're not going to make exactly the same photo and composition, with the same perspective, AOV, subject, exposure time, and DOF, your "comparisons" are not comparisons of image quality..
Indeed. Accountability is gone. "I take no responsibility" is the go to phrase for more than just the POTUS.
Oh -- well that's not so bad, then, I guess. Guess we're just overreacting. 😬
Yes -- the moving goalposts on "proof" based on the topic is core to the issue. For example, all the hospital data on Covid was suspect, according to the doctorate in math family member, but blog posts about global warming from someone with no background in climatology (or any STEM field, for that matter) was "proof" that Global Warming is a hoax.
We're not far enough in the thread yet, but be prepared to open new photography subforums: "Flat Earth Photography" and "UFO photography". 😁
In my worldview, the understanding the technical is merely a means to accomplishing the artistic. I talk more about the technical simply because that's where I'm the most knowledgeable, whereas with the artistic, my knowledge is little more than "I like this" or "I don't like this".
We can definitely agree on that. Energy was gradually stored on the planet over vast time spans.. Our tech is now releasing that energy in very short (geologically speaking) time spans. It's the equivalent of the natural impact events that massively changed the planet in past eras. But this time it's human caused.
In simple terms, people believe what they want to believe, and it's typically very difficult to change that.
That's absurdly, completely, insanely wrong, and yet you've chosen to believe it. At the very least, you haven't checked to see if even makes sense.
The surface area of the earth is about 200 million square miles, using this formula: area = radius squared x 4 x pi.
Now, what is '1/6th trillionth' in your statement? Is it '1/6th of a trillion' (which is about 167 billion), meaning 1/167,000,000,000 of the earth's surface is populated by humans? Or is it '1 sixtrillionth' 1/6,000,000,000,000, meaning 1/6,000,000,000,000 of the earth's surface is populated by humans?
For your sake, let's assume the former. In that case, humans populate an area of about 200,000,000 / 167,000,000,000 miles, or about 0.0012 square miles. Do you still want to believe that?
If you want to say something intelligent about this, you first need to define what 'occupy' means. Does it mean how much land area our bodies occupy? If so, is that standing up, sitting, or lying down? Does it mean how much land our cities, farms, and other modified areas of the planet occupy? Decide.
Actually, you should first decide if such a comparison even matters. A single volcano with a relatively small surface area can influence climate over the whole earth if it erupts endlessly, as human activity in general has been doing for centuries, and human industrial activity has been doing for decades.
the maldives were suppose to be under water by 2020 that the scientists forcast back in 1980 🤪 wonder why they just built a billion dollar resort on the beach the last few years 🤔 btw i owned a research vessel. i wonder how much "you" dont get told or the public 😁
