Do We Engineers See the World Differently?

There was areal life dam that killed hundreds of people. Mr. Mulholland thought it was safe, but it was built near three fault lines. It did fail - catastrophically! The movie Chinatown was based on it. The real dam is at the San Francisquito canyon, a few miles from where I live.

I take my dog for walks down the creekbed and I see some odd things out there. I found an inner tube for what looks like a Model T type car under layers of dirt - It started to show, because the erosion from the creekbed exposed it (about 8 feet from the floor of the creekbed). I also found some large machinery, some large steel pipes (4 feet diameter) and lots of old ceramic tile (bathroom and kitchen tile). I'm pretty sure this is stuff from the dam breaking.

If you're interested, there's a really good article in the Westside Reader this month. You can see it online - Google search Westside Reader Santa Clarita.

"A recent story on Fox news..."

You misspelled Faux, common error.

I do think that engineers see things differently, if only because of their training. At the same time, I think most engineers tend to adjust their thinking to their surroundings, but always retain an attitude of "How can this be improved?" or "Why does something work yhe was it does?"

Possibly a more intriguing question is "Why do people become engineers?"

I think it is more frightening the number of people in my family and in the community who don't get the "Big Bang" jokes.

It is like they are just not functioning in that area or don't have the background knowledge to see/understand it.

When you think about it, it must be a difficult script to write. Trying to get the balance between technology, theory and humour in a form that a reasonable percentage of the audience will understand and appreciate.

BAB

If you believe that my statement "implies that an engineering education creates an engineer", either you misinterpreted my comment, or I was not clear in my statement.

The critical part of my statement was the question as to why people become engineers. Perhaps I should have opened with that statement.

Your comment regarding "the early formative years" is, in my estimation pretty much what I was thinking, but failed to put into words.

An engineering education does NOT creates an engineer, but rather teaches him/her facts and theories about the physical world that compliment his/her questions of why and how things are the way they are, as well as physical and economic limitations on the extent to which a quality or quantity may be modified or improved.

"An engineering education does NOT creates an engineer, but rather teaches him/her facts and theories about the physical world that compliment his/her questions of why and how things are the way they are, as well as physical and economic limitations on the extent to which a quality or quantity may be modified or improved."

Exactly, before we had formalized Engineering, the 'engineers of the day were known as 'alchemists,' 'wizards,' 'Tinkerers,' 'blacksmiths,' 'medicine men,' or one of several other titles, based on the traditions of the era and the general understanding of science at the time. Most Greek Engineers cot lumped together with the 'philosophers,' because they didn't seem to have any other term for "Smart Guy."

I suspect the lighting and power engineers in ancient Egypt were all named Tesla, or maybe "Ralph".

"Am I an engineer because I love solving problems or do I love solving problems because I am an engineer?"

Yes, we think differently! I think engineers tend to begin tackling a situation with the outcome in mind, then we look for the shortest route to get there. Normal folks don't seem to think that way.

Nature/nurture, it depends... There was little nurture in my situation. I grew up taking things apart and fixing them but did not show an early aptitude for math and science. Single parent Mom nudged me toward military service but stronger grades & a high school counselor convinced me to try college before committing to service.

Long story, short: I am a civilian ME working for the military. I believe I was pre-programed to be an engineer despite the odds.

That is a very human characteristic, since we humans have only been doing engineering since the dawn of mankind.

Humans have only been 'Beavering away' since ...........

Oh, and Foff with the off topics.

Whomsoever.

"I once worked with a very good engineer who believed that AIDS was god's punishment of homosexuals."

Good critical thinking skills, but a big blind spot over the portion of his brain where "What my pastor tells me" is stored. Either that or he was a bigot; he hated homosexuals and was using religion to justify his hate⁽¹⁾.

"A good friend of mine had a PHD in Biology and tried to make a kite with steel rods and tried to fly it by running up and down a tree lined street in front of his house."

Those with PhD's are typically in the 'low oxygen zone,' they spend so much time in the rarefied atmosphere of their research that they understand little else. My father has a funny incident from when his company was hired on to do the wiring for a new office building on FermiLabs property. While he was wiring up a breaker panel, a flock of scientists who had escaped their handlers⁽²⁾ wandered into the hallway, and immediately were fascinated by the contents of his tool bag. They were marveling at the design of a Philips Screwdriver.

"I also worked with an engineer who had no aptitude in practically applying his knowledge. He could do the math, but couldn't handle a wrench."

Good brain, poor manual dexterity, possibly poor hand-eye coordination. The man simply needed more videogames in his youth.

Notes:

1. Fun fact for Christians, THAT is what "taking the Lord's Name in vain" means: Using God to justify that which is unjustifiable. Shouting out "Goddamit!" when you hit your thump with a hammer? That's not taking the Lord's Name in vain, that's not even you saying it, that's the pain talking. Stealing from someone out of jealously, and then claiming that God told you to do it, that's using his name in vain (using it to claim that you weren't breaking 'do not covet goods' and 'do not steal'). Persecuting the Jews and Muslims during the Spanish Inquisition. HOOO BOY! was that trying to justify the unjustifiable, I don't even want to KNOW how hard Torquemada got smacked for leading that.
2. In FermiLabs the scientists do get 'handlers,' sometimes called 'minders.' These are the people who give the reminders of "It's lunchtime, did you remember to eat?" "No, we will not make a functioning mock-up of the Demon Core experiment⁽³⁾." "You've been signed in to the building for 18 hours straight, do you remember that you have a home with a shower and a bed?" "The Demon Core experiment is to hazardous to duplicate exactly, OSHA regulations will not permit us to build it." "Please come over to this side of the purple-and-yellow striped line, if the experiment starts, that area will receive dangerous levels of radiation." "We are not going to build a Demon Core to experiment with 'various manifestations of Cerenkov Radiation." "No you cannot get a closer look at the plutonium sample. If you go into the room with the exposed sample, you will receive a lethal dose of radiation and die." "For the last time, we will NOT build a Demon Core for you!"
3. If you don't know what the Demon Core is, you can read up on it on Wikipedia.
   

Your comment of;

"I also worked with an engineer who had no aptitude in practically applying his knowledge. He could do the math, but couldn't handle a wrench."

Work with a few engineers that with a benefit of a doubt were fresh out of college....

^{Some had a good amount of experience, but I was being nice.}

They would calculate items on a project, no matter if it would effect the project outcome or not, mostly not.

Project schedules were always late, and the worse, the project would fail to perform just due to that they would actual fail to do any calculations on the items that really mattered.

What would get me, they would use the excuse that this is a learning experience.

I responded with;

You've being doing this for 12 years now, how many times do you have to screw up working on the same problem on different project before you learn and get it right

Sounds like they didn't have 12 years of experience, just 1 year 12 times.

Ground Hogs day all over again.

It doesn't sound that way, I've hire engineers fresh out of college. where they would try to practice every thing they've learn in one project,... so to speak.

Other greenhorns reveal their attitude after they were hire, grumbling that they could do your job, but after I had to take over and mop up their mess of a project(s), they eventually matured.

By definition, engineers take technology (developed BY engineers) and scientific concepts to produce innovations that inevitably prod civilization's progress. That means that we do see things others miss. Many people take things on what others say without thinking about the issue.

Case in point; the other day, my son gave me a refillable butane lighter. Instructing me on its use, he said that, before refilling it, you need to stick a pin in the port to release any excess butane or it would not fill properly. What?!?!

He is (a little) wiser now, but where do people get ideas like this?

It's the difference, not between an engineer and a layman, but between a person who is interested in the why and how, and the person who just accepts what they're told.

Are you an autobroker, an engineer, or an engineer who is now an autobroker?

I like your story about your son the the butane lighter. As far back as I can remember, it would bother me when I heard things that weren't correct.

In my field, I hear lots of crazy things. When I do, I first have to remember what my job is - to broker the deal. Then I decide if I should correct the person or let it go. If I do choose to correct them, I have to do it in a nice way or I'll lose them as a customer. That's why most times I just let it go.

And to answer your question, I've had an inquisitive mind since I was a child. I did complete my BS in Engineering and I worked as a pseudo engineer for about five years. In the process I shifted to being a business owner and a little over 14 years ago, I changed fields and became an auto broker. For me, I like it, because I have a passion for cars. I not only love the beauty of them, but also the engineering behind it.

Thank you for your reply. I agree with you that many times it is better to let it go. I usually size up the situation and decide then. There are a lot of people who cannot take constructive criticism!

Well put!

Information and "data" are indeed interpreted by different people in different ways-just look at many a CR4 thread. I cannot think of any situations where plain logical thinking doesn't work to solve or at least partially solve some issue so it can be rationally explained/figured out.

It does bother me when I see interpretations that do not follow logic (call it speculation which, on occasion will come up with the truth). A lot of comments in the thread about fact because it is written somewhere with no regard of the original source. The rumor mill will never cease. Most people will repeat anything they have heard or seen without regard for what the source was - it's human nature to do so. Some one said or printed it so it must be true¡¿

I don't try to change every ones opinion to match mine. You have to pick your own battles based on who the "enemy" is. Sometimes it is just as well to sit back and let them rant.

Any one for politics??☻

Same with me. It bothers me when I hear speculation being passed as fact. I'll post the details of my story and everyone here can let me know what they think.

Funny how you mention politics!

There may be a number of engineers that have a mild form of Asperger syndrome.

With this, they have the ability to cut right through as well as demonstrate a high level of concentration with the capacity to stay focused for long periods of time.

As well as having very little patience.

In other words, a real attitude problem. A fictional example would be Sheldon Cooper

That is because the Universe (and all Psychiatrists in it) have been trying to kill you and I since we were born. That is the true nature of the beast. Our lives are about survival, and passing on our genetic code to the next generation of subjects of the cosmic experiment.

I've work engineers that covers a whole spectrum of mental abilities/disability's.

From decent likable people. to mousy workaholics (that always feel someone is spying on them to steal their thunder)..

Putting a label on individuals that works in an particular industry, is using a pretty wide paint brush.

... Now meteorologists on the other hand. :-O

After I read the article, and by the time I got down to Item D of your post, very good BTW, I started to wonder if the reason for the Psychologists are just looking to justify THEIR existence.

One of my daughters was an English major in college; I often commented to her that were we to switch curricula, I would have been able to handle hers much more easily than she could have handled mine. (and I was not an "A" student)

Not so with my other daughter, a graphic artist.

I especially liked your reference to a 'differently wired' brain; more like it's improperly wired.

"Few Christians I know of would even bother to (1) attempt to prove or demonstrate their faith to a non-believer, much less (2) push them into a situation where the unbeliever would be absolutely convinced that Jesus is Lord. I figure that if (1) the person is of age, and can't figure out what to believe in, I sure as hell am not going to waste my time "proving" my faith to them, and if they are (2) still classified as children, it is up to their parents to teach them the ways of faith (or not)."

You know some very good Christians, my friend, we need a lot more like them out where they can lead by example. We need them on the television instead of the Oral Roberts or whoever is running those big TV megachurch programs.

Around here, people try to convert others by having winning ways, by leading an exemplary life as a gentleman (or lady). There is no excuse to do otherwise.

No excuse, but some people still use the Bible to spread hate, and that ends up making all Christians look bad. Not naming names, we can probably all think of two or three off the top of our head.

There have been cases where Jew, Christian and Muslim have all sat down to break bread together peaceably, it probably happens several times a day in our cities and colleges⁽¹⁾, some of those meeting may even be ones where they share their Faith with each other, and see how much they have in common (aside from shared hatred of Mr, Jones and his pop quizzes in Calc II)⁽²⁾. Sadly, "real people getting together to peacefully coexist" in never 'news,' so all we get to see are the few bad apples on the ground, not the ORCHARDS of good apples all around.

Notes:

1. Not saying that the cities and colleges are better than the small towns. Just that the more 'urban' areas tend to be more blended, more 'cosmopolitan' than the countryside. Small towns are a bit more 'homogeneous' than the cities, so it's less likely that you'd find people of all three Faiths in the same town, much less having lunch at the same time.
2. I brought up students eating together, so I had to put in a 'griping about a disliked teacher' jab. That's half of what the students talk about at lunch, the other half is either trying to borrow someone's homework, or gossiping about who's falling for whom in class.
   

Perhaps contained within this recent response by you is some small point of bias. I have found over the years that country folk may be more tolerant, open-minded, and easy to get along with than those from University campii (but this is no generalization, far from it).

I think it is more a fact of life that wherever and whenever we are, we will encounter all types possible at some similar frequencies, more in some areas, less in others.

Variety is one of the spices of life. Sometimes spices are sweeter, sometimes bitter.

I am not sure how you are going to classify this situation I've observed while living in New York..

NY State newcomers will typically find people that are living in the upstate NY are "nice and warm" somehow very accomodating people until they get to know you!

While its typical for them to say that most of the time they find NYC (downstate) people to be kind of "snotty and cold", but then later on will to turned this observation into being somehow kind of the opposite! City dwellers are somehow very friendly and quite different from the previous observations

...until they get to know you...

maybe that just means a different set of priorities, morals, and interests?

I think the city folk generally are somewhat cautious and reserved most of the time, but the upstate folks I knew when I lived up there in Potsdam one summer were all OK, but it was a college town also, and I was a college kind of guy....good until "they got to know me".

Back on the farm, we used to joke about how if any monster grabbed me outside in the night, it would turn me loose in the morning when it found out what it caught.

Again, that might be based on the differing 'cultures' in urban and rural life. (Please correct me if I'm overgeneralizing):

In the rural areas, hospitality to visitors is the norm, but as the small towns are 'everyone knows everyone else,' someone who is staying may find themselves pressured to 'open up' more, and to conform to the standards and traditions of the close-knit community they are entering.

In urban areas, it's the opposite, we start out wary and distrustful of 'strangers' (who may be someone who lives three blocks away), but over time, we start to 'lower our guards' as we see that this stranger is not one of the 'dangerous, stab you and take your wallet' types we always hear about.

In the end, both types of communities are at a similar state of openness and trust, they just got to that point from opposite starting locations.

Wow.

You must have been, "up Short Creek way".

For those who don't know that's the old name for the twin cities on the Arizona/Utah border.

I hear tell they don't take too kindly to strangers up there.

Not only that, I have heard if one is up Short Creek way without a paddle, they are in a world of hurt - that is apt to make one see the world in a completely different way.

I see the world as a large ball in space comprised of all the elements, some in motion, and in various proportions - not. Mostly, I see just see this flat land where I live and work - Lubbock, TX - a world unto itself.

One of the theories about the 'Short Creek way' towns is that they are actually 'closed communities' where the residents are practicing 'Old School Mormonism' (aka Polygamy) despite those aspects being illegal in the US. That's why the 'distrust of outsiders,' each one is a Small Town With A Dark Secret, and they are guarding their secrets well.

Having Dark Secrets is non-exclusive to the Mormon polygamist community. There are plenty of other dark secrets to some towns, that apparently require cards held closely.

I never said it was exclusive, just that it was the reason those towns were living up to the trope.

You should see Rosemont, IL. The commercial section is spread out and open to all, but the residential section is a little fortress: A gate with a guardhouse on the fenced-in street side, and the other sides are abutted by the berm of the Interstate Highway, or by the Railroad tracks. The firehouse is built along the fence, with two sets of doors, one for access to the gated community, one for access to the hotels, theaters, arenas and restaurants.

If you think that's the reason for the two doors, either they have two full sets of apparatus, or you've never been held up in traffic while a 100' ladder truck is being backed into the firehouse.

Every locality that I've ever lived in, worked in or visited had the vehicles faced toward the street while in quarters.

Aside from the hotels, Rosemont is built pretty low to the ground.

Buzz: "Strip Malls. Strip Malls EVERYWHERE!"

I don't think the RFD HAS any ladder trucks.

Wait a second! You're talking about one area of Rosemont. The residential areas are on both sided of the Tollway. The area you're talking about is west of the tollway. It seems like a fortress is because it borders the Toll Road the Kennedy Expy and railroad tracks. If I had those three things around me, you bet I'd like high walls. There are some 4,200 residents who live in Rosemont - less than half live in the triangle mess. And O'Hare airport has a runway less than a mile from the homes. Trains, planes and automobiles!

In LA, there's a city called the City of Industry. The population is a hair over 200, yet there are 80,000 workers who come into the city every day. I've never been to a home in City of Industry, but I would think it would have to be insulated from the industry.

"Wait a second! You're talking about one area of Rosemont. The residential areas are on both sided of the Tollway. The area you're talking about is west of the tollway."

Yes, I'm talking about the 'older' residential area, the section built like a pasture for McMansions. The 'newer' residential area, built like a 'capped at three story' model of a Chicago Housing Project (with nicer landscaping, where there *IS* grass) is not part of the 'in crowd' of Rosemont.

"It seems like a fortress is because it borders the Toll Road the Kennedy Expy and railroad tracks. If I had those three things around me, you bet I'd like high walls."

You misunderstand, the Highway and the railroad ARE the walls. There's nothing but a standard 8 foot high chain link fence between highway/railroad and the residential area. The only way to get into the 'Older' residential area, by car or on foot, is through a guarded gatehouse. Rosemont's Health Club is in that area as well; the sign offers memberships to the public, but the only ones who can get to there to apply are the residents of the 'old section.' all others get turned away at the guardhouse before they can even GET to the gym to apply.

I know that older area. Why someone would want to live next to a toll road, an expressway, a train track and 1/2 mile east of a runway at O'Hare!!!

You mentioned Chicago Housing Project. Here's a good one for you. When I was around 20 years old, I had a friend who was very straight laced. My buddies and I decided to play a trick on him. We went downtown on a weekend night, had a good time - probably had too much to drink. We told him there was a short cut home, so when we left downtown, we headed west on Division. The neighborhood changes very fast and soon we were in front of Cabrini Green. We told our friend to look at the sign on the fence - Cabrini O Green. Panic hit him and as we drove down Division we rocked the car side to side. We didn't know it, but he was really scared. Or maybe, he was the only one with any sense - wow, that was a stupid thing we did!

Your observation regarding mammals' "deeply ingrained sensitivity to population density" can be observed at almost all levels, and probably even extends to virtually all species.

At the most basic level, this sensitivity is determined by the resources needed to maintain the species at at least a survivable rate.

As to the discrepancy in the chaos of the Gold Coast high-rises compared to the Projects despite the same population density, one must consider that the Gold Coast high-rise occupant CHOSE that style of living while those in the Projects are essentially STUCK in that style.

That's why I added the variables 'Desperation' and 'Distraction' as a way to quantify the difference. When one has Choice, they have low Desperation; when one is Stuck, they have high Desperation. The amount of Distraction one has access to is also roughly dependant on how much money one has to spend, the more well-to-do tend to have more options to avoid 'sitting at home listening to the neighbors argue through the wall.'

Your last two posts would make some awesome equations.

In Peru, many people have very, very little and live well below the poverty level. Why is it that they seem to be happy, they cherish their family and they respect their elders?

I think it has to do with expectations. The Peruvians don't think that they'll ever have much and are satisfied with their lifestyle. The people in the ghettos in LA aren't satisfied with their life - they want more. They also see the other side every day - the money driving down the freeway or seeing downtown LA from their homes in East LA. The wealth is within reach (physically), but only if they take it themselves. That's why I believe that "buffer zones" need to exist.

When I lived in the suburbs of Chicago, it was nice, but in no way opulent. If I went further east, I'd see the wealthy homes. I'd have to drive through slowly improving neighborhood to reach the lake. Then driving further north, I'd see the really nice places. Each area had a "buffer zone" to keep the people who didn't belong out. The police would let you know that they're watching - I was pulled over many times as I drove through those areas. The message was clear that I wasn't welcome. It makes it much harder for the have nots to see how the wealthy live.

Here in LA, there are no "buffer zones". Neighborhoods change so fast out here and the liberal philosophy equal rights allows the have nots to cruise through the wealthy areas.

Why is it that a kid in the south side of Chicago has no idea what a new Mercedes S550 looks like, yet a kid from East LA knows not only what the car looks like, but also has seen Bentleys, Ferrari's and Lamborghini's?

Wait, are you saying the key to 'solving' the poverty crisis is to set up 'buffer zones,' so the poor and rich don't have to see each other? That's going to take a lot of work, and feel a lot like rebuilding the housing projects that we've only recently dismantled due to the fact that the idea of 'warehousing the poor' didn't work as expected.

Not at all. I think the neighborhoods should gradually improve and each neighborhood should have a mix of people, but not too diverse. For instance, we shouldn't have someone who has servants and lives in a 30,000 sq foot house living a couple blocks from a family living on welfare and food stamps. How can businesses cater to both clients? You know what happens, the local business caters to the wealthy and the poor must drive, walk or take the bus far away.

How many people on welfare can afford to shop at an appointment only clothes boutique or have their car serviced at a European Auto repair shop? I believe it's bad for the kids, because their neighbors have everything. They'll feel like their parents are failures. If however, they lived in a lower income area, they'd feel at home and the stores and repair shops would cater to them.

Sounds like your solution has been tried before: the poor are kept in the 'inner city,' the affluent reside in the 'suburban sprawl.'

That didn't work out that well, as city services (such as the public transportation the poor need to get to and from work) to the inner city kept getting cut because the city budgets kept shrinking. When the Tax Base 'flees' to the suburbs, there's nobody left to raise operating capitol from other than the poor (who have no money to give) and local businesses. Increasing the taxes on the businesses causes the 'chain' stores and corporate-owned factories to relocate to 'better tax climates (i.e., the suburbs) and cuts into the profits of the local 'ma & pa' stores, slowly squeezing them out of business.

We see examples with the school districts: the poorer areas have less property tax coming in, so the school gets less funding, and the reduced funding of the school causes those who can afford to to move to a better school district, selling their house at a loss just to get away, which reduces property values, which reduces the property tax coming in, rinse and repeat.

What you need is a way to keep the well-to-do from fleeing so far their tax base money cannot be used to keep up the basic services that their poorer neighbors need. But that would taste too much like the dreaded Socialism for you, wouldn't it?

To me, it sounds like the dreaded, Lose-Lose-Lose Everybody Loses situation.

On the other side of the coin, when communities undergo urban renewal/re-purposing, shops will be seen opening up. At least some jobs are available, housing renewal also produces jobs in the trades which is a good sign of class mobility. As more and more people work within this discrete volume element, taxable revenue increases, the general tolerance for crime decreases, and the police presence temporarily will increase as a result of public outcry over whatever crimes continue to take place, until the threat level of crime is reduced, or the project fails. This is free-enterprise, has nothing to do with (a) socialism, (b) fascism, or (c) Donald Trump, at least nothing specifically to do with.

But for Urban Renewal/re-purposing to happen, someone has to provide the 'seed money' to get thing started.

'Sweat Equity' Renewal projects (such as community gardens) tend to be self-limiting, as the focus cannot expand much beyond the 'starter plot,' and the volunteers typically lack the organization/bureaucratic skills to keep the group focused and on task if it expands beyond a certain population.

"Let's all get together and save the local car wash/burger joint/barber shop/mission house" makes a great plot for a 'feel-good' Summer movie, but in real life, if the community had the skills and resources to pull that feat off, they would have been able to prevent the decline in the first place.

I'm not saying these people are 'weak,' or 'leaches;' everyone falls down from time to time, when that happens, those who are not currently on the ground need to lend a hand. Not a hand-out, a hand-UP, help those who have fallen to get back on their feet, and those people, if they don't help you in return later, will help others who have fallen.

Why does this seem like such a hard issue for people? It's just like dealing with an Engineering problem: If you have a bicycle that falls over, do you throw it in a ditch because it fell, or do you pick it back up? If a car gets a flat tyre, do you abandon if for 'being weak,' of to you pull out the spare tyre and restore the car to drivable condition? Why does a person who has fallen on hard times invoke contempt instead of sympathy?

I am just saying they get more sympathy in proportion to the sweat they are willing to expend. You can lead a horse mule to water, but only Luke and Elmer (the Texas A&M Aggies) know how to tell the other to "pull her head up, she's suckin' mud!"

If you never heard that joke before, I probably would be banned for life for telling it here.

"I am just saying they get more sympathy in proportion to the sweat they are willing to expend."

I cannot argue that point, but to continue the 'give a man a hand when he's down' analogy, it would appear that a certain group⁽¹⁾ won't offer that hand when the man is down and reaching up, will not offer it when the man has pulled himself to one knee, will not offer it when he is bent over, hands on knees, but will wait until/if he is standing up and brushing himself off, then say "Oh, looks like you didn't need it anyway," and walk away without actually having done anything. But if that man cannot pull himself up by his bootstraps, this certain group will just say "He's not trying hard enough" and walk away without helping.

Notes:

1. While the general impression (provided by what the Liberal Media reports, and what can be determined by the 'fair and unbiased' statements of Fox News) is that it is 'all conservatives' that are this group, I being the Hopeless Idealist, am willing to concede that it is more likely a subgroup, 'greedy, selfish conservatives who make the news.' In other words, I admit that the sample I have seen is just the sensationalized 'worst of the worst.' But just like with Muslims, when the portrayal is only an extremist subset, how do we determine the size of the 'dissenting' faction?
   

I would say two things:

1) This is a very good platform, and I agree with most of it. The points of disagreement are mostly minor differences in phrasing; I Won't go into 'nitpicking the nails in the planks.'

2) Most if not all Conservative Politicians seem to adhere to this only so far as it will advance their personal careers, and they will twist the meaning to tortured parodies to get their way. As an example, North Carolina's HB2 bill, the infamous 'bathroom bill,' which, among other things, prohibits county and city governments within the state from enacting LGBT anti-discrimination laws. Said bill had been described by US Department of Justice to violate, among other things, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, and as such, the bill threatens the state's eligibility to receive Grant money from the US Department of Education. The governor is now claiming that it is 'federal overreach' for the US Department of Education to withhold funds from a state that is now ineligible to receive them⁽¹⁾.

Notes:

1. A similar thing is the reason that the Boy Scouts of America lost the support of the Chartering Organizations for almost all of their Explorer posts, and had to focus their 'late teen' Scouting efforts into the (at the time) smaller Venture Scouts program. The BSA was openly promoting and enforcing a policy of discrimination against gay and athiest Scouts and Scout Leaders. When these policies were brought to light, the leadership of the BSA released a statement saying, in essence, "We are a private, members-only organization, and we may select membership requirements as we see fit." This caused many organizations with strong anti-discrimination policies in their regulations and bylaws (such as Police and Fire Departments, Military and Coast Guard Stations; pretty much every non-religious Chartering Organization) to withdraw support for the Explorer Post under them, as supporting the Post would violate the Chartering Organization's own anti-discrimination policy. There's a whole sorrid epic about the BSA's troubles and tribulations, both with the USA and with International Scouting, but I won't go into detail here. Suffice to say, a lot of it revolves around the Mormon Church and their attempts to steer the BSA to the Church's preferences.
   

Agendas in whirled politics is not news.

Thank you for that summary.

I consider myself a conservative and to generalize that conservatives won't help others is just plain wrong. You have no idea how many times I've helped out others. How many hours I spend helping my community (I volunteer a lot). Or how much I share with others in need. Not to mention how many of my conservative friends have done the same if not more.

And to me, it doesn't matter if someone is conservative or liberal. If he/she is a good person who lives by the rules of a higher being, that's really what matters. We're only on this planet for a short amount of time, right?

"I consider myself a conservative and to generalize that conservatives won't help others is just plain wrong. You have no idea how many times I've helped out others. How many hours I spend helping my community (I volunteer a lot). Or how much I share with others in need. Not to mention how many of my conservative friends have done the same if not more."

You are right, I do not know how much conservative people help out, mainly because when I see people volunteering, I don't ask about political affiliations, we're all there to help, nobody's being 'preachy,' and we get the job done and go home with smiles on our sweat-streaked faces.

Most of what I hear about 'conservative values' come from the Conservative Politicians, they are the ones saying "No money for social programs" "Gays should not get the same rights as normal people" "Women are too stupid and emotional to make decisions about their own bodies and what is growing within" "Illegal aliens are ruining the economy" "Our buddies, the rich pay too much in taxes" "Corporations are people, but poor and minorities aren't" "We need to teach the Christian Bible in public schools, not science." If these politicians are saying things that are so against what true conservatives believe, why do they keep getting elected? And why don't we hear more people complaining that these politicians are misrepresenting the party?

If these politicians are saying things that are so against what true conservatives believe, why do they keep getting elected? And why don't we hear more people complaining that these politicians are misrepresenting the party?

That is a VERY good point! I have problems to understand why politicians are elected when what they promise is from the beginning, even for a simple minded person, impossible to do. This is not limited to "conservative" politicians, it should be extended to the whole bunch. Independently of their political color the behavior is the same and it is not limited to the US it is the way this "cast" behaves allover. And the poor citizen pays for their errors or lies. But electors are stubborn they continue to have confidence generation after generations, old or young.

__________________

"· "the federal government should not be paying for social programs but they should be funded by states or localities". And it's reported by the media and framed by liberal politicians as "No money for social programs"."

Okay, I'll grant that the Conservative platform tends towards more State-funded programs, as opposed to Federal-funded programs.

By the way, since you're in Florida, how has Rick Scott been doing keeping the state-level social programs running?

Also, have you ever looked at which states pay more in taxes than they receive in federal funding, and which states receive more federal funding than they pay in taxes? It makes an interesting picture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_taxation_and_spending_by_state

how has Rick Scott been doing keeping the state-level social programs running?
Most likely if you ask a liberal, they will claim the programs need more money and Scott is doing a terrible job. And if you ask a conservative, they will say the opposite. Personally, I think Scott's done a mediocre job in that area.
I took a look at the wikipedia link you provided. It's interesting, but what's missing is a table of taxation by state. The two tables shown are Total Federal Spending by State and Per Capita Spending by State.

My mistake, I had assumed from the title that it was showing the Tax/Funding ratio.

Here are some links with the ratios shown. I didn't want to start with them, since the surrounding text might be biased towards a certain conclusion:

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/

https://www.google.com/#q=which+states+receive+more+federal+funds+than+they+pay

I don't agree with your claim about what conservative politicians say. My friend is a conservative State Assemblyman and he has never said the things you did. Our County Supervisor is a conservative and he's never said those things either. Most of our Town Council is conservative and these things are never said. Mind you, I've never heard these things said in the privacy of our homes.

I believe you're drinking the liberal Kool-Aid.

Well, let me provide some examples of where such things are said:

"No money for social programs" is normally stated as 'we must reduce the budget.'

"Gays should not get the same rights as normal people" is typically the abstract of the 'Religious Freedoms Restoration Act' laws, which businesses use as a 'license to discriminate.'

"Women are too stupid and emotional to make decisions about their own bodies and what is growing within" - All the abortion ban bills, and the additional restrictions placed on Planned Parenthood clinics (Which already are barred from using Federal money to perform abortions, and only do abortions in states where it is legal. And by the way, they do NOT sell fetal tissue, the infamous video was so highly doctored it might as well be a Roswell Alien Dissection video, or Bigfoot crashing a birthday party.)

"Illegal aliens are ruining the economy" - spoken as a "need for increased border control"

"Our buddies, the rich pay too much in taxes" - Look at WHICH taxes are bring talked about in the tax cuts, Estate taxes, for example, are 0 for the first one million dollars of the estate, so anyone who is not a millionaire pays nothing in the 'death tax,' and therefore is not the person to benefit by its abolishment

"Corporations are people," - Citizens United v. FEC, among other lawsuits

"but poor and minorities aren't" - restrictive Voter ID laws

"We need to teach the Christian Bible in public schools, not science." - Anyone pushing Creationism or Intelligent Design, or mandating that Evolution be clearly describes as 'just a theory' in science textbooks.

I respect you, and I'm willing to believe that you live in a town of 'sane' conservatives, who hold to the true values of Conservatism, however, there are many politicians saying these things with their actions and with the bills they sponsor and vote for, any they are the ones garnering the national spotlight, not your Arcadian community.

By the way, do you know what the 'bathroom rules' were before South Carolina's HB2 bull? "You use the bathroom that is right for you, and we trust you to know which one is right. If you cause trouble in there, then we punish you." Then HB2 came in with "You MUST use the bathroom that matches your birth certificate, even if that is not the 'right for you' bathroom." The 'pushback' from the federal government, Target, etc has all been "We trust people to know which bathroom is right for them, and we're not going to check birth certificates. Of course, if you cause trouble in there, you will be punished." By the way, that part about "If you cause trouble, you will be punished." is actually everywhere; that is the foundation statement, the bedrock of the entire CONCEPT of a legal system, almost the very concept of Society, which is why it's not stated openly that often, everyone should know it by heart by the time they're old enough to draw on the wall in crayon.

I admit, I couldn't find the best 'dog whistle' for that comment, mainly because Trump's been ditching the dog whistles for bullhorns, and so far, I don't think anyone from the GOP leadership or Trump's (former) primary rivals have stood up and said "Mister Trump, what you say is balderdash, We Republicans do NOT stand for that! You are twisting the Party message into something offensive and disgusting!"

As I do not have time to do further research, I withdraw that line from my statement.

That's why Europe keeps getting targeted. It was too easy for the terrorists to get in and even if they tighten up now, there's too many who've come in.

We don't want to be an island. I think we can all agree on that. We do need to do a better job controlling our borders, because I for one hope that our stores and airports don't become targets.

9/11 was a wake up call. Think about how unprotected our airports/airplanes were back then.

"By the way, do you know what the 'bathroom rules' were before South Carolina's HB2 bull?"

I need to make a correction here. HB2 is a North Carolina Bill, not a South Carolina bill, as I had misstated.

I sincerely and humbly apologise to the residents and government of South Carolina for any offense my error may have caused.

"...South Carolina's HB2..."

The HG2 controversy is in NORTH Carolina.

As for Creationism or Intelligent design, is there another explanation of how everything got here that is comprehensible to humans?

Depends on who you listen to. The ancient alien crack heads think life was seeded on earth intentionally by a master race of aliens. I do not.

"The ancient alien crack heads think life was seeded on earth intentionally by a master race of aliens."

Ah yes, the Rialians. I'm surprised they and the Intelligent Design crowd don't get along, their beliefs are highly compatible:

• Life on earth was created by some Intelligent Designer. - ID
• Life on earth was created by Aliens. - Rialians

"Aliens" could be the "some Intelligent Designer," Rialianism could be seen as a refined version of Intelligent Design. That is, unless ID is using "some Intelligent Designer" as a placeholder for "God, but we're not going to say it out loud, because then people would realize we're just Creationists wearing a different necktie."

Neck tie remark - probably about like my remark about black belt in 6s should be a neck tie.

I would like it better if the Ancient Aliens were Italians. Then the world would be about spaghetti! This takes string theory to a whole new level.

There is a special place in Dante's inferno for unbelievers. It is tucked away in a corner next to all the Church of Christ folks who think they are in heaven. (That's a joke, people).

There is plenty of scientific evidence - for a lot of things - does not mean "we" can entirely make sense of it. It is best not to leap over a pile of scientific documents, and land in a fire, or a frying pan. I still believe in God, and believe he/she is smart enough to make the earth look old, if it really is not. Or make it look younger than it is. The bottom line - neither of us was there in the beginning. All we can do is take the information we have and extrapolate. Extrapolation is only valid when the complete mathematical behavior of the "fit" to the data is well known at all boundary values, then there is no real need to extrapolate, simply calculate. If we cannot be there to witness (observe) the boundary conditions, there is no way to have a solution in a closed form. Linear extrapolation (or even nonlinear) can be made, but how accurate is it?

"I still believe in God, and believe he/she is smart enough to make the earth look old, if it really is not. Or make it look younger than it is. The bottom line - neither of us was there in the beginning."

What you are saying there is that everything we observe or measure could be a lie. If observations and measurements are lies, then anything derived from them would be invalid.

"All we can do is take the information we have and extrapolate. Extrapolation is only valid when the complete mathematical behavior of the "fit" to the data is well known at all boundary values, then there is no real need to extrapolate, simply calculate. If we cannot be there to witness (observe) the boundary conditions, there is no way to have a solution in a closed form. Linear extrapolation (or even nonlinear) can be made, but how accurate is it?"

I can't even provide a counter-argument to this, because it's so twisted it's not even wrong. You've already stated that our observations are lies, because we cannot measure the True age of the Earth. If the initial data is lies, the outcome can only be more lies. There is nothing to extrapolate, as we have no good data to extrapolate FROM.

Accepting your premise would mean that all Observation, the foundation of Science, is a lie, and therefore all Science is a lie. Without Science, how can there be Engineering, which is Applied Science? Without Engineering, how can there be Engineers, or an Engineering forum?

You can you be sure that yesterday even existed? Gan you prove that God DIDN'T create the universe this morning, as we see it now, and with all of us having false memories about the 'past' that never really happened?

Let's not take this to the extreme of calling the Universe a lie. What I am saying is that we have simple ways, and at best we can only extrapolate within the calibrated limits of these ways. There is no underlying rule that the complexity of the Universe has been comprehensively understood, only that most of what can be measured today seems internally consistent with other measurements. It does not say that in deep time, nonlinear processes did not exist that would appear to deepen time when linear extrapolation is used to assess the observational window.

Example: No one can know this as a first principle, although there are certain examples in photo-physical chemistry where when sufficient field intensity is available, light absorption takes place "anyway", where the atomic line is a "forbidden" line. Not only that, sufficient population of the forbidden state can be induced that these have time to collide and annihilate to higher one higher state and one lower state. The natural time decay of the "triplet" signal goes away far faster than it does at lower quantum population, hence we know that something nonlinear took place, i.e. higher order kinetics. This is not something I suspect any engineer would typically run into on a "normal" business day. Probably not something a paleoarcheologist would expect either, but how does one know? Probably by levels of decay products.

Now you're using the Science you've already debunked (by your statement that God can make the age of something not match with it's True age) to explain how time, Deep Time, and atomic decay may be nonlinear in ways we don't understand?

The leading edge of Science is always right on the border of Ignorance; Scientific investigation, by definition has the researchers straddling the line between 'what we know' and 'what we don't know.' Every scientific theory will have cracks, that's where it's sitting against the border. The thing that irritates me the most when people bring up religion to explain things, or to make statements like "The world is 6,000 years old, it only LOOKS a billion or so years old because God MADE it to look old," is that they're using God to fill in the cracks, instead of investigating the cracks and trying to learn WHY they're there, which will help to refine theories and push the border back a little further. God does not belong in the cracks of theories, God is not caulk, and I would be very surprised if He was okay with being treated like caulk.

Let me ask you this:

In the (now submerged) Garden of Eden, did the trees have rings? Did Adam and Eve have navels? I don't know the answer to that (or a thousand million other questions), but it would be nice to know.

I know where chickens came from - dinosaur eggs apparently. The chicken crossed the road to run from the dinosaur!

With how this branch of the thread is going, I think I have only one thing left to say:

♫When Logic, and Proportion, have fallen sloppy dead,

♫And the White Knight is talking backwards,

♫And the Red Queen's off with her head,

♫Re-Mem-Beeeeeeer What the Doormouse said!

♫Feed your head!

♫Feed your head!

OK, checking out of wonderland now. Hope your tomorrow is better than tamale.

First off, I started this comment several hours ago, but work got in the way before I completed it. I went ahead and finished it, realizing that someone may have already responded, so if I'm repeating someone else's comment it's only because I'm too lazy to go check before I submit this one.

What you are saying there is that everything we observe or measure could be a lie.

I don't think that's what he's saying at all. Regarding the age of the earth, what's measured may be wrong. That does not make it a lie. It's only a lie if one knows the it's incorrect and is stating it as fact.

And even if one were to admit that it's incorrect does not mean that all measurements or observations are invalid.

Regarding theology (at least Christian theology)....If God is all powerful, yet he wants us to believe in him by way of faith, not by proof, then would it not be reasonable to consider that he may hide inescapable proof of his existence in order for faith to be needed? Why he might do that is another question...perhaps it makes the journey truly more meaningful.

Plain and simple; the believers are saved and will meet their Maker in heaven.

Sometimes I think engineers and scientists demonstrate a level of philosophical thinking on a level with philosophers.

OK. But where did the "aliens" come from?

I'm not arguing for a particular belief, only that human experience cannot accept that something came from nothing.

I did issue a correction to that, it's sitting right above your post.

And as for how things got here, I find that Evolution provides a usable explanation, one that can even be used to make predictions about future experiments and observations, that's one sign of a 'valid' (does not mean 'true in all cases' or 'perfect') theory: it can be Tested, it can be used to design experiments and Predict likely outcomes, and it has the potential to be proven false, or to be replaced by a more refined theory.

In support of Evolution, we have had experiments with pea hybridization, done my Mendel, and repeated by others, we have had experiments on Fruit Flies that have supported Evolution, we even have the Dog, which Man has bred from semi-domesticated wolves. And Domestication of canines has even been repeated, by the Russian experiments in Fox domestication.

In support of Creationism, we have the Bible, and .... the Bible.

In support of Intelligent Design we have ... Creationism, with the word God crossed out and replaced with 'Intelligent Designer.'

I know that politicians (on both sides of the aisle) say some things they shouldn't. Sometimes it's out of anger or frustration. Sometimes they're telling the truth (they're not nice people). Still other times they're misquoted - the oppositions party propaganda machine.

Normally, the extreme left and right doesn't reflect the desires of the regular folks in society. I believe that the extreme folks do think they're right and everyone should follow their lead. Funny how the minority believes they're the majority - our minds sure are powerful!

Most of the regular folk are a mix of conservative and liberal beliefs. They just lean a little more to the right or left.

And to the subject of taxes. Years ago, when I was making a pretty hefty amount of money, someone challenged me to figure out how much I paid in taxes. He told me to include all the taxes I paid; SSI, Medicare, Fed Inc, State Inc, taxes for my employees, property taxes, sales tax, veh. registration, gas tax, city business license, airport tax, rental car tax, hotel tax, utility tax, sewer tax, etc. I remember it was in the 70-75% range. Being rich was expensive! I still pay around 50-60% of my gross income now. I believe that I'm overtaxed and I don't think the money is efficiently used.

I think it depends on what the "weak" do in their time of crisis. Do they ask for help? Are they too proud and don't ask and end up struggling? Do they work harder to get themselves out of trouble? Do they give up? Or do they try to take what's not theirs?

Like you said, we all need help some time and most of us are willing to help. I've helped a lot of people who were down and out. Heck, I have five people living in my house right now who were homeless (or a step away) not too long ago. I enjoy helping them and they're all doing what they can to get back on their feet. I think my house is a nice place to live and the neighborhood is very safe and quiet. I also feel that my act of kindness will help them heal (emotionally) faster and I hope my lifestyle rubs off on them and they find a way to be successful. At the very least, I think it gives them hope.

A great example of urban renewal is the Silverlake area of LA. Or Koreatown. Mid City LA. Hollywood. Inglewood (watch the movie Grand Canyon if you want to see how it was 25 years ago). Downtown LA. The Gaslamp Dist of San Diego.

Here we call it gentrification and it happens without any push from the city or government.