Refugee Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 18 hours ago, ThatJerkDave said: I still don't think he and I would get along, if we were to hang out at the bar. And it would be a 50-50 thing between us. I don't remember all the specific psychological terms, but the "alpha" guys don't intimidate or impress me and we tend to clash. I fully admit that it is half my fault, and that I will antagonize when I feel like someone is trying to "big time" me. I believe the preferred nomenclature is “jerk”. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatJerkDave Posted May 21 Author Share Posted May 21 3 hours ago, Uffdaswede said: Up until you were claiming fault you were going full Sigma. If we can pass that off as self-reflection diarized within a virtual society and not as a passive desire to get along in the real world you can keep your Sigma status. But your score was dinged. Never apologize to the herd. Rodgers isn’t that hard to figure. His capital T talent for football fuels the narcissism—which then looks like Alpha. But an Alpha shouldn’t have as much trouble with relationships as he does. His intellect provides something of a moderating influence. I do like his dry sense of humor. It shows awareness and subtlety. I don't know what Sigma means, other than it is a Greek letter. But that wasn't an apology. I just know that it takes two to tango, and often times I will dance with a quarterback, pitcher, pilot, etc that tries to be king ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 it's funny that people put so much stock into " alphas" and "betas" when it's widely understood in wildlife biology that the original study on Wolves that creates this idea was critically flawed. In the wild, in fact the "Alpha Male" and "Alpha Female" of a wolfpack is generally just mom and dad, since the juveniles are going to wander off to mate with some wolf they're not related to once they're mature. It's just that when you keep wolves in captivity, they behave in unnatural ways. So there's no such thing as an alpha, a beta, or a sigma when it comes to people. Anybody who is telling you "all people can be easily and cleanly separated into a small number of boxes" is trying to sell you something and is not to be trusted. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgbeethree Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 28 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said: it's funny that people put so much stock into " alphas" and "betas" when it's widely understood in wildlife biology that the original study on Wolves that creates this idea was critically flawed. Same with gluten "intolerance". The same scientist who did the original study came out and basically said, "Whoopsy daisy. I screwed up the first test, redid it multiple times properly, and there's no such thing." You're either Celiac or not but a multibillion dollar industry popped up in the meantime so you don't hear much about that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 I mean the 1998 Lancet paper by Wakefield that purported that "vaccines cause Autism" was retracted partially in 2004 (after 10 of the 12 coauthors retracted the conclusion of the paper) and completely in 2010 (after the data was learned to be fraudulent) but that hasn't made Aaron Rodgers reconsider anything. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uffdaswede Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 2 hours ago, PossibleCabbage said: it's funny that people put so much stock into " alphas" and "betas" when it's widely understood in wildlife biology that the original study on Wolves that creates this idea was critically flawed. In the wild, in fact the "Alpha Male" and "Alpha Female" of a wolfpack is generally just mom and dad, since the juveniles are going to wander off to mate with some wolf they're not related to once they're mature. It's just that when you keep wolves in captivity, they behave in unnatural ways. So there's no such thing as an alpha, a beta, or a sigma when it comes to people. Anybody who is telling you "all people can be easily and cleanly separated into a small number of boxes" is trying to sell you something and is not to be trusted. I freely admit I’m selling boxes. Trust me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighCalebR Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 The basis for "young sheldon" looks different than I thought it would. At 17 I was taking a "Foods" class that I was forced to take to fill some time. Congrats big brains you got a new one. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 The alpha/beta thing is also funny when you consider that nature in fact suggests several different mating strategies. For example, lephant seals keep harems, that is there will be one bull who has access to several cows of breeding age. Usually a male outsider will have to fight the bull in order to access the cows in order to mate, which results in a lot of injured seals. An alternative mating strategy is when smaller males hide in the herd of cows and attempt to mate when the bull isn't watching closely (seals sleep a lot.) It's well known, across a number of species, that it's an evolutionarily stable strategy for males of that species to employ a number of different strategies to maximize their reproductive fitness. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 1 hour ago, HighCalebR said: The basis for "young sheldon" looks different than I thought it would. At 17 I was taking a "Foods" class that I was forced to take to fill some time. Congrats big brains you got a new one. She's from Chicago and hasn't been murdered yet, so she must be smart. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 16 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: She's from Chicago and hasn't been murdered yet, so she must be smart. I mean, the Chicagoland area has 9.5 million people in it. If we take the highest murder rate in the last 20 years (crime was much, much higher in the 90s than it is now) that's about 800/year. Extrapolating based on this number it would take just under 12 millennia for everybody in Chicago to be murdered, assuming no new people come into the city and no one dies of natural causes (like being 10,000 years old.) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 (edited) 3 hours ago, wgbeethree said: Same with gluten "intolerance". The same scientist who did the original study came out and basically said, "Whoopsy daisy. I screwed up the first test, redid it multiple times properly, and there's no such thing." You're either Celiac or not but a multibillion dollar industry popped up in the meantime so you don't hear much about that. What Non-celiac gluten sensitivity (along with a host of other grains) is absolutely a "thing". Sure it's probably over commercialized, but avoiding gluten and replacing its modern sources with nutrient dense food is absolutely a beneficial move. Modern wheat isn't the worst thing in the modern diet, but it's not good either. Medium rank of many evils. Edited May 21 by incognito_man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgbeethree Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 1 hour ago, incognito_man said: What Non-celiac gluten sensitivity (along with a host of other grains) is absolutely a "thing". Sure it's probably over commercialized, but avoiding gluten and replacing its modern sources with nutrient dense food is absolutely a beneficial move. Modern wheat isn't the worst thing in the modern diet, but it's not good either. Medium rank of many evils. I'm pretty sure the near consensus opinion now is that it is the FODMAPs (long a$$ acronym for the carbs) in the wheat that are messing people up not the gluten. Wheat and other grains happen to be high in both. Eliminating gluten also tends to eliminate most FODMAPs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PossibleCabbage Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 (edited) I think RE: Gluten my real sympathy regarding trendy gluten avoidance, is that "catering to the gluten averse" makes things much tougher on the Celiac people who *really* need to avoid gluten. Like if your pizza place offers a gluten free crust, but it's rolled out on the same counter with the same tools and put in the same pan as the gluten-full crust that might appeal to the gluten-avoidant, but that's not going to work for your celiac folks. Like as someone with a potentially fatal food allergy, I think it should be abundantly clear when the allergen in question is or isn't in something. Edited May 21 by PossibleCabbage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgbeethree Posted May 21 Share Posted May 21 8 minutes ago, PossibleCabbage said: I think RE: Gluten my real sympathy regarding trendy gluten avoidance, is that "catering to the gluten averse" makes things much tougher on the Celiac people who *really* need to avoid gluten. Like if your pizza place offers a gluten free crust, but it's rolled out on the same counter with the same tools and put in the same pan as the gluten-full crust that might appeal to the gluten-avoidant, but that's not going to work for your celiac folks. Like as someone with a potentially fatal food allergy, I think it should be abundantly clear when the allergen in question is or isn't in something. Don't spent too much time worrying. As someone who has spent the whole gluten intolerance era in a kitchen the Celiac folks and the kitchen crew 100% know the difference. The Celiac folks aren't gong to eat anywhere they aren't 100% sure of and 99.99% of cooks aren't going to serve them anything they aren't 99.99% sure of. No one wants to die. No one wants to kill somebody. The people with serious allergies like that don't mess around at all (or they'd be dead already). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted May 22 Share Posted May 22 1 hour ago, wgbeethree said: I'm pretty sure the near consensus opinion now is that it is the FODMAPs (long a$$ acronym for the carbs) in the wheat that are messing people up not the gluten. Wheat and other grains happen to be high in both. Eliminating gluten also tends to eliminate most FODMAPs. Good clarification. I used gluten where I should have said "wheat". I agree there's widespread consensus that the component in wheat leading to trouble is fructan. I should be more careful with my wording. I'm pretty anti-wheat (except for einkorn) for a variety of reasons, and favor people being suspicious about wheat (but not because of the protein) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts