Southwest pilot arrested in SAV

🦈💜 said:
Does it really, truly, genuinely add to the social experience, or are we, collectively, all just a little bit psychologically / socially dependent on it?
Click to expand...
AFAIK there is no scientific consensus on this, but a lot of the hypotheses for “why didn’t a gene for enjoying chemicals that make you extra vulnerable to predators and accidents get selected out back when our ancestors were trying out bipedality and eating spoiled fruit to get buzzed?” Center around some variation of “making the pack work together better” so…..maybe we are?

Of course as with most things biological and evolutionary even if there is truth to that, it’s probably only a small part of the picture. It could also be as simple as it’s baked into the way our brains and hormones (dopamine is a hormone right?) work and we’re backed into a corner, evolutionarily, where once our brains started getting huge there was no way to go back and re-evolve them without the brain chemistry that makes us subject to addiction and dopamine-seeking behavior. I think they call that an evolutionary ratchet?

IDK but it is an interesting thing to ponder. You’d think the apes that got wasted on spoiled fruit would have been selected out with Sabre-toothed-cat-like-quickness.

And then of course there’s the very non-scientific, but also funny and possibly slightly true joke that we spent several million years evolving consciousness and immediately started trying to forget it.
 
Roger Roger said:
AFAIK there is no scientific consensus on this, but a lot of the hypotheses for “why didn’t a gene for enjoying chemicals that make you extra vulnerable to predators and accidents get selected out back when our ancestors were trying out bipedality and eating spoiled fruit to get buzzed?” Center around some variation of “making the pack work together better” so…..maybe we are?

Of course as with most things biological and evolutionary even if there is truth to that, it’s probably only a small part of the picture. It could also be as simple as it’s baked into the way our brains and hormones (dopamine is a hormone right?) work and we’re backed into a corner, evolutionarily, where once our brains started getting huge there was no way to go back and re-evolve them without the brain chemistry that makes us subject to addiction and dopamine-seeking behavior. I think they call that an evolutionary ratchet?

IDK but it is an interesting thing to ponder. You’d think the apes that got wasted on spoiled fruit would have been selected out with Sabre-toothed-cat-like-quickness.

And then of course there’s the very non-scientific, but also funny and possibly slightly true joke that we spent several million years evolving consciousness and immediately started trying to forget it.
Click to expand...
Funnily enough, I just was reading something about why we evolved an ethanol tolerance too…it was more about how doing stupid stuff while drunk was less deadly than most waterborne bacteria.
 
pwttogfk said:
Funnily enough, I just was reading something about why we evolved an ethanol tolerance too…it was more about how doing stupid stuff while drunk was less deadly than most waterborne bacteria.
Click to expand...
Infectious disease has killed more humans than any other cause by a long shot so there’s som logic to that. But, other animals just evolved better resistance to waterborne bacteria. Still could very well be part of the picture. Like I said above, most of the time the full picture of evolution doesn’t follow the neat stories we like to tell.
 
Kingairer said:
I probably drink 3 or 4 times a year now days. With all the other things I try to do, it seems counter to that to drink on a consistent basis.

From a legal standpoint, I would think a good lawyer would be able to bring up the problems with doing a field test in an angled, multi layered, jetbridge.
Click to expand...
The field sobriety test, in this case, showed clear evidence of nystagmus. Even I could see it from the bodycam view. Add to that a strong odor of alcohol and reports that drinking occurred until 4am, plus refusal to test, I'm dubious as to whether the field sobriety test even matters at that point. But if it does, both officers observe clear evidence of nystagmus consistent with impairment, barring any other medical conditions.

If he had failed on the gait portion or the balance portion alone, that might be grounds for tossing it. Most field sobriety tests are part of an investigation, not conclusive in and of themselves, and often contain an element of verbal judo. ("Backwards? I can't even do that sober.") But this one was pretty damning, and is only a component of the overall picture.

Just my 2¢
 
derg said:
I’m going to go ahead and disagree.

You can drink a beer, hop in your car and easily get a DUI.
Click to expand...

Social pressures normalize drinking and driving even as we threaten to severely punish offenders.

I don't disagree that punitive action isn't the right answer, but there's an implicit assumption in your statement that it's inherently acceptable to drink a beer and then go to drive somewhere.

Why do we treat that as acceptable? Why do we, in fact, pressure people to do it? Drive to a friend's house, drive to a bar, have alcohol with dinner...?

It's an unhealthy culture, and the business end of "normalization of deviance."

I mean, that's literally what we're talking about here.

We've normalized the behavior of operating a motor vehicle after ingesting an impairing intoxicant, as if it's ok right up to some imaginary line.

Do we agree on that?

derg said:
Should that person no longer be employable?
Click to expand...

We need a better system than ... all of this. We isolate and severely punish people for doing things we've normalized, and appeal to "personal responsibility" to offset risk-taking behaviors.

In effect, we make the crime "getting caught."

It's also systemically worse for marginalized groups.
 
Roger Roger said:
Infectious disease has killed more humans than any other cause by a long shot so there’s som logic to that. But, other animals just evolved better resistance to waterborne bacteria. Still could very well be part of the picture. Like I said above, most of the time the full picture of evolution doesn’t follow the neat stories we like to tell.
Click to expand...

Remember, evolutionary fitness only cares above survival until successful reproduction of viable offspring. Disease may kill a lot of people, but less likely to affect those of health reproductive age. After one stops reproducing, evolution is no longer in action.
 
pwttogfk said:
Let’s look at Europe. The drinking age is lower but the penalties for drinking and driving are higher (and the threshold is lower). They don’t have the odd approach to alcohol (or sex or THC) that we do.View attachment 85025To quote someone who’s unfortunately on the Supreme Court, “I like beer.” I also won’t have a beer if I drove unless I can hang out afterwards drinking nothing more than water until there’s no doubt I’m completely sober. We treat drinking and driving far too casually.

Someone could probably drink “a” beer, hop in a car, be below even most European BAC limits, and get a DUI charge. I’d highly doubt it would stick if there was a blood draw. This is why the quacks in OKC need to butt out of arrest records and why a conviction absolutely should be career-ending material in my mind.
Click to expand...
damn youre telling me a culture of urban living combined with more public transit infrastructure doesn’t let me drink and drive? almost like there’s viable options to drink socially safely
 
🦈💜 said:
Social pressures normalize drinking and driving even as we threaten to severely punish offenders.

I don't disagree that punitive action isn't the right answer, but there's an implicit assumption in your statement that it's inherently acceptable to drink a beer and then go to drive somewhere.

Why do we treat that as acceptable? Why do we, in fact, pressure people to do it? Drive to a friend's house, drive to a bar, have alcohol with dinner...?

It's an unhealthy culture, and the business end of "normalization of deviance."

I mean, that's literally what we're talking about here.

We've normalized the behavior of operating a motor vehicle after ingesting an impairing intoxicant, as if it's ok right up to some imaginary line.

Do we agree on that?



We need a better system than ... all of this. We isolate and severely punish people for doing things we've normalized, and appeal to "personal responsibility" to offset risk-taking behaviors.

In effect, we make the crime "getting caught."

It's also systemically worse for marginalized groups.
Click to expand...

I can certainly agree with that.
 
Roger Roger said:
But, other animals just evolved better resistance to waterborne bacteria.
Click to expand...

At what cost? No free lunch (see sickle-cell, etc.). Also, the evolutionary timelines are mind-bendingly long for these sorts of big-ticket items. Also, also, to the extent that evolution does occasionally work very quickly (relatively speaking...think dogs vs. wolves), it's in populations that are not wildly successful/dominant (like humans).
 
Boris Badenov said:
At what cost? No free lunch (see sickle-cell, etc.). Also, the evolutionary timelines are mind-bendingly long for these sorts of big-ticket items. Also, also, to the extent that evolution does occasionally work very quickly (relatively speaking...think dogs vs. wolves), it's in populations that are not wildly successful/dominant (like humans).
Click to expand...

This is mostly accurate, but there is an argument for Lamarckian evolution. It’s not just what DNA you have, but how that DNA is expressed, and whether or not that pattern of expression is also inheritable.

At some point adults started to express the gene for lactase, something that was typically lost a few years after birth and thus were able to gain nutrition from milk. From what I read, that happened in a blink from an evolutionary standpoint.

Nature typically will favor the lowest energy state solution, so your point is well taken. Bacteria no longer under antibiotic environmental pressure will eventually lose their resistance, simply because the very slight thermodynamic cost of maintaining an unneeded trait makes it ever so slightly less competitive.
 
arkavgal said:
I'm not making an assumption about his motivations. Merely pointed out that getting in the seat is a deliberate choice.
Click to expand...
and his disease told him everything is fine....there might be a disconnect between making a bad choice and having an addiction.
 
bike21 said:
Anything is a gravel bike if you want to be.

N+1 coming shortly for me, planning to go back to a proper park bike next season along with a shorter travel rig for bikepacking. Currently on a GG Smash and it does well at lots of things, but a bit too jack of all trades for me.

And that new gravel rig hopefully. Don't think I've done a 3 bike season before, but whatevs. Gotta sell two bikes at least. So 3-2 = only 1 new bike right? Right?!
Click to expand...

That’s the best N+1 math I’ve seen in a while
 
BEEF SUPREME said:
That’s the best N+1 math I’ve seen in a while
Click to expand...
Since you brought up my two favorite bikes currently:

2023 Transition Spur. I’ve updated a lot of the components the brakes were the biggest upgrade got rid of the SRAM brakes and put a 200mm rotor up front with TRP brakes.
IMG_1026.jpeg


2022 Norco HSP 27.5. Bought the bike used from Bryn Atkinson for a song. Put short cranks on it as it had 175s for Bryn. Now it’s got the 155 NSB cranks and the drivechain was changed to single speed.
IMG_1059.jpeg
 
BEEF SUPREME said:
Since you brought up my two favorite bikes currently:

2023 Transition Spur. I’ve updated a lot of the components the brakes were the biggest upgrade got rid of the SRAM brakes and put a 200mm rotor up front with TRP brakes.
View attachment 85037

2022 Norco HSP 27.5. Bought the bike used from Bryn Atkinson for a song. Put short cranks on it as it had 175s for Bryn. Now it’s got the 155 NSB cranks and the drivechain was changed to single speed.
View attachment 85038
Click to expand...
How are the TRPs? My SRAM brakes blow chunks. The Mrs's bike has 4 piston XTs and they rock. Leaning toward those on a future bike.

Norco looks fun, considering something with dual crown but might stick with a Fox 38 or a ZEB for the park bike. I'll be looking for something used as well.
 
bike21 said:
How are the TRPs? My SRAM brakes blow chunks. The Mrs's bike has 4 piston XTs and they rock. Leaning toward those on a future bike.

Norco looks fun, considering something with dual crown but might stick with a Fox 38 or a ZEB for the park bike. I'll be looking for something used as well.
Click to expand...

Too bad you don't live locally I just follow Bryn on social media and wait for him to sell his bikes. They are basically new in perfect condition and blow out pricing.

I love, love, love my TRPs. I run the DH Evo on all of my DH bikes and big travel enduro bike except for the Norco in the above photo since Bryn put Saints on it and it had new pads. They are just as good as the TRPs but the modulation is not as good. More light switch than dimmer switch. Seemed like a waste of money to just part them out plus they use the same mineral oil, bleed kit and pads as TRPs

I've got the TRP Slate EVO on the Spur. Since I didn't need the full DH bike brakes on there but wanted something with enough power for PWN steeps and good modulation. Plus they are a pretty good deal and $300 bucks for the set on the TRP website.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top