Hi. On Skeptics there is a question suffering problems involving a short Portuguese language video, with currently no proper translation available. If someone here is interested in helping out to upgrade a question (or even better: to provide an answer): skeptics.stackexchange.com/q/52020
@ANevesthinksSEisevil Well, I would appreciate an edit tremendously, and do not see anything wrong with it. (In principle: foreign language claims in bad translation/paraphrase are a bane over there). Me thinks that any help a (native?) speaker can offer to increase the precision should be welcomed by really everyone.
I just approved that edit adding a transcript. Adding your own translation would still be a plus. (As now I still don't really get it what she is saying — but then that may be the reason for a negative answer on her actual content… ;) ) Thanks so far in any case!
Since I'm just too slow for listening to her comprehending the language: can you explain in very short words how she arrives from 'electron spin' to 'dissonance', or a point before the mark you identified that illustrates her basic concept of her food categories? (If that's asking to much, please ignore it…)
@LаngLаngС I can add more context to the thing? it might help
I'll add more context from the video.
Part of the problem is that the video is not 15s long. It's 3:53 of bullshit, if you will "pardon my french", that adds a lot of context. Asking "is this sentence true" is... not great. But you're from Skeptics, you know this problem much much better than me.
@LаngLаngС see 0:34, she is talking about "correlation / embryology / organs and systems", and "Metabolical changes in 1 organ - systemic symptom in another organ!!!".
I can't understand where she gets the correlations
@ANevesthinksSEisevil A fair share of pigs' breakfasts over there blunts my palate for French specialties ;) It's just a matter of principle that a good question should not be misleading readers & answerers, especially not if it's just based on misreading/misunderstanding. If she just talks common bull the whole time, so be it.
I'm sorry, but it takes a couple higher magnitudes of effort to dismantle the claim, than it takes to make it...
But I really don't mind helping with taking transcripts, and having a poke at translating them.
@LаngLаngС Yes, IMO the more important work and responsibilities of a Skeptics.SE is not what one would expect, the "debunking" or "confirmation" themselves, but the tone and processes of the actions. And those will set the tone and processes for thought processes and belief systems and frameworks and whatever, in a "teach a person how to fish" sort of way.
Based on my sloppy ears, I thought I might hear 'chiral' instead of 'girar' (& yes, if were better at this I would have known 'quiralidade'), then I saw the 'dissonant' missing… Sometimes those CAM ppl have true value disguised in flowery conceptual language. Chirality would be stereo chemistry and so. But, it sort of crytallizes now that 'this case' is a 'case' ;)
@ANevesthinksSEisevil Thanks. I share this antipathy for 'debunking' & 'fact-checking'. That often just deepens the divide. It is really important for me to look at both sides of such matters, with ample benefit of doubt for both, and then trying to build bridges into or out of a swamp. Your quick & very helpful response is much appreciated :)
Oh, for chat responses on SE I think it's really reasonably 'quick' ;) Whether you are based in Vladivostok, Porto or Florianopolis, just now my local library made me as a 'paying customer' wait a whole week before ack'ing that they got my order in 'incoming' and promised to process it in the next 'couple of days'…
