Roamer

I didn't ridicule you Moontanman, i ridiculed the USAF in my first post(which "somebody" seemed to like) and explained their attitude in my second post.

20 hours ago, Roamer said:

So i have to ask: what's your point ?

Are you claiming a cover-up ? Would be quite likely in the case of actual aliens, but it would mean there would be more aliens ready to be discovered, search for them instead of hoping to gain access to area 51.

Do you want an organisation investigating aliens ? Maybe better not having it be a government-agency because they re not going to be too competent in it. (At least not untill actual aliens  have been found)

These are two (different) points, if you 're trying to make them both, you should probably make two threads.

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

Yes I think an organization, a fair and scientific investigation that goes on and doesn't stop because one sighting can be explained.  An accredited university of excellent reputation should have a department dedicated to this.

If UFO's belong to any intelligent community(either alien or foreign) they would be trying to stay hidden, hence (pure)scientific research would be inadequate to unmask them, investigators would need to be hunters, like criminal investigators are(supposed to be).

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

Ta say UFOs are nothing but some redneck hillbilly with an anal fetish is insulting  on a level with racism. I'm a hillbilly are you a clueless flatlander? Want to exchange insults all day or read the OP and either react or go on because you have personally insulted me... 

Rascism focuses on who somebody is, not on what they say.   I know a flatlander, he always tells me the earth is flat, and i smile and agree with him, then i go on with my life because disagreeing with him ain't worth my time, a bit like the USAF does with UFO-theorists.

On 10/23/2019 at 12:02 AM, Moontanman said:

instead of investigate UFOs.  

The job of the US Airforce is to protect US airspace from hostile action, not to investigate EVERYTHING in the air, and especially not to address civilian complaints about aliens using complicated machinery to have butt-sex with them. Having a small debunking-team so the rest of the USAF can focus on their (core-)job falls perfectly in line with this.

So i have to ask: what's your point ?

Are you claiming a cover-up ? Would be quite likely in the case of actual aliens, but it would mean there would be more aliens ready to be discovered, search for them instead of hoping to gain access to area 51.

Do you want an organisation investigating aliens ? Maybe better not having it be a government-agency because they re not going to be too competent in it. (At least not untill actual aliens  have been found)

On 9/1/2019 at 4:32 AM, Art Man said:

I told him to call the cops and he said, "I can't do that, they'll think I'm crazy." 

Going to the cops to solve a crime, especially small crimes, is generally useless, however, it does strengthen the case against the stalker in case things escalate or the stalker is actually apprehended.

If your friend is too concerned about a few strangers laughing at him to go to the cops he obviously doesn't care about his "stalker."

On 9/1/2019 at 4:32 AM, Art Man said:

This was a true story about a friend of mine who told me about this yesterday.

First claiming it's about a friend then talking about what happened to you(r locker) is incoherent and suggests you're confused and/or imagining things.

On 9/1/2019 at 7:46 AM, Art Man said:

"Coincidentally" a few minutes ago I found that someone got in one my locked storages yet again, you think its the same gay?

Storage lockers are notoriously unsafe, it could be a coworker who misremembered which locker it was, or your boss trying to find drugs.

3 hours ago, Moontanman said:

What I am trying to show here is the idea that the air force never really did anything but push pelacanism as hard as they could to explain away any sighting they could not easily show a reason for...

umm, rivers flow, they start in mountains and flow to lakes, seas & oceans.

looks like a magnetic field, just strange i don't see what it repulses off.

ps i think you posted in the wrong section.

x can still be 1

On 23-2-2018 at 12:22 AM, NortonH said:

I am helping my son with a high school project so I want to make sure i get this 10000% right!

He has been asked to apply the formal scientific method analysis to the question of 'climate change'.

This sounds like a 14 year old boy is asked to prove or disprove decades of scientific work.

Does he get  a mark or something for this ? If so, maybe you should upload a copy/picture of the assignment so we don't get off-topic, because right now you 're in a bit over your head.

I voted no, i do not see any reason why a negative vote should count less then a positive vote; i believe moderation hinted at "abusers" ,but personally i mostly/only give upvotes and likes and no downvotes, and that's just the way i like to give votes, but if someone else only gives downvotes this only means that person probably wastes more time reading through bad posts instead of skipping them(and not clicking politics in the first place) like i do, and thus communicates his subjective (and unargumented) opinion in a different way.

I know we all love positivity more then negativity, but positivity becomes meaningless without negativity to counter it.

13 hours ago, Silvestru said:

(I am not saying rep should be assigned by categories, maybe just eliminating this up vote option from Joke sections or religion or speculation and leave this for actual science threads.).

I did notice there is a upvote, downvote, and a like-vote, and i think the difference is getting blurry(aka, did someone say something smart or did he save me the trouble of replying, did he say something funny, or maybe even ask a question that i would like to see answered(i think this last one would deserve it's own curiosity-vote) ,anyway, removing downvote from the non-science and the likevote from the science-section might be a good idea.(ps are likevotes counted ??)

What if i told, that each day you wake up, you're a slightly different version of the person you re though/supposed to have been the day before, and the person from the day before will never come back again ?

What if i told you, that when your body dies, you stop experiencing yourself as a human, however, your body would decompose and be reassimilated by the bio-mass, life would continue, possibly in your off spring, likely in your species, and certainly in other species, and, in the long run, the universe would continue to explore itself ??

And what if i told you, that how life evolves, and how the exploration of itself of the universe continue, is still dependent on how you affected the world when you were alive ???

On 6-1-2018 at 10:56 PM, Willshikabob said:

I don't know what I should do with this stuff in terms of making it science fair ready, but that's what you guys are here for, right? 

You 're holding a science fair ??

4 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

I was mistaken.

Do you understand it now ?

2 hours ago, koti said:

this is not a technical issue

Yes it is.

Specifically, they ask for software changes making it easier to hack an iphone, which could be used on an iphone NOT in their posession.

If you have an iphone in your possession that you need to hack, you only need an engineer to physically open it and retrieve any data from it.

3 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Even an insane leader (oxymoron, unless they're a King/Emporer) can't believe that one bomb versus several hundreds of thousands, is a going to be a winner. Kim knows he is never going to win by firing his bomb so his only option is the threat, classic bluff. 

Nuclear arsenal is a perfect opportunity to make the "winner" be a loser, so why would this be a "bluff" ?? (aka MAD etc)

On 24-11-2017 at 7:55 PM, jamesmatheson said:

how does this affect science?

It would give some new(and easier) formulas to write.(if it checks out)

3 minutes ago, Strange said:

But does it, that's the question.

Usually it does, since usually a higher temperature means a higher solubility, though it depends on the type of filth involved.

Warm water generally does a better job removing filth stuck to your skin,

and, as employees are supposed to look clean/attractive to customers, it makes sense to make them use hot water.

6 hours ago, 3____344340095e33-2 said:

Many papers are published claiming if one sense is weaker due to a disability than the other senses of the brain compensate.

Compensation would mean the senses even out, and this is simply not true, what ís true is that braincells asssigned on handling a sense that no (longer) works get reassigned to helping out with another sense or brainfunction,

this does not mean the other senses become so much better that your senses together get on par with the senses of someone who has all senses.

Quote

Anybody not believe in coincidence?

Well, nót believing in coincidence goes a bit far, but, i 'd rather look at the patterns, for example;

both killers chose to assasinate their target on a friday; heck, i can imagine that someone who goes out to kill the biggest target he can find has a strong work ethic and would choose to finish their work(preparations) on the end of the workweek, so fridays seem to have a  high(er)-probability of being unsave for a president(or senator?)

The age and career of the persons involved are obviously higher probability as well, becoming president is something you need plenty of experience for,

and becoming an (one time-)assasin is mostly self-taught, so needs less preparation time.

“We have fought to find an approximation in law so that all others can understand that from our perspective treating the river as a living entity is the correct way to approach it, as in indivisible whole, instead of the traditional model for the last 100 years of treating it from a perspective of ownership and management.”

“We can trace our genealogy to the origins of the universe,” said Albert. “And therefore rather than us being masters of the natural world, we are part of it. We want to live like that as our starting point. And that is not an anti-development, or anti-economic use of the river but to begin with the view that it is a living being, and then consider its future from that central belief.”

I 'd say this is a better development then granting the rights to be treated as a legal entity to a company.

Weapons are becoming more destructive, so people are more carefull in using them/allowing them to be used.

3 hours ago, dimreepr said:

They're the same, in that neither are conscious, they are both systems that have a conscious user;

I do believe the govt of North-korea has a (single) user, however, most countries in the modern world are lead by a consensus coming from a complex of elected representatives, judges, treaties(in and outside of the country) and lobbies/vested interests.

Ants are led by their genetically imposed hierarchy, btw.

We already have new consciousness emerging, it's in organisations and governments, the last could become/is becoming problematic to evolution.

Internet isn't "conscious" as it hardly acts as a single being, the individual users could be seen as an emotional sytem of the internet though.

@Tar;

I could disagree and agree with most of your post, depending on perspective,

but, I tried to take a meaningfull distinction, it's probably not complete, feel free to contribute.

9 hours ago, Gees said:

Welcome to the thread.

Thanks, umm, where is this thread supposed to go ?

On 3-9-2017 at 4:12 AM, Gees said:

What I have seen is evidence that consciousness evolves, life forms evolve, and all life forms are conscious.

Everything evolves(which realy, means that changes happen on such a slow scale they're hardly measurable)

that conscious evolves is not an argument that consciousness is needed for (life's) evolution.

If i may introduce some concepts;

1) Auto-reactions; even biting down when some food enters your mouth is an auto-reaction.

2) Memorized actions(trauma's at the  core); basically the same as an auto-reaction, but it is memorized, for example remembering that a particular area is (too) hot(some vulcano)

   this would require an auto-reaction to have a lasting impact on an entity's decision-making(by either increasing the same auto-reaction or creating a new auto-reaction to, for example, a recognition-point(some rock near the vulcano is considered "bad" by the entity)

3) Opposite auto-reactions, or any other balance to auto-reactions; basically an entity would have multiple auto-reactions and this would result in a "decision"

(and if this "decision" would be"in error with evolutionary laws" then evolution would take care of it.)

4) Pattern-recognittion, which is realy a bunch of auto-reaction finding they're working in unison.

(maybe point 3 would chronologically happen before point 2, i dunno)

Regarding your remark, it seems to me that auto-reaction(s) were among the early abilities that would be selected for in evolution,

and up to the fourth point could 've happened and selected for in the first hundred million years of evolution.(just throwing some rough estimates around)

But the remarks you throw around are like saying "muscles are needed for evolution" while anyone knows some of the first creatures didn't have muscles but certainly had limbs

(and ways of moving these limbs) and discussion gets bogged down by linguistics.