Ten oz

A board general statement. Perhaps an ill chosen one. As it applies to Ferguson; the rates of black people being stopped, searched, and arrested is undeniably disproportional. http://ago.mo.gov/VehicleStops/2013/reports/161.pdf As a matter of recorded fact those numbers carry more weight (are more important to this conversation) than speculations about people's attitudes, actions, or habits.

In my opinion justice doesn't apply to things that have past. A person can work toward a more equal, fair, safe, etc future but the same for past events can never be achieved. I think past events should be used as examples to help improve the future. The future should not be a platform to re-live or avenge the past. If a person is imprisoned it should be because they are a current or future threat to the safety and security of society. At the OP's example; killing the killer of ones father or that killer dying by other means may possibly make society more safe but would not provide justice so to speak. What happened can not be reserved or made different.

@ Professor Blue, in my opinion a big part of the problem is that a lot of people simple refuse to acknowledge that facts carry more weight than speculation or opinion. Whether it is obvious things evolution and climate change or social problems like unequal pay for women and high police interaction rates for blacks. The statistical information is clear. In the case of Ferguson people of color are disproportionately stopped, searched, and arrested at higher rates by a police force that itself is diproportionaley lacking in people of color. Unfortunately there is often a belief system driven by anecdotal personal experience that many people use to ignore the actual numbers. Speculations about aggression in the black community or challanges to individual character are made equal parts of the conversation as some people dismiss the actual statistics. In my opinion empirical statistics over time are far more telling than any individual event. I believe that when things constantly happen to a group of people over long periods of time it requires acknowledgement and change. After all doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result is insane. I also think it is the responsibility of a responsible gov't to look for legal & structural ways of resolving matters that are negatively impacting groups on people in their communities. BTW Cliven Bundy is in Neveda, not Montana.

I am not suspicious. I just find it odd that you ask questions about information that is public record, very easily researched, and links to have already been provided. I do not suspect this, that, or the other; I simply don't understand why you continue to question rather than read the creditable sources already given or research yourself.

Perhaps I should have said in addition to. I was adding on to your post. Did not mean to imply what your meaning was.

I also suspect that the actual data isn't meaningful to him. He has yet to pose a question regarding the data that he couldn't have found the answer to in 2 minutes or less on the internet.

WASHINGTON – The U.S. prison population declined 1.7 percent (or by 27,770 inmates) from 2011 to 2012, falling to an estimated 1,571,013 prisoners, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. Nine states had a decrease of over 1,000 prisoners in 2012: California, Texas, North Carolina, Colorado, Arkansas, New York, Florida, Virginia and Maryland. This is the third consecutive year of a decline in the number of state prisoners, which represents a shift in the direction of incarceration practice in the states over the past 30 years. The prison population grew every year between 1978 and 2009, from 307,276 prisoners in 1978 to a high of 1,615,487 prisoners in 2009. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/p12acpr.cfm Canada's Prison population: http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2012-ccrs/index-eng.aspx

There was not a drop in 2000. www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p10.pdf

WASHINGTON One area where the United States indisputably leads the world The United States has 2.3 million people behind bars, almost one in every 100 Americans. The U.S. prison population has more than doubled over the past 15 years, and one in nine black children has a parent in jail. Proportionally, the United States has four times as many prisoners as Israel, six times as many as Canada or China, eight times as many as Germany and 13 times as many as Japan. With just a little more than 4 percent of the worlds population, the United States accounts for a quarter of the planets prisoners and has more inmates than the leading 35 European countries combined. Almost all the other nations with high per capita prison rates are in the developing world. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/21/us/21iht-letter21.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

You are using getting "horny" as a standard of some sort and I don't understand what you mean. My cat get "horny" and attempts to have sex with my house shoes when I leave out. Many of dogs have gotten "horny" at first sight of my legs. The sensation of being horny is hormonal more than it is conscious.

There are a lot of different studies floating around that place the non paternity rate of fathers in Europe and Northern American low as 1-3% to high as 28-30 percent. http://www.isogg.org/wiki/Non-paternity_event What impact does this have on the child being raised by a non biological parent believed to be a biological one? Just as various types of stress affect hormones in children which alter development does exposure to a parent with specific shared genes alter the expression of those genes in biological children? For example; do I have my fathers nervous tick as result of emulating him, experiencing his tick trigger something in my genes, or as a matter of genetics I would've had the tick with or without him in my life? assuming any of the three examples are true is good or bad for society as a whole? Also if anyone has a link to reliable research on non paternity I would be interested in seeing it as I have been unable to locate any.

"Frequency of praying to God was dichotomized between seldom and never to distinguish prayers from non-prayers." Many Muslim pray multiple times a day. By that standard someone who prays 2-3 times a week "seldom" prays while someone who prays only during holidays may as well answer never. On my opinion the questioned asked provide no insight into what is actually believed. What is religion but a belief system?

How exacting of a universe we have is a matter of perspective and not matter of fact. However let's assume, for the sake of argument, I agree. How does the existence of a God/creator explain anything? In my opinion the concept of a God simply shifts questions but does not answer any. Questions like how was the universe was created still persist. Simply crediting God doesn't answer the question. By whom something was created and how something was created are different things. It that makes God an unimportant component in understand how. If you were trying to reverse engineer a piece of technology simply knowing the name of its inventor would be useless unless knowing the name allowed you insight to their research, methods, materials, tools, or etc. knowing God as the creator of the universe does not help our undertsanding of the universe. It does not provide insight to God's research, methods, materials, tools, or etc.

@ the OP, religion itself is purely environmental. The overwhelming majority of children born in a Muslim country to practicing Muslim parents will grow up Muslim. Just as the overwhelming majority of children born in Christian countries to practicing Christians will go up Christian. How religion is practiced and what is believed vary greatly. Polling twins about their religious beliefs without quantifying or defining a religious belief structure doesn't seem useful. A 5 foot 7 inch with shorter siblings might consider themselves tall while a 6 foot 2 inch person with taller sibling might consider themselves short. The study failed to quantify religion. What it means to "find comfort in god" or "finding strength" is very subjective. A person can think god is important without holding any traditional view of god. More direct questions would provide better insight. Questions like: do you believe you have a soul and that it will continue to live after you die or do you believe in god and that he/she/it is singularly responsible for all livings things and matter in the universe.

I do not see anything about "Evolution, Morphology and Exobiology" in the thread starter.

I think conceptually you are mistaken in trying to compare human sexuality directly against animal sexuality. Sex serves a slightly different purpose amongst all societies of animals and behaviors vary. A male Quoll for example savages multiple females during mating season. Many females die has a result. While an albatrosses practices peaceful courtships that lead to life long mating relationships. Human sexuality to Rams or any other animal's sexuality isn't an apples to apples comparison.

.....but that is not the standard. By the human definition many mammals are bisexual and few mate for life with an exclusive partner.

Exclusivetivity is not a standard in nature. Many humans are exclusive between each other for life but that is not the case for all mammals. Not even always the case for humans. Many mammals play the odds. Mate with everything and anything they can until something winds up pregnant. Defining sexual behavior as any one thing is a human thing. It doesn't universal apply throughout nature in the same terms.

What about exclusive heterosexual behavior? For example, if dogs are bisexual what does that speak to?

I am not a zoologist but have had pets (cats, dogs, rabbits) throughout mylife. If you consider performing sexual acts of another of the same gender to a homosexual or lesbian act than I would agrue that every pet I have ever had were gay. Whether it's male dogs trying to mount each other or my leg. So I am not sure what your criteria here is?

Many aspects of human society could be changed. You started this thread asking about money, $60 made availible per day. Money itself as a system of managing trade is not necessary. Humans invented, learned, created, and thrived long before money became the standard. The existence of money, the implementation of a currency, was not a need.Yes, we could eat grasshoppers and it would be more sustainable and possibly healthier than many of the things we choose to eat. I feel the idea of such moves this conversation significantly away from where it start. Giving people a little extra spending money and transforming the worlds agricultural industry are two very different things. I no longer understand your position or goal in the discussion. I had thought, from the OP, it was to improve the basic standard of living for people through altruism?

What do you believe you have provided? St Louis country has a PROVABLE history of racial bias in their law enforcement practices. Following investigations they have fired leadership and disbanded entire departments. That plus the actual rates of police stops and searches showing over a 10-1 greater rate for blacks is very compelling evidence. I have linked all. What have you presented? Do you think simply referencing something like the LA riots (which had no connection to Ferguson) is evidence of something? Opinions are not facts and thoughts are not evidence. I have presented real information. You have present a philosophy for consideration which you have thus far failed to support with anything but speculation.

Why money? What is actually more valuable in the long run $30 dollars a day or investments in infastructure? If a government makes things like healthcare and education free or housing affordable isn't that actually worth more than $30 a day. No body is getting through college or paying for a hospital stay with $30 a day. in some cases new rail lines, buses, express ways, and other forms of easing travel for commuters may actually save a person more than $30 a day. For example; I spent several years working in the finicial district of San Francisco. Driving into the city meant a $5 bridge toll plus $30 for all day parking while I was at work. Plus about another 4-5 dollars in gas depending on road conditions made it around $40 a day just to go to work in my car. Fortunately the the San Francisco Bay Area they have a commuter rail line (bay area rapid transit) which I could take rather than drive. It cost about $6 dollars each way (lates 90's prices). So instead of a $40 dollar commute it allowed for a $12 dollar commute. Cash in the hand isn't the only way to benifit people. Having billionaires pay for people to attend medical school or building more recreation centers in under privilaged communities helps too.

Thank you for the link. There are some concepts referenced within it I am not familiar with. What drives dissapation and where does the energy go? Also, is the changing ground state do to quatum fluctuation theoretical or observed?

Good point. Language has been critical. I would go further than you have and say all language written, verbal, or gestured all equally were important at the time of invention. The improvements communication allowed for in every aspect of living had exponentially expanding influences.