Ten oz

Those systems work great in those countries. I am not claiming otherwise. I just don't believe they would work in the United States. There are a great many reasons why I don't believe they would work here but the simplest reason comes down to anger. We are a angry nation. Europe doesn't execute it's citizens we do. Europe doesn't lead the world in imprisoning citizens we do. Europe doesn't lead the world in military spending we do. Here in the states we are willing to spend billions punishing "bad people" but aren't interested in spending a dime to help sick people. Our culture is different, more aggressive towards its own, angry. That is why the average American has a stronger opinion about gun rights than they do climate change. We are the only country to ever drop an Atom bomb during war and we aren't even a little bit sorry about it.

Are there examples of people who lived with full-body paralysis and loss of all senses? Honest question. Not a challange. I would be interested in reading about a case like that.

Lawrence Krauss speaks about this a lot.

Had a lengthy discussion about this last month. I am very curious to see what type of discussion this creates in a forum such as this one where everyone has some appreciation for science.

Our collective knowledge as a species may possibly be infinite but individual knowledge is not. We all die and as such have a limit on what we can learn and experience. Even if our collective knowledge were infinite no one would ever be able to process so much as a millionth of it in a lifetime considering that every portion of something infinite is by default infinite or at the very least inconceivably large.

^^^^I have a lot of thoughts on this but am not sure where you are looking to take this discussion?

Unfortunately we view capitalism through a religious like prism. Asking how much it will cost, how much can be made, who benefits, how it impacts GDP, and etc will always come before actually helping anyone. With that in mind we need a different approach. The socialist and nonprofit models in Europe simply won't work. I think the govt should work towards flooding the healthcare market with trained service providers. Basic supply and demand. If we had too many trained Doctors, nurses, technicians, and etc it would drive the costs down. The govt already has massive drives to recruit military, police, fire fighters, and all sorts of other personnel. All those govt jobs come with various paid college benefits. That is a one of the primary recruitment tools. Those paid college benefits can be used for anything. If those programs were adjusted to steer people into college programs related to the medical industry rather than any degree of choice the balance of supply and demand could be shifted within a generation.

IMHO our (United States) basic system is pretty good. Our problem is gerrymandering. Allowing politicians to pick their voters rather than the voters pick their representatives is a huge problem. It is why we have such terrible partisanship. If districts were set by algorithms designed to calculate population and area size to divide districts up equally I believe govt would improve overnight.

In "A Universe From Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather Than Nothing" Lawrence Krauss does basically ask why the universe exists. When something is real asking why mostly creates useful dialogue. Why are there stars, why does earth have an atomesohere, why do people get cancer, why does the ocean have tides, and so on are all questions humans asked long before the answers were known. Many of the questions humans asked seemed unanswerable at one time or another. In the case of God asking why is useless. This implies God isn't real. We can't ask why because they is nothing to study and investigate to satisfy the question. Krauss can ask why is there a Universe rather than nothing because there is a Universe that can be studied. I can't ask why there is a God because there isn't a God. If God existed why would most certainly apply. If I asked you why you exist the answer would be straight forward as saying because your parents had you. Deeper still you could explain the entire biological process of your conception and birth. As for why life exists at all science is constantly working on that question. There are numerous working theories for why life exists. God doesn't exist so asking why God exists just falls flat.

You may very well be 100% correct. My understand has been that all the information is there in DNA only much of it isn't expressed. Like the experiments performed to grow teeth in chickens by biologist Mathew Harris. Birds no longer have trigger the growth of teeth but the ability/genes for them to do so is still in their DNA.

Human intellect strives to answer questions. Most of humanities greatest steps forward have started by first understanding why. Why apples fall, lighting strikes, or why to sun goes away at night. Why has been a cornerstone in critical thinking. Yet I seldom see it applied to God. Religious people agrue that science can't disprove God or that the beauty or the universe requires a creator but no one ever attempts to explain why there is or would be a god in the first place. To say God loves, has faith, or is infinite is not an explanation for WHY. Assuming there is a god..... WHY?

Genecks asked "how could you tell conciousness was still happening" I will go a step further and ask if consciousness requires a body? Sight, sound, touch, taste, smell, etc define our world and as such define how our brains process information. What does a bodiless human consciousness think? It is hot or cold, hungry or full, does it feel sleepy, or etc? Do our brains require inputs to properly function?

What are your goals? Are you looking to bench press your own body weight or are you looking to bench double your body weight? If your goal is to merely look good with your shirt off a sensible diet is all you need. I don't know your goals but in general short cardio bursts between lifting sets can increase GH levels. That is part of the science behind CrossFit. Every few sets you sprint around the block or something to race your heart rate up.

Forgive me if the following isn't organized clearly: Black holes feed for long periods of times. If a black hole created our universes wouldn't it have fed material into our universe over a long period of time? That does not fit with current expansion models. In order for your black hole theory to work energy during the supernova of a large enough star would have to momentarily burst into and or create another dimension and the the following expansion into that dimension immediately dissipate energy and close the connection between dimensions. The black hole which follows would never have the energy to reconnect dimensions again.

*Disclaimer* I am an electrician not a genealogist. If we assume evolution is true (which I do) than all humans are one species with a common ancestor. That common ancestor is believed to have arisen on the continent of Africa. As such all humans have genes from those darker haired, tanned skin, brown eyed ancestors. So even a child born with blue eyes from blue eyed parents carriers brown eyed genes. So in biracial children the math isn't straight forward as 50/50. All humans are ultimately related if we go far enough back and we mix the batch everytime we mate so isolating the odds of which traits should appear and when is tough.

What is an appropriate definition/bar for superior when comparing species? Many species have existed much longer and in more abundance than have humans. Does that make those species superior? Void of a goal or purpose I don't believe anything can be classified as superior. So unless a motive for all life is attached to the question "are humans superior" there is no context in which to answer the question. If I were to ask if gold is the most superior metal the question would be meaningless without indicating for what purpose. Gold may be superior to other metals if the purpose is to conduct electricity but inferior if the purpose is to make a hammer.