YaDinghus

Well, I rather meant what exactly irish people/people of irish descent specifically do in their leisure time is beside the point of this thread since destilling alcohol to high concentrations wasn't a widespread technology 175000 years ago ;-) It is quite likely that H. Heidelbergensis who are the likely antecedents of H. Neanderthal and possibly H. Sapien's and H. Neandertal's latest common ancestor, already knew how to construct shelters of organic materials, which could keep a fire safe, since caves were notoriously dangerous because of Cave Bears. That doesn't mean early humans wouldn't have ever used caves for their convenience, and even long term habitation once they were sure that no dangerous predators lurked within. So technically I'm not contradicting you, just opening up more avenues for the debate

I have Irish ancestry, so I have a pretty good idea of what they might have done during their forced leisure time ;-) . This is, however, somewhat beside the point of this thread

Have you been to college? The first thing we learned was to TAKE NOTHING AT FACE VALUE. He properly cited research papers from established anthropology articles and books. Alas, it's more than 10 years ago, so no, I can't recall the sources my professor referenced. But you trying to discredit my very renowned college professor is a pathetic tactic. I mean, seriously...

People who crave security as much as the Isreali are particularly prone to fascidm, as they will readily restrict even their own civil liberties for the sake of security. We have seen this happen in the USA after 9-11. We are seeing this happen in Europe after the senseless and brutal attacks in Paris and Berlin, and other locations where Trucks were steered into crowds of people killing dozens. Israel has been under siege since it was forned from the British colony of Palestinia. I am in no way claiming that I like what is happening. But this has little to do with the specific conflict between Israel and the arabic countries surrounding Israel, and its part off the population that is arabic, but with human nature. And I don't see how Israel has a stronger responsibility to resist fascism, based on their history, than any other people in the world do (which is higher than the heavens, metaphorically)

If there is no special point in the universe, then every point in our observable universe should have a past light cone that is indistinguishable from our point of view. Building from this logic, a point at the edge of our observable universe should have points on it's observable universe's edge which we can't observe, which have their own indistinguishable past light cones. Building on the principle of universal isotropy, therefore, the universe should be infinite in size. What about time? If the universe is cyclical in nature, then it should extend infinitely in time as well. If it isn't, then the universe has a definite beginning, the Big Bang. Does that mean it has a definite "end"? Not necessarily, though the most convincing evolutionary scenario to my mind is the heat death, when entropy can no longer increase, which can be interpreted as the ending of time, which would make time finite towards the future. Maybe(?) at this point in Time Temperature will become "negative" and suddenly a new Big Bang will spark anew, which would make the whole thing cyclical, but this is pure speculation.

Maybe you're stuck in 19th century physics, when everything was believed to be known. But hey, people like Heisenberg, Pauli and Einstein debugged it and now science continues to grow

I'd say resistance to change is pretty much a universal principle (compare to inertia - the resistance to change direction and velocity of movement). From an economic point of view, it makes sense to keep practises that have worked well so far and implement changes carefully (it doesn't make sense however to keep the old ways when the new ways are established as producing better results). Also I am not aware of any ritualistic practises in prehistoric toolmaking. I wouldn't outright reject the idea, though. Ritualisation is a powerful tool for conveying ideas across generations, and aspects of this can be identified in many traditional crafts and trades.

I'd like to see your source on that. Back in the day in anthropology classes, especially in prehistoric economy, we learned that hunter/gatherers only need(ed) to spend 2-4 hours a day on average to get the food they needed to do more than survive. The hardest part about surviving was knowing how to treat severe injuries and avoid food poisoning...

from the Wikipedia article on Mormyrids. It's quite impossible to say how intelligent Neanderthals really were. Tissue conservation techniques weren't exactly advanced around 40ka ago, so we can't examine the brain of a "true" Neanderthal for differences in the internal arhitecture between Neaderthals and Sapiens. Also we couldn't really examine how an ancient Sapien would do on a modern IQ test, because you can't see cultural evolution in a brain, either. Edit: Wow I totally missed the 2nd page...

Iron Maiden - Speed of Light

Everyone has their own process when dealing with the meaninglessness of everything and indifference of life and the universe. I drank myself to a stupor almost every day for a decade.

Soooooo glad it's over

Most certainly everyone will be scanned. I don't think they'll be cavity searched, but then I'm not in the secret service or whoever else is in charge where the meeting takes place.

That deserves credit; sasa ke beratna imalowda toda tumang

It doesn't make me unhappy or discontent to accept this amendment, so I see no problem in it ;-)

Too bad for those people... but being unhappy, or at least not striving for happiness, contradicts my philosophy

At least that's what I read out of it. I'm usually pretty good at making sense of incoherent statements

I have no idea what you're trying to say here, I could have a guess but I'd rather you explain yourself more clearly, it saves time. Basically what they're saying is that if heaven came to earth, so would hell. Good people - > Utopia, Bad people -> Dystopia

My whole point is that Utopia, being virtually impossible, is the idea we need to work towards. To know what we want to change about society, we need an idea of what we want society to be. For this reason we need to imagine our Utopia. Whenever you make something, there is an idea of what it should be, and the better you are at the skills required to make what you want, the closer your project will come to the 'real deal'.

I think it might have a lot to do with how we expect a beverage to taste. Regular wine drinkers will know which wine is to be stored at which temperature, and if it is to be decanted, for how long. Of course with fizzy drinks, they lose their ability to keep carbon dioxide in the watery solution. Fizzy drinks always as cool as possible. And then there's the story with beer. Aside from being fizzy most of the time (unless you're drinking Ale) it just tastes terrible at room temperature (there are a few beers in Germany, Austria and the Czech Republic that DO taste good at room temperature, but that's the exception, because they have very little hops, which causes regular beer to taste bitter at room temperature)

Pretty much sums up my sentiments of BUI

I don't care what anyone does with the money. I wouldn't give out food stamps. I also wouldn't make having an apartment a condition. It should just be enough to buy food and have a small apartment or sublet, and a little extra. As @Strange just said, this isn't about food stamps. If you have a job that earns more money than whatever is the BUI, I would suggest the BUI level is what can be earned free of tax, and after that a progressive increase. This is pretty close to the german model, where 9000 € per year (2018) can be earned free of tax, as it is the so-called Existenzminumum. There is however no BUI there.

The concept o BUI is afaik that it is universal, so everyone should be afforded this by society, which is usually the government when it comes to paying up. Honestly I have no clue of the percentage of people who don't or just barely have access to this, I guess it's near 10% in Europe and the US.

It's equally absurd as the notion that an omnipotent being exists... Which I surmise is exactly the point

What percentage of the population do you feel needs, should have, or would benefit society at large if they received assistance? What I was actually going about was the fact that wording isn't really the issue, and that we need to rethink (economic) justice for BUI to work. The trivial solution where nobody gets anything is the one with the least effort on a societal scale involved, but zero effort is actually the antithesis to social justice, on an individual level as someone getting all for no effort offends the one giving their all and getting no more or even less. This also applies to trust fund kids who have no matierial worries because their predecessors were successfull, nut just victims of neoliberalism; on the collective level because that is in effect neoliberalism, because there is no collective effort to avoid the poor from being exploited by the rich. I feel that every person should have the money needed to pay for 20 square meters and 2500 kcal worth of food plus 50% without having to work for it. That should guarantee a measure of choice concerning what a person can eat, where they live, and also a small vice to persue. Obviously this would have to depend on wjere they live, as 20 square meters in Iowa cost less than 20 square meters in Chicago