admiral_ju00

Lol. I suppose that was a poorly chosen example as far as the rocks thing. However, the Carbon-14 test is used on fossils as depending on the age of the fossil (it's location in the strata, exposure to contaminants, etc), it does still have *some* organic matter on/in it. Ofcourse once the fossil is mostly N-14, the Carbon-14 is useless on it. For example, to date, the oldest fossil out of which a successful extraction of mtDNA was done is dated to just about 50,000 years old. You nitpicking Physicists. Filthoids, all of ya. Just kidding.

I don't know of how many bugs actually have a brain, more likely almost none of them have it. So in that case, they wouldn't retain any memory(long or short term) and have no ability to learn things. However, it maybe some sort of an innate genetic trait, or possibly even some evolutionary remnant of the old times. Or it could be that a brighter light in the middle of nothing simply sparks their curiosity.

Bleh. You should know better than to listen to the creationist mumbo-jumbo. Reading it for fun is one thing(and I do that for sheer boredom), but taking things to heart is quite another. C14-C12 dating is very accurate until 40,000 years of age. The half life of C14 is about 5,700 years, and the problem with using the C14-C12(or simply Carbon 14 dating techniques) is that past 40,000 years(you may be able to push it to 45, but stop there), the element, rock, fossil, what have you, has about 2% of Carbon left it in. At that small of an amount, it's difficult to tell if the sample was contaminated or not. That's where the Potassium-Argon comes in or the K-40 test, which has a half-life of about 1.25 billion years. Also, the C14 test is very, very accurate at dating stuff past 10,000 years of age. Lots of Archaeologists and Anthropaleontologists will swear by it's accuracy. Also, it depends on where you get your samples. The best items that you can use the C14 test are those that came from volcanic areas. If the sample(say a rock) was under water(in particular the salt water), then that changes things dramatically, and things are not accurate at all. The problem is that if the sample is contaminated, or the environment is simply not fit for a C14 test on an item you suspect is upto 40-45k years, then other less reliable testing methods are used. Some of those are the Electon Spin Resonance, Thermoluminance, etc. But if that's all you can use, then do it.

Many scientists place SCIENCE and Scientific Research above financial benefits they may have received should they chosen a different profession.

I just had a chance to see the 1st 30 minutes of the movie and damn, the special effects are amazing. The plot is fantastic and does not even compare to the POS Final Destination 1. Those who've already seen it, what are your thoughts on this movie?

Interesting phenomenon of the pesticide effects on the ecosystem. Interesting still is our solution to the problem: Nothing http://edition.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/08/04/environment.deadzone.reut/index.html

Mermaids. But I have my own filthy reasons to justify that

Cleopatra. Anything she'd want.

Yet another interesting Nature vs Nurture scenario. In this case, I'd say a bit of both is involved.

The answer to original question, I agree with Phi for All and Atinymonkey. While who ever said that every country has it's share of fugly and beauty(and I 100% agree), I also think(Warning: Personal Opinion) that some of best looking women are in Japan and Russia. However, reason why I highlighted the above line is this: I find it purely comical. The IT company I work for(temp job, while I'm still in school) has recently started doing business with the F-Secure Corp out of Denmark. Those of you who have it, know about it, but I find it funny how many remarks and blatant display of ignorance I get from our customer base regarding it, and the Europe in general. By far the most interesting question/conversation I recently had went somewhat along these lines: Me: Well, the F-Secure is made by a Company out of Europe and in Europe, it is well known and respected, etc. Customer(One Never to be mentioned HICK from some never to be mentioned Hickville USA): Europe eh? That's like 2nd rate stuff if you compare to USA right? Me: Uhm, ................ No no no no NO!

Besides those that are already mentioned here, there are a number of others. For example if you're a math nut, there are a few for that area as well......

Check the link I posted in the Astronomy section about making your own telescope. The plans there may help you, or there is a whole society somewhere in Cali that's dedicated in helping the public to built cheat telescopes. Search around for it on his site 1st as I'm sure he mentiones it there somewhere.

Granted. However, I'm not buying that theory. At least not yet.

How would a planet the size of Mars have a stronger gravitational force? If this planet did explode and turn into an asteroid belt and it was between the Jupiter and Mars then shouldn't it do far greater damage to Mars than to simply heavily scar it? I'm thinking that if such a planet really did explode between the Jupiter and mars, shouldn't it take a very large chunk out of Mars or something eg: it will no longer be round or something?

And your point being....?!?

Leison: Their server must have been down as it is working for me now. Mooeypoo: Nice knowing you're still around

I don't think it could have been the DNA. RNA, is a better candidate.

Funny. On a second thought, I think you're onto something there

What do you mean? Like I said, when I first read this thread, I thought that either that was a very intricate way of getting someone's attention and certainly a more polite way of saying "Don't say stuff you know nothing about" or that was a legitimate news story. Certainly you can see why I was a bit confused by this article which had no source.

I thought he was making stuff up, kind of play on words thing. As foot-and-mouth can mean either he was serious or he has came up with this whole elaborate scheme of getting someone's attention here. And no, while I do not consider myself lazy, I did not search for the source(unknown at the time), nor was I willing to ask any questions on what that really means.

Well, that's not what Hitler or some earlier Anthropologists said. Then again, let's not bring forth the interesting history of something I love.

The cell theory is. I've not heard of that other one. As for that 2nd one, are you sure you're not talking about a cell membrane as opposed to an actual theory?

I've read somewhere that in the Y, only about 21 active genes have been identified, and some of those were repeats anyway. That kind of a frequency is rather ultra low, since the Y has 50mil nucleotides.