Phi for All

At least they'd know right before they hit, when the tension goes out of the leash.

I think this is the key, to de-value the undeserved extra clout having lots of money has, beyond the money itself. Some things should be unavailable for purchase.

Welcome to evolution! Selection pressures are often complicated across many species, and finding a mate is often hard. I don't trust absolute points of view. Life doesn't happen like this. Every girl? Nothing to do? It can seem this way when you can't read minds. Whoa, that's a fallacious argument if I've ever seen one. How could you possibly know this about anyone's genes? You really need to stop thinking in absolutes when it comes to living organisms, ESPECIALLY higher order ones. And when you're thinking about humans, this kind of limited, almost binary thinking will always

I think this could work, IF we make sure the private, public, and state ownership/management processes were each insulated from each other as much as possible. Public/state funded programs don't work as intended if there's a lot of private influence, the same way private enterprise is stifled by excessive public/state intervention. What about people who are really good at making money? It seems like they shouldn't be left out if "find your niche" is the goal.

It's easy to be mistaken when comparing approaches to space capabilities. The US heavily encourages private enterprise in general, whereas China favors state involvement at every level. You should read Lost Without Translation: Identifying Gaps in U.S. Perceptions of the Chinese Commercial Space Sector. It's by the same folks at Secure World Foundation that produced the interesting video you linked to. They also publish a fantastic resource called Handbook for New Actors in Space, which is a must-read for anyone in political leadership today. Private launches are under the aegis of the

Since there are MOUNTAINS of it available from trusted online resources, can I assume you're looking in unusual places? Perhaps you should expand your search beyond cereal boxes, pamphlets, and billboards? Or perhaps narrow down your request, since neurobiology covers a great deal of information? There is a certain irony in claiming you don't understand why the brain isn't considered more important.

I think arguments from incredulity are misplaced when trying to meaningfully talk about ANYTHING that involves so many humans.

! Moderator Note So stop it, it's off-topic. Tell us about the evidence you have for the disk HERE, in this thread. Write down the bits you think support your hypothesis (you DON'T have a theory). It's up to YOU to support your idea. It's unreasonable to assume that your idea is correct just because nobody else is offering a different idea. "We don't know" is a perfectly acceptable answer in science, MUCH better than guessing. Btw, the red and green notes are from moderators enforcing the rules. When we do this, we usually don't participate in the thread. So pl

! Moderator Note Except you seem to require it to make your arguments, which means they can't be good arguments. And if you keep whinging about the rules, which is off-topic, the thread will be closed. It's really up to you to follow the rules.

! Moderator Note That's a speculation you were unable to support, from a thread that was closed. You can't use it as evidence in a mainstream section.

The medium (video) is not appreciated here, because this is a DISCUSSION forum. Your ideas have NOT been censored, you're free to post them HERE, if you like. We can't know whether you're interested in science or in promoting your YouTube channel, and it's VERY difficult to respond properly to parts of a video. I suggest you get over it, and stop claiming you're being censored, because you aren't. And the more you object about it, the more it looks like you just wanted more hits for your video instead of improving your science.

That's hilarious, and SO ironic! It reminds me of a bumper sticker a friend of mine had made up: "I didn't get to be a starship captain by living in a fantasy world!"

It was pointed out early on that a certain amount of money was mandatory to happiness, in order to remove the concerns you mention. I'm not sure why the rest of the conversation went beyond your understanding.

But those rich people do nothing to stop the capital extremists, who are often looking for positions of power so they can grow their money exponentially. The wealthy who would stop at nothing want to reduce regulations to a minimum, using profit alone as the barometer. The rich people you're talking about need to stop following them, draw the line, and stop voting for extremism in leadership. They need to stop voting for disparity just because the taxes are lower.

That's funny, I use a similar anecdote to show the importance of NOT buying junk. I used to lose pens and sunglasses all the time because they were cheap and I didn't care about them. After a friend sat on my last pair, I decided to spend some money and get some nice sunglasses. I NEVER set them down carelessly, and for the first time I was able to keep a pair for a good long time. I bought a nice pen as well, and made sure I never loaned it out, or kept track of it on the rare occasion a friend asked. I justified that as being a responsible consumer choice as well as practical. I bought