Phi for All

I might open an old closed thread for Physia if (s)he reduced the type size in her signature. I dislike being distracted by disturbing displays (sorry if it seems like I'm dissing you).

macman, we have a Politics section which you will be eligible to post in after 50 posts. Don't start political threads in Ecology and the Environment or any of the other science subforums. And when you start a thread anywhere, ask yourself if others will know what you mean by your choice of words. "They" is so vague as to be meaningless. "Give up" meaning voluntarily or forcibly? "Give up" their weapons to who? "Weapons" is also a very broad term that needs to be specified to limit the discussion.. And for the love of all that is good and pure, *please* use a spell checker on your posts before you post them. A few errors are no big deal but most of your posts are unreadable without spending undue amounts of time on deciphering them. "I suck at spelling" is no excuse for letting the condition persist. Thanks for understanding. We can't see you so your words are more important than usual.

This request is not acceptable. If you can't get what you need from a public library or university library please don't ask members here to abuse copyright laws.

Occasionally the cattle will catch me talking to myself, eliciting cries of snobbery. It's just a habit of the wise to speak to the most intelligent person in the room.

We used to enjoy smaller homes, with more socializing at each other's homes and theaters and parks and restaurants. We read or watched our news from journalists we trusted more, there was less professional spin to wade through, and we had more live discussion about politics and social issues with co-workers, friends and family because we had more time. Before personal computers and cable TV brought us access to an abundance of information, we were focused on fewer things. I started hearing about gangs and gang culture back in the eighties and many in the middle+/- classes started fearing for the safety of their own neighborhoods. Community designs changed to fit a fortress mentality. We suddenly became all about security and convenience. We demanded massive designer spaces that can house home theaters and gyms and offices. Kids bedrooms now come standard with cutouts for computer desks, televisions and stereos. We've saved ourselves all that nasty "going out of the house" time and that equally nasty "relating with other members of the family" time. We use that extra time to work harder to buy all the equipment we used to rent, and once we're done with our 10 hours of work / commute and 4 hours of home / family time we take the 2 hours left to utilize / process all that extra input we have access to. Everyone's knowledge becomes more specialized and varied as more input / data is made available to us. We've created our own little kingdoms where it's easy to let our internal politics take precedence over national politics. We'll allow politicians more and more slack as long as our own fortress is not too badly or immediately compromised. Whoa, sorry, blah blah blog. Had to get that off.

I took the Katrina reference the same way, with Gore stating that the number and severity of storms rises with the global temperature (whatever the cause), causing problems similar to what happened in New Orleans. Is this not the case? And the part about potentially “shutting down the Ocean Conveyor”, what exactly is "very unlikely [to happen]"? I recall him saying that it had already happened once before. Was that not true?

Bluff techniques like this are so powerful they don't need to be legal to be effective. A friend worked for a major software maker and her division was told that management was having a weekend retreat to figure ways to cut expenditures. The bluff was spread that they had been told to fire two people or come up with equivalent annual savings. On the Monday morning after the weekend retreat everybody came to work to find all the free coffee stations in the break rooms dismantled. On Tuesday morning, everyone showed up with their Starbucks in hand, ready to work. Nobody, in the whole office, voiced a single word of complaint.

If I had an employee in a non-sales position who posted questionable material about themselves on the web I would consider it none of my business. If that same employee mentions where they work in the posting it suddenly becomes my business, literally. Sales positions are different, imo. A salesperson creates relationships which tie their name together with the company they sell for. The two become synonymous if the salesperson is doing their job right. If I knew one of my salespeople was creating an incompatible image for their name (or their face, if the salesperson meets clients face-to-face) outside of business, I would question how effective they could be for me *in* business. I wouldn't consider firing the salesperson until this other image became a problem but I would certainly keep an eye on the situation.

If this is caffeine or Obsessive/Compulsive Disorder related, press 3 repeatedly.

When starting threads it's a good idea to give your readers a reason for discussion, rather than just stating a premise. Remember that you're not here to teach ideas, you're here to discuss ideas. Fred56, are you suggesting that everything is predetermined? Or are you postulating that some basic form of matter or energy connects us to every other form of matter and energy? Also, can you explain your phrase, "...every photon of energy and wave of matter is where it is now, at the end of the next comma,..."? I found the next comma but a search for all the matter you promised proved fruitless.

Nice.

TZH, you joined a science discussion forum. All of your posts direct us to the same place. We are not here to help you promote your website. Feel free to put a link to your website in your signature and join in the discussions but please stop spamming us with your advertising. Thanks for understanding.

I think this is what fosters a lot of bad journalism. You don't like the man so you shoot down his work. Never mind that he is raising awareness in a way that few can (how many 100% scientifically accurate global warming documentaries would you expect the general public to "warm up" to?). Blame him for driving a big vehicle but ignore the fact that his Secret Service detachment probably won't let him drive a Prius.

While I can appreciate Pangloss' concern over scaring away smart judges, I always think it's good to bring questionable decisions on the part of elected officials to the public attention. Even though we elected them we need to keep tabs on their actions. My biggest concern is that these tactics will find their way into the hands of those who want certain judges (and their judgments) discredited so they can reach into their pockets and pull out a different judge. Also, everyone makes mistakes but the media has a way of making it seem like one mistake is just the tip of the iceberg ("Is this just a one-time slip-up or is someone hiding the truth behind this judge and his errors? Tune in at 10 for the whole story").

Anecdotal, but a friend's cat used to pounce on mice and hold them down with her teeth and paws until they died, then bring them to her owner. My friend always thought it was cute whenever she witnessed it. One time the cat bit a little too deeply and got a taste of blood. The cat messily devoured the whole mouse and my friend stopped getting presents from her cat from that day forward.

Mea culpa, and apologies to Shepherd Book and the tree who stands vigilant watch over him.

Hello and welcome! Bingo! It seems he's really fattyjwoods, opening multiple accounts and spamming over the boards. Post ho, ho, ho.

I think most fundamentalists would like the answer to be "Yes". One of the ways to simultaneously gain followers *and* credibility (credibility with those who'll only hear one side anyway) is to suggest there's a big controversy going on. "OMG! The scientists all want to wipe out your belief in GOD!!!" But I'd have to say, "No, there is no secret or overt war against religion". To me, it's really simple. God can't be proven or disproven, not by scientists or the clergy (though both try, both ways). Since He's unobservable science can't measure Him. It should be acceptable that science can ignore God until further evidence comes along. And it should be acceptable that people of faith can believe what they want as long as they don't force it on others. I think the main problems are certain creationists who want to use science to prove God, and certain atheists who want to use science to disprove God. They are the ones blurring the lines and causing the big "controversy". Stop trying to prove that evolution is false! Evolution isn't threatening your religion! Stop asking for evidence of God! If He left incontrovertible evidence then faith would be worthless!

Sorry, not very big on gangland executions and power = respect. Not ma thang.

Oh totally. I had to shop for a month to find a blow dryer that just blows hot air at my hair. I didn't need 15 settings of heat and speed, with or without ions, brush and diverter attachments, all that crap. When I finally found it it was cheap too. And it's lasted already twice as long as any of it's more expensive predecessors. I'm not a fan of multi-use devices since they tend to do several things badly. I'm like YT, give me a phone that lets me talk to people with a battery that lasts all day. If I need to open a can or iron my socks I'll find the appropriate device and it won't be my phone.

"Baby look at me And tell me what you see You ain't seen the best of me yet Give me time I'll make you forget the rest" This is from Fame and Irene Cara sang it. I'm guessing this is a bit dated though since you weren't even born in 1980 and maybe someone new has covered it.

It's not an opinion, it's a mechanism by which we agree to abide so we can have talks about religion on a science forum. Trust me, without it every thread in the old Philosophy & Religion sub-forum ended up in flames. False Dilemma. Who said there was a problem with God? Sounds familiar. I think that's pretty much what I said earlier. Again, there wasn't a problem to begin with. God can't be tested or predicted by science. Why should it be either's fault? Well, yeah, exactly. So why should SFN change a mechanism that might lead to the resurrection of the P&R forum? Individual experiences that are not repeatable can't be observed or tested. You can't make any predictions. Again, this falls within the definitions of the distinction I made earlier. I'm not Phil. And I don't see where even my personal account of observing God would qualify as scientific evidence. This allows people like creationists to attempt to use science against itself. Intelligent Design adherents love to point to the limitations of science. Again, for our purposes here, we have to agree on certain mechanisms or every thread devolves into meaninglessness. Perhaps if we were a religion forum it could be different but we're not and don't want to be.

Post whores don't read FAQs. They are too busy resurrecting dead threads to post, "I agree".

The worst is when the Necromancer meets the Post Whore and you get old threads with new comments like, "I agree" "LOL" and "Looks good". There is a special level of Hell for those people, the same one reserved for child molesters and people who talk at the theatre. * * Thanks, Sheppard!

Just a quick personal observation but why would you call it dull? What's my motivation to go somewhere that's dull and read dull stuff written by some dull guy? A little marketing can go a long way. How about My Challenging Blog or Psycho Science Blog or even Blinkin' Blog (your logo is molecules fit together to make a log cabin, your tag line is Building Up to Brilliance)? If you're not worth a little selling, why would I buy into you?