iNow

You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

It probably causes autism.

Thank you everyone for your interest in this topic, and for sharing your thoughts. I do, however, have one request. Please remain clearly focused on the science of belief and why it may have stayed with us humans for so long. By focusing on the science, we can have an interesting and mostly objective dialog about the topic, all while not offending people who themselves hold belief, and (perhaps more importantly) without breaking the rules of this forum regarding religious discussion. So, please... Keep contributing, keeping sharing information and thoughts, but let's avoid comments regarding religious people, whether they have mental disorders, and similar lines of thought. The intent of this thread is to explain, via evolutionary processes, why so many people believe in deities and why so many people are religious. Thanks!

A DoJ investigation into torture is also a political process, and if investigations are allowed for fellatio, then investigations should be allowed for torture and potentially serious breaches of law. I facepalm every time you equate investigating a blowjob with investigating the torture of prisoners in direct contrast to the Geneva Convention, and how you try to brush it all aside as mere political theater. I say again.... The long view is that our laws need to mean something.

Curiously, there was a special on the PBS program NOVA:Science Now just this week. Here's the link: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/teachers/programs/3410_01_nsn.html To the right of the page, you can click the link to "Watch the video online." Also, I haven't reviewed it for accuracy, but the link below seems pretty detailed and accessible: http://www.memory-key.com/NatureofMemory/sleep.htm Either way, check out the NOVA program, too. Enjoy.

Yeah, but there is a giant difference between "not fully explained yet" and "science cannot explain." Implicit in the second is that science cannot... ever... explain something, and that's just silly. BTW - Sleep is restorative for muscles, and also heavily involved in the consolidation of memory and experience. In short, sleep allows us to prevent new stimuli from being perceived while the brain reorganizes itself. Every morning when you wake up the structure of your brain is quite different than the structure of your brain when you fell asleep. There are many ideas that are not "fully explained," but that does not mean that science cannot explain them. I'm confident you agree, but I'd venture to guess that there are many others reading this thread who think otherwise.

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?p=511448#post511448 This off-topic, totally irrelevant, often wrong posting has become somewhat of a trend with this threads creator.

If s/he is on the staff, then yes. That is what s/he is here to do. They moderate the boards. Regular members cannot delete posts, but a mod can when they are unrelated to the topic.

Precisely. The aforementioned (more complex) equation (which is not a "special case"): [math]E^2 = (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2[/math]

Explainable by science.

It's the starch.

Even if it's not spam, the thread title alone makes this worthy of deletion since it's plainly untrue.

Just to be fair, it actually WAS obvious to you since you got the answer right away with no help from others. You just needed confirmation to feel sure, which is perfectly okay.

Just to be a bit pedantic, the comments made above by you guys are only accurate if you're referring to a standard horizontal-axis turbine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_turbine#Horizontal_axis However, once users begin referring to vertical-axis turbines, multiple blades (and sets of blades) not only helps performance, but is pretty much required to achieve any output. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_turbine#Vertical_axis Regardless, you're quite correct about the horizontal-axis turbines, and your explanations are clear and simple, so thanks for that.

I swear to Thor, we're being bombarded with 50-kiloton thermostupid above. If you guys want to improve yourselves, and truly learn and educate yourself about reality, then please ask questions and our community will help you to attain answers. However, if your sole intent is to run around like a bunch of spastic children spouting ridiculous nonsense that makes you look like paste-eaters and would cause your parents to be ashamed, then please go away.

There is no ether. When one says "c" they are using it as a constant. It represents a real number which does not change. It's just a variable... Like when you do algebra and represent a quantity with "x." The only difference is c is a constant representing the speed of light, but it is just a number, and has zero to do with ether. Also, you referred to moving toward or away, and the effect you describe is known as the doppler effect. While the frequency of the light will be shifted due to the doppler effect, it's speed will be unchanged. You are trying to apply classical mechanics to light, and unfortunately that's not how nature behaves.

IMO, the "long view" is that laws need to mean something.

Holy crap.

There are also some great links and reading on this topic here: http://www.einstein-online.info/en/spotlights/cosmology/index.html h/t Martin

I know what his point was. It doesn't negate mine. While there may be social repercussions to crying in public, the reason she feels like crying in the first place (I postulate) is that she too commonly pushes those emotions down for fear of how she will be perceived, instead of being authentic with her feelings and expressing them as they present naturally. If my suggestion is accurate, then pushing them down even more only exacerbates the problem... It does NOT resolve it. And... with me... I put personal health over social health pretty much any day of the week, but I suppose YMMV. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged And, seriously... WTF does that even mean? What a bunch of horseshit. So, if I get diabetic neuropathy after another decade all I have to do is cry to get my nervous system to "heal itself?" Awesome! Yay! Can it also cure the effects of a stroke? Sweet, dude... Good deal. Bell's Palsy? Just get those little monkeys to shed a few tears and they'll be fine! Also, let's just tell everyone on the planet with multiple sclerosis to watch a chic flick where some old codger kicks the bucket and they'll be saved. Oh, and don't forget about Old Yeller... That's some high quality pharmaceuticals right there, man, just be sure to use as directed. I wonder if my health insurance covers Netflix. I should check... Just in case I ever get Parkinson's disease. Why have we been wasting all of this money on medical research when all we needed to do was cry? Thanks, Dr. Syntax! You've changed my life!

No, Dr. Syntax. Much more likely is that buttacup is continually suppressing her true emotions in public, essentially repressing them until they boil over and out of her control. Emotions will come out, and when we push them down all the time, they come out more forcefully. It has little to do with childhood, and won't be cured with this primal therapy you tout in every post you make. It's simply an indicator that she needs to be more authentic with her feelings, and deal with them in the present instead of pushing them aside as they happen. Telling her to "NOT CRY IN PUBLIC" is probably the single worst piece of advice you could offer. EDIT: My apologies to buttacup if my post crossed any lines or is inaccurate in any way.

Agreed, I was just suggesting this issue is about much more than just that. It sickens me a bit the reaction to this from Cheney and the right. The Attorney General is doing his job... He's trying to enforce the laws of the nation, and is merely considering investigating more fully these issues. The mere mention of the possibility of investigation causes Cheney and the righties to blast into apoplectic mode and cry out about how the investigations are partisan and put our country at risk and blah blah blah... If they were so concerned about putting our country at risk, perhaps they should have made better decisions while in power and not engaged in tactics which served as the single best recruiting tool for terrorist groups and turned our allies against us. It just appalls me. Apparently these people think it's a "serious mistake" and a "partisan ploy" to actually enforce the laws of our nation... I guess... well, you know... unless you're getting a blowjob. Then it's time for impeachment. I think the worst part is just how many mindless asshats buy into that same "Obama is going to get us all killed" talking point, when in reality Obama has nothing to do with his Attorney's General (Eric Holder) decision... In fact is trying to prevent Holder from performing the investigation, but cannot since the AG doesn't need Presidential permission to enforce the laws of the nation... He's simply doing the job with which he was charged.

This does not sound true to me. We may be able to do this in the future, but I'm pretty sure we're not there yet. If you are suggesting that we ARE doing it already, perhaps you can provide me with a source confirming that? Your other questions can still be answered even if it's not happening yet, but I don't know those answers. They are interesting questions.

Wouldn't one need to predict a) how much stock and b) which stock they buy for that test to be valid or useful? Merely predicting a stock purchase seems to have too many confounding variables, and is a 50/50 chance at the start. This suggests to me a low utility, and not a predictive test, but I may be mistaken.

Right. So, uh... still no falsifiable predictions, I see.