dichotomy

I think it's every lifeform's right to eat what it has evolved to eat. Everything came out of the big bang, its all from the same source of energy and matter. It's all the same stuff. All life formed from the same ancestors, so it can eat itself if it likes. hmmm, is it lunch time yet?

Does 'self-sustained' imply that that the lifeform actively, or passively consumes energy/matter to live? Is there anything that science isn't sure whether to classify as alive or not alive?

Yep, it's not uncommon knowledge that many WW2 strategists were master chess players.

True, violent video games are just one tool of many. 'America's Army' is a handy tool, I would imagine.

I'd assume if you are submerged in a culture like the Spartans you will continue through to the killing stage quite comfortably. If you are in a truely peace loving culture, I'd think the aggressive impact of simulated violent games would be generally quite low. I've heard this, and thought of the Spartans immediately. The US military has learned much from the Spartans it seems. The more things change the more they stay the same.

Are you picking a fight with me!!! They aren't. All I'm saying is that simulated violence, interactive or passive, are contributors toward violent acts. Spartans would have given their 7 year old children 'harmless' war games to play as part of the training methodology in order to build a great warrior. Of course in those times it was probably justifiable to order for a culture to survive.

I don't think that violent video games alone cause more worrying aggression, but I do think they are like a cup of water dropped into a bucket. Once the bucket is full, an irrationally aggressive individual is likely. In answer to some other posts, I think the 'full bucket' needs other ingredients to eventuate, like real life martial arts/boxing, target/duck shooting, crafting of weapons, being bullied. Simulated violence from horror, action, war, etc, films and games are minor contributors to committing violent acts, but still they DO contribute, they are the 'soft' introduction to children, to doing real harm. That being said, the real life ingredients are much more important, naturally. A question I struggled with earlier in life myself is HOW aggressive do i need to be in ordinary life? I think that watching romantic westerns and war movies didn't help my (nor the immedite community I grew up in) progress to get to what is more widely acceptable. I'm sure the question of just how aggressive one should be is a question that all of us ask ourselves on and off? And, I suppose some may answer, "As aggressive as other people allow me to be". Except when you callously crush snails.

Here's some links that suggest that indeed they do. “Iowa State University psychologists provides more concrete evidence of the adverse effects of violent video game exposure on the behavior of children and adolescents.” http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070404162247.htm “Violent video games frequently have been criticized for enhancing aggressive reactions such as aggressive cognitions, aggressive affects or aggressive behavior. On a neurobiological level we have shown the link exists.” http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051012082710.htm I think it's logical that participating in violent activities, simulated or real, will, as a rule, contribute to making people more aggressive. We can see this in many tribal cultures, and many contemporary ones. Extreme point but - The ancient Spartans trained soldiers from the age of 7, they successfully conditioned children into being 'quality' soldiers. My point being that the younger you expose children to violence, the more likely that they will be 'successful' at violent acts. Violent video games are just one form of 'soft' conditioning that can later contribute, in the worst cases, to become crystallized real life tragic violence.

I’ve only hallucinated heavily once on good old magic mushrooms. I didn’t think anything more of it than being a slightly scary & interesting distortion of my senses. It sort of proved to me that the senses in good working order are very critical to our long term survival. It’s my opinion that dreams do have significance, but I also believe that they can only be interpreted correctly, with some effort, by the dreamer him/herself. Hallucinations don't seem to have any significance other than telling you that you have just poisoned yourself, or that you are unwell at that time, IMO.

Ok, what happens when the extreme opposite occurs, i.e. the sense in question (say sight) is overloaded with information? Also, are there any promising advances with scientists working on reactivating neural plasticity in adult brains? I think my parents answer would be to eat more lambs brains.

About the only vitamins I take now are C during colds and flu and B to help alleviate hangovers.

If you compare tomatoes with tomatoes, you are right that flavour can be equalized to a degree with aging. But I can see with my own eyes that the standard supermarket tomatoes I buy are much more watery, that is, they have much less solid flesh holding them together when you slice them into sandwich sized slices. So possibly what I'm tasting is the sheer quantity of fleshy bits (in the home tomatoe) as aposed to the watery seed containing bits (in the supermarket ones). The texture comes into taste too with me.

You have convinced me that balance is a sense. I didn't realize that sight could be so easily disabled by simply blocking perfectly good vision for a few months. I would have thought that after a few more months, or years, of the 'blind fold' being removed it would become operational again. Thanks for the link. Oh, I do. I just like asking the questions first!

Yes, then you may agree that balance is "developed", as you state, and not an automatic sense in the same way hearing is. I'm still not sure that balance is relevant or indeed would develop at all in zero G. A 'sense' of direction would be useful, but direction doesn't necessarily need balance, does it? Direction only needs reference points, like an object floating in front of you that you reach out for? Of course, this implies that some senses are automatic (ie. the 5 senses) and some are only functional if they are practiced into being (and eventually becoming automatic, like riding a bike), such as balance? So shouldn't senses be defined as being automatic perceptions and not practiced/learned ones?

The obvious difference between hearing and balance is that we don’t practice hearing, its automatic. But we do practice balance. Balance seems to be a developed skill that relies on the other senses for its very existence; hearing is an automatic sense that responds to vibrations. What I’m getting at is that the 5 senses (or is it really 3 senses) are central to any other ‘sense’ existing. Is this correct? If we were born into and lived in zero gravity space (no land horizon to be seen), would our “sense” of balance even develop? Our senses of sight, sound, touch, smell and taste would, because they are indeed innate.

I use this on my peach and nectarine trees. Is there a safer alternative? I always thought copper was relatively safe. All I really know about my own home grown 'organic' fruit is that it tastes better. Especially when I compare supermarket tomatoes with home grown ones. Super market ones are much more tasteless and watery.

I’ve tried to buy organic when cost permits, generally out of a fear of negative long term effects of pesticides to the enviroment and me. After looking at what constitutes ‘organic’ I don’t think organics are silly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_certification What they primarily need to be though is cost effective, widely available and have some sort of ISO certification to clear up confusion between nations.

Hi Skeptic, are these solely human sensors? Or are you covering a broader biological group here? I'm interested to hear just how many different human sensors have been identified to date. It seems to me, after reading CDawin's post, that there is 1. chemo-reception, 2. sight, 3. vibration. XTC's 'senses working overtime' might have to be changed to, "I've got 1,2,3 senses working overtime"

So what do the pro-pitbull people think is an acceptable risk in keeping these animals in city areas? 1 death per 100 people? 1 death per 1000? 1 death per 1000000? Just interested in what is deemed an acceptable human mortality rate by the pro pitbull people? Watch out! He might sic his dog onto you!

Sleep deprivation switches me into dragon mode. Which I suppose is related to reptilian mode. I'm not surprised by the findings. Certain militaries, which will remain namless, use sleep deprivation as a form of 'soft' torture do they not?

Then maybe you can walk across a tightrope without falling, without any practice? Because your sense of balance is so fine tuned? So, you are saying in reality there are only three senses? Due to the type of receptors that are used for each sense? Which is balance related to? I'd guess touch? Cheers.

Bump! Anyone? Also, Q 30. Can microbes really survive space atmosphere? Has this been absolutely proven by U.S, Russian and Chinese based scientists?

No. I suppose not.

Correct! I wasn't aware of that, I first heard it used in these Tom "T-Bone" Stankus lyrics. http://www.lyricsondemand.com/s/stankastbonelyrics/existentialblueslyrics.html

I did say as a rule. And they got their sense fixed, and not learned into being. Something like balance is not even present from birth, it is practiced. And probably relies on, at least, the sense of touch to even exist.