dimreepr

I hope this doesn’t take this thread too far off topic, but as a biker I have been made very aware, from experience, that we are sometimes blind to what we’re not expecting. http://www.theinvisiblegorilla.com/gorilla_experiment.html http://www.simplypsychology.org/perception-theories.html

Ouch, that burns...

Whilst I have to agree with your assessment of the role the media play in shaping the modern statesmen, I do have a caveat, that being the tendency, at least here in the UK, for the modern politicians to be in a “bubble”. They go straight from education into politics via internships. So the problem is twofold 1. They have to have money so only the elite may apply. 2. They have no real world experience. This creates a natural void between the average citizen and the ruling class.

Paranoid nonsense, mainstream science doesn’t accept your challenges because they too are nonsense.

This doesn't necessarily follow as the subordinates will conspire against such a leader, especially in tribal situations. http://en.wikipedia....adership_theory

Then you need to come back with evidence that actually supports your hypothesis, the multiverse may exist but not IMO in the way you suggest.

Whilst these links are very interesting, they don’t support your hypothesis, other than suggesting we are part of a multiverse. Your hypothesis posits that each version of the different universes are inside ours, but at different scales, whereas the tentative evidence you have provided posits they are outside of our universe. Correct me if I’m wrong.

I’m certainly no expert but it seems to me if the ort cloud had enough material to protect us from gamma ray bursts then we’d have difficulty in seeing the cosmos in any great detail, as for the size this will help. http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/65024-interactive-scale-of-the-universe/page__p__664954__fromsearch__1#entry664954

I agree that’s what he’s arguing but the premise is flawed. Homosexuality is an act between consensual adults; the argument doesn’t follow in the case for paedophilia, even when it’s consensual the child doesn’t necessarily understand the consequences. Besides which the trend in each case is opposed, homosexuality is gradually becoming more acceptable in mainstream ideologies whereas the opposite seems to be true for paedophilia.

In a word yes, however there’s nothing like a deadline to concentrate the, collective, mind. I have likened the situation, as I see it, to a plane full of people arguing over how fast to hit the mountain. No doubt the captain will rest the controls just in time to steer us clear, we can but live in hope.

I didn’t, either actually or by inference. I do understand this issue is very emotive and I apologise for any offence I have caused. However this is a science forum and as you can see from the links I have supplied my post does have, at least some, foundation. Of course as with any stat it’s not universal true 100% of the time. I’m not really sure of your point, in WWII it has been documented that this was the case on both sides. To account for this the modern army has altered its training regime.

Ok so my memory of the stats was exaggerated, it turns out it was 15% to 20% willing to kill. http://www.cynical-c.com/2007/08/08/only-15-to-20-of-combat-soldiers-in-wwii-would-fire-at-enemy/ http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/hope_on_the_battlefield Not too sure this miss remembered stat is worth 2 neg rep points though. Edit/ I can’t find the paper/article that supports my assertion directly but these are close. http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/kuszewski20091117/ http://www.sociopathworld.com/2012/04/natural-born-killer.html http://www.alternet.org/story/130947/america_is_a_dangerous_vigilante,_heroes_are_sociopaths%3A_the_not-so-mythical_world_of_'watchmen'/?page=3 I’m sorry you feel this way, maybe you misinterpreted my post? Many people seem to interchange the term psychopath with sociopath there is a difference. http://suite101.com/article/the-difference-between-psychopaths-and-sociopaths-a258748

This strikes me as easily defendable; just make any potential target very reflective. A mirror would be immune to any sized laser.

I would tend to agree, generally, accept technology takes a lot of graft to establish. Someone is working hard.

I’ve always wondered about the similarities between the big bang explanation and black holes. In my ponderings the initial state of the universe being in a hot dense state, could be the result of a black hole going through a natural process of reaching a critical mass and rebounding. Could every black hole have this potential? I’m sure that this is nothing more than just ponderings of an inarticulate mind and easily dismissed but is there a specific reason this process couldn’t explain the accelerated expansion of the universe? If more than one black hole goes through this process.

AFAIK the percentage of men on the front line that deliberately shot to avoid killing was up to 95%, the other 5% were known as “heroes”. In peacetime these men/women are known as sociopaths. Most people can easily tell the difference between a game or entertainment and life. Demonising the enemy is one way of subverting this fact; another is to train the modern army in a way that normalises the act of killing.

From my observation of humanity without a positive input, we do tend towards laziness. For me it has nothing to do with tools and technology it’s more fundamentally a problem of nurture and environment. IMO the most important lesson a parent can impart to its children, apart from the basics i.e. safety and socially correct behaviour, is a good work ethic. With a good work ethic technology becomes an aid to enrich life. Without a good work ethic technology enables laziness.

Selfishness implies an introspective understanding of social intricacy and a willingness to demand special treatment in spite of need. Intelligence comes at a cost, that being a long and dependant infancy.

A lot of my favourites have already been mentioned, so I’ll limit my reply to those that seem to have slipped through the net: East of Eden, Sweet Thursday, Cannery Row and The Pearl, Steinbeck. For Whom the Bell Tolls and The Old Man and the Sea, Hemmingway. Anything by Pratchett. Dirk Gentlys Holistic Detective Agency and The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul, Adams. There are lots of others that, for the moment, slip my mind.

I’m sorry this is a reference to an English science fiction series called “Dr Who”, TARDIS means time and relative dimensions in space and is a time machine.

You do realise a “TARDIS” is a purely fictional concept?

Most explanations of different dimensions seem to explain them as curled or twisted to the point that they can’t be recognised or measured in a conventional manner, or are you trying to represent “A TARDIS”?

An interesting question, but it seems to me to have nothing to do with God. Isn’t these just cases of psychosis pinning an apparent cause “God” to actions they can’t otherwise explain?

I'm certainly no genius, but I'm constantly asking myself questions, most of which are of such nonsense as http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/61840-elbowcaps/page__p__641777__fromsearch__1#entry641777 so for me it would be a pre-requisite for such great people, just a higher quality of question. Edit/ Not necessarily a childlike quality though.

I’m at risk of sending my own thread off topic here but, in the UK the NHS’s biggest drain is, the “ethical” need to keep people alive (for the sake of life). If, along with the “Donor Card” a “Living Will Card” could be kept about ones person many, many millions could be saved, here, at least, in the UK.