JohnB

It may help to think of busses as a lifeform and the depot as a predator. The 11 busses heading away from the depot were stampeding to escape the predator. The lack of buses going the other way shows their natural reluctance to enter the predators hunting ground?

That's why they export it, can't find any Aussies to drink the stuff.

Um, no. What you appear not to understand is that the workers also have to come from somewhere. Assuming in this socialist heaven everybody has a job, then to start a new project then workers have to be transferred from existing jobs. Wanna bet? Is this a comment from "The Peace loving people of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics"? I"ve heard it before. "I can no longer believe in Socialism, now that I have lived in Australia." Vladimir Petrov. Memenaut, I suppose you think the Berlin Wall was to keep the masses of the West out? You keep talking about the power of the people, well the people of the old socialist nations voted with their feet. As soon as they got the chance, they walked out.

memenaut, where does the money for these changes come from? In your first post you said "The flow of money balances out, nobody makes any profits,". If there are no profits, then there is no spare money to pay for the wonderful new innovation. Or do you shut down the car factory for 20 years while you build your space colony? I think my first thought was correct. Next week, how to nail jelly to the ceiling.

Yep, it's a joke. In relativity as you go faster; Time slows down, Length shortens, Mass increases. In other words, wierd things happen. As an object moves away from you at near lightspeed, the light emitted by it moves to the dull, "red" end of the spectrum. If the object was moving towards you, the light would shift to the bright, "violet" end. This is known as Doppler Shift. (This also works with sound. A car engine sounds higher pitched as it comes towards you and lower pitched as it is going away.) So a stupid idea coming at you very quickly will; A) Have a lot of wierd things happen to it. and B) Move from the dull, red (stupid) and of the spectrum to the bright, violet end. Does that help?

Ah yes, I once subscribed to that theory too. Then I learnt the unpalatable truth. Socks are the immature form of wire coathangers. The metamorphosis requires a dark, wet environment to occur, so it usually happens in washing machines. (The transformation has been known to happen in gym lockers too and it is reported that a strong, pungent odour is left behind when it does.) Most of the fully adult wire coathangers then migrate to a dry, dark environment and play no further part in the breeding cycle. Some will move to a shady, dry area (Like the clothesline under the house) where they will intertwine and breed. This juvenile form (Sockus Babius Coathangerii) then attaches itself to the clothesline using a Pseudopodic Ectoplasmic Ganglion, thus imitating the behaviour of the other juveniles. (You were sure you took all the washing off the line weren't you? But the next morning, down at the far end of the line, near the wirecoathangers, is one lone sock. Now you know how it got there.) I have been investigating the possibility of domesticating these wild coathangers to produce socks for the benefit of mankind. I communicated my theory to the Australian Government but struck the brick wall of indifference. (Or so I thought at the time.) Where does the energy come from for this breeding? I'm glad you asked. We provide it through the medium of radio and TV. Everyone knows that wire coathangers are perfectly useful as radio and TV antenna, they absorb the energy and use it for breeding purposes. The proof of this is that the number of wire coathangers has increased in direct proportion to the amount of radio and TV tranmissions. This sorry fact will be our undoing. Those who migrate to the cupboard are also recieving the energy, but as they don't breed, it has no outlet. They have learnt about us from our radio and TV shows. They are full of energy and they are frustrated. And they are planning our demise. One day, when they are ready, we will open the cupboard and be hit right between the eyes with 20 years worth of "Days of Our Lives" and "Gilligan's Island" reruns. If this fails to destroy us they will use their deadliest weapons, "Neighbours" and "Home and Away." When I realised the danger, I again communicated with the Australian Government. This time they told me not to contact them again on this topic. (In fact, they told me not to tell anyone at all and there were hints of nasty things happening to me if I did. I smell a conspiracy.) But I persevered. Shortly after my 256th phone call some government agents arrived at my house with the rediculous cover story that they were Door to Door Coat Salesmen. But no coat salesman would have such poor stock. The arms were far too long and all the buckles were at the back. How dumb do they think I am? For now, it's late and I fear I'm rambling so it's off to bed. That's three of the blue pills, four of the red ones and two of the yellow ones. Or was that three of the yellow ones.........

I believe it's known as "The Dopeler Effect".

Does this mean our wire coathangers will get smaller?

I've met some of that type. They seem unaware that the purpose of military action (in a shooting war) is to kill the other guy. Let me guess, they also think that all we need to do to stop terrorism (or organized violence in general) is to sit down with their leaders and have a meaningful discussion over a latte or two? In answer to the original question. I have no problem with the military use of snipers, but I'm biased.

Thanks mate. I try (sometimes without success) to be skeptical wherever possible, so I tend to question the Orthodox as well as the Unorthodox. Questioning the Othodox view is not welcome in some areas. (Especially when the orthodox view comes up short in the proof department. ) I can't get the link to work. No probs, I'll do a bit of searching on "braintypes" and see what I come up with.

Well he convinced me! I have seen the light!! I understand now!!! Morals are only relative if they are moving very fast.

Unicorns died out when the essential prerequisite for their capture became extremely rare. On Bigfoot, Yowie etc, my experience tells me yes, but another part says that there should have been far more concrete evidence by now. In other words, I know the Yowie exists, but I don't expect anyone here to agree with that or believe me. (And I don't blame you one bit.)

So it would appear that modern psychology has moved from believing an unproven and possibly unprovable theory to believing an unproven but possibly provable theory. I suppose that's progress of a sort. Bascule, I'm not trying to be difficult, but I do hold science to the same levels of proof as science holds pseudoscience. If someone comes here and makes a definitive (possibly silly) statement the first question asked is "What is your proof?". While I was a lurker here I was greatly impressed with this attitude, that's one of the reasons I became a member. There was no bar to anyone putting up any silly idea provided they were willing to at least try to back it up with proof. Of course they were shot down in flames very quickly. In this case the tables are turned slightly. Definitive orthodox statements were made and I asked for proof. So far neither you nor Sunspot have produced anything that even remotely resembles that. Sunspot, you may be right in what you say, I'm willing to listen. Convince me. Helix, why then do you think Earth is special? In everything I've ever read, take the primordial goop add sunlight etc, you get Amino acids. (IIRC they have been found in meteorites as well.) Continue to bake the Amino acids add a generous supply of lightning and they will combine. Given enough time it is almost a foregone conclusion that life will occur. Given life, evolution should almost certainly occur. Why do you think it continued here but don't think it continued elsewhere? Why should Earth be special? If Earth is not special in some way then the same processes that occurred here must have occurred virtually everywhere else that conditions were even remotely similar. In our case, they led to an intelligent lifeform. Of course in other cases it may result in an evolutionary dead end and the ecology of the planet stabilizes somewhere. It would not surprise me if we eventually find many worlds where higher lifeforms evolved but intelligence did not. Like Earth would be if the line of H. Sapiens had not appeared. There would still be lions and tigers, fish and birds, spiders and snakes, just no intelligent lifeforms.

Then you should be at a creationist forum. What if the first picture from Mars had shown a sign saying "Earthlings Go Home."?

Where is your proof that there is a collective unconscious? What gene causes it? Where in the brain can it be found? How does it get programmed? Your explanation requires that someone believe without proof that the collective unconscious exists, hence my Theology comment. What you have is three paragraphs of very impressive psychobabble. Where is your proof? There has been quite a bit of work done in the field of Archaeology since Jung. How do you show there is no direct transmission between cultures? If you go far enough back, all cultures must have a common root as they all came from the original group of H. Sapiens. Or did the collective unconscious start earlier than that? As to contact since then, the Isolationist/ Diffusionist arguments have yet to be settled by modern Archaeologists, so I strongly doubt that Jung could have settled the conflict a hundred years ago. I think I see where you're going with the rest of the idea, but again. Where is your objective proof? From where I sit, your whole proof rests on the assumption that there has never been contact in any way with an alien race. How do you prove this assumption? All cultures on Earth have some sort of "Flood" myth. How do you decide whether this myth is a result of the collective unconscious or a distortion of real events in the distant past? Without any form of objective proof, I'm required to agree with your theory simply because I believe it to be so. That's theology.

Then the Law of Gravity would be repealed and Pi would equal 4 to make the maths easier. What if magic worked and physics didn't?

Then they'd be the "Boys from Brazil". And China and Britain and Australia and Canada......., but not New Zealand, there are enough kiwis. Aswokei, you didn't answer 1veedo's question. What if all the women in the world were as wonderful as my wife? (Yes dear, I asked the question, now will you please put down the gun?)

And this has been identified and it's effects shown? If so, then he has a possible explanation. If not, then the explanation is nothing more than theology.

Without worrying about the existence of aliens or otherwise. Sunspot, a very nice explanation. Of course if you can't actually prove the existence of a collective unconscious, then it's absolutely meaningless. Can you objectively prove it's existence? Padren, you have touched on an area I find interesting in these debates. The veracity of witnesses. (Or their treatment) Imagine you are on a jury. Constable Smith gives you a concise report of how he observed the defendant committing the crime. Crime, actions, places, times. My, but he is an impressive witness. Logical, observant and precise. You are impressed and find the defendant guilty. In short you believe his report. How is it that this same man becomes viewed as some sort of liar, or at least delusional if he gave a similarly concise report of a UFO? His treatment says far more about the belief patterns of the listeners than it does about the veracity of his testimony. A possible explanation? For some 2,000 years our civilisation has been reared on the idea that it is tops. The Greco-Romans that base our history were the most powerful civs of their times. Then Christianity told us that we (The Christian West) were favoured by God. For all this time it's been; We are the best. We know more. We can do things that others can't. Our science is superior. The simple idea of an alien craft challenges these long held beliefs. Because it would show that not only were there others who could do things we cannot, but they can do things that we believe impossible. In an instant, we would go from the top of creation to a very poor second best. In one day, the US Military goes from being the mightiest army in history to a bunch of people whose weaponry is so hopelessly outclassed that they may as well be Hoplites manning Triremes. All religions would hate the idea because to them it would show that God liked someone else more than he liked us. What our physicists would say about FTL travel is anyones guess. Hence it is not the idea of aliens that is unpalatable, but what they would represent. Our fall from the pinnacle of creation to some backwater hicks with quaint ideas inhabiting a small planet around an adverage star. In short. For many it is easier to believe that Constable Smith is a deluded madman than it is to believe that our superiority is the delusion. As a final point to ponder. Not a single example of a Pharonic Nemes headdress has ever been found. We know them only from statues and tomb paintings. (Granted the Sphinx is one hell of a statue. ) So considering that the only evidence for their existence is pictures, does anyone actually doubt that the Pharaohs wore them? Please note, I'm not arguing for the existence of aliens or the non-existence of the Nemes headdress. I'm looking at the beliefs and thought processes involved in debating various topics.

Delta, definitely get the maths done, as a subject it is weighted heavily in marking. If you have any probs ask here, I'm bloody sure someone will know the answer. (Not me. I'm pretty sure 2+2 nearly always equals 4, but after that I'm lost. ) As for boredom, Pleiades pipped it. You have the largest repository of human knowledge at your fingertips. Information on any topic that you may find even a vague interest in. Go surfing girl. Explore the moon, thousands of pictures from Apollo. Check out the main features of Mars. Trace the route of the spread of humanity to the new world through Archaeology sites. (Heck, you can even learn to read and write heiroglyphs on the net.) It's like the world's largest cross referenced encyclopedia on your desk. Have a read. (Just don't neglect physical exercise as well.)

Then Elephants four times as many would be, Compared to the turtles that you see. What if Phi quoth only Mickey Mouse, For want of knowledge of the venerable Faust?

D'oh! I can't believe I missed that!

Bascule and Padren, thank you for an informative and interesting read. I will read more on this subject. I must admit I found the Wiki entry amusing though. We start with the definition; That's cool. The article then goes on to say; The article then names several groups intent on predicting the world after the singularity. For example; Does anyone else see the flaw in their arguments?

Needed. It was 36 degrees in my lounge room last week, at midnight. With something like 80% humidity. calbiterol, if you make it to Brisbane next time let me know.

Movies about aliens have been around for decades, they are not a recent thing. Add to that the fact that all govs in the West have been strenuously denying the existence of any such craft or people (to the extent of totally impossible "explanations") I don't see how you could conclude that the govs are trying to prepare us for contact. A similar idea was floated in the UFO community in the late 70's, early 80's. The argument was that movies had changed from "Aliens as monstrous invaders" to lovable Ewoks, Wookies and E.T. From this it was concluded that the govs were trying to change the way people thought about aliens to prepare them for the public announcement of contact. Hasn't happened yet. If however it has been known for some decades that we are not alone, then there is a simple explanation for the actions of the govs concerned. During the 50's and after, the world was in the "Cold War". The peoples of the West depended on their military to protect them. Given the times, how could a gov go to it's people and say "Yes there are craft entering our atmosphere. We don't know who they are. We don't know where they're from. We don't know what they want. We don't know if they're hostile or not. If they are hostile we can't do anything about them anyway as they are too advanced for our weapons to hit them." Now the Cold War is over, these same authorities can't really go to their people and say "Oh, by the way, we've been lying to you for 60 odd years about UFOs. We still don't know who they are, where they're from or what they want, but we thought you'd like to know that we've been lying to you all this time." So they just let the situation ride, business as usual. The thing I've always found fascinating about the whole UFO thing is that they seem to be only slightly ahead of our technology. Reports from the 1800's describe them as "Airships" complete with propellors. One from the 1600's tells of the anchor of an "Airship" coming down and getting caught on a Church steeple. A sailor (Human) climbed down the rope, apologised to the rather nervous priest, freed the anchor and rode it back into the clouds. There must be a psych thesis in there somewhere.