51. BBC 'too scared to allow jokes about Islam'

Comment #154565 by aquilacane on April 3, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Shuggy wrote:
I can't wait to see "The Mullah of Dibley" or "Imam Ted".

Come to think of it, is "The Vicar of Dibley" or "Father Ted" shown in the US?

In Canada, we have a show called Little Mosque on the Prairie, but it is Canadian so it sucks. You can tell in the first frame of a Canadian program that it is Canadian and whether or not it will suck. I don't know how they do it, must be a Canadian directors trick. If you want everyone to know it's Canadian, open on a green field and dress everyone in 1880 period costume. Make sure there are never more than three people in any shot. Horse crap film industry in this country.

Sorry, back to the Mosque crap, the show sucks, and it does more to appease our angry Muslim psychos than actually call attention to any real meaningful debate. Make them feel welcome. I find I am against multiculturalism more and more these days. Really creates an environment of hate, suspicion, and isolation. I have met 80-year-old Greek men and women who’ve lived in Montreal since their teens and still couldn't speak English or French... what the hell?

I barely classify myself as Canadian anymore, no point. I was born here that’s it. I don’t work for this country, I don’t care for this country, I won’t fight for this country, I would leave if there were someplace to go. Healthcare is going by the side of the road, and the only things I can see being promoted as unifying symbols of Canada are a stupid leaf, Tim Horton’s coffee, and a game played on ice by overpaid, overgrown children. And to make it all worse, I have to kiss the asses of these hate mongering fucktards because their stupid book threatens to kill me if I don’t. Screw that!

52. Scientists reshape Y chromosome haplogroup tree gaining new insights into human ancestry

Comment #154340 by aquilacane on April 3, 2008 at 5:53 am

Adam M
Don't you mean Y-MAN

53. Faith healing church parents charged over toddler's death

Comment #153816 by aquilacane on April 2, 2008 at 5:56 am

SweatyPalmSunday, if when you look at a young child, a baby, and you are not driven to protect it at all cost, by instinct, save perhaps the cost of your own life, I fear you have suppressed something very important. If you choose instead to kill that child for the inconvenience that you yourself caused, I would surely be at the hilt of the blade about your throat.

I cannot conceive of a reason why you should willingly kill an otherwise healthy child in a time of general peace and prosperity, and with so much available outside support. An accidental suffocation in a time of high anxiety, perhaps while being chased by dogs and the Lynch-man, ok, you just want to keep the little bastard quiet to save your ass. Mistakes happen. But I can guarantee you that the failures of others (the Greeks in this case) are a poor excuse for your own failures. Smarten-up, you can be rational and emotional or just rational and in denial of your emotions.

54. Iowa county board gives initial OK for ghost hunters to investigate asylum

Comment #151343 by aquilacane on March 28, 2008 at 2:28 pm

I think the first line was meant to read:

IOWA CITY, Iowa - County officials have given their informal OK for ghost hunters to be checked in to a one-time Iowa insane asylum for believing that spirits are lurking about.

55. Police: Girl Dies After Parents Pray for Healing Instead of Seeking Medical Help

Comment #150861 by aquilacane on March 27, 2008 at 1:29 pm

Spinoza wrote:
Lucas, I understand the sentiment, but ignorance, delusion, and stupidity are not fairly punishable by death.

When dogs are rabid you put them down, not for their faults, but to safeguard the healthy.

56. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #149116 by aquilacane on March 25, 2008 at 6:14 am

I think I was nine when I concluded that even though one may argue that life did not evolve on earth, it doesn't remove the fact that life must still have evolved somewhere. By applying a degree of separation you still don't remove the problem. I thought this was obvious. IDers must think chocolate bars appear in corner stores ready to go, out of nothing.

Imagine this from your kid:

Yes mom, I know my bedroom is full of old dinner plates covered in rotting food but I swear it wasn't me, that food hasn't been rotting for as long as it looks, it just suddenly appeared like that from some other distant bedroom (where it also wasn't rotting pesumably, yet is still somehow rotten).

I hope my example makes no sense as the problem is senseless.

57. Religion 'linked to happy life'

Comment #147589 by aquilacane on March 20, 2008 at 11:58 pm

Comment #145976
Shemp333 said

"Ignorance is Bliss!!!"

You said it Shemp

No more need be said

58. Oklahoma: One Step from Doom

Comment #141113 by aquilacane on March 10, 2008 at 3:47 am

A few big problems here:

How would a teacher know if the student was right, unless the teacher was educated in that child's specific religion?

Will all teachers be required to know all religions?

By what method will a teacher explain to the children how the same question can have two or more correct answers?

What will the state do with intelligent children who see this as false and refuse to comply?

How ridiculous an answer is permissible as long as it has religious affiliation?

Will any evidence be required to support the religious opinion?

Can a child refuse to answer any and all questions due to religious dogma and still recieve a passign grade.

Must the child answer in their parents religion, or are they permitted to chose their own religion with which to answer the question?

For a better chance at getting the question right, can a child reference multiple religions providing more than one answer to each question?

Is a child permitted to change their religious views to suit the question?

Must the child's opinion be of an organized religion or is the child free to use any religious opinion including their own invented religion?

Since religious opinion can not be questioned, will all answers be deemed correct so long as they are of a religious nature?

If the childs answer is not in keeping with their parent's (or their) religion will it be deemed incorrect or can the child claim their religion to be an offshoot (variant) of the parent religion?

What do teachers teach if the answers are up to the children to provide. Will class be nothing more that questions you take home and fill in based on the bible?

There are more...

This is stupid...

I feel sick... puked in my mouth a bit.

I thought the last nail was in the coffin of the good ol' US of A a while ago, but this really puts the box in the ground for me.

59. In Defence of Selfish Genes

Comment #139967 by aquilacane on March 6, 2008 at 8:49 pm

Richard,
I know little about selfish gene theory; however, as a professional in the Advertising business, I know you should never misspell the title of your book.

Each time is a marketing opportunity.

Sam

60. Hebrew University researcher: Moses was tripping at Mount Sinai

Comment #138587 by aquilacane on March 4, 2008 at 3:05 pm

Trippin' on plant dope was a popular hypothesis in my house, even from a very early age. I remember my mother calling Jesus et al nothing more than a bunch of shroom heads trippin' around the dessert. This was over 30 years ago.

61. Survey shows Non-Religious Outnumber Those of Every Single Faith (But One)

Comment #138038 by aquilacane on March 3, 2008 at 7:36 pm

SeaLife wrote:

"We may have to consider that ending childhood indoctrination is not enough to create a rational society"

This is not true. It is the religious conditioning during childhood indoctrination that is the problem. Which religion isn't important, it's the thought process. Once you can accept both the natural and the supernatural in one reality, you are pretty much anyone's sucker. I'm surprised it isn't more than 44% who switch.

62. Physicist Neil Turok: Big Bang Wasn't the Beginning

Comment #133986 by aquilacane on February 27, 2008 at 5:49 am

If you consider that time doesn't exist, this model works even better. Why try to explain the begining of something that isn't even there? Of course, when we finally have the technology to discover our nearest neighbour universe, and realise that we share matter on an even larger scale than merely whithin our own little universe, this idea will need some fine-tunning. Millions of mirrors in a bigger room with more corners, and more than just air floating around.

63. Moral thinking

Comment #133000 by aquilacane on February 25, 2008 at 1:56 pm

There are no such things as morals, purely a human justification for natural behaviour. Next, you'll be trying to tell me time is real.

64. Dumb and Dumber: Are Americans Hostile to Knowledge?

Comment #127407 by aquilacane on February 15, 2008 at 8:49 am

It won't be long before I can bus cheap American labour over the border into my Canadian factories. Pay them crap and make them sleep in freezing cold rooms with no water or facilities.

And they will like it, or starve!

65. Admitting that you have no religion is not politically correct

Comment #122368 by aquilacane on February 5, 2008 at 8:07 am

Send letters to:

Ms. Nashifa Carter
Harassment and Discrimination Co-ordinator
email: nccarter@wlu.ca

66. Admitting that you have no religion is not politically correct

Comment #122366 by aquilacane on February 5, 2008 at 8:03 am

I've just sent my letter of concern to:

Ms. Nashifa Carter
Instructor SBE(MOB)

67. US scientists close to creating artificial life: study

Comment #116022 by aquilacane on January 25, 2008 at 10:10 am

Awesome, truly wonderful news.

68. Mitt Romney Defends Himself Against Allegations Of Tolerance

Comment #114256 by aquilacane on January 21, 2008 at 4:29 pm

What really makes me puke is the fact that this may as well be real. Honestly, I can't see the joke... this is what it's like for real.

69. Violence fear over Islam film

Comment #113618 by aquilacane on January 20, 2008 at 7:28 am

"It is difficult to anticipate the content of the film, but freedom of expression doesn't mean the right to offend,"

If this is true, should not the Koran and every religious book be band? Does not the Koran offend every single intelligent human who reads it? Surely if the Koran is permitted, then any offensive material is permitted. An offense for an offense. Seems fine by me.

70. 'Gospel of wealth' facing scrutiny

Comment #104117 by aquilacane on December 27, 2007 at 11:53 pm

"Empathy for the vulnerable. Anger for the greedy. I can't laugh."

I bet most of the people who give would do just fine if they didn't give. The lady in the article was angry, because big things didn't happen to her. She had to borrow money, because she was greedy enough to give it away in hopes of an easy score. She got what she deserved. The greedy feeding on the greedy. I laugh. I just hate how these televangelists get to fleece so openly, there are many innocent victims, she just ain't one of them.

71. 'Atheistic fundamentalism' fears

Comment #102333 by aquilacane on December 22, 2007 at 11:37 am

He has a point. Over the past 10 years the fundamentalist atheist front has claimed responsibility for at least 120 church bombings, and countless random murders, as well as the two wars we've started. I mean come on, we have to accept a little blame for our aggressive anti christmas tactics.

72. Borders Tags Atheist Book with 'O Come All Ye Faithless' Cards

Comment #102012 by aquilacane on December 21, 2007 at 11:44 am

"He continued, "Christians have always been used to being punch bags but I would have hoped that, in a society in which we are seeking to show respect to all people and beliefs, we might have grown out of this kind of nonsense."

Except, I'm not trying to show respect to all people and beliefs. You earn respect, and I have none for religion, nor most people I meet. Just because I respect your right to believe, does not mean I respect what you choose to believe. I find religious belief as a form of blasphamy against rational intelligent thought. To be religious is to insult the potential of all humanity.

73. What does atheism say about the purpose (or the meaning) of life?

Comment #99751 by aquilacane on December 17, 2007 at 1:29 pm

There is no inherint purpose or meaning

74. Happy Newton Day!

Comment #99601 by aquilacane on December 17, 2007 at 6:53 am

Happy Newton Day. I think something like this will need to replace christmas in my house. Give a gift of science. A thought prevoking gift on Newton's birthday in the name of questioning the norm, and always looking for better answers to lifes questions.

75. A universe that follows 'laws' implies a 'law giver'

Comment #99593 by aquilacane on December 17, 2007 at 6:28 am

"A rational universe implies a creator"

On the contrary. A rational universe implies nothing. It takes willpower to divert the natural order of the universe. That would imply that kaos, or a non rational order, can only be achieved by will.

Only a supreme being could create sudden inexplicable kaos and disorder, without warning or reason (that could be discovered) on a scale the size of the universe. In other words, only a universe that does not behave within the bounds of a natural law, can be described as a supernatural universe.

If the universe is controlled by will, as we would be able to determine through its irregularity (not regularity). A creator with the power to do anything would demonstrate that power by violating natural law, not conforming to it.

Violations of natural law are not known to occur. If this is true, there is no creator violating them, as is to be expected from a supreme creator. After all, a perfect being is not bound by natural law. Therefore, we require violations of natural law to detremine the existance of a creator, not the conformity to natural law, or natural law itself.

76. How can the Earth be so perfectly suited for life by coincidence?

Comment #99266 by aquilacane on December 16, 2007 at 6:35 am

Actually, life is perfectly suited to the earth, you have it backwards; so therefore, your question is invalid.

77. The empty myths peddled by evangelists of unbelief

Comment #97155 by aquilacane on December 11, 2007 at 2:13 pm

I made it all the way to:

"From where does Dawkins derive this faith in human freedom? Not from science. It comes from Christianity"

then I had to give up.

Give me a break

78. Colouring book warns kids of pedophile priests

Comment #95803 by aquilacane on December 9, 2007 at 8:35 am

We know 7% have been denounced. We don't know how many have not yet been denounced, but should be. I think it's safe to assume, the percentage is actually higher than seven. However, they are innocent until proven guilty, so who knows how many will actually be convicted.

79. Nurses Told to Turn Muslims' Beds to Mecca

Comment #94244 by aquilacane on December 5, 2007 at 4:47 am

I'm thinking of starting my own personal religion. It goes like this:
1. It is forbiden to discuss any detail of the religion with any person, save these three points
2. It is believed that all religious rights claimed by all religions are the rights of the new religion
3. It is believed that every humans' rights are equal. What one person is entitled to, all people are entitled to.

So, with that said, I would ask them to face me toward the south and supply me with clean running water to splash on my face with, 5 times a day.

80. Turkey probes atheist's 'God' book

Comment #91726 by aquilacane on November 29, 2007 at 5:09 am

liberalartist wrote

"6000 people were brave enough to buy TGD in a muslim country! Or should I say only 6000 people had the guts to buy TDG in a muslim country?"

Those 6000 copies will be read by 200,000 people, and they'll tell two friends, and they'll tell two friends, and so on, and so on... you get the picture.

How do you think these religions started? You grow peoples' minds by planting a better seed. We need promises though, there has to be something to turn toward. Atacks won't work, we need bribes. REAL bribes.

81. Turkey probes atheist's 'God' book

Comment #91725 by aquilacane on November 29, 2007 at 5:00 am

"you might consider writing a new book that's specially for Muslims and getting help from Ibn Warraq, Rushdie and others who know Islam better."

Good idea. Leave it authorless though. Don't give them anything to attack, but pure rational, logical thinking. Just call it "The Book" and give free press rights for all who want to distribute.

82. Turkey probes atheist's 'God' book

Comment #91402 by aquilacane on November 28, 2007 at 8:36 am

"incites religious hatred and insults religious values"

We should attack every religious book for inciting atheist hatred and insulting rational values.

Why is there no protection of logical, rational values?

83. 'Muhammad' teddy teacher arrested

Comment #90895 by Aquilacane on November 26, 2007 at 3:36 pm

When will we build an atheist homeland? I'm getting lonely among the savages.

84. 'Muhammad' teddy teacher arrested

Comment #90893 by Aquilacane on November 26, 2007 at 3:34 pm

When will we build an atheist homeland? I'm getting lonely among the savages.

85. The absurd world of Martin Amis

Comment #90776 by aquilacane on November 26, 2007 at 10:06 am

Don't know why that keeps posting twice?

86. The absurd world of Martin Amis

Comment #90775 by aquilacane on November 26, 2007 at 10:04 am

I have no problem seeing people as they tar themselves with their own brush. I don't allow people to pick and choose which dictates their supposed all powerful god bestowed. If you follow Islam, you are Islamic to the letter, or you are not Islamic. If you are Christian, you are Christian to the letter, or you are not Christian. There is no half way when dealing with a supreme being.

If you call yourself an Islamic person, then I judge you based on the brush your tar yourself with, and I judge you based on the dictates of the first reading of the Islamic faith, not the second, third or fourth. The very concept of perfect beings (gods) means they cannot have their words changed; they are perfect always. To change the word of any god implies that they are not perfect. If gods are not perfect, there is no reason to listen to them; if they are perfect, then I know how to judge you, because you call yourself Islamic or Christian, and I know the dictates of those gods.

Either you believe what you actually claim to be, or you are mistaken in claiming it. If you label yourself as Islamic or Christian because it is comfortable and not because you believe completely the words of your supposed god, it is your fault how you are treated.

87. The absurd world of Martin Amis

Comment #90773 by aquilacane on November 26, 2007 at 10:04 am

I have no problem seeing people as they tar themselves with their own brush. I don't allow people to pick and choose which dictates their supposed all powerful god bestowed. If you follow Islam, you are Islamic to the letter, or you are not Islamic. If you are Christian, you are Christian to the letter, or you are not Christian. There is no half way when dealing with a supreme being.

If you call yourself an Islamic person, then I judge you based on the brush your tar yourself with, and I judge you based on the dictates of the first reading of the Islamic faith, not the second, third or fourth. The very concept of perfect beings (gods) means they cannot have their words changed; they are perfect always. To change the word of any god implies that they are not perfect. If gods are not perfect, there is no reason to listen to them; if they are perfect, then I know how to judge you, because you call yourself Islamic or Christian, and I know the dictates of those gods.

Either you believe what you actually claim to be, or you are mistaken in claiming it. If you label yourself as Islamic or Christian because it is comfortable and not because you believe completely the words of your supposed god, it is your fault how you are treated.

88. Study: Babies can tell helpful, hurtful playmates

Comment #90058 by aquilacane on November 22, 2007 at 2:30 pm

Aligning ourselves with helpful people could be very advantageous. Not sure what it has to do with morality, other than recognizing it in others. Could it not just be a selfish trait that raises our chances of being amongst helpful people, so each member of the group has less work to do. Perhaps helpful people are easier to control, and boss around, looking for them as friends would make the power struggle easier.

89. URGENT APPEAL: Please Help Protect Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #89035 by aquilacane on November 19, 2007 at 2:50 pm

After reading this thread, I think the largely unwarranted stereotype of tightwad Jew should be accurately re-applied to our atheist fellows. Are we not a bunch a sniveling little pocket pinchers looking for any rational excuse to do nothing with our lives.

We help no one; we give nothing; we build nothing; we don't gather together in support of one another; our largest efforts are emails and witty posts; we have no voice at all; no political lobby; no hospitals; no charities; no country, we debate meaningless crap that affect .001% of the population.

We have nothing but banter, and a deep desire to act superior despite not one shred of proof we are worth having as members of society. What good ever came of an atheist, but opinion? Get your money out, fuck! If she's doing well financially (and that is if, because I see no "PROOF" of your claims), it's because she has the balls to do what none of you are willing to, so shove it!

90. Allan Gregg interviews Richard Dawkins

Comment #87384 by aquilacane on November 12, 2007 at 2:28 am

There is no argument against god. A theist merely needs to argue that an all-powerful being wants us to believe we have proof, but that it is simply an illusion. All that we see is by the will of god, created to give us order. Our proof by definition, is a gift of god, and is in fact proof of god. For only a perfect being could exists in a reality that proves it does not.

All you can do is request the evidence for the claim, or ignore the claim outright. If you are required to defend yourself against the claim, do so vigorously, demanding proof for such claims.

Philosophy, for the most part, is an over-analyzed view of natural order, written by a bunch of gasbags with way too much time on their hands, and a biased (therefore unqualified) position from which to make the analysis. I'm sure the frog finds itself rather central to the grand scheme of things. I generally couldn't give shit about another person's ponderings of what I can see out of my own front door.

Philosophy is always either self-deprecating to a fault, self-complimentary to a fault, or so full of obvious common sense it seems pointless to make the point. Regardless, someone is almost always trying to appoint some kind of meaning to it all, and there in lies the fault.

91. Georgia plans service to pray for rain

Comment #86586 by aquilacane on November 9, 2007 at 4:52 pm

If it does rain, they will use it as proof of god. If it doesn't rain, they will use it as a sign of god's anger. If it rains bloody fire and brimstone, and a tall man with a white beard comes down from the sky, and banishes them all to hell for disturbing him at a very important part in his great plan, I'll use it as proof of god.

92. Losing faith in Quebec

Comment #86557 by aquilacane on November 9, 2007 at 3:34 pm

Philip 1978 - regarding Glooscap, I noticed this, as well.

From Wiki:
Gloosap is casted in the similar role as the Ojibwa Nanabozho and the Cree Wisakedjak. His name Kloskabe means... literally, "Man [created] only from speech."

So my question is—who spoke?

Sounds like a bit of a circular logic sillyness to me. Or they're flat-out telling us the truth that it's all just a story, and only realy exists in their telling of it.

93. Washoe, the sign-language chimp dies

Comment #85409 by aquilacane on November 5, 2007 at 6:51 pm

"Washoe also taught sign language to three younger chimps who remain at the institute, Central Washington spokeswoman Becky Watson said. They are Tatu, 31, Loulis, 29, and Dar, 31."

If Washoe was just looking for reward as Pinker argues, what was the reward of teaching other chimps how to use sign language?

And if there was a reward, was it not gained through the use of language?

I believe it was.

94. Huge Black Holes May Hold Keys to Galaxy Formation

Comment #84572 by aquilacane on November 2, 2007 at 2:47 pm

Vinelectric—with respect to your time comment, time is nothing more than the observance of energy exchange. I don't assume that all things occur at the same "time". I assume it is linear, but it is linear based on a scale of spent, static, or gained energy. Nothing can be gauged unless there is transference of energy. I recall the atomic clock experiments, and from what I can gather, the argument was that as matter accelerates time slows down. Which isn't true, a force has been applied to the clock (atom). This acceleration affects the atom's energy transfer. We are not affecting time; we are affecting the clock. It would be like holding the hands of a clock and saying, look I've slowed time, when in fact, there is no "time" to slow. Even if the atom were static, the concept of time would continue, even if the ability to gauge it were compromised. Time is nothing more than a constant non-existent, you can't go back in it, you can't go forward; you can only gain or lose energy. Where you would gauge the "time" it took to travel from here to there, another person without the concept of time could gauge it in the pulses of an atom, or the sum of energy expended over distance during the trip. Harder to calculate, but more accurate in as far as gauging what is really happening.

95. Huge Black Holes May Hold Keys to Galaxy Formation

Comment #84569 by aquilacane on November 2, 2007 at 2:31 pm

Vinelectric—I know what you mean, but if you compare universe to nothingness independant of atom, it is neither large or small. Same goes for comparing atom independant of universe. I don't mean same size in as far as they appear equal, but I mean same size in as far as they can not be determined to be big or small when compared to nothingness. I guess what I am trying to say, I stress the word trying, is that a fraction of a billionth of a trillionth of one half of one proton has as much detail and depth as an entire univers. The only measurement that can destinguish them as being different is when they are measured against each other, but when both are held up against the rule of nothing they are the same. We can not see a detailed view of a fraction of a billionth of a trillionth of one half of one proton, but it is as equally diverse and complicated as our universe. We can only compare the atom to the universe because they both exist within the same fiel of observation.

I think, that's what I am saying. Let me think about it.

96. Huge Black Holes May Hold Keys to Galaxy Formation

Comment #84556 by aquilacane on November 2, 2007 at 12:41 pm

arogop—Caffeine... I'd say reefer. Joking aside, having read what I wrote, I must admit it's hard to follow, It was early, and I was in a hurry. perhaps I'll try to sort it out better and post it somewhere else. I can see it though. Seems logical, too. I guess it always does though.
Any takers on the time not existing argument?

97. Huge Black Holes May Hold Keys to Galaxy Formation

Comment #84531 by aquilacane on November 2, 2007 at 9:23 am

I was thinking about the whole multiverse idea, and I came up with a few thoughts that could stand for a bit of intellectual abuse, if you know what I mean.

Now, I've heard the multiverse theory described as the birth collapse and re-birth of a universe, over and over again, as though we are merely in one instance of the universe's many instances of being. And I agree, this is one of the images of the universe that I have visualized in my mind.

I do also visualize the potential of a multiverse, that is not only repetitive in it's coming into existence over and over again, but also the concept of a multiverse that is in fact made up of multiple universes, all existing at the same time. Each universe in a different state of being, whether that be collapsing, expanding, sharing, colliding, and so on.

When I thought about it more, I continued to see a third multiverse theme developing. I always have a problem with beginning and end. Where does it start, where does it end? I need finite boundaries, otherwise my logic breaks down.

This third multiverse, in my mind at least, exists on a notion of scale, and pattern. I've noticed, as many have, that there seems to be an obvious theme with respect to the way matter groups together (what we can see of it that is) and forms our reality.

Atoms, solar systems, galaxies, and the universe are all very similar in their outward appearance. The differences, visually at least, are their scale. We can measure them against one another to compare their relative sizes. This got me thinking, if size is only relevant between two existing objects (for lack of a better word) then size has no meaning when compared to nothing. Huh? What I mean is, the size of the universe, as we know it, is basically the same size as an atom when looked at through the eyes of nothingness. Huh, Huh huh? Nothingness has no scale, there is no smallest or largest, everything is relatively the same size, because there is no scale. Which means, no matter how small you are, or large you are, you are basically the same size when compared to nothingness. Nothingness is what remains when you remove all matter and energy, so the starting point of existence, has no scale.

What? Think of the multiverse, as a fractal image. Those posters that repeat the same image regardless of how far you zoom in. I'm not suggesting that each universe, the further you zoom in, is identical, but I can visualize how they can exist one inside the other.

Our existence in this particular universe is confined by our ability to witness the universes greater than our scale of perception and smaller than our scale of perception. We are only able to see or detect the existence of reality within a very limited window of observation. Why, because, unlike nothingness, we exist, and therefore, we have a reference of scale. Nothingness does not, and so no matter how small or how big something is, to the eyes of nothingness, they are relatively the same size, their detail is as defined and expansive the smaller you get, as they are the larger you get. Similar to a fractal, no matter how small you go, it is as complete and defined zoomed-in as it would be zoomed-out. Have I lost you yet?

The beauty of a multi-multi-multiverse, is the conclusion that a multiverse can not have a beginning or an end. For it to have a beginning or an end, it would require that nothingness had a determined scale on which to base the size and point at which existence would start. That is impossible, nothingness has no scale, right? So existence is infinite, in its comparable scale to us, but barely negligible when compared to nothing (which is the only alternative to something. Existence looks big compared to us, but really it's next to nothing, and always has been.

P.S. there's no such thing as time, so always isn't very long either.

98. Huge Black Holes May Hold Keys to Galaxy Formation

Comment #84419 by aquilacane on November 2, 2007 at 3:05 am

HappyPrimate—Yeah, I've always seen them as intergalactic vacum cleaners. Giant hoovers that suck up matter and join together until they have enough mass to explode again.

99. Huge Black Holes May Hold Keys to Galaxy Formation

Comment #84158 by aquilacane on November 1, 2007 at 10:13 am

Before you read this, I don't know what I'm talking about. I only see things as images in my head, not math equations or words. I can't think that way, so be patient with me as I am a layman.

I wrote a reply to another article in where I suggested that perhaps the big bang was the result of multiple black holes grouping together and releasing there accumulated mass in the form of an explosion, when they reach volatile capacity (when the sum total of mass entering falls below the sum total of mass being ejected, or something like that). Upon devouring a galaxy black holes drift toward the second nearest galaxy (which is also collapsing) and form with it. Like very small drops of water slowly gathering to form a super drop. Of course, these black holes do not have to be from our own universe alone (any black hole will do), they could be black holes from a neighbouring universe (like a carbon atom next to another carbon atom).

This allows the super black hole, the black hole that remains when all black holes coalesce together (except those in the furthest regions as they could be captured by competing black holes from neighbouring universe), to reach volatile capacity without actually having to collect and concentrate all matter in the universe into one point. There is enough bonus material passing between universes to reach the required entropy for big bang action. Maybe this is why we have more mass than we should, or appear to have. It could just be the sum effect of neighbouring universes tossing off matter in the form of escaped black holes. The big bang, in other words, happens all the time, but differently, and with different matter from different universes.

Aquilacane you crazy bastard!

100. What's the evolutionary advantage of offering your place to an old woman on a bus?

Comment #83017 by aquilacane on October 28, 2007 at 2:17 pm

If you look at the Sabertoothed tiger and consider that his teeth were an evolutionary advantage to catching large prey, but later in their evolutionary history, they large teeth became a disadvantage when there were fewer large prey animals to catch. One could argue that there can only be historical advantages to a behaviour or trait in general and no absolute advantages, as the environment decides whether or not the trait is in fact an advantage or not. Perhaps beating old women will become an advantage as we take them out of the food consuming population after recording any knowledge that may provide the group with any benefit.