Comments by Frankus1122

Comment #185664 by Frankus1122 on May 28, 2008 at 9:29 am

Al said;

As if Canada needed any more bad publicity, they are already Canadian

If you said this in Canada I would take you to the Human Rights Commission so fast your head would spin.

Sounds like jealousy to me.

402. Mark Steyn vs. the 'Sock Puppets'

Comment #185649 by Frankus1122 on May 28, 2008 at 9:04 am

I watched this as it happened on TVO. It was sad for the accusers. It looked like Amateur Hour. These guys had the most insipid 'arguments'.

What really bothers me is that it seems as though we will not be able to speak truths because they offend.

403. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185593 by Frankus1122 on May 28, 2008 at 6:51 am

Christopher Davis:

They forget that the greatest evil of racism is that it fails to recognize people as individuals.

It is a difficult line to walk. Statistically certain groups of people have particular traits. Steven Pinker talks about this rather well in The Blank Slate.
It gets messy when we try to determine why certain people are the way they are. Is it genetic? environmental? cultural? a combination of all of these factors? Because I can be defined as belonging to a certain group does that mean I am not to be treated as an individual? Are there dangers in not treating me as a member of a particular group, if members of that group tend to act in dangerous ways?

As I understand it you are in Afghanistan. How do you tell if someone is part of the Taliban? Are there certain characteristics that Taliban seem to share that you use as a guide? Are there people who are not Taliban that also share these characteristics?

I see humans as pattern seekers. Racism is a result of this. We can't treat every thing we encounter as wholly unique. We just can't. This leads to errors on occasion.

I don't think I am saying anything relavatory here. And I'm not entirely sure how this relates to the original topic of this thread. But trying to bring it back to the quote that started this off: yes it is evil to fail to recognize indivduals as such, but is it always possible?

404. What is science for?

Comment #185416 by Frankus1122 on May 27, 2008 at 7:00 pm

Good one Mr. Wong!

405. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185312 by Frankus1122 on May 27, 2008 at 12:12 pm

Like I said, banning guns in D.C. caused violent crime to sky rocket.

Banning guns is not the same as getting rid of guns. Presumably all the law abiding citizens gave up their weapons while all the criminals kept theirs.
Our mayor wants to ban handguns in the city. I don't think it will reduce gun crime at all for the reasons stated above. If handguns were eliminated from the city it would be a different story.

Our city is fairly handgun crime free. Not entirely and there has been an increase lately. I think it has to do with culture and what is deemed as acceptable. What you and MaxD were talking about is a huge factor. There is a gangsta mentality that is becoming more popular with certain groups in society. Again I think it has more to do with socio-economic status than it does with race.

I have to pull a number 10 now. See ya.

406. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185299 by Frankus1122 on May 27, 2008 at 11:38 am

Al,
The stats I referred to were comparing Canada and USA. By extention of your logic Canada shopuld be negatively influenced by the USA as the USA is by Mexico.

Banning guns does not, of course, get rid of the guns that are already there. However, if you have a culture where gun violence is so prevalent (unlike Switzerland) and access to guns (legal or not) then you have the problems you have.
All I am saying is that guns are a part of the problem the US has with gun violence. I don't have a solution but I think to say that guns are not part of the problem is incorrect. Eliminating the prevalence of gun ownership would be a partial solution.

407. Town moves against Islamic school

Comment #185278 by Frankus1122 on May 27, 2008 at 10:59 am

Can one ask the question:
Do they kill because they are black? Or do they kill because they are poor? Are they poor because they are black?

I don't think that you can say that guns are not part of the problem.

The US gun death rates are far higher than other industrialized countries, and among the highest
recorded in the world. 2005 statistics indicate that the US had 10,100 gun homicides compared to
222 in Canada. While Canada and the US have comparable rates of homicides without guns
(1.79 vs. 1.35 per 100 000), the US firearm homicide rate is 5 times Canada's (3.8 vs. 0.69 per
100 000) and the US handgun homicide rate is 7 times Canada's (2.83 vs. 0.39 per 100 000).
The US also has 5.8 times the rates per 100,000 of robberies committed with firearms even
though rates of robberies without guns are comparable.

Taken from here:
http://www.guncontrol.ca/English/Home/Releases/GlobalGunEpidemicRev07.pdf

408. What is science for?

Comment #185253 by Frankus1122 on May 27, 2008 at 9:12 am

Are you being intentionally dense?

Tyler Durden,
One could ask the same question of you.
To whom are you asking this question?
Think about it man! :)

Clearwoot has been designed to be as he is. So yes, there is an intention behind all that he does. The alternative is that he has accidentally or randomly or by chance stumbled upon his unique brand of LOGIC. And that is not allowed according to ID.

409. What is science for?

Comment #185250 by Frankus1122 on May 27, 2008 at 9:07 am

clearwooter has solved the ID problem once and for ALL and now we move on to the important matters of 'bad' language. Never swear to god. He will send you to H - E - double hockey sticks.

410. A Tribute to Douglas Adams: Towel Day May 25th

Comment #184590 by Frankus1122 on May 25, 2008 at 7:51 pm

I took my towel to a BBQ party today. It came in handy in that I forgot my hat and the sun was shining, so it served as a head covering. It got a bit hot under the towel so my head got a bit sweaty. Luckily I had a towel to mop my brow. It also came in handy when the children decided to stop inhaling the helium from the balloons and fill them with water instead. My Adams towel served to dry me off after I was hit with a water balloon.
I never imagined that a towel could actually be as useful as that.
Thanks!

411. What is science for?

Comment #184563 by Frankus1122 on May 25, 2008 at 5:57 pm

Comment #184553 by GordonYKWong

Yes, I couldn't AGREE more. You are on the clearWOOT train.

Comment #184552 by blake121666 on May 25, 2008 at 5:19 pm

Hey, I just made a very large posting and it hasn't shown up. I'll get around to doing it again if it hasn't shown up by tomorrow night.

You've lost it. You get logged out after 5 (?) minutes. Long posts that take longer than that to create are often lost in this way.
I am now in the habit of 'selecting all (Ctl A) and copying (Ctl C) before I hit send.

412. The Faith of Flanders

Comment #184430 by Frankus1122 on May 25, 2008 at 6:50 am

Comment #184348 by bachfiend

Thanks! That gave me a good belly laugh and brought back fond memories of my elementary school lunch hour. I ate nothing but peanut butter and honey sandwiches for 3 years while watching the Flintstones at lunch.

The Simpsons is a smart show. Flanders is not anything but a device to poke fun at religious types.

413. What is science for?

Comment #184259 by Frankus1122 on May 24, 2008 at 8:10 am

MaxD,
You are asking the same question as you would an IDer.
IDers deny that Darwinian Evolution is the explanation for how things came to be what they are. They just don't believe it. So they invent an alternate explanation. They have no explanation for the mechanism by which things came to be other than 'goddidit', just as H-Deniers have no mechanism to explain the Holocaust other than' Jewsdidit'.
They are both deniers of the explanations that do provide mechanisms for how things came to be, and neither provides a mechanism of their own.

414. What is science for?

Comment #184250 by Frankus1122 on May 24, 2008 at 6:53 am

AllanW,

Thanks, but I am still not entirely clear.
He said:

a naked fear of what the Jews may do to you

in the context of those who deny the Holocaust.

The "naked fear of what the Jews may do" is what apparently prevents serious historians from exposing the 'truth' about the Holocaust.
ASM has exposed the 'truth' and now he is apparently hiding out in Mexico because of "what the Jews may do."
It doesn't really explain what his motivation is. He indicated a "love of truth" was what drove him (and presumably David Irving, David Duke, Israel Shamer, Ernst Zundel, etc.) to the conclusion that the Holocaust is a big hoax.
Okay. Let's say it is true that the Holocaust is a big hoax. Now what? Should we turn all of Israel over to the Palestinians? The Jews were capable of creating this massive hoax on the world once, what's to prevent them from doing it again? We need a solution to this Jewish problem.
Am I on the right track here ASM?

Just as the creationist 'science' is based on the belief that goddidit, it seems that the 'Holocaust hoax truth' is based on the belief that jewsdidit.
The two camps are the same in that their 'evidence' is seen through the filter of preconception. However, there is another difference. Whereas the creationists are motivated by a love of God, the deniers are motivated by a hatred of Jews. The former are merely wrong, the latter are wrong and evil.

415. What is science for?

Comment #184243 by Frankus1122 on May 24, 2008 at 5:47 am

ASM,

You have convinced me.
The Holocaust is the biggest hoax in history.

Now what?

What is the next step? Is it just a case of having the 'truth' be known? Or is there a further motivation?
We now know that the Jews have created a fantastic hoax on the world. So what? What do we do about this?

I am trying to understand where the obsession has its roots. I think I know, but I am wondering if you truly have the honesty to make plain.

416. Five Things Humans No Longer Need

Comment #184178 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 8:40 pm

Dr. William Parker, a professor of Surgery at Duke University, and his colleagues, think they've discovered why we have an appendix. In their studies of benign gut bacteria, they've found curious biofilms and concentrations of "good" bacteria in and around the appendix. These bacteria aid in digestion throughout the gut. Dr. Parker suspects that the appendix is a kind of "safe house" for these bacteria, where they can hide during episodes of diarrhea that flush the gut clean, and then move out to re-colonize the gut when the coast is clear. Ironically, he thinks that due to modern medicine, which makes diseases like cholera and dysentery uncommon, the appendix is under-stimulated and occasionally overreacts, causing appendicitis.

I heard this on Quirks and Quarks

417. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #184176 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 8:36 pm

Max,
You read the article here and commented upon it.

Here is the section that got me thinking:

Most primates have wisdom teeth (the third molars) but a few species, including marmosets and tamarins, have none. "These are probably evolutionary dwarfs," says anthropologist Peter Lucas of George Washington University, Washington DC. He suggests that when the body size of mammals reduces rapidly their jaws become too small to house all their teeth, and overcrowding eventually results in selection for fewer or smaller teeth (International Congress Series, vol 1296, p 74). This seems to be happening in Homo sapiens.

Robert Corruccini of Southern Illinois University in Carbondale, says the problem of overcrowding has been exacerbated in humans in the past four centuries as our diet has become softer and more processed. With less wear on molars, jaw space is at an even higher premium, "so the third molars, the last teeth to erupt, run out of space to erupt", he says. Not only are impacted wisdom teeth becoming more common, perhaps as many as 35% of people have no wisdom teeth at all, suggesting that we may be on an evolutionary trajectory to losing them altogether.

It is that last bolded section that has me wondering how this can happen.

418. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #184169 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 8:23 pm

Calilasseia,

If you are still around could you explain how/why the human jaw is getting smaller and some people are not developing wisdom teeth?
I asked this question elsewhere and I think I sort of have an answer but I am not sure and you seem to know what you are talking about on matters such as this.
I know our diets have changed and we no longer require big massive jaws with lots of teeth, but from where does the selection pressure come? Our genes don't 'know' we no longer need extra teeth and smaller jaws so how is this selected for?

419. Five Things Humans No Longer Need

Comment #184164 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 8:07 pm

Comment #184153 by mordacious1

And what about parts of the world where there isn't access to dentists, are wisdom-toothless people higher than 35% because those with them died off or are not as attractive?

Actually the article I referred to said that about 99.8 percent of Bantu speaking people have wisdom teeth while no Mexican Indians do. I don't think dentistry has had any effect yet.
But I have wondered the same thing about eye-glasses. Certainly there would be selection pressure on people who couldn't see clearly.
However, from what I read (and learned from posters on this site) it seems as though genes are not as specific as we sometimes think. They can express themselves in various way depending on other genes and environmental factors. They also have many purposes. Poor eyesight or fewer teeth may be the result of some other selection factor.
It is a complicated process.

420. What is science for?

Comment #184157 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 7:54 pm

Al said:

If the Holocaust is a myth, hoax and fabrication, how come the only people to discover this have been bigots, discredited non-scholars, the mentally deranged, Islamic militants, and other assorted whackos?

I love it when people think like I do.

As is the case with that those who try to promote 'Intelligent Design' and claim that the 'Designer' (capitalized) could be anything at all -not necessarily God, the real truth is in the motivation. They will claim that they are motivated by freedom of intellectual thought. They claim that there are alternate views on the evidence which make more sense; that point to an 'Intelligent Designer'. It could be an alien they claim.
But we know that is not the truth.
They have an ulterior motive. The Intelligent Designer is none other than Bible-God.
I had this discussion over 25 years ago with a creationist who was arguing that 'creation science' should be taught as an alternative to the Theory of Evolution. He brought out all sorts of alternate explanations for things like the fossil record. The main thrust of his argument was the 'science' behind the creationist world view.
In the end I asked what was his goal; what was his motivation?
He believed in Bible-God and wanted the Good News spread on campus.
It wasn't about science, it was about god.
I cannot believe (argument from personal incredulity) that ASM's motivation is 'historical accuracy'.
He hates Jews just as surely as the Intelligent Design/creationist loves god.
That's the motivation.

421. Five Things Humans No Longer Need

Comment #184146 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 7:25 pm

Thanks jo5ef.
I did a bit of poking around and it seems you are perhaps partially correct. There seems to be a lot more involved if I understand this article correctly:

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1458632

Which I am not sure I do entirely. I ain't no scientist but I think I got the gist of the paper.

Here is a relevant excerpt:

A reduced number of molars may be advantageous from a human evolutionary perspective. Because of the dramatic lifestyle and diet shift experienced since the discovery of fire and the development of cooking utensils, third molars, which could have been essential for the survival of earlier hominids, became not only functionless but also an important cause of morbidity for modern humans (54). Dental arches have been reduced over hominid evolution (2â€"4, 56). As a result, third molars became frequently impacted or malpositioned, preventing the teeth from attaining a functional position. Furthermore, because of the difficulty of cleaning them and keeping them free of disease, impacted or malpositioned third molars lead to a higher susceptibility to periodontal disease, such as infections, carious lesions, cysts, tumors, and destruction of adjacent teeth and bone

422. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184080 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 2:28 pm

Thank you Almighty Quetzacoatl.
Now further demonstrate your omniscience and answer my question on the other thread.

423. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #184079 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 2:26 pm

Okay. I will try again:

Can someone answer my question here:

CLICK HERE

424. Five Things Humans No Longer Need

Comment #184067 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 2:09 pm

Comment #184053 by moderndaythomas

Our health no longer depends on the presence of large cheek teeth, so when the mutations occur and the teeth don't come, it otherwise goes unnoticed. And nature doesn't purge use from the population. In fact, the less teeth that we have in our skull translates to fewer cavities and abscesses

Is it one gene that is responsible for the formation of wisdom teeth? Do other mutations occur that cause other teeth (canine, for example)to not form?
Is there anyone who can seriously answer my question? (Thanks steveroot:)
Is it still the case that more absesses and cavities would lead to less reproductive success?
Are there now different selection mechanisms going on in societies that have dental care?
I don't think I am wrong to believe that reproductive success is the mechanism by which evolution works.
I can't see how a genetic mutation that causes a lack of wisdom teeth can be a factor in reproductive success.
If I have wisdom teeth am I less likely to reproduce? It could be the case, I suppose, but has there ever been any studies to determine whether or not this is true?
Evolution is blind (not intelligent). It does not 'know' that we no longer need wisdom teeth. According to the Theory of Evolution it is only through mutations that lead to offspring producing more offspring that those mutations survive and slowly change the structure of the organism.

Can someone explain this to me or was Ben Stein right?

425. How to reconcile Richard Dawkins?

Comment #184035 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 1:17 pm

Humans are a dynamic system, no ideology is.

I like this.
It fits in nicely with how I think.
Life is funny.
(Funny strange or funny ha ha? Yes).
Ideologies arouse passions; without which we would lose some of humanity's great achievements. We would also lose some of our greatest atrocities.
Can we be passionate about the ideology of dynamic systems?

426. Five Things Humans No Longer Need

Comment #184031 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 1:00 pm

He suggests that when the body size of mammals reduces rapidly their jaws become too small to house all their teeth, and overcrowding eventually results in selection for fewer or smaller teeth (International Congress Series, vol 1296, p 74). This seems to be happening in Homo sapiens.

I don't understand how this is happening.
Am I less likely to reproduce because I have wisdom teeth? Are homo sapiens with wisdom teeth generally less likely to reproduce because they have wisdom teeth?
If that is not the case (and I don't see how wisdom teeth or lack thereof would influence reproductive success) then what is the mechanism that is causing homo sapiens to evolve in this direction?

427. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #183913 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 7:18 am

Comment #183883 by phatbat

Every one should just ignore his posts from now on.

I prefer to treat his posts with the respect and dignity they deserve.

428. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #183895 by Frankus1122 on May 23, 2008 at 5:58 am

Comment #183889 by lol mahmood

Yes. Cool bit of atheist fundy LOGIC.

Actually there is a theory that Judas, being reviled through history, is actually the Word of God, paying the ultimate sacrifice by suffering for our sins through eternity. If that is the case then Judas equals the Word equals God. If Atheists are Judas then Atheists are God.
It may seem paradoxical but that is one of the cornerstones of 'true' theology.

Now how's that for LOGIC?

EDIT: I would like to put a little 'TM' by the word LOGIC, paying tribute to its creator: clearwooter.

429. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #183776 by Frankus1122 on May 22, 2008 at 7:41 pm

clearmind,
Your posts have a strange effect on me.
I'm not sure I should post this so openly but....
I think I love you.
Are you married?
Do you have a girlfriend or a boyfriend?
Could you post a picture of your LOGIC brain atop a camel?

430. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #183718 by Frankus1122 on May 22, 2008 at 3:36 pm

Comment #183678 by Tezcatlipoca:

So now you know what to call a group of three or more Librarians. Ha-ha-ha.

Can you say "PARTY!"?

Here is an educational video on the March of the Librarians:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td922l0NoDQ

431. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #183660 by Frankus1122 on May 22, 2008 at 12:48 pm

Al,

I attended a talk by Andrew Kean at a Librarian conference in February.
Here is an exerpt from the session description:

Thanks to the democratization of the Internet and what is now known as Web 2.0,anyone with a computer is given equal footing and the ability to be heard. In today's self-broadcasting world, if you have an opinion, you can publish a blog, post a video on YouTube, or alter an entry on Wikipedia. But is this really such a good thing? Our "cut and paste" on-line culture in which intellectual property is freely swapped, downloaded, remashed, and aggregated, threatens over 200 years of copyright protection and intellectual property rights, robbing artists, authors, journalists, musicians, editors, and producers of the fruits of their creative labours. The Cult of the Amateur shows us how the anonymity that Web 2.0 offers calls into question the reliability of the information. Unconstrained by professional standards, editorial filters, or at the very least, traditional libel laws, anonymous bloggers and videographers can manipulate public opinion and pass off biased opinion as facts. The distinction between expert and amateur, author and audience becomes blurred and the results can be devastating.

I thought he was a bit of an asshole. He derided the people who posted to wikipedia. The woman sitting behind me said her son had posted more articles than anyone to wikipedia. She went on to say how much work he put into researching the articles to make sure they were the best they could be.
Kean said he was a sucker for creating free content.

All of the other presenters at the 3 day conference who spoke about the topic of user-created content on the Web were of a differing opinion.
I believe I read somewhere that misinformation on wikipedia does not last long.
(The preceeding sentence is an example of the kind of thing which could be a problem: some half-remembered 'fact' becomes 'carved-in-stone' truth. Or does it?)

Like I said and you iterated: it has its useful purpose; it's knowing what that is and what to look out for that is critical.

432. Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks

Comment #183652 by Frankus1122 on May 22, 2008 at 12:24 pm

Can't bring myself to care about the greek but as to wikipedia:
How many print based encyclopedia have warnings as to neutrality, and quality of writing, and the need for citations, etc.?
It has its flaws but there are also distinct advantages to it.

433. In God's Name

Comment #183565 by Frankus1122 on May 22, 2008 at 9:21 am

Comment #183543 by mjauzedog

My position is that whether it is an independent school or not, children should not be taught any religious and pseudoscientific claims as alternative scientific theories. If creationism/ID was taught in biology class, the school should be shut down quicker then a fundamentalist Christian gets down on his knees and starts pleasing Jesus ;)

I just finished watching the whole show.
My concern is for society at large.
It is not an issue that is nuetral when parts of the society is being taught things that are demonstrably false. People walking around believing that the world is 4000 to 10000 years old and that God hates fags and Muslims is detrimental to society.
I don't know. I don't want to curtail freedom of thought but you shouldn't be allowed to teach children bullshit like the above mentioned.
In Ontario we don't allow smoking in public buildings. We have to wear seatbelts when driving. These are impositions on my personal freedom that I am okay with because I live in a society. There are benefits to society because of these laws.
The belief that homosexuality is a sin can lead to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. That is also against the law here and elsewhere.
What the hell am I talking about?
Like I said earlier: I don't know.
But it bugs me.

Frankus the grumpy old man.

434. Sun's properties not 'fine-tuned' for life

Comment #183540 by Frankus1122 on May 22, 2008 at 8:39 am

If our sun was unique or 'special' that would prove that God created it just for us.

Whew! That was a close one for us atheists.

435. In God's Name

Comment #183285 by Frankus1122 on May 21, 2008 at 6:35 pm

From GregPhillips
To DavidJSA

Thanks for your excellent posts.

ditto

Oh and I seem to have gotten more than my fair share of birdshit on me over the years

ditto

I have been shat upon at least a half a dozen times. Maybe because I hang out outside a lot.
Or god doesn't like me.
Or seagulls don't like me.
Or shit just happens.

But why on my head? :(

436. Philippe Starck: Why design?

Comment #182651 by Frankus1122 on May 20, 2008 at 6:43 pm

I was commenting on another thread about the importance of design. Bruce Mau had a Massive Change exhibit at the Art Gallery of Ontario a couple of years ago.
There were some interesting ideas generated which I am still thinking about.
For example I think cars are terrible. I drive one but I am not happy about it. I would like a form of transportation that was not so bad in almost every way I can think of. I know about bikes but they have certain limitations.
For more on Massive Change:
http://www.massivechange.com/

437. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #180796 by Frankus1122 on May 15, 2008 at 8:14 pm

Comment #180793 by Caudimordax

Is it okay if I call you Frankus instead of Frankus1122?

Yes. And thanks.
The '1122' comes from trying to be consistent with login names. 'Frankus' was taken on other sites with which I registered before this one.
The '1122' comes from an old hippie I knew who told me: "Eleven and twenty-two are POWER NUMBERS, man!"
It's always kind of stuck in my head.
And because numerology is one of the one pure sciences I thought I would go with those two powerful numbers.

BTW: for those who cannot hear my sarcastic tone through the keyboard: not serious about numerology.

438. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #180790 by Frankus1122 on May 15, 2008 at 7:59 pm

txpiper,
Reading over the last few pages of posts I was struck by the fact that most of the people responding to you seem to be aware of what you know but you are not aware of what they know.
In short, they know more than you.
When you argue from personal incredulity or provide flawed statistical analysis you are betraying your ignorance.
Many have suggested that you really try to understand how evolution actually works by reading a book or two.
Try it. What have you got to lose?
Time and time again you try to put forth 'evidence' which is easily debunked. I feel a bit embarrassed for you.
It is like trying to explain to a 4 year old why eating only ice cream is not good for your health. Your arguments are just not on buddy.
Get an understanding of how evolution works.
Right now you have a good MISunderstanding of how evolution works.
Knowledge is not a sin.

439. Americans pray at the pump for cheaper petrol

Comment #180686 by Frankus1122 on May 15, 2008 at 2:49 pm

al-rawandi

What about the rest of Saudi Arabia's potential oil fields. Which have not even been explored yet? You are certainly only talking about currently discovered oil fields.

I could be wrong here but I think the idea is that we have gone past the half way point. There are more oil deposits but they are not the readily available ones. You have stuff like the Alberta tar sands - not the easiest stuff to extract. It will become increasingly more difficult and expensive to get the oil we need.
It is not that there is no oil left but rather the oil that is left will be subject to the law of diminishing returns.
I think that's right. If not the big T will set us straight.

440. The Neural Buddhists

Comment #180222 by Frankus1122 on May 14, 2008 at 11:49 am

Comment #180199 by Colwyn Abernathy

a "heroic dose"...5 dried grams.... ;)

Did you think that everyone knew what you were thinking?
Did someone come up to you and tell you that you were so high that you thought everyone knew what you were thinking even though you had not spoken that thought out loud, thereby proving to you that in fact people were reading your mind?

Just curious.

441. Americans pray at the pump for cheaper petrol

Comment #180135 by Frankus1122 on May 14, 2008 at 8:58 am

All the talk of sending nuclear waste into space is interesting but once again, to be selfish, what about getting uranium out of the ground?
I do not want a uranium mine in my backyard.
You are talking about spent fuel, but what about the waste from the actual mining of uranium?

http://know-uranium.org/

Another link with some non-industry funded information.

It is revealing to me how much less trusting I am of 'official' reports on the safety of uranium mining when it is happening in my backyard.
I have also witnessed the behaviour of the mining company involved in the dispute in Eastern Ontario. It is like a weird caricature of evil corporate bad guys. The owner of the mining company not only looks like Mr. Burns but acts like him as well.
There is a lot of opposition to nuclear/uranium, not all of which is completely unfounded.
But again, I am a bit too close to the situation to be completely objective.

http://www.ccamu.ca/

442. Americans pray at the pump for cheaper petrol

Comment #180036 by Frankus1122 on May 14, 2008 at 6:12 am

Comment #180020 by Dr Benway

If we simply designed them with the door on top, we'd save an enormous amount of energy.

I think design is the key issue. Cars are horribly designed. As are refrigerators and homes and the way we buy and produce groceries and other products.
I believe if more effort was put into redesigning our world with energy efficiency in mind we would be far better off.

The 100 mpg automoblie X Prize may be the kind of push we need. If it were extended to other areas...

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4261425.html?series=19

443. The Neural Buddhists

Comment #180028 by Frankus1122 on May 14, 2008 at 6:01 am

So religion is for the weak and the ignorant?

Yes.

444. God seekers go public

Comment #179830 by Frankus1122 on May 13, 2008 at 8:40 pm

Dr. Benway,
You just reminded me of the perpetual motion machine highlighted on this site not too long ago.
There is discussion and general hand wringing about our energy future on the 'Americans pray at the pump for cheaper petrol' thread.
I wonder how that magic energy generator is coming along.

445. Americans pray at the pump for cheaper petrol

Comment #179759 by Frankus1122 on May 13, 2008 at 4:31 pm

BTW aren't we missing a post from a giant bird?
This article seems right up his alley.
And the post could almost be relevant.

446. The Neural Buddhists

Comment #179752 by Frankus1122 on May 13, 2008 at 4:16 pm

Barry Pearson :

What is that 40% about? Is it what the article here is talking about?

Probably.
Someone asked me if I believe in God.
I replied, "No. I don't believe in any sort of magic at all."
He said, "What about a higher spiritual power?"
Me: "Was I unclear?"

Is there stuff that we don't know about in the vast universe?
Probably.
Is the unknown stuff a 'higher power'?
There could be beings with powers beyond ours, but they would be part of the natural universe.

There may even be 'spirit' in the universe. It could be the case that beings have existence in some other dimensions that transcend our space-time existence. Being beings that inhabit dimensions beyond ours they would not interact with our space-time and therefore we could call them 'spirits'. To interact with them would require us to somehow get out of our space-time and make contact with other dimensions.
All this could be.
Maybe.
There is just no evidence for it whatsoever.
I am not even sure how you would try to discover whether or not 'spirit' existed.
If the 'higher powers' are immaterial then they cannot by definition interact with us. If they are part of the material universe then okay. They would just be something that is yet to be discovered and understood.
I like science fiction.
It has lead to some real science.
But until the flights of the imagination do have real science behind them I wouldn't base my life on a fantasy.

447. Americans pray at the pump for cheaper petrol

Comment #179706 by Frankus1122 on May 13, 2008 at 2:27 pm

Shaden and annabanana check out the "Nuclear" link on the above mentioned site.
The article entitled
'Why Nuclear Is Not Healthy for Human or Other Life'
is an interesting counter-point to the WIRED article.
A lot of what is on the CCAMU site is very hippie. However, I don't think the facts they produce are made up. Perhaps they aren't balanced but what do you use to balance radioactive spills and birth defects?

448. Americans pray at the pump for cheaper petrol

Comment #179694 by Frankus1122 on May 13, 2008 at 2:09 pm

And what should we do with all of the waste created by nuclear power? We're running out of places to put it as it is. Until there's a more viable method of disposing of or decontaminating all of the waste, nuclear isn't the best option, either.

I have to agree because of personal reasons. A mining company wants to open a uranium mining site and processing plant in my backyard. Literally.
The past record of mining sites and processing plants, as far as I can determmine, is horrible. Has there been a tailing pond for processed uranium that has not leaked? Ever?
Long term storage of waste is a big big problem that needs to be solved before we plunge headlong into a situation that could be around for centuries.
Here is a link to a site outlining my personal problems:

http://www.ccamu.ca/

The history link provides details. I am one of the 'settlers' trying to block the mining of uranium in my backyard.

449. The Neural Buddhists

Comment #179665 by Frankus1122 on May 13, 2008 at 1:41 pm

The mind seems to have the ability to transcend itself and merge with a larger presence that feels more real.

Oh does it really?

I think the answer is yes. The mind does SEEM to merge with a larger presence that feels more real. This is something that many people experience. But again, I think there is an answer for this feeling in what the brain (physical) is doing.
Am I missing something?

450. The Neural Buddhists

Comment #179659 by Frankus1122 on May 13, 2008 at 1:34 pm

I know, it seems like the author is very confused about what he thinks.

Yes, the point was a bit muddled. I think some people are reading more this than what is there.
Is he not saying that the brain is responsible for 'mystical' experiences?
Perhaps it is because I am a 'hard core materialist' that I don't have a problem with what he is saying. If he is saying what I think he is.

God can best be conceived as the nature one experiences at those moments, the unknowable total of all there is.

Or what we call God is, in fact, a brain state. I'm okay with that. I think I am in touch with the universe because I have a wave of firings across my brain. Cool.
I think that is what happened to that brain scientist who had a stroke and got all mystical and 'connected' as a result. It was a TED talk I linked to before.
I don't think there is a problem saying we get weird connected feelings of oneness when our brains fire off in certain ways.

Or is he saying something else and I just can't see it because of my 'materialist-lens'?