Velocity_Boy

That's way too much milk to consume is such a short time, especially right before going to bed at night. One does not have to be lactose intolerant to expeience discomfort after doing so. Hell, I love choicalate milk and am have not a trace of L.I. but if I did that I too would feel lousy at bedtime. Or really ANY time, except maybe after a long run or intense workout. Like the "all of a sudden" everybody is allgeric to gluten, I am skeptic of the incrase over the past decade of those claiming lactose intolerance. The milk and its production methods have not changed. The growth hormones have always been there, and besides, are totally inert in the final milk product that is put on the supermarket shelf. So the reaosn for this LI is NOT to be found in the milk, ergo, by process of elimination it has to be in the consumer. Discovering what this is, exactly is the next step. I am guessing it is just another result or symptom of our nation's lousy diet and fitness level. People feel like doo doo so they have to point the finger at something, to avoid just not eating or drinking so much and hitting the gym.

I was simply stating that in my opinion the veracity for somebody dispensing helath and fitness info should be in direct correlatione with their own personal fitness level. "proof is in pudding.:" I have tired of oyur trolling, and you attacked me here for no reason, and also went off topic to do so. your post has been reported to the mods. I'm guessing you're not gonna be here very long.

Hmm, by design, do you mean to ask what type of study it is? As far as the type of methodology used? If so, it was a Correlation Research Study.

What? No way. Your method violates the rules. By removing a second glass....If you need to since the first one was not one fourth the total weight showed on the scale, you use the scale a second time. How can you think this is allowed? Right, OP?

In IT and networking P2P is peer to peer.

Low levels of consciousness (LLC) basically only imbue it's host organisms....Which do far as we know is an animal...With the knowledge of being alive. That is, sentience. And also the ability to orchestrate plans and simple tactics so as to acquire needs of survival. They can sometimes show basic reasoning skills, but those are usually only for well being and survival. In other words, an organism with LLC doesn't have the complex emotions we homo sapiens have. No jealousy, envy, wrath. That sort of thing. HLC animals are imbued and beset with emotions. Feeling and thoughts and desires that are superficial to the business of need survival. What color should I paint my bedroom? That's a pure HLC symptom. Any thoughts that entertain vanity or project into the future, as in....Should I take Heather to that opera next week?....Are privy only to HLC. Unless of course they are concerned with survival. And even then, an LLc doesn't have the ability to worry about future events. The future is fiction, anyway. It doesn't exist. But HLC can envision it. Well, we try! An LLc is totally unable to envision this. Except again, in basic survival planning. Like, it rained today so tomorrow when thirsty I go to place where water was before, after rain come from sky. But that is really only basic survival reasoning, and is based on past experience. For LLC, no experience equals no planning abilities. Hope that helps a little.

My wife is Nisei. And she's a Sudoku goddess! In Japanese it's called "suuji wa dokushin ni kagiru. She pronounces that better than I do. LOL My Japanese is improving, though.

Hypnosis is not a science, as it does not rely on the empirical method. I would personally give it Psuedo Science stature. At best. At worst? Irresponsible and often dangerous superstitious hoakum. Onboard with Astrology and homeopathy. http://www.sciencefocus.com/qa/there-any-scientific-explanation-hypnosis

Not even remotely enough info about Billy go off any accurate psychological diagnosis. Anybody here who does is simply guessing. And any layman's guess they offer on such miniscule input means less than nothing. A mental health professional would never dare offer a DX either on such scanty info. Billy could be perfectly balanced, but a little pushy. He could be a BPD. He could be a schizophrenic serial killer. He could be simply lonely. Who knows. Not us, not anybody reading your post. If you want to get to know him better, return his calls, if you don't, then don't. Also, not to nitpick, but psychoanalyze is the wrong term. What you really wanted was a diagnosis. What we call a DX. Psychoanalysis is a very specific method of psychiatric therapy, and it's largely obsolete these days.

LOL...This thread reminds me of the line Rainman used when he Jeff's new woman......"Are you on any prescription medication?" Only stuff I take besides Centruum Chewey Adult Vitamins is the occasional Ibuprofen or Tramadol when any of my various old sports and MA injuries flare up. Of course IBU is available otc but I get these bigass 800mg footballs from the VA. As I do the Tramadol.

Hey Sis! Well I'm compelled to comment on your excellent list for a couple reasons. One, the ironic one, is that I was going to offer a philosophy book for this thread that actually had your username in its title...Yes, that one! The Myth of Sisyphus by the great Albert Camus. Also, you mentioned my favorite philosopher, well, along with Socrates, that is, and he is Baruch Spinoza. Who has been called by many The Father of Pantheism. I consider myself of that same belief. And you're correct about Einstein. Christians and other Theists often like to throw some of Einstein's God quotes at atheists as proof that this great mind of science was a Theist. Well, you and I and anyone who is familiar with Einstein's works knows that is totally wrong. Einstein WAS a Pantheist, at least, he subscribed to many tenets of that ideology. His God...Is we can even call it that...Was Nature. The Universe. The exquisite appearance of Intelligent Design, that really is just the Laws of Nature and Physics and Cosmology doing their stuff. I also agree that one should first get familiar with the Classic Greeks like Socrates and Plato, Aristotle, before delving into the rationalists and the empiricists that came along later...Like Descartes, Kant, Kierkegaard, and those fellows you mentioned. The Greeks with their emphasis on Ethics will set a good base, or cornerstone for the newcomer to philosophy to build upon. I mainly dig Socrates for his sheer chutzpah. LOL.

"Zealot: The life and times of Jesus of Nazareth"...By Reza Aslan. It's about the true historical man who lived in First Century Roman occupied Palestine whom we have come to know as Jesus of Nazareth. Seems that area and time were filled with political and religious zealots, of which Jesus was but one example. Aslan does a great job of recreating the turbulent atmosphere back then, and the major players in it. A must read for anybody interested in the topic. Warning..... Fundamentalist Christians who think Jesus was God will not fancy either this book nor Aslans hypothesis of who and what Jesus really was. https://www.amazon.com/Zealot-Life-Times-Jesus-Nazareth/dp/0812981480/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1489787124&sr=1-1&keywords=Zealot

d http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/why-are-there-still-so-few-women-in-science.html http://www.aauw.org/research/why-so-few/

If you deliberately tried to make that post as convoluted and impenetrable as possible by employing far too many adjectives and unecessary quasi science terminology, I must say you did a fine job. At first I thought you were failing against the decade long obsession our country seems to have with enforcing political correctness, but I had to quit reading after you began speaking of algorithms. Which I figured didn't belong in a rant on free and uncensored speech. So I then reckoned I didn't even know what your point was. Could be just me, I guess. But I can caution you that we have a slew of truly smart folks here and you're not likely to do well by trying to impress with verbosity and pedantry. And vocabulary, either. LOL

Bullied? I find that a tad hard to believe, given the splendid manners I have seen exhibited here by most members. This has to be the tightest run and least hostile forum I've ever been on. Try going over to Create Debate or 4Chan if you want some flame! And...I gotta ask...Are you female? Given your avatar of that Negosenic Warhead (?) girl from Deadpool, I am curious. Forgive me if that query is out of line.....And mods..If it's straying off topic. I promise not to pursue it further. 😇

Hence my saying the Chinese wouldn't know what you're speaking of if you "mentioned" the words "pot stickers" and not "jianjiao." *Sigh*

Uhh, if I were you I might've left that last bit out. The OP is gonna take it as a confirmation of his original point! LOL

There are too many variables in your hypothetical Jupiter Strike question for it to be answered with any degree of accuracy, I think. Rather than I believe it's safe to say that no planet would be the same after a foreign space body slammed right through it. LOL. Jupiter IS a gas giant so its density is far less than that of one of our solar systems inner five planets, including Earth. It's almost a hybrid between a small nebula and a planet, I imagine. So maybe it would disperse? And then it's detritus would eventually be captured into the gravitational orbit of Saturn? Adding to it's rings? This is pure guessing on my part. Makes a cool visual, though. Thing with Jupiter is it's so damn huge! Bigger than all the solar systems other planets and satellites combined! And your topic reminded me of how I recently read that many Cosmology guys think that one of the requisite components a planet needs to harbor intelligent life is for it to have a huge ass Jupiter type planet in it's solar system so it can deflect potentially fatal foreign bodies like asteroids and meteors from hitting it. I found this interesting, being a strong proponent of the idea that we are far from being alone in the universe. Thanks!

Folks in China do not routinely eat canines. That is a myth. Rather, this practice is done in only a few small provinces. The equivalent, geographically, of, say, a few small towns in the Appalachian region here in the USA as compared with the entire country. So, for the vast majority, eating dogs is as frowned upon and even appalling to them as it is to most Americans. And the Chinese food we are fed here in most Chinese restaurants bears almost no resemblance to what they eat over there. If a Chinese person came here and was fed, say, General Tso chicken, they would have no idea that it was considered Chinese food. They also would have no idea what we were talking about it we mentioned mu shu pork, pot stickers, or fortune cookies.

Teeth are regenerated. But it a one time deal, usually offered during our early childhood years. After that, you're pretty much on your own, mate. LOL. Most entities in the human body are not regenerated totally. Rather, they are repaired or partially restored. It's misleading to claim bones are regenerated, also. If your right femur is amputated six inches above it's distal end it does not grow back, for example. Neither would even a comparatively small phalange in your God or finger. Rather, if fractured they heal. But even then under only optimal circumstances and depending on the severity and nature of the fracture. The largest organ in your body is your epidermal layer. With more restorative cells in it per centimeter than any other organ. Yet even it will not always regenerated to pre trauma condition.

Seems as though we now know that senescent cells, which are nicknamed Zombie cells, can cause more harm than previously thought, including cancer. So by eradicating them there's a good chance of eliminating or at least regarding many aspects of aging and disease. Peruse this link for more on this intriguing new find......... https://www.yahoo.com/news/killing-zombie-cells-improve-health-142941368.html

Telekinesis? Really? Talk of it should not be allowed on a science forum, as it is decidedly fake. Bogus. As real as crystal healing and astrology. Not even psuedo science. James Randi for decades offered a cool one million bucks to anybody who could do it. Even if they could move a human hair one centimeter from five feet away! Let alone, bending a spoon or making a lamp got off a desk top. Nobody ever came remotely close to claiming he money. Gee...What a surprise! LOL

I think you're being far too kind to String Theory by referring to it as Leading Edge theoretical physics. I mean, hell, is it really even a theory? I was under the impression it was a mere hypothesis? I don't think the requisite tenets of ST to be a theory have been met? For example, have any of it's hypothesized workings of actions been observed and proven and then bested attempt to debunking? I think maybe not. Was not ST in it's heydey during the Brian Green "Elegant Universe" era about a decade or more ago? And has it not fallen a bit out of favor? And is it not outright ridiculed by some physicists? Didn't the cern discovery of the Higgs Boson a few years ago do a big to discredit ST? Just saying. And there's this.......... https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2015/12/23/why-string-theory-is-not-science/#12fba3936524

So....This is my own personal hypothesis as to why time travel is impossible. As you may know, we are all spinning around the universe. The earth prints the sun, our so!At system is in adoration around our own milky way galaxy, and our galaxy and the billions of others in the universe are also in constant motion. For the most part they are receding from that point of origin where the Big Bang occurred some 4.6 billion years ago. OK...So we are therefore not in the same place we were last week. Or last year. And given that our solar system is moving at thousands of miles per hour...Indeed most of those systems I mentioned are moving at great speeds..We are a heck of a looooong say from where we were, say, when Hitler was killed some 70 years ago. So.....In order to go back in time, you would have to rearrange the entire part of the universe we are in or were in, so as to be like it was during the time you want to back to! An impossible task, eh? And this same logic would hold for trying to time travel to the future! You need to arrange those planets and stars to the formation they'd be in when you want to travel to. Now then...This idea of mine, of needing to rearrange the universe to travel in time, will be met with an argument by some who claim that all that can be avoided by using wormholes. LOL. Wormholes are trendy now, but kept in mind they are pure speculation. Comprised of nothing but hypothetical math equations and groundless ideas. We have never proven one to exist, nor even know that they are out there. Much much less know that voyaging through one would be possible. And also not even knowing that traversing through one would be a means of time travel. In all likelihood, if they exist they would be means of nothing for anybody attempting to go through one except to perish from bring squashed like a bug. So I say wormholes are not even a viable argument for time travel. Might as well make up a word off the top of your head like Time Warp Manifold Globular (I really did just now think of that!) And say, hey...That could be a shortcut for time travel.