bascule

I have a rock that keeps Al Qaeda away. That's why.

All of your sensory systems can develop ILMs at various stages of signal analysis which can trigger actions in the cerebellum. The more you repeat a given behavior (i.e. reacting to sensory cues) the more these ILMs start to develop. They short circuit having the sensory data go all the way into your neocortex/thalamus and thus the need for "conscious" processing. I notice something similar playing music. I get into playing well rehearsed bass patterns, just going through chord patterns and switching up the rhythm. The more I try to focus on doing this, the worse it comes out. However if I start thinking about something completely different, sort of zone out into introspection, the music just flows with no conscious input. It's awesome. Okay, I have to go play bass now...

Is anyone else annoyed that Loose Change, the most accurate conspiracy movie since Oliver Stone's JFK, has been #1 on Google Video for the past several weeks?

Phil, I readily admit that memetics has languished of late. The most pertainent problem was the internalist versus externalist debate. The externalists were the ones really trying to make memetics into a science, because memes-as-cultural-artifacts means you have empirical evidence to work with. I don't think externalist memetics works though. Cultural artifacts are not the base replicating unit of memetics. A meme is a phenomenological object, an association pattern that exists within consciousness. I really think the languishing we've seen in the memetics movement is due to the fact that externalists have realized that their approach simply doesn't work and internalists know that it will be at least a decade before we can even begin to conceive of studying phenomenological objects empirically. I don't see how you can look on the patterns as being "superficial" at all. Perhaps I've been exposed to some different material. One of my favorite ones expressing very meme-like ideas was James Burke's Connections: An Alternative View of Change series, where he traced the evolution of ideas backwards in time, showing the bizarre ways in which ideas influence each other, and using a number of case instances drawing some general conclusions about the way information evolves. One of the most poignant that he brought up was that the rate at which change occurs depends upon the rate at which we communicate, which has continued to increase throughout history. Anyway, certainly nothing scientific, but I found your comparison to electrons orbiting a nucleus to planetary orbits as an indication that you're rather averse to the concept altogether, and I'm surprised that, given your obvious facination with these sorts of ideas ideas, that you have rejected the concept outright. Are you rejecting it for any other reason that it's not empirically based and that the concept doesn't necessarily explain the sorts of predictions it makes?

According to Just Six Numbers they are:

I'll say this at least, fresh, raw fish certainly tastes better than cooked fish. Yum! But, of course, eating raw fish is also much more likely to make you sick than if you cook it (unless it's gravlax). I've heard it argued that raw foods are healthier, however. Not really sure how much truth there is to that. There's a considerable amount of evidence which shows that our early ancestors went through a period of being primarily fish eaters (at least in terms of the animal flesh we consumed). [SOURCE!] Fish were our primary source of the DHA needed to develop and maintain our brains before we evolved the ability to produce DHA ourselves. Our bodies seem naturally tuned to consume fish more than any other type of meat.

GMO algae

This is a film put out by the Immortality Institute. I'll be the first to admit that these people are a little nuts, and the whole film comes off that way. But still, it's awesome: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6581761732541483047 The basic ideas are: Immortality is the ultimate goal of medical science. Medical science will soon be extending human lifespans in faster than realtime, i.e. procedures will add more time to human lifespans than the time it takes to develop them. Once this happens, humans (who have access to life extension technologies) will essentially be immortal. The film also discusses transhumanism and the Singularity. Yay!

"Hi. I know the secret of the universe."

I built a perpetual motion machine. It runs on my own capacity for self-delusion.

I'm of the belief that it descended from an autocatalyst with variadic products which catalyze the production of themselves, giving way to a primitive system of heredity. Circumstances were such that the reaction never stopped, and here we are today.

I take it all back, I've found some compelling evidence of what really hit the Pentagon

Please review the evidence here before screaming conspiracy over the Pentagon: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html A lot of people seem to be taken in by those "This is the only piece of evidence" arguments. Look, this is the only piece of evidence we have that we ever went to the moon: Well, that settles it. The moon landing was a hoax. I don't know if there's a term to describe that type of argument. I'm going to go for "baldface lie"

So is the idea that the generator operates continuously to recharge the tanks (with HHO gas!) and then you can only use a small amount at a time before exhausting the supply and having to wait for it to refill the tank?

There were two videos released. I'm not sure if one of them is from the gas station: http://www.judicialwatch.org/5772.shtml

And it came to pass that in time the Great God Om spake unto Brutha, the Chosen One: "Psst!"

Martin, I raised some similar objections to that same statement. I'm still yet to hear how irreducible complexity is a testable hypothesis.

http://clickcaster.com/item/view/the-evolution-of-mentos-coke Noice!

QuickTime is a container format for a whole slew of potential video codecs. .mov files typically use the Sorensen codec. There are also MPEG-4 files named .m4v, and MPEG-4 AVC (H.264) files called .mp4

Why Java is used for anything besides enterprise tasks continues to elude me

A panel of government experts disagrees: http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_ch2.pdf

Surely you aren't talking about WTC1 and WTC2. I don't know how you could possibly overlook all the evidence that they collapsed from a fire. But since you obviously are choosing to overlook the evidence, I might as well point you to it. It's all right here: http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_ch5.pdf WTC1 and WTC2 were also the first skyscrapers to be hit by jumbo jets with enough fuel to make a transatlantic flight. WHAT AN AMAZING COINCIDENCE! Let's look at the unusal circumstances surrounding WTC7: - It was showered by debris from two of the largest skyscrapers in the world collapsing - FDNY was in shambles. They simply were not equipped to deal with the event. Many of them were trapped inside WTC1 and WTC2 when they collapsed - Oh, did I mention FDNY didn't have enough water to fight the fire A number of oil fires were burning inside WTC7 for a long period of time. Ordinarily the fire department would have no trouble getting these fires out, but they were dealing with an unprecedented event. WTC7 had also been expanded in such a way that the addition spliced into beams in the existing structure for support, making it more prone to collapse if the structure were weakened (by, say, an oil fire) 1. Argument to popularity. Just because a lot of people believe something doesn't make it right 2. These people are idiots. If they think WTC1 and WTC2 looked like controlled demolitions they have no idea what a controlled demolition looks like. WTC1 and WTC2 both collapsed from the top down, "zippering" open and showering debris on everything surrounding them below. Controlled demolitions typically weaken supports in many floors at once in order to cause a controlled implosion. However, the entire building is brought down. The only building this can be suggested for is WTC7. WTC7's collapse was not consistent with a controlled demolition either. In a controlled explosion charges are detonated over a period of a few seconds at most, and the building begins collapsing immediately after the initial explosions. WTC7 did not collapse this way. A full 36 seconds elapsed from the initial signs of structural failure until the structure actually gave way. The mechanical penthouses began to sink into the roof... 30 seconds later the east penthouse disappears completely (the east side of the building is where the structural failure is assumed to have occured). 5 seconds later, the west penthouse disappears. Then approximately 1 to 2 seconds later, the entire building collapses. How is THAT consistent with a controlled demolition? My source for all the information regarding WTC7 is the FEMA report. It's quite thorough and answered all of my questions: http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_ch5.pdf "were reported"! What an awesome source! This is an evidence based discussion. Unsubstantiated anecdotes are expressly forbidden.

SmallIsPower, I don't think you understand the Biocosm Hypothesis whatsoever. The "phase change" comes about when intelligent entities consume the universe, not merely with the advent of intelligence which, until it starts to become more widespread, is rather ephemeral. Think of how many cosmic events could obliterate all life on earth.

There seems to be a great deal of interest in these forums in discussing whether the official accounts of 9/11 are accurate. Originally the other 9/11 threads were locked due to far too much bickering and far too little evidence-based argumentation. Most of the controversy surrounding 9/11 has centered upon two events: the alleged collision between Flight 77 and the Pentagon and the alleged collapse of WTC7. In regards to these events, there are two pieces of evidence I'd like to bring to the discussion. The first is the video of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, which was released today: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdHdX6Znvc4 And the second is the official FEMA report regarding the collapse of WTC7: http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_ch5.pdf I'm now curious if someone alleging a coverup in the official explanation can use either of these pieces of evidence to make their case. Please keep the discussion directly related to the evidence, as if you fail to do so, I'm certain this thread will be locked shortly. From what I can tell: The video seems congruent with the official explanation. The evidence at the site of WTC7 shows it collapsed due to an oil fire which weakened the steel structure along the east wall until the building collapsed.

Don't forget Blackalicious's Chemical Calisthenics!