Kyrisch

I thought the fact that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle states that energy conservation can be violated as long as the product of the total energy with the total duration through which the conservation is violated is bounded by Dirac's constant, and that recent observation puts the estimated energy content of the universe to be approximately zero allows for a violation of energy conservation on the order of the age of the universe and creation compliments of the same mechanism that causes virtual particles to pop in and out of existence without any deterministic cause could theoretically occur? Wow... What a sentence.

Bush was a strong character, and look where it got him! I don't think it's a good idea to model an ideal presidency after Bush. Moreover, you must not have watched the State of the Union Address in which Obama clearly reprimanded both the Republican and Democratic party, as well as the Judicial branch. He was bold and clear that he was tired of the partisanship that was mucking up the works. If you perceive Obama as being a weak leader who 'tries to please everyone' you obviously have not been paying attention to recent politics.

I don't understand why dropping unreasonable ideas and adopting new reasonable ones is source for complaint. He's not 'making it up as he goes along', he's thinking. He has new information that he did not have during the election and he's doing what he thinks is best based thereupon. I will say it again, blindly adhering to any political agenda, Democrat or Republican, or any fixed agenda after it is no longer reasonable is not something to be praised. This is exactly what President Bush did, and it is the main reason many of his policies failed.

Maybe Obama is departing from the hyperpartisanship that has gripped this country and caused so much potential progress in the government to come to a grinding halt (e.g. the health care debacle in the congress) . His 'radical' departure shows that he's willing to be sensible about issues and do the right thing, not what his party dictates. He has the highest office in the land, he had better be doing what he thinks is right, not what some arbitrary 'political spectrum' dictates. However, this may result in the opposite of what you claim. I don't think people respond to reasonability. They respond to fervent adherence to their own beliefs. As such, I think Obama, unless this approach yields tangible results quickly, will lose favor with many of his old supporters.

To offer an explanation of why the OP seems to find them much more attractive than the average SFN consensus, it's probably because s/he likes them as people. The boy, in particular, since the OP paid so much attention to the details of his appearance, I would even say there is some emotional attraction to as well, on the level of 'a crush'. This would bias one's perception easily. People find people they like more attractive on average than people whom they do not. (I have no source for this, I apologize, but I have read it.)

I actually think it's a bot. Remember how it never responded directly to things?

"the bible is true" is not a well-formed expression. You can examine the validity of statements within the Bible, but the Bible on the whole can't really have a truth value. Further, in order to test the more specific hypothesis, "all the destruction and evil is the result of sin" you'll first have to define more precisely exactly what you mean by evil and exactly what you mean by sin. And all this before we can even begin to assess its truth value.

Those all look like pretty average-looking people to me...

blood, intermediate species are still 'one species type'. Macroevolution is NOT about one species 'changing' into a completely different species, but rather small changes accumulating until two populations of a species reach the point where they no longer can interbreed, or do not due to behavioral sexual isolation. Intermediate species are not half and half; if anything, they're 99% and 1%.

These are all, "Merry Christmas and Happy New Year", not just happy new year.

Since the water in the barrel will not rotate nearly as much as the ice we can ignore the angular velocity of the water completely and we have the following two statements of energy conservation: [math]GPE_A = \frac{1}{2}Mv_A^2 + \frac{1}{2}I_{ice}\omega^2[/math] and [math]GPE_B = \frac{1}{2}Mv_B^2[/math] Since the energy necessary to effect the rotation of the ice inside the barrel is nonzero, the linear velocity of the barrel must be less than that of the barrel containing water. Therefore the water-filled barrel will reach the ground first.

[emphasis added] This is ambiguous to the point of uselessness. You don't consider embryos alive because they require the incubator of the womb, but in many ways the same thing can be said of all life on earth with respect to earth as their 'incubator'. Does "on its own" mean in the vacuum of space? Because very, very few things on earth which are considered alive can survive such harsh conditions.

In light of happy snapper's recent reaction to the forum as well as many others' negative feelings and misconceptions about why their pet thread was placed into this apparent file 13, I agree that it may be a good move PR-wise to rename the forum thus.

While there is some randomness involved, it is not the main drive of the algorithm. This video, though relatively sensational, explains that when the algorithm is presented with a question that has multiple responses, it does in fact look back and uses the past few lines to determine which is the most contextually appropriate response.

A recent video featured on ebaumsworld showed a French woman whose joints were so malformed that she moves about on all fours, resembling a quadruped. I was wondering what could possibly be wrong with her, medically. I only spent a little time searching on Google but I failed to find anything useful. Could anyone here enlighten me? Warning: The title/comments may be offensive (it is Ebaumsworld, after all )

Interesting, thanks for the corrections!

Evidence? Sources?

The biggest problem with this, besides the fact that it could not be done efficiently on a small enough scale to be useful, is what happens when you decompose water like that: [math]2H_2O \xrightarrow \ 2H_2 + O_2[/math] As you can see, this will result in a concentration of the extremely light (so you would have to deal with buoyancy) extremely flammable (which is not a good idea if you have electrolysis going on anywhere near) diatomic hydrogen gas that would be twice as large as the oxygen gas you wish to utilize.

I have a feeling the future of this technology is going to lie in the area of sex-change operations as opposed to reconstructive surgery.

The main problem with this is that programming a way for the program to determine its own fitness is incredibly difficult. How would one go about programming a function which calculates fitness that's general enough to recognize all forms of 'higher' complexity as the ones you listed above?

He probably typed whatever he wanted to verify into google and then just put the first link that came up without even reading the content...

I think it's due to the fact that the mass of a sperm containing a Y chromosome as compared to an X chromosome is slightly less, allowing them to move slightly faster.

Creation by what means? Do you have evidence for this process? A theory is great but without a mechanism it is close to useless.

Selection bias.

Does anyone else see the ridiculous amount of irony in this statement? -facepalm-