mooeypoo

wow.. hey, great idea! okay.. we COULD start with the current one, but perhaps we'll have to split it into two..? We can even have it in the form of showing the movie and having a bunch of us talking in the background (like that show, whatsitcalled) and laughing hehe or something ~moo

Well, awsome, now we need some background material that is profoundly, undeniably and utterly based (no, wiki doesn't fit ), some basic ideas on what are the main points to say in there, and then off we go to building a main story presentation and script. I'd personally recommend going by Carl Sagan's way, and not doing a "cold" movie with scientific-logical-cord narration, but rather a more "passionate" story-telling of science. Whatcha guys think? Can we do it? ~moo

Since "Fascism" is a regime, I would rule out Al Qaeda emmediately (hardly a regime, more of a terrorist organization built by individual cells hyrarchy), and the Saudi Royal Family would suit "Totalitarian" more than Fascism, at least by my imho and understanding (which, admittedly, about Saudi Arabia, is limited).. So I'd say Iran fits that, Iraq used to fit that, Syria DEFINATELY fits that, and I might even include Egypt, though it's under a pretence of 'western' totalitarian government.. err.. sometimes. ~moo

I thought about that, but then, doesn't the force on the sail is connected also to the distance of the fan from the sail itself? If I imagine it correctly, then if I put the fan very far away, it will barely affect the sail - so what if I put it very very close to the sail? will I never be able to create a "bigger" effect? ~moo

If my avatar was a female, it was so me.

Aahh.. bascule, isn't that fan directed in the opposite direction? it's positioned to blow air "backwards", no? And, yes, I'm familiar with Newton's 3rd Law, I just don't know which of the actions is "bigger" (or.. stronger?) to create a more massive reaction: The air "pushing" the sail, or the air pushing the boat backwards... Now, another simliar question (or an "expansion" of this one): What if I put the Fan OUTSIDE the boat, but travelling with it - say, with another boat behind it, giving the sail constant wind. Then, the sailboat would move by the power of the wind itself, right? So.. could I create a situation where I position the fan ON the boat, but raise it's "windpower" high enough to overcome the "backward" force and hence get my boat moving forward still?

Ha hehe I just asked my roomate, she said the same thing appearantly it's a good site, you already have 2 recommendations for it Good luck with the game btw. ~moo

So (and excuse me for "lowering" the level.. hehe) what you're saying (if I got you right) is that the fan acts like the "Propeller" in a boat, only it's in the air instead of in the water? Err.. I am not quite familiar with the forces that apply, so sorry if this is a stupid question. ~moo

Hi guys, This is probably a question that has been asked before, but I just thought about it a few days ago and couldn't quite figure out if I have the right answer. If we look at a sailboat, it's working in a quite "simple" way: The wind pushes the sail and gives the boat momentum. The wind, however, is not something that we can say originates from a specific POINT. It's the movement of air molecules. What would happen if I stick a very powerful fan on the rear of the sailboat, facing the sail? Would my sailboat be faster? When I was thinking about it, the first thing that came to my mind is a comparison to a situation where I'd be pushing the boat from within the boat itself. Which would've given me nothing, obviously. But here, we are talking about wind. Wind is not "stuck to the ground" like me, when trying to push the boat. On the other hand, the fan is still moving WITH the movement of the boat itself.. so.. I kinda got stuck there. So. Would a sailboat move faster with a fan creating wind blows on the Sail? ~moo

My roomate is a professional Poker player (plays in tournaments and such), so I'll ask her, but you probably find some free demos online you can learn the game with. However, the big issue of the game is face-to-face playing.. yaknow.. "bluffing" And that just takes experience, I guess hehe. ~moo

We need to CREATE a majority, though. Our opposers (who have no logical basis) fight a PR fight, and get the "votes" of the unknowing majority. It's time we fight back in PR, and have some responses. Don't you guys agree? I just can't help but seeing a very grim future, where people just believe in Scientology or something of this sort, and renounce science alltogether. The WORK of science may still be running, but if you have the 'common knowledge' of kids (who have very bad science books as is) and teens against critical thinking and science, you get less future scientists and skeptics. ~moo

Rebiu, can you base your claims? I'd like to read where there are based resources that led you to this quite hard conclusion.. I might reach the same one, if I have the right resources. ~moo

Wow, I'd say... that's quite inappropriate, too. ~moo

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/taliban-time.html Here's a bit of the Taliban's history, for your refference. The USA's influence was much much later. ~moo

It's actually written "Kebab", and yes, there are actually good things from the Middle East, the whole generalization of it. Are you going to answer our questions, Rebiu, or just keep throwing incredibly pointless remarks around? ~moo

I am trying to figure out if this should be read as "He was okay, even though he was jewish" or "ha, see, he was condescending jew". Concidering there seems to be no OTHER point to this thread, I would seriously want to know what you meant. In the name of debate, of course. And to the point. And on the topic. A bit of clarification, Rebiu?

I wasn't kidding about making a movie of our own btw. We can come up with a general idea, write a script and work on combining images that exist with someone narrating. I'm willing to work on something like that, if there are any other volunteers... ~moo

Well, it's speaking of a specific person, and not a position. If this movie killed off a president, it would've been different than this movie killing of George W. Bush. ~moo

The president can't sue? Or.. well.. uhm the government or something..?

We should make one.

I don't quite know how it is in the USA.. do you guys have something to limit Freedom of Speech, or is all possible? In Israel, for instance, Freedom of Speech is highest, as LONG as you are not LEADING someone towards committing a crime. Telling "lets see what happens when Bush is killed", and making it look like it is a good thing (and I don't yet know if that is what the movie did, I am just saying as an example) is certainly included in it. How does it work in America? Do you guys have anything like that? ~moo

I believe a movie, statement, suggestion or story about the assassination of any politician, or human being for that matter, is utterly and entirely wrong, and deserves to be excluded from the "freedom of speech", even by grounds of "causing" or "leading" people towards an act. The assassination of Yitzhak Rabin comes to my mind, obviously and sadly. Not to belittle the matter -- is this movie about the assassination of BUSH himself, or of "a" president of the united states? ~moo

Appearantly, this movie is quite old, and was aired on NBC, at February 25th, 1996, and again at June 8th 1996. There's also a bunch of responses to it: http://www.csicop.org/sb/9603/origins.html http://paleo.cc/paluxy/nbc.htm http://www.skeptictank.org/flist074.htm http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mom/oronteus.html Not that we need any, but quite telling nontheless. In any case, I was wondering why it is that scientists chose not to "fight in the same battlefield", and just release a movie debunking this. Instead, scientists decide this is too silly to respond to in the same media, resulting in this movie being the main thing an unknowledgable average individual sees. Isn't it time we start responding this war (and it is one, obviously) by using the same means? a response-movie would've been influencial to say the least, specifically to people who find reading long texts is tiresome, and don't bother conducting extensive check themselves (the majority of individuals on our planet). ~moo

It's amazing how many strawmen arguments, and misinterpretations and sheer lack of knowledge and lies are being told in this movie.. The entire movie is based on the idea that fossil documentation is done by the ammounts of earth layer found above it.. how silly. but then.. Iguess the second I've seen who is the host, I knew precisely what I was getting myself into. ~moo

It's okay, Sisyphus, this debate, obviously, is not looking to be interresting. I am still waiting to hear it's point. And the other one's point. ~moo