Ringer

I don't know what this has to do with what I was saying First, almost all life that has been on Earth is now extinct has nothing to do with overpopulation, over farming, etc. Scientific consensus shouldn't have any large impact on morality of right and wrong. I have no idea what you are saying in your second statement. If you are right, do you have any sort of evidence to back up what you are saying besides a hunch, we haven't wiped out all mammals in any way, shape or form. Human beings that believe that we do not require the rest of the biodiversity to sustain the requirement for a stable global environment are signing their own extinction event. Science is advancing but they still don't have a clue of all the players involved in all of the biochemical processes that affects all the requirements to sustain life.

I would assume most members here would not just quote something on here that they disagree with or just wrong, because that's not crackpottery. I would think anything posted on here is the result of a sickening refusal to see anything wrong with the ideas you are presenting, believing that just because people want to see your reasoning they are trying to steal your ideas, or consistently making claims that just plain don't make sense and blaming everyone else. I would think anything that is posted on here has been, for lack of a better word, ridiculed to the point the poster is either gone or can see the error and would be accepting in someone learning from their mistakes.

Sounds like he needs to hire a stronger sorcerer or shaman to cast off the curse put on his fair maide. . . fair prostitute.

Yeah, I couldn't remember what to call the axon between the terminal and hillock, so I just said body and hoped my meaning would get across.

I have one that always stuck with me, it wasn't from here, though I'm sure there are variations all over evolution topics. At the time of this conversation I was so dumbfounded by the statement I couldn't even think of how to approach that and my pause cause them to think they had actually made a valid point.

I have to hope that first sentence was a complete joke. As I have said, the OT is a book of genocide and wars. Would you like me to start quoting stats in the bible of killing thousands with an ass's jaw? Have you never heard of the Crusades, French Religious Wars, Islamic conquests, etc, etc. The second is hopefully joking as well. Look at the statistics of costs of war, there are very few wars were any money is made. Let's think of what made people discriminate against Muslims. . . Oh yeah, radical extremists trying to start a holy war.

1.) There isn't a specific difference to be pinpointed that would be meaningful. 2.) Their learning and knowledge could develop to the same level, but there isn't enough known about the specifics of neuronal development to know about the to say any brain could ever be completely identical. There are far to many neurons to believe they could be identical though. 3.) Yes, you always create more synapses through dendritic development. 4.) The bodies of axons are what is myelinated, it stops before the synapse. Also, most developing synapses are mainly done through dendrites forming connections with existing axons.

In addition to iNow's post that argument would imply that those without religion are morally better than religious people due to the fact they don't have the incentives to avoid immoral behavior. Although some anti-religious people would love that, it simply isn't true. People are inclined to behave within social mores with or without religion. Not to mention that religious wars have been the most deadly in terms of body count next to WWI and WWII. And if the OT is to be taken at face value, it's a book of genocide after genocide.

Just because we live in a deterministic system doesn't mean responsibility is void. We are still doing what we are doing, we are our brain, there is no separation between what our brain does and what we do. Just because our conscious mind isn't the one that is necessarily in the drivers seat doesn't mean we aren't making the decisions. I'm unsure of what you mean by a forced deception. That would be a characteristic of free-will, if it doesn't exist, not the definition.

I think the point of the video posted is that neuroscience shows the brain to be controlled by deterministic processes; that usually makes people say free will doesn't exist. I've heard this quite a bit, but I'm still not sure on 2 points. What is freewill exactly and what does it matter if it exists?

Neurons are generated later in life, but the process is extremely slow. Many books will say they don't because in effect the rate at which neurons are developed is too slow to be useful. I'm unsure what you mean by stressed nerve. Memory is more complicated than just remembering something are not. It depends are many different factors, but any sort of damage done to a single nerve shouldn't affect transfer of memory from short term to long term unless the sensation of the damage takes priority.

What do you mean untouched? If neurons are damaged they have some ability to repair themselves depending on where the damage is. One hypothesis, I don't remember if this was tested, is if neurons are cut schwann cells tend to myelinate the damaged area and wont allow it to be repaired.

From what I can tell through a skim of the AMA article, the puberty suppressant drugs are fairly safe and used regularly in prepubescents. Again this was a skim, but it seems in this case the drugs may have been introduced slightly early in the child's life it is more likely the drug will help the child cope and not develop further psychological problems while deciding if they want to keep their gender or not. The point of these drugs is to allow the child to grow older so they can better make a decision without going through puberty of the sex they do not wish to be. [edit] I just realized that it seems Phi was already saying this. [/edit.]

You aren't doing anything except pulling numbers out and relating them through meaningless arithmetic. Our years have absolutely nothing to due with any universal constant, finding any relationship with a certain year and anything else is just coincidence. You also can't move decimal points around to get the number you want.

I think he's talking about this The telling parts of that is, though, one saying we shouldn't be mucking around with nature. That doesn't really say anything, unless he is against all types of medication. The next is a personal opinion emphasized by him saying, "to me". From what I can see the parents are doing the right thing by giving him time to decide. Not to mention he was diagnosed with gender identity disorder at a very early age makes it seem like the probability of the parents forcing this very slim.

Out of curiosity, what kind of homework are you doing?

Are you saying you don't believe that pi is a ratio between the circumference and diameter of a circle? That was explained, you can test it on any circle you like and it will always come out the same. So, since that was given to you, the ball is in your court to explain where your number came from. No one will 'steal your math', science isn't exactly a place you can steal ideas expect to make loads of money and become famous. If someone steals your idea and it's dead wrong they wasted a lot of time and effort. Since the majority of amateur ideas are wrong, not saying it's bad to come up with ideas, the odds of theft being any more than loss isn't worth any thief's time. If someone were to try, it would be fairly easy to resolve.

And if you don't accept a literal translation of the bible, no Catholics I know do, then you won't have any problem with any field you study.

I think our statements are seen only by us.

If there is no economic crisis why would we need to solve it?

That's why I asked. It's the only Erdos I am aware of and I couldn't understand why he would be talking trash about math and then pull out the most prolific mathematician ever.

Are you talking about Paul Erdos, the mathematician?

Seeing as no one here knows anything about you, where you live for example, I don't think this is a very good place to start asking this question. Your best bet would be talking to your school adviser/counselor, they usually know where to start. Then call some schools that look interesting and visit them.

Well, I declare myself the winner. Bartender, a round for everyone.

Pincho, if water doesn't attract why can plants use capillary action to move water upwards against gravity?