jackson33

Pangloss; I really don't wish to make this a big issue or argue, however here is a short interview Steve Kroft gave, behind the scenes, about the interview. Kroft mentions that media had given a false image of the man, that he was brilliant and that he (Assange) WAS both a Journalist and PUBLISHER. http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7300034n&tag=topnews For anyone that wishes to view the actual interview, it can be seen on the same link offered above. It is in two parts offering a good review of what we have been discussing on this thread. Pangloss, while thanking you for giving me cause to listen to the entire interview, I do believe you are misunderstanding many things he said, standing by my post.

I'm sorry Pangloss, but I don't personally feel any person interested in anything can be unbiased, yet still feel the press, media or any person maintains the right to report news. There is probably nobody, certainly on this forum, that is more biased toward Conservative, Constitutional principles than myself, but I'll maintain my desire everyone has the right to disagree. What your indirectly inferring is being disingenuous in reporting and I'd really like some reference points. It seems, Assange has EMBARASSED, both major US Parties and many people with some very different ideologies, suggesting a bias toward the States, which is very common in both Australian and European Media. Our own Federal actions, as well as media in general in the US certainly has NOT itself been objective toward his actions and if were me, I'd be a whole lot more aggressive toward the US, than I've noted from him.... I did intend to watch 60 minutes, knowing he was on tonight, but got tied up on the Egypt issue. For some reason the pre-markets are ignoring these events, which would be good news for me, while confusing on how and what to do in my own pre-market activities in the AM...

I'd guess "the outsider" knew full well before writing his post, what the decision was going to be and frankly from reading his post, he will do just fine. I don't believe he is a pending "criminal" or anything of the sort, nor would I suggest not accepting his Dad's money or for most young folks borrowing money to make a third attempt at this point in his life, is necessarily a bad thing. Interest in Science, a passion for computers and landing a 50K job in today's economy adds up to a whole lot of common sense. If he sticks to "his plan" investing and building a nest egg, the education can come anytime and no place in the world I live in does it say that secondary education has to come at 18 years of age or so.... As for College for the average person, in the first place, I don't know how many college Graduates I've hired to drive trucks, work in warehouses or run some small business. TODAY, these kids are coming out of college owing thousands of dollars (some over 100kK$) and simply can't find A JOB. My two cents....

rigney; I generally read threads such as yours, noting that for some reason lately they are increasing but am always reluctant to respond. Your interest or desire to understand the unexplainable (opinion) is nothing new and over 50+ years I've followed articles and discussions on this issue. I do have one point, I don't think will upset the pro-BBT advocates, noting here I remain a sceptic and that's what acceptable today was not what was 20 years ago or do I believe will it be in maybe a few years. Before the telescope, our Universe was thought to be the few thousand stars seen. As technology and actual deployments of them into space has advanced have developed, what has been seen has changed many things, not excluding the age of the Universe if indeed somehow created through the BB Theory. As your article suggested what's seen 10BLY away, with clarity would have debunked BBT in total many times during it's short life span. To say this a little differently, what was seen beyond certain points in the past as not clear and using artist illustrations of what could be, turned out not to be the case. As these different understandings and questions have evolved, many new theories have evolved, a good many not explainable in themselves without the BBT base to work with and where many of your questions involve. Here is a very brief history of the telescope and it's effect on astronomy; http://www.400years.org/en/for_teachers/teaching_ideas.php Now to my one point; The James Webb Space Telescope should be activated around mid-2015. There are many good articles available with a google search, including this one. It will be a orbit a million miles from earth and should give a much clearer actual view (no artist simulations required) and IMO could either refute BBT or make me a believer. For instance, those galaxy now clear to 10BLY away, very similar to our own MW which originally did NOT fit BBT, might be observed to a more distant point. I don't want to further confuse the issue for you or argue any points on this forum, but the actual photons received from distant locations are extremely low. taken in short time exposures over days or longer and any distortions of energy received could be greatly eliminated.

CR; No doubt, I could find a hundred references to one word being used over another used by any poster, including myself, for the sake of political correctness. I think you and swansont both know this, but the comment was made in jest...apparently accepted otherwise. Actually however, I feel ALL forums, to some degree ban posters as you say arbitrarily, have mentioned this in the appropriate sub-forum many times even have given THIS forum credit for having been more fair.

Sisyphus; I'm sure you already know, but I take it as; If your going to question something, literally trying to change society, you best know the arguments. Around here, they call this providing proof. I have no idea how many posters over my years on these science forums, that have been banned, questioning science theory for no other reason than questioning it, some with hundreds of links providing proof as they understood some issue. Shouldn't Silverman be held to at least near the same standard or any Atheist/Person saying Science trumps Religion and speaking to maybe 4-5M people. Intellectually speaking then, yes to deny the existence of something based on science and IMO, should have some knowledge of physics (not sure about math)....Your stretching the point a bit, to insinuate believing in God could be a "Physics Question", however surely back in history someplace between Religion and Philosophy before science, it was. Skeptic; I could give you fairly complete explanation, but the mention of the moon would have serviced and both parties should have known that much....

Political Rhetoric (Using language effectively to please or persuade) is most certainly designed to change opposing minds, without which elections would be meaningless. Since we STILL live in a free society and we are divided on political/social ideology, that rhetoric or sometimes referred to as campaign speech must remain free to voice. When you speak of drawing people into action, yes it means exactly that, promote your candidate, give money and get out and vote. What Loughner is accused of doing is a crime, a despicable act on his own people but was neither performed from being indoctrinated or influenced by any persons speech, music, game or IMO is most any major felony. I suspect he has been delusional for years about his place in life or society or simply wished his 15 minutes of fame. As Pima County Sheriff Dupnik alluded to several, such tendencies in people were at one time committed for Psychiatric Evaluation, treated and released only when the professional felt safe in society, which is no longer legal, in most cases.

Yeah, I watched O'Reilly (a devout Catholic) that night, miss few of his shows and I rarely miss, Glen BecK (A Christian Mormon) on Fox or the Rush Limbaugh (Christian) Radio show and the one thing that stands out is the lack of science knowledge. What does stand out in these cases, along with hundreds of others is their Patriotism to Country and their benevolent attitudes toward mankind. While it also surprised me Silverman, an advocate for Atheism and should know basic science, the antonym of Religion in many ways and couldn't give the standard Moon/Solar effects on tides, was a bit of a surprise. However I'd suggest 90% of all people, educated or not are also ignorant on this and most everyone is, to what all is involved. Playing to peoples emotions to change things according to an agenda IMO, all take on a religious tone. While David Silverman or any advocate may not believe in a God or deity, without another purpose in mind, whatever that might be, to advocate for or against anything must have a purpose. His (Silverman) said purpose is that people are being mis-lead, but I'd bet he has other reasons, none of which necessarily involve Religion. Silverman has only been President of the "American Atheist" organization since September 2010, but the group has a long history, back to Madalyn Murray O'Hair, literally the God Mother of the modern Atheist Movement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Atheists If any of you are interested in the history of Judicial Activism or Atheism roots in the American Society, you might like reading Ms. OHair's, wiki bio.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madalyn_Murray_O%27Hair

rigney; It's hard to estimate whether John Boehner ®, the incoming Speaker of the House is being rhetorical or sincere in his desires. My personal problem with him is he has been around since 1991, was there during the last challenge to the Challenge to the Constitution (1991/92), the publics disapproval and elections of the first Republican Congress in 40 years (1994 Gingrich) and it's methodical demise over the next many years (1998-2006) and did nothing, he was part of the problem he now claims wants to correct. Contrary to what's being said, the NEW HOUSE will choose their speaker and this might just be some ploy to keep any possibility of disrupting the traditional acceptance of the previous House's selection, I don't know. Many new members, however have already been offered special privileges (committee assignments) and apparently will follow through, which to me is the same old scenario.