Sepiraph

I disagree, through wikipedia you can more easily find research papers. If you ever had to look for those research papers before wikipedia and internet became popular, you'd know what a hassle it was. Finding a research papers means you usually have to order the papers from a University library and then you'd have to usually photocopy them. It was a huge waste of time. I understand most people are concerned about people taking the easy route through wikipedia, but no original research is ever going to come off from people who opted to take the easy route anyway. I'd rather pay attention to the people who use wikipedia as a general reference and as a reference points to dip deeper into the subject. For example, do you have any idea how amazing it is to find a translated version of Riemann original paper on the Zeta function nicely referenced at the end of wikipedia? A lot of scientific articles in wikipedia have very good reference papers, and together with google no library in the world could ever rival them. Also don't even get me started on the subject of high school education, instead read Paul Graham's article on why the whole education system is worse than a farce.

I agree, "Are we playing God" is a truly meaningless question, often asked by people who also happened to be idiots. I would imagine when men first started to use fire, some of the monkeys around him was thinking along the same thoughts.

Actually I don't hate Paris Hilton at all, she seems like a decently attractive and extremely rich young lady that I wouldnt mind being friends with. I actually hate the people who actually professed to hate Paris Hilton a lot more, to me they epitomize hypocrisy.

Blocking wikipedia should be considered as an Internet crime.

At the very least it allows you to practice to be ambidextrous in writing (although nowaday I think people can either just type or use their cellphone for voice/video capture). Although frankly I think reading textbooks and notes on my own has been far more useful than attending classes.

No, that would be a false analogy and it was a rather poor attempt at strawman. Good attempt at fitting two logical fallacies in one post though!

In that case, you can just go to your local library and grab a few math books. Generally, none of them are beyond high school level.

I'd like to see an article on the monetary value of the British subjects who came to the land of the Indians before they took everything over and called it America. (and do it relative to the Indians, I reckon it would be something that approaches negative infinity) However having said that, I would probably voice the same concern as the Americans if tons of illegal immigrants started to go through our borders.

Well said. It doesn't really matter if their missile defense system is a joke as long as the defense contractors and certain individuals in government would get billions for it.

Super-human at what? At killing people and using weapons, putting themsleves in danger and risking their own lives while taking orders from some politicians seem like super-human at being dumb.

Depending on the level but the basic mathematics required would be linear algebra (Hilbert space, matrix theory etc.), differential equation (ODE, PDE), calculus of variation etc. You should just grab a few QM texts from your University library.

Being a E & M theory, it has to be if it was to be correct ... Although I think Einstien deserves the credit for special relativity, his insight goes beyond merely a E & M theory.

I think you understand the principle behind Occam's Razor, but you are applying it incorrectly. The examples you provided has to do with incorrect conclusion (possibly due to incorrect understanding) rather than using extraneous assumptions to reach a conclusion.

I believe it is generally meant to refer to the "original post" or "original poster", depending on the context being used.

That's a good question, but I don't think resipiratory system is necessary at all and perhaps you should re-think the order of the question. I think the important criteria are for an entity to: 1) self-replicate and 2)"evolve" or adapt (and allowing the possibillity for the increase in its complexity). Then it seems that the passing of information is merely the necessary condition in order to achieve these criteria. Also we know that life happened, at least once, on Earth in carbon-based form because we are here. So what makes anyone presume that it cannot happen again in a digital (perhaps sillicon-based) form?