Phi for All

Several studies support the conclusion that social conservatism produces citizens with lower cognitive abilities. Folks with rigid social attitudes just don't take advantage of opportunities for learning the way a more socially liberal person would, and the effect is cumulative over a lifetime. I would use this to support an argument that someone who identifies as mostly conservative is an easier target to manipulate mentally. So choosing to act intelligently to protect others is shame-based behavior? I don't think so, pal. The only people who should be ashamed are those who aren't trying to overcome their animal instincts with human intelligence and critical reasoning.

! Moderator Note You have ignored replies with explanations you don't agree with, so you don't get to claim this. If you don't start responding to posts that refute your idea, I'm going to close this and give you a warning point for Soapboxing. Stop waving your hands and pony up on the evidence!

! Moderator Note Moved to Homework Help. We don't give answers to homework questions, but we can help you work it out. What do you have so far?

What's the difference (to you) between a chat and a discussion? Are you looking for a more casual, less rigorous approach to science? Or are you looking for a place to talk about your wild science ideas where you won't be criticized? What's the purpose of requiring face-to-face conversation? In a forum, most of the posts are in written form, which is the most efficient way to take in information for most people. Why do you want people to write about their thoughts AND be present visually? I'm not saying what you're looking for isn't out there, but what do you hope to get out of it? "Thoughts on the world" need to have meaning, or be trustworthy information to add to your base of knowledge. We had a chat site (I think it's gone now) but too many folks just used it to get around our rules for rigor and civility.

! Moderator Note If you want to discuss science here, you need to keep it meaningful and civil. And take your fingers out of your ears, PLEASE.

! Moderator Note The subject is robots. Please open a new thread to discuss favorite theme park rides.

It shouldn't be confusing at all, if I understand what you're saying. It's a classic storytelling/teaching/training pattern, and one your resting brain might make use of to help you interpret and make sense of something you've experienced. Now THAT seems to be almost pre-cognitive at times. But it shouldn't, seeing as how the brain has everything you ever experienced to work with in order to make reality and the dream mesh up like that, and whatever your mind comes up with is going to seem perfect, or at least eerily intuitive.

! Moderator Note Try NOT responding to modnotes, and use your time for discussing the counter-arguments posed by the members. It shouldn't be this difficult.

! Moderator Note You've had two pages of exactly this, but since you ignore all the arguments that don't support your own, these threads just keep going with no resolution. More like a blog than a discussion when you keep soapboxing your ideas without taking replies on board. It's a bad habit, it's frustrating to those taking their time to respond, and that's why it's against the rules of this science discussion forum. If this doesn't improve quickly, I'm closing the thread. More rigor, please.

Thank you, studiot. I'm pinning this one up on the Science Education fridge with a magnet in the shape of a bulging brain.

Three things. 1) A theory is not a guess, and in science a theory is the best explanation currently available. 2) Here we don't believe people are stupid. We believe instead that people can have stupid ideas, and there's a big difference. 3) I don't know where you get the claim for a low IQ. It's not observable. You're communicating very well (and probably in a second language), and so far the evidence says you function very well cognitively. Since we're a science discussion forum, evidence is very important, and your observations don't match up with the rest of us. If you want to continue claiming to have a low IQ, you're going to have to support that argument with some evidence. Popular science articles refer to "the fabric" of the universe as an analogy to help us picture how gravity affects us as we move through the spacetime continuum. In reality, there is no fabric. We use three spatial dimensions (length, width, height) and a temporal dimension (time) as a continuous coordinate system to help us navigate through space. The "place" you bombard with a laser needs to have matter in it for the laser to interact with. If there's no matter in that "place" in space, the light doesn't have anything to interact with. One of the most difficult concepts to grasp in science is that light has one speed in a vacuum, represented by the letter "c" in equations. The speed of light is a constant, and light units (photons) are always in motion, always moving at c. Now you have some studying to do about light. It's very important to get good quality information, and I'm glad you found us. Having ideas is fantastic, especially if you're willing to post them for critique and listen to the replies. MOST ideas people have in science are wrong, and figuring out why makes us all smarter. Thanks for sharing, and next time please don't be uncivil to any of our members by calling them stupid (especially you). Being civil is our #1 rule, and it applies to everyone.

I think the biggest concern is that our skulls aren't evolved for horns, and just sticking them onto your head (however you might do it) is going to create major problems with stress and fracture on the container for the organ that makes you unique in the animal kingdom. Smacking your head on the car door with two inch horns posted to your cranium would be potentially lethal instead of a minor annoyance. I have to say it's also kind of a backhanded insult to human intelligence. When we learned to cook with fire, our jawbones shrank enough to allow our brains to grow bigger. Similarly, an animal that's evolved a horn attached to its cranium has less room for brains. Wanting horns is like saying you'd rather look like an animal than think like a human.

Maestro99 has been banned for a foul-mouthed rant which he chose in lieu of reasoning us through his anti-evolution stance. Apparently, Jesus doesn't love us AT ALL!

Update: Our good Christian friend here decided to use his reasoning power to post a juvenile, foul-mouthed private reply instead of supporting his ignorant arguments. A disappointing specimen of homo incredulous ignoramus.

We can see that dolphins and whales still, to this day, have pelvic bones where legs had developed, which is strong evidence they walked on land. Other factors also support this. So far, your only argument is your incredulity (which is basically you saying "Since I can't believe this happened, it didn't"). All of your arguments so far have been refuted many, MANY times by many people. Even the Pope acknowledges that evolution is a fact. You have no support for your arguments, and this is a science discussion forum.

Hey!! I'm sipping coffee over here! You can't be this clever on the weekends. That's when I brew the good stuff, and I don't need to be spitting it all over my screen.

I have the wealth of accumulated human scientific knowledge to help me trust in the best supported explanations for various phenomena. What do you have, some Iron Age mumbo jumbo guesswork you've chosen to put your faith in, rather than trust? You sound as though you think the universe is 6000 years old.

You made a statement of incredulity, and incorrectly put a question mark after it. There is a difference between breeds of dogs and species of birds, and studying it might help you overcome this gap in your learning process. You may not trust the Theory of Evolution to describe the process we observe on a daily basis, but evolution itself is a fact. Nothing you say changes that. We observe it in nature every day. Don't you have some of your parent's traits?

The Argument from Incredulity is especially dangerous, imo. Those who use it THINK they've asked a question, and usually expect an answer, but all they've done is stop the discussion (and thus their learning) with a non-supportive statement that can't have any meaningful replies.

The Germans I know acknowledge evolution as fact. And the theory of evolution describes the process. You sound as though you've only studied it a little and decided it was wrong for some reason. That's not a well-reasoned learning strategy.

Which is blogging. A discussion is when you say what you're thinking, and then listen to what others actually think, instead of guessing. This is a discussion forum.

The people who told you this ranting style makes your arguments more interesting were wrong. Even poetry is obnoxious when it's always turned up to 11.

No, but I'm going to question why you think it's OK that a woman is going to have to do much more than that to meet the same standards. I'm willing to bet she'd have to behave differently as well before you'd consider her wallet safe.

I like some of the new fibers that wick moisture away from the body and dry in seconds. Covers the skin, but lets it breathe. They've come a long way since polyester leisure suits. These are people who think their clothing affects sunlight at night. We can lose a few.

So the ends justify the means? It's OK to be unfair to women in this instance because nice guys finish last? Wasn't it this behavior that kept women out of the White House to date? You've chosen the "dance with who brung ya" strategy, or as I like to call it, the Sunk Cost Fallacy. It's time to stop hating women.