Phi for All

I mistakenly thought your comments were about amphibians, since they're the ones with regenerative capabilities, not lizards. I mistakenly assumed the conversation had turned to amphibians since the OP stated that regeneration is the fascinating part, not the reattachment of limbs, and certainly not to all animals. My bad.

Do you have a link to a paper on such an experiment? Human anatomy can avoid producing scar tissue in this way, but I've just never heard of it being done on regenerating amphibians to bypass the formation of a blastema.

And I don't think that's the way regeneration in salamanders and newts works anyway. I've read that the blastema formed on wounds like that become the new limb. In the wild, the newt can't go back to get its tail, nor can it sew it back to the stump, so why would the ability evolve that way? You're answer about lizards is probably true with them as well.

The problems faced by US citizens in this instance aren't limited to those caused by the effects of slavery. Any change in the way we treat those with slave ancestry should include all non-whites. I'm not saying reparation is due to all, but if there is an attempt to re-educate the white population regarding tolerance and humanity, it should include how we treat people of any color skin. Personally, I think there are a few more basic re-education opportunities here for all Americans, and including some of them in a reparations program might make it more palatable to some. We have a major problem with the negative perception of intellectualism. We have a major problem with extremist capitalist takeover/wealth disparity. We have a major problem with corruption in our politics at all levels. We have 25% of the world's prisoners in commercial operations that have little to do with justice. If we want to be extremely efficient, especially against the current administration, we should take a branded approach to these problems. Tackle them all because they're inter-related, and working to solve one helps solve the others. An overarching campaign to clean up our act is needed, something with even more lasting effects than Lady Bird Johnson's anti-littering efforts. There was a great example of something stupid we were doing that needed to be fixed on a national level. I have zero problems with the social engineering that today makes it impossible for me to throw trash on the ground.

Um, no. The mines are the many obstacles that black-skinned humans face in the US that don't apply to white-skinned humans. The attitudes that actually resulted in triggering the worst of (white) human nature. And nobody but you is suggesting running in to anything. The exact opposite is true, so why make this conversation so hard? In this age of tweets and sound bytes, panties get bunched pretty quickly, and nobody wants to give these types of subjects the intellectual time they deserve. I think discussion on black reparations is too important to set it on fire so quickly. Forums like this should be places to dig deep, and leave the shallow positions to the cable pundits whore in it for the ratings and profit.

It is when the elements that created the "sins" (do you call them that because you want them easily forgiven?) are still in place. Instead of learning to live with and avoid stepping on the mines, how about we remove the minefields?

We ALWAYS run the risk that some folks may not get to throw in their 2 cents when we close a thread. In the Tyson thread, the OP was over-emphasizing Tyson's stance from a debate where he was asked to pick a side to defend, and when this was pointed out it made no difference to his agenda. I'm sorry to be blunt, but when I'm moderating, I really could care less about any of you individuals posting to any individual thread. It doesn't even enter into my mind when I see the opening poster unveil a shit-stirring agenda, or post fallacious arguments over and over, or any one of a hundred things people do to get their threads closed. You getting a chance to comment isn't a factor. My job is to enforce the rules. Contact the Admins if you feel I should be replaced. As far as religion goes, It's against the rules to bring it up in mainstream sections. Should this be changed? Or should we be like other science forums and drop religious discussions altogether? I don't think discussing religion is analogous with unfalsifiable science subjects. When people start posting 30,000+ versions of the many worlds theory, each insisting they have the only true explanation, I may change my mind. What makes it interesting, MigL? It seems like an excuse to criticize and accuse others of being thin-skinned, while holding yourself up as scientifically virtuous. And since you also state that you'll never start a religious thread, it also seems like more shit-stirring. It's not even something you're interested in. Senseless?! I'm not paid enough to deal with your condemnations. Just because you didn't get to comment doesn't give you the right to bash my reasoning skills. It's great that you can judge us based on partial information. I'm probably too senseless to do that.

What is a "key element", and by what mechanism would "physical reality" preserve them forever (even assuming the universe is infinite)? Does "key elements" include individual consciousnesses? How are you using the term "resurrection"?

False dilemma. Why couldn't the reparations include something like favored access to higher education, which would be compensation AND help avoid future similar events? It's hard to argue against a smarter citizenry. Instead, I would remind those intolerant racists that they aren't taking PERSONAL responsibility in this instance. This is about being a US citizen, and taking that responsibility seriously. Particularly, this is about being a white US citizen and realizing that this will make us better. But that's also a conversation we need to have in this country. We've forgotten the difference between living in a group and living in a society. We're ignoring our vaccinations for personal reasons, and farming out our responsibility to the law to private prison firms, and allowing our representative democracy to be corrupted by individual extremists.

It's like you're talking to other people we can't see.... Very frustrating when this is supposed to be a conversation. Why are you bringing up Gates and Darwin and God? Didn't you come to a science discussion forum to discuss science?

"If you don't know, now you know." -- Panic at the Disco Excellent, thanks Sensei! So do you think a properly fitted aircraft could fly ASAP to a reported UFO sighting and try to detect samples that don't match what we'd expect to see?

Reasoning like this is painful to see. Your critical thinking skills are a dumpster fire. I don't mean to offend, and I'm not attacking you personally. Your arguments are silly and you're ignorant about a LOT of science that you openly criticize. Sorry. Really very sorry.

Did you want to discuss the science, or did you just want to attack Tyson? Because I don't see anything beyond ad hominem and emotional rant here. This is the Astronomy and Cosmology section.

The main problem I see is that our current tech is looking for readings on specific things. If we're checking on standard contaminants, would anything from offworld even show up? If we're measuring aluminum particles per million, would aluminum from an alien craft show up differently?

We often hear about tests that conclude particles (of some material) aren't native to the area where they're found. There's a bunch of stuff in the atmosphere, and I was wondering if we're capable of detecting matter from offworld in it. We can tell where dust from one country has blown into another, so it would seem like the tech is robust enough. If we could detect aluminum particles from aircraft, and determine where that aluminum came from (?), it seems likely that we could also detect if it didn't come from around here.

I'm spitballing here, but don't we have aircraft designed to take measurements on atmospheric conditions sophisticated enough to detect parts per million? Has anyone ever used them to check the region of air where a UFO sighting took place? Again, I don't find fantastic maneuvering and speed capabilities all that outlandish or suggestive of non-human invention. But if we found stuff in the air that suggested these ships are putting offworld ejecta into our atmosphere with their anomalous propulsion systems, we could only conclude that it's aliens, or that humans have been offplanet secretly making experimental spaceships (or some combination of both).

Of course I do. But there are at least three other mundane explanations that have far greater probability of being correct than aliens. If we even had one alien artifact to test, I'd bump aliens up a notch or two. But alas, all those pesky government coverups grabbed every single one of them. Sure. That's why most of the arguments I see for aliens fall short. There's almost always a normal reason for what gets reported. It's about sensory sightings, or abnormalities, or one-off situations that can't be tested or debunked. That's why checking for non-terrestrial biosignatures would be better. It removes ALL the mundane reasons when you find some. What about these encounters goes above and beyond what secret government budgeting is capable of? I would be pretty shocked to find out our government (or Russia's, or China's, or any wealthy nation's) didn't have some secret weapons they've been working on. Landing on the White House lawn wouldn't convince me. Again, if it's terrestrial tech, I'm sure it could be made to look very convincing. We HAVE to be able to study something and determine beyond doubt its non-Earth origins. We can tell what part of the planet various organic and inorganic material is from, so we should be able to identify something not from here.

The radar signatures mentioned in that thread displaying non-standard/unrecognized behavior are only evidence in support of UFOs. They don't support alien existence any more than they support the existence of flying reindeer. I would accept evidence suggesting some kind of non-terrestrial biosignature as being supportive of alien involvement. Do we currently have the technology to detect matter in our atmosphere that may have been introduced by travelers from offplanet (discounting anything prebiotic)? If we can rule out any mundane reasons why such biological material is present, that might suggest support for alien visitors.

STOP. Take a breath. Read what is being written. Saying that there is zero evidence for an explanation is NOT the same as claiming it's impossible. There MAY be aliens out there, but there is zero evidence that supports aliens more than a terrestrial explanation. Let's stop talking past one another, shall we?

They're zero evidence of extraterrestrials. They are definitely evidence for UFOs. The two aren't equal. And you bring this up why? Is this like your claim that the Navy says these UFOs are alien?

You won't last long here if you keep making fallacious arguments. EVERYBODY here is interested in discussing these issues with you, but NOBODY wants to deal with stupid, ignorant, poorly formed ranting from someone standing on a soapbox. How about you climb down and deal with people in an intellectually honest way? It also doesn't automatically mean alien either. Not animosity, just frustration with poor reasoning. You jump to a conclusion many are still skeptical about, and you lash out when this behavior is pointed out. I can see why you perceive it that way, but we're a civil board if you stop and give it a chance.

We were talking about radar contacts. Why would you mention pilot ignorance? Or is this strawman just easier to hit? Ah, here's why you mentioned pilot ignorance! But really, how could "the pilots" know about stuff that's not "need to know", or that comes from another country? I think claiming "the pilots" know "all" the tech is pretty sketchy. Really bad reasoning.

It's only peripherally supportive of extraterrestrials, like saying sonar evidence that could be whales is really aliens. It's much more likely to be whales. Similarly, it's much more likely that these UFOs have an earthly origin. Some country testing unusual aircraft. Ignorance and fear. When you mix them, as you have, it produces stupidity, hate, and unreasonableness. Critical thought on vacation, if you will.

We can discuss this as much as you want, as long as you aren't asking for a diagnosis. Nobody on the web is qualified to do that without physical testing, so we'll also tell you to see your doctor. The extra frequency and discomfort MAY be psychosomatic due to your focus on the phenomenon, but it's strange that it happened without the normal food stimuli (or outside the normal time for the stimuli). There's a LOT of molecular activity going on above a hot cup of coffee, and probably some irritants that get released when you open the packaging on a breakfast bar. But the problem most likely isn't with the stimulus, but rather with the way your body is wired to react to it. The signal transmitted to the brain from the nerves can be different between people. I've had explosive sneezes before, obviously triggered by some stimulus, but I've never experience the nausea you mention. It almost sounds like your body is so determined to be rid of X that it prepares to sneeze and/or vomit simultaneously in order to purge the irritant. Do your eyes ever water as well? I've also experienced some weird cross-wiring wrt the head/face/throat/sinuses (where all the intake orifices are). Sometimes when I get a scratchy throat, if I can't clear it with saliva or a cough, my eyes will water (another reaction to irritants). I've sneezed right after plucking a hair from my moustache. This may be our bodies dealing with our particular neural pathways. Again, if you're concerned, you should ask your doctor. It would be REALLY cool if you could journal your experiences, treat this like an experiment. EVERY DAY, you mark down whether it happened or not, and if so, what the detailed circumstances were. Besides being great evidence to show your doctor you aren't crazy, this kind of experiment could give you some predictive power over this phenomenon.

As Moontanman points out, you're wrong here. In the denser medium of water, mantas "fly", albeit more like an airplane than a bird since they don't need to constantly flap their wings to move and remain "aloft". With that bit of ignorance dispelled, has your objection to the opening post changed?