Phi for All

I love almonds and cashews most, and oddly enough I picked up from somewhere that almonds are very healthful, while I view cashews as an indulgence. Cashews have a rich taste and texture that make them seem like a less healthy choice, but I don't think that's true.

What's eerie is how you always know just as I'm sitting down at my desk. This is the hole in my ceiling from the last time you zapped a whoopee cushion on my chair, you freaking supervillain.

It's OK. Hypervalent_iodine wanted to close it after your OP, which would have been hilarious. A triple shot of irony. We should have let her. For that, I apologize.

He quoted the part about the mods being "too oppressive", to comment that we don't like being oppressive at all. And yes, I'm sure he knows it was the troll's claim. No foul.

I thought this would be an interesting discussion, one that would lend some foreign perspective on my country, which is something I value highly. However, I'm not interested in correcting misinformation, conspiracy theories or defending myself against historical special pleading, especially when the attack comes from a badly constructed soapbox. Please continue without me.

Again, every country does this to a certain extent. Tourism is usually the thrust, but I can see where it could promote immigration also. We're not really promoting immigration at the moment, so I wonder how old the video you saw is. I think we've allowed our corporations to run wild. They have too much power in fashioning the legislation that should keep them in check. A big part of this power is because we've allowed the corporations to own the media that should keep us informed. Our media is only telling us what the corporations want us to hear. We get told social medicine is bad because the corporation that owns the radio station also owns some hospitals. We get told AGW is a myth from the company the owns the television station and also owns several companies that would lose profit if they had to comply with tougher emissions regulations. And of course we get told that there are many people like AlphaZNV who think we're evil and hate us. Right now, we're in a nasty situation where wages from the middle class have slowly been funneled to the top 1%, which leaves us with little consumer power. The corporations are always looking to profit, but they've starved us so we're no longer as attractive a market. Our jobs move overseas, costs and prices keep going up higher than wages. The American people want prosperity. The American corporation wants profit. The two are not always compatible.

What an incredible intellect! A shining example of how dedication and research benefits us all. He will be missed.

It's tough to warp the truth when everything is in print like this. You should NOT stick with this intellectually dishonest line of attack. Complaining about someone's integrity and then putting words in their mouth is a very hypocritical approach.

You can't insult an idea, and your idea was all he was talking about. Personal insults aren't allowed.

! Moderator Note A note to everyone, let's tone down the usage of words designed to get a rise out of each other. No more trolling/flaming to emphasize your points, you don't need it.

This is only a definition of religion used as a metaphor. Consumerism may be compared to a religion in this way, but the definition is not literally applicable. Consumerism is NOT a religion, but some aspects can seem that way, so we compare and use the word contextually.

The kind of atheism we've been talking about isn't anti-God, and it's not a religion. You're back to torturing that definition again. There is a difference between A) "I believe god(s) exist", B) "I believe god(s) do NOT exist" and C) "There isn't enough evidence to support either A) or B)". C is the default position in science, like a switch you can set to the middle instead of setting it for positive or negative. It's not for or against, it's a neutral position, waiting for evidence to support one explanation over the other.

This sounds like fear, based on a need to strip credibility from a stance that discredits your worldview. Atheism NEEDS to be a religion in order for your not-such-a-hard-world to make sense, doesn't it? I find it intellectually dishonest of you to start a discussion about god(s), claim I'm religious because I don't believe in them, and then accuse me of being self-important when I defend my position that not-believing ≠ believing. Like many others, I'm finding your arguments to be highly irrational and not reality-based.

I'm always a little stunned that some folks don't realize the sheer numbers of man-hours that go into scientific research at all levels and all subjects, and that this somehow leads them to believe that somebody like Gene Ray could make the claims he does without it being tested by hoards of scientists all over the world. If there was EVER verifiable science going on there it would be noted and acted upon. Science respects results, it can't argue with reality, and if folks like Gene Ray had anything viable then others would be reporting similar results. You can't keep so many people from sharing success and knowledge. If a concept is non-mainstream, it doesn't mean it's sitting undiscovered, waiting to be seized by someone who will just give it half a chance. It means it's fallen short in its ability to explain a phenomenon, or it's been trivially refuted due to poor methodology, or it doesn't explain reality better than another hypothesis. It means that people who've spent their lives studying to be experts in their chosen profession have taken a serious look at this idea and they all say it has no merit. As for our part here at SFN, when topics are opened and immediately start receiving negative replies, it tells us that the thread is destined to be flame-bait. When the OP can't produce any evidence, such threads are typically ridiculed, simply because the poster is usually adamant in their assertions despite the lack of evidence. Historically, if we didn't do anything about these threads, they'd just go back and forth with no resolution (how can there be?), page after page, with tempers flaring and normally civil posters getting frustrated enough to break the rules. That's why we shut down the worst of them, when they show no signs of being productive.

"... be incognito and stay away from God" or you'll be religious, the same way you prove yourself to be political if you ever tell someone you don't vote! Don't talk about how you hate motorcycles or you'll be a biker! Don't talk about loving meat or you're a vegetarian! That sports team you claim to hate, we know that makes you an ardent fan! Denying Thor makes you an Olympian at heart! Not believing in God is NOT a religion, but I understand how SOME theists desperately want it to be to make themselves look less crazy. I have to go now. I told a friend that I don't believe in stealing and the police are here to arrest me for being a thief.

Could there be a difference in focus? "One in a million" seems to focus more on the one unique item, where "one out of a million" seems to focus more on the huge sampling. I might use the former to stress uniqueness and the latter to stress the probability.

There is no evidence to support this. Any bias you detect must stem from a different, existing organ.

As long as we have individual nations, we're going to need protection. Even if all the nations get along, there will always be groups that don't, in a world with this many people. It's very rational to keep a few swords around, just for the odd intruders, and then you might as well make sure everyone knows you've got them. It would be great to think we could reach a point where we don't wage war on ourselves anymore. My solution is always better education, make the world smaller, get to know each other better as people. I think our ultimate future is in offplanet exploration, and I'm not sure how we'll approach that when it comes to protecting ourselves. Will we feel the need to bear arms in defense against what may happen to us out there? If we're not warring amongst ourselves, will we assume there might be dangers requiring a few swords in space?

! Moderator Note Explain what you want to discuss. Last chance.

Dots connect. I got that part. As for the rest, it looks like you think you've found something profound, but you don't really have the technical knowledge to convey to others what you think you've found. You're asking people to just look at your image collection to see if someone with more (different? better?) education can put your idea into words everyone else can understand. You're waiting for someone to shine light on something that has so far been intuitive only to you. Is that a fair assessment? I say this because you just attempted to "explain this the best way possible" and end up by saying "if you can not see or understand it,it is not meant for you,but that does not mean it is not meant for others", which is NOT the way knowledge works. That's the way the Emperor's New Clothes works.

I would think the quality of your restoration lies more with how broken the glass is than with the glue you're using. When you say "imperfection approx zero", are you saying there are absolutely no small chips of glass unaccounted for? That each piece of broken glass will go back together again without flaking or otherwise showing a break? Also, when you ask about a "perfect restoration", do you mean aesthetically perfect, functionally perfect or both? I shouldn't assume the glass is clear but does that make a difference? Is this a window pane or a blown-glass figurine or lamp fixture? Are you worried the adhesive would let water or air come through the breaks?

The number one rule for mod selection is we never ask someone who is asking to be a mod. This keeps those with an agenda out. For years we thought ydoaPs was a mole from the Creationist Museum because he kept yammering at us about being a mod while vehemently denying any affiliation, yet his Outlook calendar only goes back 6000 years. Very suspicious. We've learned that great diversity makes for a well-rounded staff. CaptainPanic is your typical engineer, with mirrors on the toes of his shoes and a well-folded map in his glove-box. He's writing a book on razor-blade origami, which has taken him longer than expected with all the transfusions. Our buddy imatfaal runs a one-man legal office/brothel/courier service from the back of his bicycle. When he's not juggling between gigoling and jurispruding, he literally pedals his services to most of London's most desperate housewives. Hypervalent_iodine is finishing her Empress of Everything training, earning money on the side working as a guard in one of those women's bikini prisons you should hear so much about these days. Her perspective is captivating, as always. DON'T DRINK ANYTHING SHE GIVES YOU. Just sayin'. swansont is, of course, who the movie character Doctor Evil is based on. He invented the frikkin' laser and helped develop techniques to minimize burst pressure in whoopee cushion teleportation. There's an enormous red button on the wall behind his desk with an equally enormous sign that reads, "Don't PUSH me!". We don't. We asked mooeypoo to leave her job running Collections for some Israeli mental institution (Mysaab? Mosshead? Mossad?) and she was secretly overjoyed. She's extremely thorough and while some of the staff find her a bit over the top, I don't think frisking can ever be "excessive". Klaynos is a member of The Rolling Stones, but I'm not allowed to say which one. A concert tour went to Cern and Mi Klaynos was hooked on the physics. He came for the concert but stayed for the collisions. Klaynos ( ) continues to petition the scientific community to change the name "Big Bang" to "Jumpin' Jack Flash". I signed, what the hell. I was asked to be a mod by blike, a plastic surgeon who makes more money selling celebrity fat on Ebay than he does with implants and facelifts. He told me he needed a "patsy" who could sign "some papers" and not be able to "figure out what he was really up to". I was flattered and said yes. It's been one long, drawn-out court battle after another ever since. I have no idea if blike is in the country anymore, or if that's even his real name.

Oooh, street fight with mods, that's 60s-70s, right? Bell-bottoms made it easy to get to your boot-knife. That's not old. That's classic, moth.

I'm still unsure what your point is. You're often imprecise in the way you explain things. It seems like you started this thread to criticize, and then were happy to dismiss our explanations by saying, "I also seen enough to Understand how it is here". How does this help us understand you? You imply we've been running this site incorrectly, or at least unjustly, for the last 11 years. Another explanation is that we lack this magic intuition that has unlocked almost every secret of the universe for you, except the one that would allow you to explain your ideas to us. Or it could be that science is such an incredibly robust subject that you can't possibly be as well-versed in it as you think you are, and have instead convinced yourself that your simple approach is (thankfully!) all that's necessary for you to understand everything. I think the problem is that you've made a leap others are uncomfortable making, that's all. You've jumped ahead and left us all behind, slogging away with our tedious methodology and rigorous standards of evidence. You should find someplace less boring and mainstream, someplace where your ideas can fly free of the fetters we would place on you. Keep in touch, don't stop believing, be the change, make good choices and read every chance you get.

Wait to be asked. It's never happened any other way. Ever.