Phi for All

The thread is about existence, not actionable demonstrations. AFAIK, none of the gods is willing to be directly observed, and anything claimed to have been done by them is more rationally attributable within the framework of the natural universe. I'm not saying science is uninterested in the kinds of phenomena often claimed to be supernatural, or that scientists don't use intuition to aim their investigations. But the scientific method is designed to minimize the error that comes with intuitive leaps, to keep conclusions from being based on shaky grounds. When a phenomenon is explained, it becomes a part of nature, and God is squeezed out of another gap in our knowledge. You're highlighting the eccentricities of those giants of science within the framework of their own day's knowledge but claiming we should emulate them because their pursuit of God would remain unchanged today, with our present knowledge. Every generation of science gains new knowledge and drops what is unproductive. It doesn't matter what those historical figures believed spiritually back then. The bulk of their work that advances science and can be tested and used to predict further phenomena is well embraced, while the rest of it is given all the emphasis it deserves. Why aren't you telling us to emulate Newton's pursuit of astrology and numerology? He was a giant of science, after all. Everything he pursued must have been valid.

I'm not a fan of the term, "level playing field" when it comes to wealth. I feel it implies that we want to take the excess money from some and give it to those who don't have very much, and I think many people feel that's the issue here. There is no "excess money". Everyone earns their bucks but everyone should pay their taxes too. I think "fair share" is better terminology for taxing people. A progressive tax ensures that fairness, since the wealthiest will pay more but usually get more out of the system. They have the most to lose so defending the country is more important to them. The infrastructure benefits them more since travel and commerce on the roads, rails and airports is usually proportionate to your wealth. Same with energy, the wealthy use more and should do more to support it. Even if you can afford to send your kids to private schools, your companies gain a disproportionate benefit from better publicly educated employees. And, of course, there's all the subsidization and wealth generated from lobbying, but I'd like to see that go away. It would be interesting to see how robust we could make our economy if we could lift that particular foot off our necks.

Science is concerned with the natural world. Why is it a disparity to place no importance on the supernatural? It's like asking your auto mechanic to take a look at your flying carpet. As far as past great scientists go, they helped to add layers of knowledge to science, and as gaps in our knowledge are filled, God is displaced as unnecessary. We can't know what Galileo et al would think about God if they were alive today with all our accumulated knowledge, but I would wager that the roots of their belief in the supernatural would be less deep. Ultimately, since science is the wrong tool to use on the supernatural, the question of whether God exists or not can only be answered, "There's no rational way to know." There is no compatibility between science and religion.

Congrats and thanks a million/50!

This reminds me of the tactics the Tea Party used after they were subjugated by the corporate special interest groups. They complained in all their rallies that Obama was raising taxes when he actually lowered them for 90% of the households.

Christianity: the Truth that's important enough to Lie about.

Oh, I don't agree with you at all. I choose knowledge over ignorance every time. Your big gripe about knowledge is that it makes you worry about every little detail. Worry is not always a bad thing, and can help you find a way to beat an "overwhelming problem". Your odds of beating that problem are much greater if you know about it than if you don't. It all comes down to being able to prepare for what can happen. You do your preparation, whatever makes you feel safe enough, and then you enjoy your life, knowing that forewarned is forearmed. And if there's an asteroid coming our way that's going to wipe out all life no matter what we do, well, I want to know that too. As Kirk said to Saavik in Wrath of Khan, "How we face death is at least as important as how we face life." I choose to face both with knowledge.

I consider this the height of ignorance. You know something is wrong and you may be dying, but you have no idea why or what caused it. Edit to add: ... and you believe it would harm your bliss to find out. So you're not ignorant that travel can be dangerous but you're off for some bliss anyway? Have a good time and try not to let your vast knowledge make you worry about every little detail of your life.

You're ignorant. How do you know that you're dying because of something you did, much less that it was that tasty sweet drink you had hours ago? Maybe it was that gun you were playing with earlier, or the cigarettes you've been smoking because the ads told you how cool you'd look and how satisfied you'd be. It's probably not that wonderful new cleaning solution you made using bleach and ammonia.... Too bad you were ignorant of the fact that you shouldn't drink your antifreeze while practicing your javelin throwing during a thunderstorm. When people are informed, carrying a metal pole around lightning would never have been the kind of concern that "keep a person from worrying about every little detail of their lives."

I didn't find Parisians to be xenophobic or standoffish. I think they may resent people who assume English is everyone's preferred language, but they aren't alone in that. I think they have some cultural formalities that many foreigners don't respect, and that may make them seem xenophobic. I do know that stores in France (not sure if restaurants are included) don't have the same "the customer is always right" mentality they do in the US. Shopkeepers, even if they aren't the owners, rule their shops and the customers bow to their expertise. For instance, it's considered very rude to grab clothing off the rack to try on in the fitting room without asking permission first. That said, I think the employees at the McDonald's didn't really think things through in this situation, or they had a lot to hide. Why would someone trying to secretly film misdeeds wear something so obvious when there's so much undetectable surveillance gear? I'm sure they were protecting their store (and their jobs) but the letter should have explained things (unless they couldn't read English?). Tearing up the letter was simply childish, and attempting to remove something attached to someone's head is unconscionable for a fast food employee. Even in the US they would have had the right to refuse service to anyone, but getting physical is way out-of-bounds, and I can't imagine France is any different. You call the cops if someone won't leave your store, you don't bounce them yourself unless they pose a threat to your other customers.

I don't think this is going to be the biggest part of the problem, although it is frustrating now. Most countries will not pass up the potential that near-Earth space exploration represents. And as soon as the technology for recycling space debris is made cost-effective, this should naturally lead us to mining asteroids for more materials that can be used off-planet to further the exploration. Dwindling resources will demand that we either change our consumption habits or find more sources, so I think that commitment to space is inevitable. Right now, though, the countries and companies that have already sent up satellites want to retain rights to their equipment without liability when the debris from their equipment damages other satellites. And if nothing is done to correct this problem, 20 years from now we won't even be able to send a rocket through the hundreds of trillions of pieces of shrapnel that will be orbiting by then. Imagine the cost of sending a craft with shielding heavy enough to withstand almost constant bombardment as it leaves the planet! I think the biggest problem is a combination of fears. Fear that someone else will "harvest" your space technology. Fear that someone will build platforms that could be weaponized. Fear that if you give up any rights at all you'll be exploited. All fairly short-term concerns, with almost no thought for long-range consequences. I'd love to see this space debris issue become something that unites us as a planet, as a species, but we need to establish some international law to govern what happens out there. And that's been tough since everyone wants everything with no limitations or restrictions. I didn't think I'd have to explain the difference between a factory fire and atmospheric re-entry heat. And I don't think I want to, particularly, so I'll just over-clarify for those who enjoy nit-picking: http://www.npr.org/2...lide-with-earth

! Moderator Note OK, dude, you need to calm down. Staff gets to choose their user titles, and ecoli chose some word play on the title "Moderator". Your reports have all been discussed, and the ones with merit have been acted upon. The ones without merit have not been ignored, but there has been no action taken because they deserved none. Criticizing your ideas or your presentation is NOT a personal thing. It's what science does to make sure any evidence presented is sound and trustworthy.

Wow. It's easier to hit the bullseye if you throw the darts one at a time. Throwing them all at once like that is dangerous to the people sitting near the board.

That's cool, and I wish him the best. Sometimes I think kids who have to scrape for what they get appreciate it more. But you didn't answer any of my questions. I know paying back ANY loan can be burdensome, but what is it about student loans that your grandson doesn't like?

But I think both of us are necessary for a good democracy, rigney, and that's where Allen West is lacking. He claims the Democrats are no better than Nazis, while simultaneously telling people that, “I must confess, when I see anyone with an Obama 2012 bumper sticker, I recognize them as a threat to the gene pool.” Ha ha ha, his constituency laughs and applauds while trading Goebbels for Mengela. Personally, I want the right to keep the extreme left in check, and the left to keep the extreme right in check. What we don't have, however, is enough true representative power with just two parties to cover all the people in such a massive, eclectic and complicated country as the US.

What does moving a speculative thread to the Speculations section have to do with people other than the person you quoted responding to your posts? It doesn't make sense. If this is the way you communicate when you have time to be thoughtful, I can't imagine what a verbal conversation with you is like. I don't really mean to make this personal, but when so many people are telling you that you're not making sense, it seems pretty obvious where the fault lies.

Sorry, I failed to tie in that Allen West is completely representative of what I responded to rigney with, that his views are so totally misaligned with the Republican platform as to make him a questionable representative. It should be enough that he simultaneously claims to uphold the freedom of religion on one hand while deriding Islam as a whole as violent and untrustworthy. He also claims to champion the truth and freedom of speech but tells a town hall meeting detractor to "put the microphone down and go home". He claims the Congressional Progressive Caucus are all "card-carrying members of the Communist Party", while simultaneously claiming that the Democratic "propaganda machine" would've made Nazi leader Joseph Goebbels proud. Nice bit of propaganda there, if you're a Democrat you're a Nazi, and if you're a progressive Democrat you're a Nazi Communist. How does fascistic communism work, anyway? Sounds like more misaligned political ideology.

Why is he against applying for a loan? He lives in a society that has set aside part of its tax revenue to loan money to help people go to college and pay the loan back when they're more gainfully employed. Does he somehow view this as charity? Would he not pay the loan back? Would he be more inclined to pay back a loan from family or a private institution? Very happy to hear about his situation, btw, I think it's great that his family could help out. There are many people who don't have that kind of support (for the hearing aids, I mean; fortunately support exists for those who want to go to college but can't afford it).

The religious right wants to allow invasive personal rights violations with regard to morality and even our own bodies. They want to legislate their own "holiness" on everyone else, with an agenda that's completely at odds with a democracy that separates church and state. Neoconservatives are merely opportunists clinging to the Republican party with no regard for what it stands for. They see money and power in policing the world, keeping us involved in conflicts everywhere, and using taxpayer revenue and legislative power to subsidize and deregulate their private interests. I think the thing to do is read the Republican platform and see where some of the religious right and neoconservative points differ. Then it's easier to see who is using the platform to bend you over. Raising the debt ceiling is nothing new. Neither is messing with taxes. Ditto altering the Constitution. Why do you feel threatened when a Democrat does it but not a Republican? I think you need to ask yourself just how far right you really are. Obama is more right of center than left, imo (and I'm not alone). Any other politician who calls him down for being too left of center is probably extremely far right. I don't think extremism is where we need to go right now. We need a fundamental shift in the way we approach almost everything. We need to start living within our means as citizens and use credit more wisely. Our major businesses are NOT looking out for the country, so electing representatives from that arena is probably going to make things worse. We need to stop thinking economically and start thinking technologically. We need to start planning based on that technology and build our smaller businesses back up, since they're the ones who tend to hire domestically more often. We need businesses that grow jobs and GDP, not just their own bottom line. Our market economy is still viable, but it's been sold out to businesses that make themselves strong by using the country, rather than building a strong company that can make the country strong through the taxes it pays, the products and services it produces and the workers it employs.

Of course it does, but in generalizing you left out the word "meaningful" and that changes everything.

I think being a religious right neoconservative AND a Republican is a lie in itself. How can the Republican platform be represented by someone who wants to invade personal rights and privacy, be the world's police and grow the federal government to accomplish those things? What kind of truly representative democracy would allow that? It's like buying an ill-fitting, out-of-style, horrible looking suit just because it has your favorite color in it.

I think you may be looking for the science dialogue forum two doors down from us. This is the science discussion forum, and often (read as "practically always") involves multiple members who are ALWAYS welcome to chime in on any topic.

OK, it's not a train, it's the glass of antifreeze you're about to drink because it tastes so sweet. You're ignorant of it's toxicity and you will NOT be able to keep your mind on your music as your kidneys cease to function and you slowly die. And it's really too bad, because with just a bit more lack of ignorance, you could be blissfully having a large scotch and letting the ethanol block the enzyme your body is using to metabolize all that ethylene glycol. To me, life is all about learning as much as possible, removing as much ignorance as you possibly can so you can prepare for problems you may encounter, do as much as you deem necessary to keep yourself safe. A little worry keeps us healthy, and a minimum of ignorance gives us the tools to ensure that we needn't worry to excess.

Which sub-forums aren't letting you post a new thread? As CaptainPanic says (in a funnily harsh way), we no longer have any minimum post counts for Politics and Religion, so that shouldn't be the problem. Pushing the right button is the only thing that comes to mind, but you must have pushed the right button to start this one. I'm flummoxed (that's right, I said it, I used the science f-bomb).

Dr. Maybe has managed, in a mere 16 posts, to get himself suspended for 3 days for failure to provide evidence for his assertions, trolling, grossly uncivil behavior including personal attacks and putting quotes around way too many words. Come back nicer, Doc, or don't come back "at all".