Phi for All

I like capitalism, but I would limit government subsidization and lobbying. I don't think a little socialism would hurt, especially on the basics like health care (just because I think we're worth it). Our voting system sucks, so I'd like to tweak that a bit.

Did you get a chance to read the explanations before your post?

We kept yelling, "The tree, the TREE!" but you just waved.

I have one word for you, young man: Caltrops.

Anyone with the word "trip" in their name can join the race. Wear sneakers with laces.

Tell you what, you ride your unicycle, and Mr Skeptic and I will race you wearing these:

The misunderstanding stems from how scientific methodology differs from what you call intuition. Everyone with a question can arrive at an answer, and everyone uses an intuitive leap to peer into the future and guess what that answer might be. The difference is that a scientist doesn't rely on intuition to take him past that first step, and instead he builds up firm ground to walk on by researching, testing, analyzing, testing further and drawing careful conclusions, always sharing his findings with others so they can either follow him or show where his footing is not on firm ground. Intuition, when used beyond the initial question, is like taking a standing leap ahead to what you think is the next bit of firm ground. It may be firm, but how will you really know until you land? And how will others follow after if you haven't built up firm ground for them to walk on? Asking others to take the leap with you means you all may end up in quicksand instead of on firm ground, and scientists HATE quicksand. Does that make more sense?

There are other things besides replication limits that cause cells to die, but they may be covered by your "assuming our health was in good condition" clause.

"A man can do what he wants, but don't post it in the IRC Quotes Thread unless he said it in the chatroom".

If this were a site dedicated to grammar and someone kept calling nouns verbs, would you just let it go and get on with the discussion? If we were into boats and someone kept referring to what motor boats do as "sailing", would you not correct them each time so they could get the boating education they need? We've discussed this at great lengths. Keeping silent when someone is wrong lends tacit support to the error and misinforms those who read afterward.

Because science requires clarity in the use of terms, especially when the terms are non-mathematical. And in this particular instance, it's because so many want to jump over the details with no rigor. Calling a speculation a "theory" puts them almost on a par with "fact" in some people's minds.

Are these the little guys that can also treat wastewater? I found some related articles here. I wonder if they can find a bacteria that eats nuclear waste and creates power from it?

It's even more difficult when someone ignores all the times they are wrong and just insists they only need an intuitive mind to understand things the way Einstein and Tesla did (even though they are often wrong about Einstein and Tesla). walkntune, so many people are giving you great advice on what to study to gain a better grasp of what you're talking about but you don't seem to want to do the hard part and actually study. Does the convenience of having "intuition and reasoning mind" override being wrong so often?

There is evidence that Rep. Wilson actually has a backbone, however it's attached to strings controlled by the lobbyist above him.

That's just a prelude to one version of running/clutching an object like it's really valuable/screaming.

I wonder which would get you in trouble faster, running/waving/screaming, or running/clutching an object like it's really valuable/screaming? Or perhaps running/holding an object out in front of you like you can't wait to get rid of it/screaming? I firmly believe that part of the reason we tend to put on weight as we get older is because experience teaches us the "wisdom" of conserving our energy when we can. We're proud of learning to stack five items on the stairs that need to go up, so we can take them all in one trip instead of climbing the stairs five times. Then we celebrate how smart we are by going out and buying bigger pants.

It sort of gives it away when you can see the ventriloquist's lips move when the dummies talk.

I wonder if there isn't some top-shelf predator related stuff going on there as well. Fast movement grabs our attention and makes you an attractive target. When people see that there is a) no immediate threat to you, b) no immediate threat to them, and c) you aren't worth chasing down and bludgeoning, they are annoyed that you are running for no good reason. I wonder if we still have some predatory sense that tells us you are running because you have something we want, and perhaps we cover that up with the justification of dangerous behavior. Moderate running to appointments seems like a great way to maintain health, especially if you're too busy for more focused types of workouts. But we are funny creatures, ones who wish we could get more exercise opportunities while looking for the parking space closest to the store, or we take the elevator up three flights instead of using the stairs.

Very good point, Mr Skeptic. What would Einstein say about those who cherry pick his ideas only to justify what they hoped to find?

QFT. Now get up off your gluteus maximus and go find those answers!

...and the world of business. How can you justify having to build new prisons if the present ones aren't overcrowded with pot smokers? Thanks AMA, for not being afraid.

Oh, please please don't. My point is that if you believe the phrase, "Life is inevitable" to be Truth, you aren't showing a healthy scientific skepticism. As Ophiolite mentioned, we don't have enough data from a single sample set to make a meaningful conclusion, let alone set it in stone as Truth.

Truth with a capital T is like sleeping with your sister; it's convenient, it's satisfying, and in everyone else's opinion, it's almost invariably WRONG.

* "There are none so blind as those who get their eyes poked out for capitalizing the word 'truth'." --Phi for All * If it was just because it was the first word in the sentence, your eyes are safe.

First off, seeing two doctors, once each, is not a good basis for assuming negligent treatment. The doctors will always start with the least invasive treatments before moving towards batteries of other tests. And you didn't give either doctor a second chance. Secondly, and don't take this the wrong way, but you obviously have a poor opinion of the doctors you've been seeing, and I'm sure you made that clear to them (you said one of the doctors got angry when you dismissed her views and demanded antibiotics). I'm not saying they wrote you off because of your attitude, but I've always found any service provider responds much better to my requests when I'm friendly. I'm just saying. And lastly, you're being very contradictory in attitude towards this illness. It's a money game, but your insurance covers everything?! You're concerned over this illness but you have better things to do with your time than go to the doctors?! It just seems as though you are second-guessing everything, and you're putting your own medical knowledge above that of people who put their skills in practice every day. Btw, I had a friend who used to have anxiety attacks, and he often felt like he needed a deeper breath than he could take normally. He never got these attacks while sleeping, and it always calmed him down to lie down with his head propped up and read a book. He also was very frustrated when doctors couldn't find anything wrong with him physically, and had a very poor opinion of doctors. To conclude, I empathize with the problems you're having. It sucks to not be in control of your health, and it's scary when you don't know what's wrong and feel like you're not being taken seriously. And there's something psychological about breathing problems that is naturally panic-laden, like you're drowning. I think you need to explain all this, in a civil and open manner, with a different doctor, one you might be able to respect. And don't mention that you are thinking of suing your other doctors. Trust me on that one.