Phi for All

I don't know where you're coming from on this one, YT. You sound angry that I brought it up. Of course it was a hoax and of course no one is supporting him. Sorry for bumping the thread.

Chill, dude. This is an example of wild claims debunked. You don't ignore wild claims, that gives them tacit support. You attack and destroy error. Fully within our purview, imo. Don't forget the thread we had where better than half polled believe time travel is possible.

You guys heard about that?! I thought we kept it very low key. Our civil war should have been buried under all the stories of the daily Waco-like incidents we've been having ever since Bush was re-elected.

*bump* I saw a Google bot taking a look at this thread today so I thought I'd bump it for the debunking value. Much of the timeline Titor talked about has already occurred. What a good hoax though!

Is this for homework?

When I mentioned "the overhead of superiority complex maintenance" I didn't mean "over YOUR head". I just meant that my complex is vast and costs a lot to keep it going. Probably because it's so superior.

The Staff gets a 20% cut on all knowledge sold. Just send it to me and I'll make sure the others get their share.

I knew we'd be getting stuff like this when they released the new Alvin and the Chipmunks movie.

You're missing the point.

The experiment where you inhale hydrogen so you can say, "Whassup?" in a voice slightly higher than if you'd used helium? It should lessen the possibilities of sparks from electronic devices. It won't do anything to lessen the concentration of hydrogen in your lungs. As hermanntrude suggests, there will always be 1 chance in x that you will die in order to complete the experiment. I guess you're the only one who can decide if the result is really worth the risk. Personally, I understand people taking big risks for big gain. With this experiment I'm having trouble seeing where the gain offsets the risk.

Stay away from all electronic devices (like cell phones) that could create sparks. Also, if you're doing this in your basement, be sure you're nowhere near the water heater and it's pilot light. Thermostats can also throw off a naked spark when they turn your furnace or air conditioner on. This is certainly not intended to be a complete checklist. There seem to be a whole bunch of reasons NOT to breathe H and none to justify it. He will make you sound funny. H could make you look funny.

Does this mean he's exempt from military service? So basically you're just using what evolution has groomed you to use, right? You have no fancy feather ruff or plumage so you use colorful words to ensure that your jeans come off and your genes move on.

Oh, I know what you mean. Too many adjectives. She paints pretty pictures in my head and I just want it to STOP! She has to be. No guy could possibly know so many different things. You must not be familiar with too many stalkers. How do you feel about having your writing style called girlish? What does that even mean? It's not like the computer dots the "i" with a little heart or anything. Is it girlish to use effective words to communicate your thoughts? While you're fleshing out your thinking and your readers are thinking about your flesh, are you concerned that a well-turned phrase may make you seem girlish? I get this too so I'm curious how you handle it.

It's canned *something*.

We're not denizens, we're *citizens* of SFN. Denizens wouldn't care about the danger.

A truly powerful telepath could blast the ball *and* cook the fajitas with the same thought.

Is this thinking wishful or did she let something slip?

*sigh* Not here, you won't. Too many mixed metaphors. Yes. Thread closed.

It's Pseudoscience & Speculations but it's still SFN folks. Let's let characters assassinate themselves, please.

The first sentence was an affirmative. The second sentence explained the end result of vBulletin's shortcomings with regards to custom user titles. The third sentence was a light-hearted reference to your requested title, "the mad one". 'Kay?

Absolutely. But we have to ban you permanently first. That's not a problem is it, TMO?

IMO, the next logical step would be to have the same three guys practice again to get the feel of it. Then you should try the experiment while separated by distance (beyond line of sight). Perhaps tell the two others you will be sending a thought pulse to them while at work or school between 9am and Noon. Roll the dice to see who to pick and choose the time equally randomly. Then see if they pick up the thought pulse and when. The practical application? You'll never need to pay for a pager or text messaging again. One thought pulse and your friend knows to call you.

This seems testable. The part I bolded seems to be the hard part. If someone is participating in the test and they know you will randomly attempt to make them turn their head, won't their anticipation throw off any precision you need to ensure that it's your thought pulse reaching them? Did you attempt this from any distance further than line-of-sight? Were you sneaking up on each other in order to attempt this unobserved? Perhaps other factors enabled your subject to sense your presence, and since you were practicing this ability it just seemed as if you felt the touch on the back of your head? Wow, how could you get bored with something that you became so accurate with? I've often wondered if humans have a latent telepathic ability that is dampened by our other senses and our "superior" communication skills. Lack of evidence isn't evidence of lack but there have been so many tests.... Skeptically, I'd be more inclined to say there was other sensory input. Rooms feel different when there is another person in it, even if you can't see them. Sensitivity to EM fields, perhaps? Or just the fact that ordinary sounds are different when they bounce off another person who just snuck into the room? Agreed. Moved.

Please listen. When an idea (thesis) is presented in science, there are steps to follow using the scientific method to set up effective methods of testing your predictions. You have ruffled the fur of every serious scientist on these boards by suddenly elevating your own thesis to the theory level. A theory in science is the best you can get. Scientists take their theses and make predictions and experiment with those predictions until they are ready to submit a hypothesis to their peers. Although this board is a far cry from peer-review, when you pose these ideas you are, in essence, submitting them for review to us. It is our job to point out mistakes and weaknesses. Sorry if some have been a bit too sarcastic in their cynicism but the burden of proof is on you. You wouldn't believe some of the ideas that come through here. Most of the people who post these ideas understand that this is a test of fire and if you pass it, your idea moves to the next phase. Some do not understand, and insist their idea is sound without backing it up with models, tests and math. Please try to be one of the people who understands, rather than insisting we are closed minded or rude. Above all, don't be one of those people who can't hear because their fingers are firmly stuck in their ears.

Architects are starting to recycle the big steel containers that cargo ships use for use in modular building. First they had some tests done to determine the structural code ratings on the containers and found they meet or exceed most city and state requirements. Then they cut panels where they need to (without touching the integral load-bearing features), run water and electricity along the walls and then finish with drywall. When all the containers for a structure are complete they ship them on site and then have an engineer with some basic workers lift them with a crane and put them together like Legos. They're sealed together and the mechanical, plumbing and electricity components are connected and voila!, a home or office is born.