Phi for All

Are they all from AOL?

It's our unspoken policy to flock towards controversial subjects to alert trollers that the thread has lots of Moderator attention. Apparently there is not as much controversy about offshoring as we thought. It's also a habit of the wise to speak to the most intelligent people in the room. * ducks for cover *

Could the "aircraft" be a shuttle in orbit? That would account for no heat or sound. The "bowling ball" (very heavy at 10kg/22 pounds) could have exploded due to the vacuum of space (except it states that the pilot exploded it manually). To me, calling the bomb an exploding bowling ball implies it's shape is round. It also must have had an explosive to propel the pieces and some kind of radio device. Perhaps this is reading too much into it, but the fact that the pieces are identical seems more surprising than the fact that there was no heat or sound (unless it was manufactured that way, as YT2095 suggests).

I used one for a chair for a little over a year. While the "constant unconscious motor adjustments to compensate for changes in your centre of gravity" Glider mentions were not overly tiring, and in fact strengthened my leg and abdominal muscles somewhat, I found that my concentration suffered. You unconsciously end up forcing yourself to stay as still as possible, since even reaching for your mouse upsets your balance. Even after I got used to the motor adjustments, I found that when I needed to concentrate on what a client was saying on a phone conversation I would stand up or sit on the edge of my desk. I'm back in a chair with lumbar support and I prefer it. If you are up and down a lot (and don't have workplace safety issues, as Glider mentioned) it's not a bad way to go. If you are mostly seated at your desk 8 hours a day I would not recommend it.

I see three main mistakes come up in every creationist argument, including this one: 1) Creationists always equate "theory" with "an idea someone dreamed up". I think it's because of the sound byte "conspiracy theory" has such a hair-brained connotation. Fact: a scientific theory is as close to absolute certainty as it ever gets. Rigorous testing and observation, along with peer review and more testing go into a hypothesis before it gains the prestigious title of "theory". 2) Creationists always use the clockmaker strawman, or some other "designer" argument based on a human invention like airplanes and try to equate it to nature and evolution. Fact: Just because human inventions require a designer doesn't mean a process that can be set in motion and works as well as evolution needs one. It's perfectly possible that some higher power "designed" the evolutionary process so he wouldn't have to "design" everything individually. Science doesn't deny the possibility, it just implies that evolutionary theory doesn't require it. 3) Creationists are so stuck on the idea of "creation" that they apply it to evolution as another strawman argument. Fact: Evolution has nothing to do with how life started, only with how it changes over time. There are other flaws in their arguments, but I see these three ALL THE TIME! And they usually don't change their stance one iota when these arguments are proven false. If I had that many props knocked out from under me so easily, I would at least start to wonder about the strength of my stance.

Let's define our terms here. What we're refering to is actually "offshoring". Outsourcing is simply hiring someone outside your firm to do some work. To its critics offshoring is "sending our jobs overseas", to its proponents it's "competing in a global marketplace". From a moral standpoint, how can the US press for exports and then deny offshoring work? It's usually the desire for our exported goods that has other countries wanting to expand their economies with offshore jobs. Economically, if someone can do the job faster/cheaper/better, competition will favor them. To say it hurts our economy is to start down the road to nationalism. Nationalists never look at both sides of the equation. They want to keep jobs here but don't want to pay $30 for a t-shirt. In the long run, offshoring will help us define which jobs can never be outsourced and will eventually help in re-educating those who've lost jobs. The US will have a more stable workforce with more versatility in terms of competition and competence. And if companies offshoring parts of their work allows them to grow, it helps the overall economy. The company I work for offshores drafting work for architects to India. We may take a US drafting job away, but more buildings get built because the costs are lower, so ten construction jobs open up. And I can't imagine how an electrician or a carpenter could ever have his job offshored.

Great job, all! That's some major brain cell usage. I know I've learned a lot from everyone here. Define "weedy", plz.

I'm taking this from the OP to mean, "What do others think of MY theory?" not "What do others think dreams are all about?" In What the Bleep Do We Know? they brought up historical references (I don't have them) that suggest when Christopher Columbus sailed up to islands who's natives had never seen a European caravel sailing ship before, they simply didn't see it. They knew something was out there coming closer but their brains couldn't make sense of what they saw and therefore showed them nothing visually. It wasn't until they could see men on board that a frame of reference became available and they were able to "see" the ships that carried them. Perhaps we see amazing things all the time and feel premonition-like feelings, but have no logical frame of reference and therefore dismiss it as irrelevant. This could account for many supernatural experiences and feelings.

My daughter was (unprofessionally) diagnosed with ADD while in preschool. We refused to go the traditional route of Ritalin and ignorance and investigated other solutions. We found the Sensory Integration Institute in a town 30 miles away. My daughter was tested and they found she had a slight imbalance in her hearing, something most tests miss. It was causing aural input to lag behind other sensory input. They ran sessions with her being bombarded by lots of different sensations while being asked to perform certain actions (lying on an oscillating table in a dark room with a slowly pulsing colored light, listening to music on headphones adjusted for her hearing impairment, playing with glow-in-the-dark toys while answering questions). The sessions forced her to integrate all the varied sensations and the results were very impressive. She has no problems with first grade and is doing extremely well socially, too. I've wanted to laugh in the face of the social worker who urged us to put her on Ritalin (she herself had been taking it since she was young). jordan, you might want to try altering the sensory stimuli in your study area. Be scientific about it and try different lighting, listen to some music (instrumental only, like classical or some good jazz), even try sitting on an exercise ball or something with different tactile input. Try lighting a scented candle also. Record your observations and how much you read and comprehend. Perhaps some sensory combination will lead you to better success.

Sometimes the way things are written are not the way we would say them ourselves. This may make the words have less meaning to you and therefore hold your interest less. If you could get into the habit of reading a sentence, then repeating the sentence to yourself in your own words, it may help you get through each chapter AND improve your comprehension. It sounds like a pain but you get used to it quickly. I used to use this technique when memorizing lines for plays, especially Shakespeare and the Greek classics, which are so stylized in terms of speech. It helps to make the words more personal before going back to what's actually written.

So ID is like intellectual welfare for the religious right?

Don't lecture me, you Ching-wah tsao duh liou mahng!

If'n ye can't talk like a pirate, ye must be a little dinghy! Arrrr! Here be a better joke: A man meets a pirate in a bar and buys him a drink. He sees that the pirate has a peg-leg, a hook, and an eye patch. The man asks, "So, how did you end up with the peg-leg?" The pirate replies, "We wuz in a storm at sea, and I were swept overboard inta a school o' sharks, and one of 'em bit me leg off." "Ouch!" said the man. "What about your hook"? "Well", replied the pirate, "We were boarding a rival pirate ship and battlin' the other pirates with swords, and one of 'em cut me hand off." "Incredible!" remarked the man. "How did you get the eye patch"? "A seagull dropping fell into me eye," replied the pirate. "You lost your eye to a seagull dropping?," the man asked incredulously. "Well," said the pirate, "it was me first day with the hook."

Is this post misplaced or a statement about what we should really consider important? The degree to which I care about a rich supermodel's drug habits can be measured in Planck units. She should buy a brain before it's too late.

Ye get a cracker fer that'n, Pol.

Shiny. It's about go-ram time.

The old folks aren't falling out, just their teeth. Blike is in med school and just got hooked up to DSL. He's back in a limited form. I think interest ebbs and flows, based on time and circumstances. Many people disappear for a while only to show back up again later, revitalized and with all new questions and answers.

The book is definitely better, but Jodie Foster did a great job in the movie. James Burke ROCKS! He makes history enjoyable as well as mixing in the best bits of science. Carl Sagan is good as well but I really like Burke's style. The Day the Universe Changed was, for me, like Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure was for others; it made me connect to history in a way no other teacher or text ever had.

I've never felt bad about banning anyone until now. I don't regret it but I'm sad for the necessity. revprez is an extremely smart and knowledgable person who used to add a great deal to this forum. I don't know why he became so hateful. As YT2095 put it, he'd have been an asset if he hadn't been twisted by the Dark Side.

Not really. Ali got himself banned a while back, then joined up under another name, which is also against the rules. After getting up to his old tricks again and getting banned, he joined up under two simultaneous accounts, yet another breach of the rules. It's a shame, really. He's a very nice older guy who lives up in Michigan and seems very intelligent with an experienced POV, but he just doesn't know how to post in a science-based forum. He refuses to concede a point when faced with overwhelming evidence, he uses fallacious arguments that take threads way off topic and he is really foul in private messaging when he doesn't get his way. People like him take up everyone's time with their tangents and rants and thread derailings. It doesn't give me a thrill to deal with crap like that. Banning people is the low point of my day, until I think of the rest of you out there and how you won't have to waste your time being harrassed by the syntax252's any more. Until the next one shows up.

Coz ye scurvy sea sponges soak it up faster'n it can flow from the cask, ye flamin' briney rats! Put inta port 'n we'll fill the hold 'n then plunder the Spanish Main!

There are several acrylics that are bulletproof (or resistant) but I don't know what the effects of your fuel would be on them. Certain plastics break down when immersed in other petroleum products.

Arrrr, for those dogs who're a day late and a dubloon short, this's now the Talk Like a Pirate thread, so's ye can get yer sea-tongue waggin' to the proper tune. So join the chantey and grab a tot o' rum or ye'll be in chains afore the sun's over the yardarm! Arrrr!