ydoaPs

Are you sure about that? Try the problem without putting numbers in and see if the mass cancels. [hide]Hint: it does[/hide]

Wikipedia knows a lot.

[20:53] <John> I should retire [20:53] <John> and let Sylar take my place [20:53] <Capn_Refsmmat> sounds like a brilliant idea [20:54] <Sylar> indeed

There is an index of forums that we have.

Draw your picture and include the broken down vectors. You know that FFriction=µN and that Fnet=ma. What have you tried thusfar with that info?

ohsnap

Draw a picture and write out all your knowns.

04NXAFktROo He wants to legalize pot. What do you think?

Well, if we dial out to P3W-451 and then launch the gate into the sun, we can go directly to supernova.

I think that free-will is actually dependent upon some level of determinism. Quite so.

There isn't any. No, it doesn't. It just awkwardly stops the way the Gregorian calendar awkwardly stops at December 31st.

Morality can be summed up as what we 'ought' to do. Some people like to dwell on the problem of not being able to derive an 'ought' from an 'is', but I don't actually see it as a problem. We may not be able to derive an ought from an is, but we can derive an "ought, if" from an "is". It is merely a matter of observing the conditions and determining the necessary course to meet the desired outcome. We are social animal, and as such, benefit from peace(at the least within our tribe). If we want an effective society, we ought foster peace. People do respect others more when they are given respect. If you want to be respected, you ought respect others. etc We can use science to find the 'is' to inform our 'ought if's. So, yes, science can(and, imo, should) be used in answering moral questions.

How about the basic "What's the difference between squids and octopi?"

Perhaps a question or two about his squid porn. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedAlso, 'who would win in a fight: you or PZ Myers?'.

It's almost April. Gilded still has Christmas pic. What is going on?

I have magic cheese. Would you like to have a bite? Too bad. It is mine.

Edible poo?

Laser-vision

I'd have a sort of 'alarm cutout' for the nervous system so you can turn off pain once you know you're injured.

epic

Peace of mind when at sea.

Supernova ftw.......no, ALIENS!

This question comes up somewhat often on religion boards. Personally, I think it's rather irrelevant as truth does not depend upon whether or not it benefits you. However, this question can, imo, be given a satisfactory answer. Atheism offers the same thing theism offers; an response to a metaphysical proposition. Neither offer any more or any less. Neither offer hope, freedom, love, morality, etc. Neither offer a framework for belief; They only offer a metaphysical proposition that informs a framework that the (a)theist may adopt. Everything else are just add-ons that depend on the person and further clarification of their belief. You can't tell anything about a theist's beliefs, other than that they believe in one or more deities, by only knowing that they are a theist. Similarly, you can't know anything about what an atheist believes, other than that they do not believe that one or more deities exist, by knowing only that they are an atheist. To suggest otherwise is intellectually dishonest.