LucidDreamer

The bone was preserved in a peat bog and only partially fossilized. He supposedly found bone fragments inside it. Some scientists think that the DNA that he found was really human DNA contamination.

"Placement of eyes on the side of the head allows the fish to readily see what is next to them and move accordingly. However, sight is not the only factor used in schooling. Fish are able to establish their placement and direction in a school are by using hearing, lateral line, sight, and even the sense of smell. " http://freshaquarium.about.com/cs/beginnerinfo/a/schooling.htm

Some paleontologist did manage to extract some DNA from a bone, which he claims is from a dinosaur. It's only 174 bases long. Since this is like one millionth the amount of nucleic acids in a genome there isn't much chance of making a T-Rex from it. There is only so much hardened amber around from the dinosaur era. There is only so much amber that contains blood-sucking parasites. There is only so much DNA that we can extract from this amber. Until we dig up some huge pit of dinosaur DNA it is impossible to recreate Jurassic Park. http://unmuseum.mus.pa.us/dnadino.htm

I think there are three factors involved when someone in hypnotized. The first factor is the hypnotic state that is created. The hypnotic state is similar to the state brought on with meditation. If you hook up an EEG to someone's brain while they are in this pseudo-somber state you see lots of alpha waves. Alpha waves are associated with a very calm state where both suggestibility and memory retention are increased. I think if you go really deep into a hypnotic state then your conscious mind is somewhat suppressed and your subconscious mind takes some of the control. Your subconscious mind is less inhibited, more suggestible, less rational than your conscious state. Another name for the hypnotic state is the trance state. The hypnotic or trance state is not always associated with a pseudo-sleep state, but it is always associated with an "alternate" form of consciousness. The second factor is the power of belief. In order to be hypnotized you must agree to the procedure. In order for you to enter a state of hypnosis you must be comfortable and trust the hypnotist. You don't necessarily have to believe in hypnosis to be hypnotized, but how effective the message is in changing your behavior is dependent on belief. Later on a decision on whether or not you smoke after a hypnotherapy session will depend on how much you believe it has effected your behavior. Belief also affects how deeply you let yourself go into a hypnotic state and what you are willing to do while you are hypnotized. The third factor is authority. Authority comes into play when you are forming your beliefs about hypnosis. If you feel that the hypnotist is a scam-artist you are less likely to allow him to hypnotize you. The hypnotherapy is also less likely to be a success if you doubt his competence. However, if you do trust your hypnotherapist the effects of your hypnotherapy are much more likely to be a success. You have read about hypnosis and believe it works. You have scheduled an appointment with a real professional. In this case authority is likely to be a strong contributing factor when it comes to how deep you go into a hypnotic state and how much it is a success afterwards. I think all of these things come into play for stage hypnosis. Some people strongly believe in hypnosis and actually enter a trance state on stage. This is similar to the trance state you might observe at a very charismatic church where people are falling down and shaking. They have entered a trance state and with the help of strong beliefs and the authority of the preacher they will do some strange things. The power of authority also plays a factor in stage hypnosis. In this case there is a hypnotist and whole audience that wants you to act a certain way. This power of authority is very strong. The 3 factors affect the participants on stage differently. Some are actually in a trance state and some do not enter a hypnotic or trance state because they don't want to or because they are nervous. But just because they don't enter a trance state does not mean that won't act foolishly. The force of the hypnotist and the audience is enough to make them comply and if they wont' then the hypnotist will weed them out early in the selection process. a) Yes and no b) If people want to get on stage and make fools of themselves then let them. So yes, in my opinion, it’s moral c) I doubt most psychologists who practice hypnotherapy think highly of stage hypnosis, but I haven’t talked to many of them.

There are several methods that you can use to hypnotize yourself. The method I used was to imagine walking on a beach on a deserted island. I imagined a beach scene with the constant sound of the waves and the soft sand under my toes; it was a very relaxing scene. As I walked on the beach I would relax all of my muscles. After walking on the beach for a while I would come to a cave. Inside the cave was an escalator. As I took the escalator down numbers would appear over my head. The numbers counted from 20 to 1 on the way down. When I reached 1 I would be somewhat hypnotized. Now, once you are hypnotized you have to give yourself a message about what you want to change. A problem arises at this point if you don't know exactly what your message is because you will wake yourself up thinking about it. The best method I found to eliminate this problem was to have a pre-recorded message already made starting with the countdown on the escalator. If your coach was just staring at the flame and not giving himself a message then I think what he was doing would be better described as a form of meditation. Of course there is alot of overlap between the two. Both hypnotism and meditation bring about similar states and both have similar purposes. The difference between them is that hypnosis is used to change your habits and meditation is more for relaxation.

LOL. awesome clip mad mardigan.

When I vote I consider the ramifications for both myself/family and for the country as a whole. I try to vote in a way that I feel the most people benefit. I have to admit that the possible effects to my family and friends take precedence, but I fell that what is best for them is often best for the rest of the country. When there is a conflict I try to weigh how much my family/friends will be affected compared to the rest of the country.

I haven’t read any overwhelming evidence for either. My gut feeling says invagination. I don't have alot of reasoning besides the other organelles of symbiotic origin have separate DNA and specialized purposes, while the nucleus contains the cells main DNA without any other purpose besides the protection of the Cell. Also, like you said there are already examples of invagination in Eukaryote. I believe that chloroplast, plastids, and mitochondria are considered to have symbiotic origins. The chloroplasts were obviously some sort of photosynthetic bacteria. The mitochondria were a prokaryote that learned to use oxygen as a reducer, taking advantage of the photosynthetic bacteria’s oxygen byproduct. The host was probably some kind of ameba like creature that ate other kinds of prokaryotes for food then later evolution stepped in. The mutation that allowed the symbiosis was very beneficial. The mitochondria were incorporated first. So I was strongly leaning towards invagination but now I am not so sure. Here are a couple of interesting articles. Both claim that the Eukaryotic cell is a hybrid of Eubacteria and Archeabacteria. Eukaryotic cells have similiarties to both. I found a couple of really interesting sites about it. http://www.astrobio.net/news/article243.html http://biosci.usc.edu/documents/bisc121-fuhrman_103103.pdf P.S. Ill start a thread about lucid dreaming tomorow.

a

I think the Cannon-Bard theory is probably a more accurate description of the initiation of an emotional state. However, I think there is truth to both of these theories. I think that the emotional state works like a cycle. You become nervous, which causes lots of tension in your muscles. Then the tension in your muscles acts as a stimulus that maintains a nervous state. I think the two function together to regulate your emotional states. I think that sometimes prolonged periods of stress cause your body to become habitually tensed. Often the tension remains after the initiating factor has already been resolved and that muscle tension keeps your mind stressed. That's probably why it’s useful to get a massage to break the cycle of stress.

Ya, I agree that euthanasia should be allowed. A friend of mine used a strange argument against euthanasia. He said that if euthanasia became legal administrators in nursing homes would get the old people to sign away their stuff to them and then get them to sign the euthanasia papers or that cruel family members would do the same thing. I think he was being a little bit paranoid, but I see his point. So I say yes with regulation.

That's ok as long as they don't recite any poetry. Maybe there really are multiple universes and perhaps the multi-verse is infinite. If that’s true we could just escape to another universe when the energy of ours runs out. Maybe there are already beings that have existed for trillions of years and they are just waiting for us to find them.

I point to Leonardo Da Vinci as an example of someone who has generated new ideas. If we only reshuffled old ideas we would have run out of inventions a long time ago. We are constantly taking in new stimulus that produces novel ideas. If we could only reorganize the old knowledge we could still have an almost unlimited amount of new ideas because the amount of information is constantly growing. There is still an unlimited amount of new ideas if you have an unlimited amount of ways to reorganize in a system that takes in new information. I still think that we actually create novel things even if we rely on our current information to produce an invention because if some of the information is new then it is still something that has never been concieved of before. Also, remember the many functions of the brain occur at the quantum level so there is an amount of uncertainty in creativity that could provide the source for actual novelty.

Yes, a link please. The first thing that pops into mind is that many structures and systems in nature resemble each other. The model of the atom with the electrons circling the nucleus resembles a solar system. Dendrites look like the roots of trees. Tornadoes look like the funnels formed by the water going down a drain. I haven’t even seen any evidence to back up this article so I don't know if it is legitimate, but even if it was legitimate it would have to show a large amount of similarity to the model of the universe to cause much excitement.

I find a mortal and pestle works great for some things. Of course, it works much better if the substance you are tying to pulverize is very dry. You might think about laying it out in the sun or putting it in the oven if its not very flammable. Also, it only works well on things that are relatively soft without malleability or elasticity.

I have actually heard that theory before. The host cell formed a symbiotic relationship with an early prokaryotic cell that had useful code. Then at some point the host's DNA, which was contained in the cystol, merged with the symbiot's DNA, forming the nucleus. I think the more popular theory is that the nucleus evolved from mutations that caused increasing plasma membrane infoldings. Of course, any species alive then is not likely to be around today, but if you are asking whether a nucleus appears to be more like an eubacteria or archeabacteria I don't know if we know that answer. The nucleus is mostly just an envelope containing DNA now so if the nucleus really did form from a symbiotic relationship then identifiable features may have been lost over the years.

I recommend: Childhood's End by Arther C Clarke Startide Rising by David Brin The magician/Apprentice series by Raymond E Fiest The Ring by David Baxtor (hardcore scifi) The Hichhiker's Guide to the universe by douglas Adams The wheel of Time series by Robert Jordon (up to like 11 books now though) I forgot to add one of the best: Dune by Frank Herbert

I just yawned after reading this thread. So it’s at least a little psychological.

I know that the veins scar after you pierce it so the next time you attempt to pierce the vein there it will be more difficult. But I don't think this is the reason why veins get used up after they are used. I know that drug users "run out of veins" to shoot in after they use them alot. I don't believe they are actually running out of veins; I think that somehow the veins shrink or move farther in after you use them or somehow become unusable for IVs. Maybe some veins do scar up and shrivel away and then your body relies on veins deeper in. You could use the term Phlebotomy on google and see what it returns.

Tell him regardless of the temperature the crucial issue is how many nucleotides are being made compared to the amount of nucleotides that are being broken down. Many experiments have shown that organic compounds can be formed from inorganic material. So as nucleotides are broken down they are also formed. It's not like each planet has a select amount of nucleotides given to it and the amount just gets smaller as they break down. Also, remind him that most modern evolutionary biologist believe in punctuated evolution that can occur rapidly. Also Nucleosides of RNA are considered to be the first building blocks of replication. Also there are extremophiles that manage to survive and replicate in very hot temperatures.

I don't believe that humans are evolving psychic abilities. In order to evolve psychic abilities there would have to be some great pressure that killed off people who didn't develop it and kept those alive who did. There doesn’t seem to be any great need to develop some form of brain telepathy when I can just pick up my cell phone. If I want to move something large and heavy then I use a crane. We have already evolved telepathy and telekinesis. Besides If we actually evolved psychic abilities don't you think we would be using them. I mean evolution went to great measures to develop the ability to speak and use logic. We use those all the time. I think if we had developed some sort of useful psychic ability we would actually be using it. Evolution doesn't go to great pains to develop something we won't use very often. Have we observed any other creatures that developed psychic abilities? Just because we have big brains that allow us to play chess and count doesn't mean we also have secret magic mind abilities. If we are evolving at all it’s the ability to use and create machines capable of doing the things that we think psychic abilities will allow us to do.

I think in a way you could make an argument for this. After all, only some people go to college. A good portion of the people that do go to college basically stop challenging themselves after college. If we wanted to I think most of us could become experts at a dozen different subjects. But most of us don't so you could say that we only use a small percentage of our brains capabilities. However, I agree that we don’t have secret psychic abilities.

Someone should have told that guy that modern anti-psychotic medication has less side-effects then they use to and that he should get back on them.

I think that is an even more interesting question. The simple answer is enzymes. But that doesn't really answer your question. Life today, with all of its complexities, is a result of the life that came before it. The means by which your mind and your body control all of the intricate chemical reactions has evolved over billions of years. The storage of information that regulates these processes is passed down to its progeny through DNA. DNA then makes a copy in the form of RNA and then from the RNA enzymes are created, which control the chemical reactions. Of course you already know that. To really answer that question you have to look at the point when a new individual is formed. So right after conception you have a single cell that contains a mixture of their parents DNA. The DNA contains all of the information necessary to carry out all of the reactions of the body. But what gets them started? When the embryo is formed there are already reactions occurring in the cell. There are already enzymes regulating the chemical reactions. The cell that the sperm combined its DNA with was formed by the mother's body. That cell already contains enzymes that control the chemical reactions. These enzymes control reactions that start a chain of reactions that begins splitting the cell into two cells, which continue to double. As the embryo continues to grow it unlocks new pieces of information from the DNA, which make more enzymes and hormones which control still more reactions. What then started the reactions that led to the embryo? Life today is a continuation of reactions that forms an unbroken chain of reactions from its predecessors, all the way back to the first cell and beyond that cell to the first self-organizing system which developed the ability to reproduce from the input of energy. The reactions of the brain are also controlled from enzymes and hormones. The brain, like every other organ or cell in your body modifies its production of hormones and enzymes based on the stimuli it receives. This stimulus comes in two forms. One is from the other parts of the body and the other is from the organisms environment, which is collected from receptors. A baby’s brain grows into an adult’s brain by a series of chemical reactions that are influenced by stimulation from the environment. All of this is controlled by the information contained in the DNA and is started by the enzymes that are already present in the first cell of the embryo. I think that part of the reason that it’s so difficult to bring something back from the dead is because you have stopped a chain of reactions that spans billions of years.