Severian

They are certainly not free. It takes a lot of financial backing to stand a chance of getting elected to any position. So not just anyone can stand (in practice).

So would I, and I never suggested that you should not. But I would not tell them that it is OK to get pregnant because I will help them look after the baby. They need to realize that their own life (and the choices they make) are their own responsibility.

Of course I would. Wouldn't you? I think that is not analagous at all though. I would be very suspicious of anyone who would claim that a fertilized egg is a 'life' (so your analogy would only be applicable after some arguable amount of time had passed).

Funnily enough, if you regard it as fundamental, then it is a theistic belief. That may sound silly, since it is a law which comes about through empirical testing - that is, we measure the force, mass and acceleration and find that they always obey F=ma. However, we have no assurance that future events will obey F=ma. After all the law could be F=ma for t<t0, F=2ma for t>t0. The only reason we have for accepting universal F=ma over the above is aesthetic, since they both describe the data perfectly well. Choosing F=ma universally is of course an application of the modern form of Ockham's razor, which some people have elevated to the a position of godhead, despite many many instances of it being violated. Taking this further, F=ma is also a statement about the lack of our knowledge. If we regard it as fundamental, then we are suggesting that there is some onmipresent omnipotent (since it can't be changed) rule that governs the universe. That sounds very much like a god to me. In science, we want to remove equations, not add to them - we want to describe the universe in as few equations as possible. But we will always be left with at least one equation or principle at the end, and that will be something that just is and cannot be derived. If that is what governs the physics of the universe, it is as much 'God' as any personal god (perhaps more so).

I think democracy is only laudable if there are free and fair elections. Unfortunately I am not sure that this is the case in Pakistan. On the other hand, I am not sure it is the case in the US either...

Isn't that what we have poor people for? I thought we had lots of problems with high unemployment - why would we need monkeys?

So, do you support the independence of the Basque region of Spain too? How about the kurds in northen Iraq & turkey? If not, why not? In fact, if a town in the southern US, near the mexican border voted to leave the US and join Mexico, should the UN recognise it as part of Mexico? Funnily enough, this sort of happened recently in the UK. The town of Berwick-upon-Tweed in Northern England, right on the border with Scotland, voted (in fair and free elections) to leave England and join Scotland. However, there is no legal procedure for doing so, so they remain part of England. Should the UN, US and EU step in to liberate them from the English yoke of oppression?

Yes, that's right. I think people should be forced to adhere to my personal morality. I would possibly allow abortion in rape cases. If fact there are really only two possibilities for consesual sex: Either the parents took precautions, and are sensible, constructive members of society who just had bad luck (like a burst condom). If so, then I am sure such sensible people will be able to bring up a child, and they should accept the changes to their lifestyle without complaint. Indeed, such sensible people can lead perfectly happy constructive lives with a child without being overwhelmed ot having their life 'ruined'. Or, the parents were idiots who had unprotected sex without thinking of the consequences. In that case, they are not competent to make the decision for themselves anyway and the state should make the decision for them.

We should be teaching them that no-one is going to go out of their way to help them if they screw up their lives. We need to have more self regulation in our population - not a bunch of mindless zombies who can't do anything for themselves. I am not suggesting that condoms should not be available to kids, or that we should prevent them from having sex. But we should educate them to the dangers and if they have unprotected sex they should face the consequences on their own. If the kids see some of their classmates ruining their lives with unwanted pregnancies or diseases like HIV, they will soon learn to look out for themselves a little better. Some wastage is inevitable.

One of our students was telling me about how he is building a microwave telescope using an old satellite dish, and his pc soundcard as a Digital-to-analogue converter.

Why would you want to?

I think we should be teaching people to live with the consequences of their actions.

Since making my earlier post on this topic I have changed my mind. I think I am now anti-abortion.

I have bad memories of BUSSTEPP.

They are present in local supersymmetry too, without the need for any string theory.

I don't think I will bother - I don't have anything interesting to say.

I agree. That is just outright fascism. It is time we got rid of this government.

Was that sarcasm? There was no casual connection between the embargo and Castro stepping down. Even communists get old. It will be interesting to see if the Cubans are willing to sell their principles for American money and luxuries.

I agree with bombus. It was none of the US's or the EU's damn business. We in the west really have to learn to stop interfering with internal politics in other countries. The Serbians had just elected a pro-west government who had expressed an interest in joining the EU. And then we go and kick them in the bollocks by recognising the independence of Kosovo. Everything was working out - all we had to do was wait and time would cure the problem. All this will do is stir up a hornet's nest of violence again, creating wave after wave of revenge.

I agree, it seems plausible. But also a bit odd that this would be true for all species other than humans. After all, many many species have parents who do not interact with their offspring.

That make sense. I was searching first and then reordering. Using your method turned up my first post (though from my comment, it looks like there was an earlier post which was deleted): http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showpost.php?p=73483&postcount=25

That doesn't work if you have more than 1000 posts since the search results only show 1000 entries.

Space exploration is useless, so it is a waste of money. Space exploration is a waste of money (see above) which could be better spent on science education. All pretty simple really!

It's a bit surprising really. One would imagine that commiting suicide once past reproductive age would actually be evolutionarily advantageous.

It is quite amazing how that response is so full of half-truths and outright lies. For example: "The next rolling grants review is in 2009, and will take effect in October 2009, the second year of the CSR period". The rolling grant applications just went in last tuesday, that is the 5th of February, about a week after this reponse, and the result of the applications has not been decided yet - they will come into effect this October. Considering that the rolling grant applications are sent to the STFC directly, you would think they would know this. Also, don't they realize that statements like "The development of the Science and Innovation Campuses in collaboration with universities, the private sector and local authorities, will support the entire UK research base" and "The Council re-affirmed the decisions already taken with respect to withdrawal from the International Linear Collider (ILC) project and ground-based Solar-Terrestrial Physics (STP) facilities" are contradictory. How can you "support the entire UK research base" if you cancel large chunks of it? (Or are they only meaning that they are supporting the bits that they are going to support ) Then they keep telling us that we are getting more money, but only quote figures "including the impact of Full Economic Costing". Or in other words, the funding appears higher because they have changed their accounting system. I found Sir Peter Knight's comments interesting too. "I am convinced that the resulting programme will ensure the UK remains at the forefront of global research". But research of which topics? Clearly not linear collider physics or solar astronomy.