Nevermore

Hey, I recently developed an intrest in microbiology, and have a great microscope. However I'm greedy, and wondered if any of you knew where I could rent an electron microscope.

I'm not, I'm blaming the average person for being too lazy.

I know, but I never mentioned it working both ways. Someone without video games is more likley to read, but someone with a book is not less likely to play video games.

Nothing' date=' I do it. But I'm talking about people who play video games and do not read. Note how many times I said "... Video games [i']instead[/i] of reading...".

I'm not saying that video games are bad, and I'm not saying that people shouldn't play them. I'm a big fan of video games my self, I've got Enter the Matrix, Vice City, a bunch of Command and Counquer games, and 5 Halflife games. All I'm saying is that people who play video games instead of read will not be nearly as good at reading as those who like to read. So, I guess what the main question should be is: Does playing video games instead of reading decrease one's reading skill?

Have you ever watched anyone else play video games? They just skip past the text and dialog.

Okay, an indirect cause wuold be: Smith plays Halo instead of reading Animal Farm. Eventually he loses all intrest in reading, and as a result of never reading, he is not very good at reading. A direct example would be: Smith plays Halo instead of reading Animal Farm, and this causes a drop in his literacy level dou to lack of mental stimulation. So, I guess I was wrong before, I am refering to low literacy rates as an indirect result of too many video games.

I'm not saying that typing in IM (lol, lmfao, omfg, l8r, cya, dl, bcz, ect.) makes you illiterate, I'm saying that people play video games instead of read, and never develop good reading skills.

didn't work

oh, and btw, how do I edit the poll options, to make it not-public?

Oh, directly EDIT: indirectly

yes

Hey, I'll be in an upcoming school debate over wether video games decrease literacy rates or not. Does anyone here have a degree in psycology, or any other applicable science? If so, can I have your opinion? (Dont get me wrong, I've got nothing against video games.)

I know I have a bad reputation on this network, for not knowing what I'm talking about, but please hear me out. I have a second hand experiance with the brain being cut off from the real world. Allow me to explain; My grandmother is blind, has almost no sense of taste/smell, can barley walk on her own, and over-all, her brain doesn't have much to do. She also has delusions, hallucinations, and elaborate imaginary friends. These provide her brain with somthing to process. When we visit her, she rarly comes out of her delusions, IMO for the reason that in the real world, her brain has nothing to do, there is almost no info coming in from her senserory organs. So, hooked up to NavajoEverclear's box, I think the brain would most likely create it's own reality.

Oh, and by the way, 123rock, can you support your arguments with facts?Because your babbling and making your-self look bad.

Back to the original question, I once heard that a worm hole can be created by the fusing of a black hole and a white hole. White holes supposedly are the opposite of black holes, spitting out matter. However, unless all white holes are joined to black holes, (thus forming a worm hole) the mere idea of white holes goes against the Law of Conservation of Matter.

You are right, but I'll admit it at least. I am a muddy dog democrat, I'd rather vote for a muddy dog than a republican. There you go. I admited it.

Douglass, I am known (especialy to Thales) as being arrogant and closed minded, but you are completely ignoring everything that you don't want to hear, so here I'll repeat it loudly for you: BUSH IS A TYRANT AND A DICTATOR Ex. Stalin took over Russia by claiming that Treasonists and sabatours were ruing the country, and that he, and he alone could stop them. Substitute the treasonists and sabatours with terrorists, and who do you get?BUSH Here's another example: Hitler took over Germany by promising to weed out unwanted people, Hitler was refering to what he planned to do in the Holocaust. Bush promised to weed out terrorists. He was refering to: you guessed it, the war in Iraq. In promising to eliminate terrorists, Bush has played of everyone's fears, and established a nation-wide racisim againist anyone from the middle east. Ex.A group of Sikhs were murdered, for the sole reason that they wear Turbans. Sikhs belive in peace and non-violence. They would not terrorize people. Conclusion: Bush is a murdurous, racist, dictator.

I would never, ever consider immortality. Have you ever read the book Tuck Everlasting? Immortality would suck. There would be nothing left to do, to strive for, to acomplish. Life would become pointless. You would beg and pray for death every day. You would beg for the bordom to end. Your life would become an awfull, swirling hell, devoid of any hope or happiness. Immortality would be infinatly worse than Hell.

Yeah, you're right, I was being arrogant.

You need to reread your posts. Oh, and by the way, I never said that the Hubble Contast had been measured, that was binshu. See?

Yes, but only in the sense of time as a clock. Think of time as a filing cabnit, events in the past are stored in the cabnit of time after they happen. However, if time did not expand, the Universe's events would fill it up very quickly. All I am saying, is that new empty shelves are added to the cabnit, (later to be filled up by events) at the rate of C.

I'm not saying my theory is fact, I'm just saying it may be this way, and listing my reasoning for thinking so.

I spy a hole in your argument