beecee

I have stated nothing as absolute fact, outside the probability of scientific theory, and the fact that we do not know positively if the universe is finite or infinite. Just answering questions put to you would be nice, and asking genuine ones in return (if you have them) would be even nicer. That's why they say "could be" as opposed to would be, or must be. And "might be" as opposed to will be and must be. And all under the heading of "Hypothetical types of Biochemistry" In fact any talk of Alien life (as defined in this thread!) is all speculative at this time, but speculation also supported by the facts that the stuff of life and possibility of Abiogenesis, is everywhere we look. Just stating it as it is. Perhaps less tic, less pedant, and more genuine questions are in order. I'll certainly adhere to what I say.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_types_of_biochemistry Some other interesting alterantive life forms there. I feel a bit iffy about A1 and/or mechanical life. Robotic life, nanobots etc, can do and achieve much today that fit the necessary provisos of life as we normally define it. As it happened, I also watched a movie last night after the footy, "MoonFall" Based on the unlikely "hollow Moon hypothetical" .... and A1. meh! sort of movie.

Perhaps, (as I see it) you have come here with a preconceived notion? Science/cosmology is about observational and experimental evidence, and our modelling from those results. The BB as already explained was not dragged out of someones rear end. And if you believe it was, (this being a science forum) you need to show evidence pointing to an error in its application, or another theory that matches what we observe more accurately.

The following two statements are incorrect and/or inapropriate...... Firstly as already explained to you, "creation" is generally a term inferring some type of ID. Secondly we cannot be sure that the universe is finite or infinite. Then you said...... I then asked..... Which by the way was never answered. Again as explained, and with the proviso ( I'm not sure whether you are trying to be funny or not) but time, as well as space, (as we know them) literally had there beginnings at t+10-43 seconds. And of course some people will always try and instill humour to avoid admitting they were wrong. Another rather "wrong" statement made by you was....... The BB of course happened everywhere at the same instant, because everywhere, all of space time, all that we know or can know at this time, was packed to within the volume of an atomic nucleus. There was no outside, nor any centre to speak of, other then the centre of our observable universe, which any and every life form can claim, wherever they are. Again, perhaps you were trying to be funny? At this time, along with others who have commented on your style, I do not know what you are trying to achieve. This thread is about "exobiology and Alien life" and the possibility and likelyhood of it existing. It isn't about trying to catch someone out with pedantic questions, cryptic attempts at humour, or confusing philosophical ideologies. Genuine, reasonable discussions is welcome.

I mentioned it earlier in the thread, perhaps the best solution, is for a Russian/s to take matters into their own hands and take him out, before any chances of the unthinkable happening.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2022/apr/02/russia-ukraine-war-latest-russian-troop-withdrawal-noticeable-says-zelenskiy-us-gives-kyiv-300m-more-in-live Russia-Ukraine war latest: Ukrainian troops retake entire Kyiv region as evidence emerges of execution of civilians – live Deputy defence minister says territory is ‘liberated from the invader’ as disturbing images in Bucha show bodies had been bound and hooded Children used as human shields, say reports ‘It is a war crime’: neighbours shot dead trying to evacuate UK prevents use of private jet linked to Russian oligarchs Ukrainian photographer Maksim Levin killed while covering war British volunteers tell why they’re fighting for Ukraine Devastating reports have been coming out of the cities in the Kyiv region that were retaken by Ukrainian forces: bodies in the streets. Destruction. Reports of Russian troops using children as shields. Anatoly Fedoruk, mayor of Bucha, told AFP that the city has already buried 280 people in a mass grave. Corpses littered the streets, he said, some as young as 14 years old. “All these people were shot, killed, in the back of the head,” Fedoruk said. Many of the bodies had white bandages on them “to show that they were unarmed,” he said. In the village of Novyi Bykiv, about 100 miles north of Kyiv, coaches of children were said to have been placed in front of tanks. “Cases of using children as cover are recorded in Sumy, Kyiv, Chernihiv, Zaporizhzhia oblasts [regions],” said Lyudmila Denisova, Ukraine’s human rights ombudsman. Read more here:

100% correct on all counts. Still to achieve controlled nuclear fusion, would be a welcomed game changer.

Perhaps it was going to inevitably happen on Earth, and a rogue meteor helped speed it up? It did happen rather early did it not? 🤤 I remember as a youngish bloke, watching Carl's original series of "Cosmos"....It was shown on a Sunday arvo in 30 minute episodes. He was a great educator. I believe most here no that, and that is what Moontanman is saying.I mean unlike your cryptic style, it's pretty easily understood from where I am. Why should I take it up with him? You're the one that reproduced some fictional phrase about the universe being infinite ( when we are not sure of that fact) from an author/screenwriter/ essayist/satirist/humourist, instead of a scientist. Again, despite your quibbling, we are as yet not sure whether the universe is finite or infinite. I don't believe it was a joke, more a statement from ignorance. At least, hopefully that has now been nullified. Critical thinking is part and parcel of the scientific methodology, and it helps if one is also proficient in the relative field, if he choses to be critical of a particular field. Your problem seems to be confusing "critical thinking" with obfuscation and being contrary for contrariness sake. That's certainly not being scientific, nor is it any indication of a decent philsophical thought. And of course if you chose to be critical of any aspect of science, be sure to have some evidence on hand. "Shall I refuse my dinner because I do not fully understand the process of digestion?" Oliver Heaviside (1850-1925) English physicist. No, I am not wrong...we are unsure whether the universe is finite or infinite. I think Moontanman summed it up beautifully, with regard to your utterences. I don't know a great deal about Socrates other then the notable titbits, and of course your own obfuscation, in attempting to drag this off topic. Just saw the deserved warning from Phi for All re the silly bickering between myself and dimreeper. Noted and will adhere.

Here are other examples of "rare" controversial moments with the Oscars. One that comes to mind was giving the wrong presentation. Another from the following link, was with regards to the classic movie, Gone with the Wind......."Actress Hattie McDaniel made film history by becoming the first black American to win an Academy Award, winning for her role as "Mammy" in "Gone With the Wind." While the award was an honor, McDaniel had to face racism and segregation. McDaniel was only allowed into the ceremony upon the intervention of the film's producers. Even then, McDaniel was seated away from the rest of the creative team at a segregated table, making this historic win an example of racism". or 1973: Marlon Brando declines Best Actor for 'The Godfather' https://stacker.com/stories/3816/15-controversial-oscar-wins-and-how-theyve-aged I have yet to ever watch them, other then news items of the event. Bores me teriffically to tears.

It's a well worn path with this one! 😉 I think that bit of nonsense, was in relation to the universe being infinite, or at least "Infinite creation". Nonsense either way, as we still lack conclusive evidence one way or the other, whether it is finite or infinite as yet. Agreed. The fact that the "stuff of life" is everywhere we look is evidence for ETL, just not the extraordinary evidence required to confirm it. ps: I like the Panspermia version of universal abiogenesis myself.

At least the man has regrets and apologises for his actions. For that he has my respect. Let's see if Rock likewise, will at least publically regret his actions and lack of discretion. Then we can all kiss and make up.

☺️ Reminds me of the time when I was a hairy arse kid around 11, 12 years old, and finally I achieved getting a Coca Cola badge, which was big stuff for kids our age in that period. As knock off time came round I was walking out of the school yard, with my badge proudly displayed and my globite suit case in my hand, when the "school bully" approached me, grabbed the badge off my lapel and threw it up on the church roof. Incensed and upset as I was, I swung my globite suit case at his head, and sent him flying on his arse, with blood seeping from a facial graze. Just at that time the head Brother came out, grabbed both of us, took us inside, separated us and then asked me what happened. I told him exactly as it occured. He gave me a light slap on the back of the head and told me to get home! The bully was interviewed presumably, after I left, and never ever troubled me again. As I said earlier, there is a time and a place. I enjoy humour, particularly of the old fashion Three Stooges, Groucho Marx type, but you don't go telling jokes about gay people at a gay convention. Or you certainly don't tell the Natalie Wood joke to Robert Wagner.

Russian forces on Thursday confiscated 14 tons of humanitarian aid from buses bound for Melitopol in southern Ukraine. What a bunch of complete arseholes they be! Worthwhile noting that it is always legal to refuse to carry out a warcrime. The aid was being transported on 12 buses bound for Melitopol in southern Ukraine, said Vereshchuk. https://www.businessinsider.com/ukrainian-official-russians-are-raiding-convoys-of-humanitarian-aid-2022-4 https://www.businessinsider.com/red-cross-civilian-evacuation-operation-besieged-mariupol-ukraine-fails-russia-2022-4?inline-endstory-related-recommendations= International Red Cross convoy forced to turn back after failed attempt to evacuate Ukrainians trapped in Russia's siege of Mariupol

Of course! The same with equal rights for women back then. Enlightened people have always existed, albeit mostly in the minority. By the same token, not "every movement" for change is always good or desirable.

I'm not supporting the bias that existed towards gay people in those times...it simply was. The same as I didn't/don't support slavery in the 1800's. No I was not about then.

Don't be too sorry matey, I never watch your nonsense anyway, or take any notice of your poor philsophy. Hush your mouth John !!!! Evidence!!! of all the gaul !!! 😅😉 Of course it is! But when was this interview? How long ago? Standards do change over time, mostly for the better. In my day, (50's and 60's) gay people were looked on mostly with scorn. And if they were recent interviews, were they conducted at a gay people's gathering? Or in front of an audience with known gay folk? I would raise the excellent "Natalie Wood and Robert Wood" analogy that someone raised earlier. Or if you like, there is a time and a place for everything.

What irony was that? Remember I'm not the first to comment on your inconlcusive, weird style of answering direct questions....or avoiding them..

Or you need to be less cryptic? Infinite creation was the reference, was it not? And I explained to you why that was not so, and the general reference of such a statement. Because like now, you chose to be obtuse. Afterall It was I that informed you that we do not know with certainty whether the universe was infinite or finite, while you rattled on with fictional references to "infinite creation"(indicating ID) instead of science.

He didn't do it for a thrill. Rock over stepped the mark of decency. We are in agreement then.

There were two transgressions. Let the academy weigh up the circumstances and punish both with warnings.

Pete Rose??? Try Shane Warne. Yes, they have actually gained an advantage over the other participants and are "disqualified" when found out...eg; some chinese swimmer whose name escapes me. Will Smith didn't gain any advantage. He won on the votes.

I certainly wouldn't walk into the back of a church next Sunday, proclaiming jesus was a fraud, nor would I walk into the back of a mosque proclaiming similar about Mohammed. To be truthful, I also thought Smith was laughing, but he may have been laughing at something else....The camera then went off him, back onto Rock. I also do not know anything about any past interaction/s between the pair, other then a rumour or two I have read here. Like I said, we have a varience of opinions. In the beginning I was actually a fence sitter with regards to this. I'm still a fence sitter now but agree both were to some degree in the wrong. Great. I'm saying that's it...end of story! Seems rather contradictory to me. There are instances where Olympic gold medals are taken back and awarded to second place, and second place awarded to third, and third to fourth. The placings are revised, and of course in near all cases justified due to cheating of some sort.

That still doesn't detract from the fact that he won it first and foremost, in line with those same laws and standards of the Academy. That's like taking back the honour from Edmond Hillary for being the first to climb Mnt Everest because he pushed his sherpa out of the way. Punish one, punish the other.

I did understand that part of the potential punishment "they outlined" was taking back the Oscar. I read your post, at least the one I replied to. It hasn't though altered my opinion that he made an emotional error of judgement...Rock was insensitive to the medical condition of Smith's wife. Both were in error. I agree!!! Who would ever be a politician? I mean really, they're damned if they do, (by one section) and damn if they dont(by the other section) Show business people also probably fill in that category as well as others. I told a joke (as I outlined earlier) at my expense, when I was about to get cataract surgery last June. Stephen Hawking told jokes about his own disabilities. Smith ( in his apology) has agreed that jokes at his expense are part of the job, but this was his wife. And in your opinion, how far do you go? You have already suggested in relation to the Natalie Wood joke that that would be too far. Like I said, (and I can really only speak for myself) I would never ever tell a joke or make any insidious comment about anothers disability...NEVER! Perhaps my moral standings need lowering.

A slap on the wrist will suffice. He won the Oscar fair and square. I accept that to a degree....but there is some comparison. No one can be held responsible for their inherited or otherwise medical conditions. I have a good laugh at myself, and my mates can have a good laugh at my expense also, as I often laugh at there's. Still It's another level to laugh about their Mrs in a room full of people, some of which, (other then Smith) may also have felt this comic went too far, and may also have welcomed Smith's intervention. IMO, of course, what you seem to be saying, is that no one has any right to take offence at any jibe or crack about another's disability...Smith took exception, perhaps too far, but in his eyes, and probably others, Rock over-stepped the mark. They were both wrong.