Ophiolite

Two things: 1) Science demands precision in observation and in reporting. While such precision is typically thought to relate to numbers it should also apply to language. insane_alien made careful use of the qualifier "if" in his post. Had DaveC426913 read what was written, rather than misinterpreted it, then his comments would have been unecessary. This may appear to be useless to you. I consider it to be of considerable general importance. 2) I have been away from these forums for several months and wished to ease myself back into posting mode with something comparatively lightweight. It would seem some of the reasons for me departing in the first place remain in effect. So sorry to have inconvenienced you.

That might be why insane_alien used the qualifier if. Do you suppose?

A pseudoscientist is one who has allowed their fascination with science (and the implications and findings of science) to overcome any desire to apply proper scientific process to their thinking. It will nearly always be attributable to a) insufficient education, or b) willfull disregard for the process.

I believe it is of the order of 1", depending upon lifestyle, diet and genetics. To avoid this outcome emigrate to a space colony. In micro-gravity you will grow by a couple of inches. This is not as good as it sounds, as us tall bastards will grow the most.

Shock, horror, dismay. The work of science .... incomplete! Uncertainties, irregularities and ambiguities still exist, even though we have been investigating the Universe for at least 5000/13000000000 of its existence. Why, this means the research must continue, scientists must be trained, and the frontiers of knowledge pushed forward. Where will it end?

I recall building a transistor based 'calculator' that added two binary numbers together. The numbers were input by setting switches for each bit, and the result was displayed by a series of lights. I called it BASIL (Binary Adder Subtractor with Indicator Lights). Knowing how that worked helped a decade later when I found it useful to write assembly language diagnostics for HP2100 mini computer systems. Happy days, when 4k of RAM was unbelievably large (and impossibly expensive).

You aren't testing for synchronicity, sunspot, which is a valid scientific concept, but for coincidence. The hits will be dependent upon three things: a) the number of possible answers, or near answers to the question. b) the 'inventiveness' of the experimenter in finding correlations between selected 'points' and those answers. c) chance Which is where I came in.

Here is the abstract of the relevant paper: Margaret C. Turnbull, Jill C. Tarter Target Selection for SETI. I. A Catalog of Nearby Habitable Stellar Systems The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 145:181-198, 2003 March In preparation for the advent of the Allen Telescope Array, the SETI Institute has the need to greatly expand its former list of 2000 targets compiled for Project Phoenix, a search for extraterrestrial technological signals. In this paper we present a catalog of stellar systems that are potentially habitable to complex life forms (including intelligent life), which comprises the largest portion of the new SETI target list. The Catalog of Nearby Habitable Systems (HabCat) was created from the Hipparcos Catalogue by examining the information on distances, stellar variability, multiplicity, kinematics, and spectral classification for the 118,218 stars contained therein. We also make use of information from several other catalogs containing data for Hipparcos stars on X-ray luminosity, Ca II H and K activity, rotation, spectral types, kinematics, metallicity, and Strömgren photometry. Combined with theoretical studies on habitable zones, evolutionary tracks, and third-body orbital stability, these data are used to remove unsuitable stars from HabCat, leaving a residue of stars that, to the best of our current knowledge, are potentially habitable hosts for complex life. While this catalog will no doubt need to be modified as we learn more about individual objects, the present analysis results in 17,129 Hipparcos "habstars" near the Sun (75% within 140 pc), 2200 of which are known or suspected to be members of binary or triple star systems. There are plenty of possible reasons suggested by their criteria for why B was chosen over A. Unfortunately, I do not have access to the full paper, which might give better insight to the specific rationale.

I see your point......is it a canine?

A ball of rock that once had oceans, probably had life, and possibly still has some today.

I was amused by the declaration that all the dinosaurs were originally vegitarian. If it were true we should be forced to conclude that God was rather unkind to those equipped with predatory, carnivorous teeth. Not at all the sort of thing for chewing up plants. The poor things must have been grossly underfed.

Why?

If you are completely new to quantum theory you should read the Cat first. If you have some background in it then you could go straight to Kittens, since, as I recall, he summarises the key points from Cat in the early chapters.

If you scroll down through the list at just the right speed and put your eyes slightly out of focus you see a picture of Mary Magdalene peeling a potato.

Thanks. It was difficult to follow: it didn't seem to be sunspot's original, or modified queries. Developing your idea of cultural cages a little makes me even more uncomfortable with the use of the word natural in any scientific context. A cultural cage, as opposed to a free range culture, implies that there will be a repertoire of behaviours associated with each cage. If we examine only behaviour in a single cage then that repertoire will appear normal, for that cage. Set against the free range culture the behaviour would be abnormal. I propose (and suspect that this is exactly what ethologists and anthropologists do) that we never use natural or unnatural, but only normal and abnormal, where such are defined and justified by statistically valid sampling and analysis.

You have lost me. Whose question?

You may be somewhat familiar with the concept of an example. If not, that's one in my previous post. Sunspot, I think the problem with your opening post was that you did not define natural behaviour. That has opened the door to irrelevant discussion of the 'well **** man, I mean, like if it's done it must be, like, natural' kind. I stick by the definition offered above - behaviour significantly different from the norm. You have introduced a further consideration. Under what circumstances do we consider man to be in his natural environment, and therefore likely to be displaying natural behaviour. Should we be conducting our measurements on the savannas of Africa? I think not. Cultural if not genetic adjustments have already been made to our current unnatural (?), but certainly normal environments. That is where we should be measuring our normal, i.e natural behaviour.

The implications of your last post turn out to be invalid. Jupiter's internal energy sources are understood to be a combination of heat remaining from the gravitational collapse of Jupiter and the condensation of helium droplets at considerable depth. There may be a small rocky core, but the bulk of the interior consists of a hyrdogen:helium mix, with hydrogen predominating. At depth the hydrogen, though still liquid, is metallic in character. There is thus no need and no means for the heat generation source you have proposed. In regard to that source on Earth - frictional drag between the core and the mantle - I should be interested to see the calculations that demonstrate how the miniscule difference in rotational rates contribute a significant amount of frictional heating. The following article is a good overview of our current knowledge of Jupiter, from clouds to core. http://www.space.com/reference/brit/jupiter/climate.html

Large pressure differentials cause high winds. You can't have high pressure without low pressure, since both are relative terms. I concur with Tycho and insanse alien: sunspot is showing a singular ignorance of the fundamentals of climatology and atmospheric ciculation.

They aren't remote wastelands if you live there. And just for your education, that's South Asia, not Central Asia. Please feel free to say something ignorant in response.

Place a tiger in a small cage and it will pace up and down, and swing its head from side to side, repeatedly. Such behaviour is unnatural for the tiger. Why? For the same reason that humans perform unnatural acts, such as the example of self harm you gave: they are under stress. If we define unnatural as being significantly different from the norm then we find that most (all) animals will behave unnaturally if placed in an abnormal or excessively stressful situation. Note: I see I have mirrored aguy2's definition. So, we must be right, since we now represent the norm (or at least the mode).

Right. Let me take this one point at a time. I disagree with your fundamental premise. There are four options that would in all likelihood be feasible using technology not much more advanced than what we have today, and certainly one of which should be achievable within one millenium, at the outside. 1) Hibernation 2) Generation star ships 3) Greatly extended life spans 4) Seed ships All of these are potentially viable methods for getting humans to other stellar systems. Two of them provide means of getting the individuals who set out to the other system. Now you appear to have set an arbitary, very short term, limit on what constitutes effective interstellar travel. So I shall consider the points arising from that. No. I do not believe we have. The recent resurfacing of Heim theory suggests there is always a possibility of something unexpected. If and only if such research is focused upon well defined possibilities that can be subject to appropriate testing in a cost effective manner. The only one that I am aware of is the Heim theory. The US Dept of Energy has expressed interest in carrying out a test if and only if the physics stands up to further scrutiny.Instead of frittering away money on other less well substantiated possibilities, it would make much more sense to be investing more research funds in the construction of a space elevator. It has always been an effective adage - walk before you can run.

Everybody seems to have ignored the other end of the food chain: horses eat grass, and saplings, and thereby promote grasslands over forests.

If you believe in pan spermia, as I do, then the results from this could be a critical test of the hypothesis. At the very least I expect a plethora of organic molecules previously unideintified in space.