Moontanman

The double slit experiment was being used to support the existence of the supernatural, does it show some sort of supernatural effects of the mind or is there a more likely explanation?

I disagree, heat shields could be made and lots of really large chunks would only have to be slowed to the point that the contents would not be spread over the earth. it wouldn't be as difficult as bringing back a man alive... as long as it remained relatively intact a chuck of platinum it would be valuable.

To be fare anyone interested should read the entire exchange... http://www.facebook.com/MicheletheRaelian/posts/310399215733622 It was a little embarrassing, I felt like I had stepped into intellectual quicksand...

One way in which you are wrong is assuming that homosexuals cannot procreate, in fact you are assuming that homosexuality is one of two states with heterosexuality being the only other one when in fact humans are sexual along a curve with most people being a combination of both, in other words bi-sexual and some call themselves pan sexual. It is our culture that places limits and labels on sexuality. Humans when denied their main sexual desire can and will substitute the same sex to satisfy their sexual needs, humans in prison area prime example of this. But assuming that being homosexual precludes sex with some one of the opposite sex is simply not true.

Ok this question started from of all things a facebook post that i commented on. The post was about crop circles of all things and I pointed out that crop circles had been shown to be man made. I was answered by a guy who it would appear is some sort of mystic or something but he claimed that my assertion of evidence being required before I would believe such a obviously false thing was flawed because the universe is made up of supernatural "things" and after a few more exchanges where I basically supported science and the scientific method as being the only way to really know what is real he showed me that video as evidence that there is something above our reality, the supernatural and how it has been shown to be real. I guess I should have known better to argue with this guy but I did... I hate getting my ass kicked by woo

All of it is at best second hand accounts, most of was written centuries after the fact, none of it is actual testimony, and at least some of it was actually changed intentionally. Not very credible by any reasonable definition...

This video shows how the double slit experiment is affected simply by observation. Is this true? Does simply observing the experiment show that reality is affected by the mind or does it show something else. 2:45 long video

I'd like to address the fish transition to land part of this thread, is anyone aware that fish that can and do survive on land exist and have evolved from fish that could not do so? Walking catfish for instance can survive for long periods out of water as they use their fins to crawl from one body of water to another. Lung fish have evolved the trait to allow them to survive the complete drying up of their ponds, both of these fish have evolved the very same traits that allowed the ancestors of modern land vertebrates to make the transition to land. Mudskippers are yet another example of fish that have evolved the necessary traits to allow them to make short forays onto land. One catfish only lives on land in the leaf litter on the floor of jungles... Most people who do not understand the concept of evolution think that a fish evolved all the traits necessary to become an amphibian in one fell swoop but the reality is that it happened in small steps over thousands if not millions of generations generally using traits that had evolved for another purpose to their advantage. Eyes are probably the most often evolved trait on animals, eyes have evolved independently in several groups, vertebrates, arthropods, cephalopods, quite possibly more than once in arthropods. Other groups have lost their eyes and re-evolved them, eyes are a huge advantage in most environments but in some they are a disadvantage and so eyes are lost over time. This idea that an animal somehow evolves a particular trait because they need it is totally bogus... And evolution hasn't gotten anything right, everything is a transition to something else, evolution is not only a blind watch maker it has no goal, no direction, and no control...

I would say that yes, if all the atoms in your body did that the chamber would contain either a vacuum or a rarefied mixture of collapsed atoms depending if the atom dust could float around or not.

I've often wondered if ultimately it's spin is what keeps a black hole from collapsing to infinity...

Can you give us a link to that? I'd love to find out how it does it.

I suggest you do a little bit of research and find out what antimatter really is. Millions of dollars in research is not needed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter

Absolutely awesome iNow... I keep looking at this panorama and thinking a lizard should run past or a tuft of grass should appear as the camera sweeps across the Martian surface...

You could give corn the same ability that legumes have so corn could make it's own fertilizer... making it a perennial might be good too, harvest it in the fall cut it down and the next spring it comes back from it's own roots... kind of like asparagus... no seeds needed...

You are confused, mars did not nudge the Earth, a mars sized body hit the earth and merged with it and in the process formed the moon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_impact_hypothesis That is just nonsense, a planet would have to be many times bigger than Jupiter to be a star, unlit or not. The OP was asking about a hypothetical planet, why is that a problem? No Luna is the fifth largest moon in our solar system... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Solar_System_objects_by_size

either one is ok by me. Who says that, can you show some support for that assertion? Again, it is quite plain that a great many things have hit the Moon, many more have no doubt hit the Earth, what is your point? Straight down has nothing to do with the equator... Again not relevant. What is the relevance of that to the OP?

Again I am not sure how this pertains to the OP.

Some support besides exchanging claims and what you believe would give this thread a bit more accuracy at the very least. I see no support for anyone's assertions here, simply claiming these things gets us no where, if you think a lesbians brain is larger than a heterosexual woman's brain you really need to show some support for it other than your claims. This is not the only assertion that needs to be supported, in fact there is so many i would have to pretty much quote everyone for the last few pages. Come on guys, we can type what we think is true or what we want to be true forever and it shows nothing other than the biases and beliefs of the people making those claims.. Show some support for these assertions, that is the idea of this forum, not just arguing opinions...

Luna... No, Ganymede is the largest moon... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganymede_(moon) Again not true... While Luna might absorb some asteroids it doesn't get them all or just get the large ones. Actually Jupiter just had an asteroid hit it the other day. Two amateur astronomers saw it. Belief doesn't enter into it, a great many large impacts have scarred the Earth over it's 4.5 billion year history. I'm not sure how this is relevant to the OP. Can you elaborate on this, how is it relevant to the OP? Do you have anything to support this assertion? I see no reason why gravity would aim them at the equator. Again some support for this would be nice What Martians?

Spoil sport...

It's a possibility that the show was out of date, I haven't seen anything about how the mission is going since the Gliese planets were announced either.

It's quite possible that your son will look like your brother in law. It's probable that your son will change in appearance as he grows, does your wife look like her brother, what did she look like as a baby? Who your son looks like will not be as important as how he is raised...

I'd like to add something to this warp drive thread, I think it is important to consider that even if the radiation problem is insurmountable in FTL travel with this "warp drive" the idea that it is a little less impossible to do is thrilling. If you could achieve say 90% of the speed of light it would pretty much open up the galaxy to us, a 40,000 year journey to the nearest star is more than just an obstacle but 5 years to the nearest star is pretty reasonable. Doing it with out huge fuel tanks (I'm not completely clear on how such a ship would power it's self) and not having to accelerate for years to get to 90% light speed would be an incredible improvement over current space travel methods even if we don't get FTL out of it...

From what I've read in another place yes it does, or is thought to do so, it wasn't very heavy with factual assertions... edit: I'm going to have to take that back, it was at below light speed that the radiation problem was not a factor and it was from another article not that one, sorry for my confusion...

You do realize that a transiting planet is dependent on the plane of the planets orbit crossing the star from the stand point of the earth. Very few stars/planets are so aligned so we would not expect to see very many planets in this situation. I'm not sure of how many such planets have been found but if for instance we see 10% of all stars are aligned so their planets do transit from our perspective and we see that 1% of those do have a planet in the correct zone it would indicate a rather high percentage of planets in the "life" zone. To make a judgement call on this you would have to be able to plug in real numbers to the values. But since few stars/planets are visible this way I don't expect to see many "earth like" planets via this method close to the earth.