Moontanman

Great looking tree house, could be a great romantic retreat... http://www.gizmag.com/erlebnest-treehouse/23317/

Yes but it might make an interesting thread, it might be interesting to start such a competition in a bar and then watch from the side lines as people tore at each other over whose politicians were the most profoundly stupid

Then again maybe the pink slime had turned green and they were afraid he would be able to see it with his new fangled eye wear...

Thank you JohnB, I have been informally studying UFOs for most of my life, I've talked to eye witnesses, and kept abreast of what the real researchers were doing and this documentary is the best one I've seen from the stand point of not hyping one view or another. Some documentaries intentionally go in one direction or another and it becomes plainly obvious quickly they are either for or against UFOs and the evidence presented. Most go in the direction of UFOs are everywhere and the invasion is about to begin type stuff. This one really does walk the fine line between they are real no doubt and they are all fake no doubt. There are sightings that are inexplicable and insulting explanations like slow meteors or a comet are no better than faked photos in my opinion. I would like to continue this thread if possible, we will have to get past the idea that UFOs are all hoaxes or that all UFOs are alien space craft and look at what the evidence really tells us... I like your two value questions, the emotional baggage invested in this subject is more important to many people than any search for evidence. Far too many people either assume that it's all bunk or they assume it's all true, the middle ground of reason seems poorly represented...

My sons couldn't have gone to university if they hadn't received student loans... I think I am going to have to go with they are good...

I ain't nuttin but the truth rigney... Democrats give money away to poor people... Republicans give money away to the rich.... Only really One of the major differences I can see and that is blurred beyond belief... get your crutches old man

Bold by me: Now that I'd like to see some support for...

So no clue to the answer of my question? Aliens are grey, everyone knows that....

Total give a ways? Who is giving away what to whom?

Some one wrote a song about me!!!! The Moontanman rap

Americans Revolt Billions of Times a Day http://www.forbes.com/sites/jerrybowyer/2012/07/08/july-4th-question-part-iii-americans-revolt-billions-of-times-a-day/

Allen West is not even close to being slanted, the right often portray themselves as just a little bit right and closer to center but they seldom are and the more loudly they proclaim it usually the further from the center they are... The extreme left often seem to go out of their way to proclaim it... I refuse to be labeled as right left or even center, I look for good ideas, the direction they come from is meaningless if it's a good idea and no matter how far left and right it comes from. The instant you decide to take a label your choices become limited...

Rigney, to me there is quite a bit of difference between being slanted and fallen completely over flat...

Why would you assume one civilization per galaxy? More than 100 billion stars in our galaxy and it would appear that most stars have planets. We have already found two possible earth like planets in the "Goldilocks" zone relatively near the Earth. It's difficult to really dispute this but there is no reason yet to assume it to be true either. Another good point but it also relies on some assumptions, it assumes that civilizations do not last indefinitely, if many of them do the longer they last the more likely contact is... I wonder if civilizations even bother with deep gravity wells, why even come in close to any star when the ort clouds of stars are full of everything you need for colonies. They could actually be in the ort cloud of the sun and we would not know it. "Why UFOs only appear to cranks and weirdos" is simply not true, there are hundreds of sightings by competent observers, multiple observers, radar and and all of the above at once, hundreds possibly thousands, some by astronomers and even physicists, some of them famous, in the late 40's and early 50's at Los Alamos National Laboratory is one example... UFOs might indeed not be real but to categorize anyone who sees them as cranks and weirdos is not supported by the evidence... I agree, estimates of our ability to colonize the galaxy with no magical technology look like a few million years at most... where indeed are they? Already here and ignoring us as completely as we ignore ants? You are correct and I can't provide, I have heard that statement many times and read it i am sure but I can find no basis for it. But I did find this http://www.faqs.org/faqs/astronomy/faq/part6/section-12.html#b Also i think it should be said that even if there are 1000 civilizations in our galaxy, if reasonably well distributed they would still be likley to be beyond our radio horizon unless they were specifically trying to contact others.

I remember a scene from an old movie, a guy had crashed a light airplane and was trapped inside and during the crash he had become soaked with gasoline. His buddy was trying desperately to get him out of the plane but it was impossible and the guy went nuts as he saw the flame approaching and begged to be killed before he burned to death, his buddy took a large board ad killed him before he could burn to death... Was the guys friend being immoral? Was the killing justified? Could this be extrapolated to justify killing anyone who was in pain and had no hope of recovery? I lean toward the killing being justified but I can't equate it with non time critical mercy killing either...

Ignorance can indeed be bliss, but knowledge is power and when ignorance bites you the new knowledge can help you over come the problem. Not not knowing something doesn't make it unreal or nonexistent it just keeps you from dealing with it in a proactive manner...

I'd like to see some support for this assumption. Can I ask for clarification here? Are we talking about just primates? Just mammals? Or all living creatures? I am not claer how this applies to anything but mammals. [/size][/font] From the history of evolution, undoubtedly the face to face sex position occurs far behind rear entry sex position, because sex reproduction occurs in 18:08 PM, but human occurs in 11:58:43 PM. So we can claim that rear entry really has a long history than face to face, and it also means face to face is really the result of evolution. Your conclusion is possibly correct but the way you go about asserting is disturbing. It's not true that doggy style is more common in anything but mammals, and it is mostly due to the body plan of mammals and the reduced tail compared to reptiles and dinosaurs. I think face to face sex is the result of evolutionary pressures, the result of humans being so sexually active. I think it's called sexual selection. I would like to point out that humans seem to use sex as a pair bonding ritual and not just for reproduction, we have almost all our sex for fun and to show our partner how much we love them. Third, what makes human have the other purpose to have a sex rather than reproduction different from other animals? I think the answer is evolution, not only physical evolution, but also psychology evolution. In physical evolution, human is the only animals who always walk upright, and scientists think the first mammal that walked upright was the ape-like australopithecines - believed by scientists to be an ancestor of early humans – which lived about five million years ago in Africa. Walking upright significantly frees up the hands to carry objects, also creates the physical conditions for face-to-face mating. But only physical evolution is not enough in short history of human. In psychology evolution, self-awareness shows up. Frankly speaking, I am not an idealist, but I really agree with some points of Descartes. Human need more than basic physical needs which only in the first floor during Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Undoubtedly, the self-awareness of human is the strongest among all animals, then human are going to pursue the other four needs, like safety needs, social needs, esteem needs, self-actualization. Do you notice that: the higher up in the model of Maslow, the more words "Self" he used, such as self-esteem in forth floor, self-actualization top floor, and of course, self-awareness makes humans so significant difference from others. I don't mean that self-awareness can exist without brain, but the form of its existing is really different from substance, for example, if people got drunk, they were unconscious, but the brain still there. Self-awareness is going to start make human to have a clear perception of internal and external things, including personality, thoughts, beliefs, motivation, and emotions, so human began to a real evolution in comparison with other animals. As human grow in self-awareness, we will understand who we are and what we want and why we want it. So men found that they were more willing to enjoy the special pleasure during sex, not only for the original purpose: reproduction, as a species. I can claim that the phenomenon of human having sex all the time is the product of development of human self-awareness, precisely to say, just man self-awareness. Finally, sex positions evolved. Because chimpanzee females are highly promiscuous, some scientists thought chimpanzee females are more likely to achieve orgasm by mating sequentially with multiple males. This is big mistake. The main reason I think chimpanzee females can't achieve orgasm is just because they mate with multiple males sequentially. If they really have an orgasm, they must have the refractory period right after orgasm, and can't get into another mating. As a woman, I have to admit that the evolutions of man and woman are not synchronous, apparently, the evolution of female, in many areas, lagged behind male. As men, they have already walked out the trap of reproduction, but women are still trapped in the cave. Evolution is always moving forward. Human and our closest relatives are already evolved far forward than other animals, and the most significant sign is the appearance of face to face sex position, because only in this position, female have a chance to stimulate the clitoris shaft by accident, and then women's self-consciousness can be awakened. Women will know that sooner or later the true meaning of sex is "genital rubbing", the problem is that male genital is penis, but female genital is clitoris shaft, not vagina. Many times history is unfair, especially in the reproduction of species. Even we can say that the reproduction is so selfish and cruel, not only can it sacrifice the interests of other species, and also even can sacrifice some group of their own species. Fortunately, evolution is still moving forward, we are only on the middle way of long evolutionary history. Human have lots of things waiting to be changed, human females have more. It is really time for women to get out the trap of reproduction. Clumsygirl, we are talking something here that is very subjective, ask 1000 people sexual questions and you are likely to get 1000 different answers. I'm not sure you can nail down any aspect of human sexuality and apply it across the board to everyone. One thing is for sure i don't see how you can connect humans making love face to face with anything other than our desire for intimacy. We certainly can and do have rewarding sexual experiences in other ways and saying that somehow face to face is uniquely human or an evolutionary significant move is not supported by your assumptions. Clumsygirl, it is quite possible we are simply not communicating, i get the impression that English is not your original language, possibly some of the problems are centered around that possibility or they could be cultural. I have found that the attitudes of some cultures about sex and what is or is not true is quite dependent of that particular culture. I am going to bold a couple places in this post that confuse me and possibly we can get past this impass and have a more meaningful conversation. I bolded some of the stuff that needs to be discussed, I'll be back later...

No, not even maybe, evolution is not self actuated in anyway. No organism, single celled or not thinks it's self new genes. The environment decides which mutations survive and which do not.

hmmm, sounds like you might have done this before...

The main thing you need is an extremely gullible or naive person. I can't imagine hearing a voice like that and being fooled to think it is not a speaker nearby.... Having said that it is possible to project sonic illusions. They can be quite impressive in certain locations but the system to do so would have to both concealed and focused on a small area the person was in. I have a stereo that I can use to make it sound very much like you are standing hear a passing freight train, at the right decibel level it is very convincing, even the floor seems to shake, but you have to keep your eyes closed or the illusion is ruined...

i agree, the definition of traitor has to be taken within the context of the people involved. In the USA it seems the right s uses the idea of anyone who disagrees with them is a traitor and then conflates it with the idea that anyone who is not a conservative is a traitor to the our country.. They define their own terms for their own benefit... Liberals don't seem to be aware of this or want to be above it somehow...

here is a you tube version of that documentary More from the people in that video about the ET hypothesis...