Moontanman

He wants to get to heaven toasty, he has to drag us down to get points with god. "if you want to get to heaven, you have to raise a little hell!">

I do indeed wish my state would allow medical MJ, I am a chronic pain patient but a few years ago i had to stop taking opiates like oxycontin simply because they were not only killing me but i had forgotten almost 10 years of my life. opiates kill, MJ does not!

Daniel, please do not think of this as a disadvantage. IQ tests do not measure your self worth in any way. It may very well be that you are like a great many people and tests just make you nervous. There so very many variables and as Jill pointed out your own drive and determination are the real Xfactor, not some tenuous IQ number. Pursue your dreams, do not allow anyone or anything to tell you what you cannot accomplish.

CDT, males do not breast feed, the male breasts are only there because all fetuses start out as female. The male breasts have nothing to do with breast feeding. Your assertion is nothing but obfuscation to throw the thread off topic.

At the end of the Cretaceous period dinosaurs were tending toward larger brains and grasping hands (some of them) In this thread lets discuss the possibility that a civilization of intelligent dinosaurs may have exacerbated the ecological collapse at the end of the Cretaceous and the proposed impactors might have just delivered the straw that broke the planets ecological back. Some say we are in the middle of a vast extinction caused by human activity, could an civilization of intelligent dinosaurs have had a similar effect? Here is a supporting thread to get the debate started. http://web.ukonline.co.uk/michael.magee/awwls/00/wls143.html

I've often wondered if the Cretaceous Tertiary boundary might have been marked by more than one impact. It always seemed unlikely to me that the Chicxulub impact event could have done in the entire planet but there is evidence on the moon that craters are sometimes caused by multiple impact events in the from of strings of craters and Shoemaker-Levy gave us some evidence of a comet breaking up after a close encounter and coming back to cause a multiple impact event. Such an event, even if it was several small impactors, would be devastating to the planets ecology, far more so than a large single impact event. I know, just me being a smart ass but in the pseudoscience forum it might be cool.

CDT, what do you mean "an aversion to discussing the topic of this thread"? I read it, it was out of date but still good read and it still contains good information about the ideas that stand at the root of modern evolutionary theory. You seem to be intent on arguing if it is still right or something similar. cut to the chase, what do you want to do besides use straw man arguments to support creationism? If you want to support creationism start your own thread and go for it, rest assured that dog won't hunt unless you have a completely new dog. The old dog is dead and fossilized.

Today it was overcast with a high pressure of 121170 millibars. The high was 495c with a light mist of sulfuric acid throughout most of the day. Winds were out of the West at 3 to 4mph..... Oh you mean in 2009! Well that was way before global warming went out of control......

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Why-Do-Women-Have-Breasts-46783.shtml http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_do_women_have_breasts Secondary sexual characteristics seem to be part of the answer and breastfeeding helpless infants seem to be the two most accepted answers. CDT what if anything does either of your links have to do with the OP?

Jill, the idea that birds did not evolve from tyrannosaurs is a totally straw man argument, both birds and tyrannosaurs evolved from a dinosaur much smaller and quite different from both birds and tyrannosaurs, this guy is just trolling for converts.

What if the earth was struck by a relativistic neutron star? Would it just trash the Earth (similar the pic i posted) or would it vaporise the earth? I once read a story about aliens destroying the earth. (some sort of interstellar war of whack a mole) but they used basket ball sized chucks of neutronium, one was anti-matter and one was was matter neutronium, they dropped them into the Earth and they orbited inside the earth until they finally came together at the center of the earth and "wump there it is" or was! The point is the neutronium didn't do much damage when it hit the earth, it acted like the earth wasn't even there. So if a black hole would just go straight through would a neutron star a few miles in diameter do the same thing?

While it would be foolish to say absolutely not, it would seem that if what we currently understand about the universe is true then an anti-matter black hole would be improbable to say the least.

I'm thinking about it. A coin will not spin when you are undergoing centrifugal force. NO No

Spin a coin, a spinning coin will not act properly if you spin it inside an object rotating for the effect of gravity. A spinning coin will not stand up on it's axis in side a space craft spinning for gravity.

Arthur C Clark used to idea of a black hole as a propulsion in his later space Odyssey books. I don't think he took into account hawking radiation.

The evaporation is so slow in a large black hole it takes many billions of years for it to evaporate. A tiny black evaporates much faster than large one and a tiny black hole would give off huge amounts of gamma rays and like a continuous nuclear explosion and finally as it evaporated down to less than enough mass to maintain it's event horizon it would explode in a huge explosion of energy, much like a multi-million megaton nuclear explosion. The photon is it's own anti-particle.

How small? How do you deal with the intense gamma ray output?

Not my photo shop work but it is cool. Like most power sources where you have to convert on type of energy into another wouldn't creating a black hole take much more energy than you could get out of it?

I hardly have facial hair at all and I have shaved since i was 25, that's 30 years and I still have very little facial hair.

Houston, you have a problem A black hole with the mass of an asteroid would radiate huge amounts of radiation. The radiation would sterilize the earth, the smaller a black hole is the faster it evaporates a tiny black hole would radiate energy mostly in the form of gamma rays.

Antimatter does not have negative mass, therefore the hypothetical antimatter black hole would not have negative mass and would indeed attract a matter black hole.

To quote Jean-Luc Picard, "anything is possible". I always though the implicit idea was that "however, some things are improbable".