Total Miner Forums

General => Adult Discussion => Topic started by: Tom on June 04, 2013, 03:34:27 PM

Title: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on June 04, 2013, 03:34:27 PM
Feel free to discuss Science and technology related things here:

I'll start off :)

Space travel is it worth the Risk? Personally I believe the Pro's out weight the Con's for space travel , but what's your opinion?
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/350728/description/Mars_trip_would_deliver_big_radiation_dose

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on June 04, 2013, 04:02:33 PM
In my opinion, to get to Mars, our technology needs to get much better. Not just the shuttle itself, but for health care. As of now, if I was chosen out of the 7 billion people in the world to go to Mars, I would not go. It would be like sending a man to the moon with the first spacecraft that got outside of out atmosphere.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on June 04, 2013, 05:24:43 PM
Personally I don't think it's a bad idea. Although funding was cut from NASA, so a government-led voyage would be slim to none.
It would have to be conducted via independent companies like Virgin Galactic or that Spaceship One thing.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on June 04, 2013, 06:29:06 PM
I do agree that independent companies/ privatisation is the way forwards a while back I found this - http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_(spacecraft) its built by a independent company (which use to be goverment funded) but even with privatisation, funding is a big problem for space travel.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on June 04, 2013, 06:44:07 PM
but even with privatisation, funding is a big problem for space travel.

My hunch is that it'll start similar to automobiles: First prototypes only limited to more wealthy because space travel would be expensive. As new technologies are developed it becomes cheaper for average person.

Though another point I would like to make would be the problem with human bones becoming brittle after years in space. I read/watched a documentary somewhere that if a human were to stay in space for over two years their bone strength would be so weak they would need a special walker to stand up on Earth.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on June 04, 2013, 06:54:41 PM
but even with privatisation, funding is a big problem for space travel.

My hunch is that it'll start similar to automobiles: First prototypes only limited to more wealthy because space travel would be expensive. As new technologies are developed it becomes cheaper for average person.

Though another point I would like to make would be the problem with human bones becoming brittle after years in space. I read/watched a documentary somewhere that if a human were to stay in space for over two years their bone strength would be so weak they would need a special walker to stand up on Earth.

Yes it's the effects of microgravity (man made gravity found on space stations) on the bones another hurdle to overcome on the great journey along with sleep pattern disruption that can cause people to go insane.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: SpiderKiller on June 04, 2013, 10:46:58 PM
Feel free to discuss Science and technology related things here:

I'll start off :)

Space travel is it worth the Risk? Personally I believe the Pro's out weight the Con's for space travel , but what's your opinion?
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/350728/description/Mars_trip_would_deliver_big_radiation_dose
A new age of colonialism involving inter planetary travel. Sounds good, also will put less of a stress upon our home planet considering less people and such.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on June 07, 2013, 06:00:30 PM
Well, there is now a new primate at the beginning! The oldest primate fossil to this date has been found. It broke the record by 7 million years. A short time on a geological timescale though.

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-06/worlds-oldest-primate-fossil-discovered

I would like to make a connection here, the fossil was found at the bottom of an old lake where oxygen levels are low. I went to a lecture by Robert Ballard, a man who studies old ship wrecks, and they actually go to lakes/seas where there is a low amount of oxygen to find very well preserved ships.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on June 07, 2013, 07:55:08 PM
I went to a lecture by Robert Ballard, a man who studies old ship wrecks, and they actually go to lakes/seas where there is a low amount of oxygen to find very well preserved ships.

He was the shipwreck hunter who found both the Titanic and the nuclear submarine USS Scorpion
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on June 07, 2013, 09:41:03 PM
I went to a lecture by Robert Ballard, a man who studies old ship wrecks, and they actually go to lakes/seas where there is a low amount of oxygen to find very well preserved ships.

He was the shipwreck hunter who found both the Titanic and the nuclear submarine USS Scorpion
Tell me something I didn't know :P
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on June 07, 2013, 09:50:29 PM
i don't know, space would be cool, but right now, as demman said, the technology just isn't there. maybe, just maybe if we had the right technology, i would probably still deny it. Mars, not worth the chance.

The moon, now that might be okay, i still wouldn't go though, space itself is just too big for me, for now.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on June 08, 2013, 06:52:35 PM
Is there a need to exclude the rest of the forum from science and tech?

This does not need to be in te adult forum it is suitable for all and not just a handful of people.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: MountainDewIt on June 09, 2013, 10:19:15 AM
Is there a need to exclude the rest of the forum from science and tech?

This does not need to be in te adult forum it is suitable for all and not just a handful of people.
That can depend. I see both sides. Yet younger members may not understand many words or something else. Besides, anyone can join the adult section.

Now, I believe that space isn't necessarily important right now. Even if we made it to Mars, what would be the point? How do we know that there's anything there besides rocks and info for history books? It would be a waste. And we were going to try and support life there, that would take years most likely and cost lots of money. I think we should just wait at least 50 years before even attempting to send another life form.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: muD on June 09, 2013, 06:04:43 PM
..It is possible to travel men to moons & planets to set up habitats. There is just no need tho.
Probes are sent for the knowledge, the understanding, the science.. It's of course much easier and cheaper to send robotics, machines are more efficient in most cases, & its a one way flight.

Seems the next commercial endeavours are mining companies setting up on comets, using as many robotics as possible of course. minimal men.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on June 09, 2013, 06:26:18 PM
..It is possible to travel men to moons & planets to set up habitats. There is just no need tho.
Probes are sent for the knowledge, the understanding, the science.. It's of course much easier and cheaper to send robotics, machines are more efficient in most cases, & its a one way flight.

Seems the next commercial endeavours are mining companies setting up on comets, using as many robotics as possible of course. minimal men.
Was going to mention this earlier but since MuDsluG mentioned it what do you guys of think of private companies, mining comets and searching for ores and materials in space.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on June 09, 2013, 06:34:02 PM
I don't know, Tom. If they mine those comets or asteroids, could that throw off the comets path? And they would be spending more more money and resources than what the comets worth. And lives could be lost doing it too, and in the end, it's not worth it.

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on June 17, 2013, 09:54:49 PM
what do you guys of think of private companies, mining comets and searching for ores and materials in space.
I personally don't have a problem with it as long as it does not harm Earth. But clearly we cannot trust either governments or private enterprise to protect Earth...

If you go by science fiction, it would seem like a useful 'next step' in technology towards the goal of colonizing the universe.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Amos on June 17, 2013, 10:07:20 PM
I don't know, Tom. If they mine those comets or asteroids, could that throw off the comets path? And they would be spending more more money and resources than what the comets worth. And lives could be lost doing it too, and in the end, it's not worth it.

What if the Earth is already in the path?  To be  able to adjust the path of a comet could save the planet.

Humans have already sacrificed their lives to get as far as this, so give up now?

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on June 17, 2013, 10:14:01 PM
I don't know, Tom. If they mine those comets or asteroids, could that throw off the comets path? And they would be spending more more money and resources than what the comets worth. And lives could be lost doing it too, and in the end, it's not worth it.
A private company would never spend more money mining resources than the value of the resources. Also nobody is forcing those people to risk their lives. It's their choice to do what they want with their life.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on June 17, 2013, 10:15:32 PM
I don't know, Tom. If they mine those comets or asteroids, could that throw off the comets path? And they would be spending more more money and resources than what the comets worth. And lives could be lost doing it too, and in the end, it's not worth it.
A private company would never spend more money mining resources than the value of the resources.

or they could jack up the prices, just because it came from space....but in the end, what idiot would buy such a thing?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on June 17, 2013, 10:18:04 PM
I don't know, Tom. If they mine those comets or asteroids, could that throw off the comets path? And they would be spending more more money and resources than what the comets worth. And lives could be lost doing it too, and in the end, it's not worth it.
A private company would never spend more money mining resources than the value of the resources.

or they could jack up the prices, just because it came from space....but in the end, what idiot would buy such a thing?
You're underestimating the amount of resources available. In a large asteroid you could be talking trillions of dollars worth of material.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Amos on June 17, 2013, 10:21:29 PM
I don't know, Tom. If they mine those comets or asteroids, could that throw off the comets path? And they would be spending more more money and resources than what the comets worth. And lives could be lost doing it too, and in the end, it's not worth it.
A private company would never spend more money mining resources than the value of the resources.

or they could jack up the prices, just because it came from space....but in the end, what idiot would buy such a thing?

Are you aware that there are asteroids with enough precious minerals to destabilize the world economy, and that the reason electronics cost so much is because those same precious minerals are use in their construction?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on June 17, 2013, 10:24:50 PM
Speaking of space, Justin Bieber might be going to space before the majority of the people on Earth.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on June 17, 2013, 10:34:24 PM
Speaking of space, Justin Bieber might be going to space before the majority of the people on Earth.
That's cool as long as we can leave him there. :P
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on June 17, 2013, 11:04:54 PM
Speaking of space, Justin Bieber might be going to space before the majority of the people on Earth.
That's cool as long as we can leave him there. :P
With no radio.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: The White Rabbit on June 17, 2013, 11:06:32 PM
Speaking of space, Justin Bieber might be going to space before the majority of the people on Earth.
That's cool as long as we can leave him there. :P
With no radio.
Or a space shuttle.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on June 18, 2013, 06:12:43 PM
Invisible cloaking- Do you think it has potential or not?

Link: http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/351050/description/Simple_invisibility_cloaks_hide_toys_pets_people
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on July 15, 2013, 01:02:39 PM
(http://www.millennialstar.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/ReductionistsPurityofScience_thumb.png)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on July 15, 2013, 08:18:08 PM
I think any long term or stable space exploration by man is going to require the establishment of a mostly self sufficient base on the moon. The moon is more than capable of such as setup with the ability of being a launch center for deeper exploration. Launching from Earth is far too costly, dangerous and difficult with the larger ships we'll need for such endeavours. assembly in space with factories on the moon make far more sense. I also believe any serious space exploration will be corporate motivated. (looking for profitable discoveries such as rare elements/resources)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7d/Moon_vs_earth_composition.svg/600px-Moon_vs_earth_composition.svg.png)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Composition_of_lunar_soil.svg/702px-Composition_of_lunar_soil.svg.png)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: TDi Saint on July 16, 2013, 12:33:01 PM
A private company would never spend more money mining resources than the value of the resources.

Quite often companies will spend a lot of money and make a large loss just to prove something can be done. The car industry is a great example, the Bugatti Veyron is sold for about a fifth of the cost to make it, they only produced it just to show-off and prove it could be done, same with most concept cars made that don't go into production.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on July 16, 2013, 12:41:21 PM
I think any long term or stable space exploration by man is going to require the establishment of a mostly self sufficient base on the moon. The moon is more than capable of such as setup with the ability of being a launch center for deeper exploration. Launching from Earth is far too costly, dangerous and difficult with the larger ships we'll need for such endeavours. assembly in space with factories on the moon make far more sense. I also believe any serious space exploration will be corporate motivated. (looking for profitable discoveries such as rare elements/resources)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7d/Moon_vs_earth_composition.svg/600px-Moon_vs_earth_composition.svg.png)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e7/Composition_of_lunar_soil.svg/702px-Composition_of_lunar_soil.svg.png)

not just us making a base on the moon, we as a species would need to change. i dont have the linky for it on hand but there was an exparament done by the russians recintly where they had a group of peopel similulate life in a space ship for over a year. things where ok at first but then they had a small celbartion to commence i think there half way point or something. so they had a LITTLE alchalahol, like not even an hour passed by, 2 of the guys nearly killed each other in a fist fight. the other guy knocked the one woman uncounices and draged her off to rape her (luckly the scicntists stped in before she was raped) and some other bad things.

so in short we would really need to change as a spices before we can think of long temr space exploration saldy :O
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on July 16, 2013, 02:42:06 PM
not just us making a base on the moon, we as a species would need to change. i dont have the linky for it on hand but there was an exparament done by the russians recintly where they had a group of peopel similulate life in a space ship for over a year. things where ok at first but then they had a small celbartion to commence i think there half way point or something. so they had a LITTLE alchalahol, like not even an hour passed by, 2 of the guys nearly killed each other in a fist fight. the other guy knocked the one woman uncounices and draged her off to hug her (luckly the scicntists stped in before she was hugd) and some other bad things.

so in short we would really need to change as a spices before we can think of long temr space exploration saldy :O
Is that not normal behavior  :o
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on July 16, 2013, 02:43:44 PM
Is that not normal behavior  :o

thats the problem its considered normal :O
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on July 16, 2013, 09:53:45 PM
It would likely take thousands or even millions of years, if at all, for that base human nature to change.

Considering the size of our modern civilizations and cities I think humans are showing a remarkable ability to act civilized.

I don't see that as a show stopper.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on July 17, 2013, 10:52:15 AM
It would likely take thousands or even millions of years, if at all, for that base human nature to change.

Considering the size of our modern civilizations and cities I think humans are showing a remarkable ability to act civilized.

I don't see that as a show stopper.

dont see what as a show stoper? the one guy nearly killing the other? or the guy nearly raping a woman?

Edit: wanted to add more, as a socity yes most 1st world countrys now are a lot better then they used to be for sure. theres still a lot of crazyness in cetrtian areas (middle east, africa, india, an assorment of old sovit satalite countrys, so on). but again yes over all a lot of areas (amrica, canada, britan, france, aulstraila) are a lto better then they used to be. but are far form perfect.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: muD on July 17, 2013, 02:39:14 PM
this algae powered building (http://www.arup.com/News/2013_04_April/25_April_World_first_microalgae_facade_goes_live) is worth mentioning

(http://www.arup.com/~/media/Images/News/2013_04_April/Biq_218x200.ashx?bc=ffffff&as=1&mw=218&thn=0&w=218)

also, you should expect to see 3d printers in average stores near you soon. -these things are awesome
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on July 17, 2013, 02:56:20 PM
this algae powered building (http://www.arup.com/News/2013_04_April/25_April_World_first_microalgae_facade_goes_live) is worth mentioning

(http://www.arup.com/~/media/Images/News/2013_04_April/Biq_218x200.ashx?bc=ffffff&as=1&mw=218&thn=0&w=218)

also, you should expect to see 3d printers in average stores near you soon. -these things are awesome

very cool, and the 3d pritners could very well be the holy grial of tehcnolagy if we do this right ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on July 17, 2013, 02:58:09 PM
this algae powered building (http://www.arup.com/News/2013_04_April/25_April_World_first_microalgae_facade_goes_live) is worth mentioning

(http://www.arup.com/~/media/Images/News/2013_04_April/Biq_218x200.ashx?bc=ffffff&as=1&mw=218&thn=0&w=218)

also, you should expect to see 3d printers in average stores near you soon. -these things are awesome

 I wonder how they will maintain the glass.. Having cleaned tons of algea from fish tanks over the years... once it grows on the surface of the glass.. not much past the surface is going to get any light...
Also Staples already carries one of the 3D printers: http://www.staples.com/Cube-3D-Printers/product_SS2044291
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on July 17, 2013, 06:46:00 PM
this algae powered building (http://www.arup.com/News/2013_04_April/25_April_World_first_microalgae_facade_goes_live) is worth mentioning

(http://www.arup.com/~/media/Images/News/2013_04_April/Biq_218x200.ashx?bc=ffffff&as=1&mw=218&thn=0&w=218)

also, you should expect to see 3d printers in average stores near you soon. -these things are awesome
Do you have a 3D printer? If so, what do you do with it? To me it seems like a toy where you play with it the day you get it, then it sits around for the rest of its life.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on July 17, 2013, 07:20:39 PM
Do you have a 3D printer? If so, what do you do with it? To me it seems like a toy where you play with it the day you get it, then it sits around for the rest of its life.

No. I couldn't justify having one. I had thought about building one for fun at one time out of printer parts and a few bits and bobs... but just didn't see much of a need for it. If I were prototyping small objects or shapes or something.. I could see the need.. but it's rather pointless for anything else.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on July 17, 2013, 08:14:07 PM
dont see what as a show stoper? the one guy nearly killing the other? or the guy nearly raping a woman?
No I wasn't clear enough. Firstly I would discount any stories from an experiment unless we knew the exact facts of what happened and why. Secondly I was talking in general. Sure there is always going to be the minority problem people, but by and large we have created amazingly civilized societies, at least in the west.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on July 17, 2013, 08:14:54 PM
also, you should expect to see 3d printers in average stores near you soon. -these things are awesome
A shop down the road from my house is showing one off. I might go take a looksie today.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on August 06, 2013, 05:57:26 PM
They made a burger by taking cow stem cells and culturing them to make proteins then muscle tissue strips which where collected and made into a burger pattie, they believe that possibly in the future this could be used to combat world hunger and allow the depleting world meat supply to recover.

link- http://science.time.com/2013/08/05/meet-schmeat-say-hello-to-the-stem-cell-hamburger/

Question is could you get used to the fact of eating something produced in a lab?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on August 06, 2013, 06:25:31 PM
Question is could you get used to the fact of eating something produced in a lab?

Food is organic. Whether it is synthesized in a lab or grown naturally, it is the same chemical compounds. That's not to say the synthetic burger is exactly the same as a slab of cow, but if scientists develop a more perfect product (i.e. the correct amount and balances of chemicals found naturally in burgers) then it should taste the same.

In a simpler example, taking salicylic acid (precursor to aspirin) from a willow tree is the same chemical as undergoing a hydrolysis reaction of acetic acid and phenol. Both chemicals will taste the exact same.
The only problem with beef in burgers is that there's more chemicals and more complexity to the ratios as well.
In short, yes food from a lab will taste the same however it will take some time to perfect.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 06, 2013, 07:00:55 PM
They made a burger by taking cow stem cells and culturing them to make proteins then muscle tissue strips which where collected and made into a burger pattie, they believe that possibly in the future this could be used to combat world hunger and allow the depleting world meat supply to recover.

link- http://science.time.com/2013/08/05/meet-schmeat-say-hello-to-the-stem-cell-hamburger/

Question is could you get used to the fact of eating something produced in a lab?

Couldn't do it. I find the thought revolting.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on August 06, 2013, 07:51:46 PM
They made a burger by taking cow stem cells and culturing them to make proteins then muscle tissue strips which where collected and made into a burger pattie, they believe that possibly in the future this could be used to combat world hunger and allow the depleting world meat supply to recover.

link- http://science.time.com/2013/08/05/meet-schmeat-say-hello-to-the-stem-cell-hamburger/
Question is could you get used to the fact of eating something produced in a lab?
I haven't bothered reading any other replies to the topic prior to this, so someone else might have said this.

The beloved vegetable corn, it's used in practically everything. Most modern corn? The genes have been altered in a lab. I doubt most food you buy doesn't have some kind of genetically enhanced item. The beloved banana? In the 1960s the main brand of banana up to then went extinct by a genetic disease called the Panama Disease. Since then, scientist have genetically modified the banana to withstand the disease. To me genetically modified is the same as lab grown.

The hamburger is still cow. The meat grown is still beef. A cow is a cow is a cow. If I was asked to try some, I would.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Stormthorn on August 11, 2013, 09:43:00 PM
I haven't bothered reading any other replies to the topic prior to this, so someone else might have said this.

The beloved vegetable corn, it's used in practically everything. Most modern corn? The genes have been altered in a lab. I doubt most food you buy doesn't have some kind of genetically enhanced item. The beloved banana? In the 1960s the main brand of banana up to then went extinct by a genetic disease called the Panama Disease. Since then, scientist have genetically modified the banana to withstand the disease. To me genetically modified is the same as lab grown.

The hamburger is still cow. The meat grown is still beef. A cow is a cow is a cow. If I was asked to try some, I would.

A big difference from "cow or plant was geneticly modified" in my mind to "Cow or plant was created on agar dishes"

The difference would be the difference between a gene treatment to cure a heraditary disease, and cloning humans ex-vivo in giant vats that are immune to the disease.

(http://www.millennialstar.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/ReductionistsPurityofScience_thumb.png)


Of course, the scale would run the other way if it was measuring usefulness in everyday life.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on August 11, 2013, 10:02:55 PM


Of course, the scale would run the other way if it was measuring usefulness in everyday life.

How do you figure?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Stormthorn on August 11, 2013, 11:12:19 PM
How do you figure?

How many times a day does the average human being confront physics or math in a way that they have any significant chance of failure? How many times are they called upon to interact with humans with a chance of screwing it up?

Having an advanced grasp on something like psychology or sociology can help you in your everyday life. Being specialized in the field of mathematics rarely does. At very high levels math is numbers and symbols completly useless to the everyday lives of humans. How often might having all the social cues and proper responses to attraction, anger, or boredom memorized help you? How often might your knowledge of Grahams Number or intimate knowledge of conversion of calories into kilojoules?

It isnt that we dont use math in our everyday lives, its that, as a scientific discipline, specializing in math is less helpful than the others. Even chemistry might help you out for cooking or (drug making if thats how you roll) but again, the more "pure" science is less applicable to everyday life for someone with advanced knowledge than the less pure ones like psychology or biology.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on August 11, 2013, 11:15:54 PM
How many times a day does the average human being confront physics or math in a way that they have any significant chance of failure? How many times are they called upon to interact with humans with a chance of screwing it up?

Having an advanced grasp on something like psychology or sociology can help you in your everyday life. Being specialized in the field of mathematics rarely does. At very high levels math is numbers and symbols completly useless to the everyday lives of humans. How often might having all the social cues and proper responses to attraction, anger, or boredom memorized help you? How often might your knowledge of Grahams Number or intimate knowledge of conversion of calories into kilojoules?

It isnt that we dont use math in our everyday lives, its that, as a scientific discipline, specializing in math is less helpful than the others. Even chemistry might help you out for cooking or (drug making if thats how you roll) but again, the more "pure" science is less applicable to everyday life for someone with advanced knowledge than the less pure ones like psychology or biology.
Thought you meant how much they benefit your everyday life i.e. modern medicine, technology, etc.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Stormthorn on August 11, 2013, 11:24:48 PM
Thought you meant how much they benefit your everyday life i.e. modern medicine, technology, etc.

No I didnt mean like that. Math benefits cyberspace the most in that case, certainly. Chemistry has a lot of things going for it to. Concrete. Plastic. Gasoline. Lead-free paint. Toothpaste. Lube. Artificial sweetner. Kitty litter.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on August 12, 2013, 10:04:27 AM
The hyper loop- take a look and tell me if you think it will take off or end up like the Segway.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/10235261/Inside-the-Hyperloop-the-pneumatic-travel-system-faster-than-the-speed-of-sound.html
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on August 12, 2013, 11:41:43 AM
i been following this for a while. he regrets talking about it as he has to much on his plate all ready

and he has not even released it yet... that's tonight
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 12, 2013, 02:36:52 PM
The hyper loop- take a look and tell me if you think it will take off or end up like the Segway.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/10235261/Inside-the-Hyperloop-the-pneumatic-travel-system-faster-than-the-speed-of-sound.html

I honestly don't see it going anywhere.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 12, 2013, 04:24:52 PM
"eclipsing trains"

that's a train...........


more like hyperbool (see what I did there herpa derpa derp) ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on August 12, 2013, 05:43:22 PM
The hyper loop- take a look and tell me if you think it will take off or end up like the Segway.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/10235261/Inside-the-Hyperloop-the-pneumatic-travel-system-faster-than-the-speed-of-sound.html
Now we would just need something to transport us from the drop-off point to our work/home....
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on August 12, 2013, 06:06:05 PM
The link it bullavocado the hyperloop design has only been showed 30 minutes ago
57( or 54 I can't be asked to check) of designs have be unveil and in floating around the Internet some where
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Stormthorn on August 12, 2013, 09:32:47 PM
Hyperloop...so its a vacuum tube delivery system...but bigger and powered by magnets?

And the guy who wants to build it himself? And his big money maker was inventing PayPal, a buisness that runs entirely off of skimming money from other peoples transactions? And also investing 100m (10% of their funding for the first year) into SpaceX and then sitting back and cashing in on that investment?

This guy sounds very good at getting other people to make money for him.

If such a system could be built I feel like it would be a liability. A train crash is bad enough, but if this were to fail mid-use it would be sending what amounts to a train car through the tube wall at 800+ mph, possibly into the heart of the city that the tube was arriving at. This doesnt sound like an inherently safe concept.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Xalron on August 15, 2013, 01:32:29 AM
Hyperloop...so its a vacuum tube delivery system...but bigger and powered by magnets?

And the guy who wants to build it himself? And his big money maker was inventing PayPal, a buisness that runs entirely off of skimming money from other peoples transactions? And also investing 100m (10% of their funding for the first year) into SpaceX and then sitting back and cashing in on that investment?

This guy sounds very good at getting other people to make money for him.

If such a system could be built I feel like it would be a liability. A train crash is bad enough, but if this were to fail mid-use it would be sending what amounts to a train car through the tube wall at 800+ mph, possibly into the heart of the city that the tube was arriving at. This doesnt sound like an inherently safe concept.

Yes it is powered by magnets. As of today, the fastest way to travel by train is magnetized hoveration (Yes I just made that word up). The hoverloop is incessantly a train inside a tube.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Xalron on August 15, 2013, 01:33:30 AM
I am in this topic now. Ask me anything and I will do my best to answer :D I am a Quantum Physicist, it is my job to know everything!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 15, 2013, 02:19:33 PM
As far as the maglev trains go, it's implausible that they will ever be built in this country. What the media doesn't tell you (other than funding is an issue and blame the Republicans) is that there frankly isn't enough of the rare earth metals required for such a project. China controls 99% of the worlds rare earth metals and keeps an extremely tight grip on them. It's actually getting to the point where it's getting difficult and more expensive to make things like smartphones and computers and various other things that require small quantities of rare earth metals.. so much so that it has delayed the release of such devices on several occasions. A Maglev train is beyond the resources. Anyone in government that pushes such a project is likely lining someone's pocket with funding for a dead at the gate project..
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on August 15, 2013, 02:55:17 PM
Hyperloop...so its a vacuum tube delivery system...but bigger and powered by magnets?

And the guy who wants to build it himself? And his big money maker was inventing PayPal, a buisness that runs entirely off of skimming money from other peoples transactions? And also investing 100m (10% of their funding for the first year) into SpaceX and then sitting back and cashing in on that investment?

This guy sounds very good at getting other people to make money for him.

If such a system could be built I feel like it would be a liability. A train crash is bad enough, but if this were to fail mid-use it would be sending what amounts to a train car through the tube wall at 800+ mph, possibly into the heart of the city that the tube was arriving at. This doesnt sound like an inherently safe concept.
it free source designs he said anybody can build it and he is will to help but he is to busy being the CEO of Tesla and Spacex.If nobody attemps it in 2 years he said he will make it himself. He designed the rockets mostly by himself and in a interview he sated he didn't want to create Tesla but he understood that nobody was going to created a good electric car.

he sit on the board of the solar city which is run by he cousins company (amazing company) and 100 million get 1 test flight (74million) and if it failed he was over as 4 test flights before all failed.

this is why he was inspiration for the film iron man because he is a genies and is the only person in American to found 2 billion dollar companys.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 15, 2013, 03:11:10 PM
it free source designs he said anybody can build it and he is will to help but he is to busy being the CEO of Tesla and Spacex.If nobody attemps it in 2 years he said he will make it himself. He designed the rockets mostly by himself and in a interview he sated he didn't want to create Tesla but he understood that nobody was going to created a good electric car.

he sit on the board of the solar city which is run by he cousins company (amazing company) and 100 million get 1 test flight (74million) and if it failed he was over as 4 test flights before all failed.

this is why he was inspiration for the film iron man because he is a genies and is the only person in American to found 2 billion dollar companys.

The decade-old Tesla debuted its first product, the Roadster, in 2006. With a base price of $109,000, it was discontinued before it hit 2,500 sales. Tesla introduced its Model S a year ago and had sold an estimated 9,650 at a bargain $70,000 through April. By contrast, Ford sold 168,843 F-series pickup trucks in the first quarter alone.

Tesla wouldn’t have sold even that many cars without the extraordinary help of government. In 2009 the company received a $465 million Obama loan guarantee, supplemented last year by a $10 million grant from the California Energy Commission.

That money has underwritten Tesla’s engineering and manufacturing, but federal and state governments also subsidize the purchase of Tesla products. Any U.S. buyer of a Tesla car qualifies for a $7,500 federal tax credit, while states like Colorado throw in up to $6,000 more in state income-tax credits. Taxpayers pay first so Tesla can build the cars and again to help the wealthy buy them.

These subsidies are important enough to Tesla that its website features an “Incentives” section directing buyers where to look for their states’ electric-vehicle benefits—rebates, free parking, exemptions from state sales tax, use of high-occupancy lanes, and the like. Buyers from states that offer no incentives get this Tesla message: “Want to help make EV [electric vehicle] incentives a reality in your area? Encourage your local or state representative by calling or sending them a letter.”

Tesla’s biggest windfall has been the cash payments it extracts from rival car makers (and their customers), via its sale of zero-emission credits. A number of states including California require that traditional car makers reach certain production quotas of zero-emission vehicles—or to purchase credits if they cannot. Tesla is a main supplier.

A Morgan Stanley MS +0.41% report in April said Tesla made $40.5 million on credits in 2012, and that it could collect $250 million in 2013. Tesla acknowledged in a recent SEC filing that emissions credit sales hit $85 million in 2013′s first quarter alone—15% of its revenue, and the only reason it made a profit.

Take away the credits and Tesla lost $53 million in the first quarter, or $10,000 per car sold. California’s zero-emission credits provided $67.9 million to the company in the first quarter, and the combination of that state’s credits and federal and local incentives can add up to $45,000 per Tesla sold, according to an analysis by the Los Angeles Times.

It doesn't surprise me that they want another government grant... It's really the only way they make money and there is 18 Billion in grant money to be had for high speed trains out of the 90 Billion Obama is giving away in his "Green Jobs" grants. Good enough reason to try and grab some of that free money. With what can only be called a "current weak demand" for electric cars, they are going to have to move into something else and soon.

Much of the decreased demand of Electric vehicles can be found not only in their short travel distance (for the electrics) but in that they lose half their MSRP value in one year in trade in value.
http://www.nada.com/b2b/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=bpT2e6M6P5U%3d&tabid=84
as you can see from the charts at that link, Electric and Hybrid vehicles made in 2012 have already lost 50% of their trade in. For the Chevy Volt as one example that is $20,000 in one year. Almost no one that has purchased a hybrid or electric car has said they would purchase another.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505164_162-57411789-10391734/study-hybrid-car-owners-unlikely-to-buy-another/
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on August 15, 2013, 04:42:35 PM
The decade-old Tesla debuted its first product, the Roadster, in 2006. With a base price of $109,000, it was discontinued before it hit 2,500 sales. Tesla introduced its Model S a year ago and had sold an estimated 9,650 at a bargain $70,000 through April. By contrast, Ford sold 168,843 F-series pickup trucks in the first quarter alone.

Tesla wouldn’t have sold even that many cars without the extraordinary help of government. In 2009 the company received a $465 million Obama loan guarantee, supplemented last year by a $10 million grant from the California Energy Commission.

That money has underwritten Tesla’s engineering and manufacturing, but federal and state governments also subsidize the purchase of Tesla products. Any U.S. buyer of a Tesla car qualifies for a $7,500 federal tax credit, while states like Colorado throw in up to $6,000 more in state income-tax credits. Taxpayers pay first so Tesla can build the cars and again to help the wealthy buy them.

These subsidies are important enough to Tesla that its website features an “Incentives” section directing buyers where to look for their states’ electric-vehicle benefits—rebates, free parking, exemptions from state sales tax, use of high-occupancy lanes, and the like. Buyers from states that offer no incentives get this Tesla message: “Want to help make EV [electric vehicle] incentives a reality in your area? Encourage your local or state representative by calling or sending them a letter.”

Tesla’s biggest windfall has been the cash payments it extracts from rival car makers (and their customers), via its sale of zero-emission credits. A number of states including California require that traditional car makers reach certain production quotas of zero-emission vehicles—or to purchase credits if they cannot. Tesla is a main supplier.

A Morgan Stanley MS +0.41% report in April said Tesla made $40.5 million on credits in 2012, and that it could collect $250 million in 2013. Tesla acknowledged in a recent SEC filing that emissions credit sales hit $85 million in 2013′s first quarter alone—15% of its revenue, and the only reason it made a profit.

Take away the credits and Tesla lost $53 million in the first quarter, or $10,000 per car sold. California’s zero-emission credits provided $67.9 million to the company in the first quarter, and the combination of that state’s credits and federal and local incentives can add up to $45,000 per Tesla sold, according to an analysis by the Los Angeles Times.

It doesn't surprise me that they want another government grant... It's really the only way they make money and there is 18 Billion in grant money to be had for high speed trains out of the 90 Billion Obama is giving away in his "Green Jobs" grants. Good enough reason to try and grab some of that free money. With what can only be called a "current weak demand" for electric cars, they are going to have to move into something else and soon.

Much of the decreased demand of Electric vehicles can be found not only in their short travel distance (for the electrics) but in that they lose half their MSRP value in one year in trade in value.
http://www.nada.com/b2b/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=bpT2e6M6P5U%3d&tabid=84
as you can see from the charts at that link, Electric and Hybrid vehicles made in 2012 have already lost 50% of their trade in. For the Chevy Volt as one example that is $20,000 in one year. Almost no one that has purchased a hybrid or electric car has said they would purchase another.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505164_162-57411789-10391734/study-hybrid-car-owners-unlikely-to-buy-another/
model S is not just an electric car.
First off a 300 mile range is more then enough for car as that is about 7 hours of driving.
the company is a luxury car company and the model s has the best rating out of all the car in the world not just electric. It is a luxury Sudan so that's why it's a heavy price.

Tesla is ONE of his company and was only founded to give people a good electric car. so to keep the price down for consumer they....take it from the consumers in tax...

i don't see the link between Tesla and hyperloop. He has stated that it is a free source design and anybody can use it and if they don't he will do it later in 2 years as at the monent he is to busy working on the construction of the falcon heavy rocket.

The reason why he is made the design is because the government wanted to create a high speed train "very slow in comparison" and uses a lot more energy(understatement). The government is planing on spending 90 billion on this train to connect the 2 city's and Elon simply created a design that will be mush  cheaper and he does not want money in return (he is stinking rich already) and i really don't see the problem.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 15, 2013, 05:17:20 PM
model S is not just an electric car.
First off a 300 mile range is more then enough for car as that is about 7 hours of driving.
the company is a luxury car company and the model s has the best rating out of all the car in the world not just electric. It is a luxury Sudan so that's why it's a heavy price.

Tesla is ONE of his company and was only founded to give people a good electric car. so to keep the price down for consumer they....take it from the consumers in tax...

i don't see the link between Tesla and hyperloop. He has stated that it is a free source design and anybody can use it and if they don't he will do it later in 2 years as at the monent he is to busy working on the construction of the falcon heavy rocket.

The reason why he is made the design is because the government wanted to create a high speed train "very slow in comparison" and uses a lot more energy(understatement). The government is planing on spending 90 billion on this train to connect the 2 city's and Elon simply created a design that will be mush  cheaper and he does not want money in return (he is stinking rich already) and i really don't see the problem.

Read it. Don't Skim.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on August 15, 2013, 06:16:46 PM
I read it.

Wrote a reply and deleted it and wrote it again without reading thought again.
So it may help if you inform me on what you think I missed

It just look like you took a piece talking about Tesla's money and how it came to be.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 15, 2013, 06:22:05 PM
I read it.

Wrote a reply and deleted it and wrote it again without reading thought again.
So it may help if you inform me on what you think I missed

It just look like you took a piece talking about Tesla's money and how it came to be.

Just that you missed all of the important aspects of that article and the entire point of my post.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Stormthorn on August 20, 2013, 12:15:44 AM
Just that you missed all of the important aspects of that article and the entire point of my post.

Can you enlighten me of the thrust of that? I'm not directly involved in the debate and reading searing yellow hurts me eyes.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Kitty on August 20, 2013, 07:09:23 AM
Can you enlighten me of the thrust of that? I'm not directly involved in the debate and reading searing yellow hurts me eyes.
It is quite painful isn't it...

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 20, 2013, 02:19:17 PM
It is quite painful isn't it...

Not as painful as the stupidity this thread is attracting.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 20, 2013, 03:07:52 PM
Not as painful as the stupidity this thread is attracting.

the stupidaty in this thread is becomeing so storng its starting to attarct me to it, and then we all know i am gona bring the stupidaty! ^_^

as to sicnciney stuff. hearing laser weapons are starting to become more of a reality for the us miltary, so far they plan to put them onto battle ships.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on August 20, 2013, 03:26:22 PM
hearing laser weapons are starting to become more of a reality for the us miltary, so far they plan to put them onto battle ships.

Budding of that, I had heard of new "heat guns" mounted atop of cruise liners in the horn of Africa. They utilize a form of electromagnetic wave that, when the wave is pointed at someone, causes a burning sensation. It's mounted atop these cruise ships in order to thwart off Somali pirate raids.
Unfortunately I cannot find an article for it
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Kitty on August 21, 2013, 05:04:49 AM
Not as painful as the stupidity this thread is attracting.
I know! Even you were attracted to this thread xD :P

Dauntless I had a quick google and couldn't find anything really discussing what you were talking about, If you find the article please link it ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on August 21, 2013, 12:40:41 PM
Dauntless I had a quick google and couldn't find anything really discussing what you were talking about, If you find the article please link it ^_^

Ok I guess I remembered incorrectly. This non-lethal weapon is called the LRAD. It wasn't a "heat gun", but rather makes an unbearably loud sound in the target's ears when focused. It mirrors the new ADS weapon the military uses, which is the actual "heat gun" i was referring to. I originally saw this in a documentary about somali pirates.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/the-weapon-of-sound-sonic-canon-gives-pirates-an-earful-a-385048.html (http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/the-weapon-of-sound-sonic-canon-gives-pirates-an-earful-a-385048.html)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 21, 2013, 02:55:12 PM
I know! Even you were attracted to this thread xD :P

Dauntless I had a quick google and couldn't find anything really discussing what you were talking about, If you find the article please link it ^_^

My only mistake was assuming that the adult section was going to be for adult serious discussions and not turn into another section filled with the inane ramblings of the immature youth that seems to be rampant on this forum. Frankly it drives away all the adult players of this game. Many are already gone or rarely make an appearance. Frankly there are several about to leave because this board has frankly gotten a bit too juvenile. Have fun ruining what could have been a good section for the actual adult players to converse. You have the entire rest of the board to act stupid in. Frankly this section needs less Romper Room. If you or others can't keep up with intelligent discussion, you shouldn't be in here.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on August 21, 2013, 03:55:11 PM
My only mistake was assuming that the adult section was going to be for adult serious discussions and not turn into another section filled with the inane ramblings of the immature youth that seems to be rampant on this forum. Frankly it drives away all the adult players of this game. Many are already gone or rarely make an appearance. Frankly there are several about to leave because this board has frankly gotten a bit too juvenile. Have fun ruining what could have been a good section for the actual adult players to converse. You have the entire rest of the board to act stupid in. Frankly this section needs less Romper Room.

I would tend to agree, though much more so that personal opinions of others on this forum shouldn't be dragged in.

My example:
I know! Even you were attracted to this thread xD :P

Also something leads me to believe this is as well....
Can you enlighten me of the thrust of that? I'm not directly involved in the debate and reading searing yellow hurts me eyes.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 21, 2013, 04:41:15 PM
I agree. Over the weekend I'm going to do a purge.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on August 21, 2013, 05:57:59 PM
My only mistake was assuming that the adult section was going to be for adult serious discussions and not turn into another section filled with the inane ramblings of the immature youth that seems to be rampant on this forum. Frankly it drives away all the adult players of this game. Many are already gone or rarely make an appearance. Frankly there are several about to leave because this board has frankly gotten a bit too juvenile. Have fun ruining what could have been a good section for the actual adult players to converse. You have the entire rest of the board to act stupid in. Frankly this section needs less Romper Room. If you or others can't keep up with intelligent discussion, you shouldn't be in here.
As I said when an argument like this began to develop in the "What exactly is there to talk about" thread, I agree with you. When I found out about the adult section I thought it would be for the older members of the forums, then I found out I was in it! If I remember correctly, I am not an adult.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 21, 2013, 06:55:14 PM
As I said when an argument like this began to develop in the "What exactly is there to talk about" thread, I agree with you. When I found out about the adult section I thought it would be for the older members of the forums, then I found out I was in it! If I remember correctly, I am not an adult.

this whole thing came up when it was irst made as we used to use the saw this thread (both here and on old forums) for every thing. it was decied at the time by criag that it was not an age thing but a micuraty level. as I remember rasiing that a lot of us here were under 18.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 21, 2013, 07:24:08 PM
this whole thing came up when it was irst made as we used to use the saw this thread (both here and on old forums) for every thing. it was decied at the time by criag that it was not an age thing but a micuraty level. as I remember rasiing that a lot of us here were under 18.

(The following is not directed at anyone in particular)
It defeats the purpose of the section when you have little kids running about turning every conversation into a juvenile tangent. As I said before, you kids have the entire rest of the board to do that in... why must you ruin this section as well. Frankly I'm fine with only 5 people ever having access to the section if that's what it takes. As I said, you have the entire rest of the board for you to be you in. As for those that could lie about their age to get in... Don't think so. Sooner or later your level of immaturity shines through revealing your true age or lack of understanding of the discussion at hand. Now I can be quite silly for a middle aged gent.. and often am (after all, you don't know me and can't see me so I can be far less introverted than I am in real life).. but I can also be quite serious when need be and this section would be a good area to reflect a little more of my true self in.. Not everyone that wants should have access to this section. Sorry but that's just how I feel about it. bob is not going to let anyone talk bad about you behind your back, this section is not for that sort of thing. It's not meant to be an exclusive club either. It just simply needs a place where an adult can be an adult on the board without some kneebiter coming along and shouting "blarg" or whatever... in response to a serious discussion.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Kitty on August 21, 2013, 07:30:47 PM
(The following is not directed at anyone in particular)
It defeats the purpose of the section when you have little kids running about turning every conversation into a juvenile tangent. As I said before, you kids have the entire rest of the board to do that in... why must you ruin this section as well. Frankly I'm fine with only 5 people ever having access to the section if that's what it takes. As I said, you have the entire rest of the board for you to be you in. As for those that could lie about their age to get in... Don't think so. Sooner or later your level of immaturity shines through revealing your true age or lack of understanding of the discussion at hand. Now I can be quite silly for a middle aged gent.. and often am (after all, you don't know me and can't see me so I can be far less introverted than I am in real life).. but I can also be quite serious when need be and this section would be a good area to reflect a little more of my true self in.. Not everyone that wants should have access to this section. Sorry but that's just how I feel about it. bob is not going to let anyone talk bad about you behind your back, this section is not for that sort of thing. It's not meant to be an exclusive club either. It just simply needs a place where an adult can be an adult on the board without some kneebiter coming along and shouting "blarg" or whatever... in response to a serious discussion.
You have a good point DB, I will request my access to the Adult discussion to be removed.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Machinimafan200 on August 22, 2013, 03:29:29 PM
We got some yellow text guy acting like a kid, even though he's saying he's mature and keeps to topic in a TECHNOLOGY TOPIC...
Yup. Totally adult.
Anyone made a Lego mindstorm bottle opener for corks, metal caps, etc etc?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on August 22, 2013, 03:37:00 PM
Could you guys stop using this topic for arguing please :( , it's suppose to be discussing technology and science.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 22, 2013, 04:37:33 PM
We got some yellow text guy acting like a kid, even though he's saying he's mature and keeps to topic in a TECHNOLOGY TOPIC...
Yup. Totally adult.
Access Removed...
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Stormthorn on August 22, 2013, 11:16:49 PM
(The following is not directed at anyone in particular)
It defeats the purpose of the section when you have little kids running about turning every conversation into a juvenile tangent. As I said before, you kids have the entire rest of the board to do that in... why must you ruin this section as well. Frankly I'm fine with only 5 people ever having access to the section if that's what it takes. As I said, you have the entire rest of the board for you to be you in. As for those that could lie about their age to get in... Don't think so. Sooner or later your level of immaturity shines through revealing your true age or lack of understanding of the discussion at hand. Now I can be quite silly for a middle aged gent.. and often am (after all, you don't know me and can't see me so I can be far less introverted than I am in real life).. but I can also be quite serious when need be and this section would be a good area to reflect a little more of my true self in.. Not everyone that wants should have access to this section. Sorry but that's just how I feel about it. bob is not going to let anyone talk bad about you behind your back, this section is not for that sort of thing. It's not meant to be an exclusive club either. It just simply needs a place where an adult can be an adult on the board without some kneebiter coming along and shouting "blarg" or whatever... in response to a serious discussion.

Age and maturity are related but I dont think we can generalize. A lot of adults lack the level understanding of a clever teen and anyone can vary in displayed level of maturity even from day to day with mood or situation.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 23, 2013, 06:50:40 AM
Age and maturity are related but I dont think we can generalize. A lot of adults lack the level understanding of a clever teen and anyone can vary in displayed level of maturity even from day to day with mood or situation.
We won't base it on age. If the moderators or myself see people making childish posts we will remove their access.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: TDi Saint on August 23, 2013, 08:23:42 AM
Well this thread has been slightly derailed with the most recent discussions so I found something interesting and wonder what you're thoughts are about it.

Scientists are actively interfering with chickens in the embryonic stage by activating "dinosaur genes" that have long been dormant. An example is that they activated one gene and the embryo developed a proper tail. I think they also managed to activate one gene and the chicken embryo began to develop curved teeth.

They also predict they will soon be able to hatch a chicken that would be very close to a dinosaur complete with arms, tail and teeth.

I'm just wondering what you all think of this?

As for my source I saw this on QI last night, if anyone's interested in discussing this I'll find some decent articles on the subject and post them here.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on August 23, 2013, 09:01:29 AM
I enjoy watching QI as well, anyway as for the chicken-dinosaur topic I found a link but it dates to before the experiments had been conducted and discusses what they planned to do.

http://www.livescience.com/17642-chickenosaurus-jack-horner-create-dinosaur.html

if anyone finds a more up to date link please post as I would like to read it.

The topic mentions about how the backbone formed a tail for humans but which is absorbed by the body during developed and then goes on to mention that even thought the trait (called atavisms) of the tail  is only remnants but reverse engineering could be used to produce new born species of animal in this case chickens with the traits lost in evolution. I'm interested by the idea as where it could possibly lead too as i can see the advantages been able to activate or deactivate genes.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on August 23, 2013, 12:27:22 PM
Could you guys stop using this topic for arguing please :( , it's suppose to be discussing technology and science.
i still don't understand why this topic is in the adult section as it is a normal conversation.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: TDi Saint on August 23, 2013, 12:41:47 PM
i still don't understand why this topic is in the adult section as it is a normal conversation.

I suppose some science topics can be very controversial, such as gene therapy and genetic modification. Less mature people who have a strong view to one side or the other probably wouldn't contribute much to the conversation and would likely end up taking a personal stance against members who think the opposite to them on the matter.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: The White Rabbit on August 23, 2013, 12:47:48 PM
Even though I enjoy QI greatly alot of the stories seem mad. But back to chicken dinosaurs... I was wondering what the outcome would be if it has been updated because it seems very ambitious and far fetch but hey stem cells research can create a 'perfect' baby by playing with the cells so whats stopping a dino/bird combo. (I personally prefer to have a perfect chicken rather than a dino chicken)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: TDi Saint on August 23, 2013, 12:59:48 PM
Even though I enjoy QI greatly alot of the stories seem mad. But back to chicken dinosaurs... I was wondering what the outcome would be if it has been updated because it seems very ambitious and far fetch but hey stem cells research can create a 'perfect' baby by playing with the cells so whats stopping a dino/bird combo. (I personally prefer to have a perfect chicken rather than a dino chicken)

It isn't that far fetched, its just currently they've only activated one dormant gene in an embryo at a time. They could also in theory do this to almost any animal on the planet as most animals will have dormant genes from ages ago that just aren't activated. I wouldn't be surprised if there are significant dormant genes in human DNA and RNA as well.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on August 23, 2013, 01:04:37 PM
i still don't understand why this topic is in the adult section as it is a normal conversation.

TDI pretty much summed it up, by posting this in the adult section I hoped to get mature responses from those who choose to comment on what may be controversial at times. It possibly could be just in general. I will allow the moderators make the decision but personally I think it's fine here currently.

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on August 23, 2013, 01:15:02 PM
Since we are bordering the topic of stem cell research and gene manipulation, what is your opinion in it, I now this is a very controversial as a lot of people are against it especially embryonic stem cells. But I'm personally for it as its research is showing promising results and advancements towards curing disease such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's as well as rare genetic diseases.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 23, 2013, 01:48:49 PM
Well this thread has been slightly derailed with the most recent discussions so I found something interesting and wonder what you're thoughts are about it.

Scientists are actively interfering with chickens in the embryonic stage by activating "dinosaur genes" that have long been dormant. An example is that they activated one gene and the embryo developed a proper tail. I think they also managed to activate one gene and the chicken embryo began to develop curved teeth.

They also predict they will soon be able to hatch a chicken that would be very close to a dinosaur complete with arms, tail and teeth.

I'm just wondering what you all think of this?

As for my source I saw this on QI last night, if anyone's interested in discussing this I'll find some decent articles on the subject and post them here.

i think its a neat idea......next step tho is a master race.......
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on August 23, 2013, 02:02:07 PM
It isn't that far fetched, its just currently they've only activated one dormant gene in an embryo at a time. They could also in theory do this to almost any animal on the planet as most animals will have dormant genes from ages ago that just aren't activated. I wouldn't be surprised if there are significant dormant genes in human DNA and RNA as well.

Correct. In fact some 90% of our genome (stats may be outdated, as im using a 2009 Cell bio textbook) is unused.
The unused portions of the genome are made up of introns (repetitive sequences not used, only for hindering mutations), Alu insert genes (non-useful sequences), and those dormant genes you mentioned. The dormant genes could be activated by some mechanism, though complex. Would require a heavy genetic engineering layout of activator proteins and sequences, as these genes are dormant for a reason.

topic of stem cell research and gene manipulation, what is your opinion in it?


Personally for Stem Cell research I'm for it. Here are my reasons:

> Totipotent cells have the possibility to restore neuron loss in damaged retinal layers or the eye, restore spinal cord mobility, and restore neuron loss with those suffering from Alzheimer's.
> Totipotent cells could potentially regenerate new organs that wont be rejected by the host, such as heart transplants, kidney transplants, or pancreatic cells.
> It has already been shown that corded blood cells (pluripotent cells that have slightly differentiated into circulatory system cells found in the umbilical cord at birth) can be used for bone marrow transplants in Leukemia patients.
> The embryos do not have nerve endings, so they cannot feel pain when "destroyed" (note my quotes around word)
> Without implantation into a uterus, the embryo would not survive if it were not utilized for research, but simply thrown out.
> The embryos can only be obtained by women donating their eggs for the research. Couples that do not wish to have more children could simply donate their eggs. This feeds into the previous argument that the embryos outside a uterus would then not survive if not utilized for research.

As for gene manipulation, I wouldn't be against it either. Note that my examples that I'm about to give are under the assumption that we have full understanding of the outcomes of our genome and gene manipulation:

> If you or your partner have a history of trisomy 21 (Down Syndrome), you could select embryos that do not carry this genetic defect. The same can be said for other genetic non-disjuctional disorders (Klienfelter's Syndrome, Turner's Syndrome). This is practiced now for IVF mothers.
> If you and your partner have athletic lifestyles, and want your children to be active and healthy, why not select genes that allow such possibilities?
Or artistic genes?
Or genes that make one more intelligent?

And this doesn't even have to be about having children. What about modifying genes for crop yields? Make larger fruits and vegetables, meats, mold growth for dairy products? I don't see why not.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 23, 2013, 02:04:30 PM
Correct. In fact some 90% of our genome (stats may be outdated, as im using a 2009 Cell bio textbook) is unused.
The unused portions of the genome are made up of introns (repetitive sequences not used, only for hindering mutations), Alu insert genes (non-useful sequences), and those dormant genes you mentioned. The dormant genes could be activated by some mechanism, though complex. Would require a heavy genetic engineering layout of activator proteins and sequences, as these genes are dormant for a reason.
 

Personally for Stem Cell research I'm for it. Here are my reasons:

> Totipotent cells have the possibility to restore neuron loss in damaged retinal layers or the eye, restore spinal cord mobility, and restore neuron loss with those suffering from Alzheimer's.
> Totipotent cells could potentially regenerate new organs that wont be rejected by the host, such as heart transplants, kidney transplants, or pancreatic cells.
> It has already been shown that corded blood cells (pluripotent cells that have slightly differentiated into circulatory system cells found in the umbilical cord at birth) can be used for bone marrow transplants in Leukemia patients.
> The embryos do not have nerve endings, so they cannot feel pain when "destroyed" (note my quotes around word)
> Without implantation into a uterus, the embryo would not survive if it were not utilized for research, but simply thrown out.
> The embryos can only be obtained by women donating their eggs for the research. Couples that do not wish to have more children could simply donate their eggs. This feeds into the previous argument that the embryos outside a uterus would then not survive if not utilized for research.

As for gene manipulation, I wouldn't be against it either. Note that my examples that I'm about to give are under the assumption that we have full understanding of the outcomes of our genome and gene manipulation:

> If you or your partner have a history of trisomy 21 (Down Syndrome), you could select embryos that do not carry this genetic defect. The same can be said for other genetic non-disjuctional disorders (Klienfelter's Syndrome, Turner's Syndrome). This is practiced now for IVF mothers.
> If you and your partner have athletic lifestyles, and want your children to be active and healthy, why not select genes that allow such possibilities?
Or artistic genes?
Or genes that make one more intelligent?

And this doesn't even have to be about having children. What about modifying genes for crop yields? Make larger fruits and vegetables, meats, mold growth for dairy products? I don't see why not.

ever see the movie gadica? go watch it you will love it ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 23, 2013, 03:19:59 PM
As I'm not an expert in Embryonic Stem Cell Research and am only someone that has studied a moderate bit about it, I'll use the following report from someone that I respect in his honesty and expertise in the Medical research field.

Ten Problems with Embryonic Stem Cell Research
by Kelly Hollowell, Ph.D.

Embryonic stem cells are the basic building blocks for some 260 types of cells in the body and can become anything: heart, muscle, brain, skin, blood. Researchers hope that by guiding stem cells in the laboratory into specific cell types, they can be used to treat diabetes, Parkinson's disease, heart disease, or other disorders. The primary clinical source is the aborted fetus and unused embryos currently housed in frozen storage at IVF facilities. A developed stem cell line comes from a single embryo, becoming a colony of cells that reproduces indefinitely. Consider now the following ten problems with Embryonic Stem Cell Research (ESCR).

1. The issue of who or what

As the nation sits embroiled over the battle of where to draw the line on ESCR, the real issue that truly divides us is whether embryonic stems represent a who or a what. In other words, are we talking about people or property?

Since Roe v. Wade we have not been willing or able as a nation to address the issue. As a result, those who oppose ESCR and those who support it will never reach an acceptable point of compromise. Still, in the midst of the flurry of all this biotechnology and all the problems it presents, there is some very good news that has been overlooked by almost everyone. Ready? Cloning proves scientifically that life begins at conception—a position to which the author and most Christians philosophically already adhere.

Additionally, the insights provided by cloning technology destroy the scientific and legal basis of distinguishing a preembryo from an embryo, the popular distinction made at 14 days after conception. This is significant because this distinction determines the handling and treatment of human life less than 14 days old, which is so basic to all ESCR.

In short, our understanding of embryonic development as provided by cloning technology could force not only those who participate in ESCR specifically, but also those who participate in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures generally, to recognize there is no real preembryo—embryo distinction and that all human life begins at conception. Therefore, as a nation, we should rightly adjust the moral and legal treatment and status of all embryos to people not property from the point of conception.

2. The deliberate misuse of terminology in defining stem cells

Proponents of ESCR often use the term pluripotent. This word intends to imply that the ESC cannot make or reform the outer layer of the embryo called the trophoblast. The trophoblast is required for implantation of the embryo into the uterus. This is a distinction used by proponents of ESCR to imply a fully formed implantable embryo cannot and does not reform after the original embryo is sacrificed. This is significant because to isolate the stem cells, scientists peel away the trophoblast or skin of the embryo much like the peel of an orange. They then discharge the contents of the embryo into a petri dish.

At this stage of development, the stem cells that comprise almost the entire inner body of the early embryo look and function very similar to one another. Once put into the petri dish, the un-programmed cells can be manipulated to multiply and divide endlessly into specific cell types. The question regarding use of the term pluripotent is whether stem cells emptied into the petri dish can reform the trophoblast creating an implantable embryo of the originally sacrificed embryo?

The uncomfortable truth is, James Thomson, who led the effort that first isolated and grew embryonic stem cells in the laboratory says the trophoblast can reform under certain circumstances. That means even after months of continuous proliferation of the cells, implantable cloned human beings of the original embryo might be forming as the stem cells are grown in petri dishes. Therefore, use of the term pluripotent is scientifically inaccurate and deliberately misleading.

3. ESCR is related to human cloning

Understanding how ESCR and human cloning relate requires delineation between the two forms of human cloning: reproductive and therapeutic.

Reproductive cloning creates a later born twin from a single cell of another person by transplanting the DNA of the adult cell into a human egg whose nucleus has been removed. This process is somatic cell nuclear transfer. In this procedure, the resulting embryo is implanted in a woman and carried to birth. Proponents say that reproductive cloning is a logical extension of infertility treatments, hence the intimate link to IVF procedures.

By contrast, therapeutic cloning occurs when an adult undergoes a cloning procedure to duplicate his own cells in order to stave off personal disease, illness or the effects from sudden and serious injury. This procedure also begins by creating a clone of the adult through somatic cell transfer. In therapeutic cloning however, the embryos are allowed to live up to 14 days, at which time their trophoblasts are removed, as in standard ESCR, to harvest the highly prized stem cells for the donor's treatment.

In summary, therapeutic cloning begins with the same procedure as reproductive cloning. The goal of reproductive cloning is to produce a baby. The goal of therapeutic cloning is to produce embryonic stem cells for research and or treatment.

Additionally, whenever embryonic stem cell research results in the spontaneous reformation of the trophoblast around other stem cells, a fully implantable cloned life of the originally sacrificed embryo is created, however temporarily.

4. The current status of ESCR in the U.S. is unsettled at best

President Bush announced on August 9, 2001, that federal funds would not be used for ESCR that result in the future destruction of embryos. They can, however, be used to conduct research on the 64 stem cell lines that currently exist because "the life-and-death decision has already been made." However, scientists who work with some of these cells say many of the 64 lines are not yet developed and some may never pan out. Some researchers are uncertain about the quality of the cells and wonder if the limited number is enough. Proponents of this research are now focused on gaining more ground by passing legislation in Congress.

5. There is law that could apply to ESCR

Originally attached to the 1995 Health and Human Services (HHS) appropriations bill, the "lemoney Amendment" has prohibited federal funding of "any research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death." Unfortunately, there are no laws to protect preembryos (embryos under 14 days old) or that prohibit private individuals, research firms, or pharmaceutical companies from forming, manipulating, or destroying stem cells, human clones, or embryos.

6. Polls show that the American people do not approve using public money to destroy human embryos in medical research

7. ESCR puts us on the road to growing humans for body parts

The un-programmed cells of an early embryo are derailed from their natural course of development and coaxed through chemical manipulation to become very specific tissue types that will be used to treat the unhealthy or diseased tissue of those already born. Opponents of funding ESCR have argued vehemently against this stark utilitarian treatment of human life, unfortunately with little effect.

Regarding the justification that the embryos "left over" in IVF clinics (reportedly >300,000 in the US alone) will simply be discarded anyway, reflects a chilling absence of moral conscience. We do not consider it appropriate to take organs from dying patients or prisoners on death row before they have died in order to increase someone else's chances for healing or cure. Neither, then, should we consider any embryos "spare" so that we may destroy them for their stem cells.

How far down this road have we already come? Consider the story of Adam and Molly Nash. Molly was diagnosed with Fanconi anemiaa hereditary and always fatal disease. Doctors determined that the best hope for Molly was a cell transplant from a relative whose cells matched Molly's, but without anemia. So Molly's parents produced fifteen embryos by IVF, only one of which had the right genetic material. It was implanted in Mrs. Nash who gave birth to Adam. Adam's stem cells were taken from his umbilical cord and implanted in his sister. Despite all the success of the treatment and the medical justification, the fact remains that Adam was conceived, not just to be a son, but a medical treatment. Adam was a means valuable only insofar as he carried the right genetic material. If he hadn't, he would have been rejected like the other fourteen discarded embryos. The undeniable conclusion is that we are growing humans for body parts.

8. Contemporary moral issues often follow the flow of money

Stem cell research and human cloning are about transforming the mystery and majesty of life into a mere malleable and marketable commodity. In the short term, this is big business and offers great fame and fortune to the pioneers and biotech companies who master their secrets and harness the power of life through ESCR.

9. ESCR currently has major disadvantages

The promises of ESCR are right now nothing more than hoped for possibilities. Successful clinical trials for people are years away at best. Why? The reality is that the scientific evidence so far does not support public statements.

First, one minor complication is that use of human embryonic stem cells requires lifelong use of drugs to prevent rejection of the tissue. Second, another more serious disadvantage is that using embryonic stem cells can produce tumors from rapid growth when injected into adult patients. A third disadvantage reported in the March 8, 2001, New England Journal of Medicine was of tragic side effects from an experiment involving the insertion of fetal brain cells into the brains of Parkinson's disease patients. Results included uncontrollable movements: writhing, twisting, head jerking, arm-flailing, and constant chewing. Fourth, a recent report in the Journal Science reported that mice cloned from ESC were genetically defective. If human ESC are also genetically unstable, that could materially compromise efforts to transform cells extracted from embryos into successful medical therapies. Finally, the research may be hampered because many of the existing stem cell lines were grown with the necessary help of mouse cells. If any of this research is to turn into treatments, it will need approval from the FDA, which requires special safeguards to prevent transmission of animal diseases to people. It is unclear how many of these cell lines were developed with the safeguards in place. This leads to a host of problems related to transgenic issues.

10. The Success and Promise of Adult Stem Cell Research

In all fairness, adult stem cells have restricted differentiation potential and do not proliferate as well as ESC. On the other hand, while ESCR yields, at best, meager results, and has only far distant possibilities of successful clinical applications, current clinical applications of adult stem cells are abundant! They include treatments for the following: corneal restoration, brain tumors, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, liver disease, leukemia, lupus, arthritis, and heart disease. Thousands of patients are treated and cured using adult stem cells. Alternative sources for adult stem cells include: placenta, cord blood, bone marrow organ donors, and possibly fat cells.

For these ten reasons my conclusion is that more dollars should be invested in adult stem cell research and the macabre research associated with ESCR should be abandoned entirely.

* Dr. Hollowell has a Ph.D. in Molecular and Cellular Pharmacology.

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on August 24, 2013, 01:44:52 AM
As I'm not an expert in Embryonic Stem Cell Research and am only someone that has studied a moderate bit about it, I'll use the following report from someone that I respect in his honesty and expertise in the Medical research field.
True. I will treat this excerpt as his professional scientific opinion. However, as in any scholarly or academic work, I still can challenge the findings. I'm saying this so you don't think I am claiming "This PH.D. holder has no idea what he's talking about." I will go paragraph by paragraph and challenge his findings. Most of my information i will use comes from the knowledge I gained from my Biomedical Ethics course taught by a physician. If I missed some paragraphs it means I did not find anything I needed to discuss.

1. The issue of who or what
Cloning proves scientifically that life begins at conception—a position to which the author and most Christians philosophically already adhere.
Additionally, the insights provided by cloning technology destroy the scientific and legal basis of distinguishing a preembryo from an embryo, the popular distinction made at 14 days after conception. This is significant because this distinction determines the handling and treatment of human life less than 14 days old, which is so basic to all ESCR.
In short, our understanding of embryonic development as provided by cloning technology could force not only those who participate in ESCR specifically, but also those who participate in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures generally, to recognize there is no real preembryo—embryo distinction and that all human life begins at conception.
I personally disagree that cloning scientifically proves that life begins at conception. Clones grow in the same manner as normal embryos: they must develop within the uterus by a surrogate mother. Can we really say that life begins at conception? The idea of life at conception assumes that the sperm and egg have fused to form a zygote. But then why cant we say sperm and eggs are "life"? Because they can't "create life" on their own? But then that would play into my previous argument that an embryo cannot survive and "be a life" outside the uterus.
As to the IVF suggestion, a new definition of preembryo would mean that the collection of fertilized eggs would have to be implanted into the mother since letting them die would be considered killing life. In an IVF procedure, as many as 20-30 eggs will be recovered from the ovaries and fertilized to find the perfect zygote. It wouldn't even be feasible to implant some 30 zygotes into a mother, not to mention irrational.

2. The deliberate misuse of terminology in defining stem cells

Proponents of ESCR often use the term pluripotent. This word intends to imply that the ESC cannot make or reform the outer layer of the embryo called the trophoblast. The trophoblast is required for implantation of the embryo into the uterus. This is a distinction used by proponents of ESCR to imply a fully formed implantable embryo cannot and does not reform after the original embryo is sacrificed. This is significant because to isolate the stem cells, scientists peel away the trophoblast or skin of the embryo much like the peel of an orange. They then discharge the contents of the embryo into a petri dish.
At this stage of development, the stem cells that comprise almost the entire inner body of the early embryo look and function very similar to one another. Once put into the petri dish, the un-programmed cells can be manipulated to multiply and divide endlessly into specific cell types.
The uncomfortable truth is, James Thomson, who led the effort that first isolated and grew embryonic stem cells in the laboratory says the trophoblast can reform under certain circumstances. That means even after months of continuous proliferation of the cells, implantable cloned human beings of the original embryo might be forming as the stem cells are grown in petri dishes.
The correct term for stem cells is Totipotent. This means the cells can differentiate into an entire organism. The trophoblast will form the Placenta in a developing fetus. The problem I have with James Thomson's findings is that only under certain circumstances can the trophoblast be regenerated. Therefore, the rest of the embryo was doomed to die anyway without the necessary placenta to obtain nutrients. So if this is true, then the regeneration of the trophoblast is nothing more than putting someone who's 100% certain is about to die on life support. Sure it saves the person and they are still living, but without the human intervention they would have died regardless. I fee the same for the regeneration findings, that just because it can be done doesn't mean it hurts the proponent's arguments.

4. The current status of ESCR in the U.S. is unsettled at best
President Bush announced on August 9, 2001, that federal funds would not be used for ESCR that result in the future destruction of embryos. They can, however, be used to conduct research on the 64 stem cell lines that currently exist because "the life-and-death decision has already been made." However, scientists who work with some of these cells say many of the 64 lines are not yet developed and some may never pan out. Some researchers are uncertain about the quality of the cells and wonder if the limited number is enough. Proponents of this research are now focused on gaining more ground by passing legislation in Congress.
I feel that a lack of funding for the stem cell research does not mean that the research should not be done. Perhaps the stem cell lines are not of high quality after consistent testing and generation of tissue. Perhaps the 64 are not as good of a batch as is needed. I know personally working in an Alzheimer's lab with brain tissue not all of the brains we receive for study come out stained correctly or are damaged from shipment. This is a fact of doing research in general, that not everything will be perfect. But a key difference between my research and stem cell research is that I will handle 300 new neurons every single study. Now imagine every scientist working on this small sample of 64 total batches of cells. To me this would raise alarms, as now all your findings must come from a small source. My point was that the cell lines may be exhausted, so why say this is evidence to not conduct the research?

6. Polls show that the American people do not approve using public money to destroy human embryos in medical research
Without actual numbers, this statement could mean a couple of things. The data could have a 51% to 49% split, which would have reason to believe people sit on the fence. Or if this poll could have been tracked overtime, so we cannot know if people's minds are changing.
For example, if over three years they polled citizens the numbers could look like this:
70% No to 30% Yes in 2011
60% No to 40% Yes in 2012
55% No to 45% Yes in 2013
My example would show despite the consistent majority say No, the yes category is progressively increasing over time. Without any data we cannot be sure what the statement "the American people do not approve using public money" actually means.
Also I could say there may have been bias in the study. If the survey was "using public money to destroy human embryos", then of course that sounds horrific. But even if the correct terminology of "Totipotent cells used for Alzheimer's, neurological, and pancreatic research", the average American would not know what it is. So a possible lack of knowledge could be a bias.

7. ESCR puts us on the road to growing humans for body parts
Regarding the justification that the embryos "left over" in IVF clinics (reportedly >300,000 in the US alone) will simply be discarded anyway, reflects a chilling absence of moral conscience. We do not consider it appropriate to take organs from dying patients or prisoners on death row before they have died in order to increase someone else's chances for healing or cure. Neither, then, should we consider any embryos "spare" so that we may destroy them for their stem cells.
How far down this road have we already come? Consider the story of Adam and Molly Nash. Molly was diagnosed with Fanconi anemiaa hereditary and always fatal disease. Doctors determined that the best hope for Molly was a cell transplant from a relative whose cells matched Molly's, but without anemia. So Molly's parents produced fifteen embryos by IVF, only one of which had the right genetic material. It was implanted in Mrs. Nash who gave birth to Adam. Adam's stem cells were taken from his umbilical cord and implanted in his sister. Despite all the success of the treatment and the medical justification, the fact remains that Adam was conceived, not just to be a son, but a medical treatment. Adam was a means valuable only insofar as he carried the right genetic material. If he hadn't, he would have been rejected like the other fourteen discarded embryos. The undeniable conclusion is that we are growing humans for body parts.
I personally believe it's not a "lack of morals" to utilize embryos leftover in storehouses that will degrade and go to waste. The statement that we do not harvest organs from dying patients is actually incorrect. Anencephaly is a physical disorder where the fetus develops improperly and the top of the cerebral cortex is missing, or even the entire cerebrum. The result is the baby literally missing the top of its head. Newborns with this disfigurement live up to a week at best, sometimes three to four. They are in pain the entire time. The organs of the newborn can be donated to potentially save the life of another newborn baby, but the organs must be harvested in a grey time period in which the anencephalic baby is still "alive".
I would be okay with having prisoners harvested of their organs.
This Adam and Molly Nash story is misleading. It makes it play out that Adam was some "body part factory" which is not true at all. I remember watching the interview of them on TV a while ago (sorry have no link to it). Adam told the interviewers that he was glad he was able to save his sister's life. These children shouldn't be looked down upon, but cared for and treated as any other child.

8. Contemporary moral issues often follow the flow of money
Saying that stem cell researchers are "only in it for the money and want fame and glory" is like saying we should not fund cancer research because the scientists are only in it to become famous and fill their wallets from drug companies. Self interest is the name of the game no matter how you look at it.

9. ESCR currently has major disadvantages
First, one minor complication is that use of human embryonic stem cells requires lifelong use of drugs to prevent rejection of the tissue. Second, another more serious disadvantage is that using embryonic stem cells can produce tumors from rapid growth when injected into adult patients. A third disadvantage reported in the March 8, 2001, New England Journal of Medicine was of tragic side effects from an experiment involving the insertion of fetal brain cells into the brains of Parkinson's disease patients. Results included uncontrollable movements: writhing, twisting, head jerking, arm-flailing, and constant chewing. Fourth, a recent report in the Journal Science reported that mice cloned from ESC were genetically defective. If human ESC are also genetically unstable, that could materially compromise efforts to transform cells extracted from embryos into successful medical therapies. Finally, the research may be hampered because many of the existing stem cell lines were grown with the necessary help of mouse cells. If any of this research is to turn into treatments, it will need approval from the FDA, which requires special safeguards to prevent transmission of animal diseases to people. It is unclear how many of these cell lines were developed with the safeguards in place. This leads to a host of problems related to transgenic issues.
This supports my argument that more research needs to be done. Research is still needed to stop transmission of animal diseases to humans and medical therapy of not rejecting the organ. Though I've heard countless times that there would be no rejection of the organ if the stem cells are grown from your own cell line, since it would be your own DNA. However, this excerpt may be referring to organs grown from other people's stem cells. But if this is true, then this isn't a fact at all because people who get heart, liver, and kidney transplants now have to take medication to not reject the organ.
Also the fact that cloned mice were used as an example to me is not as concrete as it seems. It has already been shown in cloning technology that cloned mammals have on average more genetic defects and for an unknown reason age very rapidly. So of course cloned mice will show odd changes with the stem cells.

10. The Success and Promise of Adult Stem Cell Research
In all fairness, adult stem cells have restricted differentiation potential and do not proliferate as well as ESC. On the other hand, while ESCR yields, at best, meager results, and has only far distant possibilities of successful clinical applications, current clinical applications of adult stem cells are abundant! They include treatments for the following: corneal restoration, brain tumors, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, liver disease, leukemia, lupus, arthritis, and heart disease. Thousands of patients are treated and cured using adult stem cells. Alternative sources for adult stem cells include: placenta, cord blood, bone marrow organ donors, and possibly fat cells.
* Dr. Hollowell has a Ph.D. in Molecular and Cellular Pharmacology.
True. Adult cells do have abundance of potential and do not result in the destruction of embryos, but rather the destruction of merely skin tissue or a blood sample. However adult cells cannot replace kidneys in dialysis patients, cannot replace a pancreas in diabetic patients, cannot spinal cord injuries in paralysis patients. The possibilities of stem cells to me can solve these problems.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 26, 2013, 03:26:52 PM
I wonder if they bothered to mention to you in that 1 Ethics class that Embryonic Stem cells have yet to treat or cure a single thing yet even after years of foreign and domestic research...Adult Stem Cells are currently treating many things and have been a number of years.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Stormthorn on August 30, 2013, 04:55:52 AM
Quote
Additionally, the insights provided by cloning technology destroy the scientific and legal basis of distinguishing a preembryo from an embryo, the popular distinction made at 14 days after conception. This is significant because this distinction determines the handling and treatment of human life less than 14 days old, which is so basic to all ESCR.

What an utterly stupid statement. Obviously even an unfertilized egg is both alive and human tissue. Heck, a single cell from a cheek swab is alive, human, and has a full set of chromosomes. We dont try to pretend it deserves full legal status. Arguing that we should protect life from the moment of conception because it is alive and has chromosomes is stupid.

The real problem with human genetic research of all kinds actually is the other points about organ harvesting and genetic exploitation by corporations, particularly when coupled with America and its love of "free market" ideals.

In a free market a corporation could buy the genetic rights to an individual and then clone them en masse for organ harvesting or research if they wanted. And because politicos tend to hate things like science (i would expect to hear something like "God didnt give clones souls so they arnt people") and love things like money, getting this sort of thing made legal might not even be too hard for major megacorps.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 30, 2013, 07:29:10 AM
What an utterly stupid statement.
In this adult forum, these kinds of statements must stop, from everybody. Use reason, not aggression.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 30, 2013, 07:57:47 AM
The idea of life at conception assumes that the sperm and egg have fused to form a zygote. But then why cant we say sperm and eggs are "life"? Because they can't "create life" on their own?
IMO sperm and eggs cannot be said to be a life. They do not have the potential to grow into an organism by themselves. I think nature agree's with me ;) it has no qualms about sacrificing countless sperm and eggs in an effort to create one zygote, and when that is created, nature does everything it can to protect it and nourish it to life. At least for the higher mammals.

But then that would play into my previous argument that an embryo cannot survive and "be a life" outside the uterus.
IMO the uterus cannot be used in this argument because it is not part of the same organism. Otherwise this argument could be extended to include all life forms that depend on others for survival, which is practically every life form, even extended to things like organic food.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 30, 2013, 08:00:04 AM
What an utterly stupid statement. Obviously even an unfertilized egg is both alive and human tissue. Heck, a single cell from a cheek swab is alive, human, and has a full set of chromosomes. We dont try to pretend it deserves full legal status. Arguing that we should protect life from the moment of conception because it is alive and has chromosomes is stupid.
Why is it stupid? We are talking about zygotes here, which can grow into the full organism naturally. No other cells can do that afaik.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 30, 2013, 08:04:31 AM
Cloning proves scientifically that life begins at conception—a position to which the author and most Christians philosophically already adhere.

Why would anybody care what position Christians adhere when it comes to philosophy or science?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: TDi Saint on August 30, 2013, 08:28:34 AM
My view on stem cell research:
Someone earlier (think it was DB) said that more research should be done into adult stem cells instead as they are already being used as treatment methods. The way I see it is that more should be done into stem cells from the zygote due to the simple fact that they are able to differentiate much better than the adult equivalent.

The fact that they aren't treating anything afaik yet is because not enough research has been done but good progress is being made. I read on the news a few days ago that scientists have manged to take stem cells and use them in such a way that they have formed what is considered the early stages of the brain which included the early stages of a cerebrum and a retina.

Because of this I feel that from my scientific point of view we should continue researching stem cells.

From a moral point of view however things get tricky, especially when you raise the question of when  the zygote can be considered a human being so this is where I'm on the fence as to whether its the right thing to do or not. I also feel research will continue to be made into the area regardless of what the masses think from both a moral and scientific view.

Also as for the living argument, I'd consider most cells as alive, they require everything that any other organism needs to survive and they have the ability, with the exception of haploid cells, to reproduce.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 30, 2013, 11:40:43 AM
What an utterly stupid statement. Obviously even an unfertilized egg is both alive and human tissue. Heck, a single cell from a cheek swab is alive, human, and has a full set of chromosomes. We dont try to pretend it deserves full legal status. Arguing that we should protect life from the moment of conception because it is alive and has chromosomes is stupid.

The real problem with human genetic research of all kinds actually is the other points about organ harvesting and genetic exploitation by corporations, particularly when coupled with America and its love of "free market" ideals.

In a free market a corporation could buy the genetic rights to an individual and then clone them en masse for organ harvesting or research if they wanted. And because politicos tend to hate things like science (i would expect to hear something like "God didnt give clones souls so they arnt people") and love things like money, getting this sort of thing made legal might not even be too hard for major megacorps.

dont hate on just amarica, theres horror storys in china of people goign into the hospital and being put under and waking up miuns one kidney.

then just recinlty also in china, a 6 year old boy was kidnaped, taken to a field and had his eyes removed with otu anastptic, and had the cornias removed form those eyes and then had the perpatrator levae the boy and his eys there to rot in a field.

so yea amrica is not perfect, btu dont pretend worse things dont go on else wear.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 30, 2013, 11:42:21 AM
IMO sperm and eggs cannot be said to be a life. They do not have the potential to grow into an organism by themselves. I think nature agree's with me ;) it has no qualms about sacrificing countless sperm and eggs in an effort to create one zygote, and when that is created, nature does everything it can to protect it and nourish it to life. At least for the higher mammals.
IMO the uterus cannot be used in this argument because it is not part of the same organism. Otherwise this argument could be extended to include all life forms that depend on others for survival, which is practically every life form, even extended to things like organic food.

for your life depnding thing, then i have to ask when does life start then? a child can not live on its on for many years, so is that child not a life?

edlery as they get older require constint care to stay alive, are they no longer a life?

mentaly ill who can not care for them selfs, are they nto a life?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 30, 2013, 03:00:37 PM
Why would anybody care what position Christians adhere when it comes to philosophy or science?

Most of the US is religious, despite what the media likes to purport.
take this 2007 break down in the population per the US Survey:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0c/Religions_of_the_United_States.png)

As you can see most Americans might care.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 30, 2013, 03:03:22 PM
Most of the US is religious, despite what the media likes to purport.
take this 2007 break down in the population per the US Survey:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0c/Religions_of_the_United_States.png)

As you can see most Americans might care.

i'm shocked both jews and muslum is that low, budisht makes sense as its gneeraly more asian, and there a veyr low pertince of us populace
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 30, 2013, 03:17:40 PM
i'm shocked both jews and muslum is that low, budisht makes sense as its gneeraly more asian, and there a veyr low pertince of us populace

The US is a very religious country. It always has been and despite the best efforts of those that that try to influence the masses that religion is not "cool" or "hip" or is "stupid", there is only about 16% of the population that is not religious. Probably less than that actually as there is probably still a good 1 to 2 percent that believes in some power other than a survey defined religion.. Tree worship or Wickens... everything else that isn't counted on the survey..
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 30, 2013, 05:54:30 PM
The US is a very religious country. It always has been and despite the best efforts of those that that try to influence the masses that religion is not "cool" or "hip" or is "stupid", there is only about 16% of the population that is not religious. Probably less than that actually as there is probably still a good 1 to 2 percent that believes in some power other than a survey defined religion.. Tree worship or Wickens... everything else that isn't counted on the survey..

or even just the poeple who said it to be "cool" ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 30, 2013, 09:16:15 PM
Most of the US is religious, despite what the media likes to purport.
take this 2007 break down in the population per the US Survey:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0c/Religions_of_the_United_States.png)

As you can see most Americans might care.
That's not quite what I meant. I meant, how can anybody take a Christians opinion on science or philosophy seriously. The very foundation of a Christians belief system is about as unscientific as it gets.

Also, regarding the numbers, these surveys are typically inaccurate. Most people just say they are Christians, but they don't go to Church every Sunday, they don't read the Bible and if they were asked the hard questions on their faith, they typically would not be able to answer them properly.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 30, 2013, 09:19:33 PM
for your life depnding thing, then i have to ask when does life start then? a child can not live on its on for many years, so is that child not a life?

edlery as they get older require constint care to stay alive, are they no longer a life?

mentaly ill who can not care for them selfs, are they nto a life?
I think you got my point around the wrong way. I believe a dependence should not be considered when trying to determine if something is a life? A uterus' function in growing the embryo is really just a warm house with a well stocked pantry is it not?

Yes, of course individual cells are 'alive', but are they a 'life'? I don't think so imo. A life is the complete organism (in whatever stage of development it's currently in), not a part of it, which may be alive, but cannot be considered as the entire organism.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 30, 2013, 09:22:31 PM
That's not quite what I meant. I meant, how can anybody take a Christians opinion on science or philosophy seriously. The very foundation of a Christians belief system is about as unscientific as it gets.

Also, regarding the numbers, these surveys are typically inaccurate. Most people just say they are Christians, but they don't go to Church every Sunday, they don't read the Bible and if they were asked the hard questions on their faith, they typically would not be able to answer them properly.

You obviously share in the bias... We'll have to agree to disagree on this matter as I won't convince you and you won't convince me... I should have been more clear on the chart. That is the US Census data chart from 2007 on the belief breakup of Americans.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 30, 2013, 09:22:54 PM
I think you got my point around the wrong way. I believe a dependence should not be considered when trying to determine if something is a life? A uterus is really just a warm house with a well stocked pantry is it not?

Yes, of course individual cells are 'alive', but are they a 'life'. I don't think so imo. A life is the complete organism (in what ever stage of development is currently is), not a part of it, which may be alive, but cannot be considered as the entire organism.

kk wasint trying to rag on you ^_^, i am getting it now, but my next question would be when is an unborn child alive then? with its first heart beat? when it comes out? if its when it comes otu what about when a woman goes ot abort and the child comes out alive?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 30, 2013, 09:27:08 PM
kk wasint trying to rag on you ^_^, i am getting it now, but my next question would be when is an unborn child alive then? with its first heart beat? when it comes out? if its when it comes otu what about when a woman goes ot abort and the child comes out alive?

For the Catholics of the world, Life begins at conception. I personally believe it occurs at fertilization... other opinions will vary..
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 30, 2013, 09:28:32 PM
You obviously share in the bias...
Whats the bias?

I think whether it's a Census or Survey wouldn't make a difference in this case.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 30, 2013, 09:31:28 PM
For the Catholics of the world, Life begins at conception. I personally believe it occurs at fertilization... other opinions will vary..
I thought they were the same thing, unless Christians think of conception as some time other than fertilization?
I also agree, fertilization is when the life begins. That is the point at which it starts growing.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 30, 2013, 09:39:04 PM
Whats the bias?

I think whether it's a Census or Survey wouldn't make a difference in this case.

I have no desire to argue over Christianity and Science. You are obviously of the opinion that they are mutually exclusive. I am not.
 The US Census is performed by the government and is by which everything is decided.. funding, taxes, birthrates, deathrates, race, age demographics, figures for well.. everything including religious affiliation. It's as accurate as is possible and is a big undertaking every so many years on a national scale. www.census.gov

I'll also provide this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_thinkers_in_science
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 30, 2013, 09:44:08 PM
I thought they were the same thing, unless Christians think of conception as some time other than fertilization?
I also agree, fertilization is when the life begins. That is the point at which it starts growing.

Not the same at all.. Catholics believe that every egg and sperm are precious life and must not be wasted. One of their founding principles behind not believing in contraception as it were. To them the very exit of sperm is the beginnings of life, well before fertilization occurs.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 30, 2013, 10:08:34 PM
I have no desire to argue over Christianity and Science. You are obviously of the opinion that they are mutually exclusive. I am not.
 The US Census is performed by the government and is by which everything is decided.. funding, taxes, birthrates, deathrates, race, age demographics, figures for well.. everything including religious affiliation. It's as accurate as is possible and is a big undertaking every so many years on a national scale. www.census.gov

I'll also provide this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_thinkers_in_science
I understand the difference between the Census and a Survey. I still maintain for the question of one's faith, I don't believe people would answer differently.

I don't believe Christianity or faith in any mainstream religion is absolutely mutually exclusive to science, but I do believe they are on certain subjects, the origin of life being one of them. True Christians believe if they or their spouse gets pregnant, it is because God has bestowed this gift upon them, not simply because they had sex and the sperm successfully fertilized the egg. They understand the sex and fertilization was part of it, but they believe in the God part of it as well, which just throws any serious scientific basis out the window.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 30, 2013, 10:33:53 PM
I understand the difference between the Census and a Survey. I still maintain for the question of one's faith, I don't believe people would answer differently.

I don't believe Christianity or faith in any mainstream religion is absolutely mutually exclusive to science, but I do believe they are on certain subjects, the origin of life being one of them. True Christians believe if they or their spouse gets pregnant, it is because God has bestowed this gift upon them, not simply because they had sex and the sperm successfully fertilized the egg. They understand the sex and fertilization was part of it, but they believe in the God part of it as well, which just throws any serious scientific basis out the window.

True Christians believe? That's a bit of a loaded statement considering the number of divisions there are in just Christianity alone.. Starting with the big split of Catholic and Protestant it divides even further and resembles a never ending series of branches as it goes.. I'm sure each group would be steadfast in claiming themselves to be true Christians. But there again you make a statement that a "gift from God" portion of the event negates the scientific part; That one can't be "blessed" with a child as it's merely the result of fluid swapping. You seem to assume that being religious makes you somehow "stupid" and incapable of intellegent thought. I'll also leave you with a few thoughts on it from someone I think you'll know:

"I maintain that the cosmic religious feeling is the strongest and noblest motive for scientific research. Only those who realize the immense efforts and, above all, the devotion without which pioneer work in theoretical science cannot be achieved are able to grasp the strength of the emotion out of which alone such work, remote as it is from the immediate realities of life, can issue."

"During the last century, and part of the one before, it was widely held that there was an unreconcilable conflict between knowledge and belief. The opinion prevailed among advanced minds that it was time that belief should be replaced increasingly by knowledge; belief that did not itself rest on knowledge was superstition, and as such had to be opposed. According to this conception, the sole function of education was to open the way to thinking and knowing, and the school, as the outstanding organ for the people's education, must serve that end exclusively.

One will probably find but rarely, if at all, the rationalistic standpoint expressed in such crass form; for any sensible man would see at once how one-sided is such a statement of the position."

"Does there truly exist an insuperable contradiction between religion and science? Can religion be superseded by science? The answers to these questions have, for centuries, given rise to considerable dispute and, indeed, bitter fighting. Yet, in my own mind there can be no doubt that in both cases a dispassionate consideration can only lead to a negative answer. What complicates the solution, however, is the fact that while most people readily agree on what is meant by "science," they are likely to differ on the meaning of "religion."

As to science, we may well define it for our purpose as "methodical thinking directed toward finding regulative connections between our sensual experiences." Science, in the immediate, produces knowledge and, indirectly, means of action. It leads to methodical action if definite goals are set up in advance. For the function of setting up goals and passing statements of value transcends its domain. While it is true that science, to the extent of its grasp of causative connections, may reach important conclusions as to the compatibility and incompatibility of goals and evaluations, the independent and fundamental definitions regarding goals and values remain beyond science's reach.

As regards religion, on the other hand, one is generally agreed that it deals with goals and evaluations and, in general, with the emotional foundation of human thinking and acting, as far as these are not predetermined by the inalterable hereditary disposition of the human species. Religion is concerned with man's attitude toward nature at large, with the establishing of ideals for the individual and communal life, and with mutual human relationship. These ideals religion attempts to attain by exerting an educational influence on tradition and through the development and promulgation of certain easily accessible thoughts and narratives (epics and myths) which are apt to influence evaluation and action along the lines of the accepted ideals. "

all quotes from Albert Einstein.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 30, 2013, 10:45:08 PM
I'll modify my statement a wee bit.

I think there is no conflict between science and 'true' religion. My definition of true religion is an organization of symbols which open the mind and heart to mythological or metaphysical concepts which cannot be entirely understood, or expressed with thoughts or words alone.

Jesus did not walk on water, Heaven and Hell are not physical places, Angels and Demons are not physical beings, etc, etc, etc, they are all symbols of mythological concepts that cannot be expressed in words.

In their form as symbols, they are entirely valid and there is no conflict with physical science.

But modern religions like Christianity and Islam have perverted these symbols by claiming them to be literal. Jesus literally walked on water, angels are real beings etc, etc. This turns the religion into a lie, renders it false, and in this sense, cannot be compatible with science.

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on August 30, 2013, 10:48:35 PM
I'll modify my statement a wee bit.

I think there is no conflict between science and 'true' religion. My definition of true religion is an organization of symbols which open the mind and heart to mythological or metaphysical concepts which cannot be entirely understood, or expressed with thoughts or words alone.

Jesus did not walk on water, Heaven and Hell are not physical places, Angels and Demons are not physical beings, etc, etc, etc, they are all symbols of mythological concepts that cannot be expressed in words.

In their form as symbols, they are entirely valid and there is no conflict with physical science.

But modern religions like Christianity and Islam have perverted these symbols by claiming them to be literal. Jesus literally walked on water, angels are real beings etc, etc. This turns the religion into a lie, renders it false, and in this sense, cannot be compatible with science.

And I'm sure you have faith in that belief.:D
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on August 31, 2013, 04:37:26 AM
And I'm sure you have faith in that belief.:D
Not faith in the religious sense no. Faith in the life long work of men who understood mythology and religion far better than someone like Albert Einstein, yes. I think that's a different kind of faith, based on reason.

When I said True Christians, it wasn't intended to be loaded, just my way of differentiating those who truly believe and follow the faith, with those who write down they are Christian on a Census form, but that's about as far as it goes.

Christians are somehow stupid? No, clearly they are no different to anybody else on the intelligence scale. In fact my best friend who has helped me more in life than anybody else (apart from my parents) is a devout Catholic, and he is considerably more intelligent than me. No I do not believe Christians are somehow stupid.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on September 01, 2013, 12:11:27 PM
LADEE is launching in 5 days :D
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/nasas-ladee-rocket-mission-to-launch-friday-from-vas-eastern-shore/2013/08/31/01e4e90c-118d-11e3-85b6-d27422650fd5_story.html
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Stormthorn on September 01, 2013, 05:09:54 PM
i'm shocked both jews and muslum is that low, budisht makes sense as its gneeraly more asian, and there a veyr low pertince of us populace

We are not a jewish or muslim nation.

An orthodox Jew or ten might stand out in a crowd because of his/their attire, but to take that as evidence of a high level of judiasm is a form of self-imposed cognitive bias. Ten orthodox jews in a concert crowd pf guys dressed like cowboys of 50,000 will stick out like a sore thumb, but they still only represent .02% of the concert population. Humans tend to notice things that stand out and attribute more meaning or statistical weight to those things than reflects the reality.

I feel that while science should always have common sense morality in mind, religious opinions shouldnt be given the same weight.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 01, 2013, 05:15:01 PM
LADEE is launching in 5 days :D
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/nasas-ladee-rocket-mission-to-launch-friday-from-vas-eastern-shore/2013/08/31/01e4e90c-118d-11e3-85b6-d27422650fd5_story.html
The spacex new falcon 9 will be launching soon. new stage, new engine, new launch site and trying to land the first stage back on the ground.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 02, 2013, 05:48:56 AM
"Air Conditioning the Military Costs More Than NASA's Entire Budget" "the Department of Defense spends $20 billion air conditioning tents and temporary structures for the military. That's more than NASA's entire $19 billion annual budget.
this is why private company will one day beat American government in space
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 02, 2013, 05:25:12 PM
"Air Conditioning the Military Costs More Than NASA's Entire Budget" "the Department of Defense spends $20 billion air conditioning tents and temporary structures for the military. That's more than NASA's entire $19 billion annual budget.
this is why private company will one day beat American government in space

I remember dear leader (Obama) sai nasa's goal was no longer space exploration but instead to make muslums feel good about there contriuations to space......I think this happened some time shortly after his first election.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on September 02, 2013, 05:44:54 PM
I remember dear leader (Obama) sai nasa's goal was no longer space exploration but instead to make muslums feel good about there contriuations to space......I think this happened some time shortly after his first election.

It was cut in an effort to allow a privatization of space rocketry and technology. The United States government can't continue forever funding space exploration with the space shuttles, so now it will be a joint effort by private companies like Virgin Galactic and SpaceX, along with limited govt subsidies.

Though I think this was a move forward, because the progression of space technology will move faster now that multiple companies can compete for better rockets, more efficient fuel systems, etc.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 02, 2013, 06:39:16 PM
It was cut in an effort to allow a privatization of space rocketry and technology. The United States government can't continue forever funding space exploration with the space shuttles, so now it will be a joint effort by private companies like Virgin Galactic and SpaceX, along with limited govt subsidies.

Though I think this was a move forward, because the progression of space technology will move faster now that multiple companies can compete for better rockets, more efficient fuel systems, etc.
virgin galactic is a joke. in development for 10 year now and all that happens that a plane fly up until it's not able to go further then a tiny rocket fires.

Do you really think that is the reason it was cut? hell no. nasa has got SLS in development and a command pod. they spend billions on the constellation  in ture nasa style then it gets cancelled
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on September 03, 2013, 05:44:34 AM
You guys might want to have a look at the budget for other space agencies before you complain NASA has nearly 3 times more budget to the next best funded agency.

I apologise in advance for the source, I understand a lot of people don't like Wikipedia. Budgets at the bottom of the page.

Link- http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_space_agencies
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 03, 2013, 06:10:36 AM
I think we all know that china's budget is a lot more then 1.2 billion.
of course NASA is not spending there own money so they have no drive. They also spend billions on projects and abandon then.
Orion which has not even been made yet cost 320 times more then Spacex developing dragon.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/11354/spacex-spends-320-times-less-on-building-the-dragon-than-nasa-does-on-the-orion

SLS (space lanuch system) is not even new it uses the old shuttle boosters and the same O-ring that don't work well cold and hot climates. SLS engines are exactly the same as the shuttles.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on September 03, 2013, 06:19:48 AM
Yeah I imagine china's budget is a lot higher. But I doubt they are going to open up and tell anyone in a hurry. As for the future of space travel I do agree it will more than likely be in the hands of private companies such as space x.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 03, 2013, 11:42:53 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/09/03/on-giant-blue-alien-planet-it-rains-molten-glass/

"rains molten glass" :O!!!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Xalron on September 04, 2013, 10:01:46 AM
So if it were too cool down..... GLASS PLANET!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 04, 2013, 01:50:26 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/09/04/girls-suffer-second-degree-burns-from-fruit/?intcmp=obnetwork

:O!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 04, 2013, 05:15:21 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/09/04/girls-suffer-second-degree-burns-from-fruit/?intcmp=obnetwork

:O!!!!!!!
wrong trend?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 04, 2013, 05:40:00 PM
wrong trend?

not sure what you mean there??
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on September 04, 2013, 07:13:02 PM
not sure what you mean there??
He was saying wrong thread, which it isn't. Interesting article. I honestly don't know why they were playing with limes. It's kind of odd. At least I know not to roll around in limes and stand out in the sun now.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on September 06, 2013, 04:34:28 AM
A little something for you chaps to enjoy (:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZflIMBxyIak
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on September 06, 2013, 10:05:46 AM
A little something for you chaps to enjoy (:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZflIMBxyIak

Nice video.  :D
In an attempt to explain the first optical illusion thing, take a look at the link below. You will see how there are white gaps between the black squares, and it looks like grey circles appear in the corners of the black shapes. Yet when you look directly at the grey spots they go away?

http://daverowland.net/Rowland/images/Illusions/HermannGridIllusion.jpg (http://daverowland.net/Rowland/images/Illusions/HermannGridIllusion.jpg)

This is called the Herman Grid Illusion. What it happening is your photoreceptors in your eyes see the extreme contrasts between the black and the white, so your brain perceives a grey medium due to overstimulation by the black squares and under-stimulation by the white edges.
Ties into the video how we perceive "whole images", not the individual parts of our world.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on September 06, 2013, 10:31:16 PM
For those who care, the LADEE livestream. Launching in less than an hour!

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/ustream.html#.UiqPbz8phYE
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 10, 2013, 11:07:41 AM
For those who care, the LADEE livestream. Launching in less than an hour!

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/ustream.html#.UiqPbz8phYE
launched in the dark and very little to see.... shame
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on September 12, 2013, 05:25:59 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/12/tech/innovation/voyager-solar-system/

Well, that's the first man made object to leave the solar system.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 12, 2013, 05:36:38 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/12/tech/innovation/voyager-solar-system/

Well, that's the first man made object to leave the solar system.

a great feat for the human race. with it poeple can now learn about what space is really like outside our solor system, as nothign has ever made it into the deeper space.

will greatly help us in our learning how to make deep space vessels ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 13, 2013, 01:47:29 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/10/disney-researchers-create-mind-blowing-communication-device/

very cool stuff. its always fun to see what new tehcnolagy we will think of next ^_^

emagin now, much liek out anseters made paints on the walls of caves or wrote massive tablets of stone. we can soon make our worlds history on a small space that once you tuch it it beams into your mind.

with advances in this why is not thinkable that we could soon be able to navagate and hear certain parts of the story or look for things in it. such neat stuff ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 20, 2013, 02:35:22 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/19/scientists-very-very-confident-theyve-found-extraterrestrial-life-see-what-it-looks-like/

very wild stuffs ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on September 21, 2013, 02:29:27 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/19/scientists-very-very-confident-theyve-found-extraterrestrial-life-see-what-it-looks-like/

very wild stuffs ^_^
http://news.yahoo.com/alien-life-claim-far-convincing-scientists-163757104.html (http://news.yahoo.com/alien-life-claim-far-convincing-scientists-163757104.html)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 21, 2013, 07:38:24 PM
http://www.examiner.com/article/nasa-responds-to-latest-space-launch-system-criticism?cid=taboola_inbound
the cost of a single sls launch is more then the cost of what some company say a mars human colony would cost to build and maintain for a few years. and damn that amount of money and swallow all of nasa budget by doing two launch if you take the mean cost.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Kitty on September 23, 2013, 09:49:41 PM
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/who-wants-steamos,news-17588.html

SteamOS is official.

Opinions?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on September 24, 2013, 04:04:19 AM
After reading its going to be Linux based and that it maybe released in a console, I'm going to wait a while and see how it works out. Also....

 (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ no word of half life 3
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on September 24, 2013, 07:05:18 AM
After reading its going to be Linux based and that it maybe released in a console, I'm going to wait a while and see how it works out. Also....

 (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ no word of half life 3
As the link said, there are two more announcements coming. I'm waiting to hear them all before saying anything.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Kitty on September 24, 2013, 07:47:14 AM
After reading its going to be Linux based and that it maybe released in a console, I'm going to wait a while and see how it works out. Also....

 (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ no word of half life 3
The cool thing is it will be free, so if you are building a gaming PC that money you save on an OS is pretty nice ^_^

I am excited to test it out when it becomes available (provided I have internet) >.>
Will be interesting to see the performance differences between this and windows, Also interested in the install size.. I wonder how big it is? Shall be quite fun to mess with ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on September 24, 2013, 11:16:59 AM
The cool thing is it will be free, so if you are building a gaming PC that money you save on an OS is pretty nice ^_^

I am excited to test it out when it becomes available (provided I have internet) >.>
Will be interesting to see the performance differences between this and windows, Also interested in the install size.. I wonder how big it is? Shall be quite fun to mess with ^_^
Yeah been free is a Pro for sure, won't disagree with you there my only query is with it been on Linux. If more games companies decide to port there games to Linux which this OS could encourage great. But if they don't you port them....
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on September 24, 2013, 06:31:12 PM
Does it support DirectX?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Xalron on September 24, 2013, 10:05:25 PM
Does it support DirectX?

From what I understand, you have to have a plugin to use DirectX. This is just from some quick research, I have never used Linux.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Kitty on September 24, 2013, 10:14:09 PM
Does it support DirectX?
From memory, no linux does not.
But Wine a windows program emaluator does.
Hopefully game devs other than the few that have, will code for linux based systems, if linux games for steam os are also compatible with other linux OS's like ubuntu and mint... This could be a serious win for the linux community.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 24, 2013, 10:18:12 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/24/new-data-on-the-moon-might-change-what-scientists-know-about-earth/

da moon! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 25, 2013, 02:57:39 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/24/new-data-on-the-moon-might-change-what-scientists-know-about-earth/

da moon! ^_^
so we thought it was 4.56 million years old and now we think it is 4.45. i don't think  that is much of a different saying that we didn't really a lot of data to make the first guess.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 26, 2013, 02:35:54 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/09/26/new-prosthetic-man-controls-bionic-leg-thoughts/

go go super scince ^_^!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 26, 2013, 05:45:49 PM

I feel elon is getting a bit McRibly...

http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-accuses-blue-origin-of-blocking-spacex-2013-9

It quite an interesting read.

Best part
"If they do somehow show up in the next 5 years with a vehicle qualified to NASA’s human rating standards that can dock with the Space Station, which is what Pad 39A is meant to do, we will gladly accommodate their needs," writes Musk. "Frankly, I think we are more likely to discover unicorns dancing in the flame duct."


Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 27, 2013, 12:59:52 PM
Found this quite funny.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/09/26/chinese_building_orbital_lab_by_2023_to_make_space_medicine/

China is not allowed to use the iss ( this is because china's space ageny is run by it's military) and basically told to go away and bluid their own.

China is planning on bluid a space station and say that international astronauts are welcomed.

I thin to is to make everybody feel sorry for china.

Still I don't trust them.

Their military bluids a station to develop "space medicine" so that astronauts don't feel bad in space after long periods yet their longed manned mission lasted two weeks compared to candian, us, and Russian which have been in space 6 month at a time and a mission this year to spend a year by ESA
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 29, 2013, 11:41:06 AM
20 minute to lancuh of falcon 9 v1.1
watch live
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2013/09/live-watch-the-launch-of-the-spacex-falcon-9-rocket.html
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: MountainDewIt on September 29, 2013, 12:07:59 PM
I was watching the video. And then at T-1 the video jacked up and now I can't watch it -_-
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 29, 2013, 12:20:44 PM
I was watching the video. And then at T-1 the video jacked up and now I can't watch it -_-
how.. bad luck. it was a picture perfect launch and all went well.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on September 30, 2013, 01:34:26 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YDnGHaXdxw
interesting.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: demman32 on October 01, 2013, 10:41:52 PM
http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/1/4791354/samsung-rigging-benchmark-scores-galaxy-note-3

Samsung why

I knew about this earlier our convo went like

Demman: Pls no rigging 4 note 2
Samsung: We did wit S4 do
Demman: Samsung pls
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Kitty on October 03, 2013, 11:40:41 AM
http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/1/4791354/samsung-rigging-benchmark-scores-galaxy-note-3

Samsung why

I knew about this earlier our convo went like

Demman: Pls no rigging 4 note 2
Samsung: We did wit S4 do
Demman: Samsung pls

It gets worse :c

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/android-mobile-benchmark-cheating-inflation,24522.html
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 03, 2013, 08:59:59 PM
It gets worse :c

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/android-mobile-benchmark-cheating-inflation,24522.html

that reminds me of a while ago here in the states there was a big hopla over gas millage on cars and what they really got. i think it might have even been years ago. basickly car companys, ALL of them, were giving false esitimaitnes on gas millage, or doing silly things like littrly just having the engine block by its self and testing it lol ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Xalron on October 03, 2013, 09:41:17 PM
I can count to infinity :3
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Stormthorn on October 04, 2013, 12:35:36 AM
The soil of mars actually has a rather high water content.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dig deeper on October 04, 2013, 02:52:02 AM
I can count to infinity :3
infinity is not a number.

it's like saying gravity is yellow and taste like bananas
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Stormthorn on October 04, 2013, 11:55:24 PM
infinity is not a number.

it's like saying gravity is yellow and taste like bananas

With solipsism, anything is possible. I might even attribute my own thoughts another name and then respond to them as if they were a different person on a forum that exists only in my head. Because I can.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Xalron on October 05, 2013, 12:57:03 AM
infinity is not a number.

it's like saying gravity is yellow and taste like bananas
Ok i'm going to start now... 1->2
The Gravity was deliscus, thank you.



Counting is essentially saying you have 1 thing for each number, for example, {O O O} {1 2 3} I just counted to three using "O". Sense between 1 and 2 there is an endless amount of numbers possible, ( 1.123456-   1.234567-  1.345678- ad so on) I can count to infinity by simply saying 1-2 or Infinity.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on October 05, 2013, 02:28:12 PM
Reminds me of D.O.G from half life 2 and on a serious note this could be a serious advance in robotics. For a robot to mimic an animal and gallop is quite a feat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE3fmFTtP9g
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Xalron on October 10, 2013, 10:05:19 AM
I call dibs.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashgear.com%2Ftalos-real-iron-man-being-built-by-the-us-army-09300786%2F&ei=xLNWUoaQFJSCqQHPuoCICg&usg=AFQjCNHLOE6aSqTWksWKz-QiBQ357bDN5w&bvm=bv.53760139,d.aWM
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Kitty on October 12, 2013, 03:26:10 PM
Steam Controller Demonstration

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeAjkbNq4xI&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 21, 2013, 02:48:20 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/10/21/life-after-death-new-techniques-halt-dying-process/?intcmp=obnetwork

wild stuff, makes me think of the movie reanimator.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/10/18/good-night-sleep-cleans-out-gunk-in-brain-study-shows/?intcmp=obnetwork

once again the extream importance of sleep.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on December 13, 2013, 11:50:12 AM
http://youtu.be/IE-YBaYjbqY
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on December 13, 2013, 01:53:34 PM
http://youtu.be/IE-YBaYjbqY

awesome, tehcnolagy is soooo cool ^_^. i love the future and the awesoem stuff coming down the line. i wonder if in our life times that cyborge bodys wil nto only be around, but be mainstream and we will live among robots liek that ^_^

for as much as the world can really just suck sometimes, seeing things like that give me hope ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on December 22, 2013, 09:31:29 AM
http://www.fromquarkstoquasars.com/is-absolute-zero-absolute/ (http://www.fromquarkstoquasars.com/is-absolute-zero-absolute/)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on January 18, 2014, 07:34:48 PM
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25743806

Opinions please?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on January 18, 2014, 07:46:49 PM
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25743806

Opinions please?

just shows we really have no idea whats goning on with oru world or the sun, and both are gona kinda do what tehy want to do with or with out our interfrince.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on January 19, 2014, 06:52:21 AM
just shows we really have no idea whats goning on with oru world or the sun, and both are gona kinda do what tehy want to do with or with out our interfrince.

Did you see the bit about the Maunder Minimum, which they believe a mini ice age happened the last time the sun "went quite". I saw a Tv programme in which the believe the phenomenon happens every few hundred years occurring after an warm period ,causing a period of prolonged cold weather it mentioned one happening in the around the 1300.
Link to a similar article - http://www.stanford.edu/~moore/history_health.html
Towards the bottom of of the article there is a breakdown of the time periods.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on January 19, 2014, 02:02:16 PM
Did you see the bit about the Maunder Minimum, which they believe a mini ice age happened the last time the sun "went quite". I saw a Tv programme in which the believe the phenomenon happens every few hundred years occurring after an warm period ,causing a period of prolonged cold weather it mentioned one happening in the around the 1300.
Link to a similar article - http://www.stanford.edu/~moore/history_health.html
Towards the bottom of of the article there is a breakdown of the time periods.

it could be we are on the beggining of a mini ice age.

gota remmber for all the talk of "global warming" that back in the 70's mayeb early 80s, the biug fear was golbal cooling...........yep we thougth things were so bad with gobal coolign that we were ready to take drastic mesures liek put black stuff on the north and south pole to get more heat in.

lession of this story? we dont know any thign about our own planet or how it works really. XD ^_^

i still stand by its all just about control. case in point, recintly a big shot UN climit change person was on video saying comunisum is the way to go becuse its the best to stop global warming.........you know comunisum, the same awesoem forum of goverment that is repsonable for 100s of millions of deaths due to its practices and who currently in china polution is so bad peopel need to wear face masks to breath.........
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Michaelc9 on February 09, 2014, 06:07:23 PM

i still stand by its all just about control. case in point, recintly a big shot UN climit change person was on video saying comunisum is the way to go becuse its the best to stop global warming.........you know comunisum, the same awesoem forum of goverment that is repsonable for 100s of millions of deaths due to its practices and who currently in china polution is so bad peopel need to wear face masks to breath.........


This does not really have anything to do with communism. Whatever poor country it is next to be the manufacturing hub of the world, whether its communist or a free state as they call it, a massive amount of pollution will be created, because its the biproduct of such production.
These sort of Eastern countries will not be using sustainable power sources for a very long time to come.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 09, 2014, 06:33:18 PM
This does not really have anything to do with communism. Whatever poor country it is next to be the manufacturing hub of the world, whether its communist or a free state as they call it, a massive amount of pollution will be created, because its the biproduct of such production.
These sort of Eastern countries will not be using sustainable power sources for a very long time to come.

not sure if you just read what I wrote wrong, or your point was lost somewhere in there?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Michaelc9 on February 09, 2014, 06:35:15 PM
not sure if you just read what I wrote wrong, or your point was lost somewhere in there?
No, I read it correctly.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on February 09, 2014, 07:48:11 PM
No, I read it correctly.
still, you seemed to miss the point. She was saying that we still dont know alot about how our planet works, not blaming communism for pollution
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 09, 2014, 11:11:47 PM
No, I read it correctly.

no you didn't, or we wouldent be having this convo.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on March 16, 2014, 10:39:06 PM
Has anyone watched the new "Cosmos- A Spacetime Odyssey" doco? It's just started here on TV so I'm not sure how far behind the rest of the world we are.

It's an update of the original Carl Sagan series.

From the first episode I learned of 3 things I didn't know before.

1. Rogue Planets
2. The rock cloud that surrounds our Solar System
3. The man named Giordano Bruno, who was the first 'documented' man to imagine a cosmos that stretches far beyond our visual range into infinity (and for his genius, he was eventually burned at the stake after years in prison).
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: muD on March 17, 2014, 02:13:08 PM
Has anyone watched the new "Cosmos- A Spacetime Odyssey" doco? It's just started here on TV so I'm not sure how far behind the rest of the world we are.

It's an update of the original Carl Sagan series.

From the first episode I learned of 3 things I didn't know before.

1. Rogue Planets
2. The rock cloud that surrounds our Solar System
3. The man named Giordano Bruno, who was the first 'documented' man to imagine a cosmos that stretches far beyond our visual range into infinity (and for his genius, he was eventually burned at the stake after years in prison).
Yes i am excited about this new series. i made a thread about it here (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=4793.msg58622#msg58622) - just the first 2eps available atm

I watched the original Carl Sagan series fairly recently which was really good, too.
Quite amazed at how much more has been discovered in the relatively short time in-between both series.
Giordano Bruno's story is harsh eh.. Certainly nice to exist in a time now in which the churches themselves would be burnt to the ground if they still continued to murder those who posed alternative theories.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 17, 2014, 08:49:39 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/17/scientists-say-they-just-found-landmark-evidence-for-the-big-bang-that-offers-a-window-back-to-the-beginning-of-time/

wild stuff ^_^

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: muD on March 17, 2014, 09:48:26 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/17/scientists-say-they-just-found-landmark-evidence-for-the-big-bang-that-offers-a-window-back-to-the-beginning-of-time/

wild stuff ^_^
Thanks for the link. Was watching something about people looking for this the other day.

The comments the religious people have made on that page are so incredibly moronic..
this was my fav;
These so-called “experts” are wrong. Period.
_____
There are two primary reasons why some of us doubt these findings: 1 – science cannot prove anything; all it can do is provide evidence that supports a theory. That evidence may be overwhelmingly heavy in support, but it still cannot prove; and 2 – the evidence they give is directly contrary to the Word of God. God was there; He knows what happened, He knows how it happened; and He told us what happened. While this evidence presented may support the physics behind what happened, their interpretation of it is directly contrary to what God said happened, especially related to the time. Therefore, it is wrong. Period.
poor guy..
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on March 17, 2014, 10:38:24 PM
Thanks for the link. Was watching something about people looking for this the other day.

The comments the religious people have made on that page are so incredibly moronic..
this was my fav;
These so-called “experts” are wrong. Period.
_____
There are two primary reasons why some of us doubt these findings: 1 – science cannot prove anything; all it can do is provide evidence that supports a theory. That evidence may be overwhelmingly heavy in support, but it still cannot prove; and 2 – the evidence they give is directly contrary to the Word of God. God was there; He knows what happened, He knows how it happened; and He told us what happened. While this evidence presented may support the physics behind what happened, their interpretation of it is directly contrary to what God said happened, especially related to the time. Therefore, it is wrong. Period.
poor guy..
It really is quite tragic, I can't imagine being so deluded.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on March 17, 2014, 10:40:18 PM
the current article is a discussion about the Big Bang theory, not a religious debate.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: muD on March 18, 2014, 08:25:40 AM
the current article is a discussion about the Big Bang theory, not a religious debate.
Pointing out how deluded some people are is not debating or discussing religion.
Plus, it is not your job, role or position to tell us what we can or should be talking about.

The article is specifically about the possible detection of gravitation wave signatures in the CMB, which if verified, is in strong support of the currently understood, evidential, verifiable model.

Using the term 'religious debate' may give some people the impression that there is something to debate where there isn't.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on March 18, 2014, 11:14:31 AM
Pointing out how deluded some people are is not debating or discussing religion.
Plus, it is not your job, role or position to tell us what we can or should be talking about.

The article is specifically about the possible detection of gravitation wave signatures in the CMB, which if verified, is in strong support of the currently understood, evidential, verifiable model.

Using the term 'religious debate' may give some people the impression that there is something to debate where there isn't.

I Personally do not support the view of the person quoted in the earlier post and trust more in the scientific evidence when presented. However it is wrong to call them "deluded" for there opinion, however much you disagree with it.

I would also like to disagree when discussing "religious debate", You can expect people to think you are debating religion when you refer to a person in a quote who has expressed there opinion with religious views stated within it, when your refer to the Person as "deluded". The assumption that your are calling them deluded due to there religion is made, in your defence you may have not have been making that statement. But people may concur that you are.
The mention of religious debate I believe occurred because of your use of language not due to the articles content.

You can choose to listen to what I have said, but like you said earlier it's not the role of members to tell you what you can or cannot discuss.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on March 18, 2014, 11:23:28 AM
Pointing out how deluded some people are is not debating or discussing religion.
Plus, it is not your job, role or position to tell us what we can or should be talking about.
The article is specifically about the possible detection of gravitation wave signatures in the CMB, which if verified, is in strong support of the currently understood, evidential, verifiable model.
Using the term 'religious debate' may give some people the impression that there is something to debate where there isn't.

Your original post had nothing to do with the merit of the article itself.
You copied someone's comment about the article and critiqued that. Then Shrooms quoted you and gave his two cents on, once again, someone's comment about the article. Only now do you actually mention gravitational wave signatures in the article, which you did not the first time.

Your stance was clearly against people who hold faith. Besides, I would expect anyone to ask you to not talk about people's beliefs, I don't have to be labeled as some debate referee. If "moronic people" bother you so much, ignore them and discuss the article, instead of pointing out your personal beliefs.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on March 18, 2014, 12:54:09 PM
http://www.workintelligent.ly/technology/trends/2014-3-10-technology-tipping-point/
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 18, 2014, 01:44:20 PM
gota love my innoicnet artical lead to muds bashing religion and then bashing daunt for pointing out he was bashing religion and ignoring the artical.

i would make a laugh face but my  buttion doesint work ^_^

all in all i tend to ingore the comments section, on ANY news site.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: muD on March 18, 2014, 05:57:49 PM
I Personally do not support the view of the person quoted in the earlier post and trust more in the scientific evidence when presented. However it is wrong to call them "deluded" for there opinion, however much you disagree with it.

I would also like to disagree when discussing "religious debate", You can expect people to think you are debating religion when you refer to a person in a quote who has expressed there opinion with religious views stated within it, when your refer to the Person as "deluded". The assumption that your are calling them deluded due to there religion is made, in your defence you may have not have been making that statement. But people may concur that you are.
The mention of religious debate I believe occurred because of your use of language not due to the articles content.
By definition that character was delusional.
I don't mind if anyone chooses to go on to further interpret my statement as synonymous to calling people deluded due to their religion.


Your original post had nothing to do with the merit of the article itself.
You copied someone's comment about the article and critiqued that. Then Shrooms quoted you and gave his two cents on, once again, someone's comment about the article. Only now do you actually mention gravitational wave signatures in the article, which you did not the first time.
i see what you did there

Your stance was clearly against people who hold faith. Besides, I would expect anyone to ask you to not talk about people's beliefs, I don't have to be labeled as some debate referee. If "moronic people" bother you so much, ignore them and discuss the article, instead of pointing out your personal beliefs.
I am not responsible for the way you interpret things. Nor is it my concern.

gota love my innoicnet artical lead to muds bashing religion and then bashing daunt for pointing out he was bashing religion and ignoring the artical.
as i've said, i wasn't bashing religion, i was recognising the impact faith based beliefs can have on an individuals reasoning.
i am quite happy to bash religion tho, i see no problems with that, but i agreed to abide by the rules when i joined so here is not the place.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 19, 2014, 01:30:01 PM
as i've said, i wasn't bashing religion, i was recognising the impact faith based beliefs can have on an individuals reasoning.
i am quite happy to bash religion tho, i see no problems with that, but i agreed to abide by the rules when i joined so here is not the place.

te-he ^_^ lets see if i can rile you up more now ;D ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/18/what-would-you-pay-for-a-brain-implant-that-promises-near-impossible-talents/

wild stuff ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/18/sony-unveils-virtual-reality-headset-for-ps4/

gona need to move to contacts at this rate XD, i have enough issues going ot an imax 3d movie and gettign the glasses over my glasses XD ^_^

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 20, 2014, 12:56:46 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/19/israeli-company-produces-water-out-of-air/

i dont knwo how commen it is any more, but i knwo water was used as a wepaon of sorts during the russian v. afgahsistan, the russians would posion the water they found in hopes of killing the afgains who needed it, not sure hwo many of there own men they killed.

and i knwo salidn used water as a wepaon of sorts agaisnt the crusaders as his men captuer the onyl soruce of water in the area they where in and at nigth would come to the hill tops and dump water in front of thirsty crusaders.

not just miltary use, the civlion aplications are near endless ^_^

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on March 24, 2014, 01:21:13 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/this-could-be-big-abc-news/super-cheap-paper-microscope-could-save-millions-lives-133616732.html?vp=1
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 26, 2014, 02:29:47 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/03/26/planet-past-pluto-new-discovery-redefines-solar-system-edge/?intcmp=features

ironickly hp lovecraft spoke of a 10th plant ;D
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: muD on March 26, 2014, 02:47:03 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/03/26/planet-past-pluto-new-discovery-redefines-solar-system-edge/?intcmp=features

ironickly hp lovecraft spoke of a 10th plant ;D
uhm, broken linky there i think

there are currently 8 recognised planets in our solar system btw. Pluto isn't one of them.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 26, 2014, 02:52:26 PM
uhm, broken linky there i think

there are currently 8 recognised planets in our solar system btw. Pluto isn't one of them.

linky is workign jsut fine for me :O!

as to the plaents, hp lvoecraft was form a tiem when we still considered pluto a planet.

imo, pluto will always be a palent to me. ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 31, 2014, 03:05:54 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/03/31/seashell-armor-could-offer-transparent-protection-for-troops/?intcmp=features

neat stuff ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 01, 2014, 02:41:28 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/04/01/black-death-wasnt-actually-bubonic-plague-study-finds/

mind blown :O! ^_^!!!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on April 01, 2014, 10:18:20 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/04/01/black-death-wasnt-actually-bubonic-plague-study-finds/

mind blown :O! ^_^!!!

Though the article doesn't seem to disprove the DNA evidence that it was Yersinia pestis that caused the Black Death in 1348-1351 CE, the article does shed light on a question that has -plagued- historians for quite a while.

This is what the article mentions, how the Plague in Madagascar did not kill as rampantly as believed it would. Because all of our sources from the Black Death state that it was end-of-the-world/apocalyptic/extinction-wide pandemic. However one can look at the Yersinia pestis outbreak in India in the early twentieth century and see that it was relatively contained, and not that many people caught it and died.

So why do the sources state that so many people died in the fourteenth century, yet so few have died from it recently based upon how it transmits and infects?

Two explanations:
1) The sources are exaggerating. Perhaps because of the sudden deaths of people around them, the written sources exaggerate an end-of-the-world feeling.

2) The widespread death in 1348-1351 CE did happen, and humanity has developed an immunity against it. The Plague was traced back during 1348 CE from China, which traveled across the silk road. From there it reached Crimea by the Mongols, who threw diseased animal carcasses over fortress walls to infect the inhabitants with the plague. It made it to Constantinople, which took off from there to spread to the rest of Europe.
Countries in Central and Southern Africa did not experience this kind of Plague.

But this doesn't account for an earlier Bubonic Plague outbreak in the sixth century, dubbed "Justinian's Plague". The same problem arises as today's account of the disease: not that many accounts outside the Byzantine Empire was recorded. Supposedly the disease killed up to 50-100million people, yet very few accounts survive. And still, people didn't acquire an immunity to this Plague then, almost 900 years before the Black Death?
The answer: they did acquire an immunity, but the two outbreaks were different strains.....

Which still puts us back at square one: why doesn't the disease spread/kill now like it did 700 and 1500 years ago?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on April 01, 2014, 11:51:44 AM
Though the article doesn't seem to disprove the DNA evidence that it was Yersinia pestis that caused the Black Death in 1348-1351 CE, the article does shed light on a question that has -plagued- historians for quite a while.

This is what the article mentions, how the Plague in Madagascar did not kill as rampantly as believed it would. Because all of our sources from the Black Death state that it was end-of-the-world/apocalyptic/extinction-wide pandemic. However one can look at the Yersinia pestis outbreak in India in the early twentieth century and see that it was relatively contained, and not that many people caught it and died.

So why do the sources state that so many people died in the fourteenth century, yet so few have died from it recently based upon how it transmits and infects?

Two explanations:
1) The sources are exaggerating. Perhaps because of the sudden deaths of people around them, the written sources exaggerate an end-of-the-world feeling.

2) The widespread death in 1348-1351 CE did happen, and humanity has developed an immunity against it. The Plague was traced back during 1348 CE from China, which traveled across the silk road. From there it reached Crimea by the Mongols, who threw diseased animal carcasses over fortress walls to infect the inhabitants with the plague. It made it to Constantinople, which took off from there to spread to the rest of Europe.
Countries in Central and Southern Africa did not experience this kind of Plague.

But this doesn't account for an earlier Bubonic Plague outbreak in the sixth century, dubbed "Justinian's Plague". The same problem arises as today's account of the disease: not that many accounts outside the Byzantine Empire was recorded. Supposedly the disease killed up to 50-100million people, yet very few accounts survive. And still, people didn't acquire an immunity to this Plague then, almost 900 years before the Black Death?
The answer: they did acquire an immunity, but the two outbreaks were different strains.....

Which still puts us back at square one: why doesn't the disease spread/kill now like it did 700 and 1500 years ago?
or maybe the reason why it spread more quickly then was how poor the living conditions were back then, and the ways the tried to fight it aren't as good as what we have now. They didn't know what they were dealing with and thought many odd things stopped them from getting sick(ever see the costumes the "healers" wore back then?). In Madagascar they probably had at least limited knowledge of how plauges worked, had access to a few, if rare antibiotics and probably weren't as overcrowded as medieval cities. I dont know much about the living conditions in Madagascar but I'm assuming they weren't as disease ridden as Europe during the time when the plauge broke out
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 02, 2014, 12:55:29 AM
i do love my linkys sparkign debate ^_^ (perticulry when it stays civil............"LEST WE FORGET") ^_^

anywho,

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/31/mystery-substance-boils-and-freezes-at-the-same-time/

wild stuff ^_^, never heard of the 3 stage thign before.........i need to start paying attetion in skool ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on April 02, 2014, 01:49:20 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/03/31/mystery-substance-boils-and-freezes-at-the-same-time/

wild stuff ^_^, never heard of the 3 stage thign before.........i need to start paying attetion in skool ^_^

Phase changes dont happen solely by a temperature change. Pressure is also a factor. Here is a diagram to illustrate:

(http://www.teamonslaught.fsnet.co.uk/co2%20phase%20diagram.GIF)

Notice the Triple Point, where the temp is -56.4C and 5.11atm. At this exact pressure and temperature for this particular substance, it will bounce between a solid, liquid, and gaseous state.


Another fun fact, where you see "supercritical fluid" that is where a gas and liquid blend. The particles mix together to the point that you cannot tell what is a gas or a liquid in solution. It becomes a blur in the test tube
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 08, 2014, 02:13:25 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/04/08/scientists-grow-human-body-parts-in-lab/?intcmp=features

amazing super scince ^_^!!!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on April 08, 2014, 02:22:36 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/04/08/scientists-grow-human-body-parts-in-lab/?intcmp=features

amazing super scince ^_^!!!
reminds me of a certain episode of south park....
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 08, 2014, 02:36:18 PM
reminds me of a certain episode of south park....

"EEK!" ;D
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on April 08, 2014, 02:51:01 PM
"EEK!" ;D
somebody got the reference
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on April 09, 2014, 04:36:40 AM
http://sciencebasedlife.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/how-do-cats-survive-falls-from-great-heights/
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 09, 2014, 12:02:37 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/08/find-out-what-happens-to-your-body-after-you-die-in-2-minutes/

wild ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 09, 2014, 02:14:57 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/04/09/powering-ships-future-navy-develops-technology-to-turn-seawater-into-fuel/?intcmp=features

um, wait is the water destroyed in the process?

can we please not destroy our worlds water >.>
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on April 09, 2014, 02:16:41 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/04/09/powering-ships-future-navy-develops-technology-to-turn-seawater-into-fuel/?intcmp=features

um, wait is the water destroyed in the process?

can we please not destroy our worlds water >.>
I'm sure the water is just turned into steam
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 09, 2014, 02:18:29 PM
I'm sure the water is just turned into steam

so long as theres no loss of water, imo we should be pushing this, and pushing it hard! :O! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on April 09, 2014, 02:21:04 PM
so long as theres no loss of water, imo we should be pushing this, and pushing it hard! :O! ^_^
thank god its the government and not a private business. The oil companies probably would have paid off any private business
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 09, 2014, 02:28:34 PM
thank god its the government and not a private business. The oil companies probably would have paid off any private business

both goverment and private biunes have there advatages and disadvatages.

exp, our gas is gona be silly exp soon here in the state i live in, thansk to our awesoem state goverment rasing the gas tax by another .28c >.>
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on April 09, 2014, 03:08:16 PM
I'm sure the water is just turned into steam

This is correct. It works the same way those supposed "hydrogen fuel cell" cars would work. It's all electrochemistry.

The problem is if the fuel is more cost effective (i.e. having to pump the water, run it through the fuel cells may take more energy than what it's worth.) Also having to move the hydrogens would be difficult without the abundance of H2 and CO2 in the seawater. Doubtful it could be applied to a land motor vehicle.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 09, 2014, 03:12:04 PM
This is correct. It works the same way those supposed "hydrogen fuel cell" cars would work. It's all electrochemistry.

The problem is if the fuel is more cost effective (i.e. having to pump the water, run it through the fuel cells may take more energy than what it's worth.) Also having to move the hydrogens would be difficult without the abundance of H2 and CO2 in the seawater. Doubtful it could be applied to a land motor vehicle.

my big problem was worry abiotu lose of water, if theres no water loss i am all for it ^_^!!

as to being able to use it on land vichiles, who knows, maybe soem tiem down the line we will figuer it out ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on April 09, 2014, 03:14:49 PM
my big problem was worry abiotu lose of water, if theres no water loss i am all for it ^_^!!
as to being able to use it on land vichiles, who knows, maybe soem tiem down the line we will figuer it out ^_^

Water is not used in the creation. This new technology extracts the CO2 and H2 from seawater, not using the water itself.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 10, 2014, 12:29:00 AM
Water is not used in the creation. This new technology extracts the CO2 and H2 from seawater, not using the water itself.

so it doesint hurt our total world water right? ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on April 10, 2014, 01:03:27 AM
What would be better is if they found a way to use this as fuel for more than just boats. Since sea water is a renewable resource it seems like it could only get cheaper as they develop better ways to capture it, instead of rising and falling like oil prices.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 10, 2014, 01:07:25 AM
What would be better is if they found a way to use this as fuel for more than just boats. Since sea water is a renewable resource it seems like it could only get cheaper as they develop better ways to capture it, instead of rising and falling like oil prices.

sea water is not a renuable resurce :O

there is a littreral limit to the amount of water the planet has.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on April 10, 2014, 01:42:42 AM
sea water is not a renuable resurce :O

there is a littreral limit to the amount of water the planet has.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_cycle

the only problem might be that all the water vapor released into the air, we might get more or heavier rain. Although that might not be a bad thing considering how much water we need to conserve these days.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Dauntless395 on April 10, 2014, 10:41:18 AM
sea water is not a renuable resurce :O

there is a littreral limit to the amount of water the planet has.

And that "limit" is so vast, it would take quite an extensive time to use up.

Calculations below:
used this site for barrel amounts: http://news.discovery.com/earth/global-warming/how-much-fossil-fuel-is-in-the-earth.htm (http://news.discovery.com/earth/global-warming/how-much-fossil-fuel-is-in-the-earth.htm)

- There were 1.354 trillion barrels (1.354x10^12) of oil in 2010 estimated to be left.
- According to wikipedia, the average US "barrel" holds 42 gallons. That is 56.868 trillion gallons of fossil fuels left in the ground. This isn't even taking into account how much we had back in the nineteenth century.

- I used this website for total "ocean, bay, seawater": http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/question157.htm (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/question157.htm)

- There are 326,000,000,000,000,000,000 (3.26x10^20) gallons of water on the earth's surface.

Comparing the two scientific notations:
(3.26x10^20) gallons of water is 100million times bigger than (1.354x10^12) gallons of oil. Yeah, we've got a long time before we run out. Or think of it this way: for every single gallon we have used in fossil fuels, we would need to use 240,000,000 gallons of water to even keep up with running out at the same time as fossil fuels.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 10, 2014, 01:11:02 PM
And that "limit" is so vast, it would take quite an extensive time to use up.

Calculations below:
used this site for barrel amounts: http://news.discovery.com/earth/global-warming/how-much-fossil-fuel-is-in-the-earth.htm (http://news.discovery.com/earth/global-warming/how-much-fossil-fuel-is-in-the-earth.htm)

- There were 1.354 trillion barrels (1.354x10^12) of oil in 2010 estimated to be left.
- According to wikipedia, the average US "barrel" holds 42 gallons. That is 56.868 trillion gallons of fossil fuels left in the ground. This isn't even taking into account how much we had back in the nineteenth century.

- I used this website for total "ocean, bay, seawater": http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/question157.htm (http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/question157.htm)

- There are 326,000,000,000,000,000,000 (3.26x10^20) gallons of water on the earth's surface.

Comparing the two scientific notations:
(3.26x10^20) gallons of water is 100million times bigger than (1.354x10^12) gallons of oil. Yeah, we've got a long time before we run out. Or think of it this way: for every single gallon we have used in fossil fuels, we would need to use 240,000,000 gallons of water to even keep up with running out at the same time as fossil fuels.

can you tell i try to be a long term planer ^_^

tyvm for the math ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 11, 2014, 02:37:12 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/04/10/doctors-successfully-implant-lab-grown-fried rices-into-4-women/?intcmp=features

amazing what we can do with technolagy now ^_^!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on April 11, 2014, 04:10:02 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/04/10/doctors-successfully-implant-lab-grown-i am an idiots-into-4-women/?intcmp=features

amazing what we can do with technolagy now ^_^!
I wonder what translates to "I am an idiot"
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on April 11, 2014, 04:26:14 PM
I wonder what translates to "I am an idiot"
The answer seems to be v agina
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on April 11, 2014, 06:11:24 PM
The answer seems to be v agina
i am an idiot?

EDIT: yes it is
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 12, 2014, 02:44:15 AM
my appaolagizes on that, I hope the linky still worked :O!

honsitly is an amazing article about it, I hope soon enough we are able to clone any body part or orgen ^_^!!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on April 14, 2014, 06:59:17 PM
The answer seems to be v agina
Now that video on YouTube of the women singing about ^^^ makes sense, she is actually trying to tell us she's an idiot. :P
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 14, 2014, 08:08:13 PM
Now that video on YouTube of the women singing about ^^^ makes sense, she is actually trying to tell us she's an idiot. :P

?????????????????
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on April 15, 2014, 06:12:04 AM
?????????????????
Here in the UK there is a TV programme that shows YouTube videos with each Episode been themed. For example this video appeared in one episode called weird and wonderful.
Probably not a good idea to post the link... But if you really want to see the video I can message you it. (Don't worry no pictures, just video of woman singing)

We are probably Derailing the topic here :P.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 15, 2014, 11:45:08 AM
Here in the UK there is a TV programme that shows YouTube videos with each Episode been themed. For example this video appeared in one episode called weird and wonderful.
Probably not a good idea to post the link... But if you really want to see the video I can message you it. (Don't worry no pictures, just video of woman singing)

We are probably Derailing the topic here :P.

sure send me a pm exspalining thing, i dont understand at all XD ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 15, 2014, 01:15:08 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/14/bird-drones-recharge-on-power-lines-while-waiting-to-swarm-the-enemy/

te-he ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/15/see-the-awesome-pictures-and-video-of-last-nights-first-of-four-blood-moons/

amazing ^_^

didnt get to see the moon as it was cloudy for me. but amazingly the whoel sky had a red hue to it, so the clouds looked red. was distrubingly creepy and buritful ^_^!!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on April 22, 2014, 05:23:19 PM
http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2014/04/05/20-jokes-that-only-geeks-will-understand-pic/?utm_source=zergnet.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_162544
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on April 22, 2014, 06:56:08 PM
http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2014/04/05/20-jokes-that-only-geeks-will-understand-pic/?utm_source=zergnet.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=zergnet_162544
18 is my favourite :D
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 22, 2014, 11:09:14 PM
16/17 are my favs, a cuple I didn't get tho :O!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 28, 2014, 03:09:30 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/28/step-aside-cheetah-theres-an-unexpected-animal-thats-taken-the-top-spot-for-fastest-on-land/
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 02, 2014, 01:20:25 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/02/the-one-little-trick-to-help-you-win-at-rock-paper-scissors-more-often/

te-he XD

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/02/survival-tip-the-cool-way-you-can-boil-water-in-a-paper-cup/

da water :O!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/01/scientists-have-an-oh-my-gosh-moment-while-searching-for-what-they-thought-was-a-shipwreck/

wild stuff ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 02, 2014, 01:46:55 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/05/02/men-skin-cells-turned-into-sperm-precursors/?intcmp=features

amazing what tech can do :O!

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/05/02/spidey-science-4-bits-real-science-in-amazing-spider-man-2/?intcmp=features

wild :O!

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/05/02/modern-humans-no-brainier-than-neanderthals-study-finds/?intcmp=features

rut-ro :O!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/02/bird-conservation-group-challenges-feds-over-wind-farm-eagle-deaths/?intcmp=latestnews

nothing liek evormentlasists tearign each other apart.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/05/02/scientists-debate-whether-remaining-smallpox-virus-should-be-destroyed/?intcmp=latestnews

imo it needs to be kpet around, becuse we dont knwo if for sure someone out there doesint have more, or that it coudl reamerge as other deises have in the past.

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 06, 2014, 12:56:32 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/04/the-unexpected-thing-a-fisherman-caught-in-the-ocean-has-scientists-intrigued/

creepy looking fishy :O!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/05/stephen-hawkings-ominous-warning-about-robots/

chilling thoughts of things to come

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/06/is-coffee-good-or-bad-for-you/

da coffie
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Keaton Potatoes on May 06, 2014, 09:57:12 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2470043/The-powered-electronic-BLOOD-IBM-unveils-brain-inspired-runs-electrolyte-rich-liquid.html
Sounds interesting.

http://phys.org/news/2013-04-plasma-device-revolutionize-energy-storage.html
Make plasma guns next!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 07, 2014, 12:00:43 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/05/07/nintendo-wont-allow-gamers-to-play-as-gay-characters-in-life-simulator-game/?intcmp=latestnews

real life sucks, have new wii life!

side note, not for me tho, as i dont care for not being able to be with my own sex ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/05/07/scientists-make-new-find-in-photos-freakish-shark/?intcmp=features

its cute ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/05/07/giant-crocodiles-used-death-rolls-to-kill-dinosaurs-researchers-say/?intcmp=features

wild stuff ^_^

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on May 07, 2014, 03:34:11 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/05/07/nintendo-wont-allow-gamers-to-play-as-gay-characters-in-life-simulator-game/?intcmp=latestnews

real life sucks, have new wii life!

side note, not for me tho, as i dont care for not being able to be with my own sex ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/05/07/scientists-make-new-find-in-photos-freakish-shark/?intcmp=features

its cute ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/05/07/giant-crocodiles-used-death-rolls-to-kill-dinosaurs-researchers-say/?intcmp=features

wild stuff ^_^
as for the mii thing....
I hate it when gamers judge a game for what's not in it. Like when people complain that fallout doesn't have multiplayer, or that titanfall didn't have a single player campaign, or that whatever game doesn't have customization for your character, or that a game doesn't have HD graphics. You should judge a game on what it has, not what it doesn't.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: BeardedSHROOMS on May 07, 2014, 07:12:09 PM
http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/7/5691744/scientists-create-life-form-with-alien-dna-six-letters
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 07, 2014, 07:43:19 PM
as for the mii thing....
I hate it when gamers judge a game for what's not in it. Like when people complain that fallout doesn't have multiplayer, or that titanfall didn't have a single player campaign, or that whatever game doesn't have customization for your character, or that a game doesn't have HD graphics. You should judge a game on what it has, not what it doesn't.

so i should liek it even tho it doesint appel to me?

fallout tryed multy player, it failed.

i still havint and probly never will play titan fall becuse it doesint have a single player campain.

graphics arnt a huge deal to me, so i am very forgiving for them ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 07, 2014, 07:47:12 PM
http://www.theverge.com/2014/5/7/5691744/scientists-create-life-form-with-alien-dna-six-letters

disturbing and far reaching, much as steven hawksing beged for the non develpoment of AI, this falls into the same catagory :O!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on May 07, 2014, 07:53:33 PM
so i should liek it even tho it doesint appel to me?

fallout tryed multy player, it failed.

i still havint and probly never will play titan fall becuse it doesint have a single player campain.

graphics arnt a huge deal to me, so i am very forgiving for them ^_^
I'm saying its dumb to say "this game doesn't have this, therefore it sucks".

as for graphics.... Ryse has the best graphics I've seen on a console. Its still a steaming pile of crap. I hate it when companys go Graphics over game play when they make a game.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on May 07, 2014, 07:56:22 PM
disturbing and far reaching, much as steven hawksing beged for the non develpoment of AI, this falls into the same catagory :O!
I think its kinda cool. This technology could evolve into something great.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 07, 2014, 09:19:06 PM
I'm saying its dumb to say "this game doesn't have this, therefore it sucks".

as for graphics.... Ryse has the best graphics I've seen on a console. Its still a steaming pile of crap. I hate it when companys go Graphics over game play when they make a game.

but if being able to marry/be with my own se was the onyl thign i wanted, its still gona suck to me, no matter what else it had.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 07, 2014, 09:19:30 PM
I think its kinda cool. This technology could evolve into something great.

"the road to hell is paved with good intentions" ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on May 07, 2014, 09:25:12 PM
but if being able to marry/be with my own se was the onyl thign i wanted, its still gona suck to me, no matter what else it had.
so you wouldn't play it because the dev has a different view than you?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 07, 2014, 09:46:30 PM
so you wouldn't play it because the dev has a different view than you?

yes, a veiw so storng agaisnt my own that they wodulent even have it as an option. there for the game has nothign to offer me, it sucks. ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on May 07, 2014, 10:59:25 PM
yes, a veiw so storng agaisnt my own that they wodulent even have it as an option. there for the game has nothign to offer me, it sucks. ^_^
if that's all someone wants in a game I can easily make one that fits their needs. Especially if it doesn't need good graphics or game play not to suck... Personally I've only bought one game for just one reason and I regret it.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 07, 2014, 11:04:58 PM
if that's all someone wants in a game I can easily make one that fits their needs. Especially if it doesn't need good graphics or game play not to suck... Personally I've only bought one game for just one reason and I regret it.

the game its self is fine, it has my slight intrest, if it had same gender in it tho, then i would aculty buy it. but it doesint, so it just remains a neat idea that doesint dilvier for me ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on May 07, 2014, 11:13:51 PM
the game its self is fine, it has my slight intrest, if it had same gender in it tho, then i would aculty buy it. but it doesint, so it just remains a neat idea that doesint dilvier for me ^_^
personally I'm not into that type of game. And I dont have the system. I just thought it was weird that they're protesting what seems like an otherwise fine game over something so dumb.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 07, 2014, 11:15:32 PM
personally I'm not into that type of game. And I dont have the system. I just thought it was weird that they're protesting what seems like an otherwise fine game over something so dumb.

unless your one of us (lgbt) its hard to exp how we feel. ^_^, nor woudl you think it dumb ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on May 07, 2014, 11:21:09 PM
unless your one of us (lgbt) its hard to exp how we feel. ^_^, nor woudl you think it dumb ^_^
I dont recall ever saying I wasn't....
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 07, 2014, 11:23:22 PM
I dont recall ever saying I wasn't....

me thinks your not down for the strugle :O!, and your right, sorry for assuming ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on May 07, 2014, 11:52:14 PM
me thinks your not down for the strugle :O!, and your right, sorry for assuming ^_^
I'd rather not talk about my sexual oriention in here, but if you pm me id be happy to talk about it. But as for the struggle... What I hate is the protests over the small stuff. I know there are alot of big things like what I posted in the fight club earlier without trying to force a game dev to do something he's not comfortable with.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 08, 2014, 12:14:19 PM
I'd rather not talk about my sexual oriention in here, but if you pm me id be happy to talk about it. But as for the struggle... What I hate is the protests over the small stuff. I know there are alot of big things like what I posted in the fight club earlier without trying to force a game dev to do something he's not comfortable with.

I am not forcing the dev to do any thing, he simply wont be seeing my money since he doesint have fetures I want. ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 14, 2014, 11:51:26 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/05/14/alien-catfish-baffles-scientists/?intcmp=features

fishy!

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/05/13/un-meets-to-weigh-fate-killer-robots/?intcmp=obnetwork

da scary robots :O!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on May 14, 2014, 01:50:24 PM
I am not forcing the dev to do any thing, he simply wont be seeing my money since he doesint have fetures I want. ^_^
ill make sure to put gay marriage in my game so I can see your money.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 14, 2014, 01:52:42 PM
ill make sure to put gay marriage in my game so I can see your money.

good ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 14, 2014, 10:15:57 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/05/14/new-oral-drug-may-prevent-death-from-radiation-poisoning/?intcmp=obnetwork

amazing :O!!!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 16, 2014, 02:50:37 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/15/robots-with-morals-the-dod-is-spending-7-5-million-to-make-it-happen/

right and wrong as dictated by the us goverment, and who ever happens to be in power at the time. what coudl go wrong?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/15/health-workers-baffled-by-why-babies-in-rural-washington-seem-four-times-more-likely-to-get-rare-fatal-birth-defect/

creepy
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 19, 2014, 06:03:55 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/18/an-endangered-plant-is-making-sheep-kill-themselves-like-heroin-addicts/

da sheep :O!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/19/what-is-this-very-rare-fish-caught-off-the-florida-coast/

da fishy ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 21, 2014, 01:20:09 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/05/21/vicious-new-praying-mantis-discovered-in-rwanda/?intcmp=features

cool ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/05/21/new-internal-bra-procedure-promises-longer-lasting-breast-lift/
WARNING: has medical pic of da boobies. not real ones, but you can tell thats what they are.

anywho, i am not having screws screwed into my rib cage XD, FREEDOM! XD
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 23, 2014, 03:21:44 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/05/23/confirmed-urine-is-not-sterile/?intcmp=latestnews

wild :O!

am not sure next one is um apaoripait for eveyr one, it has ligigtment old time art work, its about "what if we applyed todays standereds of buety to old art of women". nartuly some of the old time paintings have some female nudity in them, the page in questions shows both the orignal work of arts. and then also the "air brushed" resutls that we would see if todays standerds of what a woman shoudl look liek where applyed back then when the paitings where made. so i am gona spoiler it, open the spoiler and go to the link at your own discretions.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/22/art-history-photoshopped_n_5367171.html
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: As many W's as possible on May 27, 2014, 06:27:24 PM
http://www.cnet.com/news/aerofex-hoverbike-headed-for-market-in-2017/
Anyone wanna give me a few thousand dollars? o:
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on May 28, 2014, 09:12:13 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/05/28/peat-bog-size-england-discovered/

wild the things we dont knwo about our own planet ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/04/30/4k-tv-fad-or-fantastic/?intcmp=tech_hcu

talk about 4k tvs

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on June 02, 2014, 02:13:09 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/06/02/brains-know-difference-between-carbs-and-artificial-sweeteners/?intcmp=obnetwork

a study on carbs and artifical sweetners

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/05/30/could-your-water-be-unsafe-to-drink/?intcmp=obnetwork

some info on water here in the states.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/06/02/futuristic-science-electronics-that-melt-away/

very cool artical about eletronics that can disolve away after there use ^_^

http://learni.st/boards/14637/learnings/742319-aids-in-digestion

health benifts of drinking lemon water in the morning ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on June 03, 2014, 01:48:53 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/02/scientists-develop-method-that-could-turn-recycled-paper-into-material-stronger-than-steel/

go go super scince!! ^_^ a possable holy grial of building matierail!!!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/03/the-new-cancer-detection-system-using-only-a-cellphone-a-lens-and-an-app/

amazing new device thats simple and relativly cheap (comapired to our current methodes) to detect cancor ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/02/something-absolutely-fascinating-happens-after-nesting-birds-get-locked-inside-underground-parking-garage/

amazing how nature overcomes and adapts ^_^

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on June 03, 2014, 02:40:35 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/06/03/learning-new-language-at-any-age-helps-brain/?intcmp=obnetwork

maybe now i will finaly fufil my dads wishes and speak fluient japanese XD ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/06/03/00-lb-ancient-croc-tore-through-turtles-battled-monster-snakes/?intcmp=features

pretty wild the amazing things that once walked the earth ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2014/06/03/plants-can-eat-to-survive-in-wild/?intcmp=features

list of plants that are edital, cool artical ^_^

seen cattails before, gona start eating clovers now ^_^

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on June 05, 2014, 01:00:19 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/03/nasa-hubble-just-captured-the-most-comprehensive-picture-ever-assembled-of-the-evolving-universe/

amazing pic of our universe ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/03/why-crickets-on-hawaiian-islands-stopped-singing-20-years-ago-and-never-chirped-again/

amazing showing of evolution ^_^!!!!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/04/scientists-find-planet-twice-as-old-as-earth-and-believe-it-could-yield-an-important-discovery/

biggy earth! only problem is its waaaaaaaay to hot, but still may support life :O!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/04/the-interesting-reason-koalas-are-always-hugging-trees/

da kowalala, hugging trees to stay cool! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on June 19, 2014, 01:22:30 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/19/on-all-continents-except-one-there-are-spiders-that-actually-do-this/

i saw before a sipder do it on plaent earth seruies, i didnt know there was a ton fo them ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on June 20, 2014, 03:05:57 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/20/6200-year-old-skeleton-reveals-how-major-technological-breakthrough-led-to-the-spread-of-parasitic-disease/

amazing the little pices of history you learn ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/19/study-finds-a-really-good-reason-to-eat-this-veggie/

cool! time to load up on them ^_^ (and they are tasty!) ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/19/why-billionaire-elon-musk-is-worried-about-artificial-intelligence/

scary stuff :O!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Exodus on June 21, 2014, 12:48:09 AM
Broccoli!!!!!!!!

I wonder what the plural term for broccoli is...

Broccol-I?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on June 24, 2014, 01:48:52 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2014/06/24/california-company-reinvents-rotary-engine/?intcmp=features

neat stuff ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/06/24/cold-dead-star-may-be-giant-diamond/?intcmp=features

i want it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on June 25, 2014, 01:18:41 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/06/25/greetings-from-earth-nasa-spacecraft-to-carry-message-for-aliens/?intcmp=features

there is one of 2 absolut truths, one is that we are not alone in the universe, the other is that we are alone in the universe, both are equaily frightening.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/06/25/3d-mammograms-can-better-detect-invasive-cancers-reduce-call-back-rates/?intcmp=features

commence slue of jokes about 3d and boobies.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/06/24/alice-in-wonderland-syndrome-actually-exists/?intcmp=obnetwork

not what i thought it was gona be XD

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/06/24/new-androids-at-tokyo-museum-look-sound-eerily-human-make-no-mistakes-in/?intcmp=obnetwork

my question is can i marry it? ^_^ move over humans, agy has a new love! gona need to add something new to the LGBT XD!!! ^_^ maybe LGBRT? XD!

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on June 26, 2014, 03:16:57 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/06/26/new-device-gives-you-the-ability-to-dodge-spies-on-the-internet/

sounds amazing ^_^ i want one ^_^!!!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on July 07, 2014, 02:06:36 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/04/this-breed-of-mosquito-is-invading-the-u-s-and-it-could-carry-a-terrifying-disease/

and how much longer must we suffer at the ban of DDT? i hate misquitos.....
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on July 18, 2014, 01:25:57 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/18/a-giant-mysterious-hole-has-opened-up-at-the-end-of-the-world-in-siberia-and-its-left-scientists-baffled/

wild stuff, lol the usuasl suspects comingout of the swerers to blame global warming XD!!!!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/18/scientists-might-be-one-step-closer-to-solving-the-mystery-of-the-family-with-five-siblings-who-walk-on-all-fours/

intresting story. and a net quirk in evolution and human thinking.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on July 19, 2014, 03:46:44 PM
http://www.zdnet.com/microsoft-nokias-android-x2-experiment-ends-enter-windows-phone-7000031723/

well then. you enter the X2 and immediately demolish the project? MS was doing alright by adding an android phone to the market, but I guess not.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on July 22, 2014, 02:07:03 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/22/scientists-make-exciting-discovery-that-could-lead-to-a-permanent-cure-for-aids/

dont worry even with this, many tirbal africans will still rape virgin girls as they belive that cures the deises.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/22/mayfly-hatch-in-wisconsin-so-massive-it-showed-up-on-weather-radar-caused-a-car-accident/

wild stuff ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on July 23, 2014, 02:26:59 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/23/chinese-officials-seal-off-plague-city-puzzling-us-experts/

leave it to the chicoms (chinsese communists) to pull this off and have a populice go along with it.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/23/fourth-bacterial-infection-death-reported-at-south-carolina-hospital/

its amazing to think that even with the us having the cleanist drinking water in the world, that these issues can crop up and lead to such sad issues in unlikly places.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/07/23/meerkats-kill-their-children-in-order-to-survive-new-study-shows/

wild stuff.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/07/23/newfound-alien-planet-has-longest-year-known-for-transiting-world/

long time till a birthday XD

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/07/23/nasa-spacecraft-just-one-year-away-from-pluto/

pluto shall alkwyas be the 9th planet to me ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/07/14/scientists-develop-super-black-material-that-human-eye-cant-see/?intcmp=obinsite

:O!!!!!!!!!!!! (mind blown), go go super scince!!! ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/07/22/truck-mounted-cannon-can-shoot-drones-out-sky/

the frnech have been playing to much halo XD ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/07/22/navy-develops-bio-coatings-for-implants-dressings/

amazing medical break threws form our gloryius USA Navy ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/07/21/south-koreas-video-game-addicts-may-be-exempt-from-military-service/

desterbing the effects of vidoe game aditction :O!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on July 24, 2014, 12:56:23 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/07/24/11-need-to-know-things-about-our-solar-system/?intcmp=features

cool that picture #3 shows both our 9th and 10th and 11th (pluto, makemake, and ceres) plaent in our soloar system ^_^
also note that the astroid belt betwwen mars and jupoter is convinrtly right where a planet would be....hmmmm

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/24/acetaminophen-doesnt-reduce-lower-back-pain-study-suggests/

pretty wild shattering a long stance on treatment of lower back pain.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/24/dentists-remove-232-teeth-from-indian-teen-mouth/

human body is a funny thing.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/23/new-study-finds-organic-foods-are-healthier-than-conventionally-grown-foods/

again showing the befnifts of organic food.
i wish we would buy more orgainc milk in our house, but its 2x as exp due to goverement substities of normal milk.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/24/surgeons-find-10-year-old-sex-toy-inside-woman-body/

ouchys........... (no worrys is no bad pciutres or any thing)

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/24/got-cavities-ancient-teeth-reveal-bacteria-evolution/

a look into the evolution of cavadies.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/07/24/tyrannosaur-gangs-terrorized-ancient-landscape/

wild stuff about dinisoors.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/07/24/octopus-mating-ends-with-strangulation-then-cannibalism/

let the jokes comenice XD





Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on July 24, 2014, 01:10:21 PM
http://evleaks.at/

Is anyone here familiar with EvLeaks?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on July 31, 2014, 12:45:24 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/31/sierra-leone-president-declares-state-emergency-over-ebola/

the spread of one of the worlds deadlists desieses continues.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/30/dr-manny-why-are-there-deadly-viruses-in-world/

an intresting read on deadly virues we face in todays world.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/07/31/taxis-planes-and-bikes-how-deadly-ebola-can-spread/

an artical about the spread of virueses, and how they do it.

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 01, 2014, 01:43:11 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/08/01/nasa-mars-mission-in-2020-to-try-to-turn-martian-air-into-key-rocket-fuel/?intcmp=features

cool stuff ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: As many W's as possible on August 01, 2014, 06:36:46 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/08/01/nasa-mars-mission-in-2020-to-try-to-turn-martian-air-into-key-rocket-fuel/?intcmp=features

cool stuff ^_^

What was hidden in that link's title was the plan to turn Martian air into oxygen :P Still that is pretty awesome to hear.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 01, 2014, 08:00:44 PM
What was hidden in that link's title was the plan to turn Martian air into oxygen :P Still that is pretty awesome to hear.

there is "air" on mars, just not oxagen.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: As many W's as possible on August 01, 2014, 10:25:57 PM
there is "air" on mars, just not oxagen.

I know there is air on Mars, thats what I said.. I guess a more apropriate thing would be to say that they're using certain atmospheric gasses to produce oxygen.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 01, 2014, 10:32:25 PM
I know there is air on Mars, thats what I said.. I guess a more apropriate thing would be to say that they're using certain atmospheric gasses to produce oxygen.

the way you worded it was funny XD ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: As many W's as possible on August 03, 2014, 06:19:59 AM
http://www.factor-tech.com/wearable-technology/wearable-tech-set-to-revolutionise-disaster-recovery-and-emergency-response/

More glasses to help with our lives :) If you keep scrolling plenty of more articles that are worth a read :D
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 04, 2014, 12:37:19 AM
http://www.factor-tech.com/wearable-technology/wearable-tech-set-to-revolutionise-disaster-recovery-and-emergency-response/

More glasses to help with our lives :) If you keep scrolling plenty of more articles that are worth a read :D

cool stuff ^_^, now I wonder if I can wear them with the glasses I already have XD ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: As many W's as possible on August 04, 2014, 01:37:44 AM
cool stuff ^_^, now I wonder if I can wear them with the glasses I already have XD ^_^

Maybe they'll make prescription versions of the glasses ;D
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 04, 2014, 01:51:15 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/04/the-effect-of-ibuprofen-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-physical-pain-relief-and-its-different-for-men-and-women/

once again showing men and women are not the same.......yes i aculty need to run around telling people that XD

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/04/this-gadget-can-charge-your-phone-in-the-middle-of-the-woods-using-only-water-and-a-flame/

cool stuff ^_^, neat where technolagy is going ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 10, 2014, 11:01:27 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/08/07/evil-usbs-to-bitcoin-botnets-hackers-hit-vegas/

neat stuff, i am glad to see such skills used for good ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/08/07/amazon-sees-potential-in-india-but-faces-big-challenges/

just a neat thing on economics of growing countrys and ecommerice.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/08/06/these-bizarre-deep-space-radio-blasts-have-astronomers-baffled/

neat space stuff ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 13, 2014, 01:47:46 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/13/400-year-old-math-problem-solved-could-make-stacking-oranges-much-easier/

da math! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 14, 2014, 12:54:45 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/08/13/bee-venom-could-be-key-to-cancer-cure-scientists-say/?intcmp=obnetwork

buzz buzz! ^_^ (shakes stinger!!!) ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/08/13/how-seasonal-eating-can-improve-your-health/

amazing stuff ^_^!! i want to try it! ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/08/14/doctors-refuse-to-see-smokers-unless-quit/

bringing up many questions of ethics.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/08/13/new-method-to-help-newborns-sleep-through-night/

da babys! ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/08/14/navy-designs-new-amphibious-assault-ships/

da big ships :O!

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/08/13/street-view-goes-undersea-to-map-reefs-wonders/

amazing things we can do now with tehcnolagy and the internet ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/08/12/teaching-kids-to-hack-for-good/

very cool stuff, i am glad to see them stress the importanct of using it for good ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on August 15, 2014, 07:44:31 PM
(http://i62.tinypic.com/2ljlr3s.png)

Has anybody noticed what I've noticed with what's going?

It's the new Samsung Galaxy Alpha and it looks like a Lumia 930/iPhone 5 mashup... hmmmm I smell lawsuit.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: As many W's as possible on August 16, 2014, 03:50:10 AM
(http://i62.tinypic.com/2ljlr3s.png)

Has anybody noticed what I've noticed with what's going?

It's the new Samsung Galaxy Alpha and it looks like a Lumia 930/iPhone 5 mashup... hmmmm I smell lawsuit.

All I really see is a giant camera now :P Maybe this is how they'll avoid a lawsuit!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: As many W's as possible on August 16, 2014, 05:40:31 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68ZagM3SNqk&list=UUukPHZgmrDonqpLzUQHr9QQ

"Self Assembling Robots" A bunch of these small coin sized robots work together to create shapes!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on August 16, 2014, 10:26:56 AM
All I really see is a giant camera now :P Maybe this is how they'll avoid a lawsuit!

nooo noo no, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the body of the phone, because that body must be setting some alarms off with the patent wars lol
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on August 16, 2014, 10:37:01 AM
http://www.tmz.com/2014/08/16/apple-iphone-6-wireless-charging-clone/

lol 1. TMZ shouldn't be reporting tech news because they know nothing. 2. they overhype it to sound like wireless charging is something new. 3. that picture isn't new. that picture is beyond months old, and maybe now did it show up on their twitter feed lol.

I guess If the iPhone doesn't have it, then it doesn't exist!

Lol all Lumia devices being made rn have wireless charging, and I think Samsung does the same too.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on August 16, 2014, 10:40:04 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68ZagM3SNqk&list=UUukPHZgmrDonqpLzUQHr9QQ

"Self Assembling Robots" A bunch of these small coin sized robots work together to create shapes!

I was hearing about this. I found it fascinating that Harvard did this.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: As many W's as possible on August 16, 2014, 10:43:18 AM
http://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/pixelspace_solarsystem.html

This was probably one of the most lovely things I've looked at on the Interwebs in the past few weeks. It's a scale model of our Solar System... if the Moon was 1 pixel in diameter. You just scroll along starting from the sun and end with Pluto! Along the way, there is so much emptiness, but some nice sentences here and there to narrate. Not too sure if this works on phone... but I enjoyed it on my laptop none the less.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on August 16, 2014, 11:04:54 AM
http://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/pixelspace_solarsystem.html

This was probably one of the most lovely things I've looked at on the Interwebs in the past few weeks. It's a scale model of our Solar System... if the Moon was 1 pixel in diameter. You just scroll along starting from the sun and end with Pluto! Along the way, there is so much emptiness, but some nice sentences here and there to narrate. Not too sure if this works on phone... but I enjoyed it on my laptop none the less.

lol this is a website I could see you making. Just how the humor of it reminds me of you very weirdly
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: As many W's as possible on August 16, 2014, 11:09:42 AM
lol this is a website I could see you making. Just how the humor of it reminds me of you very weirdly

Using the maths they have about the scale... I really want to make some sort of outdoor project just to understand how large the thing really is. That scale slightly sized down would be the size of about 1 1/2 football fields...
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on August 16, 2014, 10:20:33 PM
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/220079372/the-urban-glider-re-think-how-you-explore-the-worl?ref=newest

so I found this really cool kickstarter project, called the urban glider. just check out the link.

I think it's definitely something that should take off and become another way of urban street travel! its brilliant and looks well organized!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Keaton Potatoes on August 23, 2014, 07:43:02 PM
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/220079372/the-urban-glider-re-think-how-you-explore-the-worl?ref=newest

so I found this really cool kickstarter project, called the urban glider. just check out the link.

I think it's definitely something that should take off and become another way of urban street travel! its brilliant and looks well organized!
That kind of reminds me of a Segway, It does look pretty cool.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 23, 2014, 07:44:53 PM
That kind of reminds me of a Segway, It does look pretty cool.

if i am not mistaken, when that swgieway thiogn came out, it was toughted as a holy grail...........there junk imo ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Keaton Potatoes on August 23, 2014, 08:00:07 PM
if i am not mistaken, when that swgieway thiogn came out, it was toughted as a holy grail...........there junk imo ^_^
After seeing mallcop I want one :P
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 27, 2014, 10:14:41 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/08/27/this-fossilized-creature-has-world-oldest-muscles/?intcmp=obmod_ffo&intcmp=obnetwork

pretty cool stuff ^_^



Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 29, 2014, 03:02:53 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/29/for-centuries-the-human-race-has-relied-on-communicating-with-each-other-through-talking-now-the-possibility-of-a-new-era-is-here/

wild stuff ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on August 29, 2014, 09:21:37 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/08/29/usda-seizes-more-than-1200-illegal-giant-snails/?intcmp=obnetwork

nothign good comes out of afrika..........why is every one looking at me liek that!?!? why do i hear an angry mob in the background! :O!!!!

i kid, any who. GAINT SNAILS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! zomg i want to hug it :O!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on September 01, 2014, 10:04:14 AM
Slightly off topic but I'd like to share a Science and technology YouTuber/video series I enjoy and hope others do too.

http://youtu.be/s_lg-zUHbFg
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 07, 2014, 09:06:07 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/09/05/the-army-is-getting-a-new-laser-cannon-and-it-can-shoot-drones-out-of-the-sky/

da lasor cannon :O!!!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on September 09, 2014, 01:27:12 PM
http://m.uk.ign.com/articles/2014/09/09/apple-announces-iphone-6
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 09, 2014, 04:10:05 PM
http://m.uk.ign.com/articles/2014/09/09/apple-announces-iphone-6

and in a month or 2, we will hear about the new iphone 6 S after every one has spent a zillion dollors on there new iphone.

infact apple has started a new campain where it waits out side of its stores to tell peopel who just bought an ihpone 6 that the new iphone 6s is out and they need to get back inline or lose there hispter statis!!! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on September 10, 2014, 03:05:25 PM
Dat bling though ::)
http://m.uk.ign.com/articles/2014/09/10/italian-jeweler-creates-rose-gold-ps4-and-xbox-one
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Keaton Potatoes on September 10, 2014, 04:35:42 PM
Dat bling though ::)
http://m.uk.ign.com/articles/2014/09/10/italian-jeweler-creates-rose-gold-ps4-and-xbox-one
Those look really nice though the gold might make them hot as hell :P
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on September 10, 2014, 09:16:43 PM
NVIDIA holds the world to ransom.

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/09/04/nvidia-launches-patent-suits/

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 12, 2014, 01:00:54 PM
NVIDIA holds the world to ransom.

http://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2014/09/04/nvidia-launches-patent-suits/

maybe i am reading it wrong, but it sounds liek talks with samsung fell threw, and then samsung decied to go ahead and use naviada technolagy with out navidas concent.

so navida is uttrely in the rigth here to scream bloody murder. unless i am missing something??
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on September 12, 2014, 07:36:35 PM
so navida is uttrely in the rigth here to scream bloody murder. unless i am missing something??
It goes back to my distaste for patents. NVIDA hold 7000 patents to do with graphics technology, giving them a stranglehold. This means that all GPU manufactures have to pay license fees to NVIDA, pushing up the cost to the manufactorer, and us the consumer. It also means manufacturers have less money to spend on R & D, so inovation is held back.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 13, 2014, 05:49:13 PM
It goes back to my distaste for patents. NVIDA hold 7000 patents to do with graphics technology, giving them a stranglehold. This means that all GPU manufactures have to pay license fees to NVIDA, pushing up the cost to the manufactorer, and us the consumer. It also means manufacturers have less money to spend on R & D, so inovation is held back.

but at the same time if it was not for patints then there would be less r/d, as its uasly about da money. if you cant recoup the milions you put into tech then there not gona bother r/d ing it.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: a blue gecko on September 14, 2014, 12:12:05 AM
but at the same time if it was not for patints then there would be less r/d, as its uasly about da money. if you cant recoup the milions you put into tech then there not gona bother r/d ing it.

The point remains that NVIDIA is a patent troll, ultimately stifling progress for their own greed.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on September 14, 2014, 12:44:05 AM
but at the same time if it was not for patints then there would be less r/d, as its uasly about da money. if you cant recoup the milions you put into tech then there not gona bother r/d ing it.
No. NVIDA have spent roughly $9b on R & D in the last 23 years. How much revenue do you think they've earned in that 23 years? A hell of a lot more I can tell you. They have recovered the cost of their R & D many times over.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 14, 2014, 04:28:48 AM
The point remains that NVIDIA is a patent troll, ultimately stifling progress for their own greed.

go ahead and spend billions on a product so I can steal it over night and profit, that's ok right because its cool when people steal navidias ideas. ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 14, 2014, 04:29:35 AM
No. NVIDA have spent roughly $9b on R & D in the last 23 years. How much revenue do you think they've earned in that 23 years? A hell of a lot more I can tell you. They have recovered the cost of their R & D many times over.

so you would have no issue with someone stealing tm and stealing your revune right? or is it only ok when its not you?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on September 14, 2014, 06:48:16 AM
so you would have no issue with someone stealing tm and stealing your revune right? or is it only ok when its not you?
TM has no patents and welcomes all competition. You should know that.

It's not about stealing a product. It's about protecting (stifling) technology. The analogy with TM would be if the author of Infiniminer or Minecraft were able to take out a patent that forced everybody else who wanted to make a block building game to have to pay a license fee to them. In that case, TM wouldn't even exist, and neither would most other block building games, so the inovation and experimentation in that game genre would be stifled.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Nefty on September 14, 2014, 08:35:38 AM
TM has no patents and welcomes all competition. You should know that.

It's not about stealing a product. It's about protecting (stifling) technology. The analogy with TM would be if the author of Infiniminer or Minecraft were able to take out a patent that forced everybody else who wanted to make a block building game to have to pay a license fee to them. In that case, TM wouldn't even exist, and neither would most other block building games, so the inovation and experimentation in that game genre would be stifled.

That isn't even possible is it? I mean block building games are a genre, not a specific game made  by a specific person right?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on September 14, 2014, 09:25:45 AM
That isn't even possible is it? I mean block building games are a genre, not a specific game made  by a specific person right?
No it's probably not possible, otherwise if ID software had taken out a patent on first person shooters when they made Wolfenstein, every subsequent author of first person shooters would have had to pay them. But that's not the point, it was an analogy. NVIDA hold so many patents covering most of the technology used in modern GPU's, in comparison that is effectively the position they have.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Keaton Potatoes on September 14, 2014, 05:15:03 PM
No it's probably not possible, otherwise if ID software had taken out a patent on first person shooters when they made Wolfenstein, every subsequent author of first person shooters would have had to pay them. But that's not the point, it was an analogy. NVIDA hold so many patents covering most of the technology used in modern GPU's, in comparison that is effectively the position they have.
They did invent them, So I mean it's theirs other companies could have tried r&d on other types of components for making GPUs but they chose to use Nvidias tech, Does it really matter if Nvidia turns a big profit or not? They invested in their inventions and happened to turned a very large profit. They're a company, They're protecting their assets.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 14, 2014, 06:44:42 PM
TM has no patents and welcomes all competition. You should know that.

It's not about stealing a product. It's about protecting (stifling) technology. The analogy with TM would be if the author of Infiniminer or Minecraft were able to take out a patent that forced everybody else who wanted to make a block building game to have to pay a license fee to them. In that case, TM wouldn't even exist, and neither would most other block building games, so the inovation and experimentation in that game genre would be stifled.

stealing a patant is still stealing. ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on September 14, 2014, 06:51:09 PM
stealing a patant is still stealing. ^_^
I'm not disputing the legality.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on September 14, 2014, 06:53:18 PM
They did invent them, So I mean it's theirs other companies could have tried r&d on other types of components for making GPUs but they chose to use Nvidias tech, Does it really matter if Nvidia turns a big profit or not? They invested in their inventions and happened to turned a very large profit. They're a company, They're protecting their assets.
I'm not disputing that. The problem in this case is the patents are probably holding back technological advancement. It's good for NVIDA, bad for the rest of the world.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 17, 2014, 03:04:46 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/09/16/scientists-surprised-by-what-they-saw-in-the-brain-of-a-vegetative-man-while-he-watched-hitchMcRib-film/

this raises soem seruies questions on care.

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on September 22, 2014, 09:16:26 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/09/22/tiny-implants-could-give-humans-self-healing-superpowers/?intcmp=obnetwork

wild stuff ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 08, 2014, 04:39:04 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/08/chickens-four-times-bigger-within-the-last-60-years-but-its-not-steroids-or-because-theyre-being-fed-more/

wild stuff for da chcikonos! :O!

big chicken, big chicken coming for you :O! I for one welcome our new chicken overlords ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/08/major-cancer-discovery-found-in-the-middle-of-the-australian-rain-forest/

wild stuff, protect da rain forests ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 23, 2014, 12:17:17 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/22/watch-the-power-of-180-mph-winds-as-they-reverse-a-waterfall/

cra cra wind ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/22/scientist-dives-into-the-secret-life-of-squirrels-a-little-bit-humorous/

one day I heard the sound the squerls make when they are defending there territory from another squearl. much to my surpise it was a simple enough sound. so I had the bright idea to reproduce it using my self.
turns out it worked. I was abel to reproduce the sound quite well and scared the heck out of a near by squearl ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on October 23, 2014, 03:30:48 PM
Happy Mole day :D
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 23, 2014, 03:50:39 PM
Happy Mole day :D

elaborate? ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on October 23, 2014, 04:52:50 PM
elaborate? ^_^
In Chemistry there is a constant called Avogadro's number (6.02 x10^23) it is the number of atoms of a substance that makes up a unit called a mole. Mole day is the 23rd of the 10 month or written in american format 10/23 and is celebrated between 6.02 am till 6.02 pm. Matching the constant.

As a chemist I thought I'd share the facts its mole day.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 23, 2014, 11:03:01 PM
In Chemistry there is a constant called Avogadro's number (6.02 x10^23) it is the number of atoms of a substance that makes up a unit called a mole. Mole day is the 23rd of the 10 month or written in american format 10/23 and is celebrated between 6.02 am till 6.02 pm. Matching the constant.

As a chemist I thought I'd share the facts its mole day.

agy has never had chemistry so this is new to her ^_^, sounds neat ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 25, 2014, 11:24:31 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/24/beautiful-ad-captures-ice-crystals-in-stunning-high-quality-display/

we think 4k is gona go any where?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 28, 2014, 04:14:50 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/10/26/elon-musk-says-are-summoning-demon-with-artificial-intelligence/?intcmp=obnetwork

all it takes is for the AI to think we are "in the way" and its game over.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on October 28, 2014, 06:13:53 AM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/10/26/elon-musk-says-are-summoning-demon-with-artificial-intelligence/?intcmp=obnetwork

all it takes is for the AI to think we are "in the way" and its game over.

We are a foolish species, when will we ever heed a warning? Those films about this kind of stuff are NOT far fetched. This CAN happen, and I don't plan on being around a tech savvy area when it does.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 28, 2014, 01:50:29 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/27/incredible-gopro-wildlife-footage-shows-lioness-hunt-prey-with-gopro-camera-mounted-to-its-body/

Gazel: i can see your camara GF!

liones:...........no you cant!

Gazel: o.........ok (munches grass)....wait a sec! whos out there!

liones: ..............no one here but us chickens!

Gazel: ok just some ckickens............wait whats a chick- (gets eaten!)

XD
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on October 29, 2014, 08:04:00 AM
Engineering failure aside, this has to be the most awesome explosion I've ever seen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3jCystkiIBs
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 29, 2014, 11:54:39 AM
Engineering failure aside, this has to be the most awesome explosion I've ever seen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3jCystkiIBs

we kept waiting to see it as we coudl have seen ti form our house even tho we were well north.

didnt know it blew up tho till we came inside and saw the news XD
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 29, 2014, 02:59:34 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/29/if-youve-been-told-drinking-a-lot-of-milk-is-good-for-your-bones-youll-want-to-see-what-this-study-found/


............lolwut?........................LOLWUT!?!?!?!?!?!?!

we cant win. now milk is bad for you???? AND DESTRYS BONES!?!?!?! whaaaaaaaaa!?!?!?! (crurles into a ball and crys).
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jaz on October 29, 2014, 06:24:56 PM
Engineering failure aside, this has to be the most awesome explosion I've ever seen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3jCystkiIBs
does look pretty cool :P lucky their was no one on board.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jaz on October 29, 2014, 06:37:20 PM
Deffinthe biggest firework this year :3
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on October 29, 2014, 06:38:24 PM
Quote from: Craig on Today at 08:04:00 AM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg113354#msg113354)<blockquote>Engineering failure aside, this has to be the most awesome explosion I've ever seen.


</blockquote>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5orJHRHbX0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVe4_G2eT0Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fufuluffQDY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McbCwSW2moo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11e8XyUBqRQ



Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on October 31, 2014, 12:54:16 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2014/10/30/are-japanese-mushrooms-cure-for-hpv/?intcmp=features

go team japan! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 08, 2014, 07:39:50 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/07/mysterious-light-spotted-by-nasa-could-redefine-what-scientists-know-of-galaxies/

da scicne! ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/07/you-know-the-youre-not-alone-feeling-scientists-found-out-whats-happening-in-the-brain/

da robot! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 10, 2014, 07:32:08 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/10/theres-a-virus-lurking-in-ponds-that-could-be-making-you-dumber/

creepy stuff :O!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 11, 2014, 08:47:49 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/11/11/risky-comet-landing-by-european-probe-will-be-7-hours-terror/?intcmp=features

risky space bisnues ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/11/the-god-particle-discovery-that-maybe-wasnt/

we may never know. ...................SCINCE!!! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on November 18, 2014, 06:18:46 PM
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/offbeat/billionaire-barry-diller-is-funding-a-dollar130-million-floating-park-in-the-hudson-river/ar-BBejWfb?ocid=ansbusinessinsider11

This billionare is investing into something great!!!! $130 million he's putting forthward to building a park over the water! its awesome!!! It would replace former Pier 54, famously known for where the titanic was supposed to arrive, and will bring more green to NYC!

I love nature, especially when people try building with it. I read a couple months ago they just finished the last third of The High Line. I also heard they're attempting to build an underground park in the place of a former train station, called The Low Line (this one will be interesting. link to site about it here: http://www.thelowline.org/ ).


Park replacing Pier 54:
(http://cdn.rsvlts.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/07_View-of-Southern-space-looking-north-from-Gansevoort-Peninsula.jpg)

The High Line:
(http://www.asla.org/sustainablelandscapes/images/highline/Highline_5.jpg)

The Low Line:
(http://www.plataformaarquitectura.cl/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/1321996622-20111122-337-lowline-slide-1lyq-articlelarge-528x308.jpg)

(dont know if this would be a right place to post something like this)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 18, 2014, 06:44:47 PM
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/offbeat/billionaire-barry-diller-is-funding-a-dollar130-million-floating-park-in-the-hudson-river/ar-BBejWfb?ocid=ansbusinessinsider11

This billionare is investing into something great!!!! $130 million he's putting forthward to building a park over the water! its awesome!!! It would replace former Pier 54, famously known for where the titanic was supposed to arrive, and will bring more green to NYC!

I love nature, especially when people try building with it. I read a couple months ago they just finished the last third of The High Line. I also heard they're attempting to build an underground park in the place of a former train station, called The Low Line (this one will be interesting. link to site about it here: http://www.thelowline.org/ ).


Park replacing Pier 54:
(http://cdn.rsvlts.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/07_View-of-Southern-space-looking-north-from-Gansevoort-Peninsula.jpg)

The High Line:
(http://www.asla.org/sustainablelandscapes/images/highline/Highline_5.jpg)

The Low Line:
(http://www.plataformaarquitectura.cl/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/1321996622-20111122-337-lowline-slide-1lyq-articlelarge-528x308.jpg)

(dont know if this would be a right place to post something like this)

behold the power of captialisum ^_^

I assume tho tax payers are goan foot the bill for upkeep tho is the only thing.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 18, 2014, 08:15:04 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/17/have-a-design-for-a-super-soldier-robot-military-research-agency-looking-for-revolutionary-advances-in-biotechnology/

could be something for some of you tech guys to look into, maybe help save a life ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/17/ford-releasing-f-150-thats-700-pounds-lighter-what-are-experts-saying-about-it/

pretty cool idea imo ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/18/possible-alzheimers-breakthrough-could-identify-the-disease-before-symptoms-even-start/

SCINCE!!!! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on November 18, 2014, 08:24:28 PM
behold the power of captialisum ^_^

I assume tho tax payers are goan foot the bill for upkeep tho is the only thing.
but hey, its nature. nature is more important than anything (at least to me). nature brings life. nature brings beauty too. could you declare the sun part of nature?


if I ever do actually go into architecture (now seeing I wont be. I might go into computer science instead seeing that its a growing demand), I would design nature parks constantly, or if the housing designs I have, will have some sort of nature implemented into it.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on November 18, 2014, 09:45:48 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 08:15:04 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg116574#msg116574)<blockquote>

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/17/ford-releasing-f-150-thats-700-pounds-lighter-what-are-experts-saying-about-it/ (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/17/ford-releasing-f-150-thats-700-pounds-lighter-what-are-experts-saying-about-it/)

pretty cool idea imo ^_^

</blockquote>

F-150s have a curb weight of 4,000 pounds. 700 pounds less is still really heavy at 3,300 pounds..
My car on the other hand is just a tad over 2,000 making it very light and quick.
(http://rallyways.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/mazda_miata_na_red.jpg)(http://www.miata.net/gallery/images/96red.jpg)
Some others are..
Model    Curb Weight
2012 Toyota Camry    3,190 pounds
2012 Toyota Prius    3,042 pounds
2012 Toyota Avalon    3,572 pounds
2013 Toyota Matrix   2,888 pounds
2013 Chevrolet Equinox LS    3,777 pounds
2013 Chevrolet Corvette    3,208 pounds
2013 Chevrolet Malibu    3,393 pounds
2012 Chrysler Town and Country    4,652 pounds
2013 Subaru Outback    3,495 pounds
2014 Subaru Impreza    3,208 pounds
2013 BMW 740i Sedan    4,344 pounds
2012 Honda Civic LX Coupe    2,617 pounds
2012 Cadillac Escalade EXT    5,949 pounds
2012 MINI Cooper Hatchback    2.535 pounds
2013 Dodge Durango    6,500 pounds
2013 Hyundai Accent    2,396 pounds
2013 Hyundai Elantra   2,701 pounds
2012 Scion xB    3,084 pounds
2012 Scion TC    3,102 pounds
2013 Buick Regal    3,600 pounds
2014 Buick LaCrosse    3,756 pounds
2014 Buick Verano   3,300 pounds
2013 Kia Optima Hybrid   3,496 pounds
2014 Kia Cadenza    3,668 pounds
2012 Lexus IS-F    3,780 pounds
2013 Audi A6    3,682 pounds
2014 BMW 5-Series    3,814 pounds
2012 Nissan Cube    3,825 pounds
2012 Nissan Maxima    3,540 pounds
2014 Nissan Versa   2,354 pounds
2013 Ford Focus    2,935 pounds
2013 Ford Taurus    4,037 pounds
2012 Smart Fortwo    1,808 pounds
2013 Mazda MAZDA6    3,323 pounds
2014 Porsche Panamera    3,968 pounds
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 19, 2014, 12:10:14 PM
but hey, its nature. nature is more important than anything (at least to me). nature brings life. nature brings beauty too. could you declare the sun part of nature?


if I ever do actually go into architecture (now seeing I wont be. I might go into computer science instead seeing that its a growing demand), I would design nature parks constantly, or if the housing designs I have, will have some sort of nature implemented into it.

I would consider the sun part of nature ^_^

yea I don't see a very high demand for arcaticts, exsopaicly with the stagnet growth we have had for 8 years and no end in sight.
at lest we get to be amaricas version of "the lost generation"..........wait a sec........
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 19, 2014, 12:12:13 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 08:15:04 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg116574#msg116574)<blockquote>

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/17/ford-releasing-f-150-thats-700-pounds-lighter-what-are-experts-saying-about-it/ (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/17/ford-releasing-f-150-thats-700-pounds-lighter-what-are-experts-saying-about-it/)

pretty cool idea imo ^_^

</blockquote>

F-150s have a curb weight of 4,000 pounds. 700 pounds less is still really heavy at 3,300 pounds..
My car on the other hand is just a tad over 2,000 making it very light and quick.
(http://rallyways.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/mazda_miata_na_red.jpg)(http://www.miata.net/gallery/images/96red.jpg)
Some others are..
Model    Curb Weight
2012 Toyota Camry    3,190 pounds
2012 Toyota Prius    3,042 pounds
2012 Toyota Avalon    3,572 pounds
2013 Toyota Matrix   2,888 pounds
2013 Chevrolet Equinox LS    3,777 pounds
2013 Chevrolet Corvette    3,208 pounds
2013 Chevrolet Malibu    3,393 pounds
2012 Chrysler Town and Country    4,652 pounds
2013 Subaru Outback    3,495 pounds
2014 Subaru Impreza    3,208 pounds
2013 BMW 740i Sedan    4,344 pounds
2012 Honda Civic LX Coupe    2,617 pounds
2012 Cadillac Escalade EXT    5,949 pounds
2012 MINI Cooper Hatchback    2.535 pounds
2013 Dodge Durango    6,500 pounds
2013 Hyundai Accent    2,396 pounds
2013 Hyundai Elantra   2,701 pounds
2012 Scion xB    3,084 pounds
2012 Scion TC    3,102 pounds
2013 Buick Regal    3,600 pounds
2014 Buick LaCrosse    3,756 pounds
2014 Buick Verano   3,300 pounds
2013 Kia Optima Hybrid   3,496 pounds
2014 Kia Cadenza    3,668 pounds
2012 Lexus IS-F    3,780 pounds
2013 Audi A6    3,682 pounds
2014 BMW 5-Series    3,814 pounds
2012 Nissan Cube    3,825 pounds
2012 Nissan Maxima    3,540 pounds
2014 Nissan Versa   2,354 pounds
2013 Ford Focus    2,935 pounds
2013 Ford Taurus    4,037 pounds
2012 Smart Fortwo    1,808 pounds
2013 Mazda MAZDA6    3,323 pounds
2014 Porsche Panamera    3,968 pounds

hehe you really love that mazda ^_^

I think its neat still, its nearly 1/4 its weight gone. what happned if your miatia was made out of it :O! maybe you could fly ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 19, 2014, 02:02:02 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/19/nasa-looks-at-health-differences-spaceflight-has-on-men-and-women-and-includes-perceived-gender-in-new-study/

I could have told you men and women are different, government should hire me XD ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/19/major-piece-of-the-human-brain-rediscovered-after-it-was-forgotten-for-more-than-a-century/

are we really at the point where theres so much to know that we forget what we have learned?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/19/see-it-this-bubble-isnt-made-to-keep-germs-out-but-the-mask-inside-is/

da military!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/18/the-new-airplane-design-some-are-already-calling-flying-doughnut/

that is so cool ^_^! I love that design and would love to see plans like it ^_^!!!!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on November 19, 2014, 10:39:08 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 12:12:13 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg116665#msg116665)<blockquote>hehe you really love that mazda ^_^

I think its neat still, its nearly 1/4 its weight gone. what happned if your miatia was made out of it :O! maybe you could fly ^_^
</blockquote>

Actually parts of the MX-5 have always been lightweight aluminum... the hood and trunk both are. Even the rear view mirror is made of light weight material since the beginning. The Car is perhaps one of the greatest designs in road engineering.. and everything about it was designed from the ground up.. that's why it has perfect 50/50 balance since the beginning. It's also why if you google "most raced car in the world" you'll find it's in fact the Mazda Miata MX-5.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjpbTWJBpII

oh.. and she does indeed fly.. Jay Leno has one like mine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1qgtCt1jG0#t=18
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 19, 2014, 10:40:15 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 12:12:13 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg116665#msg116665)<blockquote>hehe you really love that mazda ^_^

I think its neat still, its nearly 1/4 its weight gone. what happned if your miatia was made out of it :O! maybe you could fly ^_^
</blockquote>

Actually parts of the MX-5 have always been lightweight aluminum... the hood and trunk both are. Even the rear view mirror is made of light weight material since the beginning. The Car is perhaps one of the greatest designs in road engineering.. and everything about it was designed from the ground up.. that's why it has perfect 50/50 balance since the beginning. It's also why if you google "most raced car in the world" you'll find it's in fact the Mazda Miata MX-5.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjpbTWJBpII

agy likes it a lot ^_^ go team aluminum! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 20, 2014, 12:07:36 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/19/boardwalk-babes-the-strange-story-of-the-incubator/

history is filled with wonder and amazement ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 22, 2014, 08:02:53 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/22/european-scientists-are-going-to-try-to-grow-food-in-space/

space food! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 24, 2014, 09:05:25 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/11/24/gps-study-tracks-grizzlies-as-follow-hunters/?intcmp=latestnews

DA BEARS! XD ^_^

bears are cra cra ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 25, 2014, 02:29:30 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/11/25/how-a-students-microscope-hack-could-save-science-thousands/

go team invention ^_^!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on November 26, 2014, 10:37:08 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2014/11/26/coca-cola-launching-expensive-milk-that-is-more-nutritious-than-regular-milk/?intcmp=obmod_ffo&intcmp=obnetwork

yea not at 2x the price.................

I cant get my parents to buy organic milk as it is, and its a heck of a lot tastyer and better for me, then reg milk. the reason........its litterl;y 2x the price of reg milk.

same issue here sadly.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/11/26/student-snapped-final-photo-before-bear-attack-in-new-jersey/?intcmp=obmod_ffo&intcmp=obnetwork

calssefied under nature, we call this da Darwin award...........

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/11/25/interstellar-science-is-wormhole-travel-possible/

da scicnce!!!!!!!!!! ^_^ and cra cra ness ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/11/25/google-engineers-say-renewable-energy-wont-solve-climate-change/

"Can climate change be solved with technologies like wind and solar energy?

No, it can’t, according to a new report by two Google engineers, published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers"

lot of people have been saying that for a very long time. every time they are vilified as if they where Nazis.......
but now maybe those people will listion.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Shorts the Environmentalist on November 30, 2014, 10:11:56 AM
behold the power of captialisum ^_^

I assume tho tax payers are goan foot the bill for upkeep tho is the only thing.
I actually don't think any of these parks are public. they were all privately funded, so I can only assume that the upkeep for these parks will be private as well.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on December 01, 2014, 08:17:51 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/12/01/amazon-rolls-out-thousands-of-robots-to-pack-cyber-monday-orders/

da robots! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on December 03, 2014, 06:23:52 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/12/03/stephen-hawking-artificial-intelligence-could-end-human-race/

all it takes is the AI to decied we are in the way, and then its game over.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on December 03, 2014, 07:18:47 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/12/03/stephen-hawking-artificial-intelligence-could-end-human-race/

all it takes is the AI to decied we are in the way, and then its game over.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test

Have a little read, the test is based on whether a computer/machine can "think" for its self and what is defined as thinking. Up to Today only one super computer has passed the test and its disputed if it truly passed it.

It is when a computer can truly think for its self, that we are truly at risk.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on December 03, 2014, 09:27:59 PM
To be more exact.. AI thinking for itself is more about being self aware.. Computers are not self aware. They can already perform specific calculations faster than humans.. a type of thinking; but they are not self aware and probably won't be within my lifetime.. you can fake awareness in programs.. but real self awareness is a sign of life itself. Something I'm not sure we'll ever achieve with computers. Computers are basically series of light switches. On or off connections (1s and 0s) triggered by software and limited to that software. Being able to think for oneself and question one's own existence is uniquely human. It's possible to program to destroy without thought however. That is sadly done now without the aid of super computers.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on December 04, 2014, 10:19:38 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/12/03/new-thermal-gadget-could-save-military-billions-of-dollars-a-year/

tank powa! ^_^!!!!

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on December 09, 2014, 04:37:25 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/12/09/its-just-a-video-of-a-raindrop-but-researchers-have-found-out-something-really-cool-about-it/

I vaugly recall seeing this done many many years ago.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on December 12, 2014, 08:27:31 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/12/12/when-did-humans-figure-out-fire-ancient-cave-offers-clue/?intcmp=features

da fire! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on December 17, 2014, 09:45:17 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/12/17/olive-oil-said-to-be-8000-years-old-found-in-israel/

first scince ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/12/17/it-kills-viruses-fungi-and-bacteria-continuously-could-this-metal-hold-the-solution-to-hospital-superbugs/

then tehcinolagy ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on December 27, 2014, 06:11:05 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/12/26/see-the-fascinating-discovery-scientists-made-five-miles-beneath-the-ocean-surface/

da fishys! ^_^

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on January 06, 2015, 09:16:40 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/06/looking-at-this-picture-actually-brought-a-tear-to-my-eye-see-nasas-new-image-of-a-familiar-sight-from-space/

amazing space ^_^, such natural prettiness ^_^!

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/06/theoretical-astrophysicist-reveals-how-an-unusual-event-in-the-sky-2000-years-ago-could-be-tied-to-jesus-birth-as-the-bible-claims/

just wild seeing scince find things that where in a book so old. also very cool that maybe it wasint a star but instead planet allienment.

agy likes history ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on January 06, 2015, 09:31:52 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 09:16:40 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg121311#msg121311)<blockquote>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/06/looking-at-this-picture-actually-brought-a-tear-to-my-eye-see-nasas-new-image-of-a-familiar-sight-from-space/ (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/06/looking-at-this-picture-actually-brought-a-tear-to-my-eye-see-nasas-new-image-of-a-familiar-sight-from-space/)

amazing space ^_^, such natural prettiness ^_^!

</blockquote>

(http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/p1501ay.jpg)
clicky for full size!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on January 12, 2015, 01:16:05 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/10/close-but-no-cigar-in-the-effort-to-colonize-the-universe-theres-one-huge-obstacle-that-spacex-couldnt-quite-conquer/

team rocket that's right! ^_^..............what are we talking about again?

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on January 14, 2015, 08:51:10 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/13/scientists-baffled-by-what-is-causing-mysterious-booms-being-reported-across-the-country/

"I’ll tell you exactly what it is. Ever hear of a government project called “HAARP?” Think about this. When the HAARP array is fired up, it creates a bulge in the ionosphere. It raises up like a basketball under a blanket, but it’s thousands of feet high. When the ionosphere raises up, it drags other parts of the ionosphere with it, moving the air masses with it. When it is suddenly turned off, the ionosphere drops back down, creating a shift in the layers of the atmosphere, making cold and hot air massed collide, which is exactly what happens when it thunders.

It can literally make these booms appear hundreds of miles from HAARP’s location in remote Alaska, causing these booms in different parts of the US. The government needs to stop meddling in controlling the weather. I’d take bets on HAARP being the reason for the screwy weather all over the country."

I remember hearing about something just like that some time ago form some military people. notably the craziness of our weather has mostrly started since they have had it in operation.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/13/nasa-satellite-captures-peculiar-line-in-wisconsin-from-space-heres-the-scientific-explanation/

cra cra ness ^_^

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on January 14, 2015, 09:34:59 PM
Are people still harping about HAARP? ^-^ Here's some science to debunk all the HAARP nonsense.. which incidentally has been blamed and accused of all sorts of shenanigans. Below is the best answer on the web about HAARP. The 2009 data on world energy usage still falls in at 15TW btw.. In my opinion the "booms" may be various things in various locations.. I've read a few and it appears not much investigation has really been done other than setting up seismic listening stations to rule out earthquakes.. that leaves all sorts of other simple explanations.

 None of the conspiracy mongers would be satisfied with the truth.

If one understood the mechanics of tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes or volcanoes there would be no basis for an informed person to give it any credence.

There isn't enough space here to present the arguments in detail but here is an abreveated summation you can recheck the math. It lies in the discrepancy between the theoretical maximum power output rate or peak power of a single power generating station and the millions of times more joules/watts that the natural disaster-in-the-making releases.

It lies in the impossibility of generating and directing a power stream of such magnitude and not be detected by an international body.

There is no construct that explains how any device especially one inferred to be a directed energy weapon could bring to bear an "unknown but universal" force which could heat the ocean's surface in a burst and not also heat the water laden atmosphere without turning large swaths of it into plasma which would also not turn the entire atmosphere into daylight. The induced heating would show up in the network of free floating, satellite-linked, temperature-sensing buoys circulating across all the worlds oceans.

But lets look at the power of the HAARP installation versus the energy released in this cited examples.

50 to 200 TW - weather: rate of heat energy released by a hurricane
15 TW - geo: total power consumption of the human world in 2004

Assuming it takes only a 10th of that energy by HAARP to trigger a hurricane--in some unknown fashion, it would take 4 months to 1.5 years worth of the total world power output released over 12 seconds. HAARPis a 40 acre facility. Do you see where this is going?

The energy release in a 6.0 mag earthquake is 4.2oPJ (petajoules 10E15) Again assuming no energy loss and perfect transmission and perfect reflection off the ionized sparse density of gases in the ionosphere and a 10% trigger: 420 terajoules or 120 kilotons of TNT or 5 Nagasaki sized bombs(20Kt) released every second for 3 seconds= 140 terawatts /second which is back to the energy demands of the entire worlds yearly consumption 28 times over. IF the US could generate and control but 100th of that energy do you not think we would be using it to replace (imported) oil firing power plants? Do you think Al Gore as vice president or Bill Clinton as president wouldn't be directing the declassification of such a power source?

Finally there is no "daily earthquake of 5.2" anywhere little alone specifically in China. Earthquakes over 4.6 are detectable from any seismic station in the world so long as they are not in the shadow of the quake and a running record of all the world's quakes are available at any of several national and international internet sites.
Source:
http://www.mhi-inc.com/Converter/watt_calculator.htm (http://www.mhi-inc.com/Converter/watt_calculator.htm)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on January 14, 2015, 09:37:08 PM
Are people still harping about HAARP? ^-^ Here's some science to debunk all the HAARP nonsense.. which incidentally has been blamed and accused of all sorts of shenanigans. Below is the best answer on the web about HAARP. The 2009 data on world energy usage still falls in at 15TW btw.. In my opinion the "booms" may be various things in various locations.. I've read a few and it appears not much investigation has really been done other than setting up seismic listening stations to rule out earthquakes.. that leaves all sorts of other simple explanations.

 None of the conspiracy mongers would be satisfied with the truth.

If one understood the mechanics of tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes or volcanoes there would be no basis for an informed person to give it any credence.

There isn't enough space here to present the arguments in detail but here is an abreveated summation you can recheck the math. It lies in the discrepancy between the theoretical maximum power output rate or peak power of a single power generating station and the millions of times more joules/watts that the natural disaster-in-the-making releases.

It lies in the impossibility of generating and directing a power stream of such magnitude and not be detected by an international body.

There is no construct that explains how any device especially one inferred to be a directed energy weapon could bring to bear an "unknown but universal" force which could heat the ocean's surface in a burst and not also heat the water laden atmosphere without turning large swaths of it into plasma which would also not turn the entire atmosphere into daylight. The induced heating would show up in the network of free floating, satellite-linked, temperature-sensing buoys circulating across all the worlds oceans.

But lets look at the power of the HAARP installation versus the energy released in this cited examples.

50 to 200 TW - weather: rate of heat energy released by a hurricane
15 TW - geo: total power consumption of the human world in 2004

Assuming it takes only a 10th of that energy by HAARP to trigger a hurricane--in some unknown fashion, it would take 4 months to 1.5 years worth of the total world power output released over 12 seconds. HAARPis a 40 acre facility. Do you see where this is going?

The energy release in a 6.0 mag earthquake is 4.2oPJ (petajoules 10E15) Again assuming no energy loss and perfect transmission and perfect reflection off the ionized sparse density of gases in the ionosphere and a 10% trigger: 420 terajoules or 120 kilotons of TNT or 5 Nagasaki sized bombs(20Kt) released every second for 3 seconds= 140 terawatts /second which is back to the energy demands of the entire worlds yearly consumption 28 times over. IF the US could generate and control but 100th of that energy do you not think we would be using it to replace (imported) oil firing power plants? Do you think Al Gore as vice president or Bill Clinton as president wouldn't be directing the declassification of such a power source?

Finally there is no "daily earthquake of 5.2" anywhere little alone specifically in China. Earthquakes over 4.6 are detectable from any seismic station in the world so long as they are not in the shadow of the quake and a running record of all the world's quakes are available at any of several national and international internet sites.
Source:
http://www.mhi-inc.com/Converter/watt_calculator.htm (http://www.mhi-inc.com/Converter/watt_calculator.htm)

thank you db for your input, agy shall give it da like ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on January 21, 2015, 08:20:35 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/20/new-theory-by-scientists-suggests-possible-existence-of-two-more-earth-sized-planets-within-solar-system/

that would give us ten planets again..................and whats on da tenth planet? shagoths! (cookie to the one who gets that refrince, 2 cookies if you know the exsact name ^_^)

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/20/rarely-seen-sea-creature-photographed-in-australia-it-looks-like-its-from-another-time/

da cra cra :O! agy wonder if its tasty ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/21/researchers-create-water-repellant-metal-surface/

da water ^_^

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on January 21, 2015, 09:23:00 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-cl=84411374&v=7nD7gr1NIf4&x-yt-ts=1421828030#t=83
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on January 21, 2015, 10:24:58 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-cl=84411374&v=7nD7gr1NIf4&x-yt-ts=1421828030#t=83
looks like the thing I just posted ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on January 21, 2015, 10:27:27 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 10:24:58 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg122238#msg122238)<blockquote>looks like the thing I just posted ^_^
</blockquote>

It is the thing you just posted about.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on January 21, 2015, 10:29:19 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 10:24:58 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg122238#msg122238)<blockquote>looks like the thing I just posted ^_^
</blockquote>

It is the thing you just posted about.

:O!!!!!!!!!!!!!

agy is now confused ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on January 28, 2015, 06:19:44 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/28/after-an-asteroid-zoomed-by-earth-monday-scientists-made-curious-observation-in-radar-images/

a da moon ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/01/27/scientists-solve-puzzle-on-how-to-un-boil-a-hard-boiled-egg-and-theres-a-real-reason-it-matters/

unbelkaivable super scince! ^_^!!!!!!!!! (dead series)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on February 03, 2015, 02:54:11 PM
Not the best source but I struggled to find others

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2937770/The-FAA-regulating-business-moon.html

Can't see this working out, however if it does then it may kick start the space age again.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 03, 2015, 06:12:33 PM
Not the best source but I struggled to find others

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2937770/The-FAA-regulating-business-moon.html

Can't see this working out, however if it does then it may kick start the space age again.

theres no way this can ever possably go wrong ever.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on February 10, 2015, 05:31:32 PM
I have already posted about Boston dynamic's "Spot the dog" in the past, but love to follow the progress and share it with you.

http://youtu.be/M8YjvHYbZ9w
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on February 10, 2015, 06:16:29 PM
So awesome.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on February 16, 2015, 05:33:48 PM
A chemists dream come true.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-31483781

Such dreamy, much wow.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 16, 2015, 09:06:55 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2015/02/16/blaze-poll-will-you-eat-the-new-usda-approved-genetically-modified-apple/

creepy :O


http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/02/16/scientists-find-new-aggressive-strain-hiv-in-cuba/?intcmp=ob_homepage_health&intcmp=obnetwork

just glass over cuba now...........I mean really we want to open up more ease of passage there with such a deadly new threat.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on February 17, 2015, 03:05:20 AM
just glass over cuba now...........
Nice one Hitler
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on February 17, 2015, 10:09:43 AM
http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/2395610/lenovo-developing-arm-servers-with-uk-science-and-technology-facilities-council

http://campustechnology.com/articles/2015/02/11/online-game-woos-students-to-scientific-process.aspx

This one is quite interesting, at first I almost stopped reading the article. But after a little more reading, it's a really neat concept and idea.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 17, 2015, 08:17:00 PM
Nice one Hitler

good to see an adult who runs a succesful game can still make come backs like a spoiled child.

edit: i cant stay mad at criag ^_^ (hugs)

while glassing over the area to prevent an exstreamly dangres new deises that we dont even have a cure for its weaker version of may seem to be an exstream. calling agy hitler is even more exstream bedies i would look bad with a mustash! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on February 17, 2015, 08:45:38 PM
good to see an adult who runs a succesful game can still make come backs like a spoiled child.

I'd argue someone who wants to glass over a country just because of a disease is the spoiled child.

There is no constructive debate to be had with someone who is willing to suggest that. It's just so totally wrong.

while glassing over the area to prevent an exstreamly dangres new deises that we dont even have a cure for its weaker version of may seem to be an exstream.
Not seem, is.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 17, 2015, 08:57:38 PM
I'd argue someone who wants to glass over a country just because of a disease is the spoiled child.

Agy: weather it makes me a spoiled child or not. Your logical adult answer is to behave the same way?

There is no constructive debate to be had with someone who is willing to suggest that. It's just so totally wrong.
Not seem, is.

Agy: i would gladly not do it. But i ask that in return for me not doing it. What are resonable EFFECTIVE ways to prevent the spread? keeping in mind we now decades latter have yet to stop the spread of reguler HIV. are you willing to let super HIV spread now in its wake? Its very easy to sit there and call me hitler for providing an effective end to the new super deisues. its a lot harder to sit there and tell me not to do it AND provide an effective alternative.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on February 17, 2015, 09:04:00 PM
Agy: i would gladly not do it. But i ask that in return for me not doing it. What are resonable EFFECTIVE ways to prevent the spread? keeping in mind we now decades latter have yet to stop the spread of reguler HIV. are you willing to let super HIV spread now in its wake? Its very easy to sit there and call me hitler for providing an effective end to the new super deisues. its a lot harder to sit there and tell me not to do it AND provide an effective alternative.
Clearly I don't have the answers. But sledge hammer solutions where the large majority killed don't have anything to do with the problem should never be the solution.

Let's not forget that in the 80s, HIV was condemned as the end of humanity. But we are still here.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 17, 2015, 09:12:32 PM
Clearly I don't have the answers. But sledge hammer solutions where the large majority killed don't have anything to do with the problem should never be the solution.

Agy: i again would love nothing more then to not have to use the sledge hammer. but if thats the only effecctive sulution then i am all for it.

Let's not forget that in the 80s, HIV was condemned as the end of humanity. But we are still here.

Agy: great humanisty dodge yet another bullit. i for one am tired of getting fired at.
it only takes peopel saying "its the end" to be rigth once after all.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on February 17, 2015, 10:36:48 PM
Cuba is a beautiful country full of mostly wonderful friendly people. They also had one of the most aggressive Aids programs in the world and have far fewer problems today due to tight controls on the Aids problem.. read the articles below.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/08/health/a-regimes-tight-grip-lessons-from-cuba-in-aids-control.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2688320/

https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/211/44946.html
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 17, 2015, 10:43:25 PM
Cuba is a beautiful country full of mostly wonderful friendly people. They also had one of the most aggressive Aids programs in the world and have far fewer problems today due to tight controls on the Aids problem.. read the articles below.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/08/health/a-regimes-tight-grip-lessons-from-cuba-in-aids-control.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2688320/

https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/211/44946.html

does the agreesive campaign possably play a role in the emergence of the new super virues? for exspale to combat the agreevise campaign the virues evolved into this new super virus.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on February 17, 2015, 10:48:16 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 10:43:25 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg124203#msg124203)<blockquote>does the agreesive campaign possably play a role in the emergence of the new super virues? for exspale to combat the agreevise campaign the virues evolved into this new super virus.
</blockquote>

No. You should read the articles.. Cuba as far as I know, has done more to prevent the spread and growth of Aids in their country.. made the tough calls and took the disease seriously early on.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 17, 2015, 11:31:55 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 10:43:25 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg124203#msg124203)<blockquote>does the agreesive campaign possably play a role in the emergence of the new super virues? for exspale to combat the agreevise campaign the virues evolved into this new super virus.
</blockquote>

No. You should read the articles.. Cuba as far as I know, has done more to prevent the spread and growth of Aids in their country.. made the tough calls and took the disease seriously early on.

the articals are form 2003, 2004, and 2012. they are far to dated to deal with the current new super virues spreaidg there. but I read them any way to further my knoldge! ^_^

2003 article, I appalude them for being among the first to take it seresly, I wish we all did.
I absololty love there thrrowness in containment ^_^
they talk about how its laws to do it and such since its under communiues. I just wish people would do it for the love of there country just beucse they love there country, not because its law.

2004 arttical, mostly what the 2003 article was, but with the added fact of permenitnt quarantetin for those who break the rules. I like that a lot ^_^

2012 article, that's interesting ^_^, they have 21 different strains of the virues!?! while amaerica mianly has 1. I wonder why that is even with there exstream efftiveness?? tho having 21 could exspalin why a new super one poped up. o, those dirty Canadians and europeaons XD (I mena the ones who go there for nuagty reasons).
agys having a good laugh at there ideals of what consistuites gays and what dfoesint XD
ah there we go, the end of mandatory quarntein, that's why the amount of people with it is spreading there now.


so they were once the penical of aids treatment/stoping the spread. but sadly due to the lack of mandatory quanrinte anymore, as well as there exstream divresaty in the virues. it seems it was doomed to have a new super virues show up.

so now do we go back to the mandatory quarante? that semed to work well. ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 19, 2015, 05:42:12 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/18/ucla-more-than-100-may-have-been-exposed-to-superbug/

agy is sadend to hear such things happen.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 23, 2015, 09:17:51 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/23/medical-experts-took-a-ct-scan-off-this-buddha-statue-and-made-an-ancient-discovery/

cra cra ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on February 25, 2015, 03:41:27 AM
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/health-31594856

Legalisation of modified IVF to allow for "3 parent babies" to allow children to be born without deadly genetic diseases.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 25, 2015, 09:36:37 AM
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/health-31594856

Legalisation of modified IVF to allow for "3 parent babies" to allow children to be born without deadly genetic diseases.

I am glad that it will hopfuly mean less desies, but am also worried about ti being a slip[pery slope with designer babys.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 25, 2015, 07:45:45 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015/02/25/cornell-researchers-find-safest-place-to-hide-from-zombies/

sicneicy zombies! ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/02/22/towering-american-agave-plant-that-waited-80-years-to-flower-has-1-more-month/?intcmp=ob_article_footer_text&intcmp=obnetwork

da big plant :O!!!

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 27, 2015, 04:27:15 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/26/fcc-formally-approves-net-neutrality-proposal-in-straight-party-line-vote/

3 people..........

not the senate, not the congress, not the president..........

just 3 people...........

in a back room......

317 pages long.......last minute revision BY GOOGLE, not a government entity........a private company.

unreadable by the public..........

the facsicit tenticals of my government seek ever deeper into the world........
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on February 27, 2015, 07:39:06 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/02/26/fcc-formally-approves-net-neutrality-proposal-in-straight-party-line-vote/

3 people..........

not the senate, not the congress, not the president..........

just 3 people...........

in a back room......

317 pages long.......last minute revision BY GOOGLE, not a government entity........a private company.

unreadable by the public..........

the facsicit tenticals of my government seek ever deeper into the world........
5 people, but yes it is bizarre. But I do agree with some of the intentions. The rich should not be in control of who gets the lions share of bandwidth, priority, etc. Then it just becomes another tool to increase the wealth gap and make it harder for the less rich to bridge that gap. It should be open and equal to all. For those who complain about the cost of the infrastructure, then they just need to rethink how to monetize it.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Steve on February 27, 2015, 09:52:31 AM
I don't agree that there was a problem that needed fixing in the first place.

I'm a bit skeptical of the intentions as well.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on February 27, 2015, 04:18:26 PM
http://www.redorbit.com/news/space/1113342468/curiosity-confirms-methane-in-mars-atmosphere-possibility-of-life-022715/
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on February 27, 2015, 07:49:07 PM
5 people,

Agy: 3 people, the 2 republicans voted against it. it was 3 leftist voting for it.

but yes it is bizarre. But I do agree with some of the intentions. The rich should not be in control of who gets the lions share of bandwidth, priority, etc.

Agy: that's a dangress road that idea.

Then it just becomes another tool to increase the wealth gap and make it harder for the less rich to bridge that gap. It should be open and equal to all.

Agy: but we are nto all equal.

 For those who complain about the cost of the infrastructure, then they just need to rethink how to monetize it.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Pringle on March 01, 2015, 01:50:22 PM
If for matter to move faster than light we need infinite amount of energy, and the Big Bang was supposedly an infinite amount of energy and we are moving through space because of it, is it possible we are moving faster than light?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jaz on March 01, 2015, 03:08:52 PM
If for matter to move faster than light we need infinite amount of energy, and the Big Bang was supposedly an infinite amount of energy and we are moving through space because of it, is it possible we are moving faster than light?
if I am understanding you correctly then by Stephan Hawkings theory no, his example was;  if a train was going at light speed then someone ran up the train the train would actually slow down while the person runs at light speed.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Pringle on March 01, 2015, 03:42:14 PM
if I am understanding you correctly then by Stephan Hawkings theory no, his example was;  if a train was going at light speed then someone ran up the train the train would actually slow down while the person runs at light speed.
I was saying light speed or faster, so you mean if we were going light speed or faster at one point and we are slowed down or is it a perception type thing.

And isn't the universe suppose to be expanding at like an exponential rate or something? Sort of indicating we are moving faster than before?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on March 01, 2015, 05:03:59 PM
If for matter to move faster than light we need infinite amount of energy, and the Big Bang was supposedly an infinite amount of energy and we are moving through space because of it, is it possible we are moving faster than light?
Infinite energy is impossible within a finite space time.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 01, 2015, 05:50:35 PM
Infinite energy is impossible within a finite space time.


...............for now ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Pringle on March 01, 2015, 06:03:32 PM
Infinite energy is impossible within a finite space time.
If space is always expanding doesn't that make it infinite
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 01, 2015, 06:06:47 PM
If space is always expanding doesn't that make it infinite

Expansive
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Pringle on March 01, 2015, 06:18:24 PM
Apparently we are moving faster than light according to this video although it doesn't have much to do with energy and more to do with space expanding

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XBr4GkRnY04&autoplay=1

Not the same as I suggested but still interesting.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 04, 2015, 04:20:16 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/02/10-year-old-boy-suffered-four-seizures-a-week-later-when-doctors-saw-his-teeth-were-black-they-found-out-what-caused-them/

agy happens to love black licorice. it tastes exstreamly similer to star aninse ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/03/deadly-bacteria-escapes-lab-in-disturbing-incident-were-taking-this-extraordinarily-seriously/

the us government at work ^_^ (builds bunker)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on March 05, 2015, 10:36:34 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/UDa2PvH.jpg)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 05, 2015, 10:38:02 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/UDa2PvH.jpg)
Thanks for this, learned something new today. (Outside of learning new things at work)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on March 05, 2015, 10:39:38 PM
Quote from: Jack Of Shades on Today at 10:38:02 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg125551#msg125551)<blockquote>Thanks for this, learned something new today. (Outside of learning new things at work)


</blockquote>

It's actually complete B.S.. just lightening the mood.. ^-^

All peppers – indeed, all Nightshade family members – have what are called “perfect” flowers.  Perfect flowers are “perfect” because each individual flower contains both male and female sexual reproductive organs (stamens and pistils).

Stand back, folks!  Pepper flowers are bisexual (or what botanists like to call hermaphroditic).
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 05, 2015, 10:44:10 PM
Quote from: Jack Of Shades on Today at 10:38:02 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg125551#msg125551)<blockquote>Thanks for this, learned something new today. (Outside of learning new things at work)


</blockquote>

It's actually complete B.S.. just lightening the mood.. ^-^

All peppers – indeed, all Nightshade family members – have what are called “perfect” flowers.  Perfect flowers are “perfect” because each individual flower contains both male and female sexual reproductive organs (stamens and pistils).

Stand back, folks!  Pepper flowers are bisexual (or what botanists like to call hermaphroditic).

lol you is da bad ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 05, 2015, 10:46:02 PM
Quote from: Jack Of Shades on Today at 10:38:02 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg125551#msg125551)<blockquote>Thanks for this, learned something new today. (Outside of learning new things at work)


</blockquote>

It's actually complete B.S.. just lightening the mood.. ^-^

All peppers – indeed, all Nightshade family members – have what are called “perfect” flowers.  Perfect flowers are “perfect” because each individual flower contains both male and female sexual reproductive organs (stamens and pistils).

Stand back, folks!  Pepper flowers are bisexual (or what botanists like to call hermaphroditic).
xD Good one, /db. It actually made sense though.  ^-^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on March 05, 2015, 10:48:47 PM
Quote from: Jack Of Shades on Today at 10:46:02 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg125556#msg125556)<blockquote>xD Good one, /db . It actually made sense though.  ^-^
</blockquote>

Yep.. feed the masses some snazzy pics and diagrams and they'll swallow anything as fact rather than do their own research... much like "man made climate change"... food for thought in more than one way.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 05, 2015, 10:51:36 PM
Quote from: Jack Of Shades on Today at 10:46:02 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg125556#msg125556)<blockquote>xD Good one, /db . It actually made sense though.  ^-^
</blockquote>

Yep.. feed the masses some snazzy pics and diagrams and they'll swallow anything as fact rather than do their own research... much like "man made climate change"... food for thought in more than one way.

I'm young and impressionable, it's a curse. I'm learning though. ;)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 10, 2015, 07:52:28 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/10/mercedes-benzs-self-driving-cars-took-to-the-streets-of-san-francisco-and-residents-were-mesmerized/

I can see where this will be cool............I can also see where this will be a nightmare.

like wise who get sued when something goes wrong?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/09/it-is-remarkable-new-breakthrough-allows-scientists-to-implant-memories-into-mice/

creepy.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on March 10, 2015, 08:21:25 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 07:52:28 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg125951#msg125951)<blockquote>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/10/mercedes-benzs-self-driving-cars-took-to-the-streets-of-san-francisco-and-residents-were-mesmerized/ (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/10/mercedes-benzs-self-driving-cars-took-to-the-streets-of-san-francisco-and-residents-were-mesmerized/)

I can see where this will be cool............I can also see where this will be a nightmare.

like wise who get sued when something goes wrong?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/09/it-is-remarkable-new-breakthrough-allows-scientists-to-implant-memories-into-mice/ (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/09/it-is-remarkable-new-breakthrough-allows-scientists-to-implant-memories-into-mice/)

creepy.
</blockquote>

There seem to be a lot of companies trying to come up with self driving cars... with many "family" vehicles these days I can kind of understand this.. as driving many modern cars is rather ... dull and tedious. Thankfully, I now have a really fun roadster that I actually enjoy driving these days. Others can stay locked within their cocoons of metal.. safe from feeling any joy in the journey, cattle in their car.. while I zoom by with a huge grin of utter bliss.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 10, 2015, 08:50:46 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 07:52:28 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg125951#msg125951)<blockquote>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/10/mercedes-benzs-self-driving-cars-took-to-the-streets-of-san-francisco-and-residents-were-mesmerized/ (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/10/mercedes-benzs-self-driving-cars-took-to-the-streets-of-san-francisco-and-residents-were-mesmerized/)

I can see where this will be cool............I can also see where this will be a nightmare.

like wise who get sued when something goes wrong?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/09/it-is-remarkable-new-breakthrough-allows-scientists-to-implant-memories-into-mice/ (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/09/it-is-remarkable-new-breakthrough-allows-scientists-to-implant-memories-into-mice/)

creepy.
</blockquote>

There seem to be a lot of companies trying to come up with self driving cars... with many "family" vehicles these days I can kind of understand this.. as driving many modern cars is rather ... dull and tedious. Thankfully, I now have a really fun roadster that I actually enjoy driving these days. Others can stay locked within their cocoons of metal.. safe from feeling any joy in the journey, cattle in their car.. while I zoom by with a huge grin of utter bliss.

you didn't always have it tho did you? did you ever have a family car to move da kiddies around in?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on March 10, 2015, 09:38:59 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 08:50:46 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg125955#msg125955)<blockquote>you didn't always have it tho did you? did you ever have a family car to move da kiddies around in?
</blockquote>
Indeed. We still have a family car for family outings.. the kids have their own cars now. The roadster is my daily driver as well as how the wife and I escape into the Mountains on weekends with the top down when the weather is nice. It's quite liberating and rejuvenating. We've decided that, without a doubt, we shall never go without one again.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Steve on March 10, 2015, 09:45:35 PM
Quote from: Agykoo on Today at 08:50:46 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg125955#msg125955)<blockquote>you didn't always have it tho did you? did you ever have a family car to move da kiddies around in?
</blockquote>
Indeed. We still have a family car for family outings.. the kids have their own cars now. The roadster is my daily driver as well as how the wife and I escape into the Mountains on weekends with the top down when the weather is nice. It's quite liberating and rejuvenating. We've decided that, without a doubt, we shall never go without one again.

My roadster is my daily driver as well. I agree with you :D
Driving is a stress removal tool for me.

Could not go without my trusty V1 though ;)

(http://i60.tinypic.com/6icphk.jpg)
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 13, 2015, 05:49:57 PM
https://www.nasa.gov/press/2015/march/spacecraft-data-suggest-saturn-moons-ocean-may-harbor-hydrothermal-activity/#.VQNbMdLF_qs

I love hearing about news like this, makes me so excited about future possibilities and findings.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 13, 2015, 09:30:46 PM
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-11/tonga-newly-formed-volcanic-island-first-pictures/6301480

This is interesting! :D
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 13, 2015, 09:34:20 PM
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-11/tonga-newly-formed-volcanic-island-first-pictures/6301480

This is interesting! :D


da island ^_^

our earth is neat ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 13, 2015, 09:40:02 PM
da island ^_^

our earth is neat ^_^
Isn't it beautiful!? I agree though, our planet is really cool. 8) It's amazing how we have a new island being formed while we are alive to see it!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 13, 2015, 10:42:40 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015/03/12/bmw-water-injection-system-gives-turbo-engine-boost/?intcmp=obmod_ffo&intcmp=obnetwork

da water engine ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015/03/12/archaeologists-have-found-world-oldest-pretzel/?intcmp=obmod_ffo&intcmp=obnetwork

da old preziel ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 13, 2015, 11:44:42 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015/03/14/neanderthals-wore-eagle-talons-as-jewelry-130000-years-ago/

http://news.mongabay.com/2015/0313-indonesia-forests-under-threat.html

http://northernstar.info/from_ap/nation_world/at-last-a-theory-about-why-denver-is-a-mile/article_aaa14eae-63d1-5018-9085-3240d08d9776.html

http://www.designntrend.com/articles/43912/20150313/human-sized-lobster-fossil-discovered-in-morocco.htm
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 14, 2015, 12:15:58 AM
http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/12/google-chrome-beta-42-push-notification/
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 14, 2015, 06:59:33 PM
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/eagle-camera-dives-worlds-tallest-skyscraper-n323546

Quite interesting POV.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 15, 2015, 05:49:16 PM
http://tbo.com/news/business/grant-sought-to-develop-bay-area-automated-roadway-system-20150315/?page=1

http://kdvr.com/2015/03/15/watch-husband-watches-wife-give-birth-from-2500-miles-away-using-virtual-reality/

http://theconversation.com/you-dont-have-to-be-barking-to-think-trees-are-like-us-38232

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/39756/20150315/latest-marine-species-survey-adds-more-than-1-000-to-the-list.htm
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 15, 2015, 11:40:54 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/03/16/psychiatrist-sheds-light-on-transsexualism/?intcmp=features

just a good medical read. 100% nutreal. ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/03/13/woman-with-rare-genetic-condition-silences-critics-becomes-model/?intcmp=ob_homepage_health&intcmp=obnetwork

"“My very first professional job was with the German heavy metal band Rammstein, that was a lot of fun,” "

you go girl ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 17, 2015, 08:02:24 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/03/17/microsoft-to-axe-internet-explorer/

I used to try to defend IE, but now its just so filled with bugs, and last straw was it screwing with my favrits and ever since it latterly randomly places new favrits in th elist already there XD
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on March 18, 2015, 11:23:25 PM
http://www.hngn.com/articles/78085/20150318/habitable-exoplanets-found-over-galaxy-videos-images.htm

http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/18/rare-storm-creates-the-largest-most-vivid-aurora-youve-ever-seen-video/

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/40645/20150318/bats-make-decisions-in-mere-milliseconds.htm

http://www.sciencerecorder.com/news/carbon-levels-in-amazon-could-cause-trees-to-grow-too-fast-for-their-own-good/

http://scienceblog.com/77433/a-second-minor-planet-may-possess-saturn-like-rings/

http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Planets-in-the-habitable-z-in-Sci_Tech-Stars-150318-183.html
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 20, 2015, 06:35:43 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/03/20/teens-and-anxiety-what-can-do/

I am Agykoo, and I am apart of the amaerican lost generation ^_^

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/03/13/transgender-people-face-discrimination-in-healthcare/

da hate.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/03/20/dont-blame-computer-screens-for-making-us-nearsighted/?intcmp=ob_homepage_health&intcmp=obnetwork

da sun!

Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 23, 2015, 06:53:27 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015/03/23/weird-water-tongue-lets-fish-feed-on-land/?intcmp=obmod_ffo&intcmp=obnetwork

da mud skipper ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/23/our-poop-could-be-a-literal-goldmine-worth-millions/

.................ha!

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/03/23/microsoft-may-lock-out-other-oses-with-windows-10/?intcmp=ob_homepage_tech&intcmp=obnetwork

cra cra :O!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 24, 2015, 06:55:14 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/24/new-experiments-could-trump-the-big-bang-theory/

did I read that right? if they cant prove the big bang didn't happen they are gona simply change the difainice to make it so it didn't happen??

like wise.
"Green Lanterns have a legend, no one can see the beginning of time. It's a universal law."
-John Stewart Green lantern of earth (bestist green lantern eva! ^_^ {drools})
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 25, 2015, 07:43:47 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/03/25/frequent-gastrointestinal-symptoms-may-be-early-sign-autism-study-says/?intcmp=ob_homepage_health&intcmp=obnetwork

an interesting theroaum.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015/03/25/shape-shifting-frog-can-change-its-skin-texture/?intcmp=latestnews

da forggy ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Gary on March 27, 2015, 08:23:21 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH-PaNugz9w

How To Turn Styrofoam, Into Solid Aluminum

Title is a bit misleading. Basically the guy makes a styrofoam mold out of sand and a bucket. Aluminum is super cheap and has a pretty low melting point, so this is a really inexpensive way of making cool metal objects.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on March 27, 2015, 10:02:18 PM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/27/behind-the-scenes-how-the-robots-in-interstellar-were-really-giant-puppets/

one of the best movies I have ever seen, if not the best (ok I think it was the best). but it HAS to be seen in IMAX. the effects and sounds of Imax bring this movie to life. trurly heart recnhign story about human survival.
and I LOVED the robots in it. they had there own personalitlys and felt like real people.
trurly mind blowing twists and turns as well. amazing unbeleavable scifi theory about black holes and quantium phyciscs. the Water planet blew my mind about time and space and the effects gravty has on them both.


http://www.foxnews.com/science/2015/01/21/what-chimpanzees-say-when-communicate-with-each-other/?intcmp=obmod_ffo&intcmp=obnetwork

da chimps ^_^, agy for one loves her monkey brothers and sisters! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Craig on April 07, 2015, 06:26:20 AM
http://charliehoey.com/threejs-demos/shader-game-of-life.html

pretty cool
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 07, 2015, 05:37:22 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/04/06/here-futuristic-3d-printed-violin-that-could-double-as-lethal-weapon/?intcmp=ob_homepage_tech&intcmp=obnetwork

da cra cra printer ^_^

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/04/06/researchers-develop-a-new-way-to-scan-objects-for-3d-printing-and-its-small-enough-to-fit-inside-your-smartphone/

cra cra ^_^

I want a 3-d printer, I just cant justifie getting one. the moment I do tho! ^_^
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Agykoo on April 09, 2015, 03:55:07 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/04/07/near-death-experiences-what-happens-in-brain-before-dying/

mind blowing ^_^!
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on April 20, 2015, 08:34:06 PM
http://www.myfoxaustin.com/story/28851671/a-new-species-of-frog-discovered-in-costa-rica-looks-just-like-kermit-the-frog
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on May 02, 2015, 03:23:14 PM
This could be BIG news:
http://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-has-trialled-an-engine-that-would-take-us-to-Mars-in-10-weeks
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: DiamondBack662 on May 04, 2015, 09:25:05 PM


Quote from: Jack Of Shades on May 02, 2015, 03:23:14 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg130851#msg130851)<blockquote>
This could be BIG news:
http://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-has-trialled-an-engine-that-would-take-us-to-Mars-in-10-weeks (http://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-has-trialled-an-engine-that-would-take-us-to-Mars-in-10-weeks)
</blockquote>

http://www.emdrive.com/
with some links to some research results and explanations..
The theory is not new.. nor is much of the research.. Even China's been working on the program.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on May 04, 2015, 09:27:26 PM

Quote from: Jack Of Shades on May 02, 2015, 03:23:14 PM (http://totalminerforums.net/index.php?topic=1789.msg130851#msg130851)<blockquote>
This could be BIG news:
http://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-has-trialled-an-engine-that-would-take-us-to-Mars-in-10-weeks (http://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-has-trialled-an-engine-that-would-take-us-to-Mars-in-10-weeks)
</blockquote>

http://www.emdrive.com/
with some links to some research results and explanations..
The theory is not new.. nor is much of the research.. Even China's been working on the program.

Naturally. I never thought this was an over night project on any countries behalf. It's just exciting that they seem to be getting closer and closer.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on July 24, 2015, 06:09:31 AM
Planet dubbed Earth 2.0

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33641648
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on August 17, 2015, 06:45:59 AM
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_2038
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on September 11, 2015, 08:21:48 PM
http://www.cnet.com/news/cancer-patient-receives-3d-printed-sternum-ribs/
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Tom on September 13, 2015, 07:08:45 PM
I would like to introduce those who don't know about 360 videos to them. They function well on PC but even better on mobile devices.

http://youtu.be/aQd41nbQM-U

Enjoy
= Tom =
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on September 15, 2015, 04:54:57 PM
Just imagine what scientist could do with this biological trait from the Jellyfish... O_o

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turritopsis_dohrnii
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: As many W's as possible on September 15, 2015, 05:58:36 PM
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox I really love the first two words of this Wikipedia page. Crazy what we can do with modern medicine and science.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Wumboist on October 06, 2015, 03:10:30 AM
I have had my own hypothesis on time travel/dimensional travel for some time now, but I haven't had anyone see any issues with it. Do you see any flaws in this?

So, I've come to the conclusion that time travel would be impossible without dimensional travel, and would be entirely pointless. I'll break this down.

A fundamental principle of classical physics that matter cannot be created or destroyed in an isolated system. By that logic, to travel time to the future, you would have to shift from 1 time to another, which would destroy the matter you are made of until the time you are traveling to, and then create the matter you were made of back at the time you traveled from, and to travel backwards, place you in a position in time where your body currently wasn't. For this to be possible, it would seem to me that time would have to be either a made up measurement that is in no way a reality (the less believable one of the two in my opinion), or that all of time is on one plane, with all of time happening simultaneously. Which, if this were to be true, it would also seem to me that we couldn't travel to anywhere else but the exact same time because it would be impossible to locate a certain time in a ridiculously small fraction of a millisecond within all of time happening simultaneously. Therefore, if this plane of time exists, it would be pointless to travel through it because you would just end in the same place you started, OR you could possibly travel dimensions (if multiple exist) to the same place, at the same time, in a dimension that has no differences to the dimension you came from or that has differences that have no effect on the time travel project.


Any opinions on this?
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Wumboist on October 06, 2015, 04:01:51 AM
I have had my own hypothesis on time travel/dimensional travel for some time now, but I haven't had anyone see any issues with it. Do you see any flaws in this?

So, I've come to the conclusion that time travel would be impossible without dimensional travel, and would be entirely pointless. I'll break this down.

A fundamental principle of classical physics that matter cannot be created or destroyed in an isolated system. By that logic, to travel time to the future, you would have to shift from 1 time to another, which would destroy the matter you are made of until the time you are traveling to, and then create the matter you were made of back at the time you traveled from, and to travel backwards, place you in a position in time where your body currently wasn't. For this to be possible, it would seem to me that time would have to be either a made up measurement that is in no way a reality (the less believable one of the two in my opinion), or that all of time is on one plane, with all of time happening simultaneously. Which, if this were to be true, it would also seem to me that we couldn't travel to anywhere else but the exact same time because it would be impossible to locate a certain time in a ridiculously small fraction of a millisecond within all of time happening simultaneously. Therefore, if this plane of time exists, it would be pointless to travel through it because you would just end in the same place you started, OR you could possibly travel dimensions (if multiple exist) to the same place, at the same time, in a dimension that has no differences to the dimension you came from or that has differences that have no effect on the time travel project.


Any opinions on this?

This seemed a bit too large to come in to this topic out of the blue, so I made it a separate topic.
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Not Actually Atlas on February 02, 2016, 03:17:58 PM
http://www.inquisitr.com/2756711/the-earth-is-actually-two-planets-incredible-finding/
Title: Re: Science and Technology Discussion
Post by: Jack Of Shades on February 14, 2016, 01:06:37 PM
The Harvester, North America's only carnivorous butterfly. (http://lepscience.com/2013/10/31/the-harvester-north-americas-only-carnivorous-butterfly/)