Jump to content

Alpha1

Members
  • Posts

    849
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Alpha1

  1. Didn't quote enough, so it kind of clouded the context. It was saying essentially that love and sexual desire were independent, so a woman may be sexually oriented to men, but could still fall in love with a woman. *shrugs* They done it another way and have used transsexuals to see if it's consistent. The arousal studies may have little to do with it, but it's just one of the many lines of reasoning to try to explain the difference.
  2. A more fitting example would be Roy Spencer, but you need to explain why the book you have put forth is citing Bailey, Savin-Williams, Chivers, and Diamond.... It's always the other side with the preconceived notions. What do you think of the Orch-OR hypothesis? I'd have to buy it to take a look at the whole book. You seem already familiar with it. You could just show me where the book specifically states that there's evidence that it's a cultural phenomenon. The book also has a page or two on erotic plasticity, but I can't read it. I'm sure it goes into how females differ. Did you read the paragraphs on the topic of sexual fluidity where it basically was suggesting that women are more fluid than men? Like this? "Women become attracted to those they love, and men fall in love with those they are sexually attracted to. Sexuality science supports this axiom." Did you read the topic of bisexuality? "Many feel that bisexuality is more common in women than in men, and that women are more "fluid" in their sexuality (Baily, Pillard, Neale & Agyei, 1993; Chandra, Mosher, Copen, & Sionean, 2011; Diamond, 2009; Kinnish, Straussberg & Turner, 2005; Laumann, Gagnon, Michael & Michaels 1994) A recent national survey found that nearly 3 times as many women as men reported having same-sex partners in the past 12 months (Chandra et. al 2011). Meredith Chivers and colleagues (2004) found that women -- regardless of their sexual orientation -- experienced strong genital arousal to both male and female sexual stimuli. In fact, many women who do not identify themselves as bisexual have same-sex fantasies or attractions" Well, men are more likely to identify as being gay than bisexual relative to women, and studies seem to suggest that women are significantly more likely to alter their sexual activities later in life. Do you think men are discriminated less on opening up about these things? http://www.gallup.com/poll/158066/special-...ntify-lgbt.aspx "Consistent with other recent studies and with the gender gap identified earlier in this report, younger women are more likely to identify as LGBT than are younger men. Among 18- to 29-year-olds, 8.3% of women identify as LGBT, compared with 4.6% of men the same age." That's interesting. And if same-sex activities are included, the survey can show a 3:1 difference. I could have sworn you said before that 10% of the population was gay.
  3. He's not in academia, though. He's a television host. I found this in the second one. http://books.google.com/books?id=d58z5hgQ2...5G4qykgStu4CIDg Both
  4. "Funding: This research was funded by the American Institutes of Bisexuality (http://www.bisexual.org/home.html) and the United States Department of Agruculture's Federal Formula Funds (http://cuaes.cornell.edu/support/index.c​fm) given to Cornell University for project NYC-321421. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist." Is there something wrong with the AIoB? Also, it doesn't always work out that the organizations who funded the research get the results that they want e.g. the Koch brothers and global warming. I don't know what your concerns are about their credentials. They all have Ph.D's. "Baumeister's theory of female erotic plasticity is supported by a significant body of data suggesting that female sexuality is more malleable and more greatly influenced by cultural and contextual factors than male sexuality. " -- Benuto That was written by someone who gave criticism to the plasticity hypothesis. Can you provide proof that it's just culture? How much of the population do you think would identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual?
  5. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%...al.pone.0040256 "As a reflection of this general sex difference, the relationship of genital arousal to either male or female sexual stimuli with self-reported sexual orientation is considerably stronger in men than in women [2], [12]. Most men are exclusively aroused to the sex consistent with their reported sexual orientation; for example, most heterosexual men are almost exclusively aroused to women and most homosexual men are almost exclusively aroused to men. In contrast, women’s sexual orientation is poorly reflected in their genital response because they respond with substantial arousal to both sexes [2], [12]. These results suggest a substantial difference between the sexes in the organization of sexual orientation." "Unlike most men, many women show substantial sexual arousal to both sexes. This general pattern, however, is moderated by women’s sexual orientation and is most common among heterosexual women, who show similarly strong sexual arousal to male and female sexual stimuli. In contrast, this pattern is less common among homosexual women, who show more sexual arousal to female stimuli and somewhat less sexual arousal to male stimuli [2], [12]. In this sense, homosexual women show more male-typical sexual arousal patterns compared to other women. This observation led to the third hypothesis of this study: "
  6. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011/10/20..._n_1021730.html That was just culture, or is it something else? http://www.webmd.com/sex/features/sex-driv...n-women-compare
  7. Yeah, If I start typing"dNTP storage", google already puts in "4 c" and they'll say a few days or weeks.
  8. I don't know what the ratio is for Sim games, but that's not the only factor. I wonder who is more likely to play raising a family and who wants to trash the place. http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=...umer&id=7196100 "Historically games have really been a lot about shoot 'em up, sports, these very aggressive activities. They're very competitive," said Lisa Leyba, the Senior Product Manager at Electronic Arts. "Girls really need something different in the games they're looking for." Game developers like Leyba say game companies are, for the first time, looking at the needs and wants of female players of all ages. "We actually play test with thousands and thousands of girls. And the things they want are dress up, they want to go on scavenger hunts, they want to have nurturing games," said Leyba Last year alone, the gaming industry grossed $700 million in software for girls. Companies introduced games like "The Littlest Pet Shop" where players take care of their own digital pet and fashion games for teens like "Charm Girls Club." Workout games like "Wii Fit" have also been hugely popular for women."
  9. www.qiagen.com/hb/taqpcr http://www.protocol-online.org/biology-for...osts/12187.html I think these might be relevant.
  10. Yet you feel a need to take care of a dragon.
  11. He mentioned a sole sales tax. It wouldn't work like a flat income tax, since the rich won't be using all their money for consumption. They would be paying a lower percentage of their income than the poor. If it's a true flat tax, then all those deductions and credits that make all those families pay little to no tax are gone. And most people who like the flat tax always seem to be content with the rest of the system.... Republicans pushing for the flat income tax hope people don't put their attention the on the low capital gains rates, state sales and property taxes, and the regressive payroll taxes. The rich are able to accumulate masses of money from doing nothing productive via stocks, rental homes, owning land/minerals, lobbying the government to enable rent-seeking activities, etc. The rich are getting 93% of the gains in the economic recovery. I think income and capital gains should only apply to high income earners. You can narrow the gap to make it revenue neutral with a land value tax. No deadweight loss, and it captures all that unearned money from land value increases.
  12. As a percentage of their income, they will obviously not pay more. Ever heard of the FairTax? It calls for a massive rebate because a national sales tax replacing all of those current taxes would be much more regressive.
  13. Shiny's so smart. If there wasn't any women voters, we would be a corporatist-fascist society. If we're talking about people who label themselves as some form of conservative, I don't think so. They will believe something even if there's tons of evidence to the contrary. Case in point, taxes. I know many conservatives think lowering taxes actually increases revenue. It flies in the face of smaller government, so a lot of them will always be in denial.
  14. Of course. I was only being half serious. Obama’s support was broad, while Romney’s was deeper. Except in time of emergency like WWII, we generally had balanced federal budgets, and deficits were not a major concern up through the 1970s. These were times when we had the highest marginal tax rates, yet they were also our most prosperous years. In the 1980s when we had the Reagan and elder Bush administrations, we suddenly had budget deficits that were unprecedented in their size. Budget deficits and the national debt suddenly became an issue. The Clinton administration in the 1990s accomplished what was generally considered impossible; they not only eliminated the deficits but created a surplus to start paying down the national debt. (Before anyone tries to jump me, I already know that those numbers do not account for intergovernmental debt) When the younger Bush administration came to power, the first thing they did was cut tax rates for the wealthy. In fact, Bush campaigned on using the budget surplus to fund these historically low tax rates. The budget surpluses disappeared, and we were back to large deficits similar to the Reagan years. It is absurd to think that in January, 2009 with the country already in a deep recession and sliding towards a depression. the new Obama administration should have embarked on a restrictive fiscal policy to reduce deficits. The major objective had to be preventing a depression which meant putting money in peoples' hands and hoping they would spend it. There is no question that there is a gap between the amount of money the government takes in and what it spends needs to be addressed as the baby boomers start retiring, and it will heavily depend on health care reform (it’s noteworthy that the U.S. is the issuer of its own currency, we have the reserve currency of the world, and we hold most of our debt). However, it is an issue on which Republican administrations have a poor record. Republicans have wanted to reduce taxes to reward their benefactors, been unwilling to pay the political cost of cutting entitlements unless they get a political trophy and believe that the country can never spend enough on defense. Until the Republicans change their attitudes in these areas, I will not look to them for a solution to the problems of budget deficits, the national debt or jobs. Even then, the government is not analogous to a user of a credit card, but some people have extreme austerity in mind which is a bad policy. Romney wasn’t going to help your roommate get a job. We had hit a point where we had income inequality not seen since the 1920's; Romney would welcome that. Ben Bernanke: Income Inequality Is 'Creating Two Societies' And let’s look at Romney's record. Just because Obama is president, it doesn't mean he has control over everything. “I came in and the jobs had been just falling off a cliff. And I came in and they kept falling for 11 months. And then we turned around and we're coming back. And that's progress. And if you're going to suggest to me that somehow the day I got elected, somehow jobs should immediately turn around, well that would be silly. It takes a while to get things turned around. We were in a recession; we were losing jobs every month, we've turned around, and since the turn around we've added 50,000 jobs. That's progress. There will be some people who try to say, 'Well governor, net-net you've only added a few thousand jobs since you've been in.' Yeah, but ... we were in free-fall for three years and the last year of that I happened to be here and then we've turned it around as a state, private sector, government sector turned it around and now we're adding jobs.... I'm very pleased that over the last two, two-and-a-half years we've seen pretty consistent job growth.” – Romney “Our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term” –McConnell "That there's no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue. They increased revenue, because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy. So I think what Senator Kyl was expressing was the view of virtually every Republican on that subject." – McConnell You have Tea Party cranks in their ranks that have made the Norquist pledge. The myth that tax cuts increase revenues has been flatly rejected by economists across the ideological spectrum including former Romney adviser/Dubya chief economist Gregory Mankiw and several others who served in the Bush administration. “I used the phrase "charlatans and cranks" in the first edition of my principles textbook to describe some of the economic advisers to Ronald Reagan, who told him that broad-based income tax cuts would have such large supply-side effects that the tax cuts would raise tax revenue. I did not find such a claim credible, based on the available evidence. I never have, and I still don't.” Mankiw What? It’s common knowledge that Democrats lead among the poor. According to exit polls, voters making under $30,000 made up 20% of the vote and overwhelmingly voted for Obama 2 to 1. I love how you just lectured people to take a basic economics course, yet you think Ron Paul’s Austrian economics position is the solution. In his first two years, that was when some major legislation got passed. Two years after, we had gridlock and a credit downgrade because of GOTea. Even now, we still do as Boehner insists that he won’t put increases for the rich on the table, though I fully suspect that they’ll cave-in as Obama has much more leverage than before. Obama has been willing to put up entitlement reform, but the Republicans still insist that revenue should not come from the highest brackets. Why should Obama accept this? He gets absolutely nothing in return. Republicans also only control the House now because of extreme gerrymandering. They have no standing, and I’m betting Obama will stand his ground on this issue. The “fiscal cliff” this time is more like a fiscal slope. No, it wasn’t. The early 80’s recession was caused by a Fed-induced contractionary monetary policy. The 2008 recession was from private sector excess. America Is suffering from a case of debt deflation. It was bad enough that unemployment hit record highs, but our options were also limited due to the fact that the Fed was already near the bottom of interest rates, and we had historically low tax rates already in place that are blowing up the deficit. In Reagan’s situation, the Fed relented and reduced the rates which brought about a housing boom. I can get numerous credible sources saying that this recent financial crisis has been the worse since the Great Depression. What? Keynesian economics a failure? You’re being obtuse to think that an austerity approach would have led to more growth in a time span of a few years. Not to mention, Reagan implemented massive tax cuts and a lot of spending. Let’s put this in perspective. It makes immediate nonsense of the talking point that Obama must be doing terrible damage to our economy by looking at businessmen funny or something. Here’s also an amusing graph showing Bush as a public sector job creator and Obama as a private sector creator. Conservatives complain about jobs not coming back, but there have been massive layoffs in the public sector. Wasn’t it always almost split 50/50? In any case, I can find several polls that show that more people or just as much support it now.
  15. Having faith in religious founders millennia ago is like believing that Karl Rove or Dick Morris would have given an accurate prediction for this recent presidential election.
  16. The funny part is that Romney is winning the popular vote. King of the South. lol
  17. McCain 2008 advisor John Weaver: Florida will probably go to the president. Truly remarkable. It's just about over, and Obama is holding his lead in Ohio.
  18. Obama is likely to win tomorrow fivethirtyeight 88% Obama http://election.princeton.edu/ Probability of Obama re-election: Random Drift 98.1%, Bayesian Prediction 99.8% Larry Sabato http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/ If the voter fraud is so bad, why did one of O'Keefe's guys get in the news? http://bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/v...r_stopped_in_nh This is why Republicans like voter ID in the way that they implement it. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/11/...orida-and-ohio/ In states like Ohio and Florida, they've been reducing hours and days (especially dislike weekends) to discourage people from voting. The result can be found in the link.
  19. This sums up the debate, and the perceptions driven by the media.
  20. What do you think of this? "PARIS — Iran condemned on Saturday the Obama administration for taking an Iranian militant group formerly allied with Saddam Hussein off the U.S. terrorism list, saying it shows Washington's "double standards." You forgot Poland.
  21. Those aren't direct quotes, and Obama was shotgunning by bringing up more than just education in his answer. "MR. LEHRER: Mr. President, please respond directly to what the governor just said about trickle-down — his trickle-down approach. He's — as he said yours is. PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, let me talk specifically about what I think we need to do. First, we've got to improve our education system. [...]" It looks to me that Obama is responding in part to Romney's claim that his approach is "trickle-down government". He could have articulated his point better, but I see what he was trying to get across. I've read a study recently that suggested about a third of unemployment could be attributed to having a flawed transition system into the workforce. Germany, for example, has better connections with employers. In the U.S., we have many people aimlessly going to college without any idea of what they'll do. It's very inefficient. Obama wanted to put money into the system to get more people into programs that have openings once they graduate.
  22. You’ve only presented a paper for the third one. Most neuroscientists and physicists don’t think a quantum explanation for consciousness is necessary, much less a consciousness emerging before evolution developed it after billions of years. From her work: “The striking point is that this value of n eqauls the number of superposed tubulins-qubits in our brain, which undergo Orch-OR, leading to a conscious event. Then we make the conjecture that the early universe and our mind share the same organization, encompass the same quantum information, and undergo similar conscious experiences.” How is it going to have an elegant organization of quantum gates and qubits at the end of inflation that would give it attributes like omniscience and omnipotence? I also get the impression that the universe had a moment of consciousness, but it wasn’t ongoing. The qubits of the quantum gravity register get entangled and begins to organize like cellular automata. What aspects of consciousness arise from quantum events? All of them? Can you explain why the brain has many integrated parts and parallel processing? Damage to the fusiform gyrus of the temporal lobe, for example, causes face blindness, and stimulation of this same area causes people to see faces spontaneously. Damage to a region in the visual cortex can lead to a loss in conscious visual perception, but they can still accurately know location or movement of an object. Trying to add a god into the picture just seems like Deepak Chopra stuff to me. We were discussing threats from other people, so I assumed it meant they would be doing bad things if left to their own devices. From what you’re saying, it’s good for evil bad things to happen. I know you don’t. I was just letting you know that I thought it was rather bizarre in a similar way that Christians attempt to explain Satan. Wait a minute… why does it take up to a year if he’s omnipotent? Repentance is unnecessary and well-doing doesn’t require effort there. Right before that, it says: MISHNAH 16. R. JACOB104 SAID: THIS WORLD IS LIKE UNTO A VESTIBULE105 BEFORE THE WORLD TO COME; PREPARE THYSELF106 IN THE VESTIBULE, SO THAT THOU MAYEST ENTER THE BANQUETING-HALL.107 It’s a reward. How would it be suggestive of a dangerous world like this one? It’s much more similar to the Adam and Eve story. A vulture waiting for a starving child to die is beautiful? Yet it’s always okay for a pregnant woman to kill it? I don’t see why it would matter when the fetus has no choice on its genetics anyways. You wouldn’t be an identical twin of your former self. That’s for sure. I don’t see how you can reconcile reincarnation with some of the things you’ve said about personality and intelligence being the same in the afterlife or how changing genes will change these people into something they are not. Life in plastic, it’s fantastic. ; ) Didn’t you say that God guided human evolution? Noble! I meant: is it good that they could possibly alter behavior in humans? Here’s one on increased impulsive behavior. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/9/72 “Latent toxoplasmosis, protozoan parasitosis with prevalence rates from 20 to 60% in most populations, is known to impair reaction times in infected subjects, which results, for example, in a higher risk of traffic accidents in subjects with this life-long infection.” It has also been linked to an increase of suicides and neuroticism. “The results were clear. Women with Toxoplasma infections were 54% more likely to attempt suicide – and twice as likely to succeed. In particular, these women were more likely to attempt violent suicides (using a knife or gun, for example, instead of overdosing on pills). But even more disturbing: suicide attempt risk was positively correlated with the level of infection. Those with the highest levels of antibodies were 91% more likely to attempt suicide than uninfected women. The connection between parasite and suicide held even for women who had no history of mental illness: among them, infected women were 56% more likely to commit self-directed violence.” Was it better for the child to die? What about the rest like multiple suicides in families? This seems too much like the belief in miracles in the hospital setting while completely ignoring the possibility that it’s just a chance event and ignoring all the bad outcomes. So why would you create people that are painfully introverted? I don’t think so because you can pretend that God is trying to teach them all to ride bikes. Did all of Sodom and Gomorrah commit murder? I find it strange that out of them, Noah, his sons, and their wives happen to all be righteous enough. It appears like it was only due to association. I could have worded it better. Is the soul limited to the speeds in which information between neurons travel? With computers, I’m sure I can find an article about speeding up the process. You act as if the soul will be bound by all these electrochemical signals. Does that also mean that people with bipolar disorder and a lower happiness potential will be limited?
  23. Basically what you’re saying is that some level of evil is good. If it’s allowing people to grow, how is it a “sin”? It’s almost as bizarre as the thought that Satan is necessary for free will, but he needs to be punished for eternity anyways. What about the part where they’re cleansed for up to a year? And I don’t think there is for a couple of reasons. Here’s a few that seem to show my point. Chapter 4 MISHNAH 17. “HE USED TO SAY: MORE BEAUTIFUL IS ONE HOUR [sPENT] IN REPENTANCE AND GOOD DEEDS108 IN THIS WORLD, THAN ALL THE LIFE OF THE WORLD TO COME;109 AND MORE BEAUTIFUL IS ONE HOUR OF THE EVENTEMPERED SPIRIT OF THE WORLD TO COME110 , THAN ALL THE LIFE OF THIS WORLD.111” Aboth (fathers) “[…]for it is said, O that I were as the months of old, as in the days when God watched over me;64 now which are the days’ that make up ‘months’65 and do not make up years? The months of pregnancy of course.66 It is also taught all the Torah from beginning to end,67 for it is said, And he taught me, and said unto me: ‘Let thy heart hold fast my words, keep my commandments and live’,68 and it is also said, When the converse of God was upon my tent.69 Why the addition of70 ‘and it is also said’? — In case you might say that it was only the prophet who said that,71 come and hear ‘when the converse of God was upon my tent.69 As soon as it, sees the light an angel approaches, slaps it on its mouth and causes it to forget all the Torah completely,67 as it is said, Sin coucheth at the door.72” Well, I’m not arguing that it can never happen, but why would you choose to try to grow them like that? Another example is GMO’s. Which ones are going to turn rotten from the environment? To what extent is this due to the soul anyways? “Children who carry a variant of a so-called "resilience gene" get along much better with their troubled parents -- those who have substance abuse, mental health or criminal problems -- than those without the gene, a new study suggests.” Noble, we’re talking about altering genes before the breath of life is given. You’ve also entertained the idea of reincarnation before. You would have a different set of genes and environment. So what if they did? For example, Muslims taught evils in madrassa schools would have led a totally different life if they were born elsewhere. Are these parasites useful? “This single-celled pathogen infects over half the world's population, including an estimated 50 million Americans. Each of Toxoplasma's victims carries thousands of the parasites, many residing in the brain.” I’ve read that it can affect human behavior. It is estimated that there have been over 100 billion people who have lived, and I’m sure many of them never lived past ten if you look at the life expectancies before modern medicine. This is like a gardener who lets his garden go to pot. It also raises questions similar to Christianity. What’s the point of this life if those dying at a very young age go on to the afterlife anyways? You’re going to have to elaborate on this one. I’m sorry. I should have stuck with an example in the Tanakh. The flood is a good example. How does that fit in with your bike analogy? Relating to this, I dislike when people try to be PC about religion. Is Islam a religion of peace? I don’t think so. However, I don’t agree with prejudice against Muslims. So what I’m saying is that it’s the religion, not you. Also, if I had to rank these Abrahamic religions, I would put Judaism first. What about someone with FAS or mental retardation due to iodine deficiency? I could go on. How could this be remotely possible without being a biological system? http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...oryId=102169531 “The smarter the person, the faster information zips around the brain, a UCLA study finds. And this ability to think quickly apparently is inherited.”
  24. Yeah, it's really dumb. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/...e-worth-saving/ "The objective of current health reform efforts should not be to abolish the employment-based system to which so many Americans feel attached, brittle and expensive as that system may be. " Even the health policy experts can make little sense. What are you worried about? I'm a little confused. From what I've read, many people in the 18-24 group are unemployed.