Science

[Completely Different]

See I find Dawkins overbearing and fanatical. Really he's a close to a Fred Phelps as the Atheist community has got. Hence I won't have anything to do with him. If you want to get a point across I'm pretty sure there are ways of doing it that don't imply that everyone who disagrees with you is a moron.

I agree.

 

He's an amazing biologist, but he just doesn't respect other people's opinions. Now, you don't have to like what they believe, and you don't have to support their beliefs being taught in school or being imposed. But not only does it seem hypocritical to completely diss them for their beliefs, it also is detrimental to the cause. People will not want to learn about a subject when the 'leaders' of it call them morons.

[RheaZen]

Reason to not become a cyborg #45...

[Dr. Paine]

Reason to not become a cyborg #45...

Metroid Prime 2 worked with that already

 

No, really. There's an enemy that can infect your suit with a virus. But yeah, either way, bad deal

[Kai]

I agree.

 

He's an amazing biologist, but he just doesn't respect other people's opinions. Now, you don't have to like what they believe, and you don't have to support their beliefs being taught in school or being imposed. But not only does it seem hypocritical to completely diss them for their beliefs, it also is detrimental to the cause. People will not want to learn about a subject when the 'leaders' of it call them morons.

Why do you have to respect someone's opinion. If my opinion is that you are an idiot, do you have to respect that?

[War Pig Killer]

Am I the only one half expecting a fundie to come in here and ask this thread to be merged with the religion thread?

[RheaZen]

Am I the only one half expecting a fundie to come in here and ask this thread to be merged with the religion thread?

I hadn't thought about that, but now, no.

 

Although I figured we ran off most of them.

[Completely Different]

Why do you have to respect someone's opinion. If my opinion is that you are an idiot, do you have to respect that?

Because, even if I think its completely and utterly stupid, making it completely obvious I think that isn't really going to further my point. Its probably just going to make me look like an arrogant jerk who can't take any criticism.

[Koroshiya-Ichi]

Reason to not become a cyborg #45...

...this only makes me want to become a cyborg even more. ):

[RheaZen]

I'd be too afraid of viruses/malfunctions. Humans already get sick enough, it seems that a cyborg is just the worse of both worlds.

[Koroshiya-Ichi]

That's probably true, but it's always been a fantasy of mine. The kind of cybernetics I'm envisioning won't come close to being a reality in my lifetime, if they ever do at all, which is both relieving and disappointing at the same time.

 

I think I would've aspired to be a physicist had things gone a little differently for me. I don't have the dedication to pursue it now, but it's still something that interests me greatly. Not the easiest subject to study independently in between everything else though...

[Dragonic_Hatcher]

Science freak. Especially if it comes to bilogy, but the other areas are nice, too... it's only that with them I'm more interested in the fancy parts.

 

Can't find a link right now, but today I read in the newspaper that the moon IS as old as the earth, supporting the therory that it actually is just a lump of the earth's mantle.

That's actually a rather old theory. I recall reading that when I was about seven, actually. A supersized meteor struck the young earth, ripping a large chunk of it off and forming into the Moon. It explains why there is no molten iron core to the moon, or molten anything.

 

Dead Planets, like the Moon, Mercury, and Pluto, are fasinating subjects. They have no molten core at all. This leads me to wonder if one of the contributing factors for Earth staying above freezing when facing away from the sun is the heat from the mantle.

[Bardess]

That's actually a rather old theory. I recall reading that when I was about seven, actually. A supersized meteor struck the young earth, ripping a large chunk of it off and forming into the Moon. It explains why there is no molten iron core to the moon, or molten anything.

The THEORY is old, sure... but the SUPPORT, the fact that the the earth is several billion years younger than measured before, is new.

 

Because the varying age of moon and earth used to speak against the theory - now that they appear to be the same age, this is no argument anymore.

[Dragonic_Hatcher]

The THEORY is old, sure... but the SUPPORT, the fact that the the earth is several billion years younger than measured before, is new.

 

Because the varying age of moon and earth used to speak against the theory - now that they appear to be the same age, this is no argument anymore.

Ah. I didn't recall that point. It just always made sence to me.

 

May I ask how many years younger they estimate it to be now? I feel horribly out-of-date.

[Bardess]

Ah. I didn't recall that point. It just always made sence to me.

 

May I ask how many years younger they estimate it to be now? I feel horribly out-of-date.

I'd have to look in the trash... read it that day in the local newspaper as a tiny little note.

 

I've been trying to find a link, but so far I didn't succeed...

 

Edit: The age of the earth I usually hear is about 4.5 million years... so the new one whould be only little more than 4 million years... let's say 4.1 - 4.3 million?

I think it's something around that.

Edited May 29, 2010 by Bardess

[Parakeet13]

@_@ That video was so confusing.

[Kestra15]

I hadn't thought about that, but now, no.

 

Although I figured we ran off most of them.

Indeed, we generally hammer them within a month.

I'd have to look in the trash... read it that day in the local newspaper as a tiny little note.

 

I've been trying to find a link, but so far I didn't succeed...

 

Edit: The age of the earth I usually hear is about 4.5 million years... so the new one whould be only little more than 4 million years... let's say 4.1 - 4.3 million?

I think it's something around that.

Billions, not millions. ;~D

Edited May 29, 2010 by Kestra15

[Ann Prey]

[Egg Spam removed]

im sorry for spamming... its just that my dragon will die soon and i need you to click this... please...

Edited May 29, 2010 by AlicornsPrayer

[Kestra15]

Eggspam has been reported guys, don't flood the Mod inbox.

[RheaZen]

The eggspam killed this thread.

[War Pig Killer]

The eggspam killed this thread.

*Sob* it was so young, too!

[RheaZen]

Any topic of interest that can be discussed/ranted about by a particular member/explained? Q and A session?

 

Anything?

[Completely Different]

*thinks*

 

Oh, oh, I have a question that's been bugging me, and I can't find the answer.

 

When I was learning basic fossil fuels- how they were formed- etc, I was taught that plants become coal, while animal matter becomes oil and gas. Is that a general over-statement, that becomes false when you study it more in depth? If not, what prevents plants from become oil/gas and animals from becoming coal? Is it merely the presence of cellulose or other chemicals that differ?

 

Its been bugging me. I can't see really what the difference would be, since they're all just hydrocarbons, although obviously not all the same types...

[TikindiDragon]

Broadly speaking - yes. It's to do with the different ways they decompose, and then the different geological pressures both are put under.

 

I approached hydro carbons from a chemical/geological point of view, so I'm not entirely sure *why* they decompose differently. I just know that when meat decomposes it forms a nasty slimy mass, and when trees decompose they form peat/mulch. The nasty slimy mass, when exposed to the right temperature, becomes oil or gas, the peat becomes coal udner the correct pressures.

[RheaZen]

I'm fairly sure it has to do with the cellulose and how it keeps its structure better - cell walls, not just membranes. But I'm no expert, so, yeah. Sodium Chloride.

[Completely Different]

*nods*

 

I figured it had something to do with the chemical structure, although I wondered if it might have something to do with animal and plant material being more likely to be placed under different amounts of pressure and heat.