LHC
Re: LHC
sure, whatever.
i'm not saying it's not interesting. i'm saying that it's irresponsible. i KNOW scientists. i have family pedigree of thinkers and researchers of that level and caliber...
based on the info in popular press, the veiws in this thread make perfect sense. the problem is that none of us in this thread have ANYthing to do with the experiment. even more to the point, the funding and power needed to produce such an experiment are beyond any of these posters ken. there's a lot of certainty about what will or won't happen or WHY such experiments are being done. this is only madness, however.
it's not that i EXPECT disaster, in fact i expect the opposite. it's that the desicion was made for me by people i don't trust(with good reason) that i don't like. this experiment is dangerous at any rate(lotta power there being used and unleashed) and the way that it is being presented doesn't acknowledge that. that's always a bad sign, not necessarily that there will be a disaster, but that the people's perceptions are being managed. hey, Chernobyl is a lovely place to take a holiday and Three Mile Island never melted down.
as to www, theres a reason that it's called a "net" and a "web"....
Braincell, this has nothing to do with churches or religion, unless it's you defending your religion in the way that you ridicule "believers" in "religions" for.
look, it's an amazing and cool thing, no doubt. but it won't do any of you a bit of good.
oh, and stardust, you misunderstand me again. i praised Tau's post for what he said because i agreed with him, not because i disagreed with you. for all you know, i DO know more about such things than you. if i don't, that's fine too. a well reasoned arguement can surely change my mind if i am in error. untill i see the error in my reasoning, it's not very fair to expect me to doubt my point of veiw. i expect the same from you. you only know what you read, the same as over here. YOU don't fund the project, so YOU don't know what it's for. the scientists doing the experiments are often in the same predicament. also, they are often in competition for funding which sometimes makes them ignore and discount admitted dangers and safety protocols. a simplified example is the challeger explosion.
it's pretty humorous seeing you guys discussing strange matter and mini black holes like you play with the stuff everyday... none of us have any bearing on whether the planned experiments are carried out or not, it's just something fun to flap our gums over.
i'm not saying it's not interesting. i'm saying that it's irresponsible. i KNOW scientists. i have family pedigree of thinkers and researchers of that level and caliber...
based on the info in popular press, the veiws in this thread make perfect sense. the problem is that none of us in this thread have ANYthing to do with the experiment. even more to the point, the funding and power needed to produce such an experiment are beyond any of these posters ken. there's a lot of certainty about what will or won't happen or WHY such experiments are being done. this is only madness, however.
it's not that i EXPECT disaster, in fact i expect the opposite. it's that the desicion was made for me by people i don't trust(with good reason) that i don't like. this experiment is dangerous at any rate(lotta power there being used and unleashed) and the way that it is being presented doesn't acknowledge that. that's always a bad sign, not necessarily that there will be a disaster, but that the people's perceptions are being managed. hey, Chernobyl is a lovely place to take a holiday and Three Mile Island never melted down.
as to www, theres a reason that it's called a "net" and a "web"....
Braincell, this has nothing to do with churches or religion, unless it's you defending your religion in the way that you ridicule "believers" in "religions" for.
look, it's an amazing and cool thing, no doubt. but it won't do any of you a bit of good.
oh, and stardust, you misunderstand me again. i praised Tau's post for what he said because i agreed with him, not because i disagreed with you. for all you know, i DO know more about such things than you.
if i don't, that's fine too. a well reasoned arguement can surely change my mind if i am in error. untill i see the error in my reasoning, it's not very fair to expect me to doubt my point of veiw. i expect the same from you. you only know what you read, the same as over here. YOU don't fund the project, so YOU don't know what it's for. the scientists doing the experiments are often in the same predicament. also, they are often in competition for funding which sometimes makes them ignore and discount admitted dangers and safety protocols. a simplified example is the challeger explosion.it's pretty humorous seeing you guys discussing strange matter and mini black holes like you play with the stuff everyday...
none of us have any bearing on whether the planned experiments are carried out or not, it's just something fun to flap our gums over.
Re: LHC
Thats right thats what I meantstardust wrote:and this one refers to skwawks original post
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/La ... n_Collider
I'm fucking crying hereRe: LHC
stardust wrote:black holes keep the masses trembling, like asteroids and aliens.
pollution, biocide and depletion not.
bullshoot.
pollution, biocide and depletion are about NOTHING except frightening the masses.
Re: LHC
It's obvious that we are destroying the planet; not only for ourselves but for a lot of other life forms. It is sad and pathetic that humans with all their intelligence are still so stupid in some ways. Life would be a lot more diverse without us for sure. It is very depressing that most people are idiotic in this regard and that is why we are all doomed.
Re: LHC
well then, stop.braincell wrote:It's obvious that we are destroying the planet; not only for ourselves but for a lot of other life forms. It is sad and pathetic that humans with all their intelligence are still so stupid in some ways. Life would be a lot more diverse without us for sure. It is very depressing that most people are idiotic in this regard and that is why we are all doomed.
you, personally, since you seem to recognize, just stop.
you'll have to do without some of the domesticating devices that you love most until a better way to realize them could be found, but there won't be any more problems like the ones you describe...
Re: LHC
Really the solution would be for people to have one child or less for a few hundred years or more. I don't have children so I am doing my part already. If everyone had zero children we would quickly go extinct. I don't advocate that but it would be better for most other life forms on this planet. The problem is we wiped out most of our predators and life is pretty easy for too many of us. We invented the concept of god so we could justify killing all the other animals. After all, god created us in his image so we are like god. As you are aware, animals don't have souls so it is alright to kill them. "Thou Shall Not Kill" only applies to people and we regularly disregard that commandment anyway.
Last edited by braincell on Fri Sep 12, 2008 11:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: LHC
no, that's not necessary.
you talk about thinking for one's self and all kinda good things, and then you quote the agenda 21 canon verbatum.
it's true that humans don't have any more right to life than other creatures, but then they don't have any more right to life than us. being that i'm human, i'll stick to the human side. self-loathing is NOT the solution. with all the PC self-loathing going on, the situation is getting worse....
still, i see why you support that which might be suicidal, the hyper-scientific dictatorship. it's sooo "our man flint"....
you talk about thinking for one's self and all kinda good things, and then you quote the agenda 21 canon verbatum.
it's true that humans don't have any more right to life than other creatures, but then they don't have any more right to life than us. being that i'm human, i'll stick to the human side. self-loathing is NOT the solution. with all the PC self-loathing going on, the situation is getting worse....
still, i see why you support that which might be suicidal, the hyper-scientific dictatorship. it's sooo "our man flint"....
Re: LHC
Btw there's a reason why people resist falling birthrates, having several children insures an easier retirement, especially in countries where you live a subsistance lifestyle your entire life.
Re: LHC
look, there's no evolution of the human.
there has been NO demonstratable evolution of any kind. people are still the same. if the masses are behaving destructively, it's because they are trying to fit the roles of the societies they are born into(like any good herd creature would). putting people into compacted cities is the direct cause of human destruction, both to the human and to the environment. it's not parasitic, it's what happens when ANY animal is treated so. the earth is nowhere NEAR carrying capacity. all of the humans in the world could fit into the state of texas with 1100 square feet per person.
Science has brought some nifty gadgets and other interesting things, many of which i enjoy or have enjoyed, but it has done NOTHING to improve human or any other life on this planet.
it's fashionable to hate humanity today. go ahead and do that suckers!
take your eugenics and stick them. all this call for controlled breeding comes from a frightened elite that fears the masses, hence wars and people like Charles Galton, and Margaret Sanger, total socio and psychopaths. obviously you can follow who you like, but following sickos like that will certainly lead to you and your family(local and extended)'s demise. for human being haters that should be just fine, but please, keep your self loathing to your self.
there has been NO demonstratable evolution of any kind. people are still the same. if the masses are behaving destructively, it's because they are trying to fit the roles of the societies they are born into(like any good herd creature would). putting people into compacted cities is the direct cause of human destruction, both to the human and to the environment. it's not parasitic, it's what happens when ANY animal is treated so. the earth is nowhere NEAR carrying capacity. all of the humans in the world could fit into the state of texas with 1100 square feet per person.
Science has brought some nifty gadgets and other interesting things, many of which i enjoy or have enjoyed, but it has done NOTHING to improve human or any other life on this planet.
it's fashionable to hate humanity today. go ahead and do that suckers!
take your eugenics and stick them. all this call for controlled breeding comes from a frightened elite that fears the masses, hence wars and people like Charles Galton, and Margaret Sanger, total socio and psychopaths. obviously you can follow who you like, but following sickos like that will certainly lead to you and your family(local and extended)'s demise. for human being haters that should be just fine, but please, keep your self loathing to your self.
Re: LHC
exactly true, it's the rejection of everything else that doesn't fit your point of view that has the ability to make you narrow minded...braincell wrote:Rejecting fundamentalist lies doesn't make me narrow minded.
-
next to nothing
- Posts: 2521
- Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 4:00 pm
- Location: Bergen, Norway
Re: LHC
"look, there's no evolution of the human. "
What is evolution then?
Is it nececarily a physical change of a spiecies body for the better? was it evolution certain animals started occupying shells? Can evolution include technology?
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evoluti ... ition.html
i liked this one:
"In the broadest sense, evolution is merely change, and so is all-pervasive; galaxies, languages, and political systems all evolve. Biological evolution ... is change in the properties of populations of organisms that transcend the lifetime of a single individual. The ontogeny of an individual is not considered evolution; individual organisms do not evolve. The changes in populations that are considered evolutionary are those that are inheritable via the genetic material from one generation to the next. Biological evolution may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion of different alleles within a population (such as those determining blood types) to the successive alterations that led from the earliest protoorganism to snails, bees, giraffes, and dandelions."
- Douglas J. Futuyma in Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer Associates 1986
What is evolution then?
Is it nececarily a physical change of a spiecies body for the better? was it evolution certain animals started occupying shells? Can evolution include technology?
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evoluti ... ition.html
i liked this one:
"In the broadest sense, evolution is merely change, and so is all-pervasive; galaxies, languages, and political systems all evolve. Biological evolution ... is change in the properties of populations of organisms that transcend the lifetime of a single individual. The ontogeny of an individual is not considered evolution; individual organisms do not evolve. The changes in populations that are considered evolutionary are those that are inheritable via the genetic material from one generation to the next. Biological evolution may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion of different alleles within a population (such as those determining blood types) to the successive alterations that led from the earliest protoorganism to snails, bees, giraffes, and dandelions."
- Douglas J. Futuyma in Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer Associates 1986
Re: LHC
what a religion evolution is....it's an attractive idea even if it's false. do you really think that this is the first or ultimate expression of human technology? btw- the opposite of belief in evolution is NOT fundemental religion. both camps tend to have part of the story and both camps tend towards the ridiculous. both are fundementalism. both are the same, a series of rules, concepts and ideas that are not understood by the adherents....
stardust, what are you talking about? for the umpteenth time, i never said humans should NOT act responsibly. i said that the issues aren't what they seem. perhaps there's data you are not aware of. just because i reject YOUR paranoid ideas( ) doesn't mean that i am completely unreasonable.
stardust, what are you talking about? for the umpteenth time, i never said humans should NOT act responsibly. i said that the issues aren't what they seem. perhaps there's data you are not aware of. just because i reject YOUR paranoid ideas(
) doesn't mean that i am completely unreasonable.Re: LHC
ok,
but i have no personal "theory". that's all your misunderstanding of my words.
i spend an inordinate amount of time trying to understand and overcome my own weaknesses. if i find something out, i try to spread the news. isn't that at least an attempt at personal responsibility? there are many fun things that i don't participate in specifically because of the consequences, never the less, i have to live in the real world with all the rest.
none of that makes false realities like "global warming" from human co2, "peak oil", or "overpopulation"(of those pesky "dysgenic" types) a reality.
no amount of scoffing will make the self-proclaimed owners disappear or have less influence on the "herd" of "dead" and/or "profane".
but i have no personal "theory". that's all your misunderstanding of my words.
i spend an inordinate amount of time trying to understand and overcome my own weaknesses. if i find something out, i try to spread the news. isn't that at least an attempt at personal responsibility? there are many fun things that i don't participate in specifically because of the consequences, never the less, i have to live in the real world with all the rest.
none of that makes false realities like "global warming" from human co2, "peak oil", or "overpopulation"(of those pesky "dysgenic" types) a reality.
no amount of scoffing will make the self-proclaimed owners disappear or have less influence on the "herd" of "dead" and/or "profane".
-
next to nothing
- Posts: 2521
- Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2002 4:00 pm
- Location: Bergen, Norway
Re: LHC
"i spend an inordinate amount of time trying to understand and overcome my own weaknesses. if i find something out, i try to spread the news. isn't that at least an attempt at personal responsibility?"
no, according to what i read thats pretty close to evolution
no, according to what i read thats pretty close to evolution