Hey Theo, help this new guy? He's tried twice and it's a good sift.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Second-Best-Lightsaber-Duel-Ever
Thanks

Theo,

Your 'yikes" comment on Mike Gravel's newest ad is ridiculous. I'm pretty offended by it, and I think it was a sophomoric attitude for you to take.

Maybe next time, let one of us who might fit in your "yikes" category, post this video, and let us have a nice talk about it. Instead of your condescending shitty comments.

??? "Underlying belief systems" CAN'T "override" physics, as physics is comprised of a set of mathematical equations that describe the PHYSICAL world.(You don't agree with what I propose, you write up a whitepaper describing your opposing thesis, USING PHYSICAL LAW, and debate me with MATH - not a blind excuse. That's all I'm asking for here - PROVE me wrong USING the EQUATIONS THAT DESCRIBE THE PHYSICAL WORLD, oh mighty self-proclaimed "atheist" that for some reason has faith in TV and Movies enough to promote all of the mainstream concepts without question.)

You're really making no sense, Theo - why don't you try to run the equations yourself? Why won't you even make an attempt? Are you just not capable of high school physics?

You have an excuse for everything.

(p.s. - I don't advocate any "belief system" - and especially NOT "intelligent design" - however I am VERY honest about being an atheist, because I'm not going to hide it. Your excuses have no basis.)




In reply to your comment:
“There are Ph.D.'s who are advocates for intelligent design, too - and their underlying belief systems override their better judgment, just like with you.


In reply to your comment:
“Some life - arguing/voting down others about subjects you don't know anything about.

If I'm a science "amateur," who do you consider to be professionals? Please note - I am a physicist.

My challenge stands. Newtonian physics is 10th grade level physics at best. If it'd take too much of your glorious "life" in order to complete my challenge, then maybe you should go back to high school.

As for your challenge, here is where I spend 75% of my time: http://xxx.lanl.gov



In reply to your comment:
“Sorry, dude - I try to have a life.
Here's a challenge for you:
Read something other than crap on 9/11 conspiracy websites from science amateurs like yourself.

In reply to your comment:
“Here's a challenge for you: Prove that the WTC COULD have collapsed using Newtonian physics and provide your dissertation.

Here is a very good Creative Commons book on Newtonian physics. Use this or any other book on Newtonian physics you know, and tell me how the towers could have collapsed in the time they did. Use any video or written documentation you choose as a record of the time those towers took to fall.
””””

Please come join Evolution in Action. Your invite has been sent.

Some life - arguing/voting down others about subjects you don't know anything about.

If I'm a science "amateur," who do you consider to be professionals? Please note - I am a physicist.

My challenge stands. Newtonian physics is 10th grade level physics at best. If it'd take too much of your glorious "life" in order to complete my challenge, then maybe you should go back to high school.

As for your challenge, here is where I spend 75% of my time: http://xxx.lanl.gov



In reply to your comment:
“Sorry, dude - I try to have a life.
Here's a challenge for you:
Read something other than crap on 9/11 conspiracy websites from science amateurs like yourself.

In reply to your comment:
“Here's a challenge for you: Prove that the WTC COULD have collapsed using Newtonian physics and provide your dissertation.

Here is a very good Creative Commons book on Newtonian physics. Use this or any other book on Newtonian physics you know, and tell me how the towers could have collapsed in the time they did. Use any video or written documentation you choose as a record of the time those towers took to fall.
””

Here's a challenge for you: Prove that the WTC COULD have collapsed using Newtonian physics and provide your dissertation.

Here is a very good Creative Commons book on Newtonian physics. Use this or any other book on Newtonian physics you know, and tell me how the towers could have collapsed in the time they did. Use any video or written documentation you choose as a record of the time those towers took to fall.

Heya Theo,

I found this working link for your 'Aleksey Vayner Resume' post. Obviously a slippery one to keep a hold of, hopefully this'll stay up a while.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2PWO2Ed5_dk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqb6XOQny_U can replace your dead video http://www.videosift.com/video/BBC-interviews-Richard-Dawkins-about-The-God-Delusion

And here I thought (left vs. right) = (good vs. evil) = (smart vs. dumb).


In reply to your comment:
“Yet more fodder for my own theory that we're not in a war of left vs. right or good vs. evil in this country, but smart vs. dumb.”

Watch this - They admit to "pulling" WTC 7 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9b4D-aO3zY&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eprisonplanet%2Ecom%2Farticles%2Ffebruary2007%2F260207building7%2Ehtm



In reply to your comment:
“Yeah, ren - that's because the experts themselves are having a hard time agreeing on how WTC7 went down - but I'm thinking being right next to two of the tallest buildings in the world as they came down in a pile of rubble might have something to do with it. See, that's how science really works - attempting to theorize what happened using the available facts, as opposed to christening yourself an expert on everything from construction to physics after watching a couple of Flash movies on the internets.

I'll take theories based on real knowledge of those subjects instead of baseless accusations out of a bad literary thriller. The towers were constructed with explosives in them? The fire was minor? Demonstrably false, and I don't know what about the last 7 years makes you think the Bush administration is competent enough to tie its own shoes, much less pull off the greatest conspiracy to ever happen, ever, ever.

Again, I can argue this from now until the end of time, but you and your brethren have the certainty of religious fervor, and there's nothing obvious or factual I can say that could shake your faith.”

Hi, I'm doing a speech on recycling and I'd like some information on the negative aspects of it. I saw your comment on the Penn and Teller page, and was wondering if you knew of any sites that show proof of the ultimate waste recycling is. I appreciate it, thanks!!!

Theo,

I watched "Night of the Living Dead," the first time while I was alone. I was in my parents house and they were gone for the weekend. It came on about midnight or one o'clock. It was totally great. Very unsettling for impressionable young minds.

Sc

In reply to your comment:
“You'd think the movie would seem campy and outdated by now, but it still scares the crap out of me; especially that first scene in the graveyard.

There's still something to be said for tone and simple imagery, I guess.”

I'm no etymologist, but don't "atheist" and "nontheist" mean exactly the same thing? I can appreciate that avoiding the term "atheist" could help you with a few people to sidestep the stigma that seems to be attached to the word, but beyond that I fail to see the point of using an alternate term with identical meaning. Am I missing something?

In reply to your comment:
“Richard did a nice job, and Paula was surprisingly fair.

I, personally, like the term nontheist, which is a better descripton; less combative.
As long as you don't hurt other people, I don't care if you believe in God, Allah, Zeus, or the Easter Bunny.”

browsed by this and thought of you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEWiuFv0He8&mode=related&search=
Have you played this?

Hey, Ironman, take this quiz here to discover which superhero you really are... http://www.thesuperheroquiz.com/

Apparently I'm the Hulk "...a wanderer with
amazing strength".