Not WIRELESS smart metres!? Why, that's exactly like having a NUCLEAR REACTOR in your basement!

These are the same kind of assholes who complain that wind turbines cause micro-vibrations which cause them stress and make them sick. They're also the same assholes who tell people not to vaccinate their kids.

*sigh* How come these people don't complain about the FM signals they've been bombarded with all their lives? Or microwave transmitter towers? How about cosmic radiation? Do people realize electromagnetic radiation also comes from wires?

Oh, okay, so you believe everything you read. That's not very intelligent, or at least it's not very SMART. The bible was written hundreds of years ago, and has since been translated and re-translated to and from dozens of different languages. Individuals and groups in power throughout different points in history have taken it upon themselves to modify the bible, adding and omitting pieces here and there to suit their agenda. They knew that gullible sheep, unable to think for themselves, are easily swayed by religion, and what better way to control a populace than by attacking their very basis for the way they live their lives?

God pre-exists everything. We know God exists because He lets us know, and He would let you know that if you sought Him out. The New Testament was written 2000 years ago. The Old Testament is at least 1000 years older than that. We have copies of the early manuscripts so we know what the original bibles looked like. So the translations today are accurate, and this idea that they are corrupt is just outright false. Yes, man has used the bible for evil ends, but this is no different from anything else man does. The very reason that Jesus Christ came to Earth is because man is so desperately wicked and needs Gods redemption.

Additionally, if one is intelligent, and they believe in ancient myths, obviously they're going to be some of the greatest minds the world has ever known, right? That's why all the geniuses of the world are devout Christians or whatever religion you want to name, right? WRONG.

NASA is not run by rocket scientists who go to church on Sunday. Great inventors and genius-level individuals such as Stephen Hawking are not religious specifically BECAUSE they are intelligent. They are able to think for themselves, not be told what to think.

Some of the greatest minds in history were devout Christians..and some of the greatest scientists:

Francis Bacon - Originated the scientific method
Johannes Kepler - Laws of Planetary motion
Galileo Galilei - Father of modern astronomy
Nicolaus Copernicus - Heliocentric Universe
James Clerk Maxwell - Electromagnetic field
Neils Bohr - the Atom
Louis Pasteur - germ theory of disease
Rene Descartes - Philosopher and mathematician
Issac Newton - Invented classical mechanics
Max Planck - Founder of quantum mechanics

A lot of modern science is built on the backs of Christian thinkers, as you can see, and that is just a short list. Today, around 10 percent of scientists believe in God. At least 50 nobel laureates believe in God. Now, if you want to talk about great thinkers, how about Albert Einstein? He believed in God. Although not a Christian, here is what he had to say about Jesus:

"To what extent are you influenced by Christianity?"
"As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene."
"Have you read Emil Ludwig’s book on Jesus?"
"Emil Ludwig’s Jesus is shallow. Jesus is too colossal for the pen of phrasemongers, however artful. No man can dispose of Christianity with a bon mot!"
"You accept the historical existence of Jesus?"
"Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."7

Of course, religion and science are completely unrelated topics, and one does not have to be non-secular in order to be a scientist, but typically, the two mindsets would conflict, as religionists base their beliefs off of emotion and other irrational concepts. Scientists use a thought process, experimentation, and ruling out possibilities in order to come to conclusions and figure out FACTS about the universe around us. There are scientists who believe in the possibility of a god, but it takes a different form than that of some all-seeing being that created everything. I'll never try to explain that to you, though, as you're too blinded by foolish nonsense that has been force-fed to you since childhood.

I will leave you with this though: Adam and Eve. Here's some fruit. I'm going to tempt you with it, and then create a snake to TALK to you and tell you you should eat some of it, and THEN I'm gunna come back and be all "OH SHIT WHAT THE FUCK?! I SMITE THEE FOR ALL ETERNITY!!!" just to fuck with humanity. Wow. You worship a pretty evil, and vindictive force. Why would you want to do that? The fucker's up there just fucking with us like a little kid with a magnifying glass over an ant hill. Jesus christ, you must really enjoy misery. I'll take the reality of humanity surviving on our own acquiescence and compassion over that bullshit any day!

I base my belief off of personal revelation. I was an agnostic my entire life and raised without religion, and I was a secular humanist and a strict materialist who didn't see any evidence for God or spirit. God woke me up to the truth and let me know He is real. If you want science facts, you only have to examine the first page of the bible:

In the beginning (TIME) God created the heavens (SPACE) and the earth (MATTER)

And God said, “Let there be light (ENERGY),” and there was light.

It took mankind 3000 years to catch up and figure out the Universes foundation is based on these principles. There is also no better description which uniquely fits the big bang theory. Creation ex-nihilio, which is creation from nothing.

The serpent you're referring to was Satan. God put the tree there because He gave mankind free will to follow His commands or not. He also warned them of the consequences if they ate of the fruit. Adam and Eve decided to disobey God and believe the lie because Satan promised them they would have Gods power if they did it. So, instead of trusting God, they lusted after His power and betrayed Him. That's why they were kicked out of the garden. Their sin brought death into the world.

No, God didn't damn us for eternity. It's the very reason God sent His son Jesus to die on the cross, to save us from this fate we created and redeem mankind. So we could have eternal life with God again in the Kingdom of Heaven. We are sinners, and the wages of sin is death. Gods gift of salvation is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Netrunner don't know if you read sci-fi but there is a great book co-authored by Arthur C Clarke about this concept. It's called The Light of Other Days and is all about wormholes. Highly recommend if you've any interest.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^rottenseed:
Well we're playing with radio waves which is part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Now, I don't know what makes radio waves so special when it comes to transferring data. I mean aside from the fact that they're harmless to us (large wavelength, low frequency, low energy) there's nothing inherent about tuning into those frequencies. Imagine too, that radio waves travel at light speed. That's the fastest we know ANYTHING to travel. If were to pick up a transmission that was sent a thousand years ago, that solar system could be as good as gone by now.
well maybe not a 1000 years...unless it was their last cry for help.

Right, that's why I'm thinking radio isn't the ultimate communication medium. Maybe there's something else more exotic that doesn't get weaker at a geometric rate, and is less susceptible to noise, and who knows, maybe even breaks the speed of light.
Drake's equation sorta assumes that there's some basic level of communications technology that civilizations develop relatively early in their lifespan, and then use continuously for the remaining duration of their existence.
I think that's a bad assumption. I doubt we'll still be broadcasting radio waves in a thousand years, let alone a million.

>> ^rottenseed:

Well we're playing with radio waves which is part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Now, I don't know what makes radio waves so special when it comes to transferring data. I mean aside from the fact that they're harmless to us (large wavelength, low frequency, low energy) there's nothing inherent about tuning into those frequencies. Imagine too, that radio waves travel at light speed. That's the fastest we know ANYTHING to travel. If were to pick up a transmission that was sent a thousand years ago, that solar system could be as good as gone by now.
well maybe not a 1000 years...unless it was their last cry for help.


Right, that's why I'm thinking radio isn't the ultimate communication medium. Maybe there's something else more exotic that doesn't get weaker at a geometric rate, and is less susceptible to noise, and who knows, maybe even breaks the speed of light.

Drake's equation sorta assumes that there's some basic level of communications technology that civilizations develop relatively early in their lifespan, and then use continuously for the remaining duration of their existence.

I think that's a bad assumption. I doubt we'll still be broadcasting radio waves in a thousand years, let alone a million.

>> ^NetRunner:

More seriously, I've always felt like Drake's equation is missing something. What if there is some way of communicating across interstellar distances that's better than radio? What if the amount of time that civilizations take to make radio obsolete is ridiculously short, like only 100-200 years?
Maybe the sky is humming with all sorts of signals...that we haven't yet developed the technology to hear.


Well we're playing with radio waves which is part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Now, I don't know what makes radio waves so special when it comes to transferring data. I mean aside from the fact that they're harmless to us (large wavelength, low frequency, low energy) there's nothing inherent about tuning into those frequencies. Imagine too, that radio waves travel at light speed. That's the fastest we know ANYTHING to travel. If were to pick up a transmission that was sent a thousand years ago, that solar system could be as good as gone by now.

well maybe not a 1000 years...unless it was their last cry for help.

Its not electromagnetism... its the power of JEEEEEEEESUS!

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

>> ^COriolanus:
Can any one provide a link for an opposing view?

The one I have been reading about is MOND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOND
There is also the newer, or newer to me, QG unification theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity
I think there is just a fundamental misunderstanding of the basic rules of matter, energy, time and space. I don't have much evidence to support this idea. It might be the same problem Einstein had with QED that I have with dark matter, it's messy. It seems like we are creating something first because of the maths we have agreed are true instead of questioning the fundamental understanding. I compaire it to Quine's web of belief. I could be wrong, perhaps there is some wacky matter out there that behaves the exact opposite of real matter, is most of the stuff in the universe, and doesn't interact electromagnetically with our plane of existence...but it seems like reaching for straws.


It's wrong that Dark Matter is just some wacky thing created because of the maths. It is observed, through its gravitational interaction. Just because it doesn't interact electromagnetically doesn't mean it's invisible. It's also wrong that Dark Matter behaves the exact opposite of real matter. The Standard Model of particle physics is far from complete, and we already know of particles that interact through one force of nature and not through others. To posit a new fundamental particle that could fit the Dark Matter profile is not really that far fetched. There are even candidates obtained through Supersymmetry that may or may not provide the right answer. I don't find this messy at all, and frankly, Nature doesn't care if you think its rules are messy or not.

Also, if you don't like messiness, MOND is really not the right answer for you. Modified Newtonian Dynamics is an interesting concept with some interesting results for their own sake, and it may still ultimately prove correct. The idea that extrapolation from high gravitational fields to low ones might be unsound is something that should not be dismissed. But so far, the data are not in MOND's favour.

>> ^COriolanus:

Can any one provide a link for an opposing view?


The one I have been reading about is MOND

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOND

There is also the newer, or newer to me, QG unification theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity

I think there is just a fundamental misunderstanding of the basic rules of matter, energy, time and space. I don't have much evidence to support this idea. It might be the same problem Einstein had with QED that I have with dark matter, it's messy. It seems like we are creating something first because of the maths we have agreed are true instead of questioning the fundamental understanding. I compaire it to Quine's web of belief. I could be wrong, perhaps there is some wacky matter out there that behaves the exact opposite of real matter, is most of the stuff in the universe, and doesn't interact electromagnetically with our plane of existence...but it seems like reaching for straws.

I think the rest of the elephant looks like we don't actually know as much about gravity and space as we thought we did, not mystery matter that doesn't interact electromagnetically...but I will happily be wrong if not.

>> ^EmptyFriend:

I'm not disagreeing. I'm actually currently in the middle of a research project on the decision to scrap Constellation and the implications. All I was saying is that taking the anger out on such a small program isn't fair. For $10M you'd have a hard time doing something as simple as upgrading all the PCs in a ship class to WindowsXP (and yes, that is something that is only now happening).
The total cost to launch a space shuttle into orbit is incredibly high though, also. Like in the $1B territory.
>> ^mentality:
>> ^EmptyFriend:
>> ^mentality:
So this is what $553,800,000,000 a year gets you.

_{Iraq and Afghanistan not included.}

good thing you took out the iraq and afghanistan money (or tried to at least), wouldn't want that number to seem ridiculously untrue.
a little search says this contract wasn't even $10 million (which is actually pretty small).
http://www.ga.com/news.php?read=1&id=72&page=7
EDIT: and just to be clear, i do think military and defense spending is way too high, but i at least support the development of new technologies as opposed to the continual support/retrofit of old stuff.


Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize that new technologies to kill people were more important than other kinds of research. Good thing we're slashing NASA's budget so we can better conduct an asymmetrical war on terror using the power of electromagnetism.
Sorry for the snark, but the ridiculous defense spending, record deficit, budget cuts in all the wrong places, and development of weapons systems grossly out of touch with what's needed, is seriously pissing me off. And that goes for the F22/F35 too no matter how f awesome they are.




It's $10 million invested from the US office of Naval Research from June 2006 to Jan 2009. It doesn't say how much was invested in the last two years, and how much the project costs in total, including other sources of funding. And that's just for a proof of concept. How much is it going to cost taxpayers to make a version fit for service, and they start arming ships with it? Yeah, billions sound like the right territory.

I'm not disagreeing. I'm actually currently in the middle of a research project on the decision to scrap Constellation and the implications. All I was saying is that taking the anger out on such a small program isn't fair. For $10M you'd have a hard time doing something as simple as upgrading all the PCs in a ship class to WindowsXP (and yes, that is something that is only now happening).

The total cost to launch a space shuttle into orbit is incredibly high though, also. Like in the $1B territory.
>> ^mentality:

>> ^EmptyFriend:
>> ^mentality:
So this is what $553,800,000,000 a year gets you.

_{Iraq and Afghanistan not included.}

good thing you took out the iraq and afghanistan money (or tried to at least), wouldn't want that number to seem ridiculously untrue.
a little search says this contract wasn't even $10 million (which is actually pretty small).
http://www.ga.com/news.php?read=1&id=72&page=7
EDIT: and just to be clear, i do think military and defense spending is way too high, but i at least support the development of new technologies as opposed to the continual support/retrofit of old stuff.


Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize that new technologies to kill people were more important than other kinds of research. Good thing we're slashing NASA's budget so we can better conduct an asymmetrical war on terror using the power of electromagnetism.
Sorry for the snark, but the ridiculous defense spending, record deficit, budget cuts in all the wrong places, and development of weapons systems grossly out of touch with what's needed, is seriously pissing me off. And that goes for the F22/F35 too no matter how f awesome they are.

[redacted]

>> ^EmptyFriend:

>> ^mentality:
So this is what $553,800,000,000 a year gets you.

_{Iraq and Afghanistan not included.}

good thing you took out the iraq and afghanistan money (or tried to at least), wouldn't want that number to seem ridiculously untrue.
a little search says this contract wasn't even $10 million (which is actually pretty small).
http://www.ga.com/news.php?read=1&id=72&page=7
EDIT: and just to be clear, i do think military and defense spending is way too high, but i at least support the development of new technologies as opposed to the continual support/retrofit of old stuff.



Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realize that new technologies to kill people were more important than other kinds of research. Good thing we're slashing NASA's budget so we can better conduct an asymmetrical war on terror using the power of electromagnetism.

*Sorry for the snark, but the ridiculous defense spending, record deficit, budget cuts in all the wrong places, and development of weapons systems grossly out of touch with what's needed, is seriously pissing me off. And that goes for the F22/F35 too no matter how f***** awesome they are.

Technically everything is magnetic due to the main force sharing electricity (electromagnetism; yes, if Magneto was much more intelligent he would own [pwn] everything). If you were in a high enough magnetic field you'd die as nerve conduction might "flip" or go weird directions. It's be one hell of a way to go and you'd have to be by something like the Sun to do it. Lastly, remember that as Oxygen becomes cooler it becomes superconducting.

Of course the other particles forced into the magnetic loops will kill you outright FAR before the magnetism.

/Seriously, someone needs to tell him white fro's are out, man. I keep thinking it's Shepard Book.

I was going to mention the same stuff. Magnetism (or properly, electromagnetism) works on EVERYTHING. The Universe would shit a brick if it couldn't use it. Perhaps, Magneto here just needs to get into the right physics classes and they'll have him using powers in ways he would never dream up.

BTW, does anyone know how the fuck magnets work?