The amount of resources or percentage of GDP allocated to science is determined by the underlying philsophy/ideology. Islam simply doesn't value scientific advances. That's why those countries don't contribute.

I've only skimmed the linked pdf but it says that the growth over Middle East countries is very uneven. Most of the growth is from Iran and Turkey and we know all about Iran. This is the country paying the Taliban to kill U.S soldiers. In most other Islamic countries it's stagnant. Iran's increase has it's roots in the war with Iraq and the desire to get nuclear weapons.

The fact is you'll only see projects like the Large Hadron Collider thanks to countries like America and those in Europe.

And BTW, is it possible to drop the use of the word "retarded". I'm happy to see that when I'm watching my Halo 3 montages and the kids are complaining about non-MLG footage, but there's nothing in his argument that is "retarded".


>> ^no-really:

I like this guy normally, but this train of thought was so retarded that I actually registered in order to derail it. 'Muslim World' is predominantly third world, so not surprisingly, few research papers are published in countries in which there is little money for food, never mind access to journals, infrastructure for equipment, travel grants or salaries for academics.
That academic productivity is linked to resources, rather than philosophy, is supported by the observation that the rate of publication has increased at four times the global average in the middle east in the last 30 years (http://www.science-metrix.com/30years-Paper.pdf), ten-fold in Iran. This is due to resource prioritisation by the administrations of those countries, not the religiosity of the scientists.
A better way of thinking about it would be to look at the number of muslims actually publishing scientific papers globally - loads of muslims live and work in the first world conducting great research that is unbiased by any secret fantasies they (or their theist colleagues) may harbour. I actually work in a lab headed by a Jew and staffed by a few atheists, a hindu, 2 christians, 2 muslims and a few shintos, and there is no correlation between how often anybody prays and their success at work.

>> ^no-really:

That academic productivity is linked to resources, rather than philosophy, is supported by the observation that the rate of publication has increased at four times the global average in the middle east in the last 30 years (http://www.science-metrix.com/30years-Paper.pdf), ten-fold in Iran. This is due to resource prioritisation by the administrations of those countries, not the religiosity of the scientists.



As he mentions in the video itself, if you look at that map, yes, many of those countries are poor, but some of them are in some of the most resource-rich areas of the world, and are up to their neck in money (Saudi Arabia etc) What all the darkest spots on that world map all have in common, is a heavy influence of Islam. Unfortunately, a heavy influence of islam on all of society probably means you'll end up having more in common as well, poor education, little or no science, politics poisoned by religion, and so on.

Nobody is suggesting you cant come from an islamic country and be a brilliant scientist, its just that under the influence of islam, society rots from within. The more islam, the less of everything else. the more devoted and dedicated followers of islam, the worse of everybody is.

Show me a country that has increased its religiosity/dedication to islam and thereby dragged itself out of poverty, misery and backwards thinking, and i'll show you false correlation..

I'm sorry but these videos are pathetic. Ignoring everything no-really said in his comment (all true), they would still be sad. Even if these statistics pointed at some actual problem, the world would be better off without many things, so what? Even if he proved that by taking up Islam you immediately become retarded and contribute nothing to society, so what? So we should ban Islam? Or better yet, invade Islamic nations to liberate them from stupidity?
You can educate people, that's it, suggesting we can "do" anything more is borderline warmongering.

Cringe...his comment about time is just plain wrong. He was really onto something when he said "time is not absolute," but then he makes the painful statement that the object moving near the speed of light experiences time more slowly. While it is true that the object experiences time in a frame that he is moving relative to differently, he will always experience time in his own frame in exactly the same way regardless of whether he is moving or not. That's the entire point of an "inertial frame" in special relativity - one result is that time always looks the same in his frame. It is times in other frames that he experiences differently.

Also (1) I agree with jwray - the color of the sky is related to the wavelength^4 term in the re-emission of electromagnetic radiation equations, and (2) don't get me started on the phenomenological lack of specificity in the overly broad comments about how we only see the world via electromagnetic waves/photons.

>> ^jwray:

He's wrong, too. The profile of wavelengths of sunlight that get scattered and transmitted by the atmposphere would be nearly the same regardless of the existence or nonexistence of humans (except for the effect of greenhouse gasses and other pollution). And the longest wavelength of visible light is red, not violet. Then he digresses into some really wrong woo-woo around 4:10. I'll downvote this guy for being ontologically incorrect.

Thanks for the quality, TW!

You know, you've been on here awhile yet don't have an avatar picture. Well, I think you should do something about that. I've elected to find you one for the time being.

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:Ww5Z0lzNdS0qPM:http://static.funnyjunk.com/pictures/wolf_guin_.jpg&t=1

In reply to this comment by Tymbrwulf:
Ah, haha fuck, *quality

>> ^spoco2:

I dunno... something smells fishy about this.
HA!
See what I did... with the fish smell and the fact that I also think it seems a bit not trueish ... oh never mind.


I don't get it.

OH WAIT! Durr.. HAHA Funny.

No, really, pm me what you meant.

Yay for promoting this. If you are ever in Las Vegas I recommend checking out http://www.atomictestingmuseum.org/

(No really, I went there and it is pretty damn awesome. Only sad face is they wont let you take pictures of anything)

Well, I've just discovered the next office productivity killer... thanks a LOT Valve.*




* No, really, thanks, this is awesome

>> ^gwiz665:

That ball is anything but soft.


That's what she said.

No, really, that's probably what she said.

netrunner

wow..
no..really.
i am actually at my desk in ..i dont even know what to call it.
ya know netrunner.
i dont know you but i have never had a problem with you OR your posts.
go check and see who voted for them..i'll wait.
but since you called ME to the table..
allow me to retort.
you sir are one presumptuous piece of work.
do you know WHY i didnt use your name in my post?
because it was never directed at you nor intended to be a passive agressive swipe at you.
if i had a problem with YOU specifically..YOU would know about it and can you guess why?
because i am open,direct and most of all honest.
how dare you sir!
how dare you presume to know anything about me based on what?
what exactly do your base your premise on?
my profile?
my comments?
some magical crystal ball?
you dont fucking know me and to TELL ME my intentions and that i dont have the BALLS to confront you up close and personal?
boy..let me tell you somethin.you better check your pussy shit at the door.
i dont play that game.you wanna call me out?
fine.
but you better know what the fuck you are talking about before you do.
and by your comment above you dont know the first thing about me.
and to think i defended your presumptuous ass when talking with the chogster.
well dont i look like a douchebag now.
you just made his case.
choggie my hero?
what the fuck kind of surrealistic dali nonsense is that?
do you think i admired choggies tactics?
i told him all the time that was no way to get people to see a different view.
but..that was his choice and he paid the consequences.
choggie challenged popular and rigid thinking.
he did so by poking and prodding and yes..trolling.
he was colorful and vibrant,original and entertaining.
he made sense some of the time and babbled conspiratorial nonsense the rest..and even that was entertaining.
i was not privy nor did i FUCKING CARE about the two of you and your homoerotic little drama.
choggie pissed off a lot of people.
i may have understood his reasoning why,even agreed with it but i never agreed with his oftimes vitriolic verbosity.
and fuck you for assuming i did netrunner.
pffft..choggie my hero.are you fucking serious?
your post alone is my poster child for the very point i was making.
choggie challenged groupthink.
his tactics sucked balls but his heart was in the right place.
do you see it yet netrunner?
are ya starting to understand just a wee bit?
YOU..sir.thought you were RIGHT.
and convinced of your own intellectual superiority you stepped forward to make a claim.
a claim based on????
nothing.
and now you find yourself reading this and i hope..dear god i hope..you are starting to feel something.
lets call this new feeling "WRONG".
you dont know everything.
your intellect is not the end all-be all.
and sometimes people just step in it..knee-deep in it.
sometimes we are WRONG even though we were so cock sure we were RIGHT.
THIS is the fundamental reason i liked choggie.
he forced people to defend a position that they were so cock sure was RIGHT.
to defend a position we have to think it through and sometimes..not every time..we find the flaw in our own presumption.
and that is how choggie referred to you specifically.
a passive agressive know-it-all presumptuous prick.
now netrunner.
hear me well.
i am mighty pissed off right now.i dont take kindly to people calling me a pussy(you did it nicely.same deal though) but i will get over myself.
your deal is with choggie..not me.
but by your comment you have made a case for what choggie claimed you to be.
prove him wrong netrunner.
because i dont really think that is who you are.i think you assumed too much and too fast and you jumped without thinking.
prove him wrong.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'throbbin, jesseofthenorth, beer, waaay too much beer, and the bible, no really' to 'throbbin, jesseofthenorth, beer, waaay too much beer, and the bible, no really, bewbs' - edited by Throbbin

the green explosion has definately saved lives and helped feed a growing population.
so on that note i agree with rottenseed.GM produce that needs less water and can reproduce under harsh conditions and still yield a prosperous harvest is always a good thing.there is a trade off though and many times that trade of is nutritional content and sadly..flavor.
when is the last time you had a tomato that actually TASTED like a tomato?
but as of now there has been no evidence that GM produce is bad for us with the exception of certain corns and grains(thanks monsanto fuckheads)which were spliced with toxic bacteria to kill certain pests.now grant you...this corn and grain is for animal feed but WHO ends up EATING the fucking animals?
seewhatimsayin?
as for hormone laden poultry/beef and pork.well if you think that is fine then you have no clue what hormones job is concerning,well,just about every system in your body.so one day if you wake up with a nice pair of titties dont come cryin to me.
and smugglarn i think you are missing the point.nobody is saying that plants are evil,nor is anybody here worshipping them.so your argument is pretty lame and if you think creating a plant gene that kills itself right before germination or seeds that will only germinate if sprayed with a certain toxic pest repellant is okie dokie.well then my friend i think it may be you who suffers from a mild case of ignorance.

lets remember that agriculture was the very first thing man learned to begin his climb towards civilizations and when huge agro-business attempts to discard 10,000 years of cultural learning,disciplines and knowledge.passed down through the generations.humanity has actually changed many plant life to his own purpose..forced evolution.to give an example:mexico has 180 species of maize(corn),america has?----4.
why?huge multi-national conglomerates who dominate the food markets.it is not farmer joe down the street who gets 3 million is subsidies but rather general mills.so much of the trouble is really with geo-politics and corporate malfeasance and absolutely nothing to do with plants being "good" or "evil".

all this doctor was doing was presenting pretty plain and simple facts and had slides to shock us.
which is a very effective tool.message?
know what the fuck you are putting into your body..pretty simple message.it is your choice to listen or disregard.
and just a side note:for those atkins diet lovers.if you had any idea what that diet does to your kidneys and liver after three weeks you would never go on that diet....ever.
and monsanto is EVIL....no really..they are fucking evil.

Are you sure this isn't a mashup like the Rush video? Really? I've watched it a few times now and... no really? Its gotta be fake I mean... really?

That does it. I'm off to find the flying pigs!

This very film with all it's matrix/terminator ripoff goodness, "Jaani Dushman", will be screening here in Los Angeles on Saturday night at The Cinefamily as part of a month long series HolyFuckingShit - Can't Stop The Musicals! Cuz on top of being some mind blowing badness, it has a musical number! No REALLY! watch it!

no, really...get off the stage

(I actually thought this was funny although I have no idea what a "trumpet award" is)