Small google sample. That's just about changes during youth to old age.

Your ability to "grab" data becomes slower as you age. I was pondering aloud if it would cause a sense of "time going by faster" then when you compare your memory to the "time that went by" on a typical childhood day, etc...

My main wonderment is over the interface the body uses in particular to take input then decides what is a: not real, b: is real. I know most of that will be data comparison, I want to know what element of the mind was able to start that in the first place. I was wondering aloud if it might be humans' input interface is *very* hard-handed and exact, then compared to an Elephant's system? Could it be dreams? That was the only other question I was asking above. L0cky covered the rest.

I have also seen mental illness in my time. It has also given me extreme patience for anyone as I know reality is a troublesome thing. Our unique ability to communicate across that void is the biggest mystery to solve; to heal, to push innovation; and perhaps spread it one day (if we dare, or even think we should have that right). Besides a Unified Field Theory...

If someone knows anymore go at it. I just need links because I'll want to read it all.

New tech toys like that help to ease the aging process. What are you going to use it for? I don't think we've ever heard your voice on here, so we know you don't do the Dag Weekly News on here or anything. Are you keeping a voice journal? Or did you want to hear your ideas played back to you in higher fidelity?

Anyhow, happy birthday, or being that it's Easter, should we dare call it a rebirthday? Huh? Huh? Who's with me?!

>> ^MINK:
but dude, you're still talking like Mission is Accomplished.
and you didn't respond to the first part, about why iraq?


I've responded to 'why Iraq' repeatedly. It's because of just how truly horrific Saddam's rule was. Genocide is bad, m'kay?

Why not Rwanda, the Congo Darfur, Sudan, Somalia and on and on? Well, I'd love to see them helping any or all of those regions as well, but if America can only be bothered to remove Saddam I'll take it too.

From America's perspective it's own benefit no doubt plays a major, and maybe even sole, role in it's reasons for choosing Iraq over the many other disaster zones in the world. I can't know, and only care in so much as it affects Iraqi's. I'm still glad that Saddam is gone and the Kurdish people can now live their lives without living as fugitives with a permanent death sentence over their and their children's heads.

You wouldn't argue America has no business in Rwanda because they weren't helping Sudan, would you? So I'll turn your question around in the context of defending people from known genocidal government rule, 'What's so special about Iraq'?

For extra credit, why isn't the entire remainder of this violence forsaken planet doing anything about Rwanda, the Congo, Darfur, Sudan, Somalia and on and on? Do we really want to just watch as genocide occurs because we dare not intervene?

Differences of opinion are good, but honestly, I have a much harder time dealing with people I otherwise like saying yes to this gratuitous, disgusting, nauseating, hurtful image than I do dealing with people who think the war in Iraq is rightious or who otherwise espouse political values I abhor: I see the reason for that. I see no reason at all for this. It isn't real. It isn't cautionary. It isn't in context. It's just pathetic.

So let me get this straight: It's much easier for you to deal with a guy like Dick Cheney who sold our nation a bill of goods so we could go to war in which over 5000 Americans and countless Iraqis have actually DIED because he believes the war is righteous, rather than a guy like me who happens to think that the gruesome portrayal of suicide might be realistic enough to persuade certain people to seek help or find help for others that they care about? There's not only no gray area for you, but I'm actually a worse human being because I don't see this clip in the same way that you do? I mean, solely because YOU find it gratuitous, offensive, and unrealistic and yet I don't, this somehow places me on a lower moral plane than the fucking war pigs in Washington because at least they think their cause is "righteous"? Wow, if Cheney ever has to face charges for war crimes he better pray to have you as a judge. All his attorney would have to say is, "Well your honor, at least he's not as bad as that guy who defended a suicide scene from a movie!"

No, you most certainly are NOT alone in experiencing a loss from suicide, but let's spare each other our sob stories because that's really besides the point. Could a scene like this possibly encourage someone to commit suicide? Certainly it's possible. But could a scene like this also dissuade others from taking their own lives? Certainly that's possible too, and unless you somehow have insight into the thinking of every suicidal person on the planet I doubt you'll convince me otherwise. And even more importantly, could people who have friends or loved ones who they know are depressed be moved enough to be more active in finding help for this depressed person after seeing this scene? That is a DEFINITE possibility too. Suicidal people react to the world in ways that aren't entirely predictable anyway, so we can't go making everything they see and hear safe just to protect them, unless you think that the parent of those kids who sued Ozzy Osbourne and Judas Priest because they blame them for their kids suicide have valid cases.

How realistic is this scene? Most persons don't walk this calmly into their own suicides, but as KOMMIE stated this woman already had other mental health issues to begin with so it's not outside the realm of possibilities. Not every suicide is a person standing on a ledge for hours while police, firemen, and family members all try to talk them down. There is a subset of persons just like her who remain calm and collected during the entire process. I know.

To restate, this scene is not at all romanticized or completely unrealistic, nor does it promote suicide, but that makes no difference to you because your opinion is the one that matters most, right? I'm just the devil, worse than Rumsfeld and Cheney because at least they think their cause is righteous while I must be some sick fuck who likes watching snuff scenes. The worst thing I said about this scene's detractors was that they don't like seeing things that make them uncomfortable, while you say that you have a harder time with me than with deluded war criminals.

Congratulations, oxdottir. You've pissed me off as bad as I used to get when I read political blogs on a regular basis and trolls would stop in to say that we liberals deserved to be waterboarded because we dared to question the President. "Differences of opinion are good", you say, but then you say I'm worse than a megalomaniacal war criminal because my opinion is different than yours. Just cut to the chase and say "Differences of opinion are good, but you're a sick piece of shit because you don't find this abhorrent just like me."

Thanks for letting me know where you stand.

PS: I have no problem with anyone else who's disagreed with me on this thread because no one besides oxdottir has implied I'm a sick bastard for defending this. Everyone on VideoSift can downvote this and I won't care, but I don't take remarks like oxdottir's lightly, obviously.

@doremifa
>How about breaking the bible down in a language we all can understand? Just a thought.

NET (New English Translation) is online at http://net.bible.org/bible.php?book=Gen&chapter=1 . I really like this one because they're very open about reasons for translating the way they did. They point out where different scrolls disagree on the copying of a word, for example. They also point out where different schools of thought disagree on what a given passage means. The footnotes are very good. If you have questions about a passage or something you can 'profile reply' me.

@mrcrosby4
>If you believe in the God of Israel and his son Jesus, you can't also believe in "billions and billions of years" of macro evolution and claim that the Bible is true. If you believe in macro evolution, then God lied to us.

Genesis 2:4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created – when the Lord God made the earth and heavens. 2:5 Now no shrub of the field had yet grown on the earth, and no plant of the field had yet sprouted, for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground. 2:6 Springs would well up from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground. 2:7 The Lord God formed the man from the soil of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. [...] 2:18 The Lord God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a companion for him who corresponds to him." The Lord God formed out of the ground every living animal of the field and every bird of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them, and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 2:20 So the man named all the animals, the birds of the air, and the living creatures of the field, but for Adam no companion who corresponded to him was found. 2:21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep, and while he was asleep, he took part of the man’s side and closed up the place with flesh. 2:22 Then the Lord God made a woman from the part he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. 2:23 Then the man said, "This one at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; this one will be called 'woman,' for she was taken out of man."

I have to wonder when science suggests that life came out of hot springs of mud. Because isn't that what the Bible just said? The Bible does not say how the formation of life was accomplished. How long did it take? Billions and billions of years? A day? A minute? No time at all? What are your thoughts on these verses? (That's not meant to be taken as a challenge. I don't think it has anything to say about 'macro evolution' as you call it. I'm more wondering what you think about the absence of a time frame.)

@ no one in particular
I think it doesn't say exactly how long it took, or how it was done in detail, because it doesn't matter. I guarantee that God and Jesus are much, much more concerned about how we're treating those around us rather than what we think about how the world and everything in it was built. I doubt that God will keep us from coming home to Him because we dared to use the intellect He gave us, and speculated about how He accomplished all His great works. In fact, He probably enjoys the fact that we appreciate and care enough to wonder about it. Ultimately, He wants credit where credit is due.