Lateralus

I don't get stressed. I might get anxious if I know something needs done or I have an important choice to make, but in those situations I relieve it by doing whatever needs done and making the choice.

I agree, don't drop the salt. [cabbage]'s bad luck. Throwing it over your left shoulder is a much better idea. It's supposed to be good luck, and you might blind Bubba as he stalks his prey.

Wiki, BBC and Google are the only websites I really love. That sounds boring, but they've earned it by being so useful.

With an estimated 10^24 stars in the universe and an average of 3 planets per star and billions of billions of years it was bound to happen somewhere, and probability is a tricky business. It's not a perfect example, but I know someone who hit a straight flush on one of the first hands of Texas Hold 'Em they ever played (odds are 1/79,122). Again, I don't think you can view these things anthropocentrically. This planet was not created good for us, we ended up being adapted to it. While the planet may support life, it's certainly not the best it could conceivably be, is it? Some places are far too hot, some far too cold, not to mention the floods, earthquakes and other natural disasters.

They're nice arguments if being right is the same thing as being happier and anthropocentric. The big bang didn't happen with humans in mind so it wasn't precise at all, it was aimless (perhaps I should say it was much more likely to be aimless than directed). We just got lucky that the Earth is what and how it is; and what it is is a planet that supports life some of the time on some of its surface. I'm perfectly willing to believe religious people are happier. I haven't seen any studies about it, but I'm not going to say it's am impossibility. How happy someone is has nothing to do with how right their (unverifiable) beliefs are.

In just over a decade and with a few billion dollars? Not likely. EDIT: To anyone concerned that the money could be better spent; Next time you want a new computer or to go to a sports game or even buy a pint of beer I hope you think about Africa and aids and cancer. What CERN are doing is far less frivolous than the way most of the money in the world is spent. Money spent on CERN and the space program combined take up less than a tenth of a percent of the world's GDP.

Utilitarianism, bah.

What exactly is dubstep? :P It's electronic music that's really bass oriented with shuffling odd time signature rhythms and dissonant 'melodies' (if you can call them that). Really dark and atmospheric. I don't know if you're familiar with it, but Thom Yorke's album The Eraser has some dubstep influence.

Well if we're going to be completely scientific about there's no a zero percent chance, but there's never a zero percent chance of anything. Most of the black hole talk is scaremongering, and the papers published on it have been ripped apart by peer reviews. We're not doing anything that isn't already happening in the upper atmosphere. Why is the LHC a waste of money? Becuase you could spend the money on something more usefull that will physically help us. Still why waste 4.4 billion on an experiment that has slight chance of killing us? Why take the risk? What will we get from it? Particle physics in general has already had applications, but what the practical applications of the LHC will be, I don't know. The fact is that's a risk you take with the acquisition of knowledge. It's very unlikely it'll be useless, though it might take a while for us to see the tangible benefits. I can't understand the mindset that something as interesting as this is a waste of money. The 'spend it on Africa!' argument is ridiculous as well. Billions and billions get thrown at Africa (as well they should), but if someone is to cry 'AFRICA!' every time a large sum of money is getting spent then we'll never do or find anything. Curiosity is as much a part of being human as altruism is, and if we can't spend money on the acquisition of knowledge then we don't deserve it.

Well if we're going to be completely scientific about there's no a zero percent chance, but there's never a zero percent chance of anything. Most of the black hole talk is scaremongering, and the papers published on it have been ripped apart by peer reviews. We're not doing anything that isn't already happening in the upper atmosphere. Why is the LHC a waste of money?

Oh God, there we go again. Sure, toss a few billions to the Africans, that'll solve their problems. You know what? Why don't we just give them every penny we spend on advertising, luxury products and all entertainment. Those aren't necessary either, and it counts for hundreds, if not thousands of billions. If used correctly it will, "give a man fish will feed them for a day, give a man the knowledge of how to fish he'll be fed for life". If we operated on the 2nd part of that saying we could eventually help Africa's problems. What's your view? Throw money away on something we don't need to know and that could possibly destroy us while millions upon millions suffer and die in pain? Nice opinion, you sure care for other human beings out there :thumbsup: It's been said over and over and over - There is absolutely no way that the LHC is going to destroy the world. I think the whole "don't need to know" thing is quite laughable. Did we need to know about electricity? What about internal combustion? You can't put limits on what you think we need to find out about when you have absolutely no clue what the possible applications are.

If you could point me to some I'd read it sometime, but it would be with the most skeptic of eyes. I know lots of people supposedly see ghosts, but it's can usually be explained in other ways. There's another reason why I mentioned faith and ghosts in the same breath - Lack of empirical evidence. In lots of cases there's no way at all to test anything (as with religion. Like you said it's all about faith, not evidence), and in the cases they do test the paranormal always comes up short.

I'm not sure if you're talking to me or not, but I'll reply anyway I suppose. I understand that faith is the whole 'point' in religion, I'm just saying that's also the reason I disagree with it. Most of the so called evidence for ghosts and other paranormal stuff is just misinformation. I think there's an element of faith to believing in ghosts because people who do (or at least some of them) will believe in it without evidence, with wrong evidence, and even sometimes in spite of the 'real' evidence which suggests otherwise.

Listening to the album Untrue by Burial. Now that I see it written down, it really looks as if it would be some kind of metal album, but it's actually dubstep, which I'm starting to get into.

No, I don't see how that opinion is bad to have. What you're showing is a good sign of a mental problem. Get that checked out asap. I agree that the reductio ad absurdum was a bad route to go down, but there's no way you can actually agree that any claim should just be believed on faith until it's been proven false. One word: Religion That's not really any kind of answer, and if you'd seen any of my posts on religious topics you'd know that I think religion is just about as silly as ghosts and all that. I know that people believe things because they have faith in them, but that doesn't mean I agree with it. It's also worth noting that the guy said he believed in anything until it was shown to be false, not that he just believed in some things that weren't shown to be false yet. So, to use the example of religion, that would include all faiths and sects, and therefore a huge number of conflicting and contradicting ideas. So, believing in anything just because it hasn't been shown to be false - Pretty silly, right?

I used to listen to them quite a lot. They're a good band, but I've gone off them lately. I'd still definitely go and see them live though. I've been to see them 3 (maybe 4?) times, and each show was crazier than the last.

No, I don't see how that opinion is bad to have. What you're showing is a good sign of a mental problem. Get that checked out asap. I agree that the reductio ad absurdum was a bad route to go down, but there's no way you can actually agree that any claim should just be believed on faith until it's been proven false.

It's most likely just the topography of the moon making it look like the shadows aren't parallel. Experts have been saying this for a while, and the guys from Mythbusters recreated the photo quite accurately and made it look as if the shadows weren't parallel just by adjusting rocks and 'moon dust'. The moon landing was absolutely real.

Seeing as you made the distinction there, does that mean these three groups are separate, implying that you, and your girlfriend, are not intelligent? Not a bright spark yourself are you? It's a standard list of OR attributes (1+ required to meet the criterial it's applied to): Him His girlfriend Intelligent And given he doesn't like people who aren't intelligent it's a simple deduction to make that both him and his girlfriend are, otherwise he wouldn't like himself or her. In that case having a list at all is redundant, since it all comes under the blanket of intelligence. I wouldn't have phrased the sentence that way myself, but I think it was pretty obvious what he(Woodcut) meant.

Cliche as it might be, I'm glad Highway Star made it into the top 20. I probably would've put it higher actually, the guitar solo is fantastic.

No one here is a danger to society, so go back to your bridge little troll. Paranormal discourse can be a dangerous thing; it encourages credulity over lovely, lovely skepticism.

I suppose I'll just raise them the way my dad raised me and his dad raised him; Keep them at arm's length so they develop a sense of hero worship towards me and they'll begin to mimic all my habits to try and impress me. It's not the most emotionally stable life, but you certainly learn a thing or two. :P

No, if CERN spent the 4 billion researching into aids, ways to provide more food, etc instead of chucking it all into atom research, I'm fairly sure it could fix some problems. I don't understand how you disagreeing with the amount of money spent on the LHC makes it any less interesting or exciting, and it certainly doesn't make it pointless or a waste of money.

There's possibilities of finding the Higgs Boson, fixing the holes in the Standard Model and quantum gravitational data that might even lead to a theory of everything. I'm really excited about it.

Every detail. It's almost like reading an encyclopedia. It didn't have the charm that Animal Farm did for me. I think the style of writing ties in with the theme quite well. It would be difficult for a book as cold as 1984 to have the charm of Animal Farm, since Animal Farm is purposefully close to a children's tale stylistically.