warri0r45

Vulgar Necrolatry by Abhorrence (finland).

Thanks, I quite like the sound of Skinless but I've not yet heard Saprogenic, so I'll check them out. Seeing as you seem to like a lot of grind, I'm going to recommend F**k... I'm dead. They're an Aussie grindcore band in case you haven't heard of them. Edit: Here's a sample: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=9oD4mXDHuMw By the way, sorry about not following through on your wish for Jazz. Completely glazed over it.

Try Blotted Science. They've released one album called The Machinations of Dementia and it's some pretty incredible instrumental prog-metal.

I'm not saying that it cuts your immune system slack (that was kenshinjapan) because that's not really true. Stickythetwigman had a good analogy - a vaccine is like training your army before going into battle for real. Cutting it slack would be letting the soldiers go out and party and eat all the junk food they want. Training your immune system to recognise a foreign agent only strengthens it.

Am I hearing things or does this game have exactly the same audio as red alert 2? http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=fxFDoumbQv4

Checking out the Blotted Science album The Machinations of Dementia.

Enjoy the final days while they last... it's definately a great time of your life to finally finish school and look back on all the good memories.

It can in some abnormal cases, like the french guy who has eaten TV's, airplanes, etc. It's very rare, but humanly possible to digest glass, chunks of metal, etc. Yep, just an urban legend.. But think, it's pretty easy to spread as fact. How many people can observe ducks in an environment like a deep cave/chamber where an echo could be heard? And the sound they make is distinctive, so I guess that also gives plausibility to the (false) assumption their quack doesn't echo at all. The article states: But also states: From what I know, stomach acid is simply not strong enough to dissolve glass or metal. Not even if it was 10x more concentrated. I can only assume that he actually passes the items naturally (i.e. they come out the other end) and the stomach lining comment is more about avoiding damage than being able to dissolve these things. Added, "digesting" and "absorbing" in this context might just mean that he can pass them through his digestive system without the problems other people would get.

There's one problem with that argument: vaccines do the exact same thing, i.e. they let your own immune system build up resistance to these diseases. They're not covering for your immune system or dealing with symptoms. Again, they stimulate the natural immune system response. That's just what we assume. Sure, you become resistant to that disease, but in reality, you're cutting your immune system slack, making it less efficient than what it should be. And yes, I assumed 99% of people wouldn't agree with me on my views of natural selection. No, that's what we know because that's how we develop vaccines. A vaccine is an analog to or deactivated version of a toxin or other bacterial/viral molecule. It's set up to generate the exact same immune response seen in the real infection. What you're saying makes no sense whatsoever - the whole strategy behind a vaccine is to strengthen your immune system, not to make it weaker or cut it slack.

There's one problem with that argument: vaccines do the exact same thing, i.e. they let your own immune system build up resistance to these diseases. They're not covering for your immune system or dealing with symptoms. Again, they stimulate the natural immune system response. I can't say i agree with you on the natural selection point either.

To get respect, teachers must give respect. There are no instances of the latter at my school. What do you expect teachers to do? Serious question.

Right with you there. The first thing kids must be taught in a science class is what science actually is (e.g. what "theory" means, what studies tell us, and as you said, the relationship between correlation and causation, etc). There's too much rote learning in school these days and not enough emphasis on understanding fundamental concepts. In my experience, important facts that you'd normally learn via rote learning come to you naturally anyway. Simply memorizing a bunch of facts means nothing. In science, and other subjects, you need the theory to understand what they mean.

Ok, but I'd still like to ask the same question: If it will lessen the likelihood of spreading disease, why not? I'm sure not everyone likes having to go through the process of getting a drivers licence these days (tests, log books, etc), but at the end of the day it saves lives. The same can be said for vaccines. Edit: It's worth bearing in mind the following information: [1]

I think there's a difference between forcing children into a certain political spectrum, and simply influencing them. The fact is, it's not like they'd been frog-marched down to the nearest HQ and told to do this for the Obama campaign, or told to hold an Obama sign and smile for the cameras. They did come in at their own free will, and if they'd have been a Republican, good for them too. At the end of the day, these children are the future. They're the ones who will have to face the challenges left for them. They're the ones who will vote in ten years time. If they're getting involved in politics at such a young age and fighting for what they believe in by trying to make a difference, I think that has to be credited. I can't speak for Australia, but certainly in the UK I don't know of many under-18s who canvass for any of the three major political parties near to an election. In fact, I don't know any who are even members of a trade union or a political party. EDIT: Just read Sumpta's closing paragraph. Spot on. =D> Of course, influencing your kids comes in different degrees. On one end of the scale you have outright indoctrination, and on the other you have a mild influence. I don't mind if parents talk about politics with their kids and encourage them to take an interest in it (in fact that's probably for the best), as long as it's not political propaganda. I think it's in the best interests of the kids to teach them to think critically about both parties as well. We are talking about politicians here, after all.

I support vaccines, and yes they should be mandated for children. Meol hit the nail on the head with the personal freedom vs. vaccines issue. Looking at it from a pragmatic point of view, it's getting jabbed by a needle for the sake of seriously lessening the chance that others in society catch a disease. Take diphtheria as an example here - throughout the 1920s, 15,000 people in the U.S. died from it [1] while in the 80s, only 33 people actually got the disease. [2] Wherever the vaccine has been used effectively, the rates of incidence have gone down. As far as I'm concerned that's a good thing, and it's the kind of thing that should be mandated. I'm not against vaccinations, but I don't think we should FORCE anyone to have them. Why not? School is good, and we force that on kids. Vaccines are good too, and we force those on kids as well. So we should. Why do you think we shouldn't?

You'd be surprised... Isaiah is 12. Isaiah made more calls than many of our adult volunteers, and he came in the office without a parent. I have a lot of pictures of young children coming in without their parents on my phone, but they're on my phone haha. This one girl Gracey, age 9, made more phone calls, and knocked on more doors than I did. She was a trooper. Her dad was always at work, and she came in on her own free-will. And you think all these kids do this without any influence from parents whatsoever? Perhaps there are some kids which take a real interest in politics from a young age of their own accord, but you can't deny that many parents force their own political views on their kids too.

Cute, but I can't help but cringe whenever I see young children at a political rally waving signs around.

Enthroned Abominations by Disgorge. Sounds sufficiently brutal thus far...

Didn't you see the footage of him wiping away a tear with a tissue while at a rally? I did twice, if I'm not mistaken. She was a significant part of his life, so obviously her death affected him. I think seeing him with a strong resolve so soon after the death of his grandmother has to do with winning the election, not being an uncaring bastard.

Winds of Creation by Decapitated (album) Decapitated are fast becoming one of my all time favourite metal bands. I think I'm going to do what I rarely do when it comes to music that i like... I'm going to go out and buy their two most recent albums so I own their entire back catalogue of studio albums. It might not sound like that big of a deal but I'm a picky consumer of music at the best of times.

Pretty good speech from Obama. As I've probably said before, I wish him all the best for the next 4 years.

No one except Republicans with a huge chip on their shoulder are going to believe speculative nonsense like that, Saru. There's no basis in fact for that comment at all. Yes, McCain delivered a very gracious speech (I especially liked him acknowledging the history of the event), and I wouldn't have expected any less of him because he's a fundamentally decent human being. The same goes for Barack Obama.

Sounds like its pretty much over. Well done Obama.

That makes sense, but it doesn't make the two equally rational positions. Not by a long shot. Not trying to be stubborn, but I'm not sure I follow, could you elucidate please? As you said, people will look at the facts differently and form their conclusions (although misinterpreting and misrepresenting is different from simply looking at). That doesn't mean that both conclusions are equally valid. For example, someone might say that the Holocaust happened while someone else might say it didn't. Those aren't equally valid conclusions based on the evidence we have.

That makes sense, but it doesn't make the two equally rational positions. Not by a long shot.