warri0r45

If i were a homosexual, I don't think I'd want people to recognise me as "normal," I'd rather people get over this nonsense that everyone in society ought to be "normal."

Right... Great album, but it doesn't need nonsense like this. I'll be damned if I'll have Brett from Auckland tell me to "open my mind" to hear obscure transitions between songs that aren't even there. I tried some out, and wasn't impressed at all. Reflection into The Patient? Rubbish - not only does Reflection fade in to the next track on the album (Triad) but it has no obvious connection to The Patient at all. Lateralus "fading into" Faaip de Oiad is clutching at straws. Eon Blue Apocalypse into Reflection makes zero sense. The tracks concerned make more sense as on the album - the drums ending Disposition sound like they are meant to enter Reflection and the clean guitar of Eon Blue Apocalypse sounds much more suited to blending into the start of The Patient. And how about The Patient into Disposition for a whopper - never mind that they are in a different key entirely (The Patient ends on A and Disposition starts in E). Let me tell you exactly why people buy into this stuff without thinking critically - it's the same reason that people will think Stairway to Heaven has Satanic lyrics in it. If someone gives you the lyrics (and hence you expect it to happen) your mind will see it as a better fit then if you heard the piece of music with no power of suggestion beforehand.

Same here. Unfortunately (or fortunately?) I've not had any experiences remotely like the ones in this thread. I'm not the kind to jump to conclusions, either.

The follow on question from the fact that poeple are bothered by it is if the mother shouldn't do it in public merely because some people will take offence. Personally I hate the sterile, politically correct image society is turning into. I hate the idea that people want every second thing outlawed just because it offends someone. So people are offended by breast feeding in public? They have every right to be offended, but not eveything which people are offended by should be banned. Do I personally think that breastfeeding in public should be banned? Hell no. It hurts no one.

Too much adult content, not enough adults acting as parents. I don't accept the cop out that you "have no choice but to accept the truth and grow up." You'd have to ask, given this trend of kids growing up fast, whether parents really care that much about this issue. Conservative attitudes don't seem to be mirrored by parents, considering the trend exists. Having said that, if I were a parent, I'd be siding on the conservative side of things in raising my kids.

Holy crap, Kaphias. That's awesome.

The greenhouse effect is a scientific fact based on nothing more than basic physics and how certain molecules absorb radiation of certain wavelengths. I've worked with the same principle myself in the lab with a spectrophotometer (apart from measuring concentrations of a given solution, they also measure absorption maxima for any given compound). Also, you really do need to look up the word theory and what it means in a scientific context, because your use of it is incredibly ignorant.

John Wiley Price can get [bleep]ed. He needs to get that chip off his shoulder and stop acting like he's being persecuted by any term with the word "black" in it. God [wagon] like this piss me off. Everyone who thinks thinks that any term is offensive needs to think of the context in which it's said. Clearly, the thick head of John Price couldn't get that "black hole" was in no way intended as a racist comment. Idiots like this only serve to perpetuate this nonsense. George Carlin nails it. http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=8HAGc521S ... re=related [i'm not getting mad at you, Jack]

I'm amazed that people get their information on science from any politicians, Al Gore included. Read a book, not a political press release.

For the same reason people engage in illegal activities in direct defiance of the law and regardless of the consequences (Even if those consequences might include death)-- Because they more or less can. It's human nature. To argue that something must not be a choice because people do it even though it's not socially acceptable is the ultimate in fallacies. I highly doubt you'd accept this argument as true when placed on less-than-acceptable practices. I see your point, but I dont think homosexuality is the kind of thing people choose just "because they can." Its also human nature to be attracted to the opposite sex, you know. What Im more arguing here is that they continue being homosexual even through continued persecution (and, in some cases, attempts to cure them, which often fail dismally [1]). They also continue being homosexual contrary to natural biological attractions to the opposite sex. It has none of the markers of the kind of thing people choose. As for your comment that I wouldnt accept the argument if placed on a less than acceptable practice, sorry, not quite. I think pedophilia, however much I disagree with it, isnt something that a normal adult just chooses (note I'm talking about the attraction, not the act of child molestation). Egads! What you've written above is-- Much like it is usually-- A misrepresentation of the "People aren't born gay argument". No one has said that someone up and chooses to be gay at a whim, but rather that no one is born gay. One isn't born with certain preferences. They're ingrained into a person's being over time. Sorry for misrepresenting your position. Its not like you fully disclosed it, though. You should expect a bit of fleshing out of each others opinions in a debate. Given that, Ill cut you the same amount of slack in that I didnt say that people are born gay. Ive seen some studies linking homosexuality to genetics but the jury is still out for me. Its a more complex trait than just simple genetics, too (hence I think your idea of being ingrained into a persons being over time could be partly true). I dont think theres any serious disagreement here.

The more I hear this, the more stupid I think it is. Do I, as a human, have some underlying caution towards people of other races as an inbuilt biological defense against unfamiliar people? Yes. But do I consciously believe that any other race is inferior to me or that they should be discriminated against? NO. The PC police have got to you too? You are not a racist because you don't like the attitude of a group of people. I could say that I don't like the attitude of your average white Aussie these days, but does that make me racist against my own race? Nope.

Ahh, right. So to eliminate discrimination (kids at school pick on kid because of his gay parents) we should reinstate discrimination? (gay parents no longer allowed to have children because they're gay). You know it's attitudes like this which drive me to question the social norms we've set up. It's people like you who are the reason that kids of gay parents will be picked on at school. If there was no gay-bashing in society from religious or generally homophobic types, kids having gay parents would be perceived as normal and there would be no bullying. You should be looking at yourself and asking if your attitude perpetuates that result. Besides that, kids of homosexual parents can have a good life. I could also add that the kid doesn't have to tell his peers about his parents but the reason why he would have to do that (again, discrimination) just leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. I don't like pandering to people who don't know how to accept others. Yeah, that's how it works. The scenario we're in now, with the existence of homosexuals, in no way negates the efforts of mankind to survive. I think we're reproducing quite enough, thanks. If anything homosexuals are helping reduce population overkill.

People throw the term "racist" around a lot these days. I don't believe any race is subordinate to mine (white) nor do I discriminate against anyone based on race, therefore I'm not a racist. Let people call me racist. I'll call them ignorant.

It's not so much a belief as it was me being young and naieve. It's pretty funny considering I'm now majoring in biochemistry... I used to wonder what cells are made of, i.e. I used to wonder if they were something other than atoms and molecules and what they could possibly be. But, of course the ordinary laws of chemistry and physics apply to cell biology as well.

Worst. Argument. Ever. Seriously. You don't want to go there. Why would a gay person choose to be so if it means persecution at the hands of other people, especially in a seriously conservative region of the U.S.? Lets take that to the extreme why would someone in Saudi Arabia or some other Sharia Law governed region choose to be gay if they can get the death penalty if found out? It makes no sense. And if being gay is a choice, then the implication is that you and I should be able to just choose to be gay. I don't know about you, but that proposition makes absolutely no sense from a personal standpoint (i.e. it's not possible for me to just "choose" to be attracted to guys) and no sense from a biological standpoint biology would dictate that we have attraction to women and absolutely not men. It would indicate that something in a homosexual is biologically malfunctional, not that they just chose to be gay. The only thing that I could see which could override that is a highly ingrained social practice, i.e. with the Greeks. Those social practices dont exist anymore (in fact many western cultures still side towards anti-gay attitudes with their laws) and yet we still have homosexuals despite the stigma.

Ironically that's exactly what I'm talking about. You all categorise each other as "liberal" or "conservative" when in reality people have a huge variety of opinions on all issues. What I'd rather is people stop calling each other by ideology or category as if you can divide people into two opposing groups, and as if pointing out divisions makes your side better (hence satisfying the most carnal notion of "us vs. them," which I find to be stupid and shallow).

That's what I hate about your politics. Division. You're so caught up on it. Mind you that's what I hate about all politics, but the labelling of ideology in America as a political divide is just incredible. It's like you're on either side of trenches fighting a war, not doing politics. You're all falling into the trap of thinking you have to think like one side of the spectrum or the other. People aren't being taught to think for themselves any more.

Exactly. Math is a way to quantify what we naturally experience. The pencil didn't not hit the ground becuase we can divide an element of time in half, then in half again, etc, etc, etc (sorry for the double negative).

Looks like I was wrong. http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?&verb=ge ... =ADA239988 Here's a way to transmit electricity through air - make air part of the circuit by ionizing it with some form of EM radiation. http://www.hsvt.org/faq.html#t3 Looks like they use UV radiation to do the ionization. Makes sense, scientifically speaking (higher energy means greater potential for ionization). In a household setting, you're better off using wires. It's really not that much of a nuisance compared to running into the electrical circuit itself or getting a healthy dose of UV radiation. And as for the wireless energy lightbulb, technically it's not wireless electricity because the form of energy being transmitted is a magnetic field, which induces the flow of electricity in the receiver. Neat idea, though.

You're mixing up electricity (electrons running through a metal wire) and electromagnetic (EM) radiation. They are completely distinct energies. You can't possibly utilise electricity like we do EM radiation in the form of the signals that work your remote, etc. The stuff that comes from the sun is EM radiation, not electricity. Sorry to tell you, but your whole post is fatally flawed. Edit: Here's the difference between the two. Electricity - notice the part that says electricity travels in circuits. EM Radiation - This is the stuff that radiates freely through space. No circuits here.

I can't believe how PC society is getting these days. You guys should expect to be offended every now and then. If it comes to the point where we legislate or act to minimise anyone getting offended for every little thing, then stop the planet. I want to get off.

Ask Hell's Most Wanted: Inappropriate image removed ~Turtlefemm They happen to include homosexuality and women on women as separate. Good god. Some people are just plain nuts. Anyway, I can't say I'm surprised that this topic keeps coming up. As long as we have religion teaching people that homosexuality is wrong, then we'll have conflict. I can only be thankful that Im straight and dont have to deal with such a view personally. I rather see people as equals, regardless of a sexual orientation they can't choose. So no, I don't see homosexuality as wrong, its just another sexual orientation. I find any persecution of homosexuals to be discrimination and completely abhorrent.

Welcome to reality. Some things you see you may not like. Kids need to be fed, and naturally for infants that comes in the form of breast milk. Classy restaurant or not, the kid would not be able to stomach solids, and the mother didn't want her child to starve. Too bad for you, I'm afraid.

If it breeds a sense of "my country is better than your country" then I don't agree with it. I can enjoy my country and the lifestyle and culture, but I'm not going to let that make me think that I'm better than people of other countries.

People have made some good points on this thread, namely that it's kind of stupid to hate a genre. It's way too much of a generalisation. Do I hate some bands? Sure, I hate some metal bands, some pop bands, some rap artists, some country bands, some R&B artists, some rock bands, etc, etc. Saying you hate a genre is way to general and would suggest that you have heard all of the artists of that genre to make an accurate comment.