insane Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 It's amazingly awesome how much you guys can talk about religion without "talking about religion". :P Hah, this time, I'm actually not talking about religion. Honest :P Just pointing out that we all have basic beliefs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death_By_Pod Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I can't even remember why you are trying to argue with me... Whats your beef against science and the scientific method? I've alreay said it obviously does not encompass all of science, but you just keep hacking away at it... As for oversimplifying, please, I could just as easily say you're blurring the argument by overcomplicating things. And the fact that we can't test every theory is obvious, its beyond our capacity in some instances, what more could you wan't? A time machine so I can go to a point in time where you can actually test everyting? I have no beef against science (I'm even studying for a science degree), your post said that science follows the scientific method (and went on to describe what you call the scientific method) and I pointed out it was factually incorrect. Your account is still practical for many scientists however its just wrong; Much in the same way Newtonian Gravitation is still useful yet wrong. That's not to say that it doesn't follow a method, it's just not the one you are referencing to. It doesn't even encompass everything we call science now so how would it be the scientific method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 I can't even remember why you are trying to argue with me... Whats your beef against science and the scientific method? I've alreay said it obviously does not encompass all of science, but you just keep hacking away at it... As for oversimplifying, please, I could just as easily say you're blurring the argument by overcomplicating things. And the fact that we can't test every theory is obvious, its beyond our capacity in some instances, what more could you wan't? A time machine so I can go to a point in time where you can actually test everyting? I have no beef against science (I'm even studying for a science degree), your post said that science follows the scientific method (and went on to describe what you call the scientific method) and I pointed out it was factually incorrect. Your account is still practical for many scientists however its just wrong; Much in the same way Newtonian Gravitation is still useful yet wrong. That's not to say that it doesn't follow a method, it's just not the one you are referencing to. It doesn't even encompass everything we call science now so how would it be the scientific method. Again, i'll say that I know that the scientific method does not encapsulate the entire realm of science nor does it dictate the one and only definate way of performing science (I think i've said this 3 times now) but you can't objectively say it's wrong if many scientists use the scientific method. You can't judge Newtonian Gravitation as 'wrong' either, there's just a better way of explaining it with Eienstien's theory of relativity. Now i'll give you a chance to present me with a method that encapsulates all of science. And it's good to hear your studying a science degree, whats your major? I'm starting a science degree this year, planning on majoring in biochemistry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death_By_Pod Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Again, i'll say that I know that the scientific method does not encapsulate the entire realm of science nor does it dictate the one and only definate way of performing science (I think i've said this 3 times now) but you can't objectively say it's wrong if many scientists use the scientific method. You can't judge Newtonian Gravitation as 'wrong' either, there's just a better way of explaining it with Eienstien's theory of relativity. Now i'll give you a chance to present me with a method that encapsulates all of science. And it's good to hear your studying a science degree, whats your major? I'm starting a science degree this year, planning on majoring in biochemistry. The method itself isn't impportant, you were intellectually dishonest in stating that science followed the scientific method. It doesn't matter if it is partially right or that many people use it; if it isn't consistent with the way people perform science, then it is wrong. This method you provided is objectively wrong, much in the same way Newtonian Gravity is objectively wrong; it's a theory that doesn't explain everything accurately. Majoring in Physics, I haven't decided on a second major yet (Maths, Computational Science or History and Philosophy of Science), or that I'll just skip the second major altogether. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonmondalson Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 In front of your eyes you see 'game over'. A list of your scores appear and you are given an overall rating. This is faxed to your family back on Earth where they can pin it on their wall to celebrate your achievement. NuclearBB: Hmm, what's this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xXru1n3dXx Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 In front of your eyes you see 'game over'. A list of your scores appear and you are given an overall rating. This is faxed to your family back on Earth where they can pin it on their wall to celebrate your achievement. After having a crappy night thank you for making me laugh. RS Stats | BF2 Stats | ARSCV | LastFM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spicer001 Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 Reincarnation ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nadril Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 In front of your eyes you see 'game over'. A list of your scores appear and you are given an overall rating. This is faxed to your family back on Earth where they can pin it on their wall to celebrate your achievement. That would be awsome :) :D . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamemonster Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 In front of your eyes you see 'game over'. A list of your scores appear and you are given an overall rating. This is faxed to your family back on Earth where they can pin it on their wall to celebrate your achievement. That would be awsome :) :D . Didn't people say that life is a game(think about it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardovilian Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 you will look exactly like you did when you died for approximately 20 years. Where did you get that information from? Even with modern embalming methods, most bodies decay to a skeleton within a year Depends on the burial method. Most cemetaries just close the casket and bury it. My grandmother died this past month, and her tomb is gaurenteed to give here at least 5 years before any decomposition begins. I am sure that more wealthy patrons would be able to secure the 10 and 20 year methods. You mean to say there's a currency in decay time? I understand the ancients being buried with grave goods to pay for their passage to the afterlife, but paying to keep looking good for an extra few years? I don't mean any disrespect to your family Barihawk, or anyone else's, but doesn't this sound to anyone else like the fad for defeating the aging process (through surgery etc.) taken just a little too far? Why is 'common sense' so named, when there is so little of it about?Welcome to puberty, we've been expecting you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 Again, i'll say that I know that the scientific method does not encapsulate the entire realm of science nor does it dictate the one and only definate way of performing science (I think i've said this 3 times now) but you can't objectively say it's wrong if many scientists use the scientific method. You can't judge Newtonian Gravitation as 'wrong' either, there's just a better way of explaining it with Eienstien's theory of relativity. Now i'll give you a chance to present me with a method that encapsulates all of science. And it's good to hear your studying a science degree, whats your major? I'm starting a science degree this year, planning on majoring in biochemistry. The method itself isn't impportant, you were intellectually dishonest in stating that science followed the scientific method. It doesn't matter if it is partially right or that many people use it; if it isn't consistent with the way people perform science, then it is wrong. This method you provided is objectively wrong, much in the same way Newtonian Gravity is objectively wrong; it's a theory that doesn't explain everything accurately. Majoring in Physics, I haven't decided on a second major yet (Maths, Computational Science or History and Philosophy of Science), or that I'll just skip the second major altogether. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Nevermind. Physics hey? Never studied it myself (chose to do Biology and Chemistry) but I do find it interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1canadian1 Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 This life we are living could be death. After death you'll be reborn as someone else and not remember your past life and be a new person like you thought you were last life. Everything will be different. RSN: Zammyftw ^^The girl that ruined music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt23 Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 The most likely possibilty if you ask me is... nothing. Just like the nothing before you were born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezz Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 I think nothingness, exactly as it was before I was born. But that's creepy :uhh: [insert birds flying in a circle here]Yes, that sig was annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A107 Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 your body rots 6 feet under ground or ur burned and get put in an urn. then u just wait for some moron to open a champane bottle and the cork flies into the urn, breaks it, your ashes fall on the ground, while the cat comes and ...... well if u have seen Meet the Fockers u know what im talking about Hi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zaquierming Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 You turn into a zombie. Two roads diverged in a wood, and I-I took the one less traveled by,And that has made all the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamemonster Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 You turn into a zombie. Your wacthing too many horror movies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 You turn into a zombie. Sorry if this is totally off topic but I LOVE YOUR SIGGY!!! KILLING WITH A SMILE IS AWESOME!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash6110 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Dude being a zombie wouold rule, eating people brains and crap Im a zombie and its pretty fun. Except for me natural fear of shotguns and shovels http://www.draynor.net/code/bar/Noobin\Please join my very new up and coming forumshttp://s3.freepowerboards.com/runeboards Feel free to AIM or MSNM me anytime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
O_M_G_Guasto Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Wikiwin ====== Animal Decomposition The body of a living organism begins to decompose (as part of a succesion) shortly after death. Such decomposition can be simplified in two stages: In the first stage, it is limited to the production of vapors. In the second stage, fluidic materials form and the flesh or plant matter begins to decompose. The science which studies such decomposition generally is called taphonomy. Historically, the progression of decomposition of a living organism has been described as taking place in four stages: fresh (autolysis), bloat (putrefaction), decay (putrefaction and carnivores) and dry (diagenesis). Process Signs of death Pallor mortis Algor mortis Rigor mortis Livor mortis Decomposition Decomposition begins at the moment of death, caused by two factors: autolysis, the breaking down of tissues by the body's own internal chemicals and enzymes; and putrefaction, the breakdown of tissues by bacteria. These processes release gases that are the chief source of the characteristic odor of dead bodies. These gases swell the body. Scavengers play an important role in decomposition. Insects and other animals are typically the next agent of decomposition, if the body is accessible to them. The most important insects that are typically involved in the process include the fleshflies (Sarcophagidae) and blowflies (Calliphoridae). The green-bottle fly seen in the summer is a blowfly. Larger scavengers, including coyotes, dogs, wolves, foxes, rats, and mice may eat a body if it is accessible to them. Some of these animals also remove and scatter bones. Factors The rate and the manner in which an animal body decomposes is strongly affected by a number of factors. In a roughly descending degree of importance, those factors include: * Temperature * The availability of oxygen * Prior embalming * Cause of death * Access by insects * Burial, and depth of burial * Access by scavengers * Trauma, including wounds and crushing blows * Humidity, or dryness * Rainfall * Body size and weight * Clothing * The surface on which the body rests The speed with which decomposition occurs varies greatly. Factors such as temperature, humidity, and the season of death all determine how fast a fresh body will skeletonize or mummify. A basic guide for the effect of environment on decomposition is given as Casper's Law (or Ratio): when there is free access of air a body decomposes twice as fast than if immersed in water and eight times faster than if buried in earth. The most important variable is a body's accessibility to insects, particularly flies. On the surface in tropical areas, invertebrates alone can easily reduce a fully fleshed corpse to clean bones in under two weeks. The skeleton itself is not permanent; acids in soils can reduce it to unrecognizable components; this is one reason given for the lack of human remains found in the wreckage of the Titanic, even in parts of the ship considered inaccessible to scavengers. Freshly skeletonized bone is often called "green" bone and has a characteristic greasy feel. Under certain conditions (normally cool, damp soil) bodies may undergo saponification and develop a waxy substance called adipocere, caused by the action of soil chemicals on the body's proteins and fats. The formation of adipocere slows decomposition by inhibiting the bacteria that cause putrefaction. In extremely dry or cold conditions, the normal process of decomposition is halted, by either lack of moisture or temperature controls on bacterial and enzymatic action, causing the body to be preserved as a mummy. Frozen mummies commonly restart the decomposition process when thawed whilst heat desiccated mummies remain so unless exposed to moisture. The bodies of newborns who never ingested food are an important exception to the normal process of decomposition. They lack the internal microbial flora that generate much of decomposition and quite commonly mummify if kept in even moderately dry conditions. Embalming Embalming is the practice of preserving decomposition of human and animal remains. Embalming slows decomposition somewhat, but does not forestall it indefinitely. Embalmers typically pay great attention to parts of the body seen by mourners, such as the face and hands. The chemicals used in embalming repel most insects, and slow down bacterial putrefaction by "fixing" cellular proteins, which means that they cannot act as a nutrient for bacteria, and killing the bacteria themselves. In sufficiently dry environments, an embalmed body may end up mummified and it is not uncommon for bodies in dry vaults to remain preserved to a viewable extent after decades, such as the murdered civil rights activist Medgar Evers. Another case of this would be the body of Lenin, who was kept submerged in a special tank of fluid for decades, almost perfectly preserved. Bodies submerged in peat bog may become naturally "embalmed", arresting decomposition and resulting in a preserved specimen known as a bog body. The body of Evita Peron was kept perfectly preserved for many years, and as far as is known, may still be so (her body is no longer on display as it once was). The time for an embalmed body to be reduced to a skeleton varies greatly. Even when a body is decomposed, embalming treatment can still be achieved (the arterial system decays slower) but would not restore a natural appearance without extensive reconstruction and cosmetic work, and is largely used to control the foul odours due to decomposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardovilian Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Science and reasoning can prove how existence came to be. No it can't. Don't get me wrong, I'm an agnostic, science student through and through, but there is absolutely NOT any definitive proof of the derivation of life on Earth. Spontaneous evolution of single-celled organisms is a POSSIBILITY, so is extra-terrestrial seeding, neither has been PROVED to be the case. While science can argue with proof the case for evolution from the earliest fossil record up to modern man, which Creationism cannot do, it still cannot point to the moment when life came to be. So if you don't know where life comes from, how can you say you know where it goes? Why is 'common sense' so named, when there is so little of it about?Welcome to puberty, we've been expecting you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Science and reasoning can prove how existence came to be. No it can't. Don't get me wrong, I'm an agnostic, science student through and through, but there is absolutely NOT any definitive proof of the derivation of life on Earth. Spontaneous evolution of single-celled organisms is a POSSIBILITY, so is extra-terrestrial seeding, neither has been PROVED to be the case. While science can argue with proof the case for evolution from the earliest fossil record up to modern man, which Creationism cannot do, it still cannot point to the moment when life came to be. So if you don't know where life comes from, how can you say you know where it goes? Perhaps one day we will know. And as for the 'Spontaneous evolution of single-celled organisms', I don't think so. A more sensible way would be first the creation of amino acids, then polypeptides, then a series of complementing polypeptides, then a way to systematically organise the creation and arrangement of these polypeptides (i.e. nucleic acids arranged in the form of DNA/RNA) then, down the line, single celled organisms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jemathonical Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Close your eyes.... Thats what happens when you die ^Sir Jem 05-The Bunny Drinking Blog?^ Click it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragen Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Close your eyes.... Thats what happens when you die Wrong. I can hear music and feel the chair beneath me & I am conscious of my existance. I can still think. When you die, you lose all thoughts and knowledge and consciousness. It's more like sleep but without the dreams. Thanks Venomai for this super sig and Kwimbob for the awesome avatar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Close your eyes.... Thats what happens when you die Wrong. I can hear music and feel the chair beneath me & I am conscious of my existance. I can still think. When you die, you lose all thoughts and knowledge and consciousness. It's more like sleep but without the dreams. Wrong. When asleep, your brain is still functioning, your heart still beating. I'm pretty sure he didn't mean it would be exactly like closing your eyes while concious... :-w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now