Science is about exploring unknown. The origins of our universe is exactly that; one big unknown. We don't exactly know what happened in the fractions of a second after the Big Bang. We want to know why matter prevailed over anti-matter. We are testing the fibers of our present understanding of Universe. What could possible be wrong with that?

You say we should not go ahead with the testing at the LHC because of we don't know 100% about what might occur once the collisions start taking place. However life itself is full of uncertainty. That is what makes life interesting to begin with. And who knows the results of the LHC experiments might enrich our lives in the future. To simply shrink away from the potential offerings of scientific advancement out of fear or ignorance would be to our determent.

With regard to ethanol I recall reading in Popular Science in January on research into genetically altering the microbes used in fermentation to produce the more effective alcohol butanol. Presently, ethanol production uses the food component of corn or wheat. Butanol does not, one could use the husks, the stocks, and other inedible plant material. The problem with is the process is far too toxic for the microbes presently used in the production of ethanol. If researcher's; whom are based in the US and UK, can succeed in creating a hardier microbe that can survive the conditions of butanol manufacturing, then we may have a fuel that is on par with gasoline and would not have to sacrifice food to obtain it.

Another means of producing hydrocrabon fuels is putting our natural gas and coal supplies through the Fischer Tropsch Process. The feed stock (coal or natural gas) is combined with steam and put through heating and pressurization. The byproduct is a refinable hydrocarbon that can be made into any kind of fuel. The German used the process to make synthetic fuel during the Second World War and presently the South Africans and the US Air Force are using FT-based aviation fuels.

Quote by Inuyasha2007

Quote by onyhowIf you mean by the Mayan calendar...nah...

It might be that they were eradicated when they do the date to that date...

And...Nostradamus' 2000 prediction didn't come true...so no worries...

Actually it did. Soon after a plane hit the world trade center. (also a Nostradamus
predicted incident)

Nostradamus never predicted 9/11. In fact the quatrans (Centuries X, quatran 72) which you refer to were written as part of a hoax following the attacks.

Quote: and the US starts World War III....

Arguable the 3rd World War came and went. Some scholars believe that WWIII was actually the Cold War. Who exactly started it? One could argue it was the Soviets with their land grab in the years immediately after Germany's defeat to the Allies. Others could argue it was us for starting the arms race by creating nuclear weapons. Regardless, all of that ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union two decades ago. The conflict between The West; the embodiment of globalization, and Fundamental Islamist; A traditionalist society, could be regarded as the Fourth World War.

With regard to the conflict between the West and radical Islamist, this was inevitable. European Colonization of the Middle East, contemptuously dividing up Muslim world instilled shame onto Islamic society. American economic policies up till now have not improved the situation in the Middle East. As a result we have a embittered triumphalist society who's fundamentalist thinkers sees globalization as a threat against Islam. The acts of terrorism against the West are a reaction to globalism.

Now to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. We did no start the sequence of events that lead to war as much as you would like to believe. Osama Bin Lauden, who is believed to have orchestrated the 9/11 attacks was counting on Our reaction and expecting us to invade Afghanistan. Indirectly, the Second Persian Gulf war was the unforseen consequence of Bin Lauden's plan.

Quote: It's come down to the fact that many religious and prophet incidents are slowly happening
one by one. In truth The 'end of days' prophecies wont happen overnight. More like, over
a large span of time. I'd say, give it another few decades and something will have happened.

Sure with lots of time coincidence and happenstance will surely prove just about any doomsday prophecy.

Quote: I know by 2020 the US won't be there anymore. Somebody will have gotten sick of the BS
it's govt. gives and just eradicated it. Right now, the US is defenseless. Over 95% of it's
military are outside the states fighting in foreign countries. So it's bound to happen.

Personally, I won't be around to watch.

And how do you know that in less than a generation the US will cease to be? What concrete proof to you possess that back that claim? With regard to our defense Almost 40% of our military strength is based CONUS or within US territory.
Between 30 and 35 percent of Our military is deployed worldwide. And only half of deployed forces are taking part in the conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan. An lets not forget the millions of US citizens that have small arms (beit a pistol or .50 caliber rifle). Is a decline of the United States as we know it today inevitable? perhaps. But such a decline will not be for decades or perhaps a few centuries. In the short term I would wager that even if the my country were no longer a super power by the end of this century the United States will remain a powerful and influential country nonetheless.

Quote by marfish14
-Lol, wow. Just because people believe something is true doesnt make it so

This is a double edge sword. For while it is possible that God may not exist, those who make that claim must acknowledge that they too may be wrong.

Quote: I suppose all those people who thought the world was flat before Galileo were right then because they all thought it was true.

Galileo never proved the Earth was round. He confirmed Copernicus's theory Earth revolved around the Sun. In fact the myth that the Church held on to the idea the Earth was flat if a fallacy. According to the wiki article on the matter modern authors have written that "there was scarcely a Christian scholar of the Middle Ages who did not acknowledge [Earth's] sphericity and even know its approximate circumference." The ancient Greeks had an idea Earth was a sphere. I recall from Carl Sagan's show "Cosmos" in which he described a fellow from Alexandria who calculated the circumference of the Earth to within a few thousand miles. Needless to say this myth was perpetuated by pop culture authors during the 19th century.

Quote: Even if there is evidence against this as there is against Christianity, we must all be infinitely ignorant. 34% of the worlds population believes one form of christianity or another, that hardly constitutes a majority, though it is quite a bit I must admit.

I take it you have not taken the time to research what you are saying. Approximately 1 Billion people or roughly 15% of the Worlds population are Christian.

Quote: I dont know where you got the idea that scientists would be converting to christianity, I'd like to see where you got those statistics. However, I dont think this would be true, because science doesnt go along with christianity very well. Science predicts evolution, christianity states that everything appeared suddenly. Science predicts that the earth is around 4 billion years old, while christianity states it is mearly a few thousands. The difference between these facts are that the one stated by science actually have evidence from the real world behind them, thats the big difference between Science and religion (fact and myth). There have been many, many religions and gods thought up, such as the greek gods, and the egyption god, todays gods. What makes you so sure that your religion is the right one, and not just a fallacy?

What makes you believe that all scientists reject religion? Science is neutral when it comes to religion of any kind. It neither promotes nor refutes. Additionally many of the people who work in scientific fields subscribed to religious beliefs as part of their daily lives. I make my point by quoting two influential scientist of the Modern World and let you decide if your claim holds true.

"Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done" Sir Issac Newton

"I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth...In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me for the support of such views." Albert Einstein

Both Galileo and Newton were devote Christians. Einstein, while rejecting the idea of a God able to intervene upon the natural world, he acknowledge God existence. The point is that scientist; like you or I, hold to some kind of belief. Like the faithful of any religion they find that religion offers answers that even science itself cannot provide.

Scientific discoveries that you cite as being evidence against Christianity does little to disprove it. You cite the debate over evolution and imply that that theory disproves Christianity. If there were no Garden of Eden, no Adam and Eve, then Christian faith must be flawed? Would it be shocking to know the Catholic Church rejects Intelligent Design, a theory based on fundamental creationism. Even so there is still the possibility that God shaped the course of Human evolution. The fact that the Earth and the Sun are approximately 4.5 Billion Years and not Four or Five thousand does not destroy the idea that God created the Solar System and the whole Universe for that matter which is five times as old.

The fact of the matter is that the belief system of science (which it is) and the belief systems of Christianity (or any religion) are very much the same. The only difference is that the former uses experimentation and observation to test and re-test beliefs (another word for theory).

I thought it was a musical adaption of Don Delillo's book "White Noise". My mistake .

Why not. If there are space fairing civilizations out there traveling the universe....then perhaps they found a means to get around the light barrier. Simply because we haven't does not eliminate the possibility of a life form having already succeed in that regard.

Quote by MapleRoselol, the title reminded me of the conflicts in Gundam SEED/Destiny ...

The concept of gene therapy is one used most often in sci-fi, gaming and anime, not being unique to Gundam SEED. For instance, Metal Gear Solid comes to my mind

Quote: ahem, anyway, I don't think it's totally wrong. I mean, if they're using genetic manipulation as a method for curing a disease, how is that different from say, using normal medication for treatment? Unless you consider that as 'cheating death' and 'playing god' too...

I too feel that if used correctly, gene therapy would be a beneficial medical technology with the potential to save lives by correcting many fatal genetic abnormalities. And I look at it from this perspective. If God did not want us to invent these technologies, he would not have endowed us with the intelligence to do it. It could be viewed as a test, to see what we do with new knowledge. Something used for the betterment of mankind can't be bad in God's eyes. Thats my look at things anyway.

It is true we have an alliance with Taiwan, however only 25 nations official recognizes Taiwan as China. For the most part The PRC is considered China, holding official diplomatic status and a UN seat.

Additionally the US has been very careful not to do either. To recognize Taiwan would have serious diplomatic ramifications with the PRC. However to recognize the PRC's claim on Taiwan would serve only to invite a Chinese invasion of that country.

Your post is well thought out. BTW, welcome to MT.

For the record, we are not allies with China. Why do you suppose there is a strong alliance between the US and Japan?......to prepare for any hostile action China may take against any of the two in that region.

That just made my day lol. Crazy Kansas folks

"worse" is subjective. Here in Southern NH, the weather has been beautiful with mild temperatures. However with the clear evenings, last night particularly, the temps drop by 20 to 30 degrees F. The temperatures have deviated from the average slightly but the weather patterns have not changed drastically.

I like Firefox, however version 2 has been giving me some trouble lately. The browser will crash when visiting Youtube or sites with the require shockwave. Both have been updated to the most recent versions, yet that still offers no results. Those are the only gripes I have.

Quote by oldmanpooHow do you "illegally" invade a country? There were reasons for the war. Is it justified? I personally can't say yet, but we didn't wake up one day and decide to just invade the middle east.

As for barring the U.S. from the Olympics, I would say no, but it really doesn't matter to me either way.

I know, odd sounding isn't it. Anti-war protesters babel on about how the War in Iraq is illegal.....but how? Consider that:

The US Constitution authorizes the Commander in Chief, that being the President, to deploy forces. Congress gave its blessing, which is required for the President to keep forces deployed for any period long than 60 days. That alone clears up any Constitutional Issues.

At present, no treaty between the US or Iraq ever existed that would make it illegal to declare war against them. Furthermore, nothing from the UN prevents any member states from waging war against other member states.

Thus, the idea that the war is illegal is a delusion.

By definition, a UFO is simply something in the sky you cant readily identify. So you may have seen something that invoked a head scratching moment, but its so trivial its nearly impossible to remember.

As for myself, I recall seeing one or two while I was outside plane watching six years ago. I don't think about them much anymore.

And at the time, we felt it was necessary to remove the threat of Saddam having or further developing such weapons. And keep in mind if he had not screwed around in the first place, we would not be in Iraq now would we?

Technically, the Korean War is not over. For the moment a state of truce exist between North Korea and the South. Therefore there are no victors, merely a stalemate.

The US is obligated by treaty to come to the aid of Japan in the event of an attack against that nation.

Keiichi, are you aware that the idea of expanding the role of the JSDF was pushed by the previous PM of Japan and a few others in the Diet. However the vast majority of Japanese view that as a breach of the 9th Article of the Japanese Constitution.

Regardless, in terms of technology and potency, the JSDF is the second most powerful military organiztion in the region, second only to the US. The JSDF has also been sent to other areas of the world before. Recall that the JGDF sent personnel to Iraq in a non-combat support role. In 1999, Japan's F-15 fighters took part in a exercise along side USAF fighter squadrons over the skies of Guam.

Fences and border patrols can only go so far. What needs to be done is the Executive Branch Agencies responsible for enforcing immigration laws need to actually enforce the laws.

Quote by DsfarfegUSA has a lot to do with illegal inmigration. Their abusive and imperialistic economic policies over decades led Latin countries to starvation and dependance in a lot of times. Now they want to stop them by building the Berlin Wall part two. Cynical.

But well, it's what you would expect from a extremist like Bush.

Who is this they you refer to? . Care to cite any references that back up your statements? Less emotion more facts please.

I read an article in which the recent increase in border patrol agents and the construction of new fences made a dent in the flow of illegal immigrates. The number of of arrests at the border fell 8% from 1.2 million the previous year to 1.1 million.

A world war of some kind would still occur due to...
A war between any two crountries in Europe that would eventually involve the allies of the two warring parties (much like how WWI turned out anyway!) or
The clash between Communists and Capitalists!

Quote by tobiast88Well, with stupid americans defending their "right" to alls sorts of weaponry...Even though the Second Amendment clearly does not permit private individuals to bear arms: it says a "well-ordered militia", and where is that on the NRA building? Conveniently forgotten.

Wrong, the conotation of phrase "right of the people" refers to the individual. That phrase is not unique to the Second Amendment but in other Bills.

[The] Congress shall make no law [prohibiting] the right of the people peaceable to aseemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievences. -- 1st Amendment US Constitution

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effect, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated... -- 4th Amendment US Constitution

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial... -- 6th Amendment US Constitution

All the references above are of Amendments that protect the rights of the individual citzen, whose lanugage is identical to that used in the Second Amendment. Thus the "right of the People to keep and bear arms clearly means the right of the individual US citzen to posess a firearm. If the Founding Fathers my country intended for only a well-regulated militia to posess a weapons arsenal....they would have clealy stated so.

As the theory goes, one falling into a black hole is not crushed to death....they are pulled into an infinitely smaller mass, "spagettification" as I recall.

Tobias is correct in identifiying that the theoretical opposite to the black hole is the white hole. The laws of physics do not reject the existence of wormholes or white holes...yet these objects have never been observed.

It should be pointed out that not everything falling into a blackhole will never come come out. The gamma bursts, which are created by supermassive stars collapsing into black holes indicates that very energetic particles can indeed escape the gravity well. Otherwise, we would not be able to detect these bursts. Also, according to Professor Steven Hawkins, black holes evaporate. If his theory is correct, of a period of trillion upon trillions of years, blackholes will fade away as pieces radiate away as heat.