BTGBullseye

And yet, the vast majority of people I have met that are "anti-religious" treat 'science' in the exact way described. That turns it into a religion for them, regardless of what it actually is/claims to be. Just like the Spanish Inquisition claimed to be doing what the Catholic Church taught, but it really did the exact opposite. What something claims to be, or what you perceive it to be, are totally irrelevant to a large portion of the world's populace.

He's Gordon Freeman! He don't need no stinking 2 hands to fire weapons!

Unfortunately that is not true for a large portion of people in this world right now. I'll explain further... And yet people treat theories as fact, which is the exact same thing, and say they "believe in science, not religion". Or it could mean they believe all the unproven theories as absolute fact, and all others should believe as they do or be ridiculed. What definition are you using? I see nothing wrong with overlap, as there are a huge number of scientists throughout history that used science as a primary way to see what wonders God had made, all so they could praise him for it. Not exclusively for either. You need to find a much less secular glossing over of religions to source your information from. I have yet to see any contradiction with that theory... Since the theory assumes that God is an omnipotent and omniscient entity, it is entirely possible that God could do exactly what the theory states, including configuring the physical structure of the perceivable world to appear to our current limited understanding as something different from what it actually is. Science doesn't know everything, and treating it like it does is turning it into a religion. TL;DR: You misunderstand what science and religion are, how they relate to each other, and how the general populace understand them. [EDIT] Before someone mentions it... The most common argument for treating theories as fact is "it's as close as we have right now", and that is a non-scientific attitude. That theory is worth pursuing for further evidence, but it should not be treated as fact. (even gravity is an unknown, and we have many theories that fit the facts, but they are all just theories)

+1

If any of us were that kind of person, we wouldn't be on this site...

I'm still wary of it despite everything, partially because I've read the list of info they gather when their 'telemetry' is set to the lowest it can go, and because there's still no way to avoid an update for long enough that a problem doesn't occur. (like happened with one of my W10 VMs, where it didn't like the VM 'hardware' so it refused to run for the next 6 months while MS fixed the problem)

AaaaaAAaaaAAAaaAAAAaAAAAA!!! for the Awesome?

Looks nice! (though IMO, you're putting your system at risk by using W10 instead of 7)

NGEs (non-government entities) are doing a lot for the race back to space, but are far from trying to exploit extraterrestrial natural resources. We have the technology to do it, but nobody seems willing to try. Drones right now are sufficiently capable for self-repair and mining of asteroids, including refining and return of the materials to earth. I've even submitted a rough draft of the process to a few different programs, and been laughed at for wasting their time. (none of the programs seem to want to gather resources, just waste the few remaining fuel sources we still have left on this planet)

Unfortunately, if you already have a WoW account, you can't use it if you're not paying for it. (would be a problem for me, and I don't want to make a junk account)

I'm glad the vote turned out a somewhat sane result. Still, it's disturbing that the proposal even made it that far.

Exactly what I try to tell a lot of people that worry about stuff like this. Death comes for us all; we'll never be able to put it off indefinitely. Try to live your life to its fullest, don't empty your life with worries about things you have no chance of changing. Unfortunately, I know of no currently existing government that is truly interested in doing this, at least not beyond a "that might be interesting to do sometime down the road, after it's become someone else's problem" way.

Because you can only power a person sized shield for about 20 minutes, and the contraption would weigh over 300lbs. (last plans I saw called for 450lbs of materials, and it would barely protect you from minor radiation for 30 minutes) In addition, the one installed in the bulkhead/wall/hull will protect other things in the room, like computers and plants. (both of which are rapidly and seriously degraded if exposed to solar radiation)

'Flame' describes an entirely different situation. (two angry people or groups arguing and attacking the other person/group instead of discussing the subject, basically a bunch of Ad Hominem attacks from both sides) Internet 'trolls' were first described as such during the early BBS days.

No to you too... The Cinematic Mod can be set to be visually identical to an unmodified version with very little effort, and if it fixes Ross's demo playback problems, it should be considered.

I've been an internet counter-troll for about 14 years now... People were trolling on the internet before the first BBS system was available. There have been trolls throughout history, long before the internet.

Actually, an electromagnetic shield isn't all that bulky, (maybe an extra inch or two thickness for whatever surrounding hull/wall you're using) and would protect you from all but the strongest surges of radiation. (and is vastly more protective than any other shielding currently known) It doesn't even require all that much power to run it. (a normal 12v car battery could power a grid large enough to protect an average bedroom from standard solar radiation for several hours)

Why? The information doesn't change by being in a different format.

That problem can even be applied to other medical issues. I will again use myself as an example. I have what is considered to be very high blood pressure. (150/105 right now) I was recently given medication to reduce it when it went into the 'extremely dangerous' range after I started getting headaches from coughing due to an illness. That medication helped reduce the headaches, and my blood pressure into the human 'normal' range. Of course, it also caused me significant arterial pain in my left leg, reduced cognitive ability, and occasional dizziness. I had to stop taking the medication when I had a bout of not being able to move my right arm due to the arterial pain. All symptoms I experienced are totally unrelated to the medication itself, but are due solely to the reduction in my blood pressure. If something like this can occur for something as well known and understood as blood pressure, how can we really accept without question diagnoses of disorders that affect an organ we know almost nothing about?

That was one of the studies that I read in regard to genetic diversity requirements, and minimum populations to continue the species for an EotW scenario.

Where are you getting those numbers from? I know that at least the ADHD numbers are extremely debatable, as the APA and the CDC have radically different numbers. CDC puts it at over 11%, and that's just children that actually get tested for it. (many don't, and many get misdiagnosed as having or not having the disorder) The problem is defining and diagnosing what is and isn't a disorder. For some, it is a disorder, but for others (such as myself with a relatively strong version of ADHD with a lot of really strong OCDs that cover it up) it isn't.

Genetic diversity requirements. Less than about 10,000 people is incapable of having sufficient genetic diversity to maintain the human species. This problem is relatively well known in genetic research circles. That 10,000 would also have to use a strict breeding regimen just to keep the diversity sufficiently high to maintain the species. (significant interbreeding for several generations, then add in a new bloodline, then interbreed for a while again) Ideal would be 100,000+ for a self-sustaining colony, as it would be able to have much more lenient breeding requirements.

If we're within 100LY of a supernova, we would have to deal with a massive radiation storm. Currently, there is no location that is accessible by humans that can protect us from lethal levels of supernova radiation. (that includes hiding behind the various gas giants in our solar system) In addition, it is theoretically possible for a supernova to cause other stars in their vicinity to go nova, which would obliterate all the planets in our solar system if it were to happen to our sun. That said, supernovae are incredibly rare, and only occur to very old or binary stars. All the stars within the supernova 'dangerous' range for our solar system are relatively young, and are not binary. The risk of death by supernova is infinitesimal. (and totally unavoidable if it ever occurred within a dangerous range) More likely would be a massive solar flare caused by something impacting the surface of the sun. This would have a similar effect to a supernova impact, but might be survivable if you were on the opposite side of the planet, and had a dedicated self-sustaining atmosphere. (probably a massive underground complex with gardens) Of course survival of the species would require at least 10,000 individuals to survive in that same complex, and adhere to a strict breeding regimen. (and you'd have to have sufficient genetic complexity to start with)

True, but the definition of 'normal' is "the usual, average, or typical state or condition", and if a 'disorder' (defined: "a disruption of normal physical or mental functions; a disease or abnormal condition.") is the typical state, it can't by definition be a disorder. This is the problem with the way current 'disorders' are categorized. There are plenty of things in our mental state that can negatively affect us, but they can't all be considered a disorder simply because of that negative effect.

The problem with mental disorders is that almost everyone has one... If so many people have it, is it really a disorder, or is the 'order' really the disorder?