This is total nonsense written on some corporate blog I've never heard of before.
I remember a survey which said that only around 30% of Americans even trusted the sitting president, so how does this nonsense survey stack up against that?
It's all garbage.
They're going to kill the web when it matters, and this is just sales spin to stop Americans from doing what the French are currently doing; forcing their government to do what the hell they tell it to rather than whatever evil, selfish shit it wants to do.
What a concept! A government held accountable by the people! Horrors!
No wonder Bush hated the French. They're not brain-dazed lightweights who let their government rob them blind without lifting a finger.
People's brains work differently. I mean, I'd spotted and considered all the significant paradoxes noted in the article very quickly after my first (or perhaps second) viewing, but I'd completely failed to keep track of in-your-face pine tree/s.
I also notice that several people responding to your post seem to be dicks. I wonder if the two things are related..?
Until somebody manages to start interfering with the level playing field of the internet so that new start ups cannot compete, then even mighty Google can fall if somebody cooler and less evil comes along to win hearts and minds. That's the problem when it's all down to the individual decision of the user as to what gets typed into that address bar.
And this is why Google is pulling Microsoft-style tactics. (They're just doing it with a smile.) This is why they have their little search bar integrated at the top of many browsers, (fuck that, btw), and why their root system is extending into OS's and physical devices and other services which are considered more or less vital to the web. Buying up massive amounts of dark fiber and building enormous data centers around the world and inventing new systems which people love to use. . , it's all done with a smile and that's good business sense, but it's still a manipulation. A good king, if you will. Heaven help us when the management gets old and sour.
Facebook is a fad. Thankfully, it hasn't worked out that it needs to build deeper root systems in order to survive. All it will take is some pop-star to pooh-pooh Facebook, or some young and hip personality to say, "Yeah, we don't do Facebook" and five years from that date and it will be where MySpace is right now.
yeah, I think that it's okay to think people like that are full of shit.
This is one of the key difficulties in dealing with any contentious issue. Some people really are alarmists, hypochondriacs, hysterical and ignorant. I've met them. I've even walked away from groups working to protest cell towers because of certain individuals who were loud and loony and made everybody look crazy by association. --And who, in discussion, were not even able to understand the basics of why there is concern. They were over-emotional and dramatic.
Considering the kooks on one side and the rude and ignorant on the other side who demand evidence and then refuse to look at it, (this is FAR more common than one might suppose), I sometimes think that people deserve to live in toxic environs.
Basically, humans are very stupid, very easy to manipulate, and 99% of the time, they don't want anything resembling truth if it will interfere with their pre-established comfortable patterns.
But in regard to your post, while offering an interesting example of how easy it is for people to fool themselves, I hope you recognize that this does not actually do anything to disprove the effects of EMR on cell tissue and the human nervous system in particular.
Idiots jumping up and down are just idiots jumping up and down. There is plenty of real science available for review and the concepts of sympathetic resonance, modulated frequencies and coherent wave forms are all pretty simple to understand. I find it sad that so many people who are so certain of their side of the fence have invested so little in actually understanding the principles involved.
If you don't have a FaceSpaceTweetBook account (or one in your proper name), they can't spy on you. It's really very simple really.
Really? It's a good thing they don't spy on bank accounts, insurance records, interac purchases, phone conversations, library accounts or anything else. It's a good thing that the psychology which drives a government to spy on computer users goes no further than that. What a relief! Now I no longer have to worry about my mail being intercepted. (Did they ever stop doing that after WWII?)
Why did anybody think this was a good idea in the first place?
It's like having a pop-up book, or one of those Griffin & Sabine books where the pages have envelopes with letters inside you can pull out and read. They're great for a novelty, like Avatar, and everybody will want to take a look if it's marketed correctly, but when it comes down to it, my meat and potatoes novel is easier when printed on cheap newsprint. I already have to wear glasses to read, and that's annoying enough.
Duh! That's not spying, that's research. If you "friend" someone you don't know, than it's your own dumb fault! If the government ordered Facebook to allow them to see ALL profiles, that's spying.
That's a weak rationalization for several reasons. A spy is somebody pretending to be somebody other than a government agent while insinuating his or herself into the lives of the targets under observation. Seems pretty cut and dried to me.
I guess you could call that "research" if you wanted to, but that sounds more like an attempt to pretend that you're not living in a fascist state than it does taking responsibility for yourself.
I really like the Monty Hall problem, but I figured out how to explain it in a way which makes it easy for the light go on. That's fun for everybody, (well, those who enjoy such problems. Other people just glaze over). But yeah, I confess, I was argumentative the first time I encountered it until I worked it out a day or two later.
That sounds truly amazing. My first thought was, "What a great period for somebody to set an adventure story!"
Pico della Mirandola's works on the Gutenberg Project are, of course, in Italian so my lazy bones need to visit a library. But thanks for the details. I think I've just found my latest subject to study.
1. Alchemy has little to do with chemistry. It's about the purification of the soul through repeated heatings and coolings, and as Newton was learning Hebrew, I'd guess he'd probably figured out some of the fundamentals in play re Gnostic Christianity and similar. "Lead into Gold" is a metaphor, as was much else about alchemy. But I don't know much about Newton, so whatever. Maybe he really was trying to generate a money mill.
2. Not knowing something isn't a crime. Exploration of ideas and the world should never be punished if the person searching is doing so out of an honest desire to learn and isn't hurting anybody in the process. People are far too hard on each other for being ignorant, and too defensive when their ignorance is pointed out. Learning shouldn't be a punishable offense.
Would somebody mark the parent as a troll? Dismissing an advisory on _bulk_ Lithium transports with "ZOMG THE GUVMENTS IS TAKING MY RIUTS!" is no better than "ZOMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN".
You think an industry which, based on stupid thinking, will no longer allow you to carry bottled water onto a flight is sane enough to not flip out over batteries which do in fact explode from time to time?
Or are you one of those people Socrates would have easily convinced of patently ridiculous things simply because each step toward madness seemed reasonable?
We have plenty of evidence of crazy government behavior. PLENTY of it. I don't trust government officials to be smart or rational. Do you?
It must be nice to be living in your version of reality where the erosion of our rights hasn't taken place and where the government doesn't tell lies.
Seriously; compare the world of today to the one of ten years ago in terms of control paranoia and witch-hunt jingoism. If you can't spot the difference, you're on drugs.
There are troops with machine guns walking around in New York today. That's not FUD. That's reality. Man up, put aside the cozy rationalizations and take a good look around you.
The distinction between Lithium Ion and Lithium Metal batteries is by no means made clear in the FAA report. After reading through it, I have to disagree with others who suggest that this doesn't affect laptop batteries. It does.
Sorry, there may well be, (somewhere) a few government workers who have not been driven insane through the repeated need to exist in an increasingly cognitively dissonant state, but it's a solid bet that they are few and far between. Not counting those who are outright sociopaths, of course.
ANY advisory coming from the government is liable to be false, spin, or otherwise manipulative in nature. In this case, I think, it's probably a set-up for future controls.
It should also be noted that batteries on their own can't burst into flame due to environmental heating in a cargo bay. (It's COLD up there at 10,000 feet!) The FAA report was only talking about batteries catching alight in an already existing fire.
But that's not the way the media story tracked. Everybody assumed batteries burst into flame of their own volition. Public impression and emotional reactions are far more important than facts today. No doubt the idea of over-charged batteries bursting into flame will be floated by alarmists.
Just another way to put the squeeze on travelers. International travel will soon require that you navigate several paradoxical gauntlets just to get seated. Best to just stay at home where you won't see what the outside world is really like.
Fascist nations never like their people to travel. This is the same thing, with one subtle difference; they're trying to sneak it by as a series of rational measures we all voluntarily agree with rather than force it upon us overtly.
A man who objected to a CCTV camera keeping watch on his bedroom window from the house opposite appeared before a judge - for stealing the camera and throwing it in a river. [...] The 35-year-old pleaded guilty at Carlisle Crown Court to a charge of burglary and the theft of the £1,500-worth of surveillance equipment.
Though, it does sound like a private issue and the judge was lenient, it's certainly a telling direction we're sliding in. Typically, they try out these sorts of mild cases on us where it's always possible to rationalize the dissolution of human value and human rights. But then it isn't long before they're installing frickin' full-body scanners and arresting people for feeding the homeless. Little bit by little bit, the world becomes unrecognizable from the one we left behind...
I lived through the 80's as well, and dollars bought a lot more than they do today and people had a lot more of them to work with.
In fact, if I recall, people weren't being evicted from their homes by the tens of thousands via fraudulent banking and foreclosure mills. Good jobs were plentiful, and people weren't going hungry in the U.S. by the hundreds of thousands. That's just the cash side.
The real thing people are annoyed with here are the basic economies of scale and the annoying choices computer manufacturers have been making. Consumer grade computer screens are being designed in a way that the average customer finds irritating. What's wrong with people making noises about the poor choices being offered when the technology exists to easily and economically rectify the situation? If you're a capitalist, and I'm guessing you probably are, then the "Shut up and take what you're given" line shouldn't be acceptable to you, especially when there's no physical or engineering reason for the market to be locked into one mode of manufacture.
And please spare me the "it's too expensive" whine. Adjust your priorities and get in the game. Life ain't easy you know.
It'll be interesting to see how you react when the money in your bank account is worthless and you're on your ass in the street. Think you're immune? You're not. People like you are the ones most likely to kill themselves when the going gets tough.
I would put it to the readers that overall "the great experiment" has turned out better than one could have hoped.
Depends on whose perspective you are taking. If the goal of the experiment was to achieve domination of the public mind and the turning of everybody into an acting sociopath, then it's been very successful I would say.
Secret wars, deals and shenanigans are generally less prevalent as the decades roll on (granted this is also evident world-wide).
What are you basing that on? I think people are, if anything, MORE easily trained into going along with lies and manipulations than ever before. Who needs a secret war when people will go along with a public one? Who needs shenanigans when people are willing to put up with corruption happening right in front of their eyes. Consider the bailout fiasco, as a massive for instance.
Excess co2 is a non problem, precisely indicated in the article premise. As we have more co2 in the atmosphere, the existing plants, including food crops, will suck it up. It may lag a bit, but this is what will happen. We don't even need super trees, just more "regular" trees. Excess wood can be turned into biochar to be provided to the planet's farms, for deep plowing in.
CO2 is not a problem, it is an ASSET, a valuable resource. Having a war on carbon is the stupidest thing humans can do right now. That so many greenies have been faked out by this latest wall street cap and trade SCAM is astounding. That is what is behind the war on carbon, those looters want the entire planet to pay for non existent carbon problem "credits" so they have trillions more in free money handed to them. It is a huge con, designed by ENRON, and then run with from the likes of goldman sachs, etc.
Wake up before it is too late, do your own research, see where the war on carbon came from, go find your own links.
I almost modded you up, but then I realized that simply re-quoting you was more effective. Your ideas are worth exploring by anybody who is a little vague or confused by the whole global warming scam. The most loudly marketed idea is generally guaranteed to be a lie. This one faked us out because Al Gore seemed like such a nice and earnest guy, but his science and his connections demonstrated that he is a liar or a fool or both. Putting a believable and apparently trust-worthy leadership figure at the head of a con job, (Obama being another example), is enormously effective.
Well I can't argue with someone who believes every conspiracy theory he or she hears. I am a Freemason, I bet you believe everything about them too. Most UFO (any object in the sky that cant be identified is a UFO) sightings are a result of X-series Air Force aircraft. X meaning experimental. Occam's Razor does not cut in the other direction. What is more plausible. Aliens are secretly monitoring us and blowing up our nukes? Or that someone, on Earth, has created and is testing an anti-nuke system.
You seem to have ignored the two main points in my previous post. Those being. . ,
1. The specific manner in which Occam's razor fails. (You just demonstrated it, with a silly exaggeration no less.)
2. That there is a lot of information you need to know before you are able to render a judgment about UFOs. Especially like the one you just offered.
You said before that, "in fact I have no problem admitting I don't know something." but you're not demonstrating it. You seem to have limited knowledge in this subject, and you sound pre-judgmental. You would do well to read up on the subject. It won't bite, and once you get into the data, you'll be kicking yourself for not having done so sooner. It's like learning math for the first time. Look up Richard Dolan.
Slashdot Mirror
This is total nonsense written on some corporate blog I've never heard of before.
I remember a survey which said that only around 30% of Americans even trusted the sitting president, so how does this nonsense survey stack up against that?
It's all garbage.
They're going to kill the web when it matters, and this is just sales spin to stop Americans from doing what the French are currently doing; forcing their government to do what the hell they tell it to rather than whatever evil, selfish shit it wants to do.
What a concept! A government held accountable by the people! Horrors!
No wonder Bush hated the French. They're not brain-dazed lightweights who let their government rob them blind without lifting a finger.
-FL
Neat!
People's brains work differently. I mean, I'd spotted and considered all the significant paradoxes noted in the article very quickly after my first (or perhaps second) viewing, but I'd completely failed to keep track of in-your-face pine tree/s.
I also notice that several people responding to your post seem to be dicks. I wonder if the two things are related..?
-FL
Until somebody manages to start interfering with the level playing field of the internet so that new start ups cannot compete, then even mighty Google can fall if somebody cooler and less evil comes along to win hearts and minds. That's the problem when it's all down to the individual decision of the user as to what gets typed into that address bar.
And this is why Google is pulling Microsoft-style tactics. (They're just doing it with a smile.) This is why they have their little search bar integrated at the top of many browsers, (fuck that, btw), and why their root system is extending into OS's and physical devices and other services which are considered more or less vital to the web. Buying up massive amounts of dark fiber and building enormous data centers around the world and inventing new systems which people love to use. . , it's all done with a smile and that's good business sense, but it's still a manipulation. A good king, if you will. Heaven help us when the management gets old and sour.
Facebook is a fad. Thankfully, it hasn't worked out that it needs to build deeper root systems in order to survive. All it will take is some pop-star to pooh-pooh Facebook, or some young and hip personality to say, "Yeah, we don't do Facebook" and five years from that date and it will be where MySpace is right now.
And I can't wait.
-FL
Ha ha!
Apparently one of Murdoch's serfs has mod points today.
-FL
yeah, I think that it's okay to think people like that are full of shit.
This is one of the key difficulties in dealing with any contentious issue. Some people really are alarmists, hypochondriacs, hysterical and ignorant. I've met them. I've even walked away from groups working to protest cell towers because of certain individuals who were loud and loony and made everybody look crazy by association. --And who, in discussion, were not even able to understand the basics of why there is concern. They were over-emotional and dramatic.
Considering the kooks on one side and the rude and ignorant on the other side who demand evidence and then refuse to look at it, (this is FAR more common than one might suppose), I sometimes think that people deserve to live in toxic environs.
Basically, humans are very stupid, very easy to manipulate, and 99% of the time, they don't want anything resembling truth if it will interfere with their pre-established comfortable patterns.
But in regard to your post, while offering an interesting example of how easy it is for people to fool themselves, I hope you recognize that this does not actually do anything to disprove the effects of EMR on cell tissue and the human nervous system in particular.
Idiots jumping up and down are just idiots jumping up and down. There is plenty of real science available for review and the concepts of sympathetic resonance, modulated frequencies and coherent wave forms are all pretty simple to understand. I find it sad that so many people who are so certain of their side of the fence have invested so little in actually understanding the principles involved.
-FL
If you don't have a FaceSpaceTweetBook account (or one in your proper name), they can't spy on you. It's really very simple really.
Really? It's a good thing they don't spy on bank accounts, insurance records, interac purchases, phone conversations, library accounts or anything else. It's a good thing that the psychology which drives a government to spy on computer users goes no further than that. What a relief! Now I no longer have to worry about my mail being intercepted. (Did they ever stop doing that after WWII?)
-FL
Why did anybody think this was a good idea in the first place?
It's like having a pop-up book, or one of those Griffin & Sabine books where the pages have envelopes with letters inside you can pull out and read. They're great for a novelty, like Avatar, and everybody will want to take a look if it's marketed correctly, but when it comes down to it, my meat and potatoes novel is easier when printed on cheap newsprint. I already have to wear glasses to read, and that's annoying enough.
-FL
Duh! That's not spying, that's research. If you "friend" someone you don't know, than it's your own dumb fault! If the government ordered Facebook to allow them to see ALL profiles, that's spying.
That's a weak rationalization for several reasons. A spy is somebody pretending to be somebody other than a government agent while insinuating his or herself into the lives of the targets under observation. Seems pretty cut and dried to me.
I guess you could call that "research" if you wanted to, but that sounds more like an attempt to pretend that you're not living in a fascist state than it does taking responsibility for yourself.
-FL
Depends on the people.
I really like the Monty Hall problem, but I figured out how to explain it in a way which makes it easy for the light go on. That's fun for everybody, (well, those who enjoy such problems. Other people just glaze over). But yeah, I confess, I was argumentative the first time I encountered it until I worked it out a day or two later.
-FL
Damn.
That sounds truly amazing. My first thought was, "What a great period for somebody to set an adventure story!"
Pico della Mirandola's works on the Gutenberg Project are, of course, in Italian so my lazy bones need to visit a library. But thanks for the details. I think I've just found my latest subject to study.
Cheers!
Yeah, I must take the time at some point to study Newton beyond his contribution to physics. I don't even know what period he lived in.
Always so many blank spots to fill...
-FL
I wouldn't worry about it too much, at some point your Fantastic Lad went off the deep end and found his navel.
My navel in the deep end? I would have thought that was for those dozing in their deck chairs.
But yeah, I can understand the hesitation. Still, you won't see the wonders if you let the sharks scare you off. Not for weak swimmers.
-FL
A couple of things:
1. Alchemy has little to do with chemistry. It's about the purification of the soul through repeated heatings and coolings, and as Newton was learning Hebrew, I'd guess he'd probably figured out some of the fundamentals in play re Gnostic Christianity and similar. "Lead into Gold" is a metaphor, as was much else about alchemy. But I don't know much about Newton, so whatever. Maybe he really was trying to generate a money mill.
2. Not knowing something isn't a crime. Exploration of ideas and the world should never be punished if the person searching is doing so out of an honest desire to learn and isn't hurting anybody in the process. People are far too hard on each other for being ignorant, and too defensive when their ignorance is pointed out. Learning shouldn't be a punishable offense.
-FL
Just another brick in the wall.
-FL
The above got posted A/C because I'd modded a number of comments and then thought I should add my own two cents.
Posting as A/C still conflicts with previous modding, and it auto-undoes mods, which makes sense, of course. Basically, I'm a doofus.
-FL
Would somebody mark the parent as a troll? Dismissing an advisory on _bulk_ Lithium transports with "ZOMG THE GUVMENTS IS TAKING MY RIUTS!" is no better than "ZOMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN".
You think an industry which, based on stupid thinking, will no longer allow you to carry bottled water onto a flight is sane enough to not flip out over batteries which do in fact explode from time to time?
Or are you one of those people Socrates would have easily convinced of patently ridiculous things simply because each step toward madness seemed reasonable?
We have plenty of evidence of crazy government behavior. PLENTY of it. I don't trust government officials to be smart or rational. Do you?
Pay attention.
-FL
It must be nice to be living in your version of reality where the erosion of our rights hasn't taken place and where the government doesn't tell lies.
Seriously; compare the world of today to the one of ten years ago in terms of control paranoia and witch-hunt jingoism. If you can't spot the difference, you're on drugs.
There are troops with machine guns walking around in New York today. That's not FUD. That's reality. Man up, put aside the cozy rationalizations and take a good look around you.
-FL
The distinction between Lithium Ion and Lithium Metal batteries is by no means made clear in the FAA report. After reading through it, I have to disagree with others who suggest that this doesn't affect laptop batteries. It does.
Sorry, there may well be, (somewhere) a few government workers who have not been driven insane through the repeated need to exist in an increasingly cognitively dissonant state, but it's a solid bet that they are few and far between. Not counting those who are outright sociopaths, of course.
ANY advisory coming from the government is liable to be false, spin, or otherwise manipulative in nature. In this case, I think, it's probably a set-up for future controls.
It should also be noted that batteries on their own can't burst into flame due to environmental heating in a cargo bay. (It's COLD up there at 10,000 feet!) The FAA report was only talking about batteries catching alight in an already existing fire.
But that's not the way the media story tracked. Everybody assumed batteries burst into flame of their own volition. Public impression and emotional reactions are far more important than facts today. No doubt the idea of over-charged batteries bursting into flame will be floated by alarmists.
Just another way to put the squeeze on travelers. International travel will soon require that you navigate several paradoxical gauntlets just to get seated. Best to just stay at home where you won't see what the outside world is really like.
Fascist nations never like their people to travel. This is the same thing, with one subtle difference; they're trying to sneak it by as a series of rational measures we all voluntarily agree with rather than force it upon us overtly.
-FL
Reminds me of this recent story from England. . .
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/carlisle-man-destroyed-cctv-camera-spying-on-his-home-1.758045?referrerPath=news/1.84783
A man who objected to a CCTV camera keeping watch on his bedroom window from the house opposite appeared before a judge - for stealing the camera and throwing it in a river. [...] The 35-year-old pleaded guilty at Carlisle Crown Court to a charge of burglary and the theft of the £1,500-worth of surveillance equipment.
Though, it does sound like a private issue and the judge was lenient, it's certainly a telling direction we're sliding in. Typically, they try out these sorts of mild cases on us where it's always possible to rationalize the dissolution of human value and human rights. But then it isn't long before they're installing frickin' full-body scanners and arresting people for feeding the homeless. Little bit by little bit, the world becomes unrecognizable from the one we left behind...
-FL
You must be kidding.
Did you see those G20 videos from Toronto?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0EmGTaYbAvw&feature=related
There is no freedom.
-FL
I lived through the 80's as well, and dollars bought a lot more than they do today and people had a lot more of them to work with.
In fact, if I recall, people weren't being evicted from their homes by the tens of thousands via fraudulent banking and foreclosure mills. Good jobs were plentiful, and people weren't going hungry in the U.S. by the hundreds of thousands. That's just the cash side.
The real thing people are annoyed with here are the basic economies of scale and the annoying choices computer manufacturers have been making. Consumer grade computer screens are being designed in a way that the average customer finds irritating. What's wrong with people making noises about the poor choices being offered when the technology exists to easily and economically rectify the situation? If you're a capitalist, and I'm guessing you probably are, then the "Shut up and take what you're given" line shouldn't be acceptable to you, especially when there's no physical or engineering reason for the market to be locked into one mode of manufacture.
And please spare me the "it's too expensive" whine. Adjust your priorities and get in the game. Life ain't easy you know.
It'll be interesting to see how you react when the money in your bank account is worthless and you're on your ass in the street. Think you're immune? You're not. People like you are the ones most likely to kill themselves when the going gets tough.
-FL
I would put it to the readers that overall "the great experiment" has turned out better than one could have hoped.
Depends on whose perspective you are taking. If the goal of the experiment was to achieve domination of the public mind and the turning of everybody into an acting sociopath, then it's been very successful I would say.
Secret wars, deals and shenanigans are generally less prevalent as the decades roll on (granted this is also evident world-wide).
What are you basing that on? I think people are, if anything, MORE easily trained into going along with lies and manipulations than ever before. Who needs a secret war when people will go along with a public one? Who needs shenanigans when people are willing to put up with corruption happening right in front of their eyes. Consider the bailout fiasco, as a massive for instance.
There are no more Rothschilds/Habsburgs.
That's not true.
-FL
Excess co2 is a non problem, precisely indicated in the article premise. As we have more co2 in the atmosphere, the existing plants, including food crops, will suck it up. It may lag a bit, but this is what will happen. We don't even need super trees, just more "regular" trees. Excess wood can be turned into biochar to be provided to the planet's farms, for deep plowing in.
CO2 is not a problem, it is an ASSET, a valuable resource. Having a war on carbon is the stupidest thing humans can do right now. That so many greenies have been faked out by this latest wall street cap and trade SCAM is astounding. That is what is behind the war on carbon, those looters want the entire planet to pay for non existent carbon problem "credits" so they have trillions more in free money handed to them. It is a huge con, designed by ENRON, and then run with from the likes of goldman sachs, etc.
Wake up before it is too late, do your own research, see where the war on carbon came from, go find your own links.
I almost modded you up, but then I realized that simply re-quoting you was more effective. Your ideas are worth exploring by anybody who is a little vague or confused by the whole global warming scam. The most loudly marketed idea is generally guaranteed to be a lie. This one faked us out because Al Gore seemed like such a nice and earnest guy, but his science and his connections demonstrated that he is a liar or a fool or both. Putting a believable and apparently trust-worthy leadership figure at the head of a con job, (Obama being another example), is enormously effective.
-FL
I have to say again that it's good to have somebody with first hand info to weigh in.
I am clearly not as informed as you. So what are the conditions beef and milking cows experience on the average large-scale farm?
-FL
Well I can't argue with someone who believes every conspiracy theory he or she hears. I am a Freemason, I bet you believe everything about them too. Most UFO (any object in the sky that cant be identified is a UFO) sightings are a result of X-series Air Force aircraft. X meaning experimental. Occam's Razor does not cut in the other direction. What is more plausible. Aliens are secretly monitoring us and blowing up our nukes? Or that someone, on Earth, has created and is testing an anti-nuke system.
You seem to have ignored the two main points in my previous post. Those being. . ,
1. The specific manner in which Occam's razor fails. (You just demonstrated it, with a silly exaggeration no less.)
2. That there is a lot of information you need to know before you are able to render a judgment about UFOs. Especially like the one you just offered.
You said before that, "in fact I have no problem admitting I don't know something." but you're not demonstrating it. You seem to have limited knowledge in this subject, and you sound pre-judgmental. You would do well to read up on the subject. It won't bite, and once you get into the data, you'll be kicking yourself for not having done so sooner. It's like learning math for the first time. Look up Richard Dolan.
-FL