Just suppose we do find an earth size planet in the habitable zone near a star within a thousand light years from here. Now suppose we were to direct a huge radio antenna at that planet. It might take up to a thousand years to get there. We would than have to hope that some intelligent life had built a receiver capable enough to detect that signal to prove to them that there is intelligent life elsewhere. Now suppose that in a couple of decades from now that we find a way to cheaply get into outer space so we could build a huge spinning mirror at a great distance from the sun. Maybe than someone could detect this mirror with the naked eye from that planet. It still would take a huge number of years to get there but than we would not depend on them being advanced enough to detect it. Now my question is this. Why hasn't a nation on a planet within a thousand light years from earth built there own means of detecting a planet and thus detected the planet Earth? If they did why haven't they tried to contact us at least 2 thousand years ago and kept it running for the last 2 thousand years? We would than have had prove of intelligent life on another planet for at least the last thousand years. I guess there are three answers. 1. They do not exist. 2. They exist but are not intelligent enough. 3. They exist and are intelligent enough but do not care enough to attempt to prove their existence. I do not know that we would care enough in the near future to prove our existence to another planet far away from Earth.
If there was a gyro and compass on the drone, the drone would know approximately where it was without GPS. It would know the direction of travel and its speed and the amount of time of travel. If we did not take this in account and encoded the GPS signal than a lot of people need to be fired and we need to stop using them until the signal is encoded. If the Iranians are capable of encoding the GPS signal so that the drone would accept it than they are capable of doing it with any computer transaction and would put our relying on computers for financial transactions in extreme danger. Since they are on the internet and are on the path of some signals than they would be able to decode these signals and send out whatever signals they wanted to. They could totally disrupt our economic system. So it is either the CIA people are total idiots or we need to stop using computers for anything that is not trivial.
Lets say there are 10 women. If the stranger says there is at least one man cheating than if only one man was cheating, his wife would know this that night because she would know that the other 9 did not cheat and since there must be one it would have to be her husband so on the first night she would throw her husband out. Now lets say there were two cheating husbands. Now on the first night the two that have cheating husbands would know that 8 are not cheating and would only see 1 women that has a cheating husband. When that women did not throw out her husband on the first night, they both would know on the second night that their husband have cheated on them since if there were only one, that women would have kicked her husband out on the first night. The logic will continue so if it is the tenth day before any husband is kicked out there must be 10 of them.
If your sarcasm about the magic man is correct than you have gained nothing by believing it but if it is wrong than you might have lost everything by insulting him. Than again why would a god create any beings if there was the slightest chance that that creature would cause that god any amount of grieve? If we believe that story we have the same amount of free will that a man who has a gun pointed at his head by a thief. Maybe it is because there are an infinite number of solar system in the universe so than not matter how small the probabilities for some event is there will be at least one where that event is true. There is no chance of us detecting life in the vast majority of the milky way galaxy and no chance of us detecting life in another galaxy. I would think that there exist some more advanced society somewhere in the universe that could build a device capable enough of altering the sunlight from its sun so that anyone looking at that sun would know that intelligent life exist there. Now lets say that society exist near a star that is visible by the naked eye. Than we would have known for thousand of years that intelligent life exist elsewhere. Now lets say a society on a planet a thousand light years away started this device 20,000 years ago and the device lasted 1,000 years so that it would have stopped 19,000 years ago. Who would have existed on Earth at that time that would have been intelligent enough to recognize that signal and recorded it so that we would have known it today? Even if someone did would we believe that person today? So I would say that both societies have to exist in a very narrow time slot so that I think there is not a very good chance of us detecting life even if it does exist.
Since the chances of getting disease Y is 20 times more than getting disease X, anything that reduces its chances is much more preferable than reducing the chances of disease X. I have calculated the chances of getting one of the diseases is.0017 by not consuming A and.00202 by consuming A. It is so close because the chances of X are so low that they almost have no effect on the results.
Why stop at executive and upper level management? Why not congressman or even the President? I am sure that with the proper software justice could be served without a hint of prejudice.
When an increase in government spending does not keep up with the increase in population and inflation than an increase is a decrease. Let me explain it to you simply. If one has $1,000 and decide to give it to a hundred people, than everyone get $10. The following year the number of people increase to 110 so to give everyone $10 one must increase the $1,000 to $1,100. Anything less is a decrease to everyone getting that money. A lot of those people are children, sick and disabled. It is not their fault that they need the money either. So the republicans are saying in the next 10 years the government can not increase the taxes of the super rich by a trillion dollars when in that 10 years they are earning several trillion dollars. I can hardly contain my tears just thinking about how much hardship those super rich are enduring.
1. Attach cable from ship to the helicopter.
2. Helicopter goes to full throttle.
3. Make cable as taut as possible.
4. Pull the helicopter down onto the deck.
Under these conditions if the deck suddenly rises up a couple of feet the helicopter will respond by rising up a couple of feet too. This is how the US Navy does it today.
What would be nice is a ranking on how much the supercomputer has accomplished. If they were ranked by how much they have saved their nations in any number of categories, such as reduced costs or better designs or better medicine. I have also read that programmers are struggling to create programs that use these supercomputers at their given speed. It could be like most home computers that these super computers are mostly idling. It would also be nice if the article was accurate. I quote "It is Japan’s highest-ranked supercomputer. Plans are being developed for Tsubame 3.0." The K super computer is Japanese so it would be Japan's highest ranked supercomputer.
I say forget cars since there is a much more important use of this technology. I say put one in every house. That way we could vastly multiply the number of windmills and solar power cells. If we could store the excess power generated when the wind is blowing and the sun is shining than we could vastly decrease the number of coal powered plants. If they think this technology will be available in three to five years than we should put almost all of our engineers on it so it would be available within a year. If this has a good chance of becoming reality than President Obama should be using all the power of the federal government to promote it. We should be able to store enough power at night to make sure that the house does not need any excess power during the daytime. It is interesting since I live by a huge man made lake that is being used to store night time power for use in the day. I would think that this technology would make that lake obsolete. But until I see President Obama promoting this technology, I will continue to not believe that I will ever see it.
If I were to live in a state without sales tax, for instance Alaska and I ordered something on the internet and had it delivered to me. Than I sent the same package to a resident in a state that did have a sales tax, for instance Michigan, Now who would have to pay the sales tax? I know someone can order something and have it sent to a different address. Which state would get the sales tax if both of them had sales taxes? If the one who purchased the item had no sales tax than someone might just set up a business where they do nothing but take orders in a state with no sales tax and have the item sent to a person who lives in a state with sales taxes. I think they might be able to make some money by charging a couple of per cent of the order. I am sure there are ways of getting around this sales tax. I have often wondered why I can not buy a loaf of bread(no sales tax on food) for $14,000 and have a automobile thrown in for free?
With so much power one would think that it could have already discovered fusion, cure to aids, heart disease and cancer. At 10,000 trillion flops per second, that would mean about 864 million trillion flops per day or about 26 billion trillion flops per month or about 312 billion trillion flops in a year.so invent something already!
If we can not prevent it than the only thing we can do is to try to lessen its consequences. First we must try to get as many people out of it path and the only way I can see is to build underground at a depth of say a 1,000 feet. Second we will need a power supply and the only thing I can see is fusion power. Third we need to be able to burn away the dust in the atmosphere and the only thing I could think of is giant mirrors in outer space to redirect sunlight to burn dust away. If it happened 300,000 years ago than human survived it than without our present day technology so we should be able to survive it again with a lot more people.
Why should one's computer be different than one's refrigerator? I would think that with the Internet one would want a computer that one leaves on all the time since this should lead to a computer with no moving parts. I for one can think of plenty of programs that will increase our security and well being too. I do not know why we do not have microphones and speakers in every room of one's house. Humans can tell if there is a problem in a room by the sound that is coming out of it so I do not see why a computer could not do the same. I would think that someone will invent a wristwatch that also monitors one's heart beat and blood pressure. I would think that this device would communicate with one's computer and thus communicate with anyone in the world. I would hope that if one had a problem than the proper people would be notified even when one is incapable of doing it oneself.
"I can't hardly blame someone with a potentially world altering invention wanting to keep it under wraps for as long as possible."
He should open source it right now so that there would be millions of people capable of producing it. If this invention was true than even if he did not make a penny on it he would be far better off than he is now. This could lead to world peace. It would certainly lead to saving millions if not ten of millions of people. Once there were one plant producing cheap energy from his invention, I for one would support a bill in congress giving him 10 billion dollars. If this is true than cheap energy would lead to a lot more automation which would make a large percentage of the population useless. It would make building underground cheaper than above ground which would lead to a drastic cut in the amount of needed energy. Underground roads and the resulting automated transportation system would makes all humans much more safe than they are now. This would make humans much less envious of anyone else material wealth so would lead to less wars but also less crime. Than again if this invention leads to making life too easy than where will people get their self worth? I would think it would lead to a drastic cut in the birth rate since child rearing would still be a lot of work. People still want children to help them in their old age but this would drasticly reduce the need for anyone to need help from a younger generation.
I am getting this pop up ad for Norton anti-virus. That would not be unusual except for the fact that the only way I can see to get rid of it is to click the accept button. There is no x or a no thanks button on it. I have microsoft anti-virus and I also have Iobit windows care program and I run firefox with their pop up blocker. Even with all of that I still get that pop up. I will not accept just because they do not have a easy way to decline.
The Japanese have already sent a supply vessel to the ISS. Why are they cooperating with the rest of the world where the Chinese are trying to do it on their own? Why are they spending so much money on this when they could get so much more by cooperating with the members of the ISS? I would be suspicious of the Chinese since I would not know how much technology they are sharing with the North Koreans. I would think that they would sign a treaty with Taiwan giving almost everything to them so they could get their hands on the technology we have already sold to them. I just do not understand them. Do they really think they can invent technology that is so much better than what has already been invented? Are the Chinese people so rich that they would want to spend so much more than what is required?
Not only are they out of reach to us, we are probably out of reach to them too. The probabilities of any one outside of our solar system knowing that we exist is very small. Now suppose someone on a planet 1,000 light years away was watching us 1,000 years ago. Now suppose they had sufficient technology to determine that we were an inhabitable world with vast oceans. They would know by the absent of radio energy that we did not possess that technology yet. But knowing it would take 1,000 years for their radio signal to reach us I would assume that they would broadcast a signal with all of their knowledge. It would cost them so little and would be a great help to us. I hope that we will do the same if we can determine that there is an inhabitable world within a 1,000 light years of us. I am guessing here but just suppose we knew of a planet 1,000 light years away and just suppose we put a satellite that was just a giant venetian blind somewhere between our sun and their planet. I would think that it could blot out our entire sun for a period of time. I would think that we could signal them just by turning it off and on. Therefore they would not even have to have a radio receiver as they would just need a telescope. So we could have received that signal about 500 years ago so they could have start signaling us 1,500 years ago at a 1,000 light years away and we would be receiving that signal for the last 500 years. I know that this would take a lot of knowledge since the satellite would have to be directly in our line of sight with their sun. But I would think that even a world that is only 50 years more advanced than we are would possess such knowledge. With this technology any star that is visible with the naked eye could have started signaling us thousands of years ago and we would have at least known of it for those many years.
How do we know what is the message of Christ? There was no secretary that followed Christ and wrote down everything he did or said. The gospels were written decades after Christ's death. So if the writers relied on their memory or the memories of others, than they are hardly a reliable account. Now if they were inspired than why is there so much differences in the four gospels? It would be extremely important to get Christ's last words right but there are three different versions in the gospels. One can tell me that they know of a way of life that will bring me great joy and happiness. I might be inclined to believe that one until that one also tells me that I will be greatly punished if I do not follow that way.
To get back to the original article, there is plenty of evidence that the flood did not happen as told in the bible. Christ is quoted as talking about the flood as if he believed in it. He was wrong about that so how can I rely on any other thing he was quoted as saying? A strict definition of his words will condemn billions of people through no fault of their own. I would never say that is a loving god
None of this can be correct. All of this evidence was left here by the devil to challenge our faith. For instance man was taught by the angels to talk. How could Adam or Eve be judged if they could not talk or have symbolic thoughts. Of course all the dates are wrong since there were only 75 generations of man between Adam and Jesus Christ(Luke chapter 3). There were 11 between Adam and Noah so humans and all the races and languages and migration developed in around 64 generations. This would be funny except for the fact that a large percentage of the population still believe it. Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses are very active in preaching it. Mitt Romney is a Mormon and could be a candidate for President next year. I guess by definition he must believe in this nonsense. Jon Huntsman is also a Mormon but his chances of getting the nomination are slim.
Why are we still trying to find cures to all of our fatal disease? After all there have been so may failures so far. There is no choice in the manner. Either give up and not try for a better world or accept that there will be failures and we will learn from them. There have been successes as GM and Chrysler are still in business.
What if every automobile had a gps system, cruise control(able to set speed to as low as 5mph) and a wi-fi system(this would tell everyone your location and destination). With that there would be a central computer that could control traffic much like air controllers control airplane traffic. This would require a button at every intersection so that pedestrians could inform the system of their location and desire to cross that intersection.
It seems to me that if this robot was such a great labor saving device, it would have been energized on the first day. I think that the only positive thing this robot is going to do is to do work on the outside of the station. That would save a person from having to be exposed to space and therefore it would not matter that the robot probably will take as much time for a human to control as it does in work. Right now it is an experiment that might pay off in the future and save some labor so that humans can do more.
Why would a god who has infinite power and time let humans live in such a horrible environment? An explanation is that god is punishing humans for some transgression. So religious people will tell you that we would be living in paradise if it just wasn't for those two evil people. Adam and Eve could not have been that evil because they supposedly worked very hard and long to keep the human race alive. We would have to at least admit that they were heroes to do that since I would think that they could have gotten so depressed after being kicked out of paradise that they would have just gone to the nearest cliff and committed suicide. I think the story of Adam and Eve is a comedy. Eve is said to have given Adam the fruit. Adam could have just said to Eve that he was full and that he would eat it tomorrow. Since god had promised that if they ate of the fruit they would surely die that day than if Eve were alive the next day than Adam would have known if it was safe to eat. The story about Cain and Abel is stupid. Can one imagine two young men being alive and the only female alive is their mother? I can just see them waking up from a wet dream and thinking that they sure wished their mother and father would get busy and at least have a sister for them. Its no wonder why Cain was crazy enough to kill Abel. God knew that Cain was going to kill Abel and yet refused to warn Abel. I would think that god is at least as guilty as Cain. Cain would have had to return to Adam and Eve after more than a hundred years to find a sister to marry. I can just see some young 13 year old girl willing to have sex with her brother who just happens to be over a hundred years older than herself. Not only that she and all of her descendant would be cursed so who in their right mind would want that? So how come after thousands of years people still believe in such nonsense? I think that a false hope is better than no hope. So it either believe that life has no meaning and will end for everyone at the point of death or believe in a fairly tale to comfort oneself in times of trouble.
I believe that humans will eventually move underground and restore the surface to a natural environment. We will live in such an environment that most humans will not even venture to the surface in their entire lifetime. Temperature and humidity will be controlled to within human's ability to detect change. This will result in a vast decrease in use of energy at the same time as our ability to produce vast amounts of pollution free energy. Robots will provide for our every need to the point that it will be hard to get out of bed. Humans will than follow the Japanese example and decline in population. The population that is left will be content to colonize our moon, Mars and Venus. All will be accomplished by living underground and nuclear fusion. Humans will eventually combine with computers to the point where everything will be an artificial environment. We will live forever and to keep up our interest in life we will allow ourselves to die and be reborn to start fresh. When we reach a certain point in our development we will than start over again. Of course no one can prove that we haven't already accomplish this and that the purpose of life is just something to do.
Slashdot Mirror
Just suppose we do find an earth size planet in the habitable zone near a star within a thousand light years from here. Now suppose we were to direct a huge radio antenna at that planet. It might take up to a thousand years to get there. We would than have to hope that some intelligent life had built a receiver capable enough to detect that signal to prove to them that there is intelligent life elsewhere. Now suppose that in a couple of decades from now that we find a way to cheaply get into outer space so we could build a huge spinning mirror at a great distance from the sun. Maybe than someone could detect this mirror with the naked eye from that planet. It still would take a huge number of years to get there but than we would not depend on them being advanced enough to detect it. Now my question is this. Why hasn't a nation on a planet within a thousand light years from earth built there own means of detecting a planet and thus detected the planet Earth? If they did why haven't they tried to contact us at least 2 thousand years ago and kept it running for the last 2 thousand years? We would than have had prove of intelligent life on another planet for at least the last thousand years. I guess there are three answers. 1. They do not exist. 2. They exist but are not intelligent enough. 3. They exist and are intelligent enough but do not care enough to attempt to prove their existence. I do not know that we would care enough in the near future to prove our existence to another planet far away from Earth.
If there was a gyro and compass on the drone, the drone would know approximately where it was without GPS. It would know the direction of travel and its speed and the amount of time of travel. If we did not take this in account and encoded the GPS signal than a lot of people need to be fired and we need to stop using them until the signal is encoded. If the Iranians are capable of encoding the GPS signal so that the drone would accept it than they are capable of doing it with any computer transaction and would put our relying on computers for financial transactions in extreme danger. Since they are on the internet and are on the path of some signals than they would be able to decode these signals and send out whatever signals they wanted to. They could totally disrupt our economic system. So it is either the CIA people are total idiots or we need to stop using computers for anything that is not trivial.
Lets say there are 10 women. If the stranger says there is at least one man cheating than if only one man was cheating, his wife would know this that night because she would know that the other 9 did not cheat and since there must be one it would have to be her husband so on the first night she would throw her husband out. Now lets say there were two cheating husbands. Now on the first night the two that have cheating husbands would know that 8 are not cheating and would only see 1 women that has a cheating husband. When that women did not throw out her husband on the first night, they both would know on the second night that their husband have cheated on them since if there were only one, that women would have kicked her husband out on the first night. The logic will continue so if it is the tenth day before any husband is kicked out there must be 10 of them.
If your sarcasm about the magic man is correct than you have gained nothing by believing it but if it is wrong than you might have lost everything by insulting him. Than again why would a god create any beings if there was the slightest chance that that creature would cause that god any amount of grieve? If we believe that story we have the same amount of free will that a man who has a gun pointed at his head by a thief. Maybe it is because there are an infinite number of solar system in the universe so than not matter how small the probabilities for some event is there will be at least one where that event is true. There is no chance of us detecting life in the vast majority of the milky way galaxy and no chance of us detecting life in another galaxy. I would think that there exist some more advanced society somewhere in the universe that could build a device capable enough of altering the sunlight from its sun so that anyone looking at that sun would know that intelligent life exist there. Now lets say that society exist near a star that is visible by the naked eye. Than we would have known for thousand of years that intelligent life exist elsewhere. Now lets say a society on a planet a thousand light years away started this device 20,000 years ago and the device lasted 1,000 years so that it would have stopped 19,000 years ago. Who would have existed on Earth at that time that would have been intelligent enough to recognize that signal and recorded it so that we would have known it today? Even if someone did would we believe that person today? So I would say that both societies have to exist in a very narrow time slot so that I think there is not a very good chance of us detecting life even if it does exist.
Since the chances of getting disease Y is 20 times more than getting disease X, anything that reduces its chances is much more preferable than reducing the chances of disease X. I have calculated the chances of getting one of the diseases is .0017 by not consuming A and .00202 by consuming A. It is so close because the chances of X are so low that they almost have no effect on the results.
Why stop at executive and upper level management? Why not congressman or even the President? I am sure that with the proper software justice could be served without a hint of prejudice.
When an increase in government spending does not keep up with the increase in population and inflation than an increase is a decrease. Let me explain it to you simply. If one has $1,000 and decide to give it to a hundred people, than everyone get $10. The following year the number of people increase to 110 so to give everyone $10 one must increase the $1,000 to $1,100. Anything less is a decrease to everyone getting that money. A lot of those people are children, sick and disabled. It is not their fault that they need the money either. So the republicans are saying in the next 10 years the government can not increase the taxes of the super rich by a trillion dollars when in that 10 years they are earning several trillion dollars. I can hardly contain my tears just thinking about how much hardship those super rich are enduring.
1. Attach cable from ship to the helicopter. 2. Helicopter goes to full throttle. 3. Make cable as taut as possible. 4. Pull the helicopter down onto the deck. Under these conditions if the deck suddenly rises up a couple of feet the helicopter will respond by rising up a couple of feet too. This is how the US Navy does it today.
What would be nice is a ranking on how much the supercomputer has accomplished. If they were ranked by how much they have saved their nations in any number of categories, such as reduced costs or better designs or better medicine. I have also read that programmers are struggling to create programs that use these supercomputers at their given speed. It could be like most home computers that these super computers are mostly idling. It would also be nice if the article was accurate. I quote "It is Japan’s highest-ranked supercomputer. Plans are being developed for Tsubame 3.0." The K super computer is Japanese so it would be Japan's highest ranked supercomputer.
I say forget cars since there is a much more important use of this technology. I say put one in every house. That way we could vastly multiply the number of windmills and solar power cells. If we could store the excess power generated when the wind is blowing and the sun is shining than we could vastly decrease the number of coal powered plants. If they think this technology will be available in three to five years than we should put almost all of our engineers on it so it would be available within a year. If this has a good chance of becoming reality than President Obama should be using all the power of the federal government to promote it. We should be able to store enough power at night to make sure that the house does not need any excess power during the daytime. It is interesting since I live by a huge man made lake that is being used to store night time power for use in the day. I would think that this technology would make that lake obsolete. But until I see President Obama promoting this technology, I will continue to not believe that I will ever see it.
If I were to live in a state without sales tax, for instance Alaska and I ordered something on the internet and had it delivered to me. Than I sent the same package to a resident in a state that did have a sales tax, for instance Michigan, Now who would have to pay the sales tax? I know someone can order something and have it sent to a different address. Which state would get the sales tax if both of them had sales taxes? If the one who purchased the item had no sales tax than someone might just set up a business where they do nothing but take orders in a state with no sales tax and have the item sent to a person who lives in a state with sales taxes. I think they might be able to make some money by charging a couple of per cent of the order. I am sure there are ways of getting around this sales tax. I have often wondered why I can not buy a loaf of bread(no sales tax on food) for $14,000 and have a automobile thrown in for free?
With so much power one would think that it could have already discovered fusion, cure to aids, heart disease and cancer. At 10,000 trillion flops per second, that would mean about 864 million trillion flops per day or about 26 billion trillion flops per month or about 312 billion trillion flops in a year.so invent something already!
If we can not prevent it than the only thing we can do is to try to lessen its consequences. First we must try to get as many people out of it path and the only way I can see is to build underground at a depth of say a 1,000 feet. Second we will need a power supply and the only thing I can see is fusion power. Third we need to be able to burn away the dust in the atmosphere and the only thing I could think of is giant mirrors in outer space to redirect sunlight to burn dust away. If it happened 300,000 years ago than human survived it than without our present day technology so we should be able to survive it again with a lot more people.
Why should one's computer be different than one's refrigerator? I would think that with the Internet one would want a computer that one leaves on all the time since this should lead to a computer with no moving parts. I for one can think of plenty of programs that will increase our security and well being too. I do not know why we do not have microphones and speakers in every room of one's house. Humans can tell if there is a problem in a room by the sound that is coming out of it so I do not see why a computer could not do the same. I would think that someone will invent a wristwatch that also monitors one's heart beat and blood pressure. I would think that this device would communicate with one's computer and thus communicate with anyone in the world. I would hope that if one had a problem than the proper people would be notified even when one is incapable of doing it oneself.
"I can't hardly blame someone with a potentially world altering invention wanting to keep it under wraps for as long as possible." He should open source it right now so that there would be millions of people capable of producing it. If this invention was true than even if he did not make a penny on it he would be far better off than he is now. This could lead to world peace. It would certainly lead to saving millions if not ten of millions of people. Once there were one plant producing cheap energy from his invention, I for one would support a bill in congress giving him 10 billion dollars. If this is true than cheap energy would lead to a lot more automation which would make a large percentage of the population useless. It would make building underground cheaper than above ground which would lead to a drastic cut in the amount of needed energy. Underground roads and the resulting automated transportation system would makes all humans much more safe than they are now. This would make humans much less envious of anyone else material wealth so would lead to less wars but also less crime. Than again if this invention leads to making life too easy than where will people get their self worth? I would think it would lead to a drastic cut in the birth rate since child rearing would still be a lot of work. People still want children to help them in their old age but this would drasticly reduce the need for anyone to need help from a younger generation.
I am getting this pop up ad for Norton anti-virus. That would not be unusual except for the fact that the only way I can see to get rid of it is to click the accept button. There is no x or a no thanks button on it. I have microsoft anti-virus and I also have Iobit windows care program and I run firefox with their pop up blocker. Even with all of that I still get that pop up. I will not accept just because they do not have a easy way to decline.
The Japanese have already sent a supply vessel to the ISS. Why are they cooperating with the rest of the world where the Chinese are trying to do it on their own? Why are they spending so much money on this when they could get so much more by cooperating with the members of the ISS? I would be suspicious of the Chinese since I would not know how much technology they are sharing with the North Koreans. I would think that they would sign a treaty with Taiwan giving almost everything to them so they could get their hands on the technology we have already sold to them. I just do not understand them. Do they really think they can invent technology that is so much better than what has already been invented? Are the Chinese people so rich that they would want to spend so much more than what is required?
Not only are they out of reach to us, we are probably out of reach to them too. The probabilities of any one outside of our solar system knowing that we exist is very small. Now suppose someone on a planet 1,000 light years away was watching us 1,000 years ago. Now suppose they had sufficient technology to determine that we were an inhabitable world with vast oceans. They would know by the absent of radio energy that we did not possess that technology yet. But knowing it would take 1,000 years for their radio signal to reach us I would assume that they would broadcast a signal with all of their knowledge. It would cost them so little and would be a great help to us. I hope that we will do the same if we can determine that there is an inhabitable world within a 1,000 light years of us. I am guessing here but just suppose we knew of a planet 1,000 light years away and just suppose we put a satellite that was just a giant venetian blind somewhere between our sun and their planet. I would think that it could blot out our entire sun for a period of time. I would think that we could signal them just by turning it off and on. Therefore they would not even have to have a radio receiver as they would just need a telescope. So we could have received that signal about 500 years ago so they could have start signaling us 1,500 years ago at a 1,000 light years away and we would be receiving that signal for the last 500 years. I know that this would take a lot of knowledge since the satellite would have to be directly in our line of sight with their sun. But I would think that even a world that is only 50 years more advanced than we are would possess such knowledge. With this technology any star that is visible with the naked eye could have started signaling us thousands of years ago and we would have at least known of it for those many years.
How do we know what is the message of Christ? There was no secretary that followed Christ and wrote down everything he did or said. The gospels were written decades after Christ's death. So if the writers relied on their memory or the memories of others, than they are hardly a reliable account. Now if they were inspired than why is there so much differences in the four gospels? It would be extremely important to get Christ's last words right but there are three different versions in the gospels. One can tell me that they know of a way of life that will bring me great joy and happiness. I might be inclined to believe that one until that one also tells me that I will be greatly punished if I do not follow that way. To get back to the original article, there is plenty of evidence that the flood did not happen as told in the bible. Christ is quoted as talking about the flood as if he believed in it. He was wrong about that so how can I rely on any other thing he was quoted as saying? A strict definition of his words will condemn billions of people through no fault of their own. I would never say that is a loving god
None of this can be correct. All of this evidence was left here by the devil to challenge our faith. For instance man was taught by the angels to talk. How could Adam or Eve be judged if they could not talk or have symbolic thoughts. Of course all the dates are wrong since there were only 75 generations of man between Adam and Jesus Christ(Luke chapter 3). There were 11 between Adam and Noah so humans and all the races and languages and migration developed in around 64 generations. This would be funny except for the fact that a large percentage of the population still believe it. Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses are very active in preaching it. Mitt Romney is a Mormon and could be a candidate for President next year. I guess by definition he must believe in this nonsense. Jon Huntsman is also a Mormon but his chances of getting the nomination are slim.
Why are we still trying to find cures to all of our fatal disease? After all there have been so may failures so far. There is no choice in the manner. Either give up and not try for a better world or accept that there will be failures and we will learn from them. There have been successes as GM and Chrysler are still in business.
What if every automobile had a gps system, cruise control(able to set speed to as low as 5mph) and a wi-fi system(this would tell everyone your location and destination). With that there would be a central computer that could control traffic much like air controllers control airplane traffic. This would require a button at every intersection so that pedestrians could inform the system of their location and desire to cross that intersection.
It seems to me that if this robot was such a great labor saving device, it would have been energized on the first day. I think that the only positive thing this robot is going to do is to do work on the outside of the station. That would save a person from having to be exposed to space and therefore it would not matter that the robot probably will take as much time for a human to control as it does in work. Right now it is an experiment that might pay off in the future and save some labor so that humans can do more.
Why would a god who has infinite power and time let humans live in such a horrible environment? An explanation is that god is punishing humans for some transgression. So religious people will tell you that we would be living in paradise if it just wasn't for those two evil people. Adam and Eve could not have been that evil because they supposedly worked very hard and long to keep the human race alive. We would have to at least admit that they were heroes to do that since I would think that they could have gotten so depressed after being kicked out of paradise that they would have just gone to the nearest cliff and committed suicide. I think the story of Adam and Eve is a comedy. Eve is said to have given Adam the fruit. Adam could have just said to Eve that he was full and that he would eat it tomorrow. Since god had promised that if they ate of the fruit they would surely die that day than if Eve were alive the next day than Adam would have known if it was safe to eat. The story about Cain and Abel is stupid. Can one imagine two young men being alive and the only female alive is their mother? I can just see them waking up from a wet dream and thinking that they sure wished their mother and father would get busy and at least have a sister for them. Its no wonder why Cain was crazy enough to kill Abel. God knew that Cain was going to kill Abel and yet refused to warn Abel. I would think that god is at least as guilty as Cain. Cain would have had to return to Adam and Eve after more than a hundred years to find a sister to marry. I can just see some young 13 year old girl willing to have sex with her brother who just happens to be over a hundred years older than herself. Not only that she and all of her descendant would be cursed so who in their right mind would want that? So how come after thousands of years people still believe in such nonsense? I think that a false hope is better than no hope. So it either believe that life has no meaning and will end for everyone at the point of death or believe in a fairly tale to comfort oneself in times of trouble.
I believe that humans will eventually move underground and restore the surface to a natural environment. We will live in such an environment that most humans will not even venture to the surface in their entire lifetime. Temperature and humidity will be controlled to within human's ability to detect change. This will result in a vast decrease in use of energy at the same time as our ability to produce vast amounts of pollution free energy. Robots will provide for our every need to the point that it will be hard to get out of bed. Humans will than follow the Japanese example and decline in population. The population that is left will be content to colonize our moon, Mars and Venus. All will be accomplished by living underground and nuclear fusion. Humans will eventually combine with computers to the point where everything will be an artificial environment. We will live forever and to keep up our interest in life we will allow ourselves to die and be reborn to start fresh. When we reach a certain point in our development we will than start over again. Of course no one can prove that we haven't already accomplish this and that the purpose of life is just something to do.