Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/sessions.php on line 254
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/sessions.php on line 255
Anime-Source.Com: Forums
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/page_header.php on line 499
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/page_header.php on line 501
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/anime/public_html/banzai/header.php:34) in /home/anime/public_html/banzai/includes/page_header.php on line 502 Anime-Source.com :: View topic - World Hunger and discussion of the human body
Joined: Apr 19, 2007 Posts: 678 Location: Currently in the Land of Anime and Manga
Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 4:12 pm Post subject:
LoneWolf325 wrote:
As for using stem cells from aborted children for research, perhaps that doesn't "waste" the bodies, but it does justify the murders.
Like I said, STEM CELLS FROM ABORTED FETUSES AREN'T BEING USED FOR STEM CELL RESEARCH!!! THE STEM CELLS USED IN RESEARCH COME FROM SURPLUS ARTIFICIALLY INSEMINATED EMBRYOS USED IN FERTILITY CENTERS THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE DISCARDED!!! All that current stem cell research can be used to justify is allowing sterile women to have children.
LoneWolf325 wrote:
Do you think we'll go to the moon in this decade(By which I mean the next ten years)? I don't. We can't. Existing 21st century technology isn't up to the challenge.
We have no reason to go to the moon. It costs hundreds of millions of dollars to do it, and we've gained nothing from our several trips there in the past. The whole "Race to the Moon" between the US and the USSR was basically just a d*** sizing competition. Yes, the ability to launch and use satellites was and is important and NASA deserves great credit for that, but moon missions were a waste for anything besides our own ego. If we wanted to send someone to the moon right now we could (at the very least we reuse old technology), but NASA's budget is better served by being invested in space station experiments and further exploration the solar system and rest of the universe.
As far as other technology is concerned, we're actually making progress on teleportation (http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/science_technology/Beam_me_up_Geneva.html?siteSect=511&sid=10095876&cKey=1229421901000&ty=st&rs=yes), robotics and, back to medical science, cybernetics and genetic engineering. HOW IS THAT NOT LIFE STEADILY BECOMING MORE LIKE A SCI-FI SHOW??!!! The only reason the whole "Jetsons" notion of flying cars doesn't exist is because control over gravity stills seems to be out mankind's grasp (in fact, we still aren't sure what causes it). Also, we are finally on the verge of creating sustainable, clean energy (something I know you care nothing about), thereby fixing some of the huge problems created by the advances of the Industrial Revolution and harnessing of electricity.
And finally,
LoneWolf325 wrote:
Well fine then, it was the diplomats and negotiators who were supposed to fix it who got ground up.
I KNOW you don't have a problem with fewer diplomats and politicians in the world.
In all fucking seriusness, you both first have to settle the difference between definitions of terms. For example, Lonewolf defines a soul as a magical abundance of life energy granted by God. To me, a soul is an awareness of existance, capacity to feel, and collection of life experiences. Such a difference in defintions lead to a loss in translation.
Such as this. Abortion is a selfish act, while donating sperm and egg (we have a lot of it) to stem cell research saves lives, cures people. Combining one sperm and one egg and waiting a week can make a man in a wheelchair walk again. I'm sure Jesus would be proud of science being put to such use.
Lonewolf wrote:
As for "soldiers and unborn children go to Hell," that's simply not true. Soldiers in war are killing, yes, but it's not murder. It's not murder when you're protecting your own life, or the lives of others in the heat of the moment, and it's not murder to execute a criminal for certain crimes(murder and rape come to mind).
War is the one true game that exists in the world. Two nations fighting to protect their homelands is just a fuck load of miscommunication, if it were true. Sadly, it is not. Every soldier is an assasin, bred to kill who the government tells them is the enemy. It's politics too.
Lonewolf wrote:
Why haven't cancer and AIDS been cured yet?
Omg, omg, omg, I have to tell you.... Stem cells are the cure for AIDS! XD!!!!!! Omg, haha. Irony. I laughed so hard.
mstice wrote:
Aside from the starvation caused by improper distribution of food by corrupt governments and organizations, hunger is one of the world's easier problems to solve and is being solved at an incredible pace.
These are the other simplest of world problems to solve.
1. Drinkable water (water desalinization)
2. Electrical energy (nuclear power)
3. Fuel (alchemy of garbage)
4. AIDS, Parkinson's disease, etc. (stem cell research)
5. Heart attacks, obesity (any type of exercise)
6. Cancer (we stop smoking cigs, sunscreen, caffeine, orgasms)
Like I said, STEM CELLS FROM ABORTED FETUSES AREN'T BEING USED FOR STEM CELL RESEARCH!!! THE STEM CELLS USED IN RESEARCH COME FROM SURPLUS ARTIFICIALLY INSEMINATED EMBRYOS USED IN FERTILITY CENTERS THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE DISCARDED!!!
Just because something is not true doesn't mean it isn't used in propoganda. I'll take your word that murder victims aren't used for stem cell research. This does not change the fact that fetal stem cell research is used as a justification for abortions.
mangaddict_reborn wrote:
Such as this. Abortion is a selfish act, while donating sperm and egg (we have a lot of it) to stem cell research saves lives, cures people. Combining one sperm and one egg and waiting a week can make a man in a wheelchair walk again.
What separates a human being from a fertilized egg? When does it stop being a "thing" and start being a "person?"
Besides that, last I checked, fetal stem cells had some nasty side-effects that make them actually the worst possible choice. Sure, they can take the form of whatever cells, but they have this tendency to not stop growing when they need to. It's like if Dr. Marcoh's Stone in Fullmetal Alchemist was causing cancer in his patients whenever he healed a broken leg.
Cancer created by the slaughter of Ishbalans.
Little Jack Horner sat in the corner, eating his Christmas pie. He stuck in his thumb and pulled out a plumb and said
mangaddict_reborn wrote:
I'm sure Jesus would be proud of science being put to such use.
Nevermind that there's an abundant supply of stem cells produced naturally when a life is created, instead of when it's destroyed. Umbelical stem cells can be harvested from the Afterbirth which occurs shortly after a child is born. They have all of the benefits of fetal stem cells, plus they stop growing when they're supposed to, and they don't cost a human life to produce.
This particular argument has happened in this forum once before. As I recall, the pro-choice side of the argument decided that morals were irrelevant in the name of scientific progress. I proposed that we sacrifice his family and friends for dissection, since it was only morals prohibiting such.
My post is still the last in that thread. _________________ The pen is mightier than the sword
But the sword is so much harder to silence than the pen.
Joined: Apr 19, 2007 Posts: 678 Location: Currently in the Land of Anime and Manga
Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:33 pm Post subject:
mangaddict_reborn wrote:
mstice wrote:
Aside from the starvation caused by improper distribution of food by corrupt governments and organizations, hunger is one of the world's easier problems to solve and is being solved at an incredible pace.
These are the other simplest of world problems to solve.
1. Drinkable water (water desalinization)
2. Electrical energy (nuclear power)
3. Fuel (alchemy of garbage)
4. AIDS, Parkinson's disease, etc. (stem cell research)
5. Heart attacks, obesity (any type of exercise)
6. Cancer (we stop smoking cigs, sunscreen, caffeine, orgasms)
No, it's highly unlikely that the cure for AIDS will come from stem cells. Ditto that for cancer. But I'll address that with my answers for your other problems.
Now, onto your other problems:
1- Drinking water. Desalinization of water is not the answer, as there is amble fresh water for the people of the world. The problem is the sanitation of that fresh water. People often have no access (or the price of access is not one they can afford) to clean water, but access to sanitary water sources is the problem. Luckily a recent invention by an Indian professor working at Cal Tech (I think Tech, but definitely a state university in California) that sterilizes water using UV light seems to have that problem on the fast track to solution. It's a relatively simple and inexpensive process, requiring only one technician (training is supposedly very easy) to run a plant that can provide ample clean drinking water for hundreds of people a year at a cost to those people of only a few cents a year. The plants/systems are small and easy to build, making them ideal for rural villages, too. However, like with the food crisis, profiteering from water may still prevent it from reaching some people. This isn't just by warlords and corrupt governments (though they definitely do it plenty), but also by private enterprise. Private water management is big business with companies netting billions of dollars by selling water to a predicted 2/3rds of the world within the next decade. With water management rights being sold to corporations, it will be up to CEOs to decide whether or not to implement this new sterilization technique and how much to charge for the water made from it.
2 and 3- These are basically the same thing. Electricity is just one form of fuel consumption. What I believe is the best solution to this Lone got right months ago in the "Earth Day" thread. That solution is biofuel, more specifically a form of crude oil harvested from algae. Algae (the species high in lipid content) can yield 10,000 gallons of oil per acre (that number may go to 15,000 or higher with current genetic engineering increasing the % of oil of certain species). That 322.5 barrels of oil per acre of algae. Right now the US consumes about 18,000,000 barrels of oil per day. That equals roughly 6.6 billion barrels per year. That means it would require about 31800 square miles of algae farmland to provide oil for the entire country. That may sound like a lot. but it's only .84% of US land of which 40.8% is already used for agriculture. And the land doesn't have to be fertile. The algae will be grown in shallow pools (of fresh or salt water), so all you need is relatively flat land with access to sunlight. Currently the US is leading research in this field and top researchers believe a competitively priced oil will be on the market in about 10 years (more conservative predictions still say in the next 20), long before current known reserves are dry. The oil will also be carbon neutral as every atom put into the atmosphere from combustion will have been fixed by the algae from carbon dioxide. Finally, this can also provide a huge economic boost by not only becoming oil independent (saving the US 1.35 billion dollars a day in foreign oil costs), but by being able to actually export oil to other countries and profit from alternative energy.
4- Aids is caused by an extremely easily transmissible virus with a very high mutation rate (HIV). There's virtually no chance of us ever eradicating HIV (we can count fully eradicated viruses on one hand), but we've been making great progress in slowing its progression to AIDS (AutoImmune Deficiency Syndrome). In time, it's likely we'll be able to delay the onset of AIDS for decades in the majority people with HIV. As with all new therapies it will be highly expensive at first, but, like every medical regime, cost will gradually decrease. I think that this is a realistic goal within the next 50 years. As for slowing HIV transmission, that's a hell of a problem. In poor (and more importantly poorly educated) areas safe sex practices are rare. This isn't due to a lack of condoms (the UN and Peace Corps supply plenty of them), but often a lack of a real education on the issue. Cultural beliefs also stand as a huge barrier as some intensely ignorant and superstitious people in Africa believe having sex with a virgin will cure their AIDS/HIV, and those men end up raping young girls and further spreading the disease. Most people in these areas will also be unlikely to be able to afford the better treatments that prevent HIV from causing AIDS, making it a less lethal endemic disease (highly prevalent in only certain areas) rather than a highly deadly epidemic/pandemic disease. It may not be a perfect solution, but it is definitely huge progress.
As for Parkinson's and other neurodegenerative diseases (like Alzheimer's, for instance), that's probably gonna be awhile. It's only in the last couple of decades that we've really begun to image the brain well and further understand the processes of nueropathology. While stem cells do provide some of the most hope for neurological disorders, results are still a long way off (hate to get political, Lone, but you can pretty much blame the Bush administration for an 8 year near halt to stem cell research). We'll have to wait several years with new stem cell regulation in effect to see what progress we're capable of and really know what's possible over the next several decades.
5- This is a probably the toughest one for two reasons- First, obesity (which is essentially the leading cause of "early" cardiac death) is rising. Second, if you outlive all other diseases you're heart will eventually give out, so if you eradicate early cardiac death and cancer (which I'll get to nest) the number one killer will still be heart disease. As for early heart disease, caused primarily by being inactive, overweight, and, on top of just the weight they provide, consumption of foods high in fat and salt, it ain't like we're not trying. We have drugs to inhibit the absorption of fats and sugars from the intestine (often not used by patients because they cause gas, cramping, and diarrhea), and we have surgeries that shrink you're stomach to the size of an egg (which is a last resort because obesity greatly increases the danger of surgery), but even if we did have a way to make people less fat we still couldn't make a pill to make them less lazy and get up and exercise. Bottom line, to cure the "obesity epidemic" and its consequences it looks like you'll actually have to convince people to eat well and exercise, and that's much harder than medical engineering.
6- What currently shows promise in cancer is figuring out how to turn the bodies immune system against successful tumors. I say "successful tumors" because proliferations of mutated cells (AKA tumors) happen fairly regularly (in you life you will probably have several of them), but our immune system recognize these cells as "foreign/bad" because of the chemicals (glycoproteins I think) they express on their cell surfaces and destroys them. "Successful tumors" mutate in a way that makes them recognized as "foreign/benign" by our immune system and ignored. If we could figure out exactly how successful tumors mask themselves from our immune system and then reactivate it against them, our bodies would cure cancer themselves.
Done. Not everything solved, but most stuff (at least unless people block progress for the sake of personal gain, which many probably will). Still, given the current picture of the world as a whole and its current progress in almost all fields, it's a hell of hard time to be pessimistic.
On a side note, I noticed that the environment wasn't mentioned. Naturally I know Lone seconds you on that omission, it is what seems to me to be the world's largest problem that we don't have any real, significant solution to. You don't have to believe me, but we're doing things to the earth that we aren't going to be able to take back. Lowering emissions and taking other steps to lessen our constant insult to it (at least in modern countries) is certainly a step in the right direction, but a lot of those efforts will simply be offset as developing countries increase in their own emissions and pollution. Plus their are serious threats that will manifest over the next several decades that are being ignored now, such as the accelerated and unsustainable rate of topsoil depletion I already spoke of. We've also completely messed with the cycles of elements like phosphorous, which is not something you can simply consider infinite in today's world. Because of the density of life we've managed to create in cities and in the agriculture of plants and animals, we've completely thrown off the balance of the very complex machine that is the world. There have, of course, been changes in the past, but nothing close to this rate of change (post Industrial Revolution) according to ice core samples that provide 175,000 years of climate data (I know you say the Earth's 6000 years old Lone, so just ignore this if you're still reading). I'm just saying, we're really messing with the cogs in a very complex clock.
P.S.- This was way to damn long to proofread, so sorry for any grammar/spelling mistakes.
If the world is several billion years old instead of merely six or seven thousand, then the idea that humanity could have something resembling a lasting impact is even more laughable.
Or as someone observed once... Have you ever noticed that all the major people out to "save the environment" have something to gain by putting other people into that panic? Financially, as well as politically. _________________ The pen is mightier than the sword
But the sword is so much harder to silence than the pen.
What separates a human being from a fertilized egg? When does it stop being a "thing" and start being a "person?"
True that. Although it is superstition getting in the way of science, it's also a matter of morality which is and should be taken much more seriously.
Me? I'll just put it out there that I'm wasting semen every day. I would love to save people's lives with my little swimmers. It would bring me great pride. The process of reassignment of stem cells, and that such a transformation is even possible, maybe suggests this is God's or the universes plan from the start. It's just too perfect. I don't classify much of a distinction between creating lives and saving lives. They're both the same to me. Is that so wrong?
mstice wrote:
No, it's highly unlikely that the cure for AIDS will come from stem cells. Ditto that for cancer. But I'll address that with my answers for your other problems.
5- This is a probably the toughest one for two reasons- First, obesity (which is essentially the leading cause of "early" cardiac death) is rising. Second, if you outlive all other diseases you're heart will eventually give out, so if you eradicate early cardiac death and cancer (which I'll get to nest) the number one killer will still be heart disease. As for early heart disease, caused primarily by being inactive, overweight, and, on top of just the weight they provide, consumption of foods high in fat and salt, it ain't like we're not trying. We have drugs to inhibit the absorption of fats and sugars from the intestine (often not used by patients because they cause gas, cramping, and diarrhea), and we have surgeries that shrink you're stomach to the size of an egg (which is a last resort because obesity greatly increases the danger of surgery), but even if we did have a way to make people less fat we still couldn't make a pill to make them less lazy and get up and exercise. Bottom line, to cure the "obesity epidemic" and its consequences it looks like you'll actually have to convince people to eat well and exercise, and that's much harder than medical engineering.
I don't like the word 'heart disease'. A heart attack is not a disease, and heart failure is not a disease. It's like saying anorexia or alcoholism is a disease. It's just an excuse not to change one's lifestyle.
All staticians agree that the end of the world will start with pressure put on America for out resources. America might prefer to go to war than to share. But if things go the way I hope them to, us giving away our food will be the best thing that happens to all of us. Saving children from death and healthier Americans.
Quote:
6- What currently shows promise in cancer is figuring out how to turn the bodies immune system against successful tumors. I say "successful tumors" because proliferations of mutated cells (AKA tumors) happen fairly regularly (in you life you will probably have several of them), but our immune system recognize these cells as "foreign/bad" because of the chemicals (glycoproteins I think) they express on their cell surfaces and destroys them. "Successful tumors" mutate in a way that makes them recognized as "foreign/benign" by our immune system and ignored. If we could figure out exactly how successful tumors mask themselves from our immune system and then reactivate it against them, our bodies would cure cancer themselves.
I'm going to have to go with Roy Masters in saying we get cancer because we don't have mind/body connections (well, u guys don't ). But theoretical crap aside, cancer has been cured a while ago. It involves injecting a tumor with a liquid metal and using magnatism to destoy it. A guy solved cancer in his own garage. Saw it on 60 minutes.
Lonewolf wrote:
If the world is several billion years old instead of merely six or seven thousand, then the idea that humanity could have something resembling a lasting impact is even more laughable.
Yo man, I don't get you. Haven't you ever heard of cavemen? Dinosaurs? Carbon dating? Where have you been? We're learning new stuff every century.
The process of reassignment of stem cells, and that such a transformation is even possible, maybe suggests this is God's or the universes plan from the start.
Remember: Just because you can does not mean you should. It's possible to break down a human being's conciousness and make him become subservient, believing he is inferior to you just because of the color of his skin. Your logic suggests this was God's universal plan from the start.
(Hint: it wasn't.)
Quote:
Yo man, I don't get you. Haven't you ever heard of cavemen? Dinosaurs? Carbon dating? Where have you been? We're learning new stuff every century.
An entirely different discussion, but I'll give you a quick reminder.
Cavemen = men who decided to live in caves, instead of tents.(Look it up. Should be either shortly after The Fall.)
Dinosaurs = perfectly normal animals, and you wouldn't record perfectly normal animals in a political historic record. The fact that dogs and cats aren't recorded in the history of the Civil War obviously means they didn't exist, right?
Carbon dating = no good for anything beyond 50,000 years, because the decay is such that at that point, C14 amounts are too small to be measured by human means. Any dates beyond 50,000 years ago are blatant lies. Additionally, carbon dating is about as accurate as judging distances by tossing rocks at something and counting how long it takes the rock to fall. There's a massive amount of calibration required, and the date you arrive at is determined mostly by the date you're aiming for. _________________ The pen is mightier than the sword
But the sword is so much harder to silence than the pen.
OK, I might be wrong about stem cells being used in AIDS treatment, but any doctor or researcher will tell you that a single case isn't a lot to get excited about. Like I said, though, your example cured his AIDS, not his HIV, which is what I said was likely to happen. I saw that there was one study where HIV was somehow eliminated from a patient with stem cell therapy, but that it's never been explained or replicated.
mangaddict_reborn wrote:
I don't like the word 'heart disease'. A heart attack is not a disease, and heart failure is not a disease. It's like saying anorexia or alcoholism is a disease. It's just an excuse not to change one's lifestyle.
Disease is defined as, "a condition of the living animal or plant body or of one of its parts that impairs normal functioning and is typically manifested by distinguishing signs and symptoms." Doctors aren't here to judge their patients and how they got to where they are (although in reality they definitely do); they're here to treat disease in everyone and treat each patient equally. I can tell you, though, that the first thing we tell people with diseases caused by unhealthy lifestyles is that they need to change the way they live. After they ignore that, drugs come into play.
Oh, and on a personal note, I'm all for deaths caused by bad lifestyle choices as long as the course is quick and treatment is cheap. The world population is sky-rocketing, and people that take life for granted by mistreating it so badly dying at a high rate seems like the best way to curb the climb a little.
Also, psychiatric diseases (like anorexia and alcoholism) are real diseases too. They result from an abnormally functioning brain, and current testing is rapidly revealing just how differently the brains of people with psychiatric diseases work compared to healthy brains (areas of hypo/hyperactivity, neurotransmitter excess/shortage). That's why I'm looking into neuropsychiatry, where doctors aim to correct the pathology of the unhealthy brain rather than just treat the symptoms it manifests.
Anyway, just because you don't like how a disease is caused or works, that doesn't make it not a disease.
mangaddict_reborn wrote:
All staticians agree that the end of the world will start with pressure put on America for out resources. America might prefer to go to war than to share. But if things go the way I hope them to, us giving away our food will be the best thing that happens to all of us. Saving children from death and healthier Americans.
The resources of wealthy countries are being gradually redistributed as we speak. Every developing nation that is growing its GDP is an example of growing redistribution, it's just in the form of money which (under the current economical system) can represent any resource in the world. In a century or two if we actually have managed to deplete resources and screw up the environment enough (and at our current rate we will), then, yeah, we will have problems. In that case, it probably will end up with America (perhaps allied with Canada who has ample natural resources) versus all comers. Luckily American military spending is roughly equivalent to that of the rest of the world combined. Go USA!
mangaddict_reborn wrote:
I'm going to have to go with Roy Masters in saying we get cancer because we don't have mind/body connections (well, u guys don't ). But theoretical crap aside, cancer has been cured a while ago. It involves injecting a tumor with a liquid metal and using magnatism to destoy it. A guy solved cancer in his own garage. Saw it on 60 minutes.
Yeah. It's cured. Hooray. Listen, cancer isn't that simple. It's not like, "Oh, a tumor. Excise it or destroy it and you're cured." Our cure rates, time spent relapse free, and overall morbidity and mortality have been steadily improving and will continue to do so, but even with the solution I spoke of before, it won't eradicate cancer entirely and people will still die from it. Plus, don't forget that if you eradicated all forms of cancer you would only extend the average life expectancy by less than 3 years. http://www.examiner.com/x-16114-Rochester-Cancer-Examiner~y2009m7d14-A-world-without-cancer-the-effect-of-a-cure-upon-the-national-life-expectancy
Joined: Dec 12, 2008 Posts: 1004 Location: between reality and lies
Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:20 pm Post subject: Re: World Hunger and discussion of the human body
mangaddict_reborn wrote:
I was eating pizza and watching The Office with my roommate. It was that hour long special when Jim and Pam got engaged. Adorable right? Well anyway, that commerical came on. It was the one with that woman singing and collecting money. Anyway, the commercial said that every six seconds, a child dies of hunger. You can imagine, the pizza began tasting like blood and I lost my appetite. And much to my annoyance, I began counting every six seconds for the rest of the night.
What exactly are we doing about this? Paying our taxes? Puh-leeze. Prayers? Prayers are changing the world as much as letters to Santa Clause. Like the monster under our beds, we think ignoring it makes it go away. Or maybe we think those children are all going to heaven or being reincarnated anyway. But that's kinda the same as saying life has no value. Why am I blabbing anyway? What's my solution to world hunger? Well, keep reading.
I live for fitness, and I know everything there is to know about the human body. I know that the average man can live without food for 30-40 days. Amazing, isn't it? However, the average American rate of consuption is about 3500 calories per human. I know that America, by itself, consumes 4 times more meat than the rest of the world combined, and 10 times more grain (by product). Basically, I can summarize the average American in two ways: A fat person who eats too much, and an athelete who eats too much.
I however, consume about 1000-1200 calories a day, and have been for almost two months. I am also 170 pounds of muscle and at 7% body fat. According to caloric calculations, I should be consuming about three times as many calories to "maintain" my current body weight. Yet I am only getting bigger and stronger and can even do laundry with my abs. Why? Because I understand nutrition and metabolism, and eat a small snack every two hours instead of meals. I'm talking, a protein bar, or a handful of chex mix, or even broccoli as a meal. And just when you don't think I can get any weirder, watermelon or cherries is like ice cream to me. I only eat heavy carbs, such as pizza or a hamburger 30 minutes before I work out. The way I work out now is with compound exercises rather than isolation exercises. This way, I can work out for 10 minutes, 3 times a week and get as good results or better than the average gym machine retard who works out 45 minutes, 4-6 times a week. And these people have to eat so much more, and I do not. They have to do cardio, and I do not. Because of lifestyle choices I have made, I am healthy and strong while eating about a third of what I "need to". I am eating as much as a little girl and I am 170 POUNDS.
An old principle goes, "As long as the rich exist, so will the poor". The same goes for everyone as we indulge in food that we don't need or deserve. We have nuclear power plants, the key to unlimited energy. We have desalination plants, the key to unlimited water. However, right now we are producing as much food as we can and there is no scientific short cut, as of yet. America is destroying the world. As long as things continue the way they are, more people will die. It's on all our heads.
Btw, this is an essay I'm working on for college! Feedback?
Hello my workout pal^^ nice to see your still up to your rad-ness:)
Dang you are 170?? i'm like 150 or something and i been trying to get there =.= dang
Personally, I think it's hilarious that I've now got the two atheists arguing over morality. Doubly so that Mangaaddict is trying to teach mstice about medical tech. I've often said Mangaaddict has delusions of intellectual deity. I think this proves it pretty well.
Seriously, boy, shut up and listen for a minute. You may learn something.
Not that I'd expect you to, just saying, you might. _________________ The pen is mightier than the sword
But the sword is so much harder to silence than the pen.
Joined: Apr 19, 2007 Posts: 678 Location: Currently in the Land of Anime and Manga
Posted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:46 pm Post subject:
LoneWolf325 wrote:
Personally, I think it's hilarious that I've now got the two atheists arguing over morality. Doubly so that Mangaaddict is trying to teach mstice about medical tech. I've often said Mangaaddict has delusions of intellectual deity. I think this proves it pretty well.
Seriously, boy, shut up and listen for a minute. You may learn something.
Not that I'd expect you to, just saying, you might.
I'm not an atheist; I'm an agnostic. As much as religious people want to lump all nonreligious people into the same group, an agnostic and an atheist have less in common than a Hindu and a Christian. We've been through this before, Lone. And two people who aren't religious can have just as much reason to argue as people who are religious. Catholics disagree with Protestants, Shiites disagree with Sunnis, and I disagree with Addict. He's also disagreeing with me in areas where I have a hell of a lot more education than anyone else at A-S (in science and medicine), so it's a little annoying- like a bee coming after a lion.
Also, and I don't intend to really debate this point too much with you because it's so blatantly obvious, dinosaurs would be mentioned in written accounts because of how big of an impact they would have on man. You might not write about a dog because it isn't that important in your life, but you sure as hell would mention a 3 ton reptile that tries to eat you. Also, you do see accounts of dogs and cats in ancient texts, as well as cows, goats, fish, lions, birds, cicadas, grasshoppers, and just about every kind of animal except dinosaurs. The absence is tremendously conspicuous.
He's also disagreeing with me in areas where I have a hell of a lot more education than anyone else at A-S (in science and medicine), so it's a little annoying- like a bee coming after a lion.
That's what I said. If he'd shut up for a moment and listen, instead of deciding that he and only he knows the truth about all things, he may start grasping articles of knowledge that have otherwise always escaped him.
Like why you and I think he's an idiot.
As for dinosaurs in the Bible...
1: they are mentioned, in the book of Job particularly, and I think in one or two other spots, and
2: I note a conspicuous absence of alligators in Civil War accounts. Big lizard, will try to eat you, lives right around where some of the battles would have taken place. The absence of a creature in an account set where and when such a creature should exist does not invalidate that account, it only indicates the creature itself had little to do with the account. _________________ The pen is mightier than the sword
But the sword is so much harder to silence than the pen.
Joined: Apr 19, 2007 Posts: 678 Location: Currently in the Land of Anime and Manga
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:59 pm Post subject:
LoneWolf325 wrote:
1: they are mentioned, in the book of Job particularly, and I think in one or two other spots, and
2: I note a conspicuous absence of alligators in Civil War accounts. Big lizard, will try to eat you, lives right around where some of the battles would have taken place. The absence of a creature in an account set where and when such a creature should exist does not invalidate that account, it only indicates the creature itself had little to do with the account.
Yes, lots of ancient texts briefly mention a dinosaur like creature in some grossly inaccurate way, which to me simply indicates a poor attempt at explaining fossils that obviously belonged to some huge reptile. That's probably how stories of dragons first came about. We know dragons aren't real, but it makes sense that ancient people who came across a fossilized dinosaur head would have assumed it belonged to some incredible creature like that. And a lot of ancient civilizations that would have shared territory with dinosaurs according to fossil distribution never mention them at all in their writings.
As for your Civil War argument, alligators had already been described plenty before then. If there were no Native American accounts of alligators or accounts from early settlers it would have been a big deal, but few Civil War accounts is right up there with me never having written about alligators when I've seen plenty in my time in south Georgia and Florida. Also, alligators very seldom attack people, especially full grown men. Unless soldiers were camping in the middle a swamp they probably had very little conflict with them. Crocodiles, on the other hand, actually eat people fairly regularly and I don't think you'll find any civilization that shares habitat with them that doesn't talk about them at great length. African cultures, Indian cultures, and Aboriginal cultures that are in croc territory talk about them a ton.
Substitute "alligator" or "crocodile" in that second paragraph of yours with a given carnivorous dinosaur of your choosing, and you've got roughly my opinion on the subject. _________________ The pen is mightier than the sword
But the sword is so much harder to silence than the pen.
Joined: Apr 19, 2007 Posts: 678 Location: Currently in the Land of Anime and Manga
Posted: Wed Nov 11, 2009 10:26 pm Post subject:
LoneWolf325 wrote:
Substitute "alligator" or "crocodile" in that second paragraph of yours with a given carnivorous dinosaur of your choosing, and you've got roughly my opinion on the subject.
There's a book by a noted Harvard psychologist called Stumbling on Happiness that you should check out, specifically the section titled Rationalization. I think that greatly helps explain how you manage to hold onto your opinions and dismiss all arguments against them despite not having a scientific or logical leg to stand on.
All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3Next
Page 2 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All images and comments are property of their respective owners, all the rest � 2002 by Anime-Source.com.
You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php.
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
). But theoretical crap aside, cancer has been cured a while ago. It involves injecting a tumor with a liquid metal and using magnatism to destoy it. A guy solved cancer in his own garage. Saw it on 60 minutes. 
