The Science Thread

Originally Posted by dteowner
Well, FWIW, here's my chain of thought…

If we accept that there are a lot more loons out there these days (as in, people with serious mental/behavioral pathology, not just people with stupid opinions), there should be some sort of cause. So, in traditional engineering fashion, I ask, "What's changed?" Well, all this wave energy we're throwing into the atmosphere is new and getting worse all the time. What is radiation poisoning but exposure to massive amounts of wave energy? So, are we basically slowly screwing up our brains with all the signals running around the air?

I'm not really looking for a tinfoil hat moment here, nor am I looking for an award because I'm sure this isn't an original thought. The fact that there hasn't been an ungodly uproar tells me that someone has already determined that all the shit we're putting in the air is just noise in the system energy-wise, but I'm wondering if someone here might have some genuine insight just because I'm curious.

It probably does have an effect, but like many things is just one of many factors.

I don't have a real answer for you though.

My theory is in the past they we more isolated, and less visible, but still there in the same numbers. Nowadays any crackpot can make a storm on the internet, and there's lots of stormchasers out there looking for validation of their crazy beliefs, which amplifies the dissemination of nonsense, especially if it helps to serve the interests of the rich and powerful.

Originally Posted by Ursusdraconis
Why would you want to have a floating lightbulb??

Well, it's not just about the lightbulb. Not the way I see it, anyways.
It is more about transmitting energy wirelessly.
It is indeed the great Tesla's vision to achieve something like that.
And himself achieved back in the day.
So, even if this is a small step, but at least we have something that can bring us closer to a day when we all have our own energy. Which we should have already since energy is all around us. And it should be free for all.
If you have no idea what I am talking about, just look up free energy or renuwable energy. I am sure you can find some great info(there is tons of it) if you are interested.

I just came across an interesting scientific study regarding online trolls : https://www.academia.edu/6016545/Tro…nt_to_have_fun

It shows a strong correlation between sadism & trolling.

Highly interesting ! Everyone please read at least the abstract !

Best quote from it :

"Sadists just want to have fun - and the internet is their playground !"

Originally Posted by Black Rune
Well, it's not just about the lightbulb. Not the way I see it, anyways.
It is more about transmitting energy wirelessly.
It is indeed the great Tesla's vision to achieve something like that.
And himself achieved back in the day.
So, even if this is a small step, but at least we have something that can bring us closer to a day when we all have our own energy. Which we should have already since energy is all around us. And it should be free for all.
If you have no idea what I am talking about, just look up free energy or renuwable energy. I am sure you can find some great info(there is tons of it) if you are interested.

Wireless energy transmission is not new (microwave, wireless chargers..) and not free. You still have to have a powersource.

But still, i agree a floating bulb looks cool

R.I.P. Messenger. March, 2004 - April, 2015.

After running out of fuel, the death of this spacecraft in orbit around Mercury was inevitable. But what a life it had!

"The front side of the sunshade routinely experience[d] temperatures in excess of 300 degrees Celsius (570 degrees Fahrenheit), whereas the majority of components in its shadow routinely operate[d] near room temperature (20 degrees Celsius or 68 degrees Fahrenheit)"

It found ice on Mercury. Pretty cool!

Originally Posted by dteowner
Well, FWIW, here's my chain of thought…

If we accept that there are a lot more loons out there these days (as in, people with serious mental/behavioral pathology, not just people with stupid opinions), there should be some sort of cause. So, in traditional engineering fashion, I ask, "What's changed?" Well, all this wave energy we're throwing into the atmosphere is new and getting worse all the time. What is radiation poisoning but exposure to massive amounts of wave energy? So, are we basically slowly screwing up our brains with all the signals running around the air?

I'm not really looking for a tinfoil hat moment here, nor am I looking for an award because I'm sure this isn't an original thought. The fact that there hasn't been an ungodly uproar tells me that someone has already determined that all the shit we're putting in the air is just noise in the system energy-wise, but I'm wondering if someone here might have some genuine insight just because I'm curious.

As you mentioned, there's a lot of electromagnetic radiation in nature, and there's no convincing evidence (yet) that the man-made contribution is a risk. I wouldn't close the book on the idea, though.

In terms of increased numbers of loons, in many ways the evidence points to the contrary. If anything, there is a better correlation between the removal of lead from gasoline, and a reduction in violent crime. There's no question that the level of lead exposure was potentially clinically significant. In all likelihood, we've had a slight net improvement in the degree to which we're frying our brains.

Good info. Thanks, Ripper.

But we could be seeing the long term effects of people frying their brains in the 60s and 70s… :/

Originally Posted by Thrasher
But we could be seeing the long term effects of people frying their brains in the 60s and 70s… :/

That's possibly true, but I believe the amount of drug abuse in that era is probably exaggerated by the popular image (if you can remember it, you weren't there, and all that jazz.) It's probably been far worse in recent times, though hard drug use seems to be on a downward trend in most places.

It's one reason why I think spending the money on drug treatment rather than the criminal justice system is probably a good idea - the kids aren't taking less heroin because they can't source it, that just have enough information to think, "Screw that!"

Originally Posted by Ripper
As you mentioned, there's a lot of electromagnetic radiation in nature, and there's no convincing evidence (yet) that the man-made contribution is a risk. I wouldn't close the book on the idea, though.

In terms of increased numbers of loons, in many ways the evidence points to the contrary. If anything, there is a better correlation between the removal of lead from gasoline, and a reduction in violent crime. There's no question that the level of lead exposure was potentially clinically significant. In all likelihood, we've had a slight net improvement in the degree to which we're frying our brains.

Yeah the leaded gasoline thing is pretty interesting. Also the story behind it and depravity of some of the interests behind it is horrific.



*note, offset related to latency period from exposure.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27067615

Yes, the story of Clair Patterson (also the scientist who calculated the age of the Earth), his battle against tetraethyllead, and the ruthless campaign of the petrochemical companies, is extraordinary.

Interesting. I hadn't heard that before. Thanks! I wonder about correlation vs causation though.

Originally Posted by Thrasher
I wonder about correlation vs causation though

Absolutely Thrasher, that was my thought as well!

Spurious correlations http://www.tylervigen.com/

Originally Posted by zahratustra
Absolutely Thrasher, that was my thought as well!

Spurious correlations http://www.tylervigen.com/

Those are pretty funny - the book How to Lie With Statistics is a classic.

But the leaded-petrol/crime argument has much better direct, supporting evidence, such that it is taken seriously. This part of the article on Tetraethyllead lays it out pretty well. For example, we know that low-level exposure is linked to lowered IQ and aggressive behaviour, and we know that blood levels have dropped from well above the significant level of poisoning to well below.

Well, I've been reading far too much Wikipedia articles today - and now I present to you what I found most interesting of them, personally …

- Stones and their symbols of the Picts

- The so-called Pictish beast

- Celtic languages - an overview

- Cross-language international onomatopoeias ("words which sound like sounds" )

- The ancient Coligny Calendar

- An odd tale : The Ring of Silvianus

The 'Everything' Formula - Numberphile

I was just reading an Wikipedia article on the "Dark Triad" : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_triad

There, I stumbled upon this section, which completely proves what I had suspected earlier :

As mating strategy

It has been suggested that the dark triad traits appear to predispose individuals to short-term rewards and relationships over long-term rewards and benefits. Although advanced societies attempt to promote long-term thinking (environmental protection, saving money for retirement), there are reproductive benefits for the individual for thinking and acting on a shorter time-course. Also, men exhibiting these traits appear to be more successful at generating sexual attraction in women.[37][38]

Consistent with this perspective, studies have suggested that on average, those who exhibit the dark triad of personality traits have an accelerated mating strategy, reporting more sex partners, more favorable attitudes towards casual sex,[37] lowered standards in their short-term mates,[39] a tendency to steal or poach mates from others,[40] more risk-taking in the form of substance abuse,[41] a tendency to prefer immediate but smaller amounts of money over delayed but larger amounts of money,[42] limited self-control and greater incidence of ADHD symptoms[43] and a pragmatic and game-playing love style.[44] These traits have been identified as part of a fast life strategy that appears to be enacted by an exploitative, opportunistic, and protean approach to life in general[45] and at work.[46]

The evidence is mixed regarding the exact link between the dark triad and reproductive success. For example, there is a lack of empirical evidence for reproductive success in the case of psychopathy.[10] Additionally, these traits are not universally short-term-oriented[47] nor are they all impulsive.[48] Furthermore, much of the research reported pertaining to the dark triad cited in the above paragraph is based on statistical procedures that assume the dark triad are a single construct, in spite of genetic[49] and meta-analytic evidence to the contrary.[50]

Immaculate sawfish conception.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-32958033