Posts by ihunt

15

Antimatter not so different after all ... poor old Freddy wrong again,another light dims in the JW heavens.

by fulltimestudent in

jw
friends

back in the years after ww2, newly discovered antimatter was perceived as destroying ordinary matter, so in one of old freddy's insane nightmares (forget which book, but it was the early 1950's) he envisioned yhwh-jesus hurling antimatter at the hated humans who refused to submit to him, and destroying their bodies bit by bit.. now, his vision dims:.

antimatter not so different after all.

scientists help make first measurement of antiproton attraction.

ihunt

To clarify, the linked article does not claim that antimatter and matter do not annihilate one another (in fact, it reinforces such an idea). What it does claim is that the forces between antimatter's elementary particles, in this case antiprotons, are very simar to the forces between normal matter particles (protons). This leads to questions about the relative abundance of matter and antimatter in our universe, namely, why there is so much matter and (apparently) so little antimatter.

EDIT

This has already been clarified, sorry for the repost

40

Heroes

by done4good in

jw
friends

in jw land having such was verboten.

who are some of yours and why?.

1. nikola tesla - greatest inventor ever, and the only one i know of who was a true scientist as well.. 2. elon musk - there is a reason he chose the great inventor's name for his masterpiece work...also has a serious pair.... 3. jim morrison - brilliant and mad poet.. 4. mike krzyzewski - the epitome of success.. 5. maya angelou - brilliant humanistic poet and writer.. 6. albert einstein - do i actually have to qualify this?.

ihunt

To name a few, (and my favorite work from them)

1) Leohnard Euler - Euler's identity

2) Albert Camus - Exile and the Kingdom

3) Friedrich Nietzsche - The Antichrist

4) John von Neumann - First Draft

5) Paul Dirac - Dirac Equation

6) linus Torvalds - Linux

7) Carl Guass - Modern mathmatics, matrix algebra

8) Linus Pauling - bonding theory

9) Dante Alighieri - The Divine Commedy

10) Lou Reed - The VU

42

Why are GMO's bad?

by cappytan in

jw
friends

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh4bi60alzu.

first person to say, "this scishow episode is a monsanto conspiracy," is a rotten egg..

ihunt

"2. GMO plants do not produce seeds, leaving the farmer with no option except to buy new seed every year."

This is simply not true.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2012/10/18/163034053/top-five-myths-of-genetically-modified-seeds-busted

42

Why are GMO's bad?

by cappytan in

jw
friends

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh4bi60alzu.

first person to say, "this scishow episode is a monsanto conspiracy," is a rotten egg..

ihunt

A good read for anyone interested in the field

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/06/us/food-industry-enlisted-academics-in-gmo-lobbying-war-emails-show.html?_r=0&referer=https://www.google.com/

Sorry if the link is off, im on my cellular

42

Why are GMO's bad?

by cappytan in

jw
friends

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh4bi60alzu.

first person to say, "this scishow episode is a monsanto conspiracy," is a rotten egg..

ihunt

"If they were, for example, to use peanut genes in corn and a consumer has a major allergy to peanuts then that could be a problem."

This isn't necessarily the case. Peanuts have thousands of genes and only a handful of them code the protein that causes allergic reactions.

Beyond that, I see a common misconception cropping up here (no pun intended). Monsanto and other agrochem companies use genetic modification to boost plants metabolism/resistamce to pesticides (currently glycophosphate aka roundup, next rna interference), whereas other companies and projects (such as golden rice, ebola cure) have engineered plants to produce novel or exogenic proteins. The risk of the first is, "what is the effect of heavy pesticide use, both on the plant and the environment?" The risk of the second is, "what are the effects of the consumption of this protein/metabolite?"

Pro GMO, down with monsanto!

10

How many teens stay because they have their eye on someone they hope to marry?

by purrpurr in

jw
friends

i was just watching a documentary film about the amish.

this one girl who left said she didn't leave until her early twenties because as a teen until then she had her eye on one of the boys in the church.

she had a crush on him and hoped to marry him.

ihunt

I would say it also depends on whether you are male or female. I have been told by a professor of mine that there are 3x as many women witnesses from the ages of 18-30 as there are men. Combine that with the fact that jdubs have one of the lowest average annual incomes of all religious groups (something like 30k a year? Sorry, no references, I should be shot...), and you have quite the biased playing field. Oh, so you're a man who is a MS/Elder/good cultee and you make a decent living? Here's 100 single sisters who would all marry you before even meeting you.

6

Cells! Awake

by ihunt in

it's been a while since i've posted, but i've been lurking more and more lately (men never made it to the moon :p).

i recently saw a copy of the august awake magazine entitle cells!

living libraries!

ihunt

It's been a while since I've posted, but I've been lurking more and more lately (men never made it to the moon :P). I recently saw a copy of the August awake magazine entitle Cells! Living Libraries! I was surprised to find this quote in the magazine

“The filament of DNA is information, a message written in a code of chemicals, one chemical for each letter,” wrote evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins. “It is almost too good to be true, but the code turns out to be written in a way that we can understand.”

I find it interesting that the organization is willing to quote such a militant evolutionist. Will any interested ones look into Richard Dawkins? The lack of scientific information is astonishing, and their metaphors are misleading to say the least. It seems to me that they are opening the door for some dangerous questions with articles like this.

For example, consider this-

In 1999, fragments of very ancient pottery with unusual markings, or symbols, were found in Pakistan. The marks still remain undeciphered. Nevertheless, they are considered man-made.
A few years after Watson and Crick discovered the structure of DNA, two physicists proposed searching for coded radio signals from space. Thus began the modern-day search for extraterrestrial intelligence.
You don't need any schooling in logic to see the flaws with that reasoning. They are crumbling...
Ian

40

The mathematical probability of spontaneous order (no designer/creator)

by Fernando in

there seem to be many prerequisites for life as we know it.. to name a few: order, function, compatibility, availability, sustainability, intelligence, consciousness, intuition and so on.. focusing on only one, namely order.. what are the chances of order arising spontaneously, by chance, with no creator/designer?.

i have often pondered this and recently came across a mathematical summary of the big picture:.

if every particle in the known physical universe (10^80 particles), participated in one trillion interactions (10^12 interactions) per second, for the entire 30 billion years of the universe's existence (10^18 seconds), then we would by now have covered only 10^110 permutations.. if you had only 100 components in a container, what are the chances that a blindfolded person could lay them out in order on a table?.

ihunt

You state that there are many prerequisites for life. I would disagree with a number of them, namely consciousness, intelligence, and intuition. All of these are components of advanced systems but certainly are not required for life to begin. A number of your other prerequisites can really be boiled down to the idea of self replicating patterns. Their function and sustainability are a product of their order, not independent attributes. This is the selective factor that determines whether or not something would "live", that is, can it function to reproduce itself. Only those random lifeforms whose intrinsic properties allowed for repetition would continue to exist past the brief frame of time when they happened into existence.

While a fully functional human being may be an impossibly complex system to come across randomly, a short RNA sequence with the ability to self replicate (possibly only a few dozen base pair long) is certainly not.

16

All the changes

by vinman in

are their any newer people here, who recently found out ttatt, who has been disturbed by all the new changes in the organization?

it is turning into something that feels impersonal.

i know change is good.

ihunt

The cart song is quite the piece of propaganda, that was the first JW video that I have ever seen. Is this really what they are giving out as "spiritual food" these days?

17

How To Witness to Jehovah's Witnesses Video

by Perry in

jw
friends

i recently shared my views on how to witness to jehovah's witnesses to a local congregation.

the video link is also below:.

maybe this will help some reach out to loved ones that are still members.. .

ihunt

I can't give an exact time, but somewhere around 40 minutes in he talks about questioning witnesses about the new covenant and the 144,000. I skipped around it and didn't listen to it very thoroughly, but there may be some points towards the end.