201–210 of 241 posts
I would say, in no particular order: * the fact that many of the dinosaurs had feathers * myriad of exoplanets * water on Mars (and many other new data on the planet) * Higg's boson (confirmed to 99.999% certainty) * Neanderthal genes present in modern humans * new ancient Mayan cities That's it from me for starters, hopefully others will join in.
And the fact that chickens are actually coming from Dinosaurs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "low costs" of bitcoin are a myth. Bitcoin transactions are extremely expensive, both financially and ecologically, it's just that those costs are currently subsidized by block rewards to miners instead of paid by consumers/end-users. If bitcoin were ever to be widely adopted, the high fees would have to be passed on to users: http://www.coindesk.com/new-study-low-bitcoin-transaction-fe... At some level, this bas…
Just curious, what do you think of Stellar's consensus system? https://medium.com/a-stellar-journey/on-worldwide-consensus-...
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/109880240641/sciences-biggest-f...
* Hackerspaces
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why is Monsanto pursuing GMO? What problem are they really trying to solve? It's not a problem of food supply. It's a problem of getting greater control and higher profits out of a saturated market. What's good for a single business is often not good for the general public.
Friend, a question if I may. Are you reading the comments of those who respond to and attempt to engage with you with an open and generous mind?
Years of study have convinced me that the general train of thought expressed here is wrong - and have given me a theory for a reason that so many smart people are wrong about it. The wrong idea, imho, is the idea that hunger comes from insufficient food production, and that exotic technology (GMO) will solve the production problem, thus ending hunger. I think this is wrong on both counts.
The reason so many people here believe something I find obviously wrong is because of basic technofetishism. We love "science". We love exotic technology. And we want to believe exotic technology can make the world better, because it so often has. So people are starting by jumping to a conclusion (GMO is good, because science!), and working backwards to a problem they imagine it can solve (hunger). But that's not critical thinking. That's wishful thinking.
Problems first. Figure out what the actual problems are, and why we have them. Apply the Five Whys.
A VERY specific request, no inventions, just things found and cataloged aka discovered. http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/systems/ Also see pretty much every space probe of the "last few years". Pity you couldn't wait another month for the Pluto flyby, unless it completely fails there will be plenty to talk about. I would imagine the biological sciences could list all kinds of interesting, possibly useful, critte…
We've gone from believing planets are extremely rare to knowing planets are relatively common. Now that planets are known to be common, does that mean life is common? What will that do to the cultures that, in effect, support themselves on the belief that humans and the earth are unique?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Friend, a question if I may. Are you reading the comments of those who respond to and attempt to engage with you with an open and generous mind?
I am listening - but I'm also educating. "Open and generous" covers both sides. I've been studying this issue for a long time - I first got involved with hunger issues when I was a kid, and later as a young adult during the Ethiopian famine. Years of study have convinced me that the general train of thought expressed here is wrong - and have given me a theory for a reason that so many smart people are wrong about it.…
I am disquieted that someone who professes to care as deeply as you seems to have failed to grasp the positions of those with whom they disagree. You have caricatured those who disagree with you as technofetishists who believe MORE PRODUCTION solves all things, incapable of seeing beyond what might be done with the newest technotoy. Whereas you know better and emerge to enlighten the benighted.
I have seen this pattern before. It seems to repeatedly emerge in activists of all stripes. I wish you the best of luck.
A VERY specific request, no inventions, just things found and cataloged aka discovered. http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/systems/ Also see pretty much every space probe of the "last few years". Pity you couldn't wait another month for the Pluto flyby, unless it completely fails there will be plenty to talk about. I would imagine the biological sciences could list all kinds of interesting, possibly useful, critte…
I think the discovery of exoplanets will have far reaching cultural implications. We've gone from believing planets are extremely rare to knowing planets are relatively common. Now that planets are known to be common, does that mean life is common? What will that do to the cultures that, in effect, support themselves on the belief that humans and the earth are unique?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would first want to see people accept GMO crops. Then I'll be willing to think of people going to the doctor to change their eye color.
The problem with GMO is that it's basically a vendor lock-in scheme for agribusiness giants. It's not a good engineering solution to the real food problems we face. Of course, the DONT EAT THE SCIENCE OR IT WILL GIVE YOU THE CANCER political nonsense is wrong. That doesn't let GMO off the hook, though. The problem it attempts to solve, on the surface, is increasing the productivity of monocropping. But productivity i…