AccuTron

Thanks for a good reply.

I haven't had a TV in years, and yes the room is much easier to decorate and actually like. And no I don't miss anything, as you probably guessed. Thus, I haven't actually seen any full episodes of the "woman's program" named "The View." I have followed links to several clips of the show. These clips might be a few years old. I have just researched staffing changes, but that tells me little about how it actually plays. Some of you will be more current. I am not surprised at what I saw. First, red pill, it's a COMMERCIAL program, soap selling, not at all interested in struggles involving integrity, which gets in the way of urge to purchase. There's that nice feminine V in the logo, which has it's appeal, and would look good on the grill of classic autos. Otherwise who cares. In the middle, controllers, seat, is what I call Squishy Gal, whose name I find is Joy Behar. I can imagine this: "Oh Mr. Jesus, that was a nice twenty seconds of hearing your words. Now, lets turn to Mr. Satan for his view. Our audience wants to know!" I presume this is what the show producers want. Give Satan his say, the viewers will stay, and somebody is later going shopping. In my limited samples, there is little chance of anything but claptrap getting thru. I've seen clips of intelligent women guests being cut off from developing the point of the argument, utterly gutting it's value, in order for some ditzy interruption which will guarantee only a level of shallowness. Worse, Whoopi Goldberg, seeming to be the "token spine" can easily spot BS for what it is, and say so. But they keep her on the wing, where she can throw a peanut at the middle now and then, but then be kept in her place. Whoopi should be the show's producer and central figure, but I'm not holding my breath. Comments?

Being non-muslim or at least not middle eastern or north african, you'd probably get a sponsor. Your point about 6 or 72 hours is important. In both cases, it's like stopping a river by putting your hand in it. As to NATO arriving, it begs a whole range of questions. But really, if Russia takes over, it won't be military, it will be political. In my limited knowledge, I'd assume increasing the percentage of Russian speaking portions of the population would be the way to do this. If the political suddenly has the right people to ask for Russian tanks, NATO won't have a political leg to stand on, and becomes moot. In the European breakout of WW2, Germany overran the small countries. But Germany at that time was relatively weak, and the Allies made key blunders. It was not a foregone conclusion. But Germany in 1944 could easily trounce anyone in front of them...unless Russian. Back to square one. How would the Original Poster describe the situation in Lithuania re Russian influence in social/political/language/culture?

Isn't the middle east in general a truly horrendous region and leaving is a great idea? Basically a refugee stream in white coats? (With honest respect to the talent involved.)

I was involved in volunteering with homelessness and food bank activity. I was going to a Catholic outlet which drew from the dregs of the greater food bank system, and much of what was donated was appallingly bad ingredients if canned or boxed, and fruits/veggies were passable with careful selection and quick eating. Cans may be years past expiration. So on the one hand, if a greater distribution system comes into being, like recycling programs have done in places, then any grocer with marginal stuff has a way to get it collected hopefully without hassle, and overall, there's enough useful quality for a poor person to pick through. On the other hand, some of it is awful, or downright unhealthy. The very word, waste, says a lot. I can't help but think grocers are already cutting down on waste just to save money. I don't really see lots of grocers finding ways to burn wilted lettuce for fuel. I'm tempted to say that it will have no effect on the French economy. Anyone consuming waste food is already pretty much out of the economy.

So the sicker we get, the better off we are?

Wow, thanks for that feedback. I also discovered his videos and they are very good.

Load of dingo's kidneys. Claiming they're not distracting is spineless lie. Oh, poor baby, she just isn't comfy, all widdle pwincess self, unless her widdle shorts crawl up inside her. Like another few inches of fabric will bring her to complete collapse. Oh, and a shirt or blouse...woo hoo, that's oppression for ya'! Any girl claiming infringement is either lying her spilling-out butt off and knows it, and/or needs a kick in said butt. Non-violently of course. Grow up.

this link, the quotes near the beginning by Horton (Lancet editor in chief) and Ioannidis: Flawed Medical Research May Be Ruining Your Health & Your Life (Important!) | Collective-Evolution and this link, larger Horton quote near beginning, and nearby, quote by Angell (New England Journal of Medicine editor in chief): Editor In Chief Of World’s Best Known Medical Journal: Half Of All The Literature Is False | Collective-Evolution

(I did a bunch of surfing without bookmarking before I realized I was on an adventure. I'll do my best with links. As I was warming up below, a thought occurred to me, and I realized it was a zinger, and this needed to split into two topics. Later I'll start a post about where else the site below sent me; about terrible quality of medical research, by two editors of very top medical journals, Lancet and NEJM.) First, enenews.com is THE site for Fukushima info. Readers since the beginning have excellent understanding, and readers provide further high quality technical info in the comments section. (I'll finally sign up with them, to direct them back to here!) Second, I was reading about black mold affecting large numbers of certain Pacific fish. Here is that page link: http://enenews.com/mysterious-black-mold-being-found-fish-pacific-northwest-govt-concern-fukushima-radiation-could-be-involved-biologists-investigating-landbased-fungus-appearing-fish-many-reports-unusual-rotti/comment-page-1#comments Page one comments...somewhere halfway-ish down the page... revealed fascinating supplementary info about melanic molds (containing melanin). The upshot of that section is that melanin turns "deadly to us" radioactivity, which is after all photons, into energy like plants use chlorophyll for a different spectra. Heavy melanin in fossilized spores at a big Cretaceous die off period matches a period of Earth's magnetic field being zero while it flipped, thus allowing massive cosmic ray pummeling. Further links, sorry you have to track them down on that page, discuss certain likely genetic pathways for mutation, and possible mechanisms for radioactivity resistance. And they grow towards sources of radioactivity. It may be that melanin was first derived in mutated mold spores, which flourished while the rest of the planet was toast. Also, is our own skin's melanin a tiny energy source nobody noticed? These molds grow in radioactive cooling water pathways, the space station, the Arctic; they are extremely good at damage repair, and curiously, the DNA for much of that roughly matches some human DNA, suggesting...for now we'll call it sci-fi...genetic mod to humans making us at least somewhat radiation resistant. Maybe that's the way Fukushima will be finally cleaned up in two centuries, resistant workers will be bred for a few generations. Whatcha' think?

I had to look up ancap. So the gold of money is superior in position, crushing even, to the black of anarchy. Hmm. Not so sure about that. Look at the flag from a distance or really small, like a boat in poor visibility. The yellow maybe disappears, and it's a unique shape which remains, which is useful against a lighter background, but also looks like sky and stars, or just a dark blob, which would make it invisible in bad weather or low light. Say what you want about the Monarch's flag, but it really stands out. Honestly, ditch the ancap and install the Confederate (CSA) battle flag. Danged visible, and one of the prettiest flags ever. Maybe, just maybe, there's a hint of meaning too....

This question could also apply to The Wizard Of Oz, Johnny Appleseed, Paul Bunyan and his giant blue ox, etc. Even the Alamo. Growing up in fifties USA, certain shared tales of American lore were known by most people, I believe. But over the decades, many immigrants will have other lore, and likely not have heard of these names. Also, long before the internet, the educational exposures tended to be standardized and mutually shared. Not as much now? So I'm curious: What is your impression of the recognition status of these topics of American lore? What cultural demographic shapes your view?

Okay, I'm throwing a brick onto the table. The second story about the airliner is suck city, no dispute there. The OP story is limited in evidence to "hit her...3 year old son on the arm and snapped at him to "come here."" Would you want to be a defendant in a courtroom with that testimony? "Snapped" is quite subjective, and it sounds like the OP was highly un-objective in his mood. To a Deep Southerner, anyone at all in much of NYC will sound snappish when they merely give the weather. "Hit"…how hard? Not trying to be a grinch here, but are we talking about a slap heard two aisles down, or something that would maybe knock over a soda can? Was she trying to shepherd a small child who kept ignoring her, while holding onto a shopping cart and purse, amongst somewhat heavy foot traffic that could knock down the kid? So much description, in fact nearly ALL, is left out here. Sorry guys, but I feel like this is a pack of PC wolves snapping at the air. Way too reflexive w/o checking the facts. PS. The door greeter was THE EMOTIONALLY UNINVOLVED WITNESS. He might have known what he was doing. PPS. Wait, you lied to her? As in, subconsciously you knew you were on shaky ground?

This reminds me of something. Recently, I think in these forums, I was introduced to Terror Management, which refers to the terror of being aware of one's mortality. Cultures in part spring up to present an ongoing continuity, something that outlives ourselves, and thus humans can get very defensive about belief challenges. I think that applies here. Prior to hearing about T M, something similar came to mind. We are brains, brains are animals, animals do what makes self survive. This is usually a, pardon the pun, no-brainer, since any one salamander or chickadee is exactly a salamander or chickadee. The human self is far more malleable, and thus any one mind state, to that brain, is The Self, and to be protected at all costs. Rational thought is external clutter.

The Japanese physicist Michio Kaku, who I used to really like. He said Fukushima would be cleaned up in 40 years…the TEPCO line…which is clearly impossible (TEPCO doesn't even believe it anymore). See ENENews.com for a very competent single source on the topic. NOBODY who reads that site would believe that 40yr BS for a second, so how come Michio did? He also referred to Alarming Global Warming like it was real. He shot his credibility in the face with that. I hope you've all read my Climate Fraud links in the forums here, climate fraud updates - General Messages I PUT DOZENS OF HOURS INTO THAT RESEARCH, AND READ EVERY WORD ON WELL OVER A THOUSAND WEBSITES, LIKE THAT MIGHT MATTER OR SOMETHING…and I hope you...groan…don't still believe the BIG LIES from: Al Gore/Ken Lay (11 counts of fraud conviction for Lay and his Enron, both carbon traders getting fees for these lies -- Lay died, I guess because God does have limits, tho' big money will silence things too); Global Warming Discoverer (yes there is one!) Michael Mann and his falsified data he was forced to reveal by an FOIA request after two stubborn years of not handing it over to a retired curious scientist, then another FOIA request to turn over his algorithm, shown in the 2006 US Congress Wegman Report…without any shred of doubt…how it makes Hockey Sticks from nothing at all, God forbid he'd admit it, he's making out like a bandit; NASA's Hansen with blatantly illegal math and physics (in my links); his own boss called him "an embarrassment to NASA"; Briffa, one of Mann's proteges, presorting his Ural's tree ring data to not include any raw data that doesn't agree with his desired result…!!!…the result itself being the bogus Mann claim shown to be completely false in Wegman! Endless more…and Michio knows none of it??? (All this stuff is public record by the way, look for yourself, I provide a bunch of links; mostly the fraud has been known for a dozen years or so, but you haven't seen it on mainstream media, have you? PLEASE don't buy that "Big Oil" nonsense. That's to make you not look.) Which segues to…ANY mainstream news media, especially networks, and sorry to say Public Radio which is a real Democrat/liberal ass-kisser. Sorry, lil' NPR babies, but Democrats are corrupt too. (NEWSCASTERS WANTED: MUST HAVE GOOD LOOKS, GOOD VOICE, AND COMPLETE DISINTEREST IN HONEST TRUTH.) Yes, given that they lie their butts off, or are just too stupid to care or check, listening to them is a mistake. Remember, most news outlets are commercial, merely subsets of the overall networks -- they sell things. The so-called news content is just to float the commercials and only needs to do that function; genuine honest dispute or outrage puts us out of a buying mood, whether it's buying store items or big lies. It fills your head with sound bite BS, with quickly-moving visual or aural things that entertain your inner kitty-cat, with intentional misinformation. It's like filling your belly with corn syrup and white bread. It will feel good at first. Then takes time to get over the icky feeling. Over longer time, it's actually poisonous. Not to mention withdrawing your support by viewing, even if it doesn't seem to matter much. Gotta have some faith in those grains of sand we want to insert into the gears of The Machine. (Stephan, are you on this climate fraud, all spoon fed from a silver platter here, by the hand of the great explorer returned from vast expanses of the networked continent, with the scratches and bruises and infected insect bites to show for it? Are you to make me send a goon to your door, upon threat of herding you into a small closed room and simultaneously opening a dozen boxes of Irish Spring soap, should you not agree to read every link under glowering and highly scented supervision?)

TRUE!

In the interest of good science: The dork look, making a face, would still be yucky in the chic dress. A decent intelligent face above the "geek" clothing would be attractive. I think a female delusion has crept in here; that we men give a shit about your clothes. We immediately imagine you naked, not because we necessarily care, but because we realize that clothing on females is usually a form of false advertising. Somebody wants to sell a car, the paint job is nice, but who gives a crap if the transmission grinds and the pistons slap. Ignore the paint job, lets hear the engine. I live in a right nice neighborhood. I don't know about most people here, but what I've witnessed just from my front yard -- how a woman who is married behaves, or one who is not yet separated -- leaves me in disgust.

I think you'll get your best growth by consciously choosing to decline the petty option. Ignore it. It's practice, to learn how to ignore future things, may be valuable some day. Samurai Social Skills. And years from now, you may find out something about her, or other people, that will put it in a different perspective, and you'll be glad you didn't do something icky.

It is of course a great shock, that the groups most likely to benefit from increased franchise (Orwellian twinge in that wording) are groups that historically vote Democratic.

A calculator site says that $15/hr is $30,000/yr. I found a site, can't find the link again, which sells lightweight, minimal, freestanding robots with basic arms that grasp and place, with visual capability. It can do most repetitive handling tasks, such as feeding a part into a press, then putting it into a carton. It has a screen where a head would be, presumably for programming, and in operation, a cartoon face appears, whereby the eyes follow the work piece. It's price is $25,000. Clearly, a purpose built burger maker or fries maker, mass produced, and which I suspect already exist, would cost much less, and not involve payroll taxes, H&R issues, careless contamination, getting to work in a snowstorm, etc. Ordering and payment are already done at kiosks. That which seems to be already in motion would seem to be immediately pushed over the edge by a higher minimum wage law. Yet, at any wage rate, some of the other advantages are so obvious that partial replacement by machines seems nearly a given.

I think that's standard.

Did anyone see the movie A.I.? It was about a purely artificial AI child, discarded amongst other AI creations. Taken as a movie, not a close scientific discourse, I found it quite enjoyable. Ironically, that is because of the emotional connection viewers will have towards various human-like machines. It seems to me, that if removed by injury or disease, certain human elements disappear from any one brain, that recreating those elements cell by cell elsewhere might imply the rebuilt existence of at least part of a person. I strongly lean towards this thought due to my experiences described in a long post above. Human behavior can be very well machine demonstrated without any internal sense of self whatsoever. The stinker is that a sense of self could develop in some future machine, and no outside humans may even detect it, since the exterior hasn't changed. The machine itself would perhaps be having a sort of struggle with it, since it had no previous comparison.

I have an insight here, a curse/blessing. The blessing of having a place to say something at all. Curse, because it involves an intensive care unit seven years ago, a day long coma, and horrid brain degradation to which the ICU staff were completely oblivious (a huge amount of "don't get me started about…" is not included here). Although you couldn't tell I was different on the outside, and I could do all kinds of ordinary functions, on the inside I was obliterated. I couldn't tell anyone for various reasons, partly because elements of my conscious brain had a hell of a time functioning at all while awake. Two years into it, I discovered in Science News what had happened…in various hospital interactions nobody seemed to notice anything at all had happened, and I desperately searched for any clue online. Something science still doesn't appreciate, but I do, because mine stopped, due to an OD of what a crooked medical person had no business putting into my blood stream to begin with. (See GABA receptors.) It caused huge brain damage. It had hampered my basic cardiopulmonary functions, and apparently had completely knocked out something nobody knew existed at the time. There's something called an electrical slosh, not mechanical, that the brain does while sleeping, or such. It's very slow, about twenty seconds per cycle, and wasn't discovered until after my injury. Large globs of neurons front and back say hi to each other electrically, to indicate to a sort of pruning mechanism, "hey these synapses are being used, don't disconnect and recycle them." Other major brain areas are still doing functions while asleep, so they don't need these handshake signals. Apparently, and I'm leaving out a bunch of stuff here, my electrical slosh was knocked out for several hours. My pruning mechanism went amok. I lost a ton of synapses that day. For about three years, it was very difficult to comprehend the stuff we take for granted. Like a sidewalk or handrail or parked car. I could name them, understand how they worked. My body knew to walk correctly among these things, could mow the yard, even drive or ride a bike just fine, but it was work, real work, to understand, to comprehend what these items "were." I guess you could call it the existential element…what is a handrail? Not like anything I'd ever encountered before. I was brain damaged, and the missing synapses clearly had lots to do with what I'll inclusively call "comprehension." I had the feeling that it was the difference between being a human and maybe a frog, or even a dog. As to apes along the way, that would be pure guess. (In passing, I've also been dealing with the severe trauma of a brain not liking to be self-destructed. It is a hideous creation in my limbic system. Some would call it a post trauma syndrome. I anger at that. It is a beast, thankfully lessening over the years, a beast, and not some #$@& abbreviation. I wonder about some combat vets, are they silently chafing too, at something hideous being reduced to an abbreviation, an insurance code?) Anyway, having found out the hard way (and having about three years to truly savor it) what it's like to be a less evolved sentient being…what changed in me, not counting the over-layer of trauma, was a great reduction in synapses. A greatly reduced network. I recall one morning at about 26 months post injury, in a moment, feeling like my brain went from analog to digital. I had coincidentally recently upgraded a video monitor from an analog cable to digital, and when I pushed the input cable select button, the instant snap of increased clarity strongly resembled what I felt, or became, in that moment. It was like I'd been asleep for over two years and suddenly woke up. Anyone who's studied complex circuitry or signal theory understands, that like a radio station being dialed in, it's the critical mass, the tipping point, that all of a sudden makes a result, or a distinct improvement. So…what is at play? That I had "comprehension areas" heavily damaged? Or, is it that I had such a vast reduction in certain processing synapses, that meaning was unavailable at an almost structural level? As to AI, does this imply in the second case that meaning will just sort of show up if it gets complex enough? And meaning to whom? That meaning center of my brain, whatever that means, is it not "merely" another network? This level that I'd lost for so long, that finally grew back, is in clear addition to the mechanical level of "understand how it works." The word which keeps suggesting itself (in an offhand non-scholarly use) is "existential." I am not suggesting that I have answers, or that there are any we can yet know. I just have this hard won information, and it seems to give strong but unclear clues.

The Vitamin Myth: Why We Think We Need Supplements — The Atlantic I am to find a forum topic from months ago that had what I recalled as good links re vitamins. I did bookmark the one link above. The link is a good place to start, and gels with what I was searching for. "What can it hurt?" Your health. Our modern lifestyles have us eating way more than our hunter/scavenger ancestors, and more varied. Unless someone is eating a total fries and donut diet, plus or minus some stupid, they are getting enough vitamins. Seriously, you are. How many of us have actually heard of a vitamin deficiency sick person, that didn't have a genetic problem, or was in a totally awful diet? You, all of us, and I have totally been there, have been massively brainwashed. The vitamins…and I come from a respectable medical family without an axe to grind…are drug pushing pure and simple. Mega bucks. For something you already have. If your cable company tried that, you'd be livid. The first two paragraphs of that link above, my underlines... On October 10, 2011, researchers from the University of Minnesota found that women who took supplemental multivitamins died at rates higher than those who didn't. Two days later, researchers from the Cleveland Clinic found that men who took vitamin E had an increased risk of prostate cancer. "It's been a tough week for vitamins," said Carrie Gann of ABC News. These findings weren't new. Seven previous studies had already shown that vitamins increased the risk of cancer and heart disease and shortened lives. Still, in 2012, more than half of all Americans took some form of vitamin supplements. What few people realize, however, is that their fascination with vitamins can be traced back to one man. A man who was so spectacularly right that he won two Nobel Prizes and so spectacularly wrong that he was arguably the world's greatest quack.

swimmingcat--thanks for the great reply; thought provoking.