Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion General Science Discussion Forum not fins , not flippers , but hands

its a long video , but very interesting.

Paul just checking ... I hope you realized something


The channel admits this in a press release about the special, saying "the film is science fiction, using science as a springboard into imagination."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mermaids:_The_Body_Found
http://theclicker.today.msnbc.msn.com/_n...id-special?lite

It is one of many sort of funky whacky "fringe" ideas but I think the TV series fringe does a much better job at these sorts of things.

if the story behind the tv show is fake then why would
Dr Paul Robertsons web site domain have been seized by the government agencies listed on the page?

http://drpaulrobertson.com/

the page has the following interesting details.



I wouldnt think that a web page designed to give the impression that the web sites domain had been siezed
would have a description such as the above.

it looks like the web site was not made to show that the story
was a fake or the description would reveal that to anyone who looked at it.

it would not state that the "Mermaid legend is true, and there is proof of real live mermaids"

so even if the web site has been siezed , someone is
still attempting to get the true story told.

and we all know that government agencies do not ever sieze any type of media and then never release that siezed media for public viewing as testified after the 911 attacks.

now do they?

personally , (not) I thoroughly trust the scientific community and every thing they write and every thing that comes out of their mouths , why shouldnt I they have never lied on purpose or tried to hide any information.

now have they?

so , its now a question of gullibility or creditability.

I lean towards the gullibility side of the story as the credibility of the other side is non existant.

Do you buy every piece of crackpot garbage put out by nutcases on the internet?????

The SITE WAS NEVER AND IS NOT SEIZED ... IT'S A SCAM POST ... THAT ONLY GUILLIBLE WOULD BELIEVE

It the site was siezed it would not come up >>> AT ALL <<<

View the soucecode for the page ... LMAO


I can't believe you fell for that gabage

I have a cousin in Nigeria who has $10 Million and wants to get the money out can you send me all your bank details so I can deposit the money in your account as well?

Orac
I know you have trouble with the english language so I
suppose that paragraph comprehension is also one of the troubles that you have.

here is what I wrote.



but I suppose that your inability to comprehend the english language has got your skirt in a twist.

sorry , but thats not my fault.

no problem...

Jed Clampet
kirkeby mansion
beverly hills
california


banking contact person : Mr Melborn Drysdale
President Commerce Bank of Beverly Hills

if you will contact Mr Drysdales secretary
Mrs Jane Hathaway at the Commerce Bank of Beverly Hills
she can assist you in sending your cousin the needed information so that he can send the $10,000,000.00 to the bank account.

Yes I am obviously missing something in translation and being totally confused about exactly what you are saying will leave this to others.

This has been around for a while and has been completely debunked. The people in it are actors and it is a movie of the fictional/factual/doco variety.

Perhaps, Paul, you should research things before posting-- I think if even I know for a fact that this video is a) old news and b) a fictional documentary, the veracity of the title is easily checked. I have even seen another doco that has the actor playing the Dr in this one! Sad though we may be, so far there are no mermaids wending their graceful Avatar type way around the oceans of the world, holding hands, falling in love and singing, long hair rippling through the water and large Hollywood breasts firmly delineated on at least half of the creatures. Sad but true.

And stop being so rude to Orac--- whose confusion seems to me to be more about the content of your posts than problems with language comprehension.

I am not easily offended or upset Ellis, living as a minority dissident teaches you that :-).

Thank you for the thought and support however.

My english is improving and I view having a few people pick me up on it makes me want to keep improving.

I have also noticed one common trait with all the radical religious and extremists on forums, they are aggressive in attacking the views of science and those not of there belief but extremely uncomfortable answering anything about them.

On this forum Preearth, Socratus and Paul are very very alike in that respect.

I am not sure if it is the fear of being tricked, insecurity in there beliefs??? A psychologist view on the trait would be very interesting. To me it is the stand out trait of all these people.

I never said that I thought it was a true story.

I just said



you guys are really quick correcting someone who is not at fault because you misunderstand them.

and Im being accused of being rude for trying to help orac with his grammar.




and when the views of religion are aggressively attacked by science then that is ok to do?

pointing your finger and saying dont point your finger...

when I wrote this



it was because orac was shouting at me with CAPS.

not something a gentleman would do , so I pointed out that his skirt was showing.

ie...



you looked like a radical scientist ranting and raving !!!

you should thank me for bringing this to your attention.



took the bait hook line and sinker!!!

Agrressively attacking your religion????

I am not sure anyone even understands your religion Paul to attack you are very very selective about answering questions.

You will notice I answer any question put to me because I am comfortable that science is honest, open and consistant.

I do accept you have a religion and beliefs which are different from mine and I do not need to convert you. I discuss many things with Rev and I do not try and convert him or prove god doesn't exist or anything like that.

The difference between my interaction with Rev and yourself is because Rev answers questions as well as asks me questions.

That is the conversation is two sided.

So instead of going through these charades and word games why don't we put it all aside and try communicating in a normal two sided exchange.

ok

my first question is , what does this mean?



just calm down a bit and try to descramble the above so that
I can understand it.



what is the religion and belief that you do have?



yes, do you need for me to show you all of the post
or do you feel comfortable knowing that its true?

I'm certainly not taking sides in this discussion, but as "who actually said what" seems to be a major issue; it might be worth mentioning that Orac didn't necessarily say he had a religion.



This could reasonably be construed as saying: I accept that you have a religion, and {I accept you have} beliefs which are different from mine.

sounds like he has a religion and beliefs.

but he does have some problems with the language which is
expected , I could in no way carry on a discussion in his native language as well as he does in mine.

I was born into a country which did not tolerate religion and I have not found any religion I could "agree" with. I use agree here but my english is not good enough to find a better word in it's place.

There are many fundemental religions which make everything about humans and this world here and now is a testing for good and evil souls. I can not accept that a divine god would be more cruel than humankind. The universe is beyond description an overkill in size for it to be all about humans, we can never visit all of it and as such a divine god would have known that so why make it so large? It seems implausable that god is all about humankind that sounds more like human ego.

I believe in many of the sort of buddist aspects of life that we should make the minimum ecological impact we can and I did find common ground with you on some of your alternative ideas.

However I am also very aware of the dangers science can throw up and some of the most testing and dangerous times will be in the next few years.

There is an area of science that has drawn great interest in the last two years which alarms me greatly called synthetic biology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_biology)

I think as scientists we sort of accepted a view that DNA was special and in some ways we associated life with DNA.

Two years ago we created XNA which is artificial DNA and we currently have 6 types and with gold nanoparticles about to join them we will now have 7.

What alarmed me was in March this year that XNA can be engineered to evolve and that changes everything and makes this field extremely dangerous.

http://io9.com/5903221/meet-xna-the-first-synthetic-dna-that-evolves-like-the-real-thing
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17769529


This area is going to pressure on what is defined as "natural" what is defined as "life" and even defining what is "safe" in this area is very very challenging.

The problem is because few layman understand the implications and many religions won't accept the idea of evolution and a loser definition of life those who should be providing the moral and ethical guidance on the area are instead silent.

I have read many books, papers and discussions around the birth of the atomic age and this area has spooky similarities.

When you see research such as
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18953034

You consider that talk about "They also plan to incorporate a simple "brain" so it can respond to its environment and replicate more advanced behaviours like moving towards a light source and seeking energy or food."

Now think that could be setup to evolve it gets very alarming.

Rarely in science would you see this response



The ability for XNA to evolve changes eveything.

It does indeed. It can lead to possible horrible outcomes. Of course it is also extremely exciting. It can lead to the realization that our ideas of what life is like are hopelessly limiting. We may wind up completely rethinking what we need to look for when we are looking for life in places other than the Earth. Now we may have no idea what life will look like.

Bill

in order to see beyond the horizon , you must move towards the horizon.

every step you take reveals new ground.

just think this could bring about actual intelligent life!

although we humans would most likely be seen as trivial
obstructions that are a danger to their ability to survive
due to our lack of intelligence , we humans who are their
makers would most likely be destroyed by them due to their intelligence.

unless they also evolve into capitalist , in that case we would be bought and sold as food or pets.

as we would serve them no other purpose.

early stages of life.

I can see them now , they have evolved / developed wings so that they can follow the sun as the earth rotates , occasionally the masses return to the surface to feed on some unlucky life form that has wandered to far from its habitat.

And of course this type of suggestion is primarily produced by too much science fiction. In fact, based on the only example of evolution in action that we have, the life forms that are currently alive on our planet, it will take at least millenia, and more likely millions, possibly billions, of years for such an evolution to occur. Also, keep in mind that no species can grow to a point where it consumes all other life forms. It would soon have nothing to live on. Science fiction is full of predators that are unconquerable. This is great exaggeration. Just remember that the Amazonian jungle is one of the most dangerous places on Earth, as far as predators is concerned. And then remember how many non-predator species, including humans, live there in relative safety.

Of course when I include humans as non-predators that is a big misnomer. Humans are the most dangerous predators.

Bill Gill

so we have nothing to worry about then...

was your reply to orac misleading?




if it will take millions of years for such a small change in its evolution to occur then we would never even see a slight change.

therefore

1) why are you excited?
2) how could it lead to anything concerning our ideas?
3) what evidence or model would we use when rethinking what life would look like?

I find it hard to get excited about things that might happen in millions of years from now.

besides we would all be in some pool of hydrocarbons deep within the earths crust anyway , being pumped out of the ground to power the current dominant life forms vehicles.

unless the evolution would or could be accelerated we would not have a thing to worry about.



science fiction is a great tool to break the monotony.
and its interesting , of course it is fiction.

alot of our technology today was first dreamed up in science fiction movies and books.

and this might make a good book and movie for us science fiction fans.

also:

with GM foods messing with our DNA it might be a nice thing to
have around just in case we start having babies with gills
or little curly tails.

could be a tool to repair some of our mistakes.