h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

9-O-J, if you need to get A2 size pictures on your site, get someone with a good camera to photograph them, then send the film to Fontango (link from this site's front page) - from what I gather, so long as you register they will process a film for free and post the images on their site for you to link to them... A cheap 35mm film will set you back about 99p for 24 frames, so you can take two or three frames of each one with different lighting.

Thanks for that; appreciated. The little drawings lose a lot in the translation, and I'm a bit worried about how 0.1mm lines will come out.

Thanks again for that.

About the nuclear bomb, one of the reasons why the scientists made it was because they didn´t realize it´s power. If you look at the claculations you will find that it will create a destructive force equal to some thousands of kilos of tnt. But it is kind of hard to really know how much that is. If somebody told you about a bomb that had this and this explosive force, would you have any idea wether it would blow up a car or the whole city?

About cell phones, it was actually true that there was no scientific facts that showed it was dangerous. Because nobody had ever looked into it. As soon as they invented the thing they started selling it to make money. Never looked at the health risks. I´m also perfectly fine with that, I´d love to see all those people who keep jabbering in cell phones die

And as for GM corn. It is a good thing, as long as the safety is very good. But the safety is basically non-existent. In fields where they experiment with GM-corn, the only thing that seperates the GM-corn to the normal corn is perhaps a wire fence. Not something the corn usually cares about. But as somebody said, if the companies are giving money to the politicians why would they stop them?

Re: Mobile phones, the radiation from the antenna is at its most dangerous for a radius of about 2 inches... Why did nobody think to make the antenna pop out of the *bottom* of the 'phone? Cancer of the chin is preferable to cancer of the brain, and the difference in altitude of 4 or 5 inches isn't going to make much difference to the reception...

subject,, bomb:


bombtholgy, chapter 1, page 2, "The Bigger The Better"


nott to be confused with morality,, simple mechenichs.


cell phones you say,

psssssh somone did

Actually, science is Carp. Strange, isn't it?

No, that's just a red herring...

... something to do with eel-ectricity?

or Nuclear Fish-ion

Do you think this is really the....Plaice... for this?

Just for the halibut, what -is- this plaice for now?

'Nonnie

Much better than 'crap'

I can't prove it, of course, but I believe that the conditions which resulted in fossils must be very rare, compared to the number of species which has already existed throughout the eons.
To put scientific proof in perspective -- what we believe now is so much more advanced than what was believed a century ago, and will only be considered marginally less silly than what will be believed a century from now.

I know what you mean... I've heard the theory expressed thus:

"Science believes that all life started in the oceans, then proliferated in inland water before finally moving onto land because all the fossils from that period are of species living in or near water. How about if only the conditions found in or near water were suitable for preserving fossils?"

"In or near water" should read "In or near large bodies of water". Sorry.

Hello...
I'm new to this, and I'm most likely not going to make any friends, but hey-ho.....
Fossilization is an extrememly rare occurance, and it does seem to happen most often in/near large bodies of water.... But then again, as it is so rare, then the number of fossils found in one area, no matterthe conditions of the environment should be roughly proportional to the size of population living in that area..no? Fossils have beenfound o occur under most types of terrain...mountains and forest etc all that really seems to be required is a hell of a lot of pressed, and something to leave an imprint in....

And going back to GM....most GM crops are actualy sterile...I refer you to the most obvious one were American farmers complain that they have to by corn seed every year......The major problem people seem to have is he possibility of a virus which infects more than one type of plant, shanghi-ing the gene that is 'unnatural' to the plant and then sticking it into an unrelated plant... I say unrelated here because as far as I know, the GM plants usually aren't planted within viral travel of the same type....But I could be wrong.

Anyhow, anyone?

Evolution is not working strongly on the individual human any more. We have become too much a social species for that. It is working at a higher level of complexity, namely society. We are becoming, or have become, a colony, swarm or whatever. A group entity. It is the nature of evolution to move its focus from the individual to the higher complexity that forms the next 'individual'.

It is also working at the level of concepts. Our concepts are evolving and thus affecting us. Our view of ourselves and our Universe detirmes how we behave. It is this that is eveolving - our behaviour.

On faith and science - faith start from a high level concept, say God, and interprets all the rest in the light of this. Science starts at the other end, with axioms, and constructs the rest on this foundation. These are not quite equivalent but certainly belief in the axioms is necessary and by definition these can not be scientifically proved from within the system. In other words faith is just as necessary in science - no proof of all the axioms is possible.

Another way - axioms are hypotheses and can not be more that this. They have to be just believed. 2+2=4 only if that is how you have already defined 2 and 4. Mathematics never quite meets reality. Crossing the gap requires faith.

Phew - that got that off my chest.

Oh - science may or may not be crap - but we all use the scientific method from the moment we get up to the moment we get to bed. We couldn't get through the day without it.

I guess the other difference is that, although it can prove neither, logic can be used to *disprove* an Axiom, but not to disprove God.