• Do you own a telescope?

    50 answers · Astronomy & Space · 19 hours ago
  • How to save the Earth?

    Best answer: Yes, Interstellar travel would be the answer, so we cannot establish repressive governments that would impede the creativity of people and the advance of technology. People can then be sent off to other planets to effectively reduce the population and stress on the Earth, and also mine needed resources from... show more
    Best answer: Yes, Interstellar travel would be the answer, so we cannot establish repressive governments that would impede the creativity of people and the advance of technology.

    People can then be sent off to other planets to effectively reduce the population and stress on the Earth, and also mine needed resources from asteroids and near by planets to further spare the Earth.

    If HUT (Holographic Universe Theory) Physics is true, and it looks to be more and more the case we can expect "Space Jump" technology in less 200 years. So FTL speed transport will not be a problem.
    35 answers · Astronomy & Space · 1 day ago
  • How can there not be a great mind behind a magnificent, complex universe?

    Things don't just appear out of thin air.
    Things don't just appear out of thin air.
    32 answers · Astronomy & Space · 2 days ago
  • Do you think the moon landing was real or faked?

    I’ve read lots about to and I’m 50-50 on whether the moon landing was faked or it actually happened. What’s your take? Any sources you could give me to help me learn more about it would be appreciated. :)
    I’ve read lots about to and I’m 50-50 on whether the moon landing was faked or it actually happened. What’s your take? Any sources you could give me to help me learn more about it would be appreciated. :)
    27 answers · Astronomy & Space · 1 day ago
  • Is this a missle from some mega advanced civilization designed to destroy earth?

    Best answer: Since it appears to be heading back out of the solar system, no. But given its unusual shape, it's possible to imagine it as a manufactured object. Too bad we won't get a good look at it.
    Best answer: Since it appears to be heading back out of the solar system, no. But given its unusual shape, it's possible to imagine it as a manufactured object. Too bad we won't get a good look at it.
    14 answers · Astronomy & Space · 1 day ago
  • Has anything discovered by man.(science) been changed as new information has become accepted?

    People have accepted information as FACT which was later discovered to be false. Why did they believe such to be true?? because MEN of some Repute had said so, the people believed MAN and his ability.. people believe in people, them to be truthful and able to discern. Alas they are unable as the heart of man is... show more
    People have accepted information as FACT which was later discovered to be false. Why did they believe such to be true?? because MEN of some Repute had said so, the people believed MAN and his ability.. people believe in people, them to be truthful and able to discern. Alas they are unable as the heart of man is wicked Peer review is as they say let the cops police themselves let them investigate police corruption.. you scratch my back I'll scratch yours..
    13 answers · Other - Science · 2 days ago
  • Area 51 Mystery?

    If there are no aliens, what's the big mystery with Area 51? Why not let the public visit the base? There are no aliens, right? What's the big deal?
    If there are no aliens, what's the big mystery with Area 51? Why not let the public visit the base? There are no aliens, right? What's the big deal?
    20 answers · Astronomy & Space · 1 day ago
  • Will Humans Ever Reach Another Star?

    Specifically humans, and not a robot we send. I read that (and I think that it was Einstein who said this, but I'm not sure) that to travel the speed of light would take more energy that is in the entire universe, and since our closest star is 4 light years away, will we ever reach it?
    Specifically humans, and not a robot we send. I read that (and I think that it was Einstein who said this, but I'm not sure) that to travel the speed of light would take more energy that is in the entire universe, and since our closest star is 4 light years away, will we ever reach it?
    16 answers · Astronomy & Space · 21 hours ago
  • Does the fact that nobody has come to visit us from the past or future mean that time travel is impossible?

    Best answer: I think that that is close to what Hawking says. People like Ronald Mallet though are actively studying time travel. I for one would think that if it is posible then they must not be able to interact with us in a physical way...otherwise we would have incountered them already. Maybe it would be more like you... show more
    Best answer: I think that that is close to what Hawking says. People like Ronald Mallet though are actively studying time travel. I for one would think that if it is posible then they must not be able to interact with us in a physical way...otherwise we would have incountered them already. Maybe it would be more like you being a type of ghost like representation in which you can see and hear things of the past as if you were there but you have no way to physcially interact with anything. I am sure people have thought of this already
    10 answers · Physics · 2 days ago
  • Did you know that according to the current theory, evolution has foresight?

    Best answer: Your Q was moved out of Religion & Spirituality by some unknown person, to this Biology category, so the claim here by one person that we have "another covert creationist in our midst" is unwarranted. My answer is to show the way old evolutionary theories have developed, so that you might better... show more
    Best answer: Your Q was moved out of Religion & Spirituality by some unknown person, to this Biology category, so the claim here by one person that we have "another covert creationist in our midst" is unwarranted. My answer is to show the way old evolutionary theories have developed, so that you might better understand such concepts as "foresight" when applied to ideas about DNA coding itself for improvements.

    After Charles Darwin's second book on evolution (1871), much thought was applied to his theory, that nature itself determined the development and progress of all living things. This implied that any man-centred or God-centred view of the world was mere wishful thinking. For example, Charles Kingsley described the impact of Darwin's theory like this:
    "Men find that now they have got rid of an interfering God - a master-magician as I call it - they have to choose between the absolute empire of accident, and a living, immanent, ever-working God." In the 19th century, the whole fabric of Christianity was called into question, with science, philosophy and history used in an attempt to show that the Christian faith no longer had a leg to stand on. However, the Scottish Free-Church man, Henry Drummond, pointed out a problem with the idea of the survival of the fittest. Even in the animal world, he said, survival is not simply a matter of stealth and strength. Care and compassion pay an important part. So Darwin's theory has been modified because of that truth.

    That's by way of a general introduction. Now, what is a scientific definition of Darwinism? I take the following from 'Life' book - Nature Library - Evolution. The full title of Darwin's first book states his own definition; "On The Origin Of Species by means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life." His second book was, "The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex". Darwin believed that "A struggle for existence inevitably follows from the high rate at which all organic beings tend to increase." And also that a creature's desirability as a mate played an important part in promoting desirable, or beneficial traits. Darwin accepted an accurate and convenient term proposed by Herbert Spencer; "survival of the fittest". He had shown that all life is one, because all life has arisen from one unremembered beginning.

    But Darwin did not know about DNA and the role of genes, so evolutionary theory today has... evolved accordingly! "In 1856 Austrian monk Gregor Johann Mendel launched the first of a series of experiments that were to demonstrate that inheritance, like evolution, is not a chaos or chance, or miracle, but a matter of law. Darwin never heard of Mendel's work, and the monk's reports lay ignored by the scientific world for decades." Others contributed to the development of evolutionary theory. Hugo de Vries (d. 1935) developed the first mutation theory through extensive studies of the evening primrose. He thought he had formed new species through mutations. (He had actually identified segregated characters, not mutations but his work provided a platform on which to build.) De Vries discovered the import of Mendel's work and, in a paper read before the German Botanical Society in 1900, he gave Mendel full credit for one of the most momentous discoveries in scientific history.

    Now, I relate all of that to show why Darwinian evolution is not the same as evolutionary theory today. A lot that Darwin proposed is now known to be wrong, and later discoveries have caused evolutionary theory to develop, so most writings on the subject deal with the up-to-date understanding, though tribute is always paid to Darwin's original proposals

    DNA is now understood to be part of a massively complex chemical interaction within cells that requires information to be de-coded by brainless cells, in order for them to replicate successfully. The question is where do we apply the word 'foresight'? To brainless cells, or to the creator of DNA? That is the question! Try asking again, once more in the R&S section, and if you get such questions removed, email me so that I might (hopefully) assist your enquiry.
    14 answers · Biology · 2 days ago
  • Will i get caught witha blood test?

    Alright so i smoke weed probably everyday but recently i stopped smoking for about 2 weeks and then i took one hit and now its been another week withought smoking weed or taking it whatsoever. Today i will go and take a blood test because i was bleeding from my nose so i will go check for amonia. Is there any... show more
    Alright so i smoke weed probably everyday but recently i stopped smoking for about 2 weeks and then i took one hit and now its been another week withought smoking weed or taking it whatsoever. Today i will go and take a blood test because i was bleeding from my nose so i will go check for amonia. Is there any chance the doctor might bring up any drugs ive taken?
    4 answers · Medicine · 18 hours ago
  • Whats the best state to live in?

    17 answers · Geography · 1 day ago
  • What if you saw someone that looked exactly like this..?

    What if you saw someone that looked exactly like this..?

    3 feet tall, and the mouth is non-functional and just a crease of skin
    3 feet tall, and the mouth is non-functional and just a crease of skin
    11 answers · Astronomy & Space · 3 hours ago
  • How much is half of 3.75?

    14 answers · Mathematics · 21 hours ago
  • How can only 370 meter sized asteroid could wipe out life on earth ?

    Is it true ? I read in a news - NASA announced that Earth would be wiped by asteroid Apophis on April 13 2036 ,my question is -it is only 370 meter how is it possible that it would wipe out entire life ?plus is this news true ?
    Is it true ? I read in a news - NASA announced that Earth would be wiped by asteroid Apophis on April 13 2036 ,my question is -it is only 370 meter how is it possible that it would wipe out entire life ?plus is this news true ?
    20 answers · Astronomy & Space · 2 days ago