|
On January 30 2014 02:03 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 02:02 Overpowered wrote: Men are more career oriented and in general safer long-term bet.
source please the sexism on this page is getting a little overwhelming
Well men can't be pregnant and the # of dads who play the "mom" roles is close to 0 while everywhere I see is stay at home moms.
Damn babies always taking our jobs.
|
On January 30 2014 01:25 Dogfoodboy16 wrote: Why do all large corporations not only hire women employees? They would only have to pay women 70 percent of a mans salary for doing the same job. Cutting costs by a third would be a big deal for any company I would assume.
Weren't most of the cases women were payed less due to less job experience, men being at the job longer or just in a higher position?
|
On January 30 2014 02:14 Najda wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 01:25 Dogfoodboy16 wrote: Why do all large corporations not only hire women employees? They would only have to pay women 70 percent of a mans salary for doing the same job. Cutting costs by a third would be a big deal for any company I would assume. Weren't most of the cases women were payed less due to less job experience, men being at the job longer or just in a higher position?
What I learned in communications class is that women are less inclined to debate their salary and are less likely to ask for a raise while a man will actively negotiate for higher hourly wages and annual pay raises.
|
stahp! its supposed to be stupid questions not stupid answers!
|
On January 30 2014 02:53 ComaDose wrote: stahp! its supposed to be stupid questions not stupid answers!
To be fair it never said you weren't allowed to answer in a stupid manner.
|
What does this person from Antigua and Barbuda who keeps calling me want to sell to me?
|
On January 27 2014 16:59 opsayo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2014 16:34 TAMinator wrote: How do I know if I'm not on a planet that is made for experimentation on the behavioural responses of humans throughout their lifetime? because that is pseudointellectual drivel and if we were an experiment u would be able 2 tell mice can prolly see the plastic gloves that pick them up and put them in a maze
Unless of course the entire universe is just a simulation. In that case I highly doubt anyone would know unless the creators wanted them to.
|
On January 30 2014 03:52 L_Master wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2014 16:59 opsayo wrote:On January 27 2014 16:34 TAMinator wrote: How do I know if I'm not on a planet that is made for experimentation on the behavioural responses of humans throughout their lifetime? because that is pseudointellectual drivel and if we were an experiment u would be able 2 tell mice can prolly see the plastic gloves that pick them up and put them in a maze Unless of course the entire universe is just a simulation. In that case I highly doubt anyone would know unless the creators wanted them to.
What if the point of the simulation is to find out of we can realize it's just a simulation?
|
The brain has a bunch of folds to have larger surface area and stuff, and that makes us smarter (very watered down, but yeah). What exactly does this contribute to in our intelligence? If we had twice as much surface space, for example, would we gain new functions or just become more efficient in our current functions? If the latter is the case, then how would we go about gaining telepathy and telekinesis through evolution?
|
On January 30 2014 04:03 Dark_Chill wrote: The brain has a bunch of folds to have larger surface area and stuff, and that makes us smarter (very watered down, but yeah). What exactly does this contribute to in our intelligence? If we had twice as much surface space, for example, would we gain new functions or just become more efficient in our current functions? If the latter is the case, then how would we go about gaining telepathy and telekinesis through evolution?
Lower animals have smoother brains, apparently for evolutionary reasons. Cognitive brain activity takes place in cells in thin surface layers of the cerebral cortex, and skull size did not increase as fast as brain complexity did as the species evolved. Convoluted human brains pack a larger surface area into a small container.
Human intelligence appears to be related to the branching of brain cells and the formation of complex links between them, not the shape of the platform where the links take place.
As humans evolved as a species, our brains grew larger to accommodate all of the higher functions that set us apart from other animals. But in order to keep the brain compact enough to fit into a skull that would actually be in proportion with the rest of our body size, the brain folded in on itself as it grew. If we unfolded all of those ridges and crevices, the brain would be the size of a pillowcase
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/31/science/q-a-brain-folds.html http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/human-brain/10-brain-myths3.htm
Telepathy or telekinesis go against the laws of physics so no improvement of our brain would allow for it.
|
On January 30 2014 04:23 Najda wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 04:03 Dark_Chill wrote: The brain has a bunch of folds to have larger surface area and stuff, and that makes us smarter (very watered down, but yeah). What exactly does this contribute to in our intelligence? If we had twice as much surface space, for example, would we gain new functions or just become more efficient in our current functions? If the latter is the case, then how would we go about gaining telepathy and telekinesis through evolution? Show nested quote +Lower animals have smoother brains, apparently for evolutionary reasons. Cognitive brain activity takes place in cells in thin surface layers of the cerebral cortex, and skull size did not increase as fast as brain complexity did as the species evolved. Convoluted human brains pack a larger surface area into a small container.
Human intelligence appears to be related to the branching of brain cells and the formation of complex links between them, not the shape of the platform where the links take place. Show nested quote +As humans evolved as a species, our brains grew larger to accommodate all of the higher functions that set us apart from other animals. But in order to keep the brain compact enough to fit into a skull that would actually be in proportion with the rest of our body size, the brain folded in on itself as it grew. If we unfolded all of those ridges and crevices, the brain would be the size of a pillowcase http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/31/science/q-a-brain-folds.htmlhttp://science.howstuffworks.com/life/inside-the-mind/human-brain/10-brain-myths3.htmTelepathy or telekinesis go against the laws of physics so no improvement of our brain would allow for it.
It really depends on how you define telepathy. If you had some sort of organ that uses for example radio waves to communicate, that would basically be telepathy to an observer who doesn't look at that spectrum. And depending on how the organ is wired would allow for pretty fast direct brain to brain contact. Though the whole "stealing thoughts" part of your classical telepath would rely on basically hacking the others communication system in some way.
But there is nothing here that is fundamentally against the laws of physics.
As for telekinesis, you could have some organ that manipulates magnetic fields, but to have any relevant strength in this case is pretty hard at a distance, so this is obviously pretty unrealistic in the confines of a body.
|
You could also say that you can move objects by manipulating gravity but I think it's fair to say that isn't within the realm of possibility of a human ever being able to emit strong enough gravity or magnetism to count for anything near telekinesis.
|
On January 30 2014 03:55 Najda wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2014 03:52 L_Master wrote:On January 27 2014 16:59 opsayo wrote:On January 27 2014 16:34 TAMinator wrote: How do I know if I'm not on a planet that is made for experimentation on the behavioural responses of humans throughout their lifetime? because that is pseudointellectual drivel and if we were an experiment u would be able 2 tell mice can prolly see the plastic gloves that pick them up and put them in a maze Unless of course the entire universe is just a simulation. In that case I highly doubt anyone would know unless the creators wanted them to. What if the point of the simulation is to find out of we can realize it's just a simulation? There is no spoon.
|
Is it possible to program on a Nintendo DS? Does it matter what kind?
|
On January 30 2014 13:03 3FFA wrote: Is it possible to program on a Nintendo DS? Does it matter what kind?
You can look into homebrew roms and how they do it I guess.
|
When is a right triangle wrong?
|
Do people who stutter also stutter in their thoughts?
|
How do blind people know when to stop wiping?
|
On January 30 2014 17:24 icystorage wrote: How do blind people know when to stop wiping?
I believe they smell.
|
On January 30 2014 17:14 Dogfoodboy16 wrote: When is a right triangle wrong?
In Non-Euclidian geometries employed by horrors from beyond space and time.
|
|
|
|