Good to see she finished running the country and had time for such an awesome announcement.
Oh no! Our current PM did something in their free time, just like every other PM would. There's no more parliamentary sittings for the year, so any PM would have an increased amount of free time at this point of the year.
I thought it was shockingly funny, it wasn't that the words were that funny or clever, but the surprise that she did it made me lol. I don't think any different of her as a PM but i did appreciate the humor.
I loled at the k-pop reference :)
Edit: i didn't laugh at work watching it, only while i was in my car alone driving to work while listening to JJJ this morning. laughing at a gillard joke in public is humiliating!
I've had rem stuck in my head since this end of the world s*** started. I sing it in my sleep, hum it while s***ting, do the awkward little dance while waiting for the bus and f*** in time to its beat. Help. Help me.
The period is between those two dates.
The procession of the equinoxes.
7:30 into this video describes the clock
4:15 into this video
It doesnt give an exact date but its a series of events that take place in the sky, the stars alligning. Its interesting that The Mayans made note of a similar time.
How could they both have known this ?
Where did that knowledge come from ?
Did another race leave a message for us of when they might return ?
Why build a clock that describes a time 12 000 years from when it was built ?
I dont think its any kind of Apocalypse but something important is about to happen. Someone wanted to make sure we knew that this time was approaching.
The twilight language explores hidden meanings and synchromystic connections via onomatology (study of names) and toponymy (study of place names). This blog further investigates "name games" and "number coincidences" found in news and history. Examinations are also found in my book The Copycat Effect
Patterns that seem connected or driven by an unseen hand.
Often similar patterns have been played out in History and they will appear after symbolic events. Many superstitions begin this way.
Cheers Nerf. I once read a research paper that indicated marijuana use increased the chances of incorrectly connecting two unrelated pieces of information, hence conspiracy belief is seemingly higher among pot users than not. As the above video seemed to have sourced.
you dont believe certain sections of the brain are responsible for specific functions?
No not really. Or at least I don't trust someone who backs a sociological argument up on the basis of it.
I read this recently which more or less stated exactly that. Saying particular bits of the brain a responsible certain bits of our consciousness is almost always wrong.
The mapping of the human mind a science is in such a state of infancy that any statements about it at the moment will almost certainly turn out to be wrong.
I am sure we can identify certain bits quite accurately, in so far as they are clearly distinct from some other part physiologically, but the part of the brain responsible for fight or flight? yeah not convinced.
So that article is written by a psychologist, and cites a book written by another psychologist and two books by philosophers. Now correct me if I am wrong, but psychologist's aren't to be considered any sort of authority on the inner physical workings of the brain right? I know for sure philosophers aren't - their inclusion in the article makes the whole thing sound dodgy to me. I mean seriously, philosophers talking about science? heh
The whole thing was full of amazon links to people's books and just sounded like a whole pile of bunk to me. They had a couple of links to rather long looking papers (I really don't care enough to read them) that the author obviously thought could be summed up in one hyperlinked sentence. Does anyone care enough to read those and could they post the results here? I highly doubt it :P
The reverse of your argument can quite easily be made fpot. Neuroscientists aren't experts on the higher socially or survival aware mind so what right do they have to comment?
The images they produce are of very questionable meaning, much less unambiguous meaning.
Here is an example of why am distrustful:
That guy is clearly a charlatan, but apparently Neuroscience supports his position.
Moreover why exactly shouldn't philosophers comment on science? Philosophy is important to interpreting data and we have clear philosophical principles for organizing our data. Occham's razor jumps to mind, be hard to find a less scientific chap who has contributed more to science.
That's true and I see your point. I really gotta say that the the biggest concern I have over that article are the amount of amazon links contained in it. When I have time I'll watch the video and have a bit of a read because I always thought that different parts of the brain performing certain functions was pretty well established. Just the other day I read somewhere that a certain part of the human brain (I forget which) is much larger and more active than its counterpart in the chimpanzee, which lends us our superior problem-solving/reasoning ability. A quick google says it's the frontal lobe.
Is this what you are disputing or are you talking more about the brains inner-workings on a sociological level?
I have no problem with Neuroscience, and it is clearly making powerful insights, however as far as a map of the brain is concerned, the science is so young that the lesson you posted fpot will almost certainly be different in five years time.
But mostly I take exception to the second part of your sentence. Sociological inference based on Neuroscience I think is laughable, and I notice it is almost never preeminent people in the field making the calls. It is nearly always someone from outside the field cherry picking.
its kind of freaky to really understand that you are just a collection of neurons doing their job.
This I have no problem with. I just question it when someone says, exactly these neurons and no others do x, y or z.
Now correct me if I am wrong, but psychologist's aren't to be considered any sort of authority on the inner physical workings of the brain right?
I just woke up so can't.. coherent this very well, but, from what I've gathered from Sparrow/Billy/& Co, there's psychiatrists and then there's psychologists (which are usually more about scientific research and in-depth understanding, rather than treatment), and then within psychology there's "hard science" researchers such as Sparrow/Billy/etc, who are actually looking at the workings of specific groups of neurons using scans and readouts and whatnot, rather than a sort of black box testing.
I've heard of parts of the brain being cut off and things still working or finding a new way, which kind of seems plausible from what I know of neural nets (maybe the brain uses neurons in a larger context which isn't region specific, but has it easier with a few areas pre-defined by evolutionary-selection which more readily get used for various tasks), but have also heard of parts of the brain being very attached to one job (e.g. the visual cortex).