Are we on the threshold of a paradigm shift in scientific knowledge

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Spike

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Obama himself has said he is in favor of the single payer system. Pelosi has made it clear she wants a single-payer solution. How would any insurance company compete with a government who can just print money? Of course UHC means single payer because no insurance company could possibly compete on an even playing field with the government.

FedEx and UPS (and DHL and a host of others) compete just fine with the USPS. And last I heard, they were all in the package delivery business.

Actually thats not entirely true. As managment at UPS I have some knowledge of the subject and FedEx and us are really considered "express delivery" companies, not a mail service. In the US there is really only one main company that does letters, and that is USPS. Sure, FedEx does alot of air envelopes and we move a fair number as well but they are all express. Heck, we don't even offer a ground service for letters, they go by air only (our worldship system won't even let you print a ground label for a letter). Our bread and butter are packages, something USPS has tried to break into and has been more or less successful depending on how you look at it.

I believe there are competing mail carrying companies in the UK and parts of Europe but I'm not 100% on that. Over here though that market is almost 100% locked down by USPS, with the exception of some minor local players.

Now back to your regularly scheduled UHC debate.

OK, but I never said the words "mail service."

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
It's beginning to look like man did not descend from monkeys after all...it may be the other way around. Tell me again about your undisputed facts...time to eat crow? I love science.

Somehow I seriously doubt this.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
It's beginning to look like man did not descend from monkeys after all...it may be the other way around. Tell me again about your undisputed facts...time to eat crow? I love science.

Somehow I seriously doubt this.

Then you're wrong. Now...please tell me about undisputed facts.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
It's beginning to look like man did not descend from monkeys after all...it may be the other way around. Tell me again about your undisputed facts...time to eat crow? I love science.

Somehow I seriously doubt this.

Then you're wrong. Now...please tell me about undisputed facts.

I find it really pointless and boring to argue with anti-evolutionists.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
It's beginning to look like man did not descend from monkeys after all...it may be the other way around. Tell me again about your undisputed facts...time to eat crow? I love science.

Somehow I seriously doubt this.

Then you're wrong. Now...please tell me about undisputed facts.

I find it really pointless and boring to argue with anti-evolutionists.

WTF...do you have reading comprehension problems? Whatever gave you the impression that I was an anti-evolutionist? You made a statement infering that man evolved from monkeys and it was 'undisputed fact'. I point out that a recent discovery appears to contradict your 'undisputed fact'...and you have the nerve to imply that I don't care about science? Oh...the irony. Wake up!

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
It's beginning to look like man did not descend from monkeys after all...it may be the other way around. Tell me again about your undisputed facts...time to eat crow? I love science.

Somehow I seriously doubt this.

Then you're wrong. Now...please tell me about undisputed facts.

I find it really pointless and boring to argue with anti-evolutionists.

WTF...do you have reading comprehension problems? Whatever gave you the impression that I was an anti-evolutionist? You made a statement infering that man evolved from monkeys and it was 'undisputed fact'. I point out that a recent discovery appears to contradict your 'undisputed fact'...and you have the nerve to imply that I don't care about science? Oh...the irony. Wake up!

Appears to. Key words. Perhaps you should delve further? Additionally, you missed my point completely, because I was mocking anti-evolutionists who seem to have a problem with the notion of man evolving "...from monkeys." Maybe your sarcasm meter is broken? I dunno.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
It's beginning to look like man did not descend from monkeys after all...it may be the other way around. Tell me again about your undisputed facts...time to eat crow? I love science.

Somehow I seriously doubt this.

Then you're wrong. Now...please tell me about undisputed facts.

I find it really pointless and boring to argue with anti-evolutionists.

WTF...do you have reading comprehension problems? Whatever gave you the impression that I was an anti-evolutionist? You made a statement infering that man evolved from monkeys and it was 'undisputed fact'. I point out that a recent discovery appears to contradict your 'undisputed fact'...and you have the nerve to imply that I don't care about science? Oh...the irony. Wake up!

Appears to. Key words. Perhaps you should delve further? Additionally, you missed my point completely, because I was mocking anti-evolutionists who seem to have a problem with the notion of man evolving "...from monkeys." Maybe your sarcasm meter is broken? I dunno.

Hmmmm...sarcasm...if you say so. This discovery may prove to be a perfect example of a huge paradigm shift in scientific knowledge...monkeys evolved from man. Wow!

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
Hmmmm...sarcasm...if you say so. This discovery may prove to be a perfect example of a huge paradigm shift in scientific knowledge...monkeys evolved from man. Wow!

Sorry for the confusion.

In any event, it would be interesting, however it's never been proper to suggest that humans evolved from apes, rather that we merely shared a common ancestor. That common ancestor being Ardi. So I'm not sure about the statement that chimpanzees evolved from us, rather it seems like more of a fork in the evolutionary pathway.

 

[gingermeggs]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
FME: I'll jump in and save someone from drowning, or run into their house if its on fire to try to get them out, or stop if there is a car accident and someone is injured. That doesn't mean I should pay for a fence around their pool, pay to rebuild their house, or pay their healthcare bill.

M: Will you pay taxes to have a provide a life guard or a fire department for when you aren't around to help out or in case it's you who is in trouble?

moony
is the USA the capitalist chimpanzees and the Eu social democratic bonobos?
the EU has economically surpassed the Usa just a few years ago and will now accelerate away from the USA's economy as they take in more members and structure their system to be more efficient. Only the USA and china have no UHC, china did, but now is realizing it's mistake of removing it.
We've heard some here say the Eu is "going right" which is bs, The fact is the europeans have been pretty central overall and tend to have coalition governments that are more balanced then what happens in the Usa.
Yes you guys are the worlds laughing stock for not having uhc and being controlled by lobbyists, it kind of is hypocritical to your constitution and is holding your economy back.

 

[gingermeggs]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Why should I as a dual income no kids family get screwed while the people with 8 kids who use the parks, playgrounds, schools, and TONS of medical care pay nothing?

Pics of you and your "long-time companion?" :laugh:

:roll: Stay classy.

yes lets not scare anyone! lol

 

[Spike]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Spike

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Obama himself has said he is in favor of the single payer system. Pelosi has made it clear she wants a single-payer solution. How would any insurance company compete with a government who can just print money? Of course UHC means single payer because no insurance company could possibly compete on an even playing field with the government.

FedEx and UPS (and DHL and a host of others) compete just fine with the USPS. And last I heard, they were all in the package delivery business.

Actually thats not entirely true. As managment at UPS I have some knowledge of the subject and FedEx and us are really considered "express delivery" companies, not a mail service. In the US there is really only one main company that does letters, and that is USPS. Sure, FedEx does alot of air envelopes and we move a fair number as well but they are all express. Heck, we don't even offer a ground service for letters, they go by air only (our worldship system won't even let you print a ground label for a letter). Our bread and butter are packages, something USPS has tried to break into and has been more or less successful depending on how you look at it.

I believe there are competing mail carrying companies in the UK and parts of Europe but I'm not 100% on that. Over here though that market is almost 100% locked down by USPS, with the exception of some minor local players.

Now back to your regularly scheduled UHC debate.

OK, but I never said the words "mail service."

Well, in that case your correct, UPS and FedEx do compete quite well with USPS as they have tried to enter into the package buisness. I believe a large part of this was our all-ready established base of customers and logistical investements that allowed us to compete so well. However, the parallels are not quite there with UHC since a large number of people would suddenly be covered by the fed. It would be like FedEx and UPS, who control something like 90% of the US package market, suddenly controlling around 60-70% together with ~20% of that being USPS. That could cause a large shift in public perception as well as customers impression of USPS.

Those percentages are somewhat made up (can't remember the facts corporate likes to go rah rah over from time to time) but they should give a good idea. Either way I'm not sure how I feel on UHC since I agree that something has to be done, I just don't know what.

 

[shortylickens]

Have been reading for a while now and need some help with something.
Is dmcowen being hideously sarcastic or deadly serious?
Cuz I honestly cant fucking tell. And I dont read P&N enough to know if he has a reputation or not.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: gingermeggs

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
FME: I'll jump in and save someone from drowning, or run into their house if its on fire to try to get them out, or stop if there is a car accident and someone is injured. That doesn't mean I should pay for a fence around their pool, pay to rebuild their house, or pay their healthcare bill.

M: Will you pay taxes to have a provide a life guard or a fire department for when you aren't around to help out or in case it's you who is in trouble?

moony
is the USA the capitalist chimpanzees and the Eu social democratic bonobos?
the EU has economically surpassed the Usa just a few years ago and will now accelerate away from the USA's economy as they take in more members and structure their system to be more efficient. Only the USA and china have no UHC, china did, but now is realizing it's mistake of removing it.
We've heard some here say the Eu is "going right" which is bs, The fact is the europeans have been pretty central overall and tend to have coalition governments that are more balanced then what happens in the Usa.
Yes you guys are the worlds laughing stock for not having uhc and being controlled by lobbyists, it kind of is hypocritical to your constitution and is holding your economy back.

Trust me, the average American has never been anywhere and has no idea he is a laughing stock of anything. He thinks he is doing the laughing. We are clucking chickens headed for the soup.

 

[Joepublic2]

I'll act in my own interests at least for the short term. Does the world allow anything else? Not in my experience. Yes, I desire a more altruistic world, but I don't see any signs of it appearing before my eyes, right now. I have to work off modern, relevant info about how the world works, rather than how it should be as you must understand.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
By FRANS DE WAAL
Are humans hard-wired to be ruthlessly competitive or supportive of one another?

The behavior of our ape relatives, known as peaceful vegetarians, once bolstered the view that our actions could not be traced to an impulse to dominate. But in the late 1970s, when chimpanzees were discovered to hunt monkeys and kill each other, they became the poster boys for our violent origins and aggressive instinct.
I use the term "boys" on purpose because the theory was all about males without much attention to the females of the species, who just tagged along evolutionarily. It was hard to escape the notion that we are essentially "killer apes" destined to wage war forever.

Doubts about this macho origin myth have been on the rise, however, culminating in the announcement this past week of the discovery of a fossil of a 4.4 million year old ancestor that may have been gentler than previously thought. Considered close to the last common ancestor of apes and humans, this ancestral type, named Ardipithecus ramidus (or "Ardi"), had a less protruding mouth equipped with considerably smaller, blunter canine teeth than the chimpanzee's impressive fangs. This ape's canines serve as deadly knives, capable of slashing open an enemy's face and skin, causing either a quick death through blood loss or a slow one through festering infections. Wild chimps have been observed to use this weaponry to lethal effect in territorial combat. But the aggressiveness of chimpanzees obviously loses some of its significance if our ancestors were built quite differently. What if chimps are outliers in an otherwise relatively peaceful lineage?

Consider our other close relatives: gorillas and bonobos. Gorillas are known as gentle giants with a close-knit family life: they rarely kill. Even more striking is the bonobo, which is just as genetically close to us as the chimp. No bonobo has ever been observed to eliminate its own kind, neither in the wild nor in captivity. This slightly built, elegant ape seems to enjoy love and peace to a degree that would put any Woodstock veteran to shame. Bonobos have sometimes been presented as a delightful yet irrelevant side branch of our family tree, but what if they are more representative of our primate background than the blustering chimpanzee? -snip-

If a friend of mine had a chimpanzee for a pet, they would cease to be my friend immediately. I read a story in my newspaper 6 months ago in which it was described how a person was essentially defaced by a friend's pet chimp. They underwent one of the few face transplants that has been done, a new technique (the subject of the article).

Yes, a paradigm shift is in order, and I've known that since the 1960's when the movement for that shift got real traction. Songs such as John Lennon's "Imagine" spell it out pretty well. I was very disappointed when that traction started slipping so badly in the 1970's with the "me generation."

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: bamacre
People don't need to go through government to be "supportive of one another." The very idea is really a slap in the face to those who voluntarily donate their time and resources helping others.

OH pulease! Do we have to slap one another's faces in this discussion? Is it either volunteerism or government? Isn't there room for both (and a lot more)? What's this either/or penchant? If altruism was all that was needed in this world we wouldn't have corporations or governments, nor churches and religions, not even educational institutions.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: Joepublic2
I'll act in my own interests at least for the short term. Does the world allow anything else? Not in my experience. Yes, I desire a more altruistic world, but I don't see any signs of it appearing before my eyes, right now. I have to work off modern, relevant info about how the world works, rather than how it should be as you must understand.

But in your own life you can do better. Don't you want friendships and intimate relations with others who treat you altruistically? If you don't think that possible, it's a sorry thing.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

For someone whose username is "Fear No Evil," he sure seems pretty damned afraid of a lot of imagined realities.