Err..cold fusion, michae1ange1o?

I thought they'd proved the experiments were flawed?

I think it would be quite easy to invent something that was more powerful than a pie-in-the-sky form of power...say a hamster-in-a-wheel?

I like your ideas on the needs we have to fulfill before we can explore space in a decent manner.

Suicidal pilots in control of what could be the most powerful explosion people have ever produced... 8O

I'm not poking fun, just making observations here...

Anyway, I find it odd the way that people think that technology is progressing so fantastically. When you stop and think about it, technological progress has essentially ground to a halt!

When you think technology, what do you think of? Mobile phones? Computers? The internet?

Now think about the choices you have made. What do they all have in common?

Electronics!

Our technological progress in the last 30 years has been largely based on the advancement of electronics, not the advancement of technology as a whole.

As an example, think of the Moon landings. (I can assume you all know what the craft looked like, right?)

Now think about NASA's "new" Moon lander...



Or even the Rockets that will send it to the Moon...



Notice anything familiar?

Sure, they have 'improved' since the original Moon landings, afterall, they are new designs!

All of the improvements are based on electronics though. Better computers, better cameras, better flashing lights.

All that NASA has really managed to do technology-wise, is get a bit more thrust from its Rockets. (If you think it is strange that i'm focussing on NASA, i'm doing it coz they are the biggest and most well-known space agency, and I have to focus on space, right?)

Now if anyone has any criticisms on my points, there is something that I should tell you first: the points that I have just mentioned are NOT my own!

These points have actually been raised by NASA itself! It was on Horizon I think a few weeks ago. (Horizon is a sciencey program in the UK)

Now if something like NASA says we haven't progressed that much in the last 30 years, what do you guys think now?

*Edit - if people wanna know more about NASA's new Moon landings, here's ta link:

*

well i need to put in my $0.05

I saw the website this forum is so active about, probaly about 3 or 4 years ago. At the time everything mentioned by the time traveler (im just using the name he quoted himself/herself with) was based losely on things that could happen and might happen, however where imposible at the time to prove as it will happen, mostly because all the events where things that didnt happen yet.

I dont remember everything from the site, it does make a while, but a few vaige things i recall are there would be a war in the east that the us would participate in, a civil war would start in the us (i believe in late 2005 or early 2006), and a nuclear war in 2015. Of course at the time back in 98 (when it was first posted) these where all things that would/could happen in the future.

Now im not saying it is true or not, im staying impartial on this.
All i do want to point out is one thing not known about time traveler, he/she started the posts in the fall of 98 (im not sure the exact time, but i believe its in the website), and he/she posted only for 2 or 3 months on that forum. On his last post he claimed he would be returning to his time, and since then no-one that i know of has claimed to be time traveler. (note i said as far as i know of, it is posible there are other posts i dont know about).

Granted he also claimed that simply by being here "in the past" he changed our future, however would still go back to his time. This makes sense, in star trek (and real science), there is the multile worlds theories. That simply means that everything that can happen does, and each time it makes a new reality. Its posible that if time traveler does exist (and im not saying he does or not), but if he does he may be from an alternate future.
From his point of view he might have changed our future, while returning to his time without affecting his time.
Actully.....in his posts i believe he mentions something like that.

I really dont know, it could be true, could be a bunch of bull, we may never know.

Tielee

ya from what tielee said, i noticed he kept going on about our worldline instead of time line, so not only does he travel through time he also skips through dimensions with the greatest of ease

I will elaborate some on it, CVN. Communism in fact are two things. First is a vision. A way of live and a perception on how things should be in this world. Paradise. The other is a government form and is an attempt (originally written by Karl Marx) to bring that vision into practice.

Marx never lived out to see that happen anywhere in the world, and thus we will never know how he, himself, would have implemented his system. The only thing which is certain is that Vladimir Lenin implemented his own version of it in Russia which didn't quite work out that well.

Marx' idea was as followed: during a period of "Proletarian Dictatorship" the population will be prepared for a communistic state. During this period, money will lose its value and people will lose their possessions. In theory, a man is unable to "own" anything. All food and objects are shared with the community. After a while, the dictatorship itself will not be needed anymore and will naturally dissolve.
In a sense, Smith is right. According to Marx, there is total equality between every human being, so there are no leaders whatsoever. This was his first vital mistake.

Lenin understood this perfectly and once he obtained his totalitarian rule, he would never give it away again. Same is true for his successor Stalin and those who followed. They implemented communism as an oppressive system and hold his citizens under totalitarian rule only to satisfy his own lust for power and control resulting in million deaths due to starvation, murders, executions, etc.

So much for the history lesson. Bottom line is that the very core of communism is the one thing every "communistic" country in the world failed to implement until now: Equality. This does not mean that no one should be in charge! Companies need leaders, countries need leaders. But communism and democracy are NOT, I repeat: NOT, mutualy exclusive.
So what is this core I speak of: quite simple, it means that all goods in a state are for the use of all of its citizens. This means that everyone should be able to have access to all sorts of food.
This means no more money and that in theory you can walk into a "supermarket" and take whatever you want and go out. Does this mean chaos? No, as long as there are enough supplies for everyone.
This means that everyone can get a car and can learn how to drive.
This means that everyone will be able to have a house and a place to live.
This means that everyone will have to work. Work and not get paid for, since everything is free anyway, but we do need people to make it that way.

The list goes on and on.

Now finally, will this work? The answer to that question is, unfortunately: No. For the simple reason because people will find it unfair that a doctor has the right on the same things as a supermarket employee.
Which I think is a stupid thought, but well. That's the way it works in this world.
Perhaps in about 300 years, when we invented the replicator and such

I hate to contribute to this fire, and I hope I'm not, but the idea of communism is written down by its creators in book. There are different books made by different publishers, but I'm assuming the content is relatively the same. If you want to know about it yourself, you can go ahead and get it. It's actually quite interesting.

Like you said Scatter, it's a dream, and you can't stop people from dreaming!

Under Communism, all people are supposed to be equal, blah blah blah...has anyone thought how that sounds oddly similar to the American Constitution? 8O

(That one principle, anyway)

Just a thought...

I won't interefere with your discussion, I just have one thing to say. There is a huge difference between the "equality" in the US and Communism. In the US people are equal in front of the law and are supposed to have equal chances to succeed, of which the last one is bull. In Communism people are equal economicaly as well - in our country we never had Communism although Rusia wanted us to have it and there was almost war. We had sociolism. At that time the difference between the maximum payment and minimal wage was 1:4. The managment in a firm got only 4 times more salary than their workers! The workers had enough money to buy luxuries*, go on vacations and worked only 40 hours per week. And everyone had a job.

We had a carismatic leader at that time which held together a number of nations and didn't give in to Rusian demands, and had our country be neutral in the cold war (that is why we almost got war with them, their troops we're already placed at our borders once.) Yes, our leader was a president for life, but the funny thing is, after he died his family was left without anything. Everything he owned was never his, he GAVE everything to the country - even the numerous gifts he receaved from foreign diplomats. He didn't own any yahts, no palaces, nothing - everything was owned by the country, which was torn apart after his death, and today we have leaders with astronomical salaries, buying big houses, while in some parts 40% of the folk have no job.

Anyway, Communism could never have worked. It's a good idea with a flaw. Marx forgot the human factor. People are kids for life I feel. We always want more toys and we don't want to share them with anybody...


* the same luxuries the managment could buy, but they had to save for it of course.

In the US, people are not equal. Perhaps in the last few decennia they made some advancements, but back in the 60s and 70s being black was almost a criminal offense.
Even now, things are the same. But now it isn't the black people who are the victims, but arabians or Muslims. I won't say it is different where I come from (the Netherlands), I am only saing that in our current system there is a looooong way to go before all humans are truely equal. Possibly, it will never happen until we implemented some other system.

I'll agree with you yes, blacks were discriminated against in the 60s and 70s and even before. It would be next to impossible to prove otherwise. What you mentioned with arabians and muslims I am not convinced of, however. I live in the US and where I am, I have never seen discrimination against any group, At least not obvious discrimination. Maybe they are discriminated against in New York, I don't know, but the US is a big place and lots of stuff happens here. I won't argue that somewhere it is happening, but most likely somewhere whites are being discriminated against as well. Basically I'm trying to say I don't think it is as bad as you would make it seem.

IOIO, sounded like an idea place, I'm sorry you lost it. Also as a sidenote, the Russia your refering to was not actually called Russia I dont think, but the USSR. I guess it might be like calling Europe the Roman Empire.