2012

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by madd sketch on January 4, 2009 at 7:36pm

Sometimes i feel like most of that stuff is set up so that they can make movies lol. Its not a completely serious idea but i couldn't help but think, that would be insane if that would be tru lol.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by madd sketch on January 5, 2009 at 7:14pm

Very tru!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jason on January 6, 2009 at 5:02am

The world will end because the London olympics will be balls

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by bboylefty08 on January 6, 2009 at 2:38pm

I don't believe in the 2012 bs it's nothing but hype that people will blindly believe in. I think most of us we'll looking forward to who is going to be running for president.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ankeet on January 7, 2009 at 2:20pm

I'm posting back in time from the future! Really. It's June 4th, 2013. December 12, 2012, smallish meteors started appearing in orbit, hurtling towards the ground, all around the world; experts don't know how they got there, but everyone started getting all religious and stuff. A lot of deaths, flooding, panic, earthquakes, red ashy sky, all that junk, there was a political breakdown, a complete New-Orleans-style lack of authority- on a worldwide scale- but as far as I know, no sci-fi-style space evac. Of course if there was, it would be all CIA covered up and all that. Who knows. So now we pretty much have no economy, a large job market for pretty much everything, lots of debris and ruin everywhere, an increase in global warming (or so the liberals say, while the conservatives are still convinced it'll sort itself out in time). Economic changes under Obama seemed to be starting to show some slight improvement, and he was reelected, but no one's heard much from him a) there are only 2 newspapers left and b) he's "gone underground" since the meteors.
Yeah, we finally got time travel to kinda work, but only over the internet. I'd explain how it works to share it with my brethren (/sistren?) of the past, but I'm not really sure how, since the meteor crashes took out all the Wikipedia servers. My productivity has definitely shown an improvement since.
Apple just released OS11, Linux is rapidly gaining market share since Ubuntu stopped sucking at wireless support, Microsoft ended up buying Yahoo but they still can't get search right, and Google still is on top, with contracts to supply free wireless internet to a bunch of major cities.
Ford and GM... well, be careful what you're investing in, denizens of 2009. 2010 is not a great year for the American auto industry.
Epic Fu still exists, but I can't post anything about them because their new style, content, and name change is covered by the new time-travel-relevant-NDA internet laws until they update their license. Which wouldn't be a problem if it weren't for Big Brother- HTML5 in combination with new international WWW laws and ISP tactics mean no HTTP piracy (as in Rapidshare link-sharing warez boards), no copyright infringement (frickin' semantic internet). But we won the war against DRM! (Though nobody's really talked about the War on Terror recently.)

Still no return of the USSR, no dumb Star Wars movies yet, Harry Potter 6 sucked, 7 was pretty good, still no Mortal Kombat: Devastation still no flying cars, and still no Duke Nukem Forever. Great end-of-the-world parties though (LAN and otherwise)!

I'd post more, but I my flux capacitator's running out of juice, and I've got to teleport over to the shop to pick up my hoverboard (lithium batteries still suck in the future). See you in some sort of not-bound-to-the-concept-of-time-later! (Yeah, we still will not have figured out how grammar is going to have worked with this.)

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by tubejay on January 7, 2009 at 2:33pm

well hello 2012, just one thing... who told you ubuntu sucked at wireless? it's the only distro (family) i ever managed to configure it with.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Ankeet on January 7, 2009 at 11:43pm

I'M POSTING FROM OCTOBER 6TH 2013
GET OUT WHILE YOU CAN
THE METEORS HAD VELOCIRAPTORS HIDING INSIDE

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by tubejay on January 8, 2009 at 12:59am

"GET OUT WHILE YOU CAN
THE METEORS HAD VELOCIRAPTORS HIDING INSIDE"

you are mistaken, that is merely vercingetorix!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by tubejay on January 7, 2009 at 2:24pm

While i'm being more specific, the stuff about multiple worlds, and dimensions, and time travel are what i find completly ridiculous. In reality quantum physics is just a bunch of similar theories that someone decided to group together, and from my experience with it, way too much of quantum physics is complete fantasy, but i will say, there are some interesting experaments and facts, but none of it supports the BS(which is most of what quantum physics is..in my opinion).

if that's the way you feel, you should put down michio kaku and pick up hawking. the quantum physics he subscribes to are the same quantum physics that people refer to when they talk about science fiction, but his take on them is more accepted by conventional scholars. although i don't find michio kaku offensive in the least. there's nothing wrong with a hypothesis, it is like saying "perhaps this implies this" and a hypothesis need never be subscribed to personally.

the "many worlds" hypothesis is fun, but you should not confuse the hypotheses with theories. theories are more formal, and they are the basis of quantum science, not the myriad guesses as to how the theories apply to us.

as it is a hypothesis and not a formal theory, you can have quantum science without it, and many scientists do. as far as i know, no one has presented any proofs that there are other worlds for you to attack. it is not intrinsic to the theory. you can rest assured that most or all of your qualms about quantum science are similar in this regard. but i wouldn't ask you to take my word for it.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Opus V on January 8, 2009 at 4:41am

I wasn't confused about the difference between a hypothesis and theories, everything i've read refered to it as a theory, same with the other "theories" i mentioned.

Now that you mention Michio Kaku, that's who one of my friends i talked to kept bringing up, and one of his most recent books, forgot the name though.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by tubejay on January 8, 2009 at 12:17pm

many worlds is a hypothesis, not a theory. i hear it most often referred to as "the many worlds hypothesis," which is a far more appropriate term for it anyway.

like i said, someone who wants the science, not the speculation of quantum physics should not be reading michio kaku. his style always ventures towards fantasy, which is fine, but has misled you and encouraged the assumptions you've made.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by tubejay on January 8, 2009 at 3:49pm

be sure you don't take what i said as "never read michio kaku." i was referring to a less-than-everyday circumstance, in which he should be avoided.

▶ Reply to This

• 1
• 2
• 3