<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Accidental Intelligent Design</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/</link>
	<description>A fun look at science news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:24:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: JDawkins</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-961</link>
		<dc:creator>JDawkins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 11:28:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/#comment-961</guid>
		<description>n0s wrote: &quot;The fact is that nothing is certain in this reality of ours. Absolutely nothing. With no exceptions.&quot;

This is just as bad as the comment which you were criticizing. While you did display a fair knowledge of the LHC, you managed to completely contradict yourself.

You say that nothing is certain... With absolute certainty. You cannot say that nothing is certain, it is like saying there are no absolutes in science.

What, perhaps, you should have said is that generally we cannot be sure of much at all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>n0s wrote: &#8220;The fact is that nothing is certain in this reality of ours. Absolutely nothing. With no exceptions.&#8221;</p>
<p>This is just as bad as the comment which you were criticizing. While you did display a fair knowledge of the LHC, you managed to completely contradict yourself.</p>
<p>You say that nothing is certain&#8230; With absolute certainty. You cannot say that nothing is certain, it is like saying there are no absolutes in science.</p>
<p>What, perhaps, you should have said is that generally we cannot be sure of much at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Better Voice of Reason</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-952</link>
		<dc:creator>Better Voice of Reason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:27:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/#comment-952</guid>
		<description>Voice of Reason, it&#039;s a political cartoon they&#039;re meant to invoke discussion.
Anyone who&#039;s said that they&#039;re is any chance that the LHC is going to destroy the universe, &quot;however small&quot;, you are a moron. The LHC is harmless, it can only provide good outcomes. There is no way that a collider can create miniature black holes that suck up the universe. Black holes are something you don&#039;t need to fear. In order to make a black hole a super massive star has to supernova, in fact we are currently spinning around one in the center of our galaxy. They are sending tiny atoms and molecules through the LHC there just isn&#039;t enough mass involved to create a black hole.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Voice of Reason, it&#8217;s a political cartoon they&#8217;re meant to invoke discussion.<br />
Anyone who&#8217;s said that they&#8217;re is any chance that the LHC is going to destroy the universe, &#8220;however small&#8221;, you are a moron. The LHC is harmless, it can only provide good outcomes. There is no way that a collider can create miniature black holes that suck up the universe. Black holes are something you don&#8217;t need to fear. In order to make a black hole a super massive star has to supernova, in fact we are currently spinning around one in the center of our galaxy. They are sending tiny atoms and molecules through the LHC there just isn&#8217;t enough mass involved to create a black hole.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Voice of Reason</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-945</link>
		<dc:creator>Voice of Reason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 03:21:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/#comment-945</guid>
		<description>honestly, its a comic, enjoy it or don&#039;t why take things so seriously?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>honestly, its a comic, enjoy it or don&#8217;t why take things so seriously?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-935</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 22:05:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/#comment-935</guid>
		<description>1) if someone decides to kill themselves its probably for more than one reason.

2) the machine was turned off before anyone even commented on the page.

3) dax anything can go wrong with anything, there could be a faulty weld/faulty instruments/faulty joints (and i&#039;m only pointing out human errors). The whole collider is trying to prove a theory... that theory could be wrong and have a different result.

4) how many times should the world have ended so far according to predictions... as far as i&#039;m concerned i&#039;m still alive with the world.

5) if you do think the world is going to end... go out and enjoy yourself, make the most of life.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1) if someone decides to kill themselves its probably for more than one reason.</p>
<p>2) the machine was turned off before anyone even commented on the page.</p>
<p>3) dax anything can go wrong with anything, there could be a faulty weld/faulty instruments/faulty joints (and i&#8217;m only pointing out human errors). The whole collider is trying to prove a theory&#8230; that theory could be wrong and have a different result.</p>
<p>4) how many times should the world have ended so far according to predictions&#8230; as far as i&#8217;m concerned i&#8217;m still alive with the world.</p>
<p>5) if you do think the world is going to end&#8230; go out and enjoy yourself, make the most of life.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aileen</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-932</link>
		<dc:creator>Aileen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 19:14:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/#comment-932</guid>
		<description>Thanks, G-Man, for the support. Psychology is not as &#039;hard&#039; a science as physics - and definitely doesn&#039;t command the kind of Big Bucks HEP does - but it is about human nature, after all. People who kill themselves will use whatever handy excuse is available at the time. CERN&#039;s device is a dumb excuse, but people have chosen dumber ones, I&#039;d guess.

clint (love that name, it&#039;s so... manly!) - I posted the cartoon because it was so darned funny. If it doesn&#039;t strike you funny, you are hereby released from all obligation to see or read it. If it&#039;s got stumbles and diggs, cool. I surely don&#039;t mind. Why should you? §;o)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, G-Man, for the support. Psychology is not as &#8216;hard&#8217; a science as physics &#8211; and definitely doesn&#8217;t command the kind of Big Bucks HEP does &#8211; but it is about human nature, after all. People who kill themselves will use whatever handy excuse is available at the time. CERN&#8217;s device is a dumb excuse, but people have chosen dumber ones, I&#8217;d guess.</p>
<p>clint (love that name, it&#8217;s so&#8230; manly!) &#8211; I posted the cartoon because it was so darned funny. If it doesn&#8217;t strike you funny, you are hereby released from all obligation to see or read it. If it&#8217;s got stumbles and diggs, cool. I surely don&#8217;t mind. Why should you? §;o)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aileen</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-931</link>
		<dc:creator>Aileen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 19:07:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/#comment-931</guid>
		<description>nOs said:
&lt;i&gt;&quot;There is actually a tiny grain of truth to the paranoia surrounding the LHC. It will actually create miniscule black holes, if the scientific theory is right.&lt;/i&gt;

Well, Hawking/Penrose developed the theory of black holes to begin with, and then Hawking theorized how they&#039;d radiate away. Nifty how things work out to confirm such things, n&#039;est ce pas?

The participation of micro-holes in reality as-we-know-it could prove to be quite fascinating if they ever get their theoretical act together, and hopefully data from the LHC will allow them to do so. I personally just saw the cartoon on another site (unattributed), and just had to include it here because it had me laughing out loud all day long. This Moreu fellow is smack-on in his sense of humor!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>nOs said:<br />
<i>&#8220;There is actually a tiny grain of truth to the paranoia surrounding the LHC. It will actually create miniscule black holes, if the scientific theory is right.</i></p>
<p>Well, Hawking/Penrose developed the theory of black holes to begin with, and then Hawking theorized how they&#8217;d radiate away. Nifty how things work out to confirm such things, n&#8217;est ce pas?</p>
<p>The participation of micro-holes in reality as-we-know-it could prove to be quite fascinating if they ever get their theoretical act together, and hopefully data from the LHC will allow them to do so. I personally just saw the cartoon on another site (unattributed), and just had to include it here because it had me laughing out loud all day long. This Moreu fellow is smack-on in his sense of humor!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan G</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-929</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan G</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 21:25:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/#comment-929</guid>
		<description>Funny...cheers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Funny&#8230;cheers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guy</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-928</link>
		<dc:creator>Guy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 04:28:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/#comment-928</guid>
		<description>Moses, and anybody else that may not understand;

The Large Hadron Particle Collider is a massive circular tube built under the borders of France and Switzerland.  It&#039;s either 17 miles long or 17 kilometers long.  (Of course the Europeans would measure it in Km, but I read about it in an American magazine, so it was probably reported in miles.  For the record, I wish we could dump this stupid system and get on the Systeme Internacionale with the rest of the world.)  Anyways, in the LHC what they are going to do, is send tiny, tiny particles around the circle and bash them into each other at amazing speeds to see what happens.  Now, these particles are smaller than electrons.  If I read this correctly, these particles, Hadrons, though they are the large Hadrons, are the particles that make up Neutrons, Protons and Electrons, so they are TINY!!!  But when they hit each other at 3x10^8 m/s we might be able to observe what happened 13.8 B years ago at the start of our universe, AKA the Big Bang.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Moses, and anybody else that may not understand;</p>
<p>The Large Hadron Particle Collider is a massive circular tube built under the borders of France and Switzerland.  It&#8217;s either 17 miles long or 17 kilometers long.  (Of course the Europeans would measure it in Km, but I read about it in an American magazine, so it was probably reported in miles.  For the record, I wish we could dump this stupid system and get on the Systeme Internacionale with the rest of the world.)  Anyways, in the LHC what they are going to do, is send tiny, tiny particles around the circle and bash them into each other at amazing speeds to see what happens.  Now, these particles are smaller than electrons.  If I read this correctly, these particles, Hadrons, though they are the large Hadrons, are the particles that make up Neutrons, Protons and Electrons, so they are TINY!!!  But when they hit each other at 3&#215;10^8 m/s we might be able to observe what happened 13.8 B years ago at the start of our universe, AKA the Big Bang.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: clint</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-925</link>
		<dc:creator>clint</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 14:22:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/#comment-925</guid>
		<description>First of all posting someone else&#039;s work into your blog for stumble and digg hits without even bothering to write a half assed article to justify it is not cool.


Second Dax, lighten up.  How many kids have killed themselves over alcohol?  By your logic can I not make fun of my friends when they get drunk?  Can I not make fun of my co worker&#039;s World of Warcraft obsessions?  Someone tried to kill the President to impress Jodi Foster.  Does this mean I should be outraged every time I see a parody of silence of the lambs?  Where does it begin and where does it end?  Why don&#039;t you give me a list of things that are acceptable to make cartoons about</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First of all posting someone else&#8217;s work into your blog for stumble and digg hits without even bothering to write a half assed article to justify it is not cool.</p>
<p>Second Dax, lighten up.  How many kids have killed themselves over alcohol?  By your logic can I not make fun of my friends when they get drunk?  Can I not make fun of my co worker&#8217;s World of Warcraft obsessions?  Someone tried to kill the President to impress Jodi Foster.  Does this mean I should be outraged every time I see a parody of silence of the lambs?  Where does it begin and where does it end?  Why don&#8217;t you give me a list of things that are acceptable to make cartoons about</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/comment-page-1/#comment-924</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Oct 2008 08:00:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sciencenewsreview.com/accidental-intelligent-design/#comment-924</guid>
		<description>Yeah Dax, it&#039;s sad when people kill themselves over things like that (Except that story is false). People just seem to take things too seriously. Like comics for instance.
I mean seriously. Besides, the picture is shooped anyways.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah Dax, it&#8217;s sad when people kill themselves over things like that (Except that story is false). People just seem to take things too seriously. Like comics for instance.<br />
I mean seriously. Besides, the picture is shooped anyways.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
