<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="todaycom/2.3.1" -->
<rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>Think Science .</title>
	<link>http://thinkscience.today.com</link>
	<description>Science. Ideas. Life.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 11:27:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	
	<item>
		<title>Speciation</title>
		<description>Speciation is far more than the result of adapting to environments. It involves mutations in the genome of a population which make them reproductively incompatible with concurrent populations from a common progenitor. (Yes... Environmental adaptations require genetic changes also. However... These are of often the result of changes in gene ...</description>
		<link>http://thinkscience.today.com/2009/12/29/speciation/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>straight line affair</title>
		<description>Here is one rant for straight line "A straight line is an arc of circle whose radius is Infinite". Infinity as a mathematical concept is a tool used to get around limitations of euclidean geometry. Nothing more. Radius is incomplete without defining the centre of that circle.

Example of "a straight ...</description>
		<link>http://thinkscience.today.com/2009/12/15/straight-line-affair/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Global Warming vs MIT</title>
		<description>After over 20 years of collecting data and running models, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has been forced to conclude the claim that "Global Climate Change" is the result of industrial carbon emissions is baseless. All the "Carbon Emission" models and predictions proposed by "Global Climate Change" experts have ...</description>
		<link>http://thinkscience.today.com/2009/12/12/global-warming-vs-mit/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Signs of improvement if there is no creationism</title>
		<description>On one hand, one may argue that it would be no better, rationaly speaking, if people just took theory of evolution as a new dogma. But I think it would be a difference anyway. Creationism is an actively subvertive movement that will combat public comprehension of how science works in ...</description>
		<link>http://thinkscience.today.com/2009/12/10/signs-of-improvement-if-there-is-no-creationism/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Possibly Impossible</title>
		<description>In order to obtain any real knowledge, it is important that we accept that some things are impossible. People often get into trouble because they are under the false assumption that anything is possible. It is not.

Allow me to demonstrate using the proposition "The cow jumped over the moon".

Example 1: ...</description>
		<link>http://thinkscience.today.com/2009/12/09/possibly-impossible/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Possible turning points to non-religious stance</title>
		<description>I think that you don't have to consider "factors leading to non-religious stance". Rather the opposite; Just consider the mere decline in opportunity to indoctrinate. If you grow up to about the age of ten without some influential significant adult having messed you up, then I think the window of ...</description>
		<link>http://thinkscience.today.com/2009/12/05/possible-turning-points-to-non-religious-stance/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Looking at love</title>
		<description>Love has different dimensions and different levels of complexity. Sure there is love in animals too, but if you start talking about frogs and flies, that would be taking it a bit too far. All of them do not display the same kind or intensity of love.

In humans, in a ...</description>
		<link>http://thinkscience.today.com/2009/12/04/looking-at-love/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Why not objectivism ?</title>
		<description>Objectivism is nothing more than a pseudo-philosophy which is patently devised to support an ideology, much in the same style of the anatomical pseudo-science which came out of Germany in the 30s and early 40s.

It is nice to wish to be free from coersion; that's why modern governments usually involve ...</description>
		<link>http://thinkscience.today.com/2009/11/19/why-not-objectivism/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Why i don&#8217;t take all views of ayn rand ?</title>
		<description>I wasn't identifying Ayn Rand as making specific claims about free-market systems: just as a pretender to philosophy, and who pretends to support statements about economics on the philosophical principles she outlines. To make "A is A" an axiom, and pretend to derive anything significant from it, is to be ...</description>
		<link>http://thinkscience.today.com/2009/11/18/why-i-dont-take-all-views-of-ayn-rand/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Let&#8217;s talk about Free market</title>
		<description>I would define a "free market" as one which operates without government interaction. This is an economic state of affairs which is not unlike anarchy.

It seems to me that our reaction (for example) might be that the fact that, like anarchy, it tends to produce significant power blocks (which bring ...</description>
		<link>http://thinkscience.today.com/2009/11/17/lets-talk-about-free-market/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>


