text:
- Sina Elli
- Tehran
- Iran
This conversation is closed.
The biggest threat to mankind. What will end the world as we know ?
Does the world need to be saved ? Are we heading toward an inevitable extinction ? will that be a new generation bomb ? or will it be pollution ? will it be depletion of natural resources ? or will the machines be our killers as it is suggested in many sci-fi stories ?
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
Jun 21 2012: Who said I was a believer. I'm an atheist and proud of it. Do you know why so many wars are fought? Because of religion! Christianity is no different than the brain washed terrorists that believe in Ala who kill ruthlessly because of religion. Christianity is no different than the ancient Greek's believing in the many gods that they once had, or the Mayans believing in their Jaguar god. Religion is the same thing no matter what mask you put on it. Simple as that.
Jun 22 2012: Hi Steward boy :
Why am I calling you boy (don't mind for it ) ? Simple , because you use what other atheists said without thinking too much ( at least this is the impression you made) ; I'm not an atheist at all , I believe that Zeus or Apollo or Cthulhu or Horus or Ra could have existed . Where , how ? I don't know and I don't care because I , as a human being am more evolved now than 6000 years ago .
Man , using atheistic formulas you never pass as a mature man : no formula covers everything, a mature man smells the danger .
Kevin :
"You know E G, it's funny when you apply logic to a religious argument, they don't ever have any logic to defend themselves with because they know they have lost. "
Thanks for informing me ( even though it's useless ), I usually don't buy mere words . Hope you don't too ! ................but why you serve me mere words if you don't buy mere words ? You know , I'm just wondering .
I used the mask metaphor you used before , yes .
Jun 22 2012: E G, I don't really want to spend the time to explain this, but I will. You see, quantum mechanics proves that particles can pop in and out of existence at the sub atomic level. The physics of a black whole also prove that time actually disappears and space time it self disappears also. In case you don't know, black holes are rips in space time. Kind of like if you cut a whole in a piece of paper. The black hole can be used to represent the era before the universe was created since there is essentially nothing there. So, this rules out the need or possibility for a "creator". Maybe I'm a little off topic, but I didn't want to get in a page long argument explaining this to you little by little.
Jun 23 2012: Come on man , you don't expect me to buy your little story , do you ?
First thing I should say is that I doubt that science says what you did (I'd like to see some references).
But even if this : "quantum mechanics proves that particles can pop in and out of existence at the sub atomic level. " is what science says, don't follows logically this : " this rules out the need or possibility for a "creator"" because you can any time ask yourself : why the particles pop in and out of existence ? ; an answer is a creator/God .
And something else : nothing , not a single thing, in this world rules out the possibilities.
Jun 23 2012: Well EG your argument of nothing can rule out the possibility is very weak, it's another china tea pot around Saturn kind of argument, I can't prove there isn't one but there's just better reasons to think that there isn't. And what Kevin says is true to an extent, the spacetime doesn't disappear but rather stops completely, so if you fell into one you would be ripped apart atom by atom, but you'd also never actually die as time stops in a black hole due to gravitational forces.
Now to really blow your noodle, in the double slit experiment, if you use electrons instead of waves you get the same distortion pattern, what does this mean? It means that the electrons have to exist in two places at the same time to cause this, welcome to quantum mechanics. Now if you get a vacuum chamber and leave in it the right equipment what you find is that whole atoms blink in and out of existence not just quarks, and they leave an energy residue. Here's how that little fact causes the universe http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo
Given enough time this energy builds up and up until you finally give rise to the universe. And I forget who said it but they said something like science doesn't disprove god, it just makes it possible not to believe in one. And then Lawrence Krauss and Stephen Hawking both say, the laws of physics can create a universe without a god. We truly can get everything from nothing.
Jun 23 2012: Steward :
-you misunderstood what I said , in fact you understood nothing , that wasn't my argument (look above that 'argument' to see the real argument) , ok ?
I saw also you gave me some leads , about them let me inform you that science is not made on wiki or youtube , I want some real references .
Jun 23 2012: EG how is a particle/ theoretical physicist not a reference?
http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Black_holes now here's a tip, open a new tap, search scholarly articles black holes, and you'll find plenty. And you did make an argument, you said " you don't expect me to buy your little story , do you ? "
Now you also stated something I didn't mention, you said, "why the particles pop in and out of existence ? ; an answer is a creator/God ." The real answer is because we are surrounded by energy, most of the mass of a proton comes from the spaces in between the quarks (which you'd learn if you watched the video). Now with most of the energy existing as absolute nothingness it's actually extremely common for a particle to just pop in and out of existence, it has no purpose or reason it just does, it's like saying why does sodium and chlorine bond together, because a creator makes it. It doesn't, keep up.
Jun 23 2012: You still didn't understand anything , we can't continue in this way .
I answer anyway to what you said :
why does it has no reason/purpose ? because you don't wanna have one or why ? because science doesn't answer to this question ( at least so you think)?
It doesn't matter if science looks out for purpose or not to ask 'why this ?' I ask because I wanna know and if science doesn't answer , bad for it .
Man , science is science , religion is religion , if you stay only in the science perimeter you'll never get to walk in the religion's one , that's why for me it doesn't matter if science looks out for purpose or not to ask why , get it this time?
The '..pedia's ' are not science , they are only a description , a presentation of it , I want science .
Jun 23 2012: E G, I can tell your trying to use mind tricks to cheat your way out of this argument. When you say that you don't want Youtube links because you don't think they are professional, that's an obvious tactic that your trying to use. On top of all that, Stewart practically blasted away any true logic you could use to defend yourself with. Your just spewing out words now.
Jun 27 2012: It's right I said I can't conjure up... (being very sarcastic of course , but you understand everything what's going on here , don't you ? ) but even not realizing my sarcasm from the first time , you should have noticed it from the next comment , there I was more explicit ( being careful at the effect though , that's right ) . You understand everything ? are you sure ? ( for not being misunderstood : I AM SARCASTIC NOW ) .
Jun 26 2012: You know, I think E G is just off his rocker at this point. E G, you have nothing on any of us. You don't think your actually winning do you. You need to just stop arguing because it's getting you know where although, I have to admit, your kind of amusing when you try to use your petty arguments.
Jun 26 2012: I don't see what I could answer to it , I don't think in terms of winning (unlike you) , to do that would mean to be naive and childish . I'm sure of a thing : you don't understand anything that's going on here . Maybe I'm not all the time polite but with this comment you are not polite surely . But I stop here .
Jun 28 2012: If thats all sarcasm, then you use it way to much(just to avoid the real topic). When you use sarcasm that much, people are going to think your serious. Your arguments aren't really that complicated either. No matter how hard you might TRY. You keep ranting on about different things. You've barely made any statements on the original topic, so I think your just trying to escape the storm, soto speak.
Jun 24 2012: Dear Kevin and Stewart,
I was away for a while and today when I read the comments I realized TED is TED because of guys like you. Thank you for being there, that gives hope to others surrounded by people like EG.
I couldn't have argued better (Although I found it unnecessary first only to realize later that others can learn from your comments as I did).
Jun 25 2012: Ahh my children, there is no point arguing about beliefs. If there was logic behind them they would be theories not beliefs. So don't waste your time trying to change that which can't be changed. We all have beliefs, some religeous some about other stuff (Why do I support (edit in sports team) ? Don't try to change anothers beliefs just be aware.
(Edit in name of some one whos opinion you respect)
Jun 25 2012: I'm a public threat , am I not ?
An what argumentation , nobody could argue better , right Sina ? oh at least not you . By the way , what argumentation ? : that particles pop in and out of existence (that's what they think the science says , even though it doesn't ) and because of it at the beginning , in an environment like the one created by a black hole today , some particles popped in existence ...... and BUUM here you go : The Universe ; therefore we don't need God as explanation . Of course I cannot be than sarcastic to this fair tale story no scientist will buy (they didn't even realize that I'm sarcastic ) , that with gods are better .
But I assumed that is what happened and I told them that even so a rational guy can't buy their story because it's not logical to blend religion with science , what do I mean by it ? simply , I mean that religion is about sense in life , is about ultimate meanings while science is not , that's why if I want to find more than science I can ask very simply : why the particles pop in and out of existence ? and of course an answer to this is God if not the single answer (Steward messed the all thing up even worse at this point with his 'scientific' explanations to a religion question, even though I warned him that if he walks only in the science's perimeter will never get to walk in the religion's one ) .
Come on guys , what rational guy (you don't need to be a scientist ) will not realize that what follows is not part of science , that what follows is a fallacy : " Science does say about why, it says it doesn't have one, never did and never will, it says nothing has a purpose." (Steward) . Do you wanna quote Einstein ? look what Einstein says , the popular quote : " Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. " or
Jun 25 2012: ""My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind.""
I translate them for you : Einstein says that we can use science to be religious ( religious in a certain sense) , he says that only by science we can have an humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit . So science has a purpose , there is nothing for nothing , I'm right to ask why in this sense because there must be an answer .
But you know , it was the same Einstein who said : " "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."" .
I don't wanna comment any more , think what you wanna do , it's your buissnes .
Jun 25 2012: Right eg google spontaneous particle generation and you'll find tonnes of resources http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mark_vuletic/vacuum.html here's one. Now this will really blow your hippie noodle, complete absolute emptiness weighs more than matter, you should watch the youtube video i linked to learn that. Now all that is required for a particle to appear in nothingness is for their to be a quantum flux or change in the quanta. This can give rise to both matter and anti matter, now before you go and speak on the behalf of all scientists maybe you should look up some of the scientists works first and see that they do agree that matter can and does spontaneously appear
Now back to your personal requirements that everything in the world has to have a purpose, fine go to whatever religion you want for answers but realize they're manmade answers which were largely only created due to personal incredulity or the fear of their not being a purpose to everything.
Now my apparent fallacy doesn't exist, if science says "we don't know" then they don't have an answer, but if they say "there isn't an answer" then that is an answer just think about it.
Now you bring up the religious scientist argument. If you claim there is a superior being then you need to prove it exists or else everyone else is just going to carry on not listening to you, now the deity Einstein believed in was incredibly dilute and he compares it to being the actual laws of physics.
So to summarize, if you're desperate for a purpose go make one up, if you want to know what scientists think, google them, or even email them. If you want to talk about black holes read some Hawking before you do. So whilst you ask the pointless questions of why does water exist and why do electrons sometimes exist in two places at the same time, we'll be asking the better questions, how is dark energy created, how do you get nuclear fussion to sustain itself.
Jun 25 2012: Nonsense man , nonsense .
Firstly : - thanks for the site about the creation ex nihilo ; I've bet that the 'ex nihilo process ' are not something that belongs to science , I still doubt it does because I don't believe the scientists , I want to understand them , I'm not a dogmatic guy and I hope you don't ask me to be so because this would mean to lose even the little logic you are left with .
But the argumentation at which you entirely failed was not about it because I assumed the premise as true and I showed you (even though you failed to understand even now in the last moment) that from this premise (that particles pop in existence) don't follows logically the conclusion that we don't need God/Creator.
But look at you : you gave me a site about, be careful now, about creation , I repeat CREATION . Do you still dare to say : we don't need a God/Creator when you , yourself , ask me to believe some scientists who try to prove without any doubt exactly what I was arguing for ? (what I was arguing for here was that from that premise don't follows logically that conclusion , why this? you should know it already but don't trust me trust your scientists who talk about Creation ex nihilo therefore about a creator/a God ; so your story is a fallacy).
"Now back to your personal requirements that everything in the world has to have a purpose," I didn't say it , I said only that science has a purpose , I proved it using the credibility of Einstein and doing so I showed clearly your fallacy , you the one who claimed the contrary . " but if they say "there isn't an answer" then that is an answer just think about it. " they didn't say it unlike you , Einstein didn't say it , what do you want more ?
"Now you bring up the religious scientist argument....." that's nonsense , I didn't bring up anything , I'm fine with the deity Einstein believed in to prove my point , I don't need anything more .
So to summarize
Jun 25 2012: So to summarize if I'm desperate for a purpose in science I'm not more than Einstein was .
"If you want to talk about black holes read some Hawking before you do" if I mention the word 'black hole ' or any other word from science it doesn't mean I wanna talk about it , we use concepts here if you didn't realize it so far .
Am I clear now ?
Jun 25 2012: Right particles pop in and out of existence, now there is no concrete idea as to how the universe began and we'll never be able to know because we can't detect beyond the cosmic plasma. So here's how you get from particles popping to the universe. The big bang and the expansion of the universe creates the space is expands into, so you can't go beyond the universe. So at the beginning time and space were all in one spot. Now at the beginning it's theorised that all of the fundamental forces merged into one. More background knowledge as it is required to understand this, (which btw you said you want to understand the scientists, you realise that's ridiculous right? Even if someone spent their entire life solely learning science they still couldn't understand ALL of what we know, you have to trust them sometimes) the total energy of the universe is 0, now this has important implications i.e even if you have nothing you still have a little something as what we call energy/ mass is mostly made of absolute nothingness. Right so NOW, all you need is an ever accumulating mass of energy so that eventually sub atomic particles form and the fundamental forces start to separate until the energy reaches critical mass and the whole thing effectively explodes creating the universe as it goes along, like I said watch the Lawrence Krauss video, he has wrote two books now on something from nothing, now do you see how you don't need a creator.
EDIT= the link wasn't about creation that implies a creator, you'll find it's a secular website, bravo on not seeing that.
Jun 25 2012: Damnit man, you really didn't understand anything , did you ? I don't give a damn if the link is a secular one , it could be , all I care is about my point and they seem to be on my side even though they are secular, I repeat my point for the last time :
There was the premise : the particles pop in existence
the conclusion of this premise : we don't need a Creator (Kevin's post) ; but from that premise don't follows logically that conclusion : - I may need a Creator to answer why the particles popped in existence beyond the scientific explanation (from here started the entire thing about the purpose of science). This why is a metaphysical question .
So summarizing : Kevin's judgement you defended is a fallacy because the metaphysics with its questions exist . This is it , simple like this . I really don't know why is so hard to understand it........... maybe my English but you are a native speaker ... .
Jun 26 2012: E G are you for real, or half troll, or high?
Don't flatter yourself. You are not a public threat, just rude.
"Man, Cool it, Boy, Damnit".
Can you discuss a topic without being plain rude? No issue if your ideas are challenging, but your comments are "condescending" if I'm being polite.
Jun 26 2012: EG
I understand the pleasure you take from this kind of behavior and confronting rational arguments and I am not going to give that pleasure to you because this conversation is not about you and how "cool" you are being rude and challenging all scientific evidence. I could not argue better than Stewart and Kevin and I would not if I could because the show you are running does not belong to TED and I am definitely not as patient as these valuable TED members. Let me clarify that despite being rude and impolite, you are being well tolerated.
A threat to the public ? definitely no but a threat to yourself is what you may consider thinking about. I see many great hints and lots of valuable links and resources in my friends' comments, you would have used them to your benefit if you had been wise. but that's not the reason you are here is it ?
I advise you to think about Obey No1kinobe's points. you may learn the proper way of communicating with people.
Jun 26 2012: Sina :
Well , Steward seems to be more clever than you , he didn't answer to my last comment , I assume he understood (if he read it) that what he was defending was a fallacy ; tell him about me "confronting rational arguments " , he may enlighten you a bit now.
"........challenging all scientific evidence." you say it as if it is a bad thing but of course it isn't , let me inform you that this is the very reason of their existence ; are you a damn believer in the scientific evidence ? if you don't challenge them how could you be otherwise ?
It seems you understand science as my dead grandma did , at all .
I think I quote Obey right now , you know your friend Obey here on TED , don't you ? Look what he said to me : " Good stuff E G, now you are really going for the person not the ideas or argument.
Well done showing your true colours." I think I would say the same thing about you now .
Jun 26 2012: Here's why I didn't reply, because you were trolling, you weren't looking for evidence you were just wanting to throw words about.
The so called fallacy, is only a fallacy in your eyes because you didn't know the other facts surrounding the idea of everything coming from nothing, with this knowledge, THEN you can get logically to a universe without a creator. I've given you lots of sites etc to do so and I'd advise that you re read them all and watch the Lawrence Krauss video.
Now challenging scientific evidence is not a bad thing, as long as you do it right ! First you need evidence or an observation that contradicts the prior evidence. Until you have that, challenging what has been proven is pointless and is a waste of everyone's time.
Now I love an argument and a debate, but I only accept evidence and observation as tools of debating, if you haven't got these then you've no base to work from and you're arguing from belief which is another waste of time as it never stands the rigorous process of the scientific method.
So why I didn't reply
1) You'd no argument and refused to value the evidence I provided
2)You were trolling
3) Because my name's Stewart, not steward, a steward is a noun referring to a job rather like a host. Learn the difference.
Jun 26 2012: Well , Stewart ( I wasn't careful with steward , I know what it means , my apologize ) let me quote you : ""Well EG your argument of nothing can rule out the possibility is very weak, it's another china tea pot around Saturn kind of argument, I can't prove there isn't one but there's just better reasons to think that there isn't."" so: Well Stewart your argument that I'm trolling , that the fallacy is only in my eyes because I don't know the supposed other facts surrounding the idea of everything coming from nothing is another china tea pot around Saturn kind of argument , I can't prove because I don't know there isn't one but there 's better to think that there isn't .
if you know the other facts why do you just thank yourself telling me that there are another facts that could alter my judgement , why don't you just tell me one , a single one and refute my argumentation ? Until you don't whatever you else say that remains a BIG fallacy .
In fact I'm not of blame here at all : there was said to me some things , I proved them wrong , if there is something more that could destroy my argumentation it's not my business , it is the business of the one who told me that couple of things at the start ; I worked with what I had , what did you expect I was going to do: that I will have read the entire scientific material on the subject ? come on .
So this two : " 1) You'd no argument and refused to value the evidence I provided
2)You were trolling" are pure nonsense and I proved it .
"Now challenging scientific evidence is not a bad thing, as long as you do it right ! " I entirely agree with you on this . "First you need evidence or an observation that contradicts the prior evidence. Until you have that, challenging what has been proven is pointless and is a waste of everyone's time." Well , it could be a way but is not the single one , I know you don't trust me but there are scientists who talk about the other way I used :
Jun 26 2012: Ok ok now you're really trolling, we started off with particles coming in and out of existence, you didn't think this could get you logically to not requiring a creator for the universe and I gave you plenty I'll list them.
Total energy of universe is 0, this means that you don't even require energy to have something and also that energy is actually 0 also. So you don't even need something to start off particle formation, if you had a totally empty vacuum void of everything, eventually particles would form.
The start of the universe is thought to have been a singularity, this means that the laws of physics go out the window,. The four fundamental forces combine to either form one or two compound forces, (the possibility of two is because it's not yet known whether gravity could join the other 3)
A bit more detail on the nothingness, watch the L. Krauss video for a better explanation. Within atoms there are quarks, by using a technique scientists have managed to see the inside of an atom mass wise. This showed that the most energy/mass within an atom came from the space between the quarks. This enters into quantum mechanics. Now I'm not the best at quantum mechanics but I do semi understand parts of it, one such part is the fact that particles can and MUST in some cases exist in two places at the same time, this shows we've a lot to learn particle and energy wise but so far we're seeing that it's almost impossible to have nothing for long as something always happens.
These all happen naturally and very very often. Now these are all the facts I can remember from previous posts there's probably more, now how does this lead you to not needing a god? Simple, because this all shows that you don't need someone or something to cause energy to form particles, all you require is a quantum flux and also due to Pauli's exclusion principle a single quantum flux on Earth affects every particle in the universe.
These are the evidence and observations of origins without god/ gods
Jun 26 2012: Karl Popper , look what he said ( here is the link : http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/ ) :
"(a) The first is formal, a testing of the internal consistency of the theoretical system to see if it involves any contradictions." but you had plenty of them , you were full of contradictions (even in the last comment you contradicted with an earlier one , I quoted you ) . You come up with something inconsistent , you don't even realize it and mess yourself up choosing to refute my argumentation in the name of other scientific facts . What rational guys would believe you ?
I was right to not consider the other scientific facts that could put in a better light your ideas , I was so simply because I did what Popper said , I did the FIRST test , the test of consistency , and you FAILED , why would I go on ?
Ans something else if your ideas are inconsistent , what make you think they would change in the light of other facts ? It doesn't work that way .
May I quote your friend who put you in trouble ? : " I can tell your trying to use mind tricks to cheat your way out of this argument. " this is all you do .
Jun 26 2012: Like I said up there^^ I have mentioned almost all the facts so that you could have them then base your argument from that and I did it consistently throughout the comments. Where from your side you haven't rebutted anything. You have repeated about how you don't get from particles popping to not needing a God, so I assumed you clearly didn't know the other facts which take you to the knowledge that particles pop in and out of existence, also stated up there^^ especially in my latest post.
No matter where you go in science these days you don't need god, universe can come from the above observations, thank you.
Edit= If you could also find some inconsistencies I'd be more than happy to clear them up for you.
Jun 26 2012: Steward :
I knew this : "...These all happen naturally and very very often. Now these are all the facts I can remember from previous posts there's probably more, now how does this lead you to not needing a god? Simple, because this all shows that you don't need someone or something to cause energy to form particles, all you require is a quantum flux and also due to Pauli's exclusion principle a single quantum flux on Earth affects every particle in the universe. " ok ? I knew this and still I came up with my argument : we may need a Creator to answer to the metaphysical why , all you said is just physical , I go beyond this , why this all happen? why this physical ? it's senseless to answer using the science because in the end I gonna ask you : why this science happen ? therefore your all explanation may require a
god ; to keep answering by scientific data you don't do anything else than walking in circle (you pull your tail alone) . I'm sorry to realize you didn't get it so far , maybe now ...... . There is an inconsistency between your premise ( including your patient explanations ) and your conclusion , you see the explanation right above . (the other inconsistencies are not that important but if you want to know them .... there are 2 or 3 I noticed ).
This problem goes even further : someone could ask : ok , to the metaphysical why I may need a god but why this god would create the universe in so way I don't see any sign of him ? ... maybe this is your problem because you say "this all shows that you don't need someone or something to cause energy to form particles " . But you see this is a different problem than the one above and sticking only with the one above you'll never get the answer to this new one . But frankly Stewart , do I need to guess ?
Jun 26 2012: And in saying this we come back to your own personal need/ wanting for their to be a purpose or a why for the universe. Does it frighten you that there may be no purpose to any of this? Does it frighten you or do you not like the idea of merely being the product of a quantum glitch?
A few more facts, the universe is expanding, in tens of billions of years the universe will experience heat death. Everything will then revert back to being nothing. Now I can't see a purpose for this, I can't see some deep meaning, but more than that I don't see why it needs to have a purpose. Why can't you just accept that there may be no purpose? And this isn't a personal jibe or anything but I'm curious, to you, why does there have to be a purpose to all of this? This is what has me confused, everyone here's fine heading face first into oblivion without there being a metaphysical reason, so why do you latch onto the need for one?
Jun 27 2012: Well Stewart , you should know first that metaphysics is not only about purposes is more than this ; it is also a try to explain and to give answers to that kind of questions . So "Why can't you just accept that there may be no purpose?" because I'm not a dogmatic guy , I don't believe in science , I don't accept science just because it is science or because everybody thinks it's a good thing , ok ?, I wanna know why .
" Does it frighten you or do you not like the idea of merely being the product of a quantum glitch?" You are really funny with this question , I'm not frighten of anything . But I don't understand you guys : you pretend to be rational guys and within science if you wanna be correct you must be rational ; but here is my perplexity : once you step outside of science you do the strangest thing you could ever do : you stop being rational , the entire rational attitude cultivated after time spent within science just disappear ; you stop asking yourself why, you just stop thinking and come to me with : 'it may be no answer' or this kind of nonsense . how come this ?
I think I know an answer , it depends on the person but for you I think I know one : - you just have a sum of scientific data in your mind , you collected it without too much thinking , it wasn't really hard : an youtube video , an article from wikipedia or from another site , maybe you have a degree in something ........... listen to me : this is not what science is supposed to be for us , it must be more , it's in its nature to be more . You just mock yourself so . The scientists mock you so .
So " Why can't you just accept that there may be no purpose?" because I'm not an idiot .
Jun 27 2012: Right firstly, metaphysics means beyond nature or beyond natural. For all intensive purposes of evidence and proof there is no evidence of ANYTHING that exists beyond the natural world. So here's why NO ONE can be rational when talking about anything which is beyond our physical world, about spirituality or about gods.
This why there is no point to even care about metaphysics, it's only speculation and personal beliefs and views based on personal presumptions which are constructed 90% of the time by people who fear death. So people want something more than just this life so they create something beyond this world and they cling to it because it comforts them. Now do you see why science doesn't touch this crap? Because it's not scientific and if it's not scientific it's not worth even looking at.
There is no self respecting, honest scientist who puts any faith into pseudo science or metaphysics.
Now if you don't think there is a purpose to this whole universe/ multi verse then you are not an idiot as you indirectly asserted. Your view is that there must be a reason for this universe, for war, for extinction, for ponies, for rainbows, for death and disease and black holes. You are fine to think that, but don't dare speak as if you know that science values metaphysics or pseudo science or creation science for that matter. Science deals with the real world in which we live and prove exists, now just accept that. Those who claim to be metaphysical scientists are just working off their on presumptions. Last fact for you, you can still believe that there's a purpose, but just so you know this science still says, and most likely always will, that there is no apparent purpose or reason why the universe exists. The best answer any physicist can give to a question as to why? Is that the universe has to exist, the laws of physics for our universe prevent a universe from not existing.
Jun 27 2012: Stewart :
Maybe you have some ideas about physics but about metaphysics you are entirely ignorant . The bad thing is not this , maybe you really aren't interested about it , the bad thing is that you aren't aware enough of your ignorance and come up here with nonsense .
"metaphysics means beyond nature or beyond natural. " and what beyond natural means ? in your opinion it means : the spirituality or a kind of supra reality created by our minds , everything what is not physical ...... and hell knows what else nonsense you are capable of . Well this is not what metaphysics is , more than this that isn't even what 'beyond natural' means . But I comment only on what metaphysics is : it is thinking about ultimate questions and the results of this thinking . It is science about what science is not . My initial point still stays as true and your words as fallacy .
"There is no self respecting, honest scientist who puts any faith into pseudo science or metaphysics. " this is a blasphemy against some of the greatest minds to humankind ever had , just some examples : Bertrand Russell , Alfred North Whitehead , Immanuel Kant , Henri Bergson ... and many others including Einstein .
"You are fine to think that, but don't dare speak as if .... " I think that and even more : I do dare .
Your irrationality hurts you , you better stop here and even though you now feel badly the need to answer (because you are frustrated ), don't do that . You , actually in the last comments didn't make any good point , don't come again discovered here , you'll just hurt yourself more . Good bye .
Jun 26 2012: Hi Kevin,
I agree our tribal nature is a problem. Agree religion can reinforce this.
I support freedom of and from religion (within limits). I don't have as many objections with religious views that accept freedom of religion, separation of church and state, don't push their dogma on others unless there is a reasonable secular rationale, and don't indoctrinate their children, and don't harm others including genital mutilation of infants etc.
Suggest working a more moderate and tolerant form of religions may be more practical than hoping it just disappears.
I'm not sure world government is the answer to nationalism. Too remote.
I don't think we can even say liberal democracies are less warlike than totalitarian regimes or theocracies. Look at the US and UK and France since they became democracies, since WW2, since the fall of the cold war.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.


text:
News of the aftermath of the Susan G. Komen break from Planned Parenthood is swiftly unfolding. We've told you all about the funding boost Planned Parenthood got as a result. But there have been other real-world ramifications from Monday's stunning announcement.
The backlash is still going on, and it's about more than just money. Komen's reputation and integrity are at stake. And the way things are going, it looks like Komen is paying a high price for its decision.The foundation is also showing signs of splintering from within.
Two affiliates of Susan G. Komen for the Cure are refusing to defund their local Planned Parenthood clinics. Komen Denver and Komen Connecticut will continue funding as usual. Via Twitter, Komen Denver posted a link to an announcement, saying, "Please read, retweet, and share to your networks. Komen Denver is PRIORITIZING women's health over politics." And on Komen Connecticut's Facebook page, they have posted, "We remain committed to our mission of saving lives and ending breast cancer forever." Komen Connecticut says they are talking with Komen HQ about supporters' concerns.
Meanwhile, The Atlantic reported this morning that the decision to de-fund breast cancer screenings through Planned Parenhood caused Komen's top public health official, Mollie Williams, to resign in protest. She's being very discreet about leaving, but in a statement she released, she concludes, "The divide between these two very important organizations saddens me. I am hopeful their passionate and courageous leaders, Nancy Brinker and Cecile Richards, can swiftly resolve this conflict in a manner that benefits the women they both serve."
Another interesting twist: The controversy has actually raised awareness that Planned Parenthood provides women with free or low-cost breast exams. According to a spokeswoman, this has led to an increase in scheduled appointments. Women are getting in those exams while they still can!
One thing seems very clear: This split is dividing loyalties. Women want to support breast cancer research and prevention. And most want to continue funding for Planned Parenthood. It looks like the split is weakening both organizations.
Do you think the Komen/Planned Parenhood split was politically motivated?
Image via WeNews/Flickr
Here is the issue--statistics and research showed Susan G. Koman for the cure was offering money, funding, and/or incentives to approximately 85% of Planned Parenthood facilities, however, it was discovered that less than 3% of the facilities were actually offering the breast cancer services on the premises--they were pocketing the money and sending women to have free breast exams at local health departments or other organizations. In addition, many pro-life Americans were very upset when they discovered that their donations to the number one Breast Cancer charity was going to fund something that they consider to be a serious sin, morally wrong, and a form of murder. I agree that there will be issues, and maybe the Foundation should have offered the opportunity for donors to specifiy their amounts to not go into the funding disctribution for the Planned Parenthood facilities. But all in all, they pulled out because their supporters raised a loud cry for them too. So while pro-choice Americans are upset about the "insanity" of the funding loss, they need to also realize that their just as vocal counterparts are what led to this. Yelling at the Foundation for pulling funding is the exact same right and privilage that pro-lifers took part in.
I understand that not every body agrees on abortion, but the money given by the Komen foundation is not used for abortions, it is bookmarked for breast health exams.I believe that the Komen foundation's decision was politically based. That being said, they are a private foundation, not a government grant service, and therefore have every right to pull their funding no matter the reasoning. It is a sad event and even more upsetting is the staggering number of women who are going to be losing important health care services.
I wonder if there will be more research brought out by either organization. Also, with Komen being such a large donor it would be nice to see Planned Parenthood do some restructuring so that they can "guarantee" the money to go towards breast health and bring up their accounting records to show where the funding is split. IE: Komen's donation goes towards these services, private donations go towards abortion services, federal funding goes towards general exams, etc.
You know what would really be great? If federal funding was also pulled, inspiring even more people to donate to PP, and freeing them from "political pressure" for good.
Jeskent, you don't have it quite right there. Only 3% of PP are able to offer Mammograms in their facilities. As far as I know, all PP sites offer breast exams and referrals for those needing mammograms, to healthcare facilities who are equipped to do them, AND paying for those mammograms.
Every penny that SGK gave to PP went directly to breast health education, cancer prevention, detection and treatment. Supporters of SGK are completely false in their belief that they have somehow helped to pay for abortions. Try learning a bit about how a non-profit works. They make apropriations for different things. Money from SGK goes into an account for breast health, and that is what iti is spent on.
If SGK supporters were shocked to find out that part of their money went to PP, then that is their own fault for not checking into the charity. SGK has never made it a secret that they were partnered with PP. In fact, they have talked about it on their very own website.
sh31k3n, SGK has never questioned the fact that their donations were going to breast health.
Why call for PP restructuring when their practices are only being questioned by a few uninformed SGK donors who are making excuses for the decision?
gooooooooooooooooooooooooooo GIANTS.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The cannon on the FV 720 Mora is not a 30mm but a French-British 40mm CTA International (Royal Ordnance/Giat-Nexter branch) firing case telescoped 40mm rounds. This cannon is scheduled to replace the actual 30mm used in the warrior and to be the main armament of the next FRES SCOUT VCI using ASCOD II platform. The French will also fit it on the future EBRC VCI which should appear during the next decade.
ARMA 3 AAF Reinforcements Pack released with new content
ARMA 3 has just received some spanking new content courtesy of the team at Bohemia.
The ARMA 3 AAF Reinforcements Pack comes with three new vehicles, the FV-720 Mora IFV, the MBT-52 Kuma tank, and the Wy-55 Hellcat helicopter, all perfect for driving off cliffs or crashing in a freak battlefield incident.
The FV-720 Mora is an infantry fighting vehicle used by the AAF. They were bought by the AAF from the British Armed Forces and reconditioned to serve two more decades. The Mora is armed with a 30mm cannon and a coaxial machinegun, providing not only a carrying capacity, but also reliable fire support.
The MBT-52 Kuma is the main battle tank used by Altian Armed Forces. A batch of a few dozen tanks and spare turrets were bought under-price from a south-European country facing an economic collapse. Like similar MBTs of the era, the Kuma is armed with a 120mm cannon, a 7.62mm coaxial machinegun and a remotely controlled 12.7mm HMG. The level of protection for the crew is also remarkable, thanks to additional armor layers.
The Wy-55 Hellcat is a multi-purpose military helicopter, most suited for anti-surface, battlefield utility with limited transport capability. It replaces its predecessor the Super Lynx, improving the maneuverability, durability and protection. The armed version is fitted with twin miniguns and unguided rockets.
There is other content to mess about with too including:
- Added MBT-52 Kuma tank
- Added FV-720 Mora Infantry Fighting Vehicle
- Added: Wy-55 Hellcat (armed and unarmed) helicopters
- Added: LRPS optics
- Added: IR grenades
- Added: Black variants of MX rifles
- Added: Selected parts of the Tactical Guide to Field Manual
- Added: Guerrilla headwear with headsets
- Added: Improved narrative characters
- Added: AAF Armor Groups for editor
- Added: 7 new faces of developers
- Added: 4 new ambient sounds
- Added: New pile of wood model
- Added: New camping light model
- Added: 3 graves
- Added: 2 variants of a garbage container
- Added: 5 variants of graffiti
- Added: Playground castle with slide!
- Added: 2 wooden shelves
- Added: Various leaflets and posters
- Added: Board map of Altis, Stratis and customizable empty map
- Added: Five variants of luggage heaps
- Added: Four variants of a trash barrel
- Added: Various fishing gear
- Added: Third Altian Radio Protocol
These are just the new additions, wait until you see the full patch notes. I suggest you get a coffee and relax, there's a long list to get through.
All the new content and updates will be automatically added to your ARMA 3 via Steam.
Related to this story
You can also post through a social network or without logging in.
-1December 12, 2013 at 3:49 pm


text:
5 out of 5
3 Reviews
Perfect size
April 21, 2010
For whatever reason, I purchased and packed just about everything else I needed before considering the necessary toiletry bag. Luckily Eagle Creek provides a very large assortment of these types of bags in many shapes and sizes. Since I had just a sliver of long space left available in my bag, most cubes or other large toiletry bags would not fit. Fortunately I came across this "tube" that fit everything in my kit while also fitting snuggly in the small space I had available for it. The bag has no extra ordinary features, but it was the perfect size for what I needed. With all of Eagle Creeks various bags, they likely have some of the right size for just about everyone.
Good for organization
May 12, 2010
This cube is pretty small, but I bought a couple to fit inside my carry on luggage. It would be great for underwear, socks, or toiletries. Material is very durable too.
Great for traveling
November 17, 2011
I've been using Eagle Creek Cubes to travel for several years and love them. The Pack-It Half Tube Cube is no exception. Its the perfect size to keep smaller items like socks nice and neat.Pros: Ease of use, Great value
Eagle Creek Pack-It Half Tube Cube-74116 Photo
Black, Blue Sea, Earth Green and Red Fire.
We're Available:
Mon-Fri: 7:30am-4:00pm PST
Sat-Sun: CLOSED


text:
Very nice lunch here with the mrs. Reasonably priced and great bottle of Shiraz. Specials on offer added to an already good menu and even had custard to go with the crumble rather than ice cream. Will certainly go back here for an evening meal
Studio 6 looks reasonable on the outside, but is really a dump on the inside. Others seem to like this, but it does nothing for me at all.
It has all the usual beers and wines and a few others on top. The toilets are cramped and disgusting. It can only be used one at a time. If you have a wieght problem, don't bother going as the toilets will not be any use at all, and there are no facilities for the disabled.
The only redeeming thing for this place is the food. The food is quite good, but the staff seem to think they are doing you a favour in serving you. Also watch out for the service charge which is automatically added to the bill.
I really like this hut style bar it reminds me of some of the waterside drinking holes I've visited in Europe. It's usually pretty dead in the day as it's set back too far from the South bank to attract many tourists. However, it fills up pretty quickly come around 6pm when the media types from nearby finish work and sit down to hole up for the evening. Unfortunately, I've found whenever it gets even slightly busy you end up waiting far too long to get served. Can't say much about the food, as I've never tried it, but there are separate indoor and outdoor restaurant sections. The outdoor section is pretty cool too with a kind of woodland picnic area feel to it. Nice and relaxed with no attitude, the way I like it
This user has arrived from Qype, a European company acquired by Yelp in 2012. We have integrated the two sites to bring you one great local experience.


text:
Annyeong!!! (^-^)
I am a totally aweSONE guy(...yeah i am narcissistic xD) from Austria(NOT Australia! :P) who has fallen in love with the 9 amazing, overwhelming and beautiful goddesses from korea called SNSD/Girls Generation! <3 <3 <3
So the nine angels are going to take the major part on this blog :D
But there will also be other KPOP Groups like CN Blue, Epik High, Drunken Tiger!
I am even a huge fan of far east asia especially korea and japan! :3
And Anime, Manga, Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts are parts of my life too! *_*
Never let the kid in your heart die...honesty, positivity, critical thinking...challenge everything...nothing can be taken for granted!
Love Life. Thankful. Lovable: Huggable. Dog Lover. Music Lover. Living all around the world. Student Of Life. Nine. Art. Scorpius. Dream.
Stuff I like
- Audio post via blanksone
- Devil's Cry
- Girls' Generation
- 2011 Girls' Generation Tour
This is how you do an intro.Audio post via blanksone


text:
Most Common Book Title?
I have no data on it, but "Dust" must be up there somewhere. Was looking for a book of that name and found five zillion different ones on Amazon.
Dispatches from District 48
Archive for the 'Books' Category.
I have no data on it, but "Dust" must be up there somewhere. Was looking for a book of that name and found five zillion different ones on Amazon.
One thing I think I have never mentioned before on this site is that in college, I was a fanatical bridge player. I developed this odd social life of bridge in the afternoon and beer pong at night. When I got tired of playing other students, my friend and I would go into town and play the local residents, who were sharks.
Anyway, people new to bridge are always intimidated by bidding, and certainly there is a learning curve there (which I made worse by using the Precision rather than the Goren standard system). But with some time, bidding becomes rote. Only perhaps in one in ten or twenty hands is the last increment of bidding expertise really useful, and then usually only when playing duplicate where even a few extra points really matter.
Once your bidding is mostly up to snuff, the game is all about card play. A good player will play out the entire hand, with guesses as to which cards are held by which players, before the first card is led.
The single best book I have ever read on card play is Card Play Technique by Mollo and Gardener. Thirty years ago there was about one source for this often out-of-print book and I bought a dozen copies, slowly giving most of them away over time. Now, however, it is back in print. If you play bridge, you have probably read this book, but if not, buy yourself a copy for Christmas.
Apparently, a company named "Sumpto" has adopted a business model right out of my novel BMOC (written about 7 years ago). This is a scene where entrepreneur Preston Marsh is interviewing and trying to recruit the protagonist Susan out of business school. They are discussing the business model of his company called BMOC. Half of its business model was that companies paid BMOC to place their products in the hands of influential high school students.
[Marsh:] The real innovation, though is… do you know what a product placement is?"
[Susan:] "Sure. It's when a company pays to get their product into a TV show or movie – like when Reese's pieces were used in the movie ET or I guess if you showed Seabiscuit eating Purina Horse Chow."
"Exactly! And product placements are particularly effective. They act like an ad but they can't be ignored like an ad. Anyway, we have taken product placements one step further: We get paid by major manufacturers to place their products not in movies but in the hands of the most popular kids in high school, the ones who really lead opinion as to what's cool and not cool who we…"
"Who you happen to have on retainer anyway."
"Exactly. But be careful how you think about 'on retainer.' The natural reaction is to assume this means money, but in our case it's not. We keep the most popular people on retainer merely by …"
"Giving them free products," Susan interrupted again, with growing excitement, "that manufacturers are already paying you to put in their hands."
This is from Sumpto's web site. (You will have to click through, for some reason even copying it as text is crashing my site, not sure why).
A big hat tip to reader Don, who not only found the site but paid me the indirect complement of having remembered my book. Thanks!
Yet another case when I was 7-10 years too early (at Mercata were were about 10 years too early to cash in on social media as Groupon did with a similar model to ours). But honestly, I was trying to make up quasi-outrageous business models. For god sakes the other two major business ventures in the book were building fountains to harvest the coins thrown in them and selling musical tones for elevators. I had no idea I should have been getting venture funding.
By the way, for the dozens of my literary fans, I am almost done with my next book, which is really going to be good. This novel writing thing really is about practice. Teasers to follow...
I recently discussed a book that sucks, so here is one that does not suck: Wool. I am not sure what makes it so compelling, but I had a lost couple of days when I blew off what I was supposed to be doing and read all of the first five books (the first few are short so that all five are only about 500 pages altogether).
Save time and buy the anthology.
I don't know how many of you read it, but for me Wool seems to echo many themes from A Canticle for Leibowitz. The series are totally different in style and content and story-telling and characters, but none-the-less they both address themes like the recurrence, almost cyclicality, of man's failings and the role of rules (even arbitrary rules) and authority in breaking or reinforcing these cycles.
And speaking of things this novel reminded me of, in the latter parts of the anthology we are introduced in Wool to a sort of instruction manual for the state that is a kind of dark version of Seldon's psycho-history in the Foundation novels.
The whole novel is familiar and highly creative at the same time. Go buy it.
In the current novel I am writing, set in the future, the dollar has collapsed and everyone uses something called "zons" instead, a currency backed not by gold or the full faith and credit of the US Government (lol) but on the stable pricing and the promise of redemption at Amazon.com. Yesterday, reality overran this admittedly small element of my story. I will need to write faster.
Apparently, the home in which L. Ron Hubbard invented Scientology is right here in Phoenix. In fact, it is right by my kids' school and I drive past it almost every day. In the next few days I will take a camera and snap a picture or two.
I was a fan of Hubbard's "Battlefield Earth" (the book, not the movie) as a young adult -- it is a classic example of 1950's pulp science fiction -- though I picked it up a few years ago out of nostalgia and found that it did not wear very well. I do not know much about Scientology, though I wonder why folks who go all-in for it aren't at least a bit suspicious of a religion involving ancient aliens that was cooked up by a science fiction writer.
The whole thing makes for a fascinating story, and I think it would be fabulous book material for someone who is not either a proselytizing Scientologist or an angry ex-Scientologist with an ax to grind.
It appears that a scene in the Fountainhead that I thought was a facetious absurdity actually occurred:
Famous architects dress as their buildings:
No Cosmo-Slotnick building
Touched: The Jerry Sandusky Story (I kid you not).
Some of the reviews are classic, though I am disappointed many of them are "please remove this book." Why should we let this jerk hide? The book up with its amazing irony and spate of scathing review comments is much better than being disappeared.
Well, I finished Reamde this weekend. It was only OK. It is a straight up modern adventure book, like perhaps a Vince Flynn novel, chasing terrorists around the globe. I enjoy Stephenson for his big, sometimes outrageous ideas, his witty prose, and his love affair with the geek culture. Except for the latter, none of this is in evidence in this book. It is certainly a more popularly accessible book, but that is certainly not what I want from Stephenson.
Cryptonomicon and Snow Crash are among my favorite novels. One of the reason I liked them were for the prose he brought to bear on even (or especially) trivial topics. His long passages on eating Cap'n Crunch or getting wisdom teeth removed in Cryptonomicon are classics. I got very little of this kind of thrill in Reamde, made worse by the fact that there were just too many main characters, none of whom were very well developed for me.
At some points, this book held my attention, and at some points it dragged. The book in some ways is almost the same structure as a comedic farce -- a whole bunch of characters who are dragged along by events into increasingly unlikely circumstances. There is no looming event or goal that drives the narrative in a, say, Clancy novel. Its just a lot of falling into one mess after another. Its also a bit unseriousness - it feels like the teens in Scooby Doo chasing terrorists. (One problem is that Stephenson's bad guys are too likable - they are always smart and ironic gentlemanly - so its hard to get as worked up about heading them off as one might in a classic thriller).
Some playwright or critic once wrote (sorry, can't remember the name) that if you put a gun out on the stage in Act 1, someone better use it in Act 3. (OK, it was Chekov, though why he said "gun" rather than "phaser" is beyond me). In this book, Stephenson leaves guns unused all over the stage. In particular, Stephenson comes up with one of his patented interesting-crazy ideas of using an MMRPG to crowd-source security analysis. I felt sure that in the manhunts that followed, that particular gun would be picked up and used to help drive to the climax, but we never hear of it again. In fact, we learn a lot of interesting things about this game in the book, which seems to be absolutely central to the plot, but in the end turns out to be entirely peripheral, an early macguffin to kick start the plot.
Another example is the HUGE amounts of the book go to talking about an interesting social realignment happening in the game, to absolutely no end. OK, so characters have abandoned the good and evil alignments put in by the game masters for a new emergent faction division. I thought sure we would see some kind of real-world parallel to this happening in the book, or some insight drawn from this that helps solve the real world problem. Nothing.
Overall, a disappointing book I would not have finished had it not been by Stephenson.
Postscript: If you become interested in the dynamics of the MMRPG in the book, where there are no character levels (only a skill system) and money and money making is central to the the game, the closest analog I have ever seen is not a fantasy game but EVE Online, a space-based game (also, to a lesser extent, Star Wars Galaxies as well, but that is now defunct). EVE Online probably has the most interesting economy of any MMRPG I have played and I know they employ an economist who sometimes writes articles about his work.
Amazon is promising textbook rentals on the Kindle that could save 80% over the cost of buying new. That is good news, and any competition to break up the cozy and price-inflated textbook market is welcome.
But Amazon is going to have to rethink the Kindle and its software before this is ever going to work. I am a huge fan of the Kindle (though I have switched my reading to the Kindle app on the iPad). But it works best reading a book straight through. Want to page back and find a particular section -- good luck. The iPad app actually works better, with a touch screen slider that allows a little better browsing. But for textbooks, they really need some kind of page navigation like coverflow in the iPod (which I hate by the way in the iPod but would love for pages in a textbook).
I have been an Amazon Prime customer for years, and have been very satisfied to get the free two-day shipping. And they have always done a good job with this, and in the past I have had literally hundreds of shipments in a row arrive on time.
However, two of my last three orders have been late, and the last order, which should have been here on Thursday, still, two days later, has not arrived despite the fact the system says it was delivered June 23 at 12:54.
But it is actually fairly easy to figure out why the service has deteriorated. On both these late orders, Amazon used the USPS to deliver the package. That explains a lot. The USPS has awful, unreliable service and has absolutely no package tracking capability. Not only is it my package missing, but neither Amazon, myself, or the USPS have any way to find out where it is.
This is awful service. I am not only a pretty high-volume customer, but I have paid an annual fee to get premium shipping -- and I can tell you that there is likely no one on Earth who considers the USPS a premium shipping option. If they keep sending my 2-day packages snail mail, there will no longer be any point to being a prime member. Maybe they will offer a super-prime membership sometime in the future that guarantees they will not use USPS (though I suppose I can get this now by clicking the one-day shipping button and paying the $3 or whatever it is extra).
I have bought numerous audio and video Teaching Company courses and have never been disappointed. Until tomorrow they are having a 70% off sale on many of their courses.
A few I have heard and would recommend:
Modern Western Civ (I am doing this one now)
Early Middle Ages (one of three by same professor on the Middle Ages. All three are awesome) here is late Middle Ages
History of Ancient Rome (not rated as well on this site but this is probably my favorite)
I am kind of amazed how long the list is, but I have actually listened to several others I would not recommend or that are not on sale.
Update: Use coupon code VFRC to get an additional $20 if you spend over $50. By the way, I don't get any commissions. I just believe in the product.
Last week I asked readers to help me remember the name of a science fiction book centered around an OCD man who has to carefully follow a specific routine or else reality unravels, an event that leaves the world subtly, or sometimes not so subtly, changed.
The book is called Resonance, and I re-read it this weekend. I had forgotten a lot of it but it really is a terrific, under-hyped book. There is real suspense as the unraveling of the world accelerates and our hero starts to better understand exactly what is going on. What I enjoyed the most was how there were two people in the book who had special, err, powers but who initially totally interpreted what these powers were or how they worked.
I have never seen a paperback version of it, but commenters tell me you can find it in the Baen free library (if so, that is a screaming deal because this is a pretty good book) and it is available on the Kindle.
I am trying to remember the name of a science fiction novel that came probably between 5 and 10 years ago. The novel centers around a man who is strongly OCD (or Aspergers maybe), who tries to closely adhere to a very set process and schedule for his life, else reality will "unravel," bringing both small and large changes in his life (ie he finds his home somewhere else). It turns out that what is in fact happening is that he can jump between parallel universes, and eventually he is called on to use this skill to save all the universes from some catastrophe. Does that ring any bells with anyone? I know a couple of kids who are old enough to understand they have similar traits that might appreciate them at the center of a novel.
By the way, I seem to remember Orson Scott Card (?) has a novel where the main character was OCD, where folks who had certain compulsions were treated as prophets. Can't remember the name of that one either. I remember the protagonist would trace cracks on the floor when she got upset.
Update: Found it: Resonance. Thanks to commenter Joe Martin. He has a link to it in the Baen free library.
Doublethink reviews a collection of dystopic short stories, and picks their favorites.
In the spirit of 99-cent books on Kindle, I found an author on Kindle named John Locke, who has written about 6 books about his assassin-protagonist Donovan Creed (he also wrote a western, of all things, which was also very good). He seems to be a Kindle-only sensation. I have not seen him other places but a while back he had all his books in the top 100 at the same time.
The books are short and an easy read. This is not Hemingway, these are classic summer beach books, but I found him pretty enjoyable.
I had a nice Instalanche this morning on my post about the 99-cent price point on the Amazon Kindle for my book BMOC. I also got a bit of attention at the KindleBoards forum. So my book is nosing into the top 500 on Kindle, but until my kid noticed I did not see the other topical rankings:
LOL, #1 in Books>Entertainment>Humor>Laywers. #2 on the same but for business. Whole new niches beckon! (Actually, these categories kind of make sense, though I am not sure who chose them -- I am not sure I did).
For the second straight day, I have sold fifty copies of BMOC, for a total of a hundred in two days, at 99-cents. Fifty copies is more than I was selling in several weeks at the old price. Thanks to Glen Reynolds for linking the idea.
Well, it may only be a short-term kick driven by you fine readers (my thanks) but yesterday in the first day at the 99-cent price point I sold fifty copies of BMOC and jumped to number 2067 in the sales rank. Since my main goal is to be read, rather than make money, this is great.
My novel BMOC is now $0.99 at Amazon. With my second book coming out sometime soon (I hope) I thought I would experiment with online pricing models. I sold about 30 a month at the old price, but Glen Reynolds linked an article praising the 99-cent Kindle price point. So what the heck, let's try it. My loss is your gain, as the ads say.
Reasons you might like the novel:
I asked Don Boudreaux his opinion of the best primer on public choice theory, a topic of interest to many libertarians. He recommended William Mitchell & Randy Simmons, Beyond Politics (1994). I have ordered a used copy from Amazon and will give my thoughts on it once I have had a chance to peruse it.
I was doing something today that I generally avoid, which is thinking about Sarah Palin. How bizarre would it be to wake up one morning and find that some random maniac you had never met in a city you might never have visited had gone on a killing spree and prominent people were all over the media blaming you for the killing. Not your political party, not all those who shared your views, not all those from a similar group, but you personally. Blood on your hands. How weird would that be (and how pissed off would I be -- I can say that I would have lashed out publicly early and hard and often, much harder than Palin's video, though no one ever has called me "presidential" in temperament).
Seems like there should be a novel in there somewhere. Yeah, I know the falsely accused thing is done all the time (e.g. the Prisoner) but I can't shake the feeling there is an interesting concept here.
This is probably the first ever inside reference to my novel. The funny part is that when I read TJIC's post, I thought "hmm, Preston Marsh, where have I heard that name?" LOL. By the way, the business idea Travis has is actually intriguing
Restaurants get napkins and linens as a service "" every day, they trade huge bags of dirty whites for clean whites. They are in the business of cooking food and hiring wait staff, not in the business of knowing how to bleach things (or in the business of picking out linens that can stand up to bleach).
So what does clothing as a service entail? It could include cleaning, sizing, rotating wardrobes as fashions change, etc.
It removes some hassles, and bundles responsibilities in the place where there are economies of scale "" people in the fashion industry can and will know more about sizing, cleaning, coordinating, etc. than consumers.
I and others have thoughts on the model in the comments.
By the way, for those who have not read my book, Preston Marsh is an entrepreneur who has made money in a series of sortof odd business models. Years ago I used to get bored at parties (actually, I still get bored at parties but I no longer use this entertainment technique) and make up occupations for myself. I remember convincing one woman who had recent evidence that I could not ski well that I was on the Olympic Ski Jumping Team ("You don't have to turn in ski jumping!")
Anyway, all the business models in the books are ones I made up for myself on the fly at parties. One involves building fountains in malls and then recouping the investment by harvesting coins from them. Another, which is central to the book, is a sort of guerrilla marketing startup which does some lifestyle consulting with teens but makes its money placing products in the hands of the coolest, trendsetting teens at high schools (a model that has since been emulated by a couple of real-life companies).
By the way, the book is still on sale at Amazon and available on the Kindle for download. Just search "BMOC."
My first novel, "BMOC," is now on Kindle for $4.99, a substantial discount off the $17.95 price Amazon has for the dead tree version. Incredibly, my author royalty is WAY more for the Kindle version even at that price than for the paper version.
Anyway, if you like this site, you might check it out. The novel is part murder mystery, party comedy, and part business book. I used to have fun with my friends at business school and later in nconsulting thinking up odd new business models (e.g. coin harvesting from fountains) and this book embodies some of the odder ones we came up with. Though as wacky as the business model of the main company in the book (called "BMOC" appropriately enough) was supposed to be, since writing it I have had a number of people send me stories of startups pursuing eerily similar approaches to marketing. Anyway, the book is a light read though with adult language and a tiny bit of sex.


text:
Former Bridgeport Mayor Joe Ganim
Image 1 of 14
Joe Ganim
Bridgeport Mayor Joseph Ganim listens while his lawyer answers questions during a press conference in front of federal court in New Haven, where he was arraigned on federal corruption charges. His wife stands by his side. Ganim denied any wrongdoing.


text:
Photos and Videos
Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel points to delegates at the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C., on Tuesday, Sept. 4, 2012. (AP Photo/Lynne Sladky)
Mayor Rahm Emanuel's office is denying responsibility for sending the severed goat's head that was delivered to Wrigley Field on Wednesday. Isn't it great that they even have to issue a statement?


text:
Lotto and God: Can a Christian Buy a Lottery Ticket?
- Thursday, August 23, 2012
Editor's Note: Pastor Roger Barrier's "Ask Roger" column regularly appears at Preach It, Teach It. Every week at Crosswalk, Dr. Barrier puts nearly 40 years of experience in the pastorate to work answering questions of doctrine or practice for laypeople, or giving advice on church leadership issues. Email him your questions at email@example.com.
Dear Roger,
Is it a sin for a Christian to purchase a lottery ticket?
Sincerely, T,
Dear T,
Once upon a time I played the lottery—just once, just one ticket. Our family was playing Yahtzee, which is a lot like poker, only you play with dice instead of with cards. The goal is to roll more good poker hands than anyone else. Rolling five dice with the same number at the same time is called a "Yahtzee" and is worth fifty points.
The odds of rolling five dice with the same number at the same time are 3,125 to 1. In the first game I rolled a Yahtzee. We all cheered with delight.
In the second game I rolled another Yahtzee! 3,125 to 1 again!
We couldn't believe it.
In the third game I rolled another Yahtzee. No one said a word. We were all dumbfounded. I grabbed my dad and said, "This is a sign from God. We have just enough time to get to the "7-11" and buy a lottery ticket before the lottery ends at 10:00 p.m." As I recall, it was one of those power ball lotteries worth at least half a billion dollars. Well, not that much. But it certainly felt like that.
I bought one ticket. One was all I needed to win. The check was already in the mail! Dad and I raced home to watch the drawing on TV. I compared the numbers on my ticket with the ones drawn on TV. By the second number I was out of the game.
My mother asked my dad if he'd bought any tickets and he pulled twenty losing tickets out of his pocket. She yelled at him for the next fifteen minutes for wasting twenty of their hard-earned dollars.
It is no wonder, T, that you've asked this question because gambling and buying lottery tickets are never expressly approved or condemned in the Scriptures.
We must be careful in deciding what to do with issues that aren't expressly forbidden or approved in the Bible. Considering the issue of gambling and lottery tickets, we must not turn our personal convictions into what we consider to be Biblical truths for ourselves and for everyone else (Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 8:1-12; 1 Corinthians 10:13-33-Romans 11:1).
Whether or not a buying a lottery ticket is a sin depends on our personal convictions. Personal convictions are the expressions of our inner conscience. If we think it's a sin to buy a ticket and proceed to buy one, then we've committed a sin because we've violated our consciences. Violating our consciences is expressly forbidden in the Bible because a violated conscience impairs our ability to hear God speak. (Romans 14:23: "Whatever is not of faith is sin.")
This is why the same behavior can be a sin for one person and not a sin for another. If you can buy a lottery ticket without breaking your conscience then buy the lottery ticket. You have not sinned. Understanding the relationship between sin and the conscience is the key to handling the "gray areas" of the Bible which are not expressly forbidden or approved—or not even mentioned.
Recently on Ask Roger
Editors' Picks
Have something to say about this article? Leave your comment via Facebook below!
Listen to Your Favorite Pastors
Add Crosswalk.com content to your siteBrowse available content


text:
(via kil0nova)
(via nighttimecandles)
A collection of what I love.
My name's Chelsea. I'm pretty much a nerd and I'm okay with that. I'm a huge fan of photography, turtles, movies and tv shows. What you'll see here is a collection of what I love. I'm Currently 22 years old, and very happy with the way my life is going. I love questions, I love answers, I love happiness.
Ask questions, reblog, like, follow. Do whatever your heart desires.
home ask me submit archive themes Sister Blogroll


text:
Fieldrunners apk
Fieldrunners apk, It 'available from a few days to Android devices: Fieldrunners HD, one of the best and most popular tower defense, developed by the children of Subatomic Studios. The game objective is to defend your base from endless hordes of enemies with a vast arsenal of weapons and towers, to enhance the best.
The graphics are in HD, well cared for, with over 400 levels in 4 fields of battle, for hours and hours of fun (for those who like the genre, of course).
Here is the main features of Fieldrunners apk :
Fascinating visual style updated with high definition graphics for Android!
Choose from 7 awesome weapons to defeat the Fieldrunners in style!
More than 400 levels in 4 unique battlefield!
Hours of fun with different game modes, challenges and achievements!
Music theme for every room beautifully!
you can find or download Fieldrunners apk from android market https://market.android.com/details?id=com.subatomicstudios for price of $2.99 i think its cheap enough. This Fieldrunners apk game needs minimum requirement Android 2.2 Froyo or higher.
Incoming search terms:
- Fieldrunners apk
- 필드러너 apk
- fieldrunners apk download
- fieldrunner apk
- field runner apk
- field runners apk


text:
Director: Thomas J. Montine, M.D., Ph.D.
Title: Pacific Northwest Udall Center (PANUC)
Website: www.panuc.org
The focus of the Pacific Northwest Udall Center (PANUC) is cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease. We strive to understand the basis of this prevalent problem for patients and, through both clinical and basic research, to discover improved diagnostics and new therapeutic targets.
PANUC brings together a multidisciplinary group of investigators focused on improving our understanding of cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease. Projects within and linked to the Center are designed to provide important insights into the pathophysiology of cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease. Equally important, PANUC serves as a unique resource for other investigators interested in translational and clinical investigations of cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease, including those at other Udall Centers.
Project 1: Functional and anatomical analysis of dopaminergic projections that mediate cognition
Richard D. Palmiter, PhD.
This project uses a combination of genetically engineered mice and virus-mediated gene transfer to examine neural circuits that may underlie cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease.
Project 2: Selective and restricted denervation in Parkinson's disease with cognitive impairment
Thomas J. Montine, MD, PhD
This project determines neurochemical and anatomic substrates of cognitive impairment in mice generated in Project 1 and assesses their validity in autopsy brains donated by individuals who died with Parkinson's disease.
Project 3: Genetic risk factors for cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease
Cyrus P. Zabetian, MD, MS
This project examines the association between gene variations linked to Parkinson's disease and cognitive impairment, as well as the rate of decline of cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease.
Core A: Administrative and Outreach Core
Thomas J. Montine, MD, PhD
This Core provides administrative oversight for PANUC at our two institutions (see Core B) and facilitates interaction between PANUC and many local and national groups that support and advocate for individuals with Parkinson's disease. Training and community engagement continue to be high priorities for PANUC. Over the last year, PANUC investigators have led or contributed to two dozen training sessions, seven clinical or research fellows utilizing PANUC resources, and 30 community events.
Core B: Clinical Core
James B. Leverenz, MD. Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) Site PI: Joseph F. Quinn, MD
This Core focuses on generating a unique resource for translation and clinical research in Parkinson's disease. The Clinical Sample (CS) is a large sample designed to allow investigation of genetic factors for cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease. CS participants undergo a limited motor and cognitive evaluation and blood draw for DNA and biomarkers twice during the initial five-year cycle of PANUC. The Annual Sample (AS) is a smaller sample of patients with Parkinson's disease who undergo more detailed annual motor and cognitive evaluations. In addition to blood draw for DNA and biomarkers, AS participants undergo lumbar puncture for cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker studies and are asked to participate in the autopsy protocol. Approximately 1 in 5 Clinical Core participants enter through the OHSU site. Core B has expanded its impact by entering into close collaboration with Northwest Neurological in Spokane, the University of Cincinnati, and Emory University.
Core C: Genetics, Biomarkers, and Neuropathology (GBN)
Jing Zhang, MD, PhD
This Core is the repository for collected blood, CSF, and autopsy material. It performs a standardized set of evaluations for genetic markers, plasma/serum and CSF biomarkers, and neuropathologic characterization of brain autopsy material. A major achievement has been demonstrating that alpha-synuclein and DJ-1 concentrations are decreased in Parkinson's disease (PD) CSF compared to controls, a result that has been replicated by multiple centers. Our work also highlights the critical importance of controlling for blood contamination when measuring alpha-synuclein levels in CSF, a protocol that has been adopted by the Michael J. Fox Foundation (MJFF). Finally, in collaboration with the Udall Center at the University of Pennsylvania, we have developed a novel assay to measure a phosphorylated form of alpha-synuclein (ps-129) in CSF, that when used in combination with total alpha-synuclein, appears to differentiate PD from atypical parkinsonism.
Core D: Data Management and Biostatistics Core
Karen L. Edwards, PhD
This Core maintains the database for PANUC and is also an important resource for study design and statistical analysis. Achievements this year include data reporting systems to facilitate QC checks of all data, expansion to include longitudinal data, and algorithms to calculate Z-scores and percentiles for core neuropsychological tests that are included in consensus reports and can be requested as part of any dataset for analyses. Core D responded to a total of 27 data requests in the past year and generated a primary manuscript that is in press.
Project 1 has established a direct link between regional loss of striatal dopamine and cognitive behaviors in mice that are also implicated in patients with Parkinson's disease. Our more recent work has established quantitative relationships between dopamine levels in the different regions of the neostriatum and motor and cognitive behaviors in mice. These results demonstrate that striatal dopamine neurotransmission is essential for normal cognitive function in mice and that the regional loss of striatal dopamine likely contributes to the cognitive impairment prevalent among patients with Parkinson's disease. Currently, this project is pursuing the relative contribution of mere loss of dopamine vs. dopaminergic neuron degeneration in these motor and behavioral changes. The implications of these results for therapeutic strategies are clear.
Project 2 has previously observed that Lewy body disease was present in lower brainstem in approximately 15%, in substantia nigra in approximately 8%, and in neocortical regions in approximately 4% of cognitively normal older adults. Our more recent advances evaluated the functional significance of Lewy body disease among community-dwelling older adults. Visuospatial function was the only cognitive domain that was primarily associated with Lewy body disease in our community sample that contains extensive co-morbid AD and vascular brain injury (VBI). Visuospatial impairment is often one of the earliest cognitive symptoms in Parkinson's disease and is a primary feature of Lewy body dementia. The basis of impaired visuospatial abilities in Lewy body–related conditions is not well understood, but may be related to damage to posterior cortical regions, asymmetric dopamine loss in the right basal ganglia, disruptions in the fronto-striatal loop, or impairments in the dorsolateral prefrontal pathways. In addition to Lewy body disease, cortical and subcortical VBI also were associated with construction ability, consistent with previous findings that VBI may lead to reduced visuospatial function.
Project 3 has identified that the APOE4 allele is associated with poorer performance across multiple cognitive domains including memory and executive function in 915 PD subjects from multiple Udall Centers. We further explored the role of APOE in PD-related dementia (PDD) in a large multicenter autopsy series (organized by Project 2), seeking to address the question of whether the ε4 allele conveys disease risk solely in the presence of significant AD neuropathologic changes (ADNC). We found that APOE4 was strongly associated with PDD even after subjects with substantial ADNC were excluded. The same was true for subjects with "pure" dementia with Lewy bodies who lacked substantial ADNC. These results raise the possibility that apoE isoforms might contribute to neurodegeneration through novel mechanisms.
The major research resource being built by PANUC consists of the extensive systematic clinical information, diagnosis, and neuropsychometric data harmonized across multiple sites coupled with DNA, plasma/serum, cerebrospinal fluid, and autopsy tissue. This year we achieved full target enrollment of our Annual Sample (n=145) and Clinical Sample (n=456). In addition, we also have assembled a PANUC consortium (Emory University, University of Cinncinati, and Univeristy of Pennsylvania) in which multiple sites around the US employ common protocols, diagnostic criteria, and test batteries to further amplify sample sizes of uniformly evaluated subjects with PD. This cooperation provides a powerful resource for clinical, psychological, genetic, and biomarker research focused on cognitive impairment in PD. In the last year, PANUC has shared resources with five other Udall Centers (Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins University, University of California at Los Angeles, University of Miami, University of Pennsylvania) and 12 other research groups in support of 14 NIH and foundation awards including the "Parkinson's Progression Biomarker Initiative" (PPMI, Ken Marek PI, J Leverenz Site PI) and "Biomarkers for Preclinical Parkinson's Disease" (J Zhang PI).
PANUC Data Management and Biostatistics Core (Core D) has constructed web-based clinical data entry and management across the five sites within the PANUC Consortium that not only will facilitate collaborative clinical research, but also may serve as an initial template for clinical data management among Udall Centers.
Overall, our plans for the next year are to continue to focus on cognitive impairment in patients with Parkinson's disease and to expand further the network of collaborations that involve PANUC patients or utilize PANUC resources. Project 1 will conclude its experiments on the relative contributions of regional dopamine depletion vs. dopaminergic degeneration to motor and behavioral changes in mice. Project 2 will focus on the correlation between lesions in specific regions of brain in patients with Lewy Body disease and the cognitive changes in specific domains. Project 3 will amplify its cohort of patients with Parkinson's disease who are being followed longitudinally with detailed psychometric testing to enhance the search for genetic risks for cognitive impairment. The Cores will continue to focus on patient recruitment, detailed psychometric testing, and development of biological and data resources.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) estimates that over a half million people in the United States suffer from Parkinson's disease, causing untold suffering to patients as well as their caregivers and other loved ones. The physical, emotional, and societal costs of Parkinson's disease will increase over the coming decades as more of us live longer; in fact, the number of patients with Parkinson's disease is expected to double in the United States by the year 2030 unless we find safe and effective means to cure, delay onset, or slow progression of this disease. Cognitive impairment is a common feature of Parkinson's disease that is disabling for patients and challenging to caregivers. Our center is focused on the clear imperative to find better tools for diagnosis and better ways to treat cognitive impairment in patients with Parkinson's disease.
Last updated December 23, 2013


text:
Born Free USA Blog
by Adam M Roberts,
Chief Executive Officer
When it comes to animals, Adam Roberts not only talks the talk, but also walks the walk. Since beginning his animal advocacy career in Washington, D.C. in 1991, Adam's ambition, tireless involvement, and profound knowledge of conservation and wildlife issues have cemented him as a go-to voice for protecting animals — and he has elevated Born Free USA to the respected and impactful organization that we know today. Adam's compassionate, informed, and forward-thinking blogs will surely motivate you to join us in our fight to Keep Wildlife in the Wild.
Wildlife Anthem: John Barry's 'Born Free'
For those of a certain generation (and many more besides) mention of the words "Born Free" evokes images of Africa, Elsa the lioness, Joy and George Adamson ... perhaps even my parents, Virginia McKenna and Bill Travers, who starred in that classic, heart-warming film.
But it also makes a lot of people hum, or sing, the transcendent title song.
Its clear and powerful melody, its simple yet profound words, provided by lyricist Don Black, have become a standard. Covered by many, the original, effortlessly sung by British crooner and former London taxi cabbie Matt Monro, has never been surpassed. Incredibly, Monro and others had to lobby for the song to be restored to the film after the producers initially rejected it for not being commercial enough. Hah!
John Barry composed "Born Free" and received two Oscars at the 1967 ceremonies: for best original song and best original score. A giant in the entertainment business, perhaps best known for his extraordinary contribution to James Bond music (from "Dr. No" to "The Living Daylights"), Barry had an easily recognizable style that embraced lush string arrangements and triumphant brass. An innovator, he was among the first film composers to employ a synthesizer.
"Born Free" star and co-founder of The Born Free Foundation, Virginia McKenna, presented Barry with a Lifetime Achievement Award at the 2005 Academy Awards in London.
John Barry died of a heart attack on Sunday, Jan. 30, 2011, at his home on Long Island, N.Y. He was 77.
The Born Free Foundation, which I co-founded with my parents in England, and Born Free USA, one of the growing forces for positive change in the United States, both rely on the support of generous people such as yourselves to work for the animals — to protect them in the wild, to end their suffering in captivity, to nurture a culture of compassion that this planet so desperately needs to ensure a brighter future for all living creatures.
We owe John Barry a huge debt of gratitude. Through that song, with that soaring "Born Free" score, he helped create an anthem to all wildlife in need and contributed mightily to what we stand for. Surely, as the song says, "Born Free, and life is worth living. But only worth living 'cause you're Born Free."
We are Born Free. Our mission is clear and nothing sums up what we are all about better than the music and lyrics that go to make up one of popular music's most enduring songs — one that I know many of you are humming right now!
Blogging off,


text:
Find commute times to your work, school, gym and more.
exists for this email.
Signed a Lease here?
Contact PropertyCheck Availability
people have contacted since you. 19 people recently contacted.
$100 Rent.com Visa® Reward Card Eligible
Tell the leasing office you used Rent.com. If you sign a lease here, report it to us for your $100 reward card. How it works
Moving Tools
Check Availability
This will create an account with Rent.com. Email addresses are not shared with third-parties. We will give you a heads up on apartment listings via email. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
Similar Apartments in or near Memphis, TN
Floor Plans (3)
- Floor Plan
- Studio
- Bed
- studio
- Bath
- 1
- Rent
- $430
- Sq Ft
- 460
- Deposit
- Email for details
- Check Availability
- Floor Plan
- 1 Bedroom
- Bed
- 1
- Bath
- 1
- Rent
- $450 - $540
- Sq Ft
- 490 - 644
- Deposit
- Email for details
- Check Availability
- Floor Plan
- 2 Bedroom
- Bed
- 2
- Bath
- 1
- Rent
- $655 - $695
- Sq Ft
- 670 - 885
- Deposit
- Email for details
- Check Availability
Prices, specials, features and availability subject to change.
Property Features
- Parking
- Assigned Parking
- Laundry
- Washer & Dryer In Unit
Units may feature
- Amenities
- Air Conditioning
- Cable Ready
- Ceiling Fan(s)
- Garbage Disposal
- Hardwood Flooring
- Kitchen
- Dishwasher
- Refrigerator
- Outdoor
- Yard
Located in Central Gardens...Our apartments offer hardwood floors, nine foot ceilings, beautiful moldings, all appliances, large porches, and most have a washer and dryer.
The Sanabel Apartments overlook a beautiful courtyard. Live in Central Gardens, walk to UT, Methodist Hospital, classes and take the new trolley to Downtown, Beale Street, Grizzly and Redbird games!
Leasing Information
Pet policy
Dogs Allowed. Cats Allowed.
Lease Terms: 12 months. Security Deposits: $250. Pet Policy: 1 pet only, 20 lbs. weight limit, $50 pet deposit, $150 non-refundable pet fee, $10/month pet fee. Breed restrictions apply.
For more information, please check availability.
Office hours
Managed by
Williams Management
Check Availability
Email the property directly:Check Availability
Ratings and Reviews
5 stars
4 stars
3 stars
2 stars
1 stars
The Sanabel Apartments Resident
The building is old and had many problems that come with an aging building. Although the landlord was nice and Read More responsive, the age and location of the building made it difficult to battle vermin. The other residents of the building tend to be young professionals just starting out or students, so there was often a community outside visiting. However, there were so many dog owners that keeping the lawns clean was difficult. The rent to square foot ratio was good and our apartment was spacious.
December 24, 2013
Moving Center
Get Free Moving Quotes
- Here's how it works:
- Enter your move info.
- Receive up to six quotes.
- Choose your favorite.
- Start packing.
Contact Information
Enter your contact information so moving companies can contact you with a free quote.
What's Next?
Qualified movers assess your needs and prepare an estimate. It takes about two business days.
They contact you directly to discuss their services and costs.
You choose the company that works best for you.
By submitting a full service or auto transport moving quote request, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use of Moving.com, and that your information may be shared with moving companies in its network to provide your quote.
Your request has been successfully submitted.
You're almost home. Moving companies will reach out to you in the next few days. In the meantime, check out What You Should Know About Working With Movers or from the Rent.com Blog How to Get a Move On.
Maps & Neighborhood Info
1364 Linden Avenue, Memphis TN 38104
My Commute
Edit Address
Save your commutes
Scores are compared to the national average. The higher the bar, the higher the crime risk. The lower the bar, the lower the crime risk.
near Memphis, 38104Transit


text:
The Leading eBooks Store Online
for Kindle Fire, Apple, Android, Nook, Kobo, PC, Mac, BlackBerry ...
Gift-Wrapped Governess
Christmas at Blackhaven Castle\Governess to Christmas Bride\Duchess by Christmas
Preview (read now) Add to my own site Give this ebook to a friend Add to my wishlist Author's page Publisher's page
Christmas at Blackhaven Castle by Sophia James
In disguise, penniless Lady Seraphina Moreton seeks sanctuary at the Duke of Blackhaven's castle just days before Christmas. Trey swore never again to be beguiled by a beautiful face, but as governess Seraphina gets close to his unruly, motherless children, he wants the festive joy she brings to stay well beyond Christmas Day .
Governess to Christmas Bride by Annie Burrows
Lord Chepstow hasn't seen Honeysuckle Miller since she was a plain, awkward schoolgirl. Now she's not so plain and is looking after the host's children at a lavish Christmas house party. And the last thing Lord Chepstow expected to want on his Christmas list is the prim governess!
Duchess by Christmas by Marguerite Kaye
Masquerading as a governess to help the brooding Duke of Blairmore find a wife is not how Regan Stuart expected to spend Christmas! Then he steals an unexpected kiss, endangering Regan's heart unless Gabriel can see beyond her dowdy costume and realize she's his perfect Christmas bride!
Harlequin; November 2011
288 pages; ISBN 9781459215788
Read online, or download in EPUB
288 pages; ISBN 9781459215788
Read online, or download in EPUB
More Fiction
Gone Girl 2012 US$ 9.99 432 pages
Fifty Shades of Grey 2011 US$ 9.99
Subject categories
- Romance > Historical
- Romance > Regency
- Romance > Harlequin Books
- Fiction > Romance > Historical
- Fiction > Romance > Regency