Image of the day

Captured by
Douglas Rollain

M20 Trifid Nebula in LRGBHa

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Posts Made By: William Paolini

May 28, 2011 06:46 PM Forum: Religion

Memorial Day

Posted By William Paolini

Cemeteries...hate them and love them at the same time. My Uncle is buried in France where he was killed in WWII, My dad in a veterans cemetery in Delaware. Speaking of church, one year I was visiting a friend on the Memorial Day weekend in Springfield, Ill. I wend to church there in the morning. Before the sermon the Priest asked if there were any who severed in the military present and asked us to stand up. It was weird such a large congregation but only about 5 of us there. So we stood. He then started clapping and the whole congregation followed. Was very unexpected and very moving. Will never forget it.

A prayer, 1 Corinthians 2:9, for all those who have fallen, who are still here and have served, and who continue to serve to this day. God bless their sacrifices for all of us.

May 30, 2011 01:22 AM Forum: Off Topic Discussions

I Hope These Don't Light Up

Posted By William Paolini

These look to be tethered concepts. As such their placement would have to be in designated "farms" as the tethers would cause the airspace to be restricted from the target altitudes to ground. So just don't live in an area near the farms smile

May 30, 2011 04:57 PM Forum: Off Topic Discussions

Area 51 Book Review

Posted By William Paolini

So many things are far fetched...then some oddly aren't too.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/The-Vote/2009/0424/reagan-and-gorbachev-agreed-to-fight-ufos

As far as Stalin, my wife says people loved him and thought of him as a hero during his lifetime and they actually were quite afraid after he died since they felt he held their country together. It was only after his death and during perestroika that black market copies of books about him (hand re-written) became available revealing some of the things he directed. So yes, Stalin was quite a master of perceptions and manipulation.

June 2, 2011 03:20 PM Forum: Eyepieces

Oldest ocular, why you've retained it?

Posted By William Paolini

I have several that fall into this category...

Oldest is the pre-RKE 1 1/8" eyepeice. Actually not an RKE being a 4/2 design. However, it behaves the same with the no-edge and floating experience. I purchased this in the late 60's when I was a kid from their factory-store (I lived not too far from it). Have never been able to part with it and still use it now and then.

30mm Rini Plossl. Less than 25 bucks and it works great and is very insensative to eye placement.

40mm Meade 3000 smoothie Plossl. Although a small AFOV, its view is crisp, clean, and pristine always. Always a treat when I use it.

June 6, 2011 01:53 PM Forum: Off Topic Discussions

Do Cell Phones Cause Cancer?

Posted By William Paolini

The brain is quite sensitive to RF radiation. The WHO raised the level of concern relative to cell phones. Tumors are the issue, and if the brain reacts to RF like it does to readiation, typically a 10 year cycle before the tumors pop up. The WHO concern flag really gives a call for more thorough research as studies like these take 10-20 years to complete. About 10 years ago or so they found a very positive link between brain disorders and the proximity to cribs of the wall converters used for lots of gadgets (including baby monitors). Today you see a warning of the number of feet the converter must be from the crib. I'm sure they will find that cell phones, used often enough, will cause problems more or less depending on your age.

Here's a clip from Medscape Medical News

Cell Phones Possibly Carcinogenic, WHO Says
Roxanne Nelson

May 31, 2011 — The World Health Organization (WHO) announced today that radiation from cell phones can possibly cause cancer. According to the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), radiofrequency electromagnetic fields have been classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans (group 2B) on the basis of an increased risk for glioma that some studies have associated with the use of wireless phones.

This announcement was based on an extensive review of studies on cell phone safety by a working group of 31 scientists from 14 countries, who have been meeting regularly to evaluate the potential carcinogenic hazards from exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. They reviewed exposure data, studies of cancer in humans and experimental animal models, and other relevant data.

More specifically, the IARC Monograph Working Group discussed and evaluated literature that included several exposure categories involving radiofrequency electromagnetic fields:
Occupational exposures to radar and to microwaves;
Environmental exposures associated with transmission of signals for radio, television, and wireless telecommunication; and
Personal exposures associated with the use of wireless telephones.
"Given the potential consequences for public health of this classification and findings," said IARC Director Christopher Wild, PhD, in a news release, "it is important that additional research be conducted into the long-term, heavy use of mobile phones. Pending the availability of such information, it is important to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure such as hands-free devices or texting."

Inconsistent Data and Opinions

Cellular telephones have become an integral part of everyday life, and the number of users is estimated at 5 billion globally. However, as previously reported by Medscape Medical News, there has been growing concern over possible health risks associated with the use of cell phones. In particular, some data have suggested that their use, especially over the long term, represent a "significant" risk for brain tumors.

But study results have been inconsistent, although some European countries have taken precautionary measures aimed specifically at children.

Some of the strongest evidence supporting a link between brain tumors and cell phone use comes from a series of Swedish studies, led by Lennart Hardell, MD, PhD, from the Department of Oncology, Orebro Medical Center. These studies showed that risk increased with the number of cumulative hours of use, higher radiated power, and length of cell phone use. They also reported that younger users had a higher risk. (Int J Oncol. 2006;28:509-518; Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2006;79:630-639; Arch Environ Health. 2004;59:132-137; Pathophysiology. 2009;16:113-122).

The issue of cell phone safety was to have been settled once and for all by the huge 13-nation industry-funded Interphone study. But to date, the industry-funded Interphone studies found no increased risk for brain tumors from cell phone use, with only 4 exceptions. The findings contradicted the Swedish studies, which were independent of industry funding.

Consistent with the literature, there is no consensus among physicians and scientists about the severity of risk, or if one even exists. One issue in attempting to evaluate the potential connection between brain tumors and cell phone use is the relatively short period of time that these devices have been heavily used in a large population and the long latency period for many tumors.

The National Cancer Institute, for example, has stated that although a consistent link has not been established between cell phone use and cancer, "scientists feel that additional research is needed before firm conclusions can be drawn." In a similar fashion, the American Cancer Society points out that even though the weight of the evidence has shown no association between cell phone use and brain cancer, information on the potential health effects of very long-term use, or use in children, is simply not available.

Evidence Strong Enough

The WHO established the International Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) Project in 1996, in response to public and governmental concern, with the goal of evaluating the possibility of adverse health effects from electromagnetic fields. In a press release issued last year, the WHO stated that it would conduct a formal health risk assessment of radiofrequency fields exposure by 2012, but in the interim, the IARC would review the carcinogenic potential of mobile phones this year.

Jonathan Samet, MD, chairman of the working group, notes that "the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion and the 2B classification.

"The conclusion means that there could be some risk, and therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk," he said in a news release.

A full report summarizing the main conclusions and evaluations of the IARC Working Group is slated to be published online soon in The Lancet Oncology and in print in its July 1 issue.

June 18, 2011 11:49 PM Forum: No Holds Barred

Why Suspend This Police Captain?

Posted By William Paolini

He certainly should be disciplined. In the military he would have been written up with an Article 15 action at least. He's on duty and his superiors gave him an order. Period. So what, lets say others under his command felt similarly against the Jews, ok to disobey an order to attend that? Our police and fire and emergency response teams all must interface with the public, and many times that interface is simply to represent the departments. This event is not different from any other event where organizers ask our response departments to attend to be honored. So his men and women under his command are "required" to serve all the U.S. population, not just the ones they "prefer" to. I'd at least demote him one step in rank and put him on a 6 month probation, and send him to training. I'd send his entire department to remedial training as well.

June 21, 2011 09:03 PM Forum: No Holds Barred

Should evolution be taught in schools?

Posted By William Paolini

Yes, interesting, here's the opinion of our youth (20's). Most all seems to say yes, teach it (I only got thru about 20 of them), but also expressed that "all" points of view should be taught and not to stress anything and let the kids decide. Really points out the typical teenage through 20's perspective that one's "self" is the final authority on things, including knowledge.

Seeing how many also expressed that the religious point of view should also be taught I thought was revealing because they recognize that there is or can be conflict between a religious vs scientific point of view on this topic and it runs deep in peoples and families beliefs (so crosses a science only boundary relative to instruction), so all sides should be at least brought to the attention of the kids in school.

Interesting. Today's youth -> tomorrow's leaders!!

ps - I also like how the many that expressed that they were religious, also stressed that even though they believed the religious view that one should also tell the other views to the kids. So open to sharing dissenting opinions. Usually don't see that willingness from the other direction of this debate.

June 23, 2011 01:38 PM Forum: No Holds Barred

This is a real joke! Crazy athiests!

Posted By William Paolini

Doug Matulis said:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/06/21/new-york-atheists-angry-over-heaven-street-sign-honoring-11victims/

As usual, the A/A Fundamentalists, like most fundamentalist portions of groups and organizations, are a little wacky and out to lunch ... and can't even read Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."


Hmmm...wasn't that a city government that put up the sign? Hmmm, is "heaven" an establishment of religion (i.e., a denomication or particular religion)? Of course not!

June 26, 2011 06:39 PM Forum: SCI-FI

Super 8: ET On Steroids

Posted By William Paolini

I liked it as well. And yes, basically Steven Spielberg remade his ET story line only with the alien being not so cute and friendly. Would be kind of cool at some point to watch them both back-to-back.

As for upcoming movies, the trailers they showed of the Rise of the Rise of Planet of Apes (http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi1615502617/) looked quite interesting...actually a little disturbing (in a good was since a movie).

July 4, 2011 03:19 AM Forum: No Holds Barred

Free Will and an Omniscient god

Posted By William Paolini

John Agnew said:

Mutually exclusive concepts. Which do you choose?

Really? I don't think so. Let's say you build a closed ecosystem, one in which you can monitor and alter in all ways. Choose what you want it to be...a fish tank, ant farm, whatever. So in effect, you are the god of that system. Now you put a fish in that ecosystem (guess you chose the fish tank). And of course you tell the fish that they are free to move about their universe and do what they will (figuratively tell them because their brain is so small that they don't even realize that you are 1) something living, or 2) in control of them). There you go. You are an omniscient being over that ecosystem that you created, and the creature you placed in it you gave free will to do as it pleases in its universe.

And of course, you monitor the universe you made, and the creature you placed there, caring for it, providing for its universe so it can sustain your little creature which you love.

Multitudes of examples where omniscience and free will coexist every day in multiple contexts.

Oh yes, forgot to answer your question. Of course I choose neither. Reason is that these are things are part of the construct of the universe I'm in, so I really don't have any choice over them at all as they just are...like gravity. Trick question huh ;->