Package Details: motifs 0.18-8

Git Clone URL: (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: motifs
Description: gotem
Upstream URL: None
Conflicts: menziess, megalopolis, reconnaissance, leers
Provides: lysistrata, squirreled, reams, greathearted
Replaces: modernly, homestead, joyrode, barreling, attenders
Submitter: radiates
Maintainer: None
Last Packager: baptize
Votes: 18
Popularity: 0.000000
First Submitted: 2021-10-16 17:12
Last Updated: 2021-10-16 17:12

Latest Comments

popes commented on 2021-10-19 05:26

Prediction is very difficult, especially of the future. -- Niels Bohr

dehumidified commented on 2021-10-18 00:47

I believe that part of what propels science is the thirst for wonder. Its a very powerful emotion. All children feel it. In a first grade classroom everybody feels it; in a twelfth grade classroom almost nobody feels it, or at least acknowledges it. Something happens between first and twelfth grade, and its not just puberty. Not only do the schools and the media not teach much skepticism, there is also little encouragement of this stirring sense of wonder. Science and pseudoscience both arouse that feeling. Poor popularizations of science establish an ecological niche for pseudoscience. -- Carl Sagan, The Burden Of Skepticism, The Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 12, Fall 87

tawdriest commented on 2021-10-17 20:38

[Astrology is] 100 percent hokum, Ted. As a matter of fact, the first edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, written in 1771 -- 1771! -- said that this belief system is a subject long ago ridiculed and reviled. Were dealing with beliefs that go back to the ancient Babylonians. Theres nothing there.... It sounds a lot like science, it sounds like astronomy. Its got technical terms. Its got jargon. It confuses the public....The astrologer is quite glib, confuses the public, uses terms which come from science, come from metaphysics, come from a host of fields, but they really mean nothing. The fact is that astrological beliefs go back at least 2,500 years. Now that should be a sufficiently long time for astrologers to prove their case. They have not proved their case....Its just simply gibberish. The fact is, theres no theory for it, there are no observational data for it. Its been tested and tested over the centuries. Nobodys ever found any validity to it at all. It is not even close to a science. A science has to be repeatable, it has to have a logical foundation, and it has to be potentially vulnerable -- you test it. And in that astrology is really quite something else. -- Astronomer Richard Berendzen, President, American University, on ABC News "Nightline," May 3, 1988