Talk:Quantum woo
From RationalWiki
"Quantum woo" seems to this same phenomenon and a more well known derivation for it. I propose moving this to that title. Thoughts? tmtoulouse 16:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
- It be more in keeping with the format of the other woo articles that way. ArmondikoV...I'll receive your jellybean! 16:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
- Aww... fun article with matching name (once you remove the word "sham" it won't be as fun anymore). Oh well, perhaps it's a lame joke to begin with. If you guys move the page perhaps you guys should rewrite/delete the fun space article. ThiehZOYG I edit like Ken! 17:04, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with proposed move, old title worked in its day, new title fits what we tend to do in these modern times. What does it have to do with fun article? Template allows parameters, I think... ħuman
02:58, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- The fun article was pretty much depending on the equivocation of the word "sham", so it may be less fun if the main article does not use that word. but that's just me, I have no idea how much less fun it would be (it perhaps is a really lame joke to begin with). Thieh[Talk needed] 03:26, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Good point. Was it about pillows? ħuman 03:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Pillow covers. Thieh[Talk needed] 05:00, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Shams. Yes. The joke depends on the mainspace title. Let us not change it. "Quantum woo" should be a redirect to here. ħuman 05:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Shams. Yes. The joke depends on the mainspace title. Let us not change it. "Quantum woo" should be a redirect to here. ħuman
- Pillow covers. Thieh[Talk needed] 05:00, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Good point. Was it about pillows? ħuman
- The fun article was pretty much depending on the equivocation of the word "sham", so it may be less fun if the main article does not use that word. but that's just me, I have no idea how much less fun it would be (it perhaps is a really lame joke to begin with). Thieh[Talk needed] 03:26, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with proposed move, old title worked in its day, new title fits what we tend to do in these modern times. What does it have to do with fun article? Template allows parameters, I think... ħuman
- Aww... fun article with matching name (once you remove the word "sham" it won't be as fun anymore). Oh well, perhaps it's a lame joke to begin with. If you guys move the page perhaps you guys should rewrite/delete the fun space article. ThiehZOYG I edit like Ken! 17:04, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
[edit] I'm probably over thinking this
If humans typically live about 70 years, wouldn't they have a half-life of about 20 or 30 years? --Paradox (talk) 19:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Quantum consciousness?
Seems to be a longstanding dispute on Wikipedia regarding microtubules' putative role in consciousness. Anybody able to help out over there? Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 03:53, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
