Taylor DeLile

Student - in Engineering, USMC 1341 E4

Someone is shy

Taylor hasn't completed a profile. Should we look for some other people?

Comments & conversations

Noface
Taylor DeLile
Posted almost 2 years ago
Pranav Mistry: The thrilling potential of SixthSense technology
I think what they should think of, if they haven't already, is applications to help very active people. Runners, hikers, mountain climbers. If I was climbing in the mountains, and I can just look at a tree to see how far I've gone or how far I'm going based on a GPS, then that would be really cool. Think about how many lost mountain climbers ( I live in Pacific Northwest, so I hear about that all the time) would benefit if they had something like that at hand. Better yet, think about how Search & Rescue would benefit from being able to use these devices to track any climber who has one. The camera would just project a little compass that shows the path they need to go, kind of like the compasses you'd see on a video game like Skyrim that shows you where the next objective is.
Noface
Taylor DeLile
Posted about 2 years ago
Michael Dickinson: How a fly flies
Atheism is a school of philosophy, emerging primarily from Asian and Europe around 5th or 6th century BCE. It's incredible how many amazing things have come out of the 6th century.
Noface
Taylor DeLile
Posted about 2 years ago
Michael Dickinson: How a fly flies
Before I really get into this post, I'd just like to say to "The Root" that he/she seems to think somehow that existence follows in a linear path just like the train that he explained before. I can't say if anything is linear or completely messed up in it's whole design, but what I do know is that isn't "illogical to ask a question." Telling someone that asking a question is unreasonable when you don't know the answer to it, is absolutely entirely against true nature of a great thinker. That would be similar to telling a child "that's a stupid question" when they ask you why the sky is blue. What would you tell them, exactly? Would you actually think to yourself that it was a stupid question? Of course, some children don't know the actual answer, so how could you fault them for trying to figure it out? Scientists and other people know the answers - at least, somebody out there does. I certainly don't. But I don't see that it's my position to explain to someone why their question is illogical only because I don't have the knowledge to give them an answer. During the 6th Centure BCE, Greek philosophers argued whether or not the earth was a sphere as a philosophical theory. Today, it is an inarguable scientific fact. I'm not going go any further with that. All I can say is that during the 6th Century of Ancient Greece, Athens also became a Democratic city state of Greece. I suppose the evolution of human knowledge is very interesting to learn about, during the progress of a child's life, as well as the progress of human kind.
Noface
Taylor DeLile
Posted about 2 years ago
What is the benefit of using Hydroponic Soil versus Natural Soil?
Well thank you for correcting me. Like I said, I don't know much about "hydroponics" but I have used it before, and I have gotten great results. I was only intrigued to learn more about using natural soil because gardeners have told me they have better growth in any plant they use natural soil to grow.
Noface
Taylor DeLile
Posted about 2 years ago
Why Should We Save the Whales?
I think that survival is a series of self destructive qualities, really. Throughout the years of life on earth, genetic codes (and full-blown organisms) have been created and destroyed to determine the strongest qualities an animal may use to survive and reproduce. As a result, sometimes entire species went entirely extinct because their genome was unable to adapt sufficiently. The animals that are extinct today, at one point adapted new instinctual or physical qualities in an attempt to endure their environment eventually encountered an issue too catastrophic that would ultimately destroy that species. Humans, however, were too clever because when we stopped adapting genetically, we began adapting cognitively, and now we're back on the verge of a strong genetic and physical evolution with the discovery of new technology. I mean, along with disease, habitat displacement, long term environmental trends, competition - genetic adaptation is the building block to combat those elements that might one day determine whether or not an animal will go extinct - DUH. Humans have obviously bypassed this form of natural selection and created their own version of artificial selection. In doing so, we artificially select which animals do and do not survive. Does this artificial selection really benefit US, since we are artificially attempting to prolong the existence of certain animals and creatures? We can create a zoological environment, pass preservation laws, and try to treat other animals as "humanely" as possible. But, does that really solve our problem as humans? What I personally see, is that by saving the whales we are just finding an excuse to harvest the resources of an endangered animals natural habitat. If you want to colonize or a plot of land, you have to destroy or displace the indigenous population of whatever creatures live there. If 90% of all the species on earth are extinct today, Noah didn't do a very a good job, did he?
Noface
Taylor DeLile
Posted about 2 years ago
Why Should We Save the Whales?
So, that is why I really wonder why we should save the whales. Our actions proceeding every animal taken from its natural habitat, and placed into an artificial ecosystem, typically result in the natural environment being wiped clean of its resources.
Noface
Taylor DeLile
Posted about 2 years ago
Why Should We Save the Whales?
What I THINK you are arguing is more ethical than ecological. Just because we could, doesn't mean we should. Ethically, I believe that is a really grey statement. For example, we COULD sentence a murderer to death - and the fact that he or she has killed a human / multiple humans SHOULD be reason enough to do that. You can even prove that killing is morally wrong, scientifically. From an Evolutionist standpoint, killing your own species contradicts the mission of survival and preservation, and reproduction and growth. To make certain that any of this happens, any aspect of a species that kills themselves needs to be cut out. Typically, that would involve a genetic remodeling over a long period of time. In our case, humans have genetically evolved as much as we are going to. Now, the only threat to the human race is, in fact, the human race. But let's switch gears a little bit... Thrown into this mix is our ability to empathize with other creatures. We see that they are also struggling to evolve and survive as times change, just like we are. Ridden with emotions that inspire us to change the world, we step in and lend them a helping hand. But, if we drive our efforts toward preserving the lives of other animals, would that take the focus away from preserving our own lives? Our solution to preserving the lives of other animals is to lock them in an artificial environment to try and encourage sex, and then turning around and chopping large amounts of forest and natural habitat down for industrialization; and we pollute their water and food with human waste; and we consume their resources entirely once the indigenous animals have been entirely displaced. We have massive cities, like Boston or Sydney or Tokyo, to prove that this is what we do as humans. And when we begin taking over more land, we multiply more quickly until the land is consumed.