<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_11_30_2322205</id>
	<title>Royal Society Releases Historic Science Papers</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1259582160000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>krou writes <i>"To celebrate its 350th anniversary, the Royal Society has <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8385560.stm">released a number of historic science papers</a> and made them available online via its <a href="http://trailblazing.royalsociety.org/">Trailblazing</a> website. Among the papers are Benjamin Franklin's notes on his kite-flying experiment, a paper on black holes co-written by Professor Stephen Hawking, manuscripts from Sir Isaac Newton showing 'that white light is a mixture of other colours,' and a few other interesting details such as 'a gruesome account of a 17th century blood transfusion.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>krou writes " To celebrate its 350th anniversary , the Royal Society has released a number of historic science papers and made them available online via its Trailblazing website .
Among the papers are Benjamin Franklin 's notes on his kite-flying experiment , a paper on black holes co-written by Professor Stephen Hawking , manuscripts from Sir Isaac Newton showing 'that white light is a mixture of other colours, ' and a few other interesting details such as 'a gruesome account of a 17th century blood transfusion .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>krou writes "To celebrate its 350th anniversary, the Royal Society has released a number of historic science papers and made them available online via its Trailblazing website.
Among the papers are Benjamin Franklin's notes on his kite-flying experiment, a paper on black holes co-written by Professor Stephen Hawking, manuscripts from Sir Isaac Newton showing 'that white light is a mixture of other colours,' and a few other interesting details such as 'a gruesome account of a 17th century blood transfusion.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277884</id>
	<title>Re:1834 End of Spanish Inquisition</title>
	<author>Stupid McStupidson</author>
	<datestamp>1259589420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>..sscccraattch...NOBODY expects the end of the Spanish Inquisition!</htmltext>
<tokenext>..sscccraattch...NOBODY expects the end of the Spanish Inquisition !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..sscccraattch...NOBODY expects the end of the Spanish Inquisition!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278382</id>
	<title>Re:Links?</title>
	<author>MagicM</author>
	<datestamp>1259593800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>(...) Make a fmall crofs, of two light ftrips of cedar (...)</p></div><p>Awesome!  I never knew old Benjamin had a lisp!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>( ... ) Make a fmall crofs , of two light ftrips of cedar ( ... ) Awesome !
I never knew old Benjamin had a lisp !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(...) Make a fmall crofs, of two light ftrips of cedar (...)Awesome!
I never knew old Benjamin had a lisp!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277874</id>
	<title>Re:F v. S ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259589360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long\_s" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">long s</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a long s [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a long s [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277734</id>
	<title>Some choice quotes from the most recent article</title>
	<author>countertrolling</author>
	<datestamp>1259588460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"... our ignorance of the Earth system is overwhelming and intensified by the tendency to favour model simulations over experiments, observation and measurement."</i></p><p><i>"We could find ourselves enslaved in a Kafka-like world from which there is no escape."</i></p><p>Could?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ... our ignorance of the Earth system is overwhelming and intensified by the tendency to favour model simulations over experiments , observation and measurement .
" " We could find ourselves enslaved in a Kafka-like world from which there is no escape .
" Could ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"... our ignorance of the Earth system is overwhelming and intensified by the tendency to favour model simulations over experiments, observation and measurement.
""We could find ourselves enslaved in a Kafka-like world from which there is no escape.
"Could?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30290164</id>
	<title>Re:1834 End of Spanish Inquisition</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259667600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That was when Chuck Norris came onto the scene</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was when Chuck Norris came onto the scene</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was when Chuck Norris came onto the scene</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277542</id>
	<title>Re:Ceaseless quest...</title>
	<author>leoc</author>
	<datestamp>1259587200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Haven't you heard?  Newtonian physics has been <a href="http://carbonfixated.com/newtongate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-renaissance-and-enlightenment-thinking/" title="carbonfixated.com">discredited after someone hacked into his quill and pen set</a> [carbonfixated.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have n't you heard ?
Newtonian physics has been discredited after someone hacked into his quill and pen set [ carbonfixated.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Haven't you heard?
Newtonian physics has been discredited after someone hacked into his quill and pen set [carbonfixated.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277724</id>
	<title>Great</title>
	<author>gaderael</author>
	<datestamp>1259588340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"...a few other interesting details such as 'a gruesome account of a 17th century blood transfusion."</p></div><p>Great, that's what the internet needs.  More "Twilight" slashfic...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...a few other interesting details such as 'a gruesome account of a 17th century blood transfusion .
" Great , that 's what the internet needs .
More " Twilight " slashfic.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...a few other interesting details such as 'a gruesome account of a 17th century blood transfusion.
"Great, that's what the internet needs.
More "Twilight" slashfic...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30281976</id>
	<title>Re:When facts were respected</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259675220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're wearing rose-tinted glass for the past. You should read how Newton hid is calculus from the world so he could make money from it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're wearing rose-tinted glass for the past .
You should read how Newton hid is calculus from the world so he could make money from it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're wearing rose-tinted glass for the past.
You should read how Newton hid is calculus from the world so he could make money from it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277344</id>
	<title>This might have saved...</title>
	<author>thered2001</author>
	<datestamp>1259586060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...Neal Stephenson a trip. Does the site contain any papers about the benefits of drinking mercury?</htmltext>
<tokenext>...Neal Stephenson a trip .
Does the site contain any papers about the benefits of drinking mercury ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Neal Stephenson a trip.
Does the site contain any papers about the benefits of drinking mercury?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278042</id>
	<title>Awesome, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259590620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why the hell weren't these publicly available to begin with?


I see the article says "put online"; what does that mean? Were they available, just limited to microfilm or something like that? I hope they were freely available before.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why the hell were n't these publicly available to begin with ?
I see the article says " put online " ; what does that mean ?
Were they available , just limited to microfilm or something like that ?
I hope they were freely available before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why the hell weren't these publicly available to begin with?
I see the article says "put online"; what does that mean?
Were they available, just limited to microfilm or something like that?
I hope they were freely available before.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279760</id>
	<title>Re:When facts were respected</title>
	<author>panthroman</author>
	<datestamp>1259606280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...how far we have fallen, people with zero background, training or experience in a field are claiming that their opinions are just as valid as someone who are studied a field for 20 years.</p></div><p>Um... questioning authority is kinda the hallmark of science.  I understand what you're saying - science is underappreciated - but empowering people to seek the truth for themselves <em>is what science is!</em> </p><p>The 16th century's Glorious Revolution was society saying "How come we have to believe Galen?  <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesalius#Scientific\_and\_Historical\_Impact" title="wikipedia.org">I'm</a> [wikipedia.org] gonna dissect some humans myself and see what's inside."  We didn't need authority to be our conduit to truth: we could seek truth directly.  (At the same time, people were rebelling against needing the Pope as a conduit to God, and voila, Protestantism.)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...how far we have fallen , people with zero background , training or experience in a field are claiming that their opinions are just as valid as someone who are studied a field for 20 years.Um... questioning authority is kinda the hallmark of science .
I understand what you 're saying - science is underappreciated - but empowering people to seek the truth for themselves is what science is !
The 16th century 's Glorious Revolution was society saying " How come we have to believe Galen ?
I 'm [ wikipedia.org ] gon na dissect some humans myself and see what 's inside .
" We did n't need authority to be our conduit to truth : we could seek truth directly .
( At the same time , people were rebelling against needing the Pope as a conduit to God , and voila , Protestantism .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...how far we have fallen, people with zero background, training or experience in a field are claiming that their opinions are just as valid as someone who are studied a field for 20 years.Um... questioning authority is kinda the hallmark of science.
I understand what you're saying - science is underappreciated - but empowering people to seek the truth for themselves is what science is!
The 16th century's Glorious Revolution was society saying "How come we have to believe Galen?
I'm [wikipedia.org] gonna dissect some humans myself and see what's inside.
"  We didn't need authority to be our conduit to truth: we could seek truth directly.
(At the same time, people were rebelling against needing the Pope as a conduit to God, and voila, Protestantism.
)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278704</id>
	<title>Re:1834 End of Spanish Inquisition</title>
	<author>LowlyWorm</author>
	<datestamp>1259596680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oppHeMlaLVM" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">Inquisition is here to stay</a> [youtube.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Inquisition is here to stay [ youtube.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Inquisition is here to stay [youtube.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30296046</id>
	<title>not much more than a sauna</title>
	<author>linoleo</author>
	<datestamp>1259588340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I did not know that people could survive such heat</p></div><p>Bah. A decent sauna is around 200 degrees Fahrenheit, and is <b>good for you</b>. I've spend plenty of quarter-hours at this temperature. US sauna are all dialed pitifully low for insurance reasons.</p><p>260F is just enough hotter than 200F that it wouldn't be pleasant anymore, but certainly not lethal in the short term. Drink enough fluids to replace the sweat and you'll be fine.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did not know that people could survive such heatBah .
A decent sauna is around 200 degrees Fahrenheit , and is good for you .
I 've spend plenty of quarter-hours at this temperature .
US sauna are all dialed pitifully low for insurance reasons.260F is just enough hotter than 200F that it would n't be pleasant anymore , but certainly not lethal in the short term .
Drink enough fluids to replace the sweat and you 'll be fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did not know that people could survive such heatBah.
A decent sauna is around 200 degrees Fahrenheit, and is good for you.
I've spend plenty of quarter-hours at this temperature.
US sauna are all dialed pitifully low for insurance reasons.260F is just enough hotter than 200F that it wouldn't be pleasant anymore, but certainly not lethal in the short term.
Drink enough fluids to replace the sweat and you'll be fine.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262</id>
	<title>When facts were respected</title>
	<author>MosesJones</author>
	<datestamp>1259592480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Royal Society really does typify the content led questioning society that the world <i>used</i> to be.  By establishing a body (The <b>Royal</b> Society) with the express intention of enabling that form of dicussion it represented very much a broad view that facts were what moved society forward rather than opinions.</p><p>How far we have fallen from 200 years ago into a world where opinion matters more than facts and where its routine for big companies in particular to hide data that doesn't match the outcome that they want.</p><p>The current pieces around Climate Change are a great example as to how far we have fallen, people with zero background, training or experience in a field are claiming that their opinions are just as valid as someone who are studied a field for 20 years.</p><p>We have people questioning doctors and demanding antibiotics<br>We have people believing rubbish like homeopathy because their "opinion" is it works<br>We have presidents believing that FAITH in something (WMDs) is more important that actual facts<br>We have people questioning evolution because their FAITH says it isn't so</p><p>Hopefully in 100 years our great-grand-children will look back on this as the biggest era of <i>deliberate</i> human stupidy.  Its not often the past is actually better but the basis of the Royal Society and indeed the society which it represented 200 years ago is a much more rational and measured one than the FoxNews driven debates of today.</p><p>I often think that Fox News would be firmly on the "gravity denier" side if it had been around at the time of Newton.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Royal Society really does typify the content led questioning society that the world used to be .
By establishing a body ( The Royal Society ) with the express intention of enabling that form of dicussion it represented very much a broad view that facts were what moved society forward rather than opinions.How far we have fallen from 200 years ago into a world where opinion matters more than facts and where its routine for big companies in particular to hide data that does n't match the outcome that they want.The current pieces around Climate Change are a great example as to how far we have fallen , people with zero background , training or experience in a field are claiming that their opinions are just as valid as someone who are studied a field for 20 years.We have people questioning doctors and demanding antibioticsWe have people believing rubbish like homeopathy because their " opinion " is it worksWe have presidents believing that FAITH in something ( WMDs ) is more important that actual factsWe have people questioning evolution because their FAITH says it is n't soHopefully in 100 years our great-grand-children will look back on this as the biggest era of deliberate human stupidy .
Its not often the past is actually better but the basis of the Royal Society and indeed the society which it represented 200 years ago is a much more rational and measured one than the FoxNews driven debates of today.I often think that Fox News would be firmly on the " gravity denier " side if it had been around at the time of Newton .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Royal Society really does typify the content led questioning society that the world used to be.
By establishing a body (The Royal Society) with the express intention of enabling that form of dicussion it represented very much a broad view that facts were what moved society forward rather than opinions.How far we have fallen from 200 years ago into a world where opinion matters more than facts and where its routine for big companies in particular to hide data that doesn't match the outcome that they want.The current pieces around Climate Change are a great example as to how far we have fallen, people with zero background, training or experience in a field are claiming that their opinions are just as valid as someone who are studied a field for 20 years.We have people questioning doctors and demanding antibioticsWe have people believing rubbish like homeopathy because their "opinion" is it worksWe have presidents believing that FAITH in something (WMDs) is more important that actual factsWe have people questioning evolution because their FAITH says it isn't soHopefully in 100 years our great-grand-children will look back on this as the biggest era of deliberate human stupidy.
Its not often the past is actually better but the basis of the Royal Society and indeed the society which it represented 200 years ago is a much more rational and measured one than the FoxNews driven debates of today.I often think that Fox News would be firmly on the "gravity denier" side if it had been around at the time of Newton.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30280178</id>
	<title>Great example of jquery in action?</title>
	<author>jamest\_adelaide</author>
	<datestamp>1259698620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought the site was Flash, but it appears to be all javasacript and HTML, using jquery.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the site was Flash , but it appears to be all javasacript and HTML , using jquery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the site was Flash, but it appears to be all javasacript and HTML, using jquery.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278234</id>
	<title>I wonder if those papers...</title>
	<author>LynnwoodRooster</author>
	<datestamp>1259592240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Discuss how consensus rules Science, and how to properly dispose of raw data?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Discuss how consensus rules Science , and how to properly dispose of raw data ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Discuss how consensus rules Science, and how to properly dispose of raw data?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279138</id>
	<title>Re:When facts were respected</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259600460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ahahahahahaha!</p><p>My faith tells me your post only needs to be a little more obvious and a little longer to make the Onion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ahahahahahaha ! My faith tells me your post only needs to be a little more obvious and a little longer to make the Onion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ahahahahahaha!My faith tells me your post only needs to be a little more obvious and a little longer to make the Onion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277708</id>
	<title>F v. S ?</title>
	<author>eepok</author>
	<datestamp>1259588280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Great, now I have to find out why, in the Benjamin Franklin text, all but the last S's in any word look like lower-case Fs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Great , now I have to find out why , in the Benjamin Franklin text , all but the last S 's in any word look like lower-case Fs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great, now I have to find out why, in the Benjamin Franklin text, all but the last S's in any word look like lower-case Fs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277894</id>
	<title>Re:1834 End of Spanish Inquisition</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259589420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I was going through the timeline and at 1830 it shows a big white dot with a pop-up "Spanish Inquisition Ends".</p><p>I never saw that coming.</p></div><p>Of course you didn't see that coming.</p><p>No one expects the Spanish Inquistion!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going through the timeline and at 1830 it shows a big white dot with a pop-up " Spanish Inquisition Ends " .I never saw that coming.Of course you did n't see that coming.No one expects the Spanish Inquistion !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going through the timeline and at 1830 it shows a big white dot with a pop-up "Spanish Inquisition Ends".I never saw that coming.Of course you didn't see that coming.No one expects the Spanish Inquistion!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277674</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277684</id>
	<title>I really like the Royal Society</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259588100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is really cool stuff, and I find it very interesting to scroll the timeline on Trailblazing to get an idea of the historical context of these papers. I just wish there were more than 60 of them and covering more fields. Still, I'm looking forward to reading Watson and Crick's paper, Gould and Lewontin's paper, and perhaps even Maxwell's paper if I can handle it.</p><p>I'm a really big fan of the Royal Society. They have so much high quality research available under Open Access, including any papers in Philosophical Transactions B (which I tend to get stuff from the most as my interests are more related to Biology) that are more than a year old. I'm looking forward to their <a href="http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/site/2010/2010\_anniversary\_issue.xhtml" title="royalsocie...ishing.org">350th Anniversary Issue</a> [royalsocie...ishing.org] which comes out in 2 weeks under Open Access. It's looking to have some interesting articles. In fact, all of the things they are doing for their 350th anniversary are really cool. Check them out: <a href="http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/authors/2010.xhtml" title="royalsocie...ishing.org">http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/authors/2010.xhtml</a> [royalsocie...ishing.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is really cool stuff , and I find it very interesting to scroll the timeline on Trailblazing to get an idea of the historical context of these papers .
I just wish there were more than 60 of them and covering more fields .
Still , I 'm looking forward to reading Watson and Crick 's paper , Gould and Lewontin 's paper , and perhaps even Maxwell 's paper if I can handle it.I 'm a really big fan of the Royal Society .
They have so much high quality research available under Open Access , including any papers in Philosophical Transactions B ( which I tend to get stuff from the most as my interests are more related to Biology ) that are more than a year old .
I 'm looking forward to their 350th Anniversary Issue [ royalsocie...ishing.org ] which comes out in 2 weeks under Open Access .
It 's looking to have some interesting articles .
In fact , all of the things they are doing for their 350th anniversary are really cool .
Check them out : http : //royalsocietypublishing.org/site/authors/2010.xhtml [ royalsocie...ishing.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is really cool stuff, and I find it very interesting to scroll the timeline on Trailblazing to get an idea of the historical context of these papers.
I just wish there were more than 60 of them and covering more fields.
Still, I'm looking forward to reading Watson and Crick's paper, Gould and Lewontin's paper, and perhaps even Maxwell's paper if I can handle it.I'm a really big fan of the Royal Society.
They have so much high quality research available under Open Access, including any papers in Philosophical Transactions B (which I tend to get stuff from the most as my interests are more related to Biology) that are more than a year old.
I'm looking forward to their 350th Anniversary Issue [royalsocie...ishing.org] which comes out in 2 weeks under Open Access.
It's looking to have some interesting articles.
In fact, all of the things they are doing for their 350th anniversary are really cool.
Check them out: http://royalsocietypublishing.org/site/authors/2010.xhtml [royalsocie...ishing.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277338</id>
	<title>oblig</title>
	<author>celle</author>
	<datestamp>1259586060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"a gruesome account of a 17th century blood transfusion."</p><p>Bring on the twilighters!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" a gruesome account of a 17th century blood transfusion .
" Bring on the twilighters ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"a gruesome account of a 17th century blood transfusion.
"Bring on the twilighters!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30281436</id>
	<title>Re:When facts were respected</title>
	<author>u38cg</author>
	<datestamp>1259669340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There never was a golden age of rational enquiry.  The thread started by Montaigne was always a thin one; there were no shortage of charlatans and fools two hundred years ago either.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There never was a golden age of rational enquiry .
The thread started by Montaigne was always a thin one ; there were no shortage of charlatans and fools two hundred years ago either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There never was a golden age of rational enquiry.
The thread started by Montaigne was always a thin one; there were no shortage of charlatans and fools two hundred years ago either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30285174</id>
	<title>Re:When facts were respected</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259691540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the hell do you think the Royal Society did?</p><p>They were a bunch of geeks who \_hated\_ the then-current intellectual establishment and were lucky enough to know some people who had the right influence with King Chuck.</p><p>The founding members of the Royal Society had zero background or training, and they debunked entire fields that had been studied for centuries. Their prior experience before their group became the Royal Society consisted of doing experiments in private for the fun of it; they outright scorned intellectual establishments such as Oxford and Cambridge until they took them over. The scholastics (read: sophists) and the alchemists (read: mystics) had an iron grip on the intellectual community back then, and the Royal Society, a group of young upstarts who came out of nowhere, tore their opinions to shreds.</p><p>And science is far better off thanks to a group of geeks coming out of nowhere and ripping the intellectual community's sacred cows to pieces.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the hell do you think the Royal Society did ? They were a bunch of geeks who \ _hated \ _ the then-current intellectual establishment and were lucky enough to know some people who had the right influence with King Chuck.The founding members of the Royal Society had zero background or training , and they debunked entire fields that had been studied for centuries .
Their prior experience before their group became the Royal Society consisted of doing experiments in private for the fun of it ; they outright scorned intellectual establishments such as Oxford and Cambridge until they took them over .
The scholastics ( read : sophists ) and the alchemists ( read : mystics ) had an iron grip on the intellectual community back then , and the Royal Society , a group of young upstarts who came out of nowhere , tore their opinions to shreds.And science is far better off thanks to a group of geeks coming out of nowhere and ripping the intellectual community 's sacred cows to pieces .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the hell do you think the Royal Society did?They were a bunch of geeks who \_hated\_ the then-current intellectual establishment and were lucky enough to know some people who had the right influence with King Chuck.The founding members of the Royal Society had zero background or training, and they debunked entire fields that had been studied for centuries.
Their prior experience before their group became the Royal Society consisted of doing experiments in private for the fun of it; they outright scorned intellectual establishments such as Oxford and Cambridge until they took them over.
The scholastics (read: sophists) and the alchemists (read: mystics) had an iron grip on the intellectual community back then, and the Royal Society, a group of young upstarts who came out of nowhere, tore their opinions to shreds.And science is far better off thanks to a group of geeks coming out of nowhere and ripping the intellectual community's sacred cows to pieces.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277674</id>
	<title>1834 End of Spanish Inquisition</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259588040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was going through the timeline and at 1830 it shows a big white dot with a pop-up "Spanish Inquisition Ends".<p>I never saw that coming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going through the timeline and at 1830 it shows a big white dot with a pop-up " Spanish Inquisition Ends " .I never saw that coming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going through the timeline and at 1830 it shows a big white dot with a pop-up "Spanish Inquisition Ends".I never saw that coming.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278344</id>
	<title>OT: sig reply</title>
	<author>NotQuiteReal</author>
	<datestamp>1259593380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>If your only tool is a hammer, every problem becomes a nail.</i>
<br>
<br>
If your only tool is a screwdriver, the answer to every problem is "screw it". Apologies to Maslow.
<br>
<br>
FWIW, original is "To the man who only has a hammer in the toolkit, every problem looks like a nail."  A. Maslow</htmltext>
<tokenext>If your only tool is a hammer , every problem becomes a nail .
If your only tool is a screwdriver , the answer to every problem is " screw it " .
Apologies to Maslow .
FWIW , original is " To the man who only has a hammer in the toolkit , every problem looks like a nail .
" A. Maslow</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If your only tool is a hammer, every problem becomes a nail.
If your only tool is a screwdriver, the answer to every problem is "screw it".
Apologies to Maslow.
FWIW, original is "To the man who only has a hammer in the toolkit, every problem looks like a nail.
"  A. Maslow</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277430</id>
	<title>Links?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259586540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know what's cool about the web?  Pages can contain hyperlinks to other pages!  For example, if you write a post saying that <a href="http://rstl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/47/565" title="royalsocie...ishing.org" rel="nofollow">Benjamin Franklin's notes on his kite-flying experiment are available on the web</a> [royalsocie...ishing.org], you can use these fancy "hyperlinks" to help people find the articles!</p><p>Of course, it appears that the articles were already on the web, and the trailblazer website is just a very, very cool index of existing information.  But, I think it's required that every slashdot summary contain at least one easily verified and incorrect fact, so that readers will be more engaged with the website and read more advertising.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know what 's cool about the web ?
Pages can contain hyperlinks to other pages !
For example , if you write a post saying that Benjamin Franklin 's notes on his kite-flying experiment are available on the web [ royalsocie...ishing.org ] , you can use these fancy " hyperlinks " to help people find the articles ! Of course , it appears that the articles were already on the web , and the trailblazer website is just a very , very cool index of existing information .
But , I think it 's required that every slashdot summary contain at least one easily verified and incorrect fact , so that readers will be more engaged with the website and read more advertising .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know what's cool about the web?
Pages can contain hyperlinks to other pages!
For example, if you write a post saying that Benjamin Franklin's notes on his kite-flying experiment are available on the web [royalsocie...ishing.org], you can use these fancy "hyperlinks" to help people find the articles!Of course, it appears that the articles were already on the web, and the trailblazer website is just a very, very cool index of existing information.
But, I think it's required that every slashdot summary contain at least one easily verified and incorrect fact, so that readers will be more engaged with the website and read more advertising.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279724</id>
	<title>Re:Links?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259605980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Cool, maybe the Republican Tea Party protesters would be interested in re-enacting Ben's kite-flying experiment?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Cool , maybe the Republican Tea Party protesters would be interested in re-enacting Ben 's kite-flying experiment ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Cool, maybe the Republican Tea Party protesters would be interested in re-enacting Ben's kite-flying experiment?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279918</id>
	<title>Some choice papers</title>
	<author>nneonneo</author>
	<datestamp>1259608200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've looked over this archive (before Slashdot posted it), and I found several articles which were very interesting to me.</p><p><a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstl.1677.0003" title="doi.org">Leeuwenhoek's description</a> [doi.org] of the "little animals" he saw with his early microscope (1677) -- this one is quite long and many entries are repetitive, but it is a detailed account of Leeuwenhoek's regular experiments and observations with microscopic life forms.</p><p><a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstl.1775.0048" title="doi.org">Surviving in a room heated to 260 degrees Fahrenheit</a> [doi.org] (1775) -- this paper strikes me as absolutely incredulous in its claims; I did not know that people could survive such heat (I have not yet found any modern information supporting or disproving this claim, so information about this from a modern science perspective would be nice!).</p><p>I have a large backlog of papers which I would like to read, but which I cannot right now due to time constraints. I certainly would like to read more of these if I had the time to do so.</p><p>Bravo to the Royal Society for making these publicly accessible and easily explored. I now have an urge to read some of the early Philosophical Transaction papers not highlighted in Trailblazing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've looked over this archive ( before Slashdot posted it ) , and I found several articles which were very interesting to me.Leeuwenhoek 's description [ doi.org ] of the " little animals " he saw with his early microscope ( 1677 ) -- this one is quite long and many entries are repetitive , but it is a detailed account of Leeuwenhoek 's regular experiments and observations with microscopic life forms.Surviving in a room heated to 260 degrees Fahrenheit [ doi.org ] ( 1775 ) -- this paper strikes me as absolutely incredulous in its claims ; I did not know that people could survive such heat ( I have not yet found any modern information supporting or disproving this claim , so information about this from a modern science perspective would be nice !
) .I have a large backlog of papers which I would like to read , but which I can not right now due to time constraints .
I certainly would like to read more of these if I had the time to do so.Bravo to the Royal Society for making these publicly accessible and easily explored .
I now have an urge to read some of the early Philosophical Transaction papers not highlighted in Trailblazing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've looked over this archive (before Slashdot posted it), and I found several articles which were very interesting to me.Leeuwenhoek's description [doi.org] of the "little animals" he saw with his early microscope (1677) -- this one is quite long and many entries are repetitive, but it is a detailed account of Leeuwenhoek's regular experiments and observations with microscopic life forms.Surviving in a room heated to 260 degrees Fahrenheit [doi.org] (1775) -- this paper strikes me as absolutely incredulous in its claims; I did not know that people could survive such heat (I have not yet found any modern information supporting or disproving this claim, so information about this from a modern science perspective would be nice!
).I have a large backlog of papers which I would like to read, but which I cannot right now due to time constraints.
I certainly would like to read more of these if I had the time to do so.Bravo to the Royal Society for making these publicly accessible and easily explored.
I now have an urge to read some of the early Philosophical Transaction papers not highlighted in Trailblazing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278156</id>
	<title>Re:Ceaseless quest...</title>
	<author>sycodon</author>
	<datestamp>1259591520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least Benjamin Franklin has all his original data.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least Benjamin Franklin has all his original data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least Benjamin Franklin has all his original data.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277750</id>
	<title>How many reference deleted data?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259588520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And how many had the journals they were published in recategorized when they dared to question the received dogma of the day?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And how many had the journals they were published in recategorized when they dared to question the received dogma of the day ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And how many had the journals they were published in recategorized when they dared to question the received dogma of the day?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30282094</id>
	<title>Re:F v. S ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259676540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know, that's sucked up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know , that 's sucked up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know, that's sucked up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277380</id>
	<title>Ceaseless quest...</title>
	<author>countertrolling</author>
	<datestamp>1259586240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For what? More funding based on dubious data?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For what ?
More funding based on dubious data ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For what?
More funding based on dubious data?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30280000</id>
	<title>Tryals Proposed when Transfusing Blood</title>
	<author>skastrik</author>
	<datestamp>1259609520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The notes on blood transfusion (year 1666) are basically a set of "tryals proposed", questions about whether traits will be inherited when transfusing blood between dogs of different temper, size and colour.<p>
As such they do make a very interesting and non-gruesome read. We have come a long way.
</p><p>
I also found
<a href="http://rstl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/1/1-22/385" title="royalsocie...ishing.org" rel="nofollow">the article itself</a> [royalsocie...ishing.org]
to be  remarkably readable in every aspect (language, spelling and fonts). I did not expect that at all, but then again I am not in the habit of reading 17th century English.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The notes on blood transfusion ( year 1666 ) are basically a set of " tryals proposed " , questions about whether traits will be inherited when transfusing blood between dogs of different temper , size and colour .
As such they do make a very interesting and non-gruesome read .
We have come a long way .
I also found the article itself [ royalsocie...ishing.org ] to be remarkably readable in every aspect ( language , spelling and fonts ) .
I did not expect that at all , but then again I am not in the habit of reading 17th century English .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The notes on blood transfusion (year 1666) are basically a set of "tryals proposed", questions about whether traits will be inherited when transfusing blood between dogs of different temper, size and colour.
As such they do make a very interesting and non-gruesome read.
We have come a long way.
I also found
the article itself [royalsocie...ishing.org]
to be  remarkably readable in every aspect (language, spelling and fonts).
I did not expect that at all, but then again I am not in the habit of reading 17th century English.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279624</id>
	<title>Re:oblig</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259605140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>not twilighters... but <a href="http://apina.nwpshost.com/full/19527.jpg" title="nwpshost.com" rel="nofollow">4chan scooped</a> [nwpshost.com] the Royal Society.

safe graphics, but NSFW text.</htmltext>
<tokenext>not twilighters... but 4chan scooped [ nwpshost.com ] the Royal Society .
safe graphics , but NSFW text .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not twilighters... but 4chan scooped [nwpshost.com] the Royal Society.
safe graphics, but NSFW text.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277414</id>
	<title>Finally, Proof!</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1259586480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See, I told you my client, Galileo, isn't guilty!<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>See , I told you my client , Galileo , is n't guilty !
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>See, I told you my client, Galileo, isn't guilty!
   </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30289200</id>
	<title>On Questioning Authority</title>
	<author>jonaskoelker</author>
	<datestamp>1259663580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Um... questioning authority is kinda the hallmark of science.</p></div><p>I understand what you're saying, but...</p><p>Well, challenging authority with <em>evidence</em> is the hallmark of science.  In the past, the authority (i.e. power) was typically part of a religious institution.  These days (this is how I interpret your parent post) people use <em>opinion</em> to challenge the authority of the scientific process (as distinct from the authority of individual scientists).</p><p>I think well-practised science has authority (over factual matters).  Religion does not.  But well-practised science challenges itself with evidence.</p><p>I think we can agree on <em>something</em><nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um... questioning authority is kinda the hallmark of science.I understand what you 're saying , but...Well , challenging authority with evidence is the hallmark of science .
In the past , the authority ( i.e .
power ) was typically part of a religious institution .
These days ( this is how I interpret your parent post ) people use opinion to challenge the authority of the scientific process ( as distinct from the authority of individual scientists ) .I think well-practised science has authority ( over factual matters ) .
Religion does not .
But well-practised science challenges itself with evidence.I think we can agree on something : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um... questioning authority is kinda the hallmark of science.I understand what you're saying, but...Well, challenging authority with evidence is the hallmark of science.
In the past, the authority (i.e.
power) was typically part of a religious institution.
These days (this is how I interpret your parent post) people use opinion to challenge the authority of the scientific process (as distinct from the authority of individual scientists).I think well-practised science has authority (over factual matters).
Religion does not.
But well-practised science challenges itself with evidence.I think we can agree on something :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277946</id>
	<title>They left an important paper out...</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1259589720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2009: Physics/Mathematics: On the slashdotting of the Royal Society<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p>But seriously, this is fantastic to see! Amazing what's freely available if you have the time and inclination to learn (and the brains to filter out all the quakery!).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2009 : Physics/Mathematics : On the slashdotting of the Royal Society ; - ) But seriously , this is fantastic to see !
Amazing what 's freely available if you have the time and inclination to learn ( and the brains to filter out all the quakery !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2009: Physics/Mathematics: On the slashdotting of the Royal Society ;-)But seriously, this is fantastic to see!
Amazing what's freely available if you have the time and inclination to learn (and the brains to filter out all the quakery!
).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278540</id>
	<title>Re:When facts were respected</title>
	<author>flyingfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1259595420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It has never been any different.  The vast majority of the unwashed masses are stupid and superstitious.  It is still true.  Sad, really.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It has never been any different .
The vast majority of the unwashed masses are stupid and superstitious .
It is still true .
Sad , really .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has never been any different.
The vast majority of the unwashed masses are stupid and superstitious.
It is still true.
Sad, really.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30287826</id>
	<title>350 Years</title>
	<author>physburn</author>
	<datestamp>1259701080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>  Its really just amazing how quickly we've come in those 350 Years, when the
Royal Society was founded we had no theory of gravity, electricity, heat, air
magnetism or engines. The most complex machines, we're clocks and windmills.
It make you think how far and how quickly man kind has come.
<p>
---
</p><p>
<a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/blogs/History\%20of\%20Science/feed.html" title="feeddistiller.com">History of Science</a> [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ <a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/" title="feeddistiller.com">Feed Distiller</a> [feeddistiller.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its really just amazing how quickly we 've come in those 350 Years , when the Royal Society was founded we had no theory of gravity , electricity , heat , air magnetism or engines .
The most complex machines , we 're clocks and windmills .
It make you think how far and how quickly man kind has come .
--- History of Science [ feeddistiller.com ] Feed @ Feed Distiller [ feeddistiller.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  Its really just amazing how quickly we've come in those 350 Years, when the
Royal Society was founded we had no theory of gravity, electricity, heat, air
magnetism or engines.
The most complex machines, we're clocks and windmills.
It make you think how far and how quickly man kind has come.
---

History of Science [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30289200
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277542
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30281976
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277894
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30296046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30285174
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278704
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30281436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30290164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30282094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_11_30_2322205_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_2322205.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277684
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_2322205.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30282094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277874
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_2322205.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279724
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278382
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_2322205.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30296046
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_2322205.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278344
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_2322205.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_2322205.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277674
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30290164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278704
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_2322205.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30281976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30281436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30285174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279760
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30289200
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_2322205.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277946
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_2322205.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30277338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30279624
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_11_30_2322205.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_11_30_2322205.30278042
</commentlist>
</conversation>
