insane_alien

the existance of groups does not preclude individuality. you can be an individual and also a member of a group that have similar interests. take these forums. we are all individuals that share an interest in science. naturally, we wish to communicate with people with a similar interest and this forum provides the means with thich to do that. i am sure you have a circle of friends with whom you share many of the same values, and to the outsider it would look like you were carbon copies of each other even though those inside your group would reffer to each other as individuals. the same does apply the otherway round. in every group there are individuals with distinguishing aspects to their personality and behaviour. just because you see them as all being the same is likely because you are not looking close enough. just as from a distance all snowflakes look the same, yet i challenge you to find two identical ones.

i have no ida of the quantity you are seeing perhaps some pictures would be helpful?

ae you sure it isn't just dust thats has settle on the water from the atmosphere? it can be concentrated in one spot by the freezing process and also cause that area of ice to melt fist(at a lower temperatue) so it would be more apparent than when the contents are completely liquid.

there isn't anything saying you can have both so it is more of a mtter of what you get first. you say astronomy interests you so that suggest you'd get more enjoyment out of it.

can you type like a normal person please. your posts are very difficult to read like that.

i expected a surge of you idiots around now. we have photos of the landing sites, we can see the equipment and tracks left by the astronauts. and we are NOT going to download a quite probably dodgy torrent that probably violates copyright and is hence, illegal. feel free to post the claims the movie makes here though and we'll explain how its wrong.

kind of says it all. if it was proven then this would not be necessary.

i wasn't arguing that lead didn't do any damage. is awas asking if he had proof that the levels present did any damage. which is pretty much what your post said albeit worded more eloquently and explicitly.

no, silence means nobody has responded yet. you'd have to prove that the lead levels are detrimental to metal ability. where's the evidence?

i always thought it came from the phases of an element. when it is in a solid crystaline form it has a low entropy and is highly ordered and when at gas it has a disperse disordered form and high(er) entropy.

in addition, if you lacked fat and contracted a serious disease or your body was strained then you would more likely to die and/or die faster.

ragnarok, there is a matter of scale involved. if i stick 1 microamp of electricity through you then no harm will come to you. if i stick 1 megaamp of electricity through you then you will die. even 10 milliamps in the right place(heart) will kill you. it all depends on the current and location it is applied.

no, and i already said that it didn't.

nothing kept them from reproducing, they just died more often than they gave birth. if a population has a birth rate of 100 children per thousand population per year and a death rate of 101 deaths per thousand population per year then they are going to die out. you seems to assume thatthey just stopped reproducing rather than had an excessive death rate. to answer your question, you can't reproduce when you're already dead.

nobody said they all died from being killed. just more of them. it wasn't as if they vanished overnight, it took millenia for them to die out.

well for one you won't have any energy reserves at all. imagine a marathon runner when they hit the wall, usually they go on to metabolise the fat, without it they'd just die.

if you can tell me how there can be fewer of a species later on without the death rate being higher than the birth rate, please let me know. i'd be very interested to know how this can happen.

we know it was greater than birth rate because we find less skeletons later on in their history indicating a declining population we know what weapons were used to kill them from the marks on their bones. usually more advanced weaponry than the neanderthals had. a 100 mile diameter crater isn't evidence?

they didn't, the death rate was greater than the birth rate untill there weren't enough left to give birth to more. there's plenty, we killed neanderthals and a big meteorite wiped out the food that supported the dinosaurs.

various reasons i'd imagine. much like humans today dies of various reasons. predators, old-age, disease etc etc.

because they died.

not true, they are planning to attach a VASMIR thruster to the station to do orbital boosts. http://www.nasa.gov/vision/space/travelinginspace/future_propulsion.html

as you accelerate it take more and more energy to get that exta m/s of speed. this is asymptotic to the speed of light. this means it takes infinite energy to reach the speed of light. as we have limited fuel(even if you turned the entire universe into fuel) we cannot reach the speed of light. also, if you sent the space shuttle at anywhere near the speed of light it would disintigrate quite quickly from impacts with dust and other particles in space. at those sort of velocities a microgram particle of dust can deliver the destructive force of a hiroshima bomb quite easily.

Adverse effects always make a drug look really dangerous. i use antihistamines to control my hayfever and the little information sheet list nearly all those symptoms too and a few more. they have never manifested themselves. it can also be argued that clinical trials show up more adverse effects than would normally be seen as they try to test a diverserange of cases with people on other medications and varying states of health etc.

that article is talking about wounds, not diseases. there is a difference between getting stabbed and catching ebola or something.