deepend

In a word, no. Might I recommend a song by Frank Zappa about the power of television called "I'm the Slime." To have free will you need a free mind.

Right now there is more freedom of speech in Russia concerning the Ukraine than has ever existed about most things here in the U.S. For just about everything you think you "know" about anything, just the opposite is probably the case. In this regard, the U.S. is worse than North Korea. But don't take my word for it on the North Korea topic. Take the word of an expert on the matter. www.foxnews.com › us › north-korean-defector-ivyNorth Korean defector says 'even North Korea was not this ... It would appear that I'm not allowed to say anything about the Ukrainian war around here without getting the troll treatment. So I figure, what the hell. I may as well tell you the truth on the matter and go out with a bang. The Ukrainian people have suffered a long and bloody relationship with Russia. That is why the person I will show you a picture of is widely admired there. Because contrary to what you've been brainwashed to believe, he wasn't an invader to the Ukrainians. He was a saviour! To the brainwashed As I said, the Ukrainian people have suffered greatly in the past at the hands of the Russians. Because of what you have been brainwashed to believe, some of that blood is on your hands. You claim to support the Ukrainian people? What a laugh!!! You are enslaved by and support those at who's hands they have suffered. Here is a meme that tells the real history and the reason for it. It is interesting that the current president of the Ukraine is also Jewish. As far as I know, contrary to this meme, Lenin was only part jewish. But the Bolshevik's were indeed mostly if not completely made up of jews. I have a picture of some of them. One of them was a jew named Genrikh Yagoda. He was the head of the NKVD and is said to have personally orchestrated the untimely deaths of at least 10 million people. I will show you a meme of him and what he said. I looked it up myself. He actually did say that. Here is something else to desuds your brainwashed minds. It is a statement by a Nobel Laureate named Alexandyr Solzhenitsyn. Now sometimes winning the Nobel Peace Prize is nothing more than a popularity contest. But Alexandyr Solzhenitsyn was an actual intellectual. He was a Russian Historian and novelist. Still having trouble believing your own eyes? That Stockholm Syndrome thing sure is a bitch, isn't it. You would probably flip out if I was allowed to prove to you that the holocaust was a hoax. The Russians were indeed the actual bad guys. And this person knew it. So if you have any doubt in your mind as to why the Ukrainians are so fiercely opposing the better equipped Russian forces, you now have your answer. I support them. You should to. The first step is in understanding them. And understanding their history is a big part of that.

You seem to disagree with me. In both bacteria and humans there is one driving factor. The need to reproduce. No matter what. You could call it an inherited trait. Inherited brain wiring or brain chemistry. It could very well be that you will develop health problems if you don't breed. Any of the philosophies any philosopher has ever come up with throughout history doesn't stand much chance against this inherited physiology. (But mine could) And any of the kinds of science discussed at this forum is only likely to exacerbate the problem. Also, as I was telling somebody else, this is the main reason behind religion. It gives people the ability to do whatever in the hell they want and justify doing so. What is the end result likely to be? Ever see the movie Soylent Green? Would you like to know the answer? That would require speaking the truth. Which the vast majority of people avoid like the plague. And the vast majority of forums won't allow to be spoken. Jesus was EVIL! Maybe not as evil as mohammed, but evil enough. To rearrange an old saying, you can commit more evil with honey than with vinegar.

I spoke of the main reason. None of the others compare. But feel free to mention the "other reasons" if you want to.

Though this is a science forum, I wonder if there are any HCGW deniers around here. They always amuse me. That aside, there is nothing amusing about HCGW. And what I find most troubling about it is that not even science programs seem willing to speak the truth about it. Maybe it is yet another case of scientists basically having to kowtow to those who pay their salaries. Universities who get much funding from big business or to big business directly. Such as our political leaders do. I recently watched a couple different programs about HCGW. One spoke of a feedback loop and another spoke about the exponential increase in HCGW. But neither stated plainly exactly what that meant. Which is that HCGW is speeding up. The warmer it gets, the faster it will get even warmer. There is one program I saw that told some truth on the matter. It was hosted by Bill Nye and was called Global Meltdown. In it he interviewed an ex college or university professor. This professor had been studying the problem for something around 15 years. What he found out caused him to quit his tenured professorship and start preparing for doomsday. Which he figured could happen in the next 20 years. The main thing that brought him to this conclusion was the exponential increase in methane release. Because methane is 86 times more potent of a greenhouse gas than CO2. Though in my opinion, we have a little longer than 20 years. I figure that it will be a miracle if any humans will be around to see the year 2050.

Of course I am speaking of the Russian invasion of the Ukraine. Most wars have been fought for the same reason. It is one group trying to take what another group has. It is no different with Russia's invasion of the Ukraine. Because the Ukraine has much that Russia would like to have easier access to. One of which is that the Ukraine produces more food than any other European country. Oh how right George Santayana was when he said, "Only the dead have seen the end of war."

For those who don't believe in human caused global warming, this is a topic that probably has little meaning. Hopefully there aren't many of those kinds of people around here. After all, this is a science forum. On the topic of free energy, the question to be asked is if the engineering aspect of it possible. From something I found, it seems to be. I will post a link to another forum that goes into the matter. I guess it will be up to the mods to decide which is more important. Free energy or that this topic was brought up in another forum. One that for the record I am not endorsing in any way. I guess we will find out

Ok. I've had enough of you. Apparently a rational discussion is beyond you. Go haunt somebody elses thread. It is interesting how much effort some people will put into being wrong. I never said that religions didn't exist in the far past. In fact, in a reply to someone else I pointed out that religions of sorts probably existed before there were any humans around. I brought up a creature that I saw on an old nature show that appeared to be worshiping. And though I tried, there is no way to find out exactly what that creature was. Next, you don't need to spout a load of BS to try and explain the human condition. I will explain it as concisely as possible. Humans behave the same as bacteria. Basically, that makes us bacteria. So there it is. Does that simplify the situation enough for you?

You know how I can tell you are full of crap? By reading what you type. You brought up Aristotle by mentioning a quote of his. I told you what I thought of Aristotle. You didn't say you wanted an opinion on your quote by Aristotle directly. If you want an answer, ask a question. But I will now answer it as if you were seeking an opinion on his quote. It is a load of BS. Without having a rational mind, he can offer no opinion on what a rational mind is. So he was wrong. He may have tried to do the best he could, but there are aliens from other planets who would be dismayed by what the vast majority of people even today would view as rational. Let alone over 2000 years ago. Next, only a fool would "entertain" any sort of thought. You can think about any sort of point of view. Making a judgement based on all the pro's and con's of any topic. But to me that isn't the same as "entertaining" any point. To me, entertaining a thought is akin to putting yourself in the shoes of somebody who holds a certain point of view. That to me is getting too personally involved in it. Which isn't a good position to be in to make a dispassionate judgment from. Don't put words into my mouth. If somebody hits you on the toe with a hammer, it doesn't require any study to know if it hurts. Next, why start another thread about discussing religion. That's what this one was about. What you speak of has nothing to do with religion. Things like bees, ants and termites have had societies of sorts for over one hundred million years. No sort of religion is involved. And your opinion as to why religions exist is wrong. One of the reasons why they exist is that when the reality you live in can't produce hope, you are likely to seek help from the paranormal. Or in another word, fantasy. I also seem to recall telling somebody around here the main reason why religions exist. It is because if there is a way in which one human can control another, there are many who will try to do so. Especially when it is something that has been done successfully in the past. Which is the case of religion. Next, I say to hell with "leaders" and what they might inspire their people to do. Because most if not all leadership is corrupt and an ego trip for the leaders. You also speak of going in a direction that make societies strong. If such a direction has ever existed, I've never heard of it. Our society is weak and getting weaker. What most people would call strength I would call filth. In the past 20,000 years, humans have lost an amount of brain that is about equal to the size of a tennis ball. We aren't evolving. We are de-evolving. And it is highly unlikely that any humans will be around to see the year 2050 due to human caused global warming. Next, you are probably right that humans are incapable of beliefs that are based on rationality. I'm sure the concept has existed. But from what I have seen, most people want to be led. They have enough on their plate in just day to day existence. They would prefer somebody else take on the bigger problems. Also, most don't really give a damn what happens. As long as it happens to someone else. Religions are crap. The reason why they exist is basically meaningless. They are either crap or outright evil. Evil to the extent that the truth isn't even allowed to be spoken. I know of one forum where it can be done. But because it is a forum where truth can be spoken, it is practically a ghost town. Why? Because the vast majority of people want absolutely nothing to do with the truth. The REAL truth. Is that preaching? No. It's the TRUTH. So don't tell me what I know or don't know. For what I might say, you aren't allowed to hear it, you don't want to hear it and this forum wouldn't allow me to speak it. "Cult" isn't a crutch. Either something is right or it is wrong. For the vast majority of people, what they think is wrong. So they are cultists to me.

In a way, yes. But an opinion on a flavor is hardly a matter worthy of a cult label. Now if you want to bring up a topic besides religion, such as history, race, economics or politics, those are issues where the term "cult" can be applied. For a couple of those topics especially, in going into them I would be going up against the cult of forums. Which is to deny the basic human right of freedom of speech. And in my case, the freedom to speak the truth. It is pretty difficult to speak about a cult from within the rules of a cult.

Well, if there are any electrons that orbit within the nucleus of an atom, that's news to me. Next, I wasn't saying that protons and neutrons directly influence the ability of atoms to chemically bond with other atoms. But the number of protons and neutrons in a nucleus has an effect on how many electrons an atom has. It is the electrons, as far as I know, that enable atoms to form chemical bonds with other atoms. You also forced me to find out that a nucleus with a different number of protons and neutrons is known as an isotope. All very interesting. But all this has fallen down a rabbit hole in relation as to whether or not uranium could be used instead of lead in a battery. This thread has lost my interest.

Anything that isn't supported by evidence is a cult. It doesn't have to do with the paranormal. Next, Aristotle said that everything was made up of earth, water, air and fire. Was he right? I wonder what he thought about the orbit of planets too. Whatever it was, he was probably wrong. People can have various philosophies. But when you speak of nature as it is, you are either right or wrong. Next, some things just don't need study. You can go on and on about why religions exist. But then the fact that they are nonsense gets buried in the mountains of pointless debate. Next, the truth is the truth. I don't give a flippin flying fuck what people think of it. It is what it is. Reality. I am also reminded of something Samuel Clemens once said. He said, "It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them they've been fooled."

In other words, metals aren't chemicals. Thanks, but I already knew that. If you're going to start telling me things I already know, we aren't going to get very far. Also, protons and neutrons are part of what makes up an atom's electrons. So protons and neutrons are part of how atoms arrange themselves chemically. I just don't happen to think that all the same kind of atoms could be classified as a metal. Metals have very specific characteristics. I have heard that at the center of Jupiter, because of the pressure it is under, hydrogen becomes so dense that it will form a metal. But to me, that isn't the same thing. Are all atoms metals? No. That proves nothing. Is carbon a metal? I don't think so. But it is an atom that can be widely found in many kinds of molecules.

Oxygen isn't a metal. My thread was based on a metal. Though with other elements that constitute gases, maybe it is possible to make some sort of battery out of them. Though I don't know how it would function. If you think a metal is a chemical, tell me all about it.