Sayonara

I got thrown out of French for making Godzilla shadows over Paris during a slide show, but that's a whole other thread

You should speak to atm. He wanted to write a trinary O/S - it'd run super happily on one of those.

It turned out when I was doing my degree that they were still doing the whole "yes, we were lying" thing at A-level in chemistry. Save a bit of time, create problems later on (especially for those who don't pursue further education, and therefore might not find out that they were told half-truths).

You don't need to prove any more that you can make up crazy theories in spite of the evidence; we get it.

The wormhole in "Sliders" was actually meant to be an Einstein-Rosen bridge. The most stupid bit was the timer device.

Let us know when you start then.

What?

If you don't get the difference, then you really need to stop talking about it. Now. Before you make a complete arse of yourself. You know perfectly well you are making inflamatory, unqualifiable remarks, and scattering the odd text smiley about won't change the way they're received. How gracious of you to permit me to stop discussing that directly after I reminded you that reproduction was not relevant to the issue. If you could get near a gay without them screaming and fleeing your burning brand and pitchfork, you would. Hurrah, we're back at "ignorance is no excuse". This thread was started to collect facts, not mistruths and heresay. What the **** has that got to do with anything? You saying heteros don't copulate or perform "indecent" acts on each other in public places? Are you that naive? I think that's more applicable to you tbh.

I have this mental image of you walking around Soho with a bucket of Homo-B-Gone, offering free vaccinations against Teh Gay, and being laughed out of town. I was talking about reply #40. It's not really relevant though. Now all you need is evidence that links the dictionary definition (or, preferable, the medical definition) to the observed effects. Just saying "I think this causes that because I do" isn't good enough. Not pertinent to the issue of same-sex relationships in humans, as has already been discussed here. Two reasons - humans have sex for non-reproductive reasons and lions don't, and gender identity is not purely a sex-driven expression.

I'd like to draw your attention to item 2 (L) in the Forum Guidelines: http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28

Most do at some point in their lives. Your ignorance of that is not an excuse to spread personal opinion and dogma as "fact". I don't know what you're talking about. Seriously, a list of describers doesn't mean much on its own. The argument that the act sex defines of the nature of gender has already rightly and qualifiably been dismissed in this thread. Furthermore, your comparison between paedophiles and homosexuals is both woefully flawed and deeply offensive.

Then prepare to be laughed at. See my above post about diseases. You're going to have to provide evidence that it's a disease if you want to continue this line of reasoning.

A gay man is a man. A gay woman is a woman. You're clearly treading in homophobe territory now.

If he's saying "why does society not accept homosexuality", and that's a biased viewpoint that he's basing on his own views (see "sanctity of marriage" thread), then it certainly is relevant. That aside I agree with most of your post, particularly with the lack of necessity in assigning a moral value to homosexuality.

Liver tissue can be generated: http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=560 A major problem is that the liver is such a complex, multi-function organ that it's extremely difficult to make a working organ and integrate it into a host body.

Basically it's a byproduct of respiration in the yeast. Glucose --> carbon dioxide + ethanol + energy C6H12O6 --> CO2 + CH3CH2OH + Energy Is that what you needed?

X70? I bought a G50 the other day. It's this big ---> <--- YT's idea, or you might be able to change the config on the T68i to send them as local data by IR, PC link etc.

Lol, Funky. You should market those against IBM.

I don't think 1 century in the west qualifies the plural there. Because heterosexuals don't have people like you calling them sick deviants, and don't therefore feel that they need to remind themselves that they have friends who love them for who they are. Your views on this aren't exactly typical of society's current attitude.

Your theory is not relevant to 3rd Enigma's question, Pinch. (Unless of course it's true, but you really need to prove it is before favouring it over current models )

Since when did any disease only afflict couples? Your logic is flawed. A homosexual couple cannot reproduce together, but a homosexual individual can reproduce unless there is another non-related problem such as sterility.

That's what I thought the list was for too.

I think you found the problem right there.

We already did all that in the "sanctity of marriage" thread. I guess searching the forum for related discussions before they start the same flawed arguments in another thread is too much effort for some people.

He doesn't have to. IT'S A DEBATE.