John Cuthber

...And, once again, I never said it was common. So, the "evidence" we are actually seeking is proof of your conjecture that it is impossible, (strictly, that it's "unimaginable"). That evidence would- of course- be evidence of long scale criminal behaviour, and a confession to having done so. Clearly nobody will have recorded it. It seems you "you turned into „annoying” mode ." by asking for something that is clearly never going to exist. You are , of course right- my education isn't strictly relevant. But, in the absence of any possibility of the evidence you "seek", w are going to have to make use of other sources. Expert analysis might be one option. So, let's see how that goes. I have studied the chemistry and pharmacology of diamorphine, and I don't see any long term lethal effects from it. For example, it's not significantly hepatotoxic; nor is it a carcinogen. So, long term use of (clean) diamorphine is scientifically perfectly plausible. And functioning heroin addicts are well known. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/27/health/functioning-heroin-addicts/index.html So, while you might be surprised by their existence, there's nothing to stop them happening. And, to get back to what was once a point, alcohol abuse will almost certainly screw you up over that timescale.

Please explain how the molecule knows if it's being administered by a doctor. The point I have made several times is that most of the deaths attributed to illegal drugs are actually due to the fact that the drugs are illegal. There might be a quicker solution to this debate. Would you accept the opinion of a pharmaceutical chemist about the harm done by long term heroin use by addicts who can get hold of "clean" supplies (for example, doctors who are also users)?

I had already looked through the previous posts. The find function in Chrome was unable to locate an instance of either "so called" or "right to exist" prior to your use of them. It would be good if people stopped trying to argue that Palestinians shouldn't seek to retaliate.

I wasn't aware that it had been. Israel has the right to exist- in Israel, not in its neighbours' territories.

I'm not saying it is obvious; I am saying it is certainly possible. Others have analysed that sort of data better than I would. Here's a report. http://www.dldocs.stir.ac.uk/documents/prescheroin.pdf

It seems to have escaped your notice that WWII was a war. We are looking at casualties inflicted during what is technically peacetime. "half of the UN human rights council is composed of states which should not be 'throwing stones'" Only half? But that's not the point, is it. The UN is the closest thing teh planet has to a court. And Israel keeps on breaking the law, doesn't it? (Please don't bother posting a list of irrelevant countries and irrelevant acts that also break international law. We know about them, but they are not important to the discussion of the difference between antisemitism and condemnation of Israel) You seem to have missed the point (or, as you would pt it "weaseled out" of it) that, in much of Gaza I would be just fine- because I'd be in an illegal Jewish enclave protected by armed soldiers. What about outside of the aseras- would I do the experiment there? OK, not a problem. I will just nip back in time to 1900. It seems things have changed since then. One factor in that change has been the continued and illegal actions of what the Palestinians see as "the Jews" and what I see as "the government of Israel" On a slightly more practical note, perhaps I could go to Gaza carrying a banner that said "I'm jewish, but I denounce the government of Israel". OK, it would be a lie; I'm an atheist. Do you think I'd be murdered for that banner? And there's another aspect to it. Imagine an orthodox Jew dressed in such a manner as to make his faith absolutely clear, in Gaza. And imagine he was somewhere obscure so that people only saw him one at a time and- imagine for the sake of a thought experiment that, when they left, the people instantly forgot about him. How many people would see him before one of them actually thought that killing him in cold blood was the right thing to do? Perhaps my faith in humanity is misplaced, but I suspect that most of the population aren't murderers. Yet they vote for a government which is in favour of "extermination". (It's not much of vote, or much of a government- but there are reasons for that) How does that happen? Could it be anything to do with the way in which Israel has behaved over the last half century or so? My best guess is that you are right on all points. NortonH will think your posts are antisemitic, because it suits the narrative he favours.

Not a bit of it. You are the one who started talking about the inheritance . By the time Trump Sr died, Trump Jr was a very rich man. And you say that "proves" that Jr was a successful businessman. I'm pointing out that Jr got a hell of a lot of money from his dad some time in the 70s. In spite of that, his businesses went bankrupt repeatedly. Which shows he's not a great businessman. His family connections let him "start again" repeatedly. So his fortune is due to having rich friends, rather than any actual skill. When someone points out "he was rich before he inherited" they are trying to shift focus from the loss of the original million and teh subsequent bailouts. Via a seance? Most people who look at gambling work out hat the odds are stacked in favour of the house. What does that say about the business skills of a man who can't run a profit in those circumstances? That pretty much sums up why- even if Trump were a good businessman, it's far from clear that he has the characteristics needed to be a President. A country can't be allowed to "fail" like that. Nobody made that claim.

Nope. Soft iron is used for shielding. It's not quite as good (because it has a lower permeability), but it's cheap.

You seem to think I'm a dick the first time I point something out which you don't like , but stop thinking it when I restate the point and demonstrate that you are mistaken. Wouldn't it be easier if you just read my posts carefully the first time and saved yourself the trouble of posting (and me the trouble of replying)?

That's exactly the sort of misrepresentation people despise Trump and his supporters for. Trump was given a million dollars by his dad (long before his death). That was when Trump (Jr) was setting out in the world- about 50 years ago when a million was a lot of money If he had just put that mony in the bank, he would have remained a very rich man He managed to go bankrupt in spite of that. So, there is no way you can honestly present him as a financial success or a "self made" anything. Referring to the inheritance- when the real issue was the gift many years before is dishonest. They have indeed- you may remember that Trump claimed that the parents of those servicemen had asked him to intervene. In reality, almost all those parents must be dead. The soldiers who died were about 20 years old (or more) 70 years ago- so they would be over 90 years old if they were still alive. Any "parents" must be about 110 by now. So Trump must have been lying when he said that. Only a cartoon character, or Trump, would feel that he should lie about that. The laws of economics are a bit flaky, but "supply and demand" is fairly reliable. If there was a significant drop in unemployment then workers would become a relatively scarce resource. And if that happened, the price of that resource- i.e. wages- would go up. But it hasn't. And that's because real unemployment is still high- it's just that the government refuses to admit it. If you make it almost impossible to claim dole, then the dole lines get shorter. But it doesn't mean those folk have jobs- it just means you stopped helping them look.

It's a pity you didn't read a little further. The next line says "The opioid withdrawal syndrome is often characterised as a flu-like illness, subjectively severe but objectively mild. " And it goes on to say "People can, and do, die from opiate withdrawal – and all such deaths are preventable, given appropriate medical management." Whereas the death rate from alcohol withdrawal isn't zero, even with intervention. So, the reality is that abrupt alcohol withdrawal is more likely to kill you (with or without medical assistance) than abrupt opiate withdrawal (with or without medical assistance). And that's the point I was making. As for "I cant imagine my friend shoot heroin for 30 years everyday straight and lead a functional life” Just because you can't imagine it doesn't mean it can't happen. People do that sort of thing. Your (lack of) imagination does not change the facts, does it? I didn't say your imagination was leading you astray, I said that it didn't influence the real world. People live more or less normal lives while regularly using heroin. If you can't imagine that, that's your problem.

It seems to have lost the connection somehow.

If I do so, it will not mean that the universe follows your imagination.

Your imagination is irrelevant. There are people who use heroin (under it's more respectable name of diamorphine) regularly for years. In terms of toxic damage done to the body, alcohol is worse- simply because the doses (ounces rather than milligrams)are so much bigger. Of course there is. Several countries have relaxed the legislation on drugs- notably Holland and Portugal. There is typically a small increase in the number of users of pot (and a slight drop in alcohol use). There's a huge saving on police time etc. The problem isn't people using drugs. There is a problem with people how use them too much, or too often. But there's a huge problem with people who are injured- not by the drug use, but by the illegality of that use. The people killed in gang wars over drug territories are killed by the fact that the drugs are illegal. The people who die of overdoses from drugs that were sold with uncontrolled strength and make-up were killed by the fact that the drugs are illegal. The people who die from infections from sharing needles are killed by the fact that the drugs are illegal. We could save most of those people. Why are we not donig so?

Lots of them are doing so- illegally. Ignoring that massive illegal land grab is "applying different standards of moral behavior to different people, races or religions " as you put it. Conceivably, but if you were walking round Palestine, you would be at risk of getting killed by Israeli action. Isn't that slightly more relevant? It's simplistic, but count the dead people on each side. Count the dead civilians on each side, count the UN condemnations of the behaviour of each side. Then tell me who is "applying different standards of moral behavior to different people, races or religions " by supporting Israel?

And it is that moronic legislation that distinguishes "hard" + "soft" drugs, by, for example, giving stricter sentences for possession of what the government deems "hard" drugs. They are social and, to a degree, legal terms. They are not scientific ones. Quite, and that's another reason why the "hard" vs "soft" classification of the drugs is unhelpful, and unscientific..

So would I. Are you able to show any evidence of Mr Corbyn (or any other senior labour politician) giving such a speech? What did I say that was hyperbole? No. I object to them flouting international law. https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm How do you describe the scenario in the picture? No, they just send bombs. That's not really better, is it? It's conceivable that it is. If, for example it stops Israel invading more of the land you need to house + feed the people of Palestine, then it may be money well spent. It's unfortunate that Israel puts them in the position of having to make that choice, isn't it? It's a claim with no evidence. Again, you will need to provide evidence if you want to be taken seriously here; this is a science forum. No, the media tell a different story. They say that Corbyn was laying a wreath at the grave of dead terrorists when he wasn't even in the country those men were buried in.. It's what's technically called lying. If you look here you can see what the media do http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6061281/Definitive-proof-Jeremy-Corbyn-standing-graves-Munich-terrorists-wreath-laying.html They say "He said there were 'many people laying many wreaths' during his visit to the cemetery in Tunisia where Palestinian 'martyrs' are buried." But they were buried in libya. The bodies of Afif and his four compatriots were turned over to Libya, and after a procession from Tripoli's Martyrs' Square, were buried in the Sidi Munaidess Cemetery.[16] from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luttif_Afif So, the media's "sensationalist story" is that Corbyn supports terrorism. But actually they just lie about it because the rich owners of the media don't want a left leaning government that would require them to pay taxes. You can find out the truth without going to Gaza... You should try it. it can be very enlightening.

Liquid helium will certainly do it, liquid nitrogen probably would. The interesting question is how to make a fridge that keeps running for 100 years.

Do you realise that alcohol is- in fact- classed as a soft drug? That's because, in fact, the distinction is political, rather than scientific. So, the two posts f mine which you quoted say exactly the same thing. Why don't you understand that? Also, if you use this definition then there are relatively few "hard" drugs - essentially barbiturates and alcohol- maybe some of the benzodiazepines too. What's the point in splitting drugs into 2 groups where almost all of them are "soft"?

OK, Withdrawal from those is bad- but that from heroin- which was widely touted as the most addictive-has been likened to a doas of the flu. (Obviously, people's experiences of both vary). It' s possible, but unlikely that someone will actually die from opiate withdrawal. https://ndarc.med.unsw.edu.au/blog/yes-people-can-die-opiate-withdrawal Cocaine and amphetamines have similar withdrawal symptoms https://americanaddictioncenters.org/cocaine-treatment/withdrawal/ https://castlecraig.co.uk/resources/drugs/withdrawal-detox-timelines/amphetamine-withdrawal/ Nasty, but seldom fatal: withdrawal from any of them is unlikely to kill you. Alcohol withdrawal has a 25% death toll if untreated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delirium_tremens So, it's very easy- by your criteria- to distinguish hard and soft drugs. Of the 4 substances mentioned in this post, (alcohol heroin, crack and amphetamine) only alcohol is a hard drug. Is that categorisation helpful?

That depends on what you mean by "supports". I agree that they have legitimate grounds for complaint about the way in which Israel illegally grabs land and slaughters children. I can see how they feel that they have no viable alternative apart from resorting to violence- to match that leveled against them. Is that "support" or a simple recognition of the position in which they find themselves? That's a remarkably stupid assertion to make about someone who is a life-long pacifist.

I wouldn't bet on that. In my (very limited) experience, if you wanted to get on or off the ship, you needed a passport. What would another document achieve?

No. Never. The Galaxies didn't come together. They (or, at least, the stuff they are made from) started off together and have been moving apart.

No, never. You can only subtract something if it has the same units.

Please don't clutter threads with this sort of word salad. if you do it by hand. But it's quick if you use a computer.