John Cuthber

It's not "if I say so" . I maintain that religion doesn't contain any wisdom. It's a sensible contention unless you can show otherwise by (guess what) showing that there is some wisdom in religion.

No. You didn't talk about cyanide. Nobody said you did. Why did you bother to say that? What you did talk about was "...organ failure: Where does it come from? Just out of nowhere? There must be an influence from the environment or from consumption of something." And I pointed out that cyanide would be something you could consume that caused organ failure. But it isn't food. Things that you consume and which destroy your organs are poisons. Your link is helpful because it clarifies what you think. However, what you think is wrong. I only need to find one vegan with arthritis and the "cure" vanishes. It's possible that a vegan diet helps arthritis (and- as I said- in the case of one form of arthritis, it will certainly help. There are not many vegans with gout.) That doesn't mean it has anything to do with pH of the blood does it? It's like saying penicillin helps with infections because it changes the pH of the blood. Well it doesn't change the pH, it kills bacteria. You seem to believe that the only thing that can change a person's illness is the pH of the blood. That is nonsense.

When you say " your belief that religion can't possibly contain wisdom " you suggest that religion contains wisdom. It doesn't. People contain wisdom. So, unless you can show that there's some "special" wisdom to be found in religion you have said nothing. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt in assuming that you had something meaningful to say. And your suggestion that "secularist lead politics has killed as many as religious lead politics." just doesn't seem tenable. Almost every war in history has had army chaplains on both sides explaining why the slaughter was right and that "thou shalt not kill" or its local equivalent didn't apply.

OK Two questions- you have met the first one before because I have repeatedly asked it and you haven't replied.. What wisdom is available in religion, but not science? Second question Who was killed in the name of atheism? (Please note that doesn't say "who was killed in the name of Communism, or Nazism?")

It could be said that religion has a "purpose" in the same way that a virus has a "purpose"- to make more copies of itself. In some instances that's beneficial. But you can't sensibly say that the "purpose" of the cowpox virus is to stop humans getting smallpox. It seems to me that the religion meme is doing much the same as the cowpox virus.

This sort of thing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect shows the real-world physical effects of the things that come from nothing.

I'm sure we have all seen little kids behaving like that- you know the sort of thing. Saying "I have a secret- but I'm not telling you what it is". In the end it turns out the reason they wouldn't tell you is that there was nothing to tell. BTW, likening people to religious zealots, withe their murderous ways, is insulting. All I did was to call you out on it. In refusing to explain yourself and answer reasonable criticism- like the fact that I'm not a killer so I'm clearly distinct from the religious fundamentallists- you are trolling. So, why not prove me wrong and answer the question (at the 3rd time of asking)? I contend that you can't- because you don't have a point, and you know it.

Would you like a second guess? http://www.axminster.co.uk/granite-surface-plate-388016 Even this sort of thing is polished to a mirror finish. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Betterware-PRIME-Solid-Granite-Chopping-x/dp/B002C2YRNA

Thanks. Feel free to actually answer the question; what point were you trying to make?

Feel free to try to explain it- preferably without saying things that are plainly untrue.

There was a time they acted respectably.

No, and it was damned heavy- but that doesn't matter much. It wasn't portable However, you could sharpen a knife on it..

Yes, you can tell by the number of people I have killed. Or not- depending on whether you use evidence or mythology. That kind- of illustrates my point. Incidentally, "different from" is usually considered better than "different than".

Last one I looked at carefully was some sort of mineral filled epoxy.

There is none so blind as him who will not see.

Well, I know what it's used for- and that's the usual definition of "purpose" It exists to maintain a privileged group in a position of power. Do you think it has a different one?

It's important to recognise the purpose of religion. It exists to maintain a privileged group in a position of power. Here's an example, but there are many, and they are a feature of every religion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_in_the_United_States

It's not proof- because it's perfectly possible that it is a coincidence. Also, it's perfectly possible that the diet changed the course of the disease- but there's no reason to suppose that this has anything to do with blood pH is there? You just made that up- it's imaginary. Being dead will change your blood pH and eating cyanide in significant quantities will lead to you being dead. So eating lots of cyanide will change your blood pH. So, if you consider that cyanide is food then you can say that food affects blood pH. If, however you are rational and don't consider things that are poisonous to be food then food doesn't change blood pH. Any number of things can cause organ damage- infection, age, injury whatever. So there's no logical reason to assume (as you have ) that the cause is food. In particular, there is no reason to think that a vegan diet influences blood pH, is there?

You seem to have made a start. One way to test an idea is to see what follows from it and find out if that matches reality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum So, if (generally, and for a long time) any group with characteristic "X" has more babies and if those babies are successful then, over time the incidence of "X" in the population will increase. Now, since we know that IQs are rising, and humanity is generally becoming better informed it's clear that higher IQs and better information is a characteristic which rises with time, so it's reasonable to conclude that this characteristic leads to more (or, at least, to more successful) babies. Since it's pretty much the opposite of "smarter people tend to have less babies than dumb people" we can conclude that "smarter people tend to have less babies than dumb people" is false.

No. That doesn't work. If it did, nobody would ever have mentioned what Corbyn was doing in the 70s However, if you look at the DUP's policies they make Trump or May look reasonable (as Dr Krettin has pointed out)

Well, to be fair "The sensor for the plasma HCO−3 concentration is not known for certain. It is very probable that the renal tubular cells of the distal convoluted tubules are themselves sensitive to the pH of the plasma." From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid%E2%80%93base_homeostasis But there's clearly something controlling it. Venus Williams has Sjogren's syndrome which is an immune system problem. She believes that her diet affects the condition. No evidence has been put forward to support this Anecdotes aren't really data. Incidentally; http://www.clearlyveg.com/blog/2016/09/01/venus-williams-not-completely-vegan It is possible for the pH control of the body to get upset by organ failure. If that control gets far out of what it should be, you die. Nothing to do with diet.

The Labour party may well still end up as the next government. It depends on whether the Tories can really stomach sharing power with a bunch of terrorist sympathisers. Given that May called this election because she thought she would win by a landslide, the outcome is a massive success for Labour. How can you possibly think it's the end of them? https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jun/07/daily-mail-devotes-13-pages-to-attack-on-labour-apologists-for-terror And then the Tories team up with the actual terrorists- and you say the attack on Labour might be deserved?

It looks like the UK has scored an equaliser in "extra time".

"Strong and stable!"

Data <> plural of anecdote.