John Cuthber

One option is for the government to be more dictatorial. Another is for them to be more educational, and to clamp down harder on those who- through their own self-interest- seek to spread lies and disinformation.

Evidence.

There is no reliable data for "ancient" (as opposed to modern) incidence of homosexuality. It is entirely possible that there were more gay people around in the past than there are now. That makes this whole tread absurd. It is true- as Itoero has said that ""Modern diet and stress cause homosexuality." - as long as you interpret the word "cause" as meaning "might be a factor in favour of" It is exactly equally true that "Modern diet and stress Prevent homosexuality." with a similar caveat. However, if you use the word "cause" in the way which the dictionary defines it then- as I pointed out- it is clearly and unequivocally untrue to say that "Modern diet and stress cause homosexuality." So, if you misuse the word, it's meaningless, and if you don't then it's simply wrong. Was this thread just a trolling exercise?

Well, just about everybody here eats a modern diet and most a re subject to stress. yet homosexuality is still a minority trait. So, you are plainly wrong.

A plant doesn't have a meaningful pH. Some bits of the plant will have a different pH to other bits. Incidentally it's pH not PH The sap of the plant is likely to be fairly well buffered https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffer_solution So the pH of the extract is probably fairly near the average pH of the plant tissues. Why do you ask?

The first of those statements needs some sort of evidence. The second is meaningless. Surely "not knowing where your next meal was coming from" was a much bigger cause of stress. Plenty of cheap varied and wholesome food is hardly a cause of stress.

I do have a G se G. I can set it up to charge the top electrode either positively or negatively. So, in fact, your statement that ""on bigger metallic sphere there is positive charge, ... Smaller metallic sphere will have negative charge," is actually wrong Why not just accept that? Also the thickness of the material the spheres are made of makes no difference as long as it conducts. Teachers should start by learning. I used to live a few miles from one of the worlds biggest V De G.

What I said was Size is not important ( to polarity) And it was wrt Sensei's strange notion that "on bigger metallic sphere there is positive charge, ... Smaller metallic sphere will have negative charge,"

We don't have a "state your age" poll- because it would be out of date as soon as anyone had a birthday. However http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/97656-poll-which-year-group-were-you-born-in/?

Size is not important ( to polarity) It doe sinfluence capacitance directly (from http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/capsph.html) So with a relatively large sphere a metre in diameter the capacitance is a tenth of a nano farad. That's not a huge capacitance. It's of the order of the capacitance of a metre or so of teh cable used to connect the TV Ariel to the receiver. Or ten billion times less than one of these http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/products/1094089/?grossPrice=Y&cm_mmc=UK-PLA-_-google-_-PLA_UK_EN_Passive_Components-_-Capacitors&mkwid=spGjDHJxF_dc|pcrid|88057073523|pkw||pmt||prd|1094089&gclid=CjwKEAjwxurIBRDnt7P7rODiq0USJADwjt5DsrXNeDRpKWl4Hp_9F8B1Wdn3flgG0m-1z0mgKscp_BoCiQzw_wcB Get two V de G generators - one of each polarity.

The ones who believe that shit are full of shit. The others are not actually believers.

It's not enough to just say it's a straw-man. Those views I cited are genuinely held as part of various religious credos. They are viewed as pretty much insane by those outside of religion. The Bible tries to teach contentment by stoning people to death. How well did that ever work? Take your pick. I had recent politics in mind, but it hardly matters. Nobody ever made a good decision by saying "Well, common sense and the evidence say A but my religion says B so I'm going with B." Doh!

Fiveworlds What do you mean by "SAT"?

I have an algorithm that answers the travelling salesman problem in O(n) 1 Get the data for the locations to visit 2 get the computer to do the calculation 3 print the locations in order of visiting. OK step 2 needs work...

One of the pair of 1TB drives I use for backups is connected to my computer- the other isn't. The difficulty is working out how often to swap them. As for "Also good luck with hacking a microsoft server farm." Well, I'm not going to try. However I invite you to consider this Practically every hacker in the world is trying to get into µsoft's servers. Practically nobody is trying to get into my computer. Which one is at more risk?

How long does it take for the computer to create it? Is it,as I suspect, O(2^N) And, as several people have asked already What do you think "SAT" means?

Or "someone else's computer" as it's often referred to. Since it's free, I presume you have precisely zero comeback if it fails. The essential problem is that, if I can access the backup device from my computer, then ransomeware can do the same.

It just "makes sense" to you that God couldn't do any better than create a bunch of sinners?

The day is the time it takes the world to go round the sun. There can't have been a day before there was a sun. Yet the made-up irrational account says the sun only came to being on the 4th day. You really don't have to get very far into the Bible before it contradicts itself. However, as I have pouted out, there is none so blind as he who will bot see, so I expect you will be blind to this inconsistency. Also, re "The bible is very complex....i guess it should be... if it came from God. " well, for a start we know where it came from These guys wrote/ rewrote it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea And, for an encore, if it was written by God, why didn't He make it clear?

The fact that it has never been observed, in spite of many attempts. However, since you are the one making the extraordinary claim- that it exists- it falls to you to provide the extraordinary evidence or to stfu. Like Pymander, you have this the wrong way round, and my answer is the same. It's the theists who will plainly believe any old nonsense they are told by the priests. Examples include " you should worship a man who turned water into wine- but you shouldn't drink alcohol" "it's vitally important to cut bits of your children's genitals" and " You should base the way you live your life on that of a man who married a 6 year old". No atheist is going to believe nonsense like that. What I asked for is the exact opposite of what you have supplied. I asked you to provide evidence that religion offers wisdom that is not available to the secular. You have pointed out that, if they choose to think about it, this "wisdom" is available to anyone. Religion, on the other hand, discourages them from thinking- even to the extent where they believe stuff that's clearly wrong. You might also want to consider the effect that religion has had on politics.

Condensation will take place if enough water vapour comes into contact with a cold surface. Since you have defined the temperature, you need to ensure that the water vapour concentration is low enough. You need a drying agent or a source of gas that's dry- like bottled air or nitrogen.

Strictly, this only works if the tunnel is small. In that case, yes, we can assume that the attraction is always to the centre. You might also benefit from this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_theorem

Why not?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT_(disambiguation)

Where did you get the idea that argon is radioactive?