John Cuthber

Because 60 has more factors than 100 so calculating fractions of an hour is easier.

Indeed! What could be more reasonable than not knowing something published in a national newspaper? There's a general expectation that paying someone to do something illegal is illegal. If something looks too good to be true (like, for example, a very cheap waste disposal service) it probably isn't true. Don't most adults know that? The bit about lawyers is a red herring. Nobody expects you to know all the laws- they just expect you to check that something isn't banned before you do it, otherwise, as I said earlier claiming ignorance would be a way to get away with murder.

It's not that ignorance is a crime, it's that ignorance is not a defence. Consider the simplistic case of the alternative "Oh! is killing people to steal their money forbidden? Sorry- I didn't know that".

Nope, those things are part of science- specifically sociology psychology and ( to a degree), economics. That's the problem; the realm left for religion is practically nothing.

They should be non overlapping, Science covers anything that's open to direct or indirect experimentation and religion covers everything else. Unfortunately, religion gets understandably pissed off when they realise that there's essentially nothing left for them- the so called "God of the gaps" problem.

What is amazing is that people can say " it's difficult to move big rocks- so space aliens or Gods must have done it" without realising that the only reason "it's difficult" is that they don't know what they are doing. The other amazing thing is that people by books written by those ignoramuses.

I have bad news for you: there is no way to reliably answer the question given just the pH of the incoming water. Do you have other information about the feedwater?

As I said, it's not trivial. If it was, it wouldn't be a prototype paradox.

Are you aware that every single scientific exploration of Chi showed that it was nothing but mumbo jumbo? Also, unless it's the capacity to do work, it's not something you can call "energy" on a science web page. If yo mean this sort of thing " Like vitality, body functions, movement of atoms (this is just theory or just example, can be wrong with atoms) and those are dimensions that this "energy" as basis governs or moves various dimensions of our reality, experience, emotion and everyday life. " then there's a problem. Science discredited Vitalism a long time ago.

If you take the definition of being a chicken (rather than some other earlier bird) as being having some critical combination of DNA then the chicken came first. That DNA was present as soon as the gametes met, but the egg (in the sense of the shell, yolk and white) formed round that embryo. Of course,if you take the "fertilised egg cell" as being the first chicken then the chicken and egg came into being at the same time. It's not "trivially" anything, because it depends on what you call an egg as well as what you call a chicken.

Energy doesn't have dimensions. What do you think you mean?

Energy is not ridiculed by science. Chi isn't recognised by science because there's no evidence for it. Saying science ridicules chi is like saying we ridicule unicorns. That's' nonsense, we can't laugh at a unicorn; they are not there to laugh at. Scientists might ridicule people who believe that chi exists. The first thing you need to do is show that chi actually exists. Until you can do that I strongly urge you not to come back; (BTW you are likely to get ridiculed if you do.)

Do you know why they spin in ether case?

So what?

Pointing out that someone is spouting evidence-free nonsense is scientific.

Practically speaking, either in a nuclear reactor or with a particle accelerator. If you have the power to make stars then https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis but I think that, if you could make them, you would already know that.

Roughly two thirds of the Earth's surface is pretty much immune to fires. Plenty of things live there.

"Hi. Bought a property. It has a 1m diameter, 1m deep sinkhole by the front yard, 5m from the house. " Why?

"Could land based life exist on a world with high levels of oxygen? " We do. "At what point would organic matter burst into flames if exposed to air? " Did it occur to you that you do not observe this and that oxygen is noted for the ability to relight a Glowing splint? "My speculation is ..." It's a good idea to know what you are on about before you speculate

"is it possible to build this device?" No.

http://xkcd.com/285/

Based on that paper it's the cannabinoid receptor that's responsible, in which case good old THC should work. The good news is that many people have been (at least crudely) extracting that for ages. Some people might not be happy with the side effects. Now do you see why I asked "which cannabinoids" in the first place?

"I didn't bother to look up the specific cannabinoids that reduce diskynseia nor the mechanism" Is there any sound medical evidence that any cannabinoids actually do this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_organ

Just checking: is he 70 years old, or 70 weeks?