John Cuthber

"one becomes more concerned with natural or higher truth" Well I'm concerned with truths that are actually true. If your "higher truths" are different then they aren't "higher truths" they are falsehoods masquerading as truth and you have been misled. "On the other hand, if there is no guy at the top, the word the middle manager becomes the new standard. " Well, there's no evidence of the "man at the top" so we should accept humanity as the standard, shouldn't we; otherwise we are just making stuff up, but pretending it's "divine". it's not clear what you mean by "The problem is that science is not based on consensus, since one good data set, by one person, can supersede even a 99.99% consensus. " But if you are saying that a good,well designed experimental set of measurements could (hypothetically) show that global warming does not exist or is not anthropogenic then it would overturn the established consensus, you are right.It would. But there would then be a new consensus in science (with the view that AGW isn't real). The point is that, even if the current view was overturned, there would still be science based on consensus. "The religious tend to hold out, looking for hard irrefutable evidence, " You might want to discus that with Galileo. Religion has a history of steadfastly ignoring evidence.

I don't "speak for" the Universe- I just notice how it behaves. You on the other hand,seem to claim that you influence it; ironically, people often accuse me of being conceited. Also there's a reason why a calculator always gives the same response; the response it gives is the right answer. If you can show me why one of my answers is wrong, I will change it- that's what both science, and being open minded, mean.

LPG is typically propane or butane- essentially a mixture, or whatever is cheap.

Oops! Sorry, I should have explained that the universe does not give a flying one about your beliefs (or lack of them). If I had pointed that out, we could have avoided a pointless thread. Can I ask one of the mods to close this thread now?

"The cornea is made up of water and an extracellular matrix of materials that one might think should be opaque." Why? Who would think that? On what basis? Most proteins don't absorb visible light. (OK that's a slight catch 22- the light that is easily absorbed by proteins is ipso facto not visible). Essentially the optical components of the eye are made of stuff that works, but they are not that different from, for example, skin, that lets enough UV through to make vitamin D. re. "Any insult to the cornea affects it' transparency. Edema, swelling.Pain and redness surrounding the cornea." I can speak from personal experience here. (1) don't damage your cornea. there are two reasons for this: it hurts like hell- it's the only thing that ever sent me along to the local ER department and (unsurprisingly) it doesn't reliably heal to give as good an optical instrument as it once was. I had 20:10 vision in that eye and it hasn't recovered better than 20:20. (2) On the other hand, to a good approximation- certainly good enough to read this and reply- the eye is able to recover. The surface is marred and the curvature not as smooth as it was, but it is transparent. BTW, Strange, no the cornea does most of the work, the lens does eh clever bit ,but it's in a medium with a relatively similar refractive index- so there's only so much it can do.

Yep. though that difference, 0.8 pH units, is probably about as big as you can get away with calling a good buffer.

No. Why would it? Atheism refers to just one thing; whether or not there's a God. It has, in principle, no relation at all on whether I believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden. But once I gave up trying to believe the credo I was brought up with, I realised I could believe in lots of other things that had been "forbidden".

No more so than being compared to a Christian, Jew, someone who actually beleives in Santa Claus etc. But that's a complete straw man anyway isn't it?- because that's not what I complained about. I objected to being tacitly called a liar. It's not like the hair cut analogy you have dragged up, not least because hair changes for reasons other than cutting,and that "looks nice" is entirely subjective. It's like saying to someone whom you have never met, and who is talking about the fact that they are bald, that you think they are a red-head. It's a direct contradiction of what I actually said. And so, it's an assertion of dishonesty. But, I guess that apology will have to do. As far as I can tell, the silly claim did much more to damage your reputation that any effect it had on me.

This bit's good "I know the pK is supposed to be close to the pH needed to maintain"

Really; what do you know about buffers?

That hundred year period includes the time (1929) when Louis de Broglie won a Nobel prize. Lets have a look at what he did to achieve that. Einstein had already shown that E=mv2 And Plank had shown that E= h F De Broglie realised that mv2 = h F Rearranged it in terms of momentum and wavelength viz wavelength = h/ momentum and got a prize. Is setting two terms equal to eachother and then doing some simple algebra "genius" or not? Essentially, the "easy" stuff has now been done and we are looking for advances that require a lot more understanding.

UK police showing admirable restraint and not escalating a demo into a conflict. You don't walk away backwards if you are being chased; you turn and run. So, it looks like more outright falsehood. Are you going to continue to ignore the fact that you called me a liar? An apology and acceptance that you were flat out wrong would make you look slightly more credible.

"Muslim area" is a figment of those foolish young men's imagination. Why are you talking about it as if it has some credibility? And yes, I'm talking about the bit where you called me a liar. Why did you think it was helpful to do that?

Yes, there is a problem and yes it may well damage the EU. But if you actually read what Donald Tusk said it was "the 28-member bloc was on the verge of breakdown with "recriminations and misunderstanding" pitting nations against one another." Not a problem with the actual immigrants, but a problem with the various politicians arguing with eachother. So, for example, with Mr Cameron essentially refusing to take any immigrants and leaving the other EU countries to handle the situation, he risks damaging the EU. So what? His party hates it, so that's no shock. We spent roughly 10 times more bailing out the banks than it would cost to buy all the immigrants a new house. It's not going to bankrupt the EU by a very long way. And if, as you claim "I really hope there can be a peaceful integration, which would then benefit us all,", why do you keep spreading this nonsense about them? Why tell me that there are "no go" areas in the UK, when I know that there are not? Why label every misdeed by as Muslim as a "Muslim" act? Why the discriminatory and biassed language that leads you to say things like " a white english girl " And why call me a liar? (Had you thought I had forgotten about that?)

Obviously, since Mohammed wasn't born yet, that clearly wasn't down to the Muslims. No, the next famous instalment of the Christians and Muslims interaction was the crusades.

"There are many no go area's for non muslims, 1.10 in clip shows a white english girl wearing a short dress, she is told she cannot dress like that in a "Muslim area", what does this make that "Muslim area"?" The fact that she was there makes it clear that it isn't a "no-go" area doesn't it- or have you completely lost contact with reality. A few blokes wandering round being rude to people isn't the same as taking over the world. If a couple of white-trash blokes were acting like that (and they do) you would hardly notice it. It doesn't make it a Muslim area- it makes it an area with a couple of arses- just like everywhere else. BTW, re the English" girl, for a start it takes a capital letter. for an encore- the Muslims are English too.

Are you aware that Nigel is- shall we say- not mainstream. Fox news, on the other hand, is mainstream, but so bad that it leaves people more ignorant than when they started. http://www.businessinsider.com/study-watching-fox-news-makes-you-less-informed-than-watching-no-news-at-all-2012-5?IR=T and, in this case they got it so stupidly wrong, they ended up getting threatened with legal action. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/12/paris-lawsuit-fox-news-reporting-no-go-zones-non-muslims These are the people who told (at 1:48) the world that Birmingham (the UK's second biggest city) is a no-go area for non-Muslims. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_zF7nbEvwY Absolutely none of it is true. And none of Sunshare's strange views have much to do with the BBC's reporting of immigration issues. Perhaps a nice mod could split the thread.

There was no suggestion of any threat from the clock. The claimed reason for the arrest was that it was a "fake bomb" but, since no such claim was made by anyone- it was a clock- he called it a clock, that reason is untenable. It was known , by the police, at the time of the arrest, not to be a bomb. So why the arrest? When the police reaction is this "Irving police might still charge Ahmed with making a "hoax bomb." Police spokesperson James McLellan said Ahmed "kept maintaining it was a clock" when he was brought in for interrogation, but that he offered "no broader explanation." When asked by The Dallas Morning News what broader explanation Ahmed could have given for a clock that was actually a clock, McLellan said the creation "could reasonably be mistaken as a device if left in a bathroom or under a car." " It is clear that they never thought it was a bomb; real or fake, but they were unable to answer a simple question about their reasoning. And there's still this. http://gawker.com/7-kids-not-named-mohamed-who-brought-homemade-clocks-to-1730999866?rev=1442419857794&utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow re"And saying " but Christians do it too " when someone brings up Muslim atrocities is no justification. They are both wrong !" is totally missing the point. Of course they are both wrong. Nobody said otherwise. The point is that it's not just Muslims who do bad things.

OK so, because they persecuted his sister for no reason “I got suspended from school for three days from this stupid same district, from this girl saying I wanted to blow up the school, something I had nothing to do with.” you somehow deduce that it's fake and part of your reason is "when do they allow juveniles to have a photo taken in cuffs at school? " Well the clear answer is "when they are arses who arrest Muslims for no reason".

Presumably you think this is fake too http://www.todayszaman.com/diplomacy_turkish-pm-meets-us-student-arrested-over-homemade-clock_399949.html And someone had better tell the White house. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3237268/Muslim-teen-14-arrested-homemade-clock-gets-support-Obama-Mark-Zuckerberg-NASA-engineers-police-announce-won-t-press-charges.html And, you need to learn to read; When I say I'm an atheist that actually rules out the idea that I'm a Muslim. Oddly, I don't live in a cave, I live in a democracy (well- of sorts)- one where people's beliefs are respected (well, most of the time). I even care enough about Europeans and Americans to not only give them capital letters, but to realise that some of them are Muslims.

At best, you have proved that the followers of Islam are a bit unoriginal when it comes to (boys') names. Since the Mohammeds are massively outnumbered by the others, you have also shown that they are a small minority- we already knew that. If you still think that 27 is more than 30, go find a maths teacher. Would I agree that "the police should go to hell" well I'm an atheist so the question's a bit thin on meaning but if I saw the police doing this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsborough_disaster or this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34272642 or this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Orgreave then I'd certainly not think they deserved a place in heaven. And, if you look at things like arrest rates in the UK then they seem to have a point about the police not acting fairly- don't forget these are not the jerks going out and getting pissed or taking drugs- those are generally the same "group" as the police. Incidentally, Christianity is something like 1400 years more ARCHAIC than Islam. Why do you think that matters? But the real question is why are you listening to the words of a few nutters? It's as silly as saying that all Christians are murderous heathens because you have heard this lot of unrepresentative twits. http://www.godhatesfags.com/

Did you read the page you cited? "Part of the problem stems from psychoanalysis's failure to test the validity of its therapeutic approach and failure to ground the discipline in evidence-based practices." i.e there's no reason to believe it works. "Part of the reason many are so skeptical of psychoanalysis today is that the body of evidence supporting its effectiveness tends to be relatively weak." ditto "However, some of the research on the effectiveness of psychoanalysis has yielded limited support for this treatment modality. " Curate's egg at best "Using the criteria established for evidence-based treatment, traditional psychoanalysis alone does not in fact pass muster as a method of therapy for the large majority of psychological disorders," I.e. it still does not work. you seem determined to believe that Freud's "work" is valid. Why is that?

Did you actually read the data on that page you cited? Here's the top 5 1 Oliver 6,649 No change 2 Jack 5,804 No change 3 Harry 5,379 No change 4 Jacob 5,050 No change 5 Charlie 4,642 No change And, as you can see, no spelling of Muhammed is in there and the top 5 names haven't changed because there isn't a "takeover". The video starts by saying there are at least 30 mosques in Luton. There simply are not. ​The "rationality" of the motley crew of marchers is indicated by them yelling "How dare they take our women". Well, nobody did- you can tell- the women are still there. One woman was questioned by police, after her husband broke the law. Seriously, if the best you can do is some propaganda video that's packed with obviously false statements, it's time you gave up. For the record, Stacey Dooley is a dab hand at sensationalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stacey_Dooley

Just how do about 5% of the UK population "take over"? Since it's not possible, it's wrong. The bit about Luton being (or having) a no-go area is a myth brought about by someone who is (in my opinion*) nuts http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/anders-breivik-trial-luton-residents-798424 * based on this sort of thing "He was instead diagnosed as having narcissistic personality disorder" from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Behring_Breivik

Freud made up psychoanalysis. It may well be used to treat anxiety, but I don't know of any evidence that it works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysis#Criticism