John Cuthber

You may find it interesting to look at the nonsense that was talked by the Conservatives in the run up to the introduction of a minimum wage in the UK and their subsequent back-tracking from that position For example " The policy was opposed by the Conservative party at the time of implementation, who argued that it would create extra costs for businesses and would cause unemployment. In 1996, The Conservative party's current leader, David Cameron, standing as a prospective member of parliament for Stafford, had said that the minimum wage "would send unemployment straight back up". [8] However, in 2005 Cameron stated that "I think the minimum wage has been a success, yes. It turned out much better than many people expected, including the CBI."[9] It is now Conservative Party policy to support the minimum wage.[10]" . from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Minimum_Wage_Act_1998 part of their "change of heart" arose from the fact that they were shone to be comprehensively wrong about all the predictions of plagues of frogs etc.

You may well think that, but it's not what Christ is reported as saying. Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5 17-19) So, Christ is on record as saying that the old testament laws are still right. That's why the early Christian church still followed them. As we have grown more sensible as a society, we have abandoned these grotesque ideas and so we no longer keep slaves of stone children to death. That's not because of religion,it's in spite of it.

it makes it jolly difficult to count.

"A thread does not reach 250 plus replies and 14 pages if it does not have SOME merit. " Yes, but the merit may only have existed in the posts patiently explaining why you were wrong.

For what it's worth there are mathematical entities called matrices that have numbers in places, a bit like what Conway might be on about (it's hard to tell). However they don't seem to help much. You can't divide one by zero. Not only that, they have rules of arithmetic that are more restrictive then ordinary numbers. Conway's major objection is that you can divide a number by another number as long as you don't try to use zero for the second number. Well at least you always have the option of multiplying two numbers. no matter what numbers you choose for a and b you can form the product ab Not only that, but it's the same as the product ba. However- if you combine a place as well as a value (and thus get a matrix) you end up with a system where not only can you not always divide A by B, but you cant always even multiply them. In short, adding position as well as value to a number leads to a more restricted set of valid mathematical operations. So, if you can't divide by zero with ordinary numbers, it's even less likely that you can do so once you add the complexity of a "space" as well as a value. This whole thread seems to me most likely to have been barking up the wrong tree. That certainly explains why it got nowhere.

I don't, but peole do http://www.democraticunderground.com/1018473628

The point about doing nothing is not that it can't be done. The problem is that it doesn't achieve anything. I'm still posting to make sure that people don't lose sight of the fact that, after 14 pages, you still haven't divided a number by zero. You (like the imaginary lawyer) have achieved nothing, but I fear that you believe that you have. Do you understand that all you have done is put a lot of characters on a screen?

Dilute solutions of Fe(++) in water are only very slightly coloured. The Fe(+++) complex with fluoride is also very pale.

No. They tell you to kill people who are different- for example those who are gay. They also tell you that you should use foreigners as slaves- that's not very tolerant. Have you read much of the Bible?

The joke isn't the question about the lawyer, but your answer. You still haven't actually said what the lawyer does. You only suggestion is that he does nothing, but that's plainly not helping. It's clear that what you are talking about is either total nonsense or "dividing " something that isn't a number by something that isn't zero.

The pH of blood is usually so tightly regulated (7.4 +/- 0.05) that you could use it to calibrate pH meters (at least for school and college use- you might need to do better for professional work). On the other hand, in some disease states the pH varies rather more than that. But those high pH and low pH states are not strongly characterised by sleepiness or wakefulness. So blood pH is not directly related to sleep. Having said that, blood pH falls slightly with age http://www.vivalis.si/uploads/datoteke/1a96.pdf and older people (who have slightly more acidic blood) will generally sleep less. And one documented symptom of acidosis is tiredness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acidosis#Signs_and_symptoms The big problem is that changes in blood pH due to things like eating (where lots of acid is transferred to the stomach to digest food; leaving the blood more alkaline) or running for a bus (where acid production in the muscles would acidify the blood) both lead to tiredness. And, of course, we recover our normal pH quite quickly, and without sleeping after those sorts of events. It's clearly not the whole story, but there might be something to it.

So, what's good about religion is when people don't actually follow it. The Church of England was founded so that Henry the 8th could screw someone else- hardly a great start. In principle (and, initially,in practice) it was essentially the same as the other branches of Christianity. As it has departed from its religious roots it has become a better guide to living. Richard Coles would have been lucky to be merely ostracised by the original Anglican church. Now the church has had its religion watered down by social pressure and so it is becoming more tolerannt as it becomes less religious.

Sure, you could distil them (it's not obvious how but never mind). it's true that steel and other metals are commonly melted during processing at temperatures much higher than those mentioned. And it's true that some metals are vacuum distilled. but I don't think many people do both. Also, why go to the trouble of some hugely difficult system? If you are going to be outrightly silly about it, why not suggests separating them one atom at a time under an STM? It's true that he didn't say he was planning to do this in a kitchen but where exactly would vacuum distillation be a good choice? Where, for example, would it be a better bet than electrolytic refining?

Oxygen, on its own doesn't strongly suggest life. Nor does methane. But having both of them does. The roughly 1 ppm of methane in the air should react with the oxygen and be destroyed- unless there's something making fresh supplies of it. The same goes for other organic material- like terpenes etc. However, spotting a trace of methane in the air of a planet from a distance would be a challenge.

For the same reason that we pull the legs off flies. Or because we pull the legs off files.

I didn't say it only depends on what you eat. Obviously, it depends on other things too

My contention is that the Pope would have more chance of "getting it" without the books or religion.

Does that mean that there is some sort of idealised RELIGION that is independent of actual religions as they are practised? If so, how can we find out what this RELIGION is? Obviously, we can't ask the people like the Pope. On much the same grounds we can't ask any human. I guess we could ask God- if anyone had His email address (and assuming He exists).

Are you seriously saying the the Pope's objection to the use of contraception isn't religious?

How fortunate, then, that I didn't say it was. Religion is the reason for a lot of unwanted pregnancies.Obviously, it's not the only reason, and not all religions oppose contraception. Yet there is still a lot of heartache that the Pope (and others like him) are directly responsible for and which (were it not for religion) they could stop.

it depends what you eat.

When you are talking about a central belief of the world's largest Christian group, it's hard to say that their intention is anything other than what they bring about- especially when they have been teaching the same view for centuries. The Pope condemning contraception is not "in the name of religion". It is religion.

So, for example, the Catholic church (among others) is trying to teach the emotional stability and tranquillity that comes from having unwanted children. Seriously?

It's a potential contributing factor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteoporosis#Potentially_modifiable

If we lived in caves and never saw the sun but kept on eating and drinking thinks like milk that contain vitamin D we would not suffer from vitamin D deficiency. Also, if there was no vitamin D in our diet (which would be possible for a vegan) but we were exposed to plenty of sunlight we would not suffer from vitamin D deficiency..