John Cuthber

Last time I checked, the Universe included everything; there can't be two universes because the "second" one would be part of the "first". Not that it matters much, if there's a God (and that's a mighty big "if") then He too is part of the Universe.

We all still are, and if more people remembered that...

then stop. If you don't know what you are doing (and you clearly don't) this sort of thing is potentially rather dangerous

For a start "Most ligers suffer from embryonic fatality or premature death,[7] and those that survive are often genetically or physically sterile and therefore unable to reproduce and continue their lineage.[8]" from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liger

This thread is not going to achieve much beyond "playing word games" If it's so simple, why have you asked about it? It's entirely possible that, since I'm content with the government I have, creating one would be a waste of time so it's not lazy or cowardly. incidentally, if you attribute something to someone as a quote, it should be what they actually said.

I doubt there are any fully transparent ones. Something like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron(II)_sulfate#/media/File:Iron(II)-sulfate-heptahydrate-sample.jpg or this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron(III)_fluoride is probably as good as it gets Why do you ask?

There are two (rather questionable) justifications for cosmetic surgery on the NHS; the psychological harm of not getting the surgery or the fact that the NHS would end up paying to repair a botched job done elsewhere. The "optional" nature of cosmetic surgery isn't as relevant as you might expect. No matter how much money you spend, people will still die. so the NHS can spend an infinite amount of money and still fail. Once you accept that you also accept that it has to make very difficult choices. If you can't afford to treat everything, how do you decide who you don't treat?

If what he meant was that all bodies of men should be allowed to set up their own government that's fine- until you realise that we are all part of one group- the human race and we are also part of smaller groups- (like the golf club or whatever) and those groups might not agree. Can I get together with a group of my friends and decide that as a self governing body, we are allowed to kill people who watch soap operas?

Possibly, but the phrase you attribute to him doesn't appear on that page; nor elsewhere on the web (as far as Google can tell). Did you make it up?

Then it seems that probably no nation exists.

Did Jefferson say that? It seems odd.

Both of which exceed the melting point of steel. What were you planning to make the equipment from? How were you planning to heat them?

Both "postulates" are trivially falsifiable.

Hasn't any of you tried thinking "outside the box"?

Are you sure?

So, as far as I understand it after 13 pages, you have a scenario that can be summarised as follows. I have invented a thing that isn't a number and a thing that isn't division (it's doing nothing) and a thing that isn't zero. Using these you can "divide" a "thing" by "zero". Which may well be tautologically true- but doesn't actually mean that you can divide by zero as shown by your repeated failure to say how to do so.

I don't know; but it would be interesting to ask them.

You missed a bit; what I said was And, if the constitution is changed to restrict gun ownership will you say "It's not a "view". It's a Constitutional damn fact. People have the no right to keep and bear arms in the US. Any politician who represents the stance that Constitutional rights are just somebody's point of view is going to lose my vote. See how that works? "? So without the silly attempt to alter the meaning, perhaps you could answer the question. Will you still say that? Also, my point wasn't babble- it's just that you ignored the point of it again so here it is again. "You say "But people have died as a consequence of the exercise of those rights," OK, what do I need to say to get someone killed? What's the magic "death spell" that I need to speak to bring about someone's demise?" If you answered questions promptly and without distorting them it would make things quicker. It may also avoid having people think you are ignoring issues because you can't answer them.

I wonder why God wouldn't inspire you to do something that's actually useful.

if you drink a lot of water you will lose a lot of electrolytes in urine. The kidneys are good at retaining the salts etc that the body needs, but they er not perfect.

"Hi all for Ecologist in the house, what is the systematic position of "Digitalis"," ​As far as I'm concerned, it's current position is growing rather well in my back garden.

There are lots of wars where the "little" side won. Can you name any where the war was not at a distance from the "big" side? Vietnam, for example, is a long way from the US. The point being that the "little guys" had the home advantage.

"Take it out of the equation because a large federal power oppressing state and local powers is one of the stated concerns of many gun advocates. " Can we put it back on exactly that basis please?. One of the points I was making is that the gun advocates think their pop guns will help in that event. It's practically disillusional. (At least some of) the people who think they need guns also think they can take on the US armed forces. Why would we listen to someone who actually believes that? As you say, there is a well organised militia- better than the founding fathers could have dreamed of, (I oversimplified it a bit when I said the police) so there's no reason for each citizen to be armed. The death toll is a clear reason not to have everyone armed. And I'd still like to know what the death spell is. And, if the constitution is changed to restrict gun ownership will you say "It's not a "view". It's a Constitutional damn fact. People have the no right to keep and bear arms in the US. Any politician who represents the stance that Constitutional rights are just somebody's point of view is going to lose my vote. See how that works? "? Imaging going back a little while and applying that same assertion to both sides of the debate about prohibition of alcohol. See how much sense it makes.

It looks like they make a pretty arbitrary choice in most cases. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_meridian#Planets It looks like Charon and Pluto are tidally locked so the "obvious" choices for their prime meridians are the middles of the sides facing each other.

return it to the manufacturer for a refund.