John Cuthber

You don't seem to understand. There's no need to add anything here. You need to explain the stuff that we have already. Gravity obeys an inverse square law. Dipole dipole interactions don't So gravity isn't a dipole dipole interaction. So you were wrong to say "If you analyze two magnetic fields closely at the same distance apart at all possible orientations to each other you will find a net attraction between the two, this is what is responsible for gravity not mass bending of space." The web page from 2006 says " 'If confirmed, this would be a major breakthrough,' says Tajmar, " Has it been confirmed? If not it's not really science. The bloke in the video seems to have expensively and pointlessly repeated this observation. Modern buildings have structural steelwork that conducts.

Sorry, what did you think that meant? Solutions don't need answers.

In principle, the distillation process only removes alcohol and water so that's carbon, hydrogen and oxygen. That will increase the ratio of nitrogen to carbon. All the other elements are left behind. Part of the problem of recycling some of the nutrients would be that they are in solution and so you would need to carry a lot of water about to transport the nutrients from the still to the field. That's less of a problem if you are on the farm and would irrigate the crops anyway. There are other more complex reactions- the obvious reason is that they yeast makes more yeast. As an aside, if you put fruit on the compost heap some of the sugars will be fermented by wild yeasts and the alcohol will be partly lost by evaporation. So, what you are proposing happens naturally anyway to some degree. Recovering some of the energy value as ethanol won't stop you being able to compost the residual stuff, and the compost should still contain Nitrogen phosphorus etc, but it will mean you have to deal with a lot of water.

Are you questioning that what the supposed Devil wanted has happened or are you questioning the fact that we live longer?

Wood is largely cellulose (which doesn't contain methoxy groups) and lignin (which does). Where do you think the methanol in wood alcohol comes from?

Meanwhile, back in reality. We know what the average interaction between dipoles looks like and it would have the same form for magnetic dipoles as it does for electric ones. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keesom_force#Dipole-dipole_interactions Now if you actually do the maths (like Keesom did) you find that the interaction falls as the 6th power of the distance between the items. but gravity falls as the 2nd power. So gravity isn't a dipole-dipole interaction.

OK, so the fact that they were not cancer specialists means that you shouldn't take their word for it about cancer. Odd as this may seem, they were not medically trained so they have no claim to authority on medical matters like longevity or health. I would have every bit as much logic behind me if I were to attribute my intelligence to a lot of regular w*nking. Can you prove that such an idea is false? If you can't then you are not doing science and that leads me to (still) think you are trolling.

I wonder if his concern is that it looks superficially like a paradox. Spacetime would have to exist within itself. But that's not a problem. My house exists within (the boundaries of) my house.

And, when this devil had done all that, most people would still be better off, better informed and live longer happier lives than ever before. They would know more about the world and be less susceptible to superstition. Best advert fro devil worship I have seen in a while, but I' afraid I'm still an atheist so my best guess is that the improvements come not from some imaginary being (labelled God or the Devil according to personal taste) but to people's ability to make things better.

Slightly frighteningly, they do use other liquids. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naphtha_launch#Naphtha_engine

It's not clear what motivates Miser, but it isn't science. I suspect trolling.

"If you analyze two magnetic fields closely at the same distance apart at all possible orientations to each other you will find a net attraction" Nope, At best you find the magnetic equivalent to the dipole dipole interactions. However, since that falls much more quickly than 1/r^2, we know it isn't gravity. At very high energies the em force and gravitational force may be aspects of some other "unifying" force, but that's another matter.

It doesn't matter that it's not a lot of money. They cut it. It also doesn't matter if Obama spent that much on holidays, or even coke because that alleged holiday would have come from a different budget. Stop wasting time with irrelevant unevinced allegations of bad judgement.

I did't realise that Plato and Nietzsche were specialists in prostate cancer. However, even if we grant that they are, the best you have come up with is an appeal to authority- that's a logical fallacy. I had a look at the study you cited. It's not really very good. The most obvious problem is this "Among men with prostate cancer, 34 percent had masturbated frequently in their 20s, compared to 24 percent among the control group. " Most men with prostate cancer are quite old. It's simply not realistic to expect them to remember what they did (and how often and with whom) decades earlier. It's also bound to introduce confounding variables like innate testosterone levels which would be expected to have an effect on cancer incidence.. Finally your assertion that we should " seek that opiate high somewhere outside the bedroom." is only one side of the coin. A lot more men die falling off motorbikes than jerking off in bed. And your "proverb" is so "common" that Google doesn't find a single instance of it. I wonder if you will admit that you made it up. And I'm now going to mention that women do it too. Does it affect their chances of getting prostate cancer?

Don't talk bollocks

What's strange about asking you why you act immorally?

Possibly, but why don't you try? Answer the question. Why did you decide to misrepresent science?

Indeed. Now would you like to answer my question. Why do you misrepresent science?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4861-frequent-ejaculation-may-protect-against-cancer.html

Indeed. Now would you like to answer my question. Why do you misrepresent science?

Actually, evidence is perfectly certain. The interpretation of it might not be. There is plenty of evidence for science. Can you supply any evidence (of the sort that would be accepted in court) for the validity of religion? Also, while we may not know who will be laughing in the end, we know which side gave more people the chance to live and laugh in the meantime. Seriously, if you had a life-threatening infection, would you trust prayer or antibiotics? And you didn't answer my question. Why do you choose to misrepresent science?

Welcome to the free market.

Nobody is "dragging humanity down to the level of matter". We were never above it. Matter is all we ever were. Nobody said "I, a thinking , feeling ,loving, empathising human being, am no better than a piece of stone" Science certainly never said it. Also, once you accept that people's feelings are related to matter rather than some mythical "mind stuff" you can do useful things, you can explain why alcohol and other drugs affect the mind. You can even make antidepressants to try to treat those who have "desperation & feeling of void or emptiness " So, while you misrepresent science as the cause of those problems it is actually a solution (an imperfect one but science is working on that). Why do you act this way?

Re 1 It has already been explained to you but here we go again. If you mess about with the storm then you are bound to change it's path. So if it hits and kills someone you are liable for their death. Re 2 So, yet another group has said that we can't do it, but you still keep on thinking it's a good idea. Why?

" 'nothing; literally" is an impossibility.' I'd kind of like to see you prove it too. " The original meaning of literal was letter for letter, and "nothing" has no letters. So the phrase means in the manner of the letters of something with no letters. It might not be impossible, but it's damned hard to see it meaning anything. In that regard, it's rather like the OP. The answer to the title question is still no.