John Cuthber

Would you be happy to receive a blood donation from someone with AIDS?

"Natural selection, genetic drift, speciation, change in allele frequency over time , these mechanisms/processes generate NO new genetic information," nobody said they did. "They have NOTHING to do with the alleged origin of all life on earth being a single organism BILLIONS of years ago " nobody said they did. "There is no source of bulk amounts of NEW genetic information. " nobody said there was. "The beta globin protein gets WRECKED a little." "wrecked"in the very real sense that it helps the person survive. " IT IS THE GREATEST MYTH IN DOCUMENTED HISTORY (6,000 years)." Nope, that's the one about the moon shining before the sun was created. It's called Genesis. "Highly recommend his book. " No, I don't think I will.

It shows: specifically it explains why you don't understand it. The real definitions of the second and the metre do not form a circular argument. (Obviously- they couldn't be, they wouldn't work) The ones about God and the bible are a circular argument so they are not valid. The point you made is simply not a valid point. Would you like to try again? Perhaps this time you should stick to things you understand.

Obama was elected in Jan 2009 According to this data http://www.google.co.uk/publicdata/explore?ds=z1ebjpgk2654c1_&met_y=unemployment_rate&idim=country:US&fdim_y=seasonality:S&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment+us that's just before the unemployment figures stop rising (October 2009) and start to fall. The best yo can do is accuse him of taking a few months to get started on reducing it. And so, once again we are back to the question of "If you have to say things that are not true to support your position is it because your position is wrong?

Way to go on missing the point there. I wonder if it was deliberate. The point is that, according to your "idea" is no ether drag in one plane so the gyros should work perfectly in that plane. You are the one who needs to show that they work in the horizontal plane but not in the vertical plane(s) because the ether drag should mess up the non horizontal ones. Also re. " BUT those laser gyros actually are not so reliable." Just plain wrong. http://www51.honeywe...ments/ADIRS.pdf MTBF 40,000 hrs http://www.es.northr...assets/mk39.pdf MTBF 200,000 hrs They are actually very reliable. Illuusio's theories are not. Re "lock in": even wiki knows how to deal with it, so I don't think the manufacturers and users have a problem with it. "RLGs, while more accurate than mechanical gyroscopes, suffer from an effect known as "lock-in" at very slow rotation rates. ... Forced dithering can largely overcome this problem. ... Dither does not fix the lock-in problem completely, ... In a technically more complicated solution the gyro assembly is not rotated back and forth, but in one direction only at a constant angular rate. And, as I said and Iluusio couldn't explain away, if it were an issue it would apply in 1 plane, but not the others. That's not what happens. In any event it still shows that the same principles that ensure the the MME works would also work in all 3 dimensions. So whatever direction the ether flowed, it would show up in RLG operations. It does not. So Illuusio's ideas don't agree with the facts and it is not because the facts have made a mistake.

I'm not interested in local effects like those within the atmosphere. Why are the spare electrons not repelled into space? (whether they are stuck to molecules or not). If, as you say, the earth (and sun) have a negative charge then they should lose electrons If they do that, the negative charge goes away. Why do you think it's still here? Seriously, if you can't answer this then the whole of the thread is based on nothing. You really need to put some work into this rather than ignoring it or inventing meaningless phrases like "further ionic density". (which is, incidentally, word salad)

Dale, Can you give me an answer that isn't word salad please? Why don't the excess electrons simply leave?

Stop whining. Zapatos asked essentially the same sorts of things of you that you asked of others. If you think it looks like an accusation then you ought to accept that it looked that way when you did it. In the meantime, do you think the CIA can possibly know of every rioter and bunch of terrorists and loonies? If not then you have to accept that the most likely answer to the question "what did they know before it happened?" was Sod all. The video had nothing to do with the issues so it's not a meaningful reply. Asking for a sensible answer isn't a matter of "You only want the discussion to be on your terms." it's a matter of wanting any meaningful debate at all. It's also part of the forum rules.

"But then, I’m still curious as to what and when the administration knew of this slaughter in Benghazi, prior to its happening?" Why do you suppose that they knew anything? It wouldn't make sense. Neither spontaneous gangs of rioters nor terrorists are in the habit of emailing the US administration to warn them. So it doesn't make sense. If, by fair means or foul, they had known about it, they would have done something about it. Your question would only make sense in some bizarre world where terrorists and rioters give fair warning: why did you ask it?

Dale, Can you give me an answer that isn't word salad please? Why don't the excess electrons simply leave?

According to you, they should work perfectly in the horizontal plane but not at all in the vertical plane. That's not what happens. If reality doesn't agree with your ideas, it isn't because reality has made a mistake. We are talking about the fact that you explicitly refused to talk about the only thing that could conceivably prove your case. " I won't disclose my experiment " Actual practical experience with ring gyros proves that you are wrong. You have refused to say why you think you are right. I also can't see why this thread should remain open.

You seem to have missed this line from my past post. Remember, data is not the plural of anecdote. Re the spectra. So people get sloppy with use of language. So what?

"If you agree, pretend that you do, that ether wind happens vertically in relation to Earth could M-M E detect it?" Yes, pretty much. These things http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_laser_gyroscope are used in all 3 dimensions for navigation and such. If the ether was real and the ether drag effect was real we would crash a lot of planes. You can stop trolling now.

1 Not if you are a competent speaker. Remember you don't need to get everyone to believe you. You need to get more than half the votes. If you can't convince most people by telling the truth then it's because either you are incompetent at explaining or your ideas are wrong. Both of those should debar you from office. 2 yes, and the issue seems to be that they do it a lot. Much more than their opponents, and their lies are also much more outrageous. Why is that? 3 No he did not. However,a as has been pointed out elsewhere, that''s not a lie. It's a failure and there are reasons for it. Calling it a lie is a lie. 4 No, I didn't see it. Is it relevant? Did they debate the number of lies in each other's campaigns? If not, are you just trying to distract attention away from the lies the US right wing tells? 5 how many incidences of not knowing what you are talking about is considered excessive? I'd say 1 was enough to show that you are insincere or a lousy speaker. 6 yes, we know. The question is why? I content that their position is intrinsically untenable so they have to lie to defend it. Do you have either a counterpoint to that explanation or even an alternative? If you want to offer an explanation centred on the idea that the right wing in the US are all on morphine that's "interesting". I rather doubt the validity of the assumption. BTW, I didn't see the debate but it seems to have left Obama with a clear lead in the slightly longer run- once the facts came out. Perhaps the US public doesn't like being lied to. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19835176

"Can you disagree with my observation with M-M experiments error" You have not made any meaningful observation: you just said it's wrong. It's not an observation, but an assertion. It is also lacking any evidence. Unless you can do a lot better than that there is nothing to discuss and we should close the thread now. Also, the MM expt showed the lack of any ether even though the plane of the experiment shifted rather a lot on the grand scale.

Can you give me an answer that isn't word salad please? Why don't the excess electrons simply leave?

Can you give me an answer that isn't word salad please? Why don't the excess electrons simply leave?

Chilled, a simple question: if someone has to lie repeatedly to persuade others of the validity of their case, is their case valid? If you agree with me that it is not then can you say why anyone votes for the right wing in US politics? (There have been a few threads where it turns out that the right wing are the real liars and idiots: I'm not saying the left is perfect- just that the dragon believers and those talking about absurd ideas of human reproduction or even plane windows seem to all be on the right. I have repeatedly asked for instances of Lefty nut-jobs and, at best, they are thin on the ground )

Perhaps, in the interest of balance, you would like to cite a few of the opposition's examples. Of course, if it is representative of just one side, you might find that difficult. Don't get me wrong, I know there are arses on both sides, it's just that one side seems to have more than its fair share.

Ok so have a quick look at the graph. Left hand half 1880 to 1940 the sea level rises by about 70 mm Gradient is 70mm/60years. Right hand side 1940 to 2010 the sea level rises from about 70 to 210. A rise of about 140 mm Gradient 140mm/70 years So the rise was roughly twice as fast in the second half of that data as it was in the first half. That's proof of an acceleration. How can you write "So there is no evidence for an increase or acceleration in sea level rise at all. " immediately after a graph that shows the acceleration?

Indeed. What you said was that they would stay and give the earth a net negative charge. I was the one who said they would leave. And there's a very simple answer to the question "Neither would all excess electrons take leave: what would be here to repel them away?" The electrostatic charge on the excess electrons that were left behind would repel them. Remember that you are the one saying that the earth (and sun) has a net negative charge. If it had then it would repel electrons. So would the sun The sun is hot enough to lose electrons by thermionic emission. If it had a negative charge then it would spit out the excess electrons into deep space. It would lose that overall negative charge. The earth is connected to the sun via the solar wind so if the earth had a negative charge then it too would repel electrons from the earth/ sun system until it was neutral. I said that nearly a month ago and it's still true now. You just haven't addressed it. Instead you have come up with pointless strawman arguments about "all molecular bonds would be lost and we would have to go without any much needed compounds. There would be no "we". No water! " and made unhelpful suggestions like "Its OK. Don't worry about it. Find a hobby. Discover girls."

The energy comes from the energy used to smelt the ore to make the metal (usually zinc) that is used up as the pile generates electricity.

And once they have been repelled the two bodies will no longer have a negative charge. Which would falsify the following statement "A case can be made for the earth and our sun to both be holding negative electrical charge charge. " You may remember that was in the opening post.

Yes, it really does matter. Telling offensive lies to smear your opponent is an extraordinarily shitty way to behave, even by the standards of politics. "The lady is dead!" Other groups that are unable to defend themselves include the very young, the very old and those with learning difficulties. Are they fair game too? Exactly what junk do you mean by "the junk I read and see from the left."? Is the left distributing porn as a political comment or what? What have the left been doing that is in some way comparable to this? If their antics are not comparable then "I don't condone this type of political BS any more than ..." is a pretty weak statement. It's not a matter of not condoning it. It's a matter of condemning it absolutely and without question.

We know about atmospheric electricity. But you are claiming something on a bigger scale. The atmospheric effects are driven by the heat of the sun in the same way that the weather is. I asked what would stop electrons leaving the earth (including the atmosphere) or the sun f it had a net negative charge. You have missed the point until you answer that.