John Cuthber

Among the dumbest ideas I have seen is the suggestion that one runs boiling conc sulphuric acid into water. "So... from there you direct the hot acid into water where it will condense and you'll have pretty pure sulfuric acid "

Do you plan to answer the question? "I would guess Cain bred with the atheist females. The atheist females liked the bad boy with the bling. While the atheist males, who descended from the apes, were into gay stuff, since this is what animals do, according to modern science. The neo-humans, who could extrapolate to the future, avoided that and began to increase their population." LOL

Since oxygen doesn't smell...

Are you saying that you could do it quicker?

"Things like ADD shows a movement back to atheist animals." LOL

The conventional spelling of fusor might help. http://www.fusor.net/board/index.php?site=fusor&bn=

Re "In regards to the position of the Catholic church on birth control, is that it must be done within marriage and by responsible means, that is by the use of a natural method of misconception. " Here's an old joke. Q What do you call couples who use the rhythm method of contraception? A parents. BTW, you might want to look up the meaning of misconception.

I think it's the responsibility of the church to give up, go home and find proper jobs, but I realise that's not the issue here. However, the church seems to think it's their responsibility to address moral issues like overpopulation. At least one major religion has a bizarre view on this matter. The church probably has a view on global warming- so do the kids at the local primary school but I'm not inclined to blindly follow their lead either. In any event, it's a strawman.

How far have you got so far, and do you know what a mole is?

As opposed to swallowing the blatantly self interested nonsense that religion peddles; the stuff that's clearly fishier than a Nigerian business scheme. You cited an excellent example of this; more Catholics (good for the church) but each of them poorer (bad for the believers).

Atheism is, as you say, the lack of something but that's not always a bad thing. Currently I have a lack of tuberculosis which doesn't trouble me much The lack of TB is probably, at least in part, due to being vaccinated against it. In a scenario where TB is prevalent the question "what do I gain from a lack of TB" is roughly equivalent to "what do I gain from vaccination". What I gain from atheism is a lack of religion. Unless anyone can show me that religion is actually good for something, then I consider TB to be a reasonable analogy to religion (both, for example, have been responsible for lots of deaths) and I consider atheism to be a reasonable analogy for vaccination.

"Atheists can not concede that animals do not have religion. This would make humans, who have evolved the religious charisma, to appear one step higher. " No, I consider those who have caught religion to be one step lower; they are the ones who, at some level, choose not to think for themselves. In my opinion, only humans have the ability to be misled by religion into doing things that are not good for the species (for example it's time someone explained the effect of condoms on overpopulation to the Pope. I hope that people will accept that's just one example; there are plenty I'm not just picking on one faith here).

Atheism also gives me the freedom to decide for myself about morality. I don't need to take someone's word for it that people who eat shellfish are evil. In the same way, it would be difficult for anyone to convince me that some group of people were "subhuman" and could legitimately be wiped out. On the other hand if I thought that their destruction was God's will then I might well kill them.

Are they getting a garbled idea about ortho and para hydrogen? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_isomers_of_hydrogen

On a practical note, atheism means not having to get up for church on Sunday.

Since the site can't tell the difference between bullion and bouillon, how far do you trust it? there's not a lot of difference between a pressure cooker and an autoclave.

I think all the Mods are pink elephants, but this is an unsupported opinion. They may think otherwise but their opinion, apparently, has no more validity than mine.

I invite you to look back to the days when education was rare, and ask if you would have been better off living back then?

Have you checked eBay etc?

Are you sure? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis

Just for the record, to two significant figures 1000/18= 56 not 55.

Is it just me whose first thought on reading the title of the thread was; define "friend"? Incidentally since neither God nor Jesus is a member of this forum, they can't give advice here. It doesn't seem appropriate for others to give advice on their behalf. They are, according to those who believe in them, perfectly capable of making their opinions known independently of this website.

If the guy gets killed while in the process of committing the crime there's not much chance that you have killed the wrong guy. Also, there's the difference that in one case one guy ends up dead but in the other case that guy and some others end up dead. To me those look like real differences. The fact that old-time justice was different doesn't mean that it was better any more than old-time science was better. Phlogiston theory anyone?

Lol http://toothwalker.org/optics/vignetting.html

One potential problem would be that the bacteria are not just in the bladder, but in the tissues and the tissue would be susceptible to UV damage and also shield the bugs. (also urine absorbs UV very well, but that's not a major problem)