hypervalent_iodine

Seems like more of a cultural thing to me. Where I'm from (Australia/New-Zealand), the thing to do is eat greasy, hang-over type food. No idea why, that's just what people do.

! Moderator Note After further discussion, staff have decided to keep this thread locked. guitaoist, for people to be able to respond to you and engage in discussion, you need to be aware that we have to be able to comprehend what you are saying. Take some time to carefully think your posts through and write them (please stop with the videos, this is a discussion forum not an extension of YouTube) in a clear and concise manner. Preferably with correct English.

Is there anything in this you actually want to discuss? If not, I will be forced to close the thread.

! Moderator Note For the record, I don't give a damn about the posting history or staff warnings given to members on other forums. That is their business. Staff here base moderator actions on the posts you make on SFN and SFN only. juanrga, if you wish to question something that staff have said to you in-thread, it's usually better to do so via PM or by using the report feature. Replying to mod notes isn't strictly against the rules, though it does lend to off topic posting and it's usually a much simpler process when dealt with outside of the rest of the conversation.

! Moderator Note This thread has been closed as staff feel it is too far gone to be brought back to the original topic. It really isn't that difficult to start a new thread should you feel things start to get too off topic. In fact, Royston did exactly that.You can continue to add to the topic there, though be warned, the attitude exhibited in this thread by some is not acceptable and will not be allowed to continue in the other thread.

! Moderator Note In fact, Royston, staff tend to agree with you on this (although in future, please use our reports feature so we can deal with it). To add an official note to Royston's post, juangra, your attitude leaves something to be desired. Your posts are framed in such a way that it seems you are trying to win some sort of imaginary competition, which is not how a discussion works. Please stop acting so condescending towards other members and start being more cooperative or your time here will be brief (which is not something we want). Questionposter, this is not an official warning, more of a bit of advice. For the benefit of the people who take the time to respond to you, could you please take some time to properly think through your posts and the posts of others to avoid the circular and (at times) frustrating debates encountered in other threads.

Is this homework?

! Moderator Note 1. This thread has become wildly off topic. 2. esbo, nothing you've cited is actual evidence of anything, merely personal opinions and bias. Please look up the term and become familiar with it for the future. 3. The trolling has become insufferable. 4. Thread closed. 5. You are not permitted to reintroduce this topic.

! Moderator Note Moved to Speculations. stevensrd1, could you please inform us as to how you are proposing your system operates and better yet, how it is that you have completely pure water. You will also be required to come up with evidence to support any and all assertions.

Though I don't have time to offer a full reply, I would just like to point out that this first question was then promptly followed by a second question, '2. whether these solutions really work, and if they have any drawbacks?'

The above comment was split from the thread, 'Christian Evidence,' as something we felt to be an eloquent summary of a problem we often counter with people who argue in favor of the existence of God both here and elsewhere. DrRocket kindly gave us permission to sticky it so that more people are able to benefit from it. Members are welcome to link back to this, should it become relevant.

Do you understand what is meant when something is said to be a good conductor of heat? I suppose what I am getting at is, could you explain what you think it means, as I rather suspect that you don't (no offense intended).

Your entire argument against us thus far is based on ad hominem, which being a logical fallacy, is against our rules (though I will say that I am not moderating here). If you claim any one of us has vested interest, then please be specific as to why. Simply being a chemist doesn't make one's opinions bias. Now, if I were a chemist and I also owned a company that makes pesticides, you might have a point. Regardless, we've posited valid points that don't require confirmation from a veterinarian, a medical professional or even an agricultural scientist. Having a discussion is a two-way street, so if you wish to debate the points brought up by other members, you'll need to do so with valid counter-points of your own.

! Moderator Note juanrga, Your style of posting in the above lends itself towards being rather condescending. This isn't a great way to hold a discussion and begs a defensive rather than a cooperative response, which is not what we would like membership to aim for when posting. This forum isn't about winning or losing a debate, it's about holding civil and informative discussion. It is of course, okay to disagree with someone, but you need to be more mindful of your tactics in future. Please do not derail this thread by responding to this mod note.

! Moderator Note michele123456, Give it a rest. Whether iNow added, 'discuss', at the end or not is not particularly pertinent given that this is a discussion forum. The 'discuss' stipulation goes without saying.

! Moderator Note anotherfilthyape, It would be a good idea for you to calm down with the name calling and general rudeness. This is a discussion forum and we aim to discuss things in a civil and respectable manner. Please do not respond to this mod note.

You have to pay to use your tub?

There was a thread on this a few months back you may also find worth reading (www.scienceforums.net/topic/55223-organic-farming/page__p__592533). Organic farming is far from being a solution to anything. In fact, it takes a few leaps backwards from where modern farming is in almost every sense. Primarily, it comes down to the fact that it can't cope with supply and demand (and any attempts to do so would require additional land) and the fact that natural alternatives are dangerous (see Horza2002's first post in the above thread). The whole concept is basically designed for no other reason than to capitalise on the public reception to buzzwords such as, 'organic'. In truth, you're much better off buying goods derived by modern farming practices.

Well then, that solves that mystery. No problems

! Moderator Note This thread is not about astrology. Guitaoist, if you keep trying to pull it back to that, this thread will get closed.

! Moderator Note One thread per topic, please. You already have a thread on this, so please discuss it there. Thread closed.

! Moderator Note Since this isn't really a political discussion, more idle chitchat, I'm moving it to the Lounge. guitaoist, questionposter and doG, I've removed your posts since they were completely irrelevant to...whatever this discussion it meant to be about. Newt Gringrich, I think. Guitaoist, comments such as, 'I bet I read way more science than you do', are not really appropriate and are also a logical fallacy (And also, astorlogy is not a science). You can read it all you like, it doesn't mean that you're right or that you know what you're talking about.

! Moderator Note I've split a number of posts from the thread into a new one as they were off-topic. Could you please stop veering off topic and stick to the OP.

We don't delete topics on request unless there is a special need for it.

! Moderator Note 1. Astrology is not science. It's crackpottery. You proved that in your thread: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/64967-proof-for-the-skeptics/ 2. This is being moved to speculations and being closed pending staff review. 3. This isn't the place to advertise your threads. 4. Please stop abusing the English language.