Phi for All

I have a sandwich bread recipe that's fairly yeasty, takes some kneading, and it starts in a cold oven. I recall something about getting a more even bake (cooked through to the middle) and a nice, tight crumb when the dough and oven come to temp together. That recipe also uses a pan of hot water beneath the loaves for a nice outer texture. It doesn't take long to proof the dough, as CharonY mentions, but I always make myself wait at least half an hour, but no more than an hour. My country bread recipes use a dutch oven, and that thing needs to be super hot to start. They say to preheat the cast iron to 450F for AN HOUR, but I only do about 20 minutes and it works just fine (seems wasteful to have an empty baking dish in there for an hour). Those breads tend not to have much yeast, more water, take about five hours to proof, and have a more open, airier crumb.

Our hearts go out to those who've been intellectually abused by the loss of their favorite forums. Cheese Nips and coffee are over there on the periodic table, please help yourselves. So glad momentum brought y'all here!

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-israel-intel-russia-hamas-attack-1833094 I don't think it's conspiracy to put forth that TFG sold Israel's secrets regarding the Iron Dome defenses, especially when nobody thinks Hamas had the capability.

Sounds nice but it doesn't answer my question in the slightest. You claimed that god wants you to be peaceful, and you admonished those who aren't, but your Bible clearly states that your god wants you to be his soldiers. I'll assume you have no answer to this glaring inconsistency, since you're trying so hard to sidestep the issue. Wow. Do I need crayons to get a point across to you? I identified EVERYTHING you claim in the OP as being cherry-picked. You use those examples, and when someone provides a contrary piece of evidence, you ignore it. That's confirmation bias. What's a "plane of existence"? This would be a splendid time to describe the geometry of such a place, but I know you can't. "Plane of existence" is an ignorant concept for people who are guessing about such matters. There is no evidence for your "plane". And your creator is no scientist, since its methodology is flawed and imprecise. Contempt? Something has to exist before I could hold it in contempt. What I possess with regard to a creator is skepticism. I see no need for the existence of a creator, and the explanations I've discovered don't require one either, so I simply don't acknowledge one. That's not contempt, if you'll notice. It's indifference to the same degree I have for Santa Claus, purple dragons, and Thor.

That's not what it says in the Bible your "designer" holds so dearly. Matthew 24:6-7, "You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places." So do we listen to what you say is a "clear message", or do we listen to the Bible? The Book of Jeremiah pretty much tells us that your god is going to use us to destroy its enemies, so how do you think this god feels when you urge people to stop fighting its enemies?

Nobody failed, except you. It's been presented that your coincidences are nothing more than confirmation bias, where you cherry pick certain instances and ignore others. This is "identifying them" as insufficient to draw the conclusions you do. There are plenty of explanations that don't require invoking some all-powerful sky prince to make sense of them.

When you're getting a golden shower, the golden angle is very important. Get it right and urine heaven!

SR wasn't meant to ALWAYS work, it's a special case, as Bufofrog pointed out. Is this a situation where you misunderstood something and dismissed it out of hand? Your reasoning seems pretty shaky in this thread.

This actually supports the concept of time as a dimension. When you decrease your motion through space, you increase your motion through time, and it works the other way too. And even with length contraction and time dilation, two observers can agree on what's happening within their different frames of reference. And it only works this way if time is a dimension you can't separate from space.

You can't move through space without moving through time as well. Changing motion through space or time affects the other in predictable ways. Special Relativity works, and it wouldn't if time weren't a dimension.

! Moderator Note Please tone down the preaching. You can support the arguments you're making without soapboxing about it.

The recurrent laryngeal nerve is something every vertebrate has from a distant fishy common ancestor, connecting the larynx (which performed a gill function) to the brain. Over time, the connecting nerve looped below the heart and just stretched to fit each evolving species. In humans, the laryngeal nerve goes from our brains, down our throats and in front of the aorta before looping underneath the heart and going back up the throat to our voice boxes. In giraffes, the RLN is crazy long. Imagine what it was like on some of the long-necked sauropods!

Sometimes realizing you're not alone in your feelings can remove some stress, and for that a forum can help. Other times it might be better to speak one on one with a professional, preferably someone recommended by your doctor. I can't help you. I don't think of negative thoughts as a "condition"; I think of them as a perspective, which is one of the few things in my life I can control. Negativity is an easier path, and often seems more realistic than being positive. It takes more work to stay positive, to think positively, and to spin events so they uplift me rather than depress me. It's hard, but the negativity is a bad habit I'm trying to kick, like nail-biting or smoking. So, negative results, time to try something else. Maybe see a professional face-to-face.

The argument that breaks ID for me is irreducible complexity. Proponents claim the human eye is so ridiculously complex that it MUST have been designed by an intelligent creator, yet ignore how badly this designer botched the job. Today, one could easily design a much more effective eye from scratch, and it's obvious from the current design that the human eye has changed over time to produce the clunky version we have now.

But I heard their Clinical Management courses involve handling snakes and walking across hot coals. And some of the student testimonials on the website were written in crayon. Is this a personal choice or a requirement? Can you give me the names of the schools where the teachers don't talk to you? That sounds ideal, actually. I'm pretty sure EVERYBODY studies at their own pace. It's impossible not to, really, so this seems like you're using buzzwords to emphasize something that happens anyway at every school.

... except it would be much more scientific to ignore the rambling and focus on the individual arguments for evidence. Taken in that light, nothing makes any of these incidents special or designed. You don't have to dismiss any of the arguments as "rambling" when they include things like predicting that politicians would be corrupt in the future.

These totally sound like silly little coincidences, except for your own manipulation (you asked the officer to look at the drive, so how was it "intended" to occur?). Birthday probabilities tell us you only need a sample of 23 people before the odds of two of them having the same birthday exceed 50%. And OMG, a son named Joseph? Something like 3% of American men are named Joseph.

Fingers. But not stuck up inside a sockpuppet. That's not allowed here.

! Moderator Note This is in the Organic Chemistry section. Guesswork here isn't helpful.

Can there be yellow without bananas and lemons? Can you have round without balls and circles? Can I borrow a cup of momentum? All of these things, including energy, are properties of a thing rather than things by themselves.

Jamie Maussan, a UFO researcher, is showing this evidence TO the government of Mexico. He's the one making the claims, not the government of Mexico. That's the way I read this story.

! Moderator Note This argument is clearly made in bad faith as an attempt to dismiss what others have said. I suggest you reread the whole thread before claiming nobody has given you any support for their arguments.

You have no real control over the past or the future, and the only things you truly control in the present are your attitude and your efforts. You can make sure both are focused on what you want to achieve.

How do you define those terms? Does "leave the past behind" mean never thinking about it anymore? Does it mean forgetting all you've learned from your experiences in the past? Does it mean only thinking about the good parts of the past? I think "move towards the future" assumes there is an ideal future for you if you can figure it out. Am I wrong about that? I think our past shapes and prepares us for what we're doing in the present, and helps us think ahead to prepare for what may happen in the future. Success in the future almost always comes from correctly predicting in the present what you'll need to get or do to achieve it, and that's mostly based on past experience.

Sometimes merchants need to finalize transactions and delay charges, but I've never heard of a bank doing it. I can almost guarantee those charges will show back up again.