MigL

For one thing, the thread title concerns the existence of Jesus of Nazareth. But the last few pages seem concerned with the existence of a historical Saul of Tarsus, and whether his writings as St. Paul were 'truthful' or not.

An understandable ( I hope ) explanation of gravitational binding vs. expansion ... If we consider gravitational potential as a negative potential, the Cosmological Constant/vacuum energy is then a positive scalar constant throughout the universe. ( the CC was used by A Einstein to balance the global gravitational potential ) The gravitational potential can be imagined as potential wells, or pits, and the CC/vacuum energy is, then, like a small step-ladder. If the well/pit is more than 1 m deep ( 2 m, 10 m, or even 1000 m ), but your step-ladder is 1 m, you can't get out, and are gravitationally bound. If the gravitational potential is much less, as it is in the vast expanses between galaxies and galaxy clusters, such that the well/pit is only 1/2 m, less than 1 m or none at all, then the step-ladder would get you to a height where you can 'fall away' from the pit, and you are not gravitationally bound. IOW, there is a 'threshold' that the CC/vacuum energy has to exceed before expansion can take effect.

Nevertheless, I was particularly impressed by it when I first got it.

This is the Religion section, after all, Eise. Beliefs are always more pertinent than facts when dealing with Religion.

Principles of Physical Cosmology, by P I E Peebles.

The mantra of the many... Or an unselfish Mr. Spock.

If the box is a bound system, that means the Cosmological Constant/vacuum energy forcing the expansion, does not rise above the lthreshold evel of gravitational binding which resists the expansion. That would mean separations inside the box do not increase with time, and there is no recessional red-shift.

My list ... Money, sex and booze. In no particular order. ( i'm joking; I don't drink that much )

I'm not aware of all the details, but I thought the judge granted the stay because the Australian government, and Tennis Australia, applied their Visa rules inequitably. Famous people, whether tennis players, movie stars or politicians, don't get to play by different rules when it come to infectuous diseases; fame does not protect you, or keep you from infecting others.

very well, let's re-hash a topic that was done to death .... Jesus was a political protester, and there was a lot to protest about in Judea during the Roman occupation, who was put to death. Jesus was obviously not his real name, because there are historical records of those times and he is never mentioned, although there are mentionings of political protesters put to death by crucifiction. Subsequently, his message ( of political reform ) was subtly changed and re-purposed as a 'religious' message. This did not happen suddenly, but over the course of several hundred years, and by several people. And I'm not necessarily claiming that the people who changed his message over these hundreds of years had an unscrupulous purpose, but by the 7th-8th century, thehead of the Christian religion was the most powerful man on Earth, such that even the Emperor ( of the Holy Roman Empire ) bowed to him. Until there is proof to the contrary, that is my opinion.

Some Letters to the Edditor, of the National Post ( Canadian ) newspaper discussing this very issue, some pro and some con. And some rather amusing. Letters to the editor: 'Will unvaccinated people who don't go to hospital get a rebate?' (msn.com)

That previous thread might be 8 years old, but, if no one found any evidence that Jesus of Nazareth was a real person in the last 2000 odd years, I don't think they would have found any additional evidence in the last 8 🙂 .

Unfortunately, Germany is rushing to decommission its last remaining nuclear reactors,because they are not 'green', and, because of the resulting energy shortfall, moving to classify natural gas ( from the pipelines ) as 'green' ( ? ), to make up the energy shortfall. IOW, import more Russian gas.

Don't know mythers But here it is

There was a previous, rather lengthy, thread on this very topic several years ago. I suggest a search, and a good read.

On the contrary, it was an interesting question which generated quite a few interesting answers. I do remember a previous thread about 'fields having mass'.

In addition to the 'false flag' provocations, where Russia sends agents to disrupt Russian sympathizer operations in Ukraine as a pretense for military intervention, there was also a major cyber attack to disable Ukranian infrastructure. Seems to be V Putin's MO, as a similar strategy was used prior to annexing the Crimean peninsula. I don't think the US will get involved militarily, just economic sanctions, at least until Europe makes an effort to police its own 'back yard', as was the case in the former Yugoslavia. I think V Putin realizes this, and is hoping Europe's dependance on his gas will keep them from getting involved, and drawing in the US; economic sanctions he can deal with, only the common people will suffer.

But nowhere near the US, where almost 40% of the population was influenced, and continues to be influenced, by that idiot with orange hair, who used to be your head of Government.

Not much of a 'reading test'. It specifically mentions country level response, not individual/personal level. And lists several countries ( Japan, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong, South Korea ) with successful outcomes, and other 'countries' without. Did you, or did your Government, influence the American response to the pandemic ?

I suggest you re-read the OP. Pay particular attention to the highlighted parts. My opinion on the matter can perhaps, be better expressed by a quote from the original link I provided previously "The problem is, no universal public health-care system is likely to survive the adoption of blameworthiness as a triage principle. The vast majority of us who wind up in the hospital, below a certain age at least, will likely regret having done something, or not having done the opposite, in order to avoid that outcome. There are people who think downhill skiing and cycling to work are so dangerous that they ought to come with special health-care premiums. We do not want those people influencing health-care policy. And it’s worth noting how quickly Legault’s logic could lead to denying health care outright to the reckless, unwise and unvaccinated." From Chris Selley: Quebec's anti-vax tax could lead us to some very dark places (msn.com)

I'm either doing a terrible job of explaining myself, or some of you are being willfully obtuse. I specifically said this was happening in Canada. Canada has Universal Health care, the US does not. Nor was there any questioning of vaccines in the 60s and 70s; I recall being vaccinated at school in the early 70s. Without parental approval, just notification, and here is also a mark on my left shoulder from vaccination in Italy in the 60s. Also, charonY, this is not a fine for non-compliance. It is an added fee, to be able to use what is supposed to be a Universal Health Care system, and there happen to be rules about imposing such 'fees' that affect federal transfer payments for health care. Then again, this is quebec, who regularlu flout federal rules, and even use the 'notwithstanding' clause in our Charter to get around those rules. This is also not related to tobacco or alcohol taxes, as those are levied on use, and not on failiure to protect oneself against lung cancer or alcoholism. The only one that comes close is fines for seatbelt non-use, but I am not against fines for not complying with vaccination orders; I am against ruining our universal health care, because some politicians, without the balls to do the right thing, are willing to ruin a good thing like our health care, in their zeal. Another that shares my opinion Harry Rakowski: If we tax the unvaccinated, what about the unhealthy who are also at higher risk of severe COVID-19? (msn.com) And the last page or soof this thread, dealing with the effects of the virus and/or the vaccines should not be in this thread. This is specifically about Government ( and not just American or British ) response to the pandemic. If my ideas still areen't clear, for whatever reason, I apologise. You guys carry on ...

This is not about whether I think people should be vaccinated; of course they should. But if the government thinks it is that important, they should make vaccination mandatory. ( never mind all the crap about the 'right' not to be vaccinated ) Like it was for us when we were kids; no one objected to mandatory vaccination to be able to attend school. Why the objections to Covid vaccines now ? The problem, as I see it, is the government subjecting a certain group to an additional tax, so as to be able to use what is supposed to be Universal Health Care. Does it not then become 'two- tier' health care ? What if you can't afford the additional tax ? Are you then denied care ? Maybe that is a strange concept to you Americans, but I would expect Stringy and other Brits, to understand. As for 'slippery slope', that is the very definition of taxation. Taxation has always increased, and once put in place are never removed, even if their original purpose is removed, they are simply 're-purposed'.

If you recall our past conversations, CharonY, you'll recall that I have also argued for stricter vaccination rules, and possible penalties for the willful unvaccinated. But it is always helpful, even necessary, to investigate both sides of an argument, so as to arrive at an equitable solution. ( no matter what Stringy thinks )

Always nice 'sparring' with you CharonY. Very well. What would your reaction have been if they taxed people who contracted HIV/AIDS by having unprotected, or much more risky sodomy ? Would that not target gay males ?

Really ? How do you know the temperature in hell ? Elton John's Rocket Man said so ... ( so did William Shatner's )