Mr Skeptic

Seems about right, except I don't think you need a lathe.

What, just bread? What about other starchy foods, or other foods containing gluten?

The research funded by tobacco companies might be a good place to look.

The obvious one is to reduce the amount of alcohol ingested; generally this also has positive economic effects. I suspect injecting yourself with this enzyme would help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_metabolism Ethanol is oxidized to acetaldehyde via the enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase IB (class I), beta polypeptide (ADH1B).

It doesn't. Displays of bravado are used in mate choice to prove one has healthy genes. 100 years is not enough to have noticeable evolution; also, a condom protects from diseases and need not be used when the couple wants to have a child. Animals have mechanisms to avoid reproducing unsustainably; for example hunger greatly diminishes sex drive. Having children is not always productive. Also, the same attributes that mean we can use condoms mean we can, for example, make airplanes and not punch anyone who insult us. Adopting people related to you (all humans are) increases your fitness. They don't have to be your own offspring to have your genes. What's going on is misunderstanding.

I think the problem is due to drinking soda instead of milk, not soda itself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphoric_acid#Biological_effects_on_bone_calcium_and_kidney_health

Anhydrous calcium chloride is a salt that is used to absorb water from the air. If left open to the atmosphere, it will absorb enough water to liquefy. If left closed, it will suck almost all moisture from the container it is in. Rusting requires oxygen, and water is also needed for "normal" rusting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rust

Yes but you also have more energy, and also you will disagree with a different observer on how much you accelerated. You and a different observer might also disagree on your mass, the rate that time goes by, and distance.

If you mean #22, I'd say edit away. No one yet responded to it (well not a point-by point response anyways), and that is probably for the best.

But what is the alternative? If we were to leave everything entirely optional, you'd get a serious free-rider problem. Why should I pay for roads when my neighbor needs them more than I do and will pay for them himself if no one else does? Why should I donate to public research when others will do it for me? Sure, there are some people that will donate to the various programs, but most likely many important things will be horribly underfunded. Shall we reward the people who are greedy and apathetic by letting them keep their money while everyone else spends money to their benefit? I think I much rather the idea that Dak proposed: everyone pays taxes, but then gets to choose what programs to fund. Or at least picks someone to represent them for choosing what to fund, to avoid over-funding/overlooking things.

Well the reptiles do use solar power to warm themselves, much like us warm-blooded creatures use our own energy. Personally, I use sunlight to generate some of my own chemicals, such as Vitamin D.

I'm pretty sure he (and you earlier) were talking of "well educated" not of "intelligence". Why the switch to "intelligence" now?

What numerical, experimental predictions does your idea make? Can you show how these predictions are derived from your idea?

The reason carbon dating stops working is because of the way radioactive decay works: half of the material decays within the half-life. After 10 half-lifes, there's 1/1000th the material. In the case of carbon dating, the half-life of carbon 14 is 5,730 years, and the starting concentration of C-14 is 1 part per trillion of the carbon. So if you have a sample that is 57,000 years old, you can tell because the C-14 makes up 1 part per 1,000,000,000,000. Or rather, you could if your equipment were absurdly accurate and you were completely certain that your sample was uncontaminated. Any contamination of the sample would introduce new C-14, whether from the CO2 in the atmosphere or from the oils of your skin, or really anything organic. This will increase the amount of C-14 and make the sample appear much younger (which in fact is true because the contamination is younger). Since even the air has C-14, at some point most of the C-14 in the sample would be due to contamination, making carbon dating beyond that point extremely unreliable and inaccurate. Likewise, it is also possible (but much harder) to contaminate in the opposite direction. To make a sample appear older, you can contaminate it with old carbon, like from a tar pit or from coal. I've heard this used to decry carbon dating as well, where creationists created a contaminated fossil by putting a sample in a tar pit, and then acting all surprised when the ratio of C-14 in it was very low. In addition, the ratio of C-14 is different in the atmosphere and in the ocean, so that lying about whether a sample is aquatic or not will result in the C-14 measurement being translated to the wrong date. --- In short, C-14 dating does not give the date, it gives the ratio of C-14 in the sample. Given certain assumptions (uncontaminated sample, original carbon source as atmosphere or ocean), this can be translated into a date. Under false assumptions, it will translate to the wrong date. And it won't work past a given age.

I think so... but it would be quite hard. We do use various ions which would be much harder to make with only these. Such an organism couldn't evolve since said ions are readily available in the environment (and would probably be poisonous if they weren't used). We also use sulfur for cross-linking, since it can have more than 4 bonds. Osmotic balance would also be much harder. I don't see why not... it would be much harder though.

You can in fact get pure cultures by diluting a contaminated sample, growing it on a plate, and picking out an individual colony. What do you need your bacteria for?

Even if the timing is politically convenient, fraudsters need to be called on their fraud, especially where it affects the global economy.

It would only work if their energy source is from outside the universe. Organisms can only self-organize because they have an external energy source.

Of course I wasn't a "victim". My parents occasionally spanked me when I did something wrong. I know I deserved it, and I knew why I was being punished. How about for a few weeks or months? Eventually it becomes abuse, whether corporal or not. Sometimes. Sometimes it won't work in the least. But reasoning would be better in the cases where it works. Physical torture and child abuse are already banned. Well that is clearly where they made 2 mistakes: first, since they didn't tell you ahead of time, you didn't do anything wrong. Second, since they didn't tell you why you were being punished, the punishment was ineffective and counterproductive. Yes, I would consider this more abuse than punishment, since it would be very ineffective for changing behavior.

Do you know why they make bullets in a gun spin?

Here's the bits I liked: And a self-described infiltrator at the afternoon rally, who dressed as a monk and carried a sign reading “God Hates Taxes,” said many tea partiers lauded him for his sign. “I thought I’d be getting drummed out of here by somebody who just thought I was here to agitate and start trouble,” he told a POLITICO videographer. “In fact, it turns out it’s very empowering. People really love this sign,” he said, adding “the whole idea that God hates taxes is an absolute absurdity, however it’s always good to know that God is on your side.” Which shows that some of the complaints are well-funded. It's always cool when the folks you're mocking love the sign you're mocking them with. Brooks Alexander, a 23-year-old Olney, Md., hotel worker and Obama supporter who wore an Obama t-shirt to the evening rally, said infiltrators were being disrespectful. “They’re doing a disservice not only to themselves, but to the people who are here trying to express their views,” said Alexander, who is African American and said he traveled to the rally to verify for himself liberal accounts blasting the tea party as racist. “All my friends told me I was crazy to come down here in an Obama shirt,” he said. “Obviously I have political disagreements [with the tea party], but I cannot lie. I cannot say that people have been anything but nice to me. They have been shaking my hand. One guy told me I had a lot of [guts] for coming down here. I will definitely walk away from this with a new understanding of the tea party.” It's also clear that there's a lot of exaggeration about the Tea Party folks.

Is this the same guy as the one arrested for threatening to kill Obama? Cause this one definitely deserves it.

But we also don't know for sure that it is wrong. Maxwell's equations, for example, are unlikely to be shown wrong. Same for Newton's laws of motion.

It throws very little mass very very fast. This makes it highly efficient, if you have the energy to do this.

Nope. It won't work. To the moving person it will seem like they use just as much energy to accelerate.