DrP

I know the character well from the 'Horus Heresy' series and the background in the codexes for the game I play. He is supposed to be amazing, but in some of the books he comes across as a total dick. He basically lies to all mankind and his mistake leaves him close to death... he sits on the golden throne near death and the 'priests' of the administratum sacrifice 1000 human souls per day to keep him alive. He is mankind's only defence against the giant warp portal he is sitting on and blocking.. eternally protecting the humans from the perils of the warp whilst sitting in his torpor. If he had listened to his 'son' Magnus instead of allowing himself to be deceived by the chaos minions then the world (in the 40K universe) would be a much greater place. ... so, although he is actually real in their universe (unlike our mythical gods), he is a bit of a dick and has no power in the physical world anymore. It is a pretty good storey though... I am well behind on the books. PS - I think you are right - education, education, education... shine the emperor's light on the darkness of ignorance.

It still isn't agreed that you are higher up than your gold fish... when they are in your pool, maybe. When you are in the middle of the Atlantic, drowning, they will feed off you and your superiority is not so obvious. They have evolved to fit their niche and they do it better than you do. Also - there is no evidence suggesting anything at all 'further up' your heirachy. Just stating it doesn't make it true... we are going round in circles... which is probably why you are getting neg rep. It wasn't me, but it could be.... in fact - I think I might because you complained about it and moaned that it was cowardly. BS - it is anonymous for a reason. Or lepricorns or unicorns or any other such myths - yes - if you start saying they are real without any proof of them then of course you will get neg rep on a science site... or a suggestion that you see a shrink. But there are no examples of it because it doesn't exist. Some animals are better than others at certain tasks but not in other areas. You are better than a fish on land but a shark will eat you in the water - horses for courses - NO heirachy as you are suggesting it. I won't comment anymore unless you direct something at me personally - I'll let Tar humour you so the pair of you can go round in circles getting nowhere talking rubbish about a heirachy that clearly doesn't exist. Waste your time all you like on another 16 pages of nonsense.... or go to the doctor and tell him you used to be a physics teacher and then show him this thread and your centrifugal force thread and see if HE can help you. ;-) Sorry if that sounds harsh... I could sit in silence and watch you continue with your drivel or I can try to help by stating straight away that you are barking up the wrong tree. Barking being the point I am making here and thus the suggestion of a doctor.

...and of course it is debatable how an artist's impression can be the true face of anyone... although I suspect the OP is just baiting the hook with the comment / trolling. :-D

I like the Total War series and the Sid Myres stuff... Civ etc.

No one is seeking to silence it.... but you need to provide proof for your claims... otherwise we will think you are just another deluded brainwashed creationist spouting what they have been taught from a very out of date book full of errors. Why should anyone take you seriously at all?

Laryngeal nerve in mammals... particularly the giraffe. If that WAS designed then it was far from intelligent.

You changed it to 'Theoretical' Physicist. I think there are many vocations a physicist has open to them. Physics is the core of all mechanics and science based disciplines and is the backbone of the manufacturing industry in pretty much all sectors. There are plenty of jobs for theoretical physicists too in multiples of areas. My question was genuine - what does a 'professional' philosopher do?

Yea - I didn't mean to be mean in my last post... it is just how it seems.

What does a professional in philosophy actually do outside of academia?

I'm not massively surprised. It took about 50 pages of discussion for him to still not grasp that centrifugal force is just an object continuing on a straight path rather than being a real force... this subject is way more complex. Maybe the average human brain is still finding it hard to evolve out of the holding superstitions. The evidence for that is all around us. Patience - we wont see world enlightenment in our lifetimes.

When numbers get fudged to fit patterns and some kinda cosmic connection is made.... or the numbers don't quite fit so goal posts are moved to make them fit..... usually with some kind of cosmic explanation or conclusion drawn. Or, when a completely innocent series or pattern occurs naturally and just happen to fit a number sequence (why shouldn't it?) and an unnecessary explaination is jumped to... usually involving some cosmic debris - That's numerology in a nutshell - but I'm not an expert. Maybe you have found some pattern and, as is usually the case in chemistry, there are exceptions to the rule. But it doesn't mean it has a reason... maybe it does has a reason. What do you think is the reason for the run fitting the pattern of prime gaps (saying for arguments sake it did actually fit, ignoring where it doesn't)? (Sorry if you have already said this earlier - I must have missed it or forgot).

That's Number Wang! Numerology does that a lot.

..and what about the remains of men discovered from 100's of thousands of years ago? Or the dinosaurs. They ain't 6000 years old. Hey - believe whatever old storey book you like, it's nothing to me - I believed it for many years too... I can't believe I was that dumb... maybe I wanted it to be true. Maybe I wanted an all loving caring father God that would bring justice to the evil people and reward the faithful... Now I see that if we actually just made ourselves this way through natural selection then it is totally amazing... no need to keep making excuses for the neglect and the evils committed by god. The world is beautiful - so what? So was the pattern left on my plate last year in the oils left by the purple stain from the beetroot I had for lunch... doesn't mean an artist created it... it happened to swirl that way on the plate after I ate that's all. That pattern I can explain because I was there at it's creation... I don't need to make stuff up to justify it's beauty.

I feel quite godly when I play Civilization III or VI and the people of my cities start complaining and whining about being unhappy with the amount of entertainment buildings they have... ungrateful little shits!... they aren't even real, why should I care about their happiness, I will be restarting the game from scratch at 2050 anyway. It has made me wonder before if I am just a member of the population in someone's game of Civ XXCI.

Yes it does that - then you delete what you don't want... or you can highlight your quote and then hit the quote button. Both work. ....and don't worry about me - concentrate on Hyperval's q's. Here knowledge of pure chemistry is a lot more current and thorough than mine. Thanks.

lol - people give the same evidence for God - "I can feel him". "It gave me a warm feeling inside" "I was moved"... all of which can be said for a fart, I have produced some that have really moved people (physically of their own accord to a different location). The thing is that you can actually light or smell a fart.. which is better proof of it's existence that the other as you cannot (afaik) light it or smell it. However, here on the internets we only have your word for this I am afraid! I mean, if you can bottle some and post it then we could get it analysed and prove your claim. .... I'll send the sample to the 'Anal'itical Chemist... ba dum!

Sorry - I'm not sure I'm getting the picture... Isn't the number 2 considered prime? Does your theory continue into the f-shells? .... and I am NOT being rude here... just asking... So what? So what if these numbers are prime? What do you think it means?

Did you feel it's presence within you? Was it warming?

If I remember rightly then don't you also get the case where the d shell will half fill with 5 electrons (one in each orbital, unpaired) before the 4s gets filled... then the 3d starts filling again to 10. I think the d shell can 'prefer' to be half full rather than have 4 or 6 electrons in it... cause more confusion with the order of filling iirc.

You are talking about a different mechanism for speeding up the seeding of a planet or totally changing a planet.... This didn't happen with Earth. What we know that did happen is that it took about 4.5 billion year to get to where we are now... so, just sit back and let it happen naturally.... The probability is that it will never happen (life forming) on MOST planets unless they are in the Goldilocks zone. PS - don't let it kill your joy or your sense of numinous for the amazing universe we live in if you change your mind about there being a super being... being honest it is even more amazing and beautiful without one... look what we have become from just matter without any help! I think of it like that now rather than "God is amazing to have made this (ignoring the horrificness of nature)" rather - "wow - everything is just amazing - lets find out what really happened!" Do you have any evidence for this? ;-)

I like this - it's profound... a pigsty does produce a lot of shit, mud and piss... but it also produces bacon and piggy sex.

Possibly - but how could you possibly know? The universe is very large and we wouldn't even know if life came about, evolved into a vast intelligent civilization and then died out again a billion years later... we wouldn't ever know about it if it was on the other side of the galaxy even, let alone in another galaxy or on the other side of the universe. I don't think you get how big it is and how small we are. We have no way of knowing if we were the first or not... looking at the maths... we probably aren't. Who says we screwed it up? Who did anyway - life in general or humans? We are just the latest most advanced life form on the planet. We are improving - life is a lot better and fairer than it was a few thousand years ago. In a few thousand years time, if we survive wars and nature trying to kill us as a species, then I would think it will be better still as we learn from our mistakes. Time and physics - clearly from what we have learned and tested. Why postulate that at all? There is absolutely no evidence for it... and it just makes things more complex - who made them? Have a nice day anyway - I am at work and can't really chat anymore.

Time and the laws of physics, chemistry and biology. Numinous is not proof of god. Surely you know that? Wonder and amazement - the pure joy of reality and existence.... it's beautiful.... but all perfectly natural and explainable without superstition and the invention of outside agencies. Or potential food. PS - it wasn't me that gave you -ve for that last post - but if you state that a rainbow is solid hard evidence of god one more time I will add to that -ve, lol. ;-)

Of course we can't do that... If you want to talk science fiction then maybe in hundreds of years we could teraform a planet... it's irrelevant. Our earth has taken 4.5 billion years to become what it is. Life has only been around for a tiny blip of that time. We have learnt so much about planet formations and the early development of self replicating molecules and the first cells etc.. over the last few 30 years... Why dismiss that in exchange for unsupported superstition? Believe what you like - but in your heart you know that you have not presented a single piece of evidence that supports the idea of a superbeing. Creation and the other laws of physics are not evidence because you are just making up a solution for something you do not understand. Just keep hanging on waiting for some kind of coincidence to come along (which it will) which in your mind you will latch onto as 'evidence' of an outside agency... Then you will have some more unsupportable 'evidence' for your argument - it is a common affliction.

...which is hard evidence of the wave nature of light and that white light contains the full spectrum of wavelengths. It is well understood (you used to be a Physics teacher right?). What are you claiming it is hard evidence of?