jimmydasaint

Enya? You are kidding Stringy? Normally I would listen to something that would rock hard - Guns N Roses, Gun,Thunder, UFO, Metallica, Dream Theater...But Enya? What happened? Even on a dark day I would never play this stuff. . If there are Enya fans out there I apologise to both of you.

Moontanman, these are the best answers I can give from my knowledge and my knowledge is definitely lacking. Our society has evolved to become different although the murder rates around the world suggest that human nature/behaviour has not changed. I cannot apologise for what God said or why. But at least I am trying to be bloody honest friend. I think that we are now at the point here t which my answers are exhausted and we will go round and round to a standstill. I cannot answer fr God because I don't have the viewpoint of a Creator. I have the limited view and limited knowledge of a creation. Religious people have a different view of God than atheists do, it is a certainty because we are not tied to the material but the spiritual. When I looked into the face of my children when they were born, I did not think "ah, sentient meat without a soul" I saw a soul and a spark in their eyes. The love I felt for them did not come from a temporary chemical imbalance, I felt it in my gut to my soul. I am sorry I could not answer your questions friend. Maybe I have to read a bit more.

I am assuming that the paper is restricted to photosynthetic bacteria making carbohydrates and other macromolecules (proteins, fats) in bacterial form that turns methane into hydrogen and carbohydrate. they mention Earth bacteria as analogues and extend the argument. Algae are not mentioned clearly - I assumed that one. Sorry.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4284464/ This could be the biosignature which, if identified, could change the history of our planet - low carbon dioxide, ammonia and hydrogen together as a ratio could indicate a form of life, especially if the gas composition fluctuates, as methane is consumed by alien photosynthetic bacteria or algae. So, if I read it correctly, we would need a rocky planet, with similar mineral composition to the Earth and the presence of simple organisms could utilise the light from their close Sun-like star to turn methane into atmospheric hydrogen. and biomass in the form of carbohydrate. Just one word: WOW!

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4284464/ Exciting news guys. With hydrogen gas so widely spread, it may just be possible that living things with a large surface area:volume ratio could diffuse methane across their surface and turn out hydrogen as a by-product. However, bacteria or singe celled organisms would be dominant and not some multicellular floozy waiting to seduce a future Captain Kirk . However, from my sketchy reading, which could be incorrect as I as having a conversation at the same time, the composition of these planets needs to have a mineral content similar to that of Earth. The reason for a thin layer of atmosphere is justified above.

A society that is nascent would presumably require some direction. A prophet figure would be the channel of Divine revelation to the masses in was it could be understood. I am pretty sure that there were many "prophets" claiming Divine knowledge at the same time as the Bible was revealed. those that were false would confuse the message. At the time, the punishments were not as enlightened as those handed out today. Just my opinion. If you read religion carefully, God is served by serving humanity. If that concept has been messed up, it is due to the short-sightedness of believers. Thank you for that reasonable opinion mate. Each society needs rules. Tacitus writing about First Century A.D. Germany mentioned the rules that the largest tribes had to moderate extremes of behaviour. Most of them advocated death for those that showed any deviancy from the acceptable, verbally articulated norm. When religious authorities do the same, they are criticised but remember that they also have to regulate societies and unite them by a common belief system. Some religious and non-religious people are despicable. I cannot comment on something or somebody whose words I have never heard. If I had to summarise my views, I would state: 1. Religion suffered from having a privileged class called priests. Individual peccadilloes became justified under the flag of religion unjustly. 2. A study of Rome in the times of Caligula and Tiberius will tell you that excesses of deviancy have always existed in society. human nature tends to be cruel. 3. Institutionalisation of religion has led to perversion of the original message in some cases. 4. Science and religion should not be totally opposed to each other. Science is a way of finding objective truth and should be embraced by religion. However Science needs to be objective and follow the conclusions of the Science to a logical end and not to support atheistic motif. 5. Human societies have always needed rules and the rules sometimes (or most of the times) have led to the death of those who showed extremes of behaviour. All the above are my personal opinions as a follower of the Abrahamic God.

Andrew, we are drawing a conclusion about Popes or religious authorities misusing power in the name of religion. Secular rulers have also misused power throughout history. I will try to find out a couple of names later and edit them in. The Popes, Catholic priests, other Abrahamic faiths etc... have always had people who twisted an ideal or an absolute idea and have justified their twisted logic. Where they have used this twisted logic to kill those who did not share their religion, e.g. witches, this is not a religious absolute, it is a form of extremist logic. In the hands of the powerful, it is a poison to society and a divisive influence. However, let's posit that God wished a people to prosper as a society. To allow society to be unified and act as a cogent unit, there had to be a control to excesses. These absolutes required to punish those that committed excesses. People would then live in a moderate environment, something like the Aristotlean golden mean. Rulers who were corrupt and sought to increase their power by rising to power increased their corruption as a consequence. A person who had to lie, bribe and cheat to rise to the top has to reclaim his money somehow and then religion becomes a mask for corruption. As far as the 10 Commandments, for a primitive society of farmers, that is going to form an early civilisation, I believe that you are being over-fussy with the commandments. Are they good enough to form a society - yes they are. I have reproduced them below, for the sake of brevity:

Frankly Moontanman, I am surprised you di not mention some of the other Popes who behaved like depraved animals. I was horrified to read about the seriously disgusting actions that they performed whilst in leadership. Was it religious belief that allowed them paedophilia, bestiality and other corrupt actions? That is my central point, and you know it. You did pick on some of the worst examples of human beings if we can call them that. If you had a choice to punish their actions,what would you do? In 2016, come on, what would you do to a paedophile and defiler of innocent human beings? Be honest here. I would have them imprisoned for life. These guys misused religion for personal means. Thank you for your thoughts and condolences on my troubles. I think I have held things in and then stopped exercising leading to my present lamentable demise. However, this is typical of Northern British people who tend to be so tight-assed with their problems that coal becomes diamond in their trousers....

I disagree. The point is more about power than power and religion combined. Christian religious ideology has existed for a couple of thousand years. Were all the Popes as cruel as Pope Innocent IV? Were the two World Wars caused by differences in religious ideology? I am an Abrahamic faith believer and I could pick out examples of religious tolerance and civilisation from religious rulers that conform to the highest ethical ideals. But, if I didn't wish to do so, I could cherry pick religious leaders who have shown the utmost disregard for morality. I am surprised the Borgias have not been mentioned at all yet.... In short, the quintessential ethics that could allow an ordered society to be founded and continue can be found in the Abrahamic faiths. If individuals choose to flout the ethical foundations of their faith, this is a reflection of their own personalities and not due to the religion.

Moontanman Man, I am a bit late to this topic due to a heart attack and subsequent stay in hospital (too much stress and no exercise since my son died in 2014...). However, I could easily pick out someone who is definitely not religious and point out the cruelty and injustice of his rule. For example, and I did not have to look too far mate: IIRC,the 13th century was dominated by the Mongols who were quite happy to kill every man, woman, child and dog who opposed them. Also, IIRC, when Genghis Khan died, every creature who passed by his funeral cortege was slain. At this rate Moontanman, we could quite happily swap these stories all night. Can you please get to the point brother?

OK guys,I did not sit still and leave it aloe. I watched the following video for clues: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5smas8uum4 then I watched the following: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=electroytes+in+the+human+body&atb=v10&ia=videos&iai=JhdFkyQBfSY and now I will make a testable and falsifiable hypothesis which you are all free to falsify so that we all move forward to a higher amount of knowledge. I am assuming that: a) the beating of the heart has an effect on calcium and sodium levels in the conducting fibres of the heart but also on Interstitial (or tissue fluid); lymph or blood plasma; b) sodium and calcium ions are extracellular: c) the beating of the heart causes a change in levels of extracellular ions such as sodium or potassium which are "relayed" to the skin where voltmeters or electrodes can detect changes in electronic potential energy which is correlated with ion movements (current). You are all welcome to comment and correct me.

Excellent answers. My question was about the wave of depolarisation conducting down the specialised conducting tissue and then through electrolytes and other tissues until it reaches the skin. I wondered at the mechanism because an ECG would presumably detect changes in electrical potential energy. Is there a concomitant current provided by ion movements which cascades across connective tissues and then permeates for over a metre over the skin? Would this mean perturbation of charge ratios across every cell membrane from the heart to the skin? Which part of the cell membranes in other tissues would be affected by the heartbeat in terms of electrical conductivity? As I have said, this is one of the many gaps in my knowledge and my Internet searches for answers were frustrating. Keep going guys...

This is one of the huge gaps in my knowledge. Can someone elucidate how wave of excitation from a heartbeat reach the skin to be detected? I cannot find a reference so an help would be appreciated.

As a Science teacher who "taught" the Biology module in the O.P. I would regard a valid assessment to be both representative and reliable otherwise it is invalid. In terms of percentage of word content over the whole of the Biology Unit (AQA Biology B1 examination), the heaviest emphasis was on Immunology and on Genetic Engineering. However there were nine topics and any representative and reliable assessment could be expected to choose a question from most, if not all, of the topics. However, this was not the case and the examination had a "sneaky" feel to it as if the examiners wanted to catch pupils out using applied knowledge questions (45% of the examination compared to 25% most years). The attitude of most students is summarised by a student's you tube post: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w7HYNCs-UM

IMHO, it is a basic human right to have a religion or no religion, regardless of the majority beliefs held by any particular country. Nevertheless, a small proportion wish to convert the world to their religion and make it their duty to "bother" others with their views. As a religious person, I don't wish to impose my views on anyone who is an atheist - I just want to get on with my life and not enter into religious arguments with friends or colleagues. If people do bother atheists, a polite reply of "No thank you" normally suffices with an accompanying smile by you as you ignore a leaflet thrust at your face. As a religious person, I want restaurant owners and clubs of any sort to stop bothering ME if I walk down the streets of London. I actually don't mind drunks or homeless people - they are usually interesting and devoid of the soulless stare of a person forced to hand out leaflets and cards to passers-by,

This needs a reference buddy. A paper, blog, anything that others can comment on. Take care.

I scanned your article but I would assume that this is a multifactorial issue as with so many causes of disease. For example wine might have protective effects against heart attacks. http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/heart-disease/in-depth/red-wine/art-20048281 So long as a you sit down and hit the bottle, you could be OK. (Joke, Lino)

This is something I have been thinking of for a while and I wonder if there is a simple way to measure the efficiency of bipedal and quadrupedal gait (of animals) in order to compare the relative efficiency of both. Anatomically, I assume it is from the power applied to a moving object or from absolute contraction of muscle to a known standard force. Biochemically, I was thinking on the lines of measuring intramuscular ATP following heavy, standard exercise. However, I am struggling to find material, references, etc... on this topic. Are there any clues out there?

Yep. One of my favourite films. The original poster has disappeared. Buckwheats and boat drinks MigL

Fair enough mate. Can you list some of the mechanisms to reverse ageing with some heavy citations so we can have an intelligent discussion. Also, I wonder, can you also reverse seventy years of accumulated stochastic genomic mutations as well. I would assume that regulatory non-expressed genomic regions would be affected by accumulated mutations. I don't know....teach me.

A clue may be to work out how many carbons enter the Krebs cycle per glucose molecule and then calculate the number of ATP s generated in total from the Krebs cycle and the election transport chain. Then, using these figures, work out number of ATP s for myristic acid which has more carbon atoms than glucose. Come back to us for more clues...