Iota

Bingo would become a global religion.

And China and Russia might not look too favourably towards American involvement-to say the least- in a country they seem to be backing slightly, and have investments in (oil). That's stepping into WW3/Cold War II theory territory; but the point being tensions are likely to increase, albeit, probably not that dramatically.

Good point. Although it's still very possible that it was the US embassy attempting to pre-emptively appease the Egyptian Muslim citizens. Which to say the least, was a good idea; to try save the lives of the embassy officials. But they still pointed condemnation in the wrong direction I think... beforehand. Edit: In contrast to this, Obama condemned it plainly.

This depicts the side of Israel despicably pulling strings for a lost cause/pointless war. It's hard to tell if Benjamin Netanyahu wants to attack Iran, but doesn't realise the long term repercussions and limitations of stopping Iran's nuclear program. Or if they expect America to occupy or DEFCON 1 Iran to avoid future complicaitons. Both which will end horribly. But the writer of this article is obviously right in saying that Israel expects America to assist their assault whatever Netanyahu's mindset might be.

Looks like a plead to the terrorists not to kill any Americans, by stating that the people they are killing aren't 'responsible' for what they're 'protesting'. Those who expressed free speech are being condemned and the terrorists are being, almost, apologised to. They should state instead that the rest of the world does not fall under Islamic law and doesn't have to comply to their fairytale belief system.

It's the early hours of the morning and as usual I'm browsing alltime10s' YouTube channel. Botulinum is the most deadly by far out of all 10 listed, but then I read in the comments section something about 'nova 6', which is associated often with COD blackops. However, I am also told it is a real substance, but there's nothing really on the internet about it. Which is weird for the internet. Has anyone else heard of it who would care to give me a bit of history/information on it? Is it worse than botulinum toxin? From the small amount I've heard about it, it's horrible stuff. ^ If you know nothing of this maybe you can help me here instead: Mercury ranked in the top 10 list as number 5. It claimed that "a single drop on the human hand can be fatal". Although I heard on BBC Radio 4 a university professor talking about how he dipped his hands in a container filled with the stuff for a while (this before the dangers of it known) and he's not dead or ill. The video got the information from DiscoverMagazine*** The video: Edit: Now it seems like Nova 6 is entirely fictional... which would make sense considering near to no information on it.

So he ticks all of the above, BUT did he live in his mother's basement?

You beat me there

Good point, you did. I'm OK at maths, I haven't ever had big problems understanding it. I find chemistry quite easy, but that's only A level chemistry so far, to be fair.

Alternatively, you are more likely to be better at the sciences if you try hard at them and ignore hokum science claims *cough*. Although maybe I'm just upset that my right thumb was under my left thumb naturally. Ah, Well, I should probably switch to an art course then! To get better results from this test, though; you might consider telling people to clasp their hands together, whichever way feels more natural, and set the results as a hidden drop down answer (a spoiler).

Hi there Bountyhunter. So (to help us give you a good answer), what do you think would happen if "the flow of electrons coming from your brain" was 'stopped'?

The world becoming industrialised should have a reducing effect on population growth, as typically seen. That's a possibility. For recycling, nation wide schemes are being, and have been introduced, which is increasing recycling rates; although waste is still very high. The problems with waste are being confronted and improved by science, e.g. more readily biodegradable plastics. Car exhaust fumes are being made cleaner all of the time, soon enough countries will be forced into alt. energy sources as crude oil/methane gas based fuels are rapidly depleted. ^Just some examples of the other end of the spectrum, looking less grim for the future. I think it's safe to assume the Illuminati, specifically, is officially defunct (I know, you didn't mean it that literally)... but there are powerful people controlling big things in the world, controversially. A lot of the stuff you're suggesting is in plain sight and not hidden. (I'm not saying you're a conspiracy 'you know what' but...) for example the 'new world order' does exist, and is an organised plan which is spoken about quite frequently by presidents etc. If you just ignore the wild conspiracy theories and have a look into it and have a think about it, you can usually see what's going on with more ease.

Very interesting. I'd heard from a friend that Mohsen Fakhrizadeh was being brought back into 'play', as well as this article saying it. It's a worrying development if all claims are true.

Good god. I haven't asked you once for "classified information", in fact, you're the one who mentioned you had classified information, before I even asked you a question. Of all of the things you should have elaborated on, you assume I meant that ambiguous reference you made about classified information??? You're just show-boating the fact that you once worked as a nuclear technician, because this thread is loosely linked to it. I'm far more interested in the politics. So keep your classified information, pal. Thank you for that slight elaboration. However, you're still hung on the idea that I'm pro America, and that I believe Iran should be destroyed before it's too late. That is NOT what I think. I'm just poking at both sides of the argument as a good two sided analysis should. I'm constantly banging on about corruption in the US in other threads all over Science Forums, so clearly I recognise it. You assume too much.

Indeed, I've already seen his profile information before now. Ergo if he made a point about that area, more specifically, I'd be happy to hear it. But that's not what's being dispensed here now- is it. But, hell, who needs relevant, coherent responses? Onwards and upwards though; this is a very good article, lots of information which paints the whole picture.

Perhaps the comments' validity/accuracy is there because they are lacking much elaboration. What he's saying might be correct, but if you bring up a point, it shouldn't be too much to ask for some information on it. I researched that a nuclear generator test used 85% enriched uranium, once, which was "much higher than typically used". I was interested to know whether that was the case, because if so, what he said is possibly not correct. I don't see any problems with the comment I made; it was a completely reasonable response to what ydoaps said prior. I'm listening to what everyone is saying, because as I said, I know so little about the current Iranian/Israeli relations and am open to hear the facts. It's just ydoaps original comment seemed a bit too hasty in implying that I'm ignoring the facts, and then when I proposed some ideas, he replied with "yep". That's just the way it seemed to me.

Now you're just undermining the whole situation with no intent to look at a real possibility.

It wouldn't matter much if the US does use weapons grade uranium for reactors, because it's no secret that they have nukes... but really, 90%< enriched uranium for their reactors... are you sure? I didn't make much of the fact that Iran offered uranium to the US because I hadn't heard of it... that's why I posted this thread to find out more. I'm not ignoring facts, I'm in the process of inquiring them. Besides, offering uranium to the US doesn't make your intentions with the material good, it could just be a way of getting on America's good side. A blatant attempt at that. If America accepted, they would no longer be able to oppose Iran's nuclear progression towards weaponry and be taken seriously.

Mmm yes, but aren't Russia, America, NATO and so on, concerned about the fact Iran now has weapon-grade Uranium? Not just the sufficient amount for nuclear energy. Not to mention that Iran and North Korea have repeatedly teamed up to supposedly help one-another's weapon programs.

Star Wars all the way, but only under the condition that the GunGans are destroyed. ... I'm already inciting species hatred in another world. Everyone will agree though; let's put the Deathstar to good use.

I'll say firstly, even if all gods were disproven it wouldn't stop people believing in them. But if it did: The world wouldn't be a better place... overall, because religion isn't the root cause of all of our problems, therefore eradicating it wouldn't solve the errors of humanity. For example, tendencies such as greed, violence and such, would still exist; territorial disputes, poverty, war would still all exist. However, there could be greater cooperation between countries and less restraints to scientific advancement in all countries world wide. Less needless killings based on religious scriptures, based on nothing more than belief. I think Atheists (in general) view religion as a burden on the world; more significantly, an out-dated one. I can see why, personally. Partly also, because we're in the twenty-first century and religion still influences politics and billions of people's lives. In most primary schools children are still practically forced to believe in a god, so it's important to discuss these occurrences and, for example, their psychological effects. Its ethical implication, e.g. why should they be forced to hear beliefs? Especially at a young age, susceptible to believe anything. They need to make their own minds, we are supposedly 'free' countries, after all. In some areas scientific evidence is opposed by religious educational systems and replaced with beliefs (creationism etc.) which just seems ludicrous, to say the least. I think for anyone who doesn't believe in a god they tend to question why- a lot, because there is no reason, essentially, for anyone to believe; there's no evidence. If you was born in India you might be Hindu, born in America you might of been Christian, born in Afghanistan you might have been Muslim, and so on... From my very short time being here, there seems to have been a mix of people asking questions about god: some pondering their own reasons for believing and getting some outside perspective; others wanting to know why people are Theists because they are curious or they think it's absurd.

Very accurate article.

They didn't know at the time about the isometric form which is non super-imposable optical isomerism, nor did they know the danger involved with their possible effects.

ajb, do you by any chance have MythBusters on your Facebook to have found that out? That's where I found it out today, is all. Michael Collins, Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong also had to go through US customs after returning from the Moon. Got to be careful and all, you know? You can't be certain, telling who might be trying to get into the US via the Moon. Illegal 'aliens' and what not.