Iota

haha best of luck with that!

I think the only reason they ask if it's 'in heaven or not' is because obviously somewhere along the line the idea of heaven has been put in their head. When kids ask things like 'is it in heaven now?' what they're really wondering is: 'what is death' or 'why did it have to die?' Personally I think kids forget quick enough about dead hamsters and dead goldfish, so telling them something along the lines of 'it was just its time to go' is better. I don't think that would traumatise them lol. Instead of giving them a comforting idea, substitute that with actually comforting them directly; by answering any questions they have as best as you can, talk to them to make sure they're alright every now and then, and keep it off their mind by keeping them distracted with other stuff. I can sympathise with the use of a comforting idea, when, say, a close family member dies, and I understand the psychological and emotional comfort part. But I think the whole 'comforting idea' route is usually a way of avoiding answering difficult questions, and brushing it under the rug. Personally, I'd deem that potentially harmful, confusing, and in general a worse method than just talking with them and answering their questions as honestly and gently as possible. If they believe in heaven they probably believe in hell too, another thing to consider. No I don't think just the idea of heaven will result in them growing up to be intolerant bigoted religionists. But it could make them more prone to believing superstitious nonsense once they grow up. I believe that to be the case for one main reason: They would never have learnt to accept or deal with difficult circumstances such as death, earlier in life, so they will more likely turn to superstition for comfort when they're older. Most people subscribe to religion for comfort.

For a moment there I thought you wasn't being sarcastic.

So you're not religious?

You need to look up what a buffer is. 'Henderson-Hasslebach' google it.

You're taller when you laying down, when you're stood up you shrink a bit. The trick is to always lay down.

Sounds economical.

So what?

The only difference between your religion and iNow's corn dog (hot dog?) pooping dragon, is that your religion comes complete with a book of mythology. If iNow agrees to write a book on it, will you be willing to worship it? I'm willing to vouch for the existence of this dragon (which is basically proof, right?), and I know others have seen it too. It came to me in a vision, bringing me laws on morality and explained to me how the universe came to be. Be warned though. If you don't worship it you can't come to hot dog heaven, instead you'll go to hell and your ever-regenerating flesh will be mutilated and cooked to make hot dogs for everyone in heaven, because you did not believe. REPENT WHILE YOU STILL CAN!

Well, the EU is clearly necessary for us European nation states to compete on the global economic stage, which is probably why USA is so insistent that the UK doesn't leave it. Asia is catching up technologically with the West and exceeds massively on production and export. China is just starting to see its people demand a higher standard of living, to reap the rewards of their country's fruitful economy; a trend which will grow quickly in the near future. Will this mean some production coming back to the West? Most likely not, seeing as China is investing so heavily in Africa, somewhere abroad where they can move their industries for dirt cheap production... Africa benefits, China benefits, it's a win win situation, if you ignore the exploitation. India and USA have followed suit and have started investing in Africa too. Maybe EU and USA together will continue to be competitive; as well combined with allies from USA's quasi-empire (South Korea, Japan etc.)... not to mention Australasia. I don't like the EU, I think it's a movement whose aim is become a world superpower through undemocratic and wreckless means. It's harmful for the UK already, and we're being bullied into joining completely. There are definitely benefits, but they come at great costs IMO. But you can't get away from the fact we need it.

Of course. I meant the argument to do with evolution in general, rather than the Lenski experiment specifically.

Are covalent bonds usually weak? Also, Nitrogen is a diatomic molecule; how many bonds does each nitrogen atom have in a nitrogen molecule?

That's why you're the biology expert! Very interesting. Still, it seems the only evidence these religionists who reject evolution will accept is seeing a 'monkey' transform into a homosapien, right before their very eyes. And repeatedly they come out with the argument that if we evolved from apes, why are there still apes today? As if that means anything at all. I think it's clever how E. Coli can be manipulated in such a way that to produce pure diesel, purely through metabolism. Saw something on that last night think I'll read up on it now, as it's come up.

6'0" What's this survey for?

Exactly, why don't you demand the same standard of evidence for the claims made in this book of yours, as you do for scientific theories such as evolution? As for 'observed evidence', there is tonnes of observed evidence in fossils and genetics. You just can't be bothered to look, you'd rather assume there is no evidence, when actually there clearly is. What you're asking for is to see evolution occurring in real time right before your very eyes. Yet I assume you accept the fact that the Earth orbits around the Sun, and not the other way round?

Your profile: 'Interests: The Truth' That's a lie.

That's right, connect the dots in whatever way pleases your definition of evidence. Solidify the falsity of your beliefs and delusions, that way they become more true and you can cast out your previous doubts regardless of rationality, and rest your mind at ease from anything contrary.

We go only by Scientific Evidence in these lands. BE GONE! Welcome to the forums!

Also, OIL RIG. Oxidation Is Loss, Reduction Is Gain (of electrons) I also find when trying to remember several big numbers, e.g. 1254, 1435, 8345. Just reading them as twelve fifty-four, fourteen thirty-five and eighty-three forty-five is a lot easier than, one thousand two hundred and fifty-four etc.

They discuss this matter at the beginning of this video, if you're interested.

does not mean what it does mean is you can't use intuitive thought to solve theories like the Big Bang. For example: It certainly takes some arrogance to honestly think that you've spotted something that leading physicists have missed, purely by means of your own intuition. If it were that simple we wouldn't need physics, or physicists for that matter.

Look at the mod's note; if you want to talk to me about contradictions, here: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/78451-hijack-endless-rehash-of-contradictory-bits-of-the-bible/page-2 would be the place to do it. Although I've resigned from discussing that, anyway.

I'll make a few points, but I rest my case after this: Yes I didn't quote all of what you said each time, because they're very big text, but I took the most relevant part and answered within the context. You said this in response to me quoting the OT. Almost as if to say, whatever I quoted was irrelevant, because there's also a NT, which is an irrelevant point which avoided the parts I quoted. I'm singling out Christianity, because I'm discussing with you, and you brought up your Christian value beliefs. I don't think so. And I also mentioned the varying degrees of severity of the mental illness. It's very clear that Christian religious beliefs, match the definition of being delusional and hallucinating, in the context of how a lot of Christians do practice. That's an observation. Like I said, you haven't properly defined your beliefs, so how can I? I can assure you there was nothing implied.

Nope, it's all the word of God, stand by it or you don't stand for Christianity. How dare thee take from or add to the word of the LORD. “You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take anything from it”(also Deuteronomy 12:32) Revelation 22:18-19 says, "For I testify unto everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book, if anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; And if anyone takes away from the words of this book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, and from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." I like how the law of God changes depending on his mood swings when he's writing each book. I also like how Christians try to dismiss all of the things they used to teach for many generations. No it's because it was clearly written by mere people, certainly not by an infallible deity. According to the NHS page on Schizophrenia, two out of four of the primary symptoms of having the disorder are "hallucinations- hearing or seeing things that do not exist", "delusions- unusual beliefs not based on reality which often contradict evidence". the prior symptom is very reminiscent of many Christians, some who express it to worse degrees than others. Some just by praying, believing they're talking to someone, who frankly, isn't there. Whereas others who believe they speak in tounges, or who out-loud speak to God, and think they can hear God speaking to them (e.g. those who wrote the Bible.) http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Schizophrenia/Pages/Introduction.aspx 2:21 of this video shows the more severe case. Brought on because a woman preacher with clear mental illness is being allowed to teach fear into children and teach the same bat s*** beliefs she has. And before you say it, not all Christians behave like this, I know, but read what I said above, and you should see it's relevant to 99% of practising Christians, and the majority of religionists in general. Just to summarise plainly: hallucinations- hearing or seeing things that do not exist (God) delusions- unusual beliefs not based on reality which often contradict evidence (Christianity 100%) Sure it's not Schizophrenia per se, but it's so close that anyone who meets this criteria should be very worried about their mental health. Finally- Schizophrenia has unknown causes, but it's suspected to be caused by a combination of genetic and environmental factors. I recall, yet I don't recall you justifying your reason for following Christian values, in fact, your reasoning contradicts you following Christian values, and makes very little sense in general. This is a very nice defence to have, because you know your beliefs are impossible to attack when most of them remain undefined, it removes the need for a rational explanation for having said beliefs, whatever they might be, which I'm sure you don't even really know. Ages 12 and up, Oh, that's OK then. Thanks for settling that. If you look back I didn't give an order of events, I merely states that he ALSO gave up his daughters to be raped by an angry mob, and quite frankly, I don't see that the order in which these events happened, makes them any less sick. Completely normal when you consider that! I should've noticed.

Make it easily differentiable for them- when you're debating someone- the difference between you attacking their beliefs, as opposed to you attacking them personally. If you've been careful to do this, and they still get offended, then there's not much more you can do really, and if they get offended, so be it. The truth is always more important.