Strange

But often not? It is all a bit vague and impressionistic. Would it be equally acceptable to say, "there is a lot of petty crime but the serious crimes are often committed by black people"?

Just out of curiosity, is that just your opinion or is there some research to back it up?

What? 1 metre divided by 25 is 40mm. Inches? Who cares!

Thanks for that. I was about to look up when mining started (I had the phrase "King Solomon's Mines" in my mind).

In both cases, the subdivisions are chosen to be practical (close enough to allow accurate measurement but not so close that they can't be distinguished) and to correspond to a sensible subdivision (multiples of 5 or 10; dividing by multiples of three would be silly). The fact that the 1:25 has 25 subdivisions is just a coincidence.

Originally, it wasn't mined. It was found in rivers and below the surface (possibly while digging crops). It was only later, after the easy stuff had been found, that serious mining started. Because of its intrinsic decorative properties (and scarcity) it would have rapidly become a medium for barter. Rather than having to transport animals or perishable fruit large distance to exchange them for spices or cloth, you can exchange them locally for some intermediate product that is easier to transport (gold, salt, silver, weapons, jewels, etc) and then take those to the people who have the goods you want.

Well, Geta. strip of paper make your own scale ruler where one centimetre equals one meter (in other words 1:100) and just draw the centimetre marks. Each mark corresponds to 1 metre and you can label them like that. Now you can subdivide those centimetre marks to allow more precise measurement to be made. For example, you could put a half-centimetre (half-metre) mark between each one. It is still a 1:10 scale not a 1:2. You could put 2 subdivision marks between each centimetre, so each is roughly one foot. It is still a 1:10 scale and not 1:3. And so on.

The scale and the number of subdivisions are not necessarily related.

Not sure what the question is. But the first number show will just be whatever is convenient for that scale (i.e. usably large and rounded to a sensible number). The units for each division would be 0.5m / 25 or 20mm.

What mystery? Apart from the fact that this is wrong, What is so clever abut saying that you can represent a number as the um of other numbers? Next you will be telling us that 5 = 3+2. (Actually, based on the above, you would probably tell us that 5=3+4.) We already knew that. It is not exactly a revelation. If you had come up with a new way of finding out exactly how much more, then it might have been impressive. Don't worry. No one wants to copy this drivel. Seems pretty accurate. Based on your other recent posts, I would suggest you refrain from posting when stoned.

I don't think that was the point (I may be wrong). I think Prometheus was just pointing out that, despite John's impossible requirement, there are plenty of people who identify as Christian. I would not be surprised if, in the same way that everyone has their own dialect of English, each of them have their personal view of Christianity.

Like so many of the pints made, I struggle to see the relevance. It is not as if non-religious people live in perfect harmony.

Just noticed that the price of bitcoins has shot up in the last few months. So even something that doesn't exist can have a high value.

I don't think this is your age or lack of intelligence. I think that hole just posted a lot of incoherent nonsense. (And the stuff about "error correcting codes in QM" is just numerology. Or some other pseudo-science.)

On a practical note related to this question, if you wanted to prevent radicalisation of young people (or reverse their indoctrination) or persuade people to be more tolerant of gay people then attacking their religion is likely to be counter-productive. It is more likely to strengthen their views - and possibly those of others around them who didn't have strong feelings on the issue before but who may now feel themselves under attack. A more effective route is probably to educate them about the other messages in their religion and why they are better ideals to live by, etc.

Standard beta decay can go both ways (beta+ and beta-) and produce similar radiation (high energy electrons or anti-electrons). I'm not sure that either is less bad than the other. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_decay#Description But I am curious, why do you ask this?

I think it depends on the topology. For example, the surface of a torus is flat but of finite size. From the little I know, multiverse models work with both finite and infinite universes.

Stop cherry picking? As you seem to be struggling with this simple concept, I will just point out that it also says "don't kill people". In other words, you can't blame the words in the book. It is the attitudes of the people you need to address. (Unfortunately, that sounds a bit like the "guns don't kill people, people do" line.)

And that mathematical definition works pretty well for real stuff as well. For example, in an infinite universe no matter how far you go, you can always take one more step.

So ignore them then. What's the big deal. You are cherry picking because you are only quoting the bits that support your opinions. If one were to quote sections that present both sides, that wouldn't be cherry picking, would it. Sheesh.

I just read through to the end of this. "Despite the mismatch, Dvali praises the ingenious way in which the team threw out the Big Bang model." Yeuch. They haven't thrown out the Big Bang model. The Big Bang model describes how the universe evolves from an early hot dense state. They haven't challenged that at all. I would take everything Itoero posts with a large pinch of salt.... (And I wouldn't trust everything I say, either. I am often wrong!)

I don't think there are any theories based on black holes exploding. That doesn't say anything about black holes exploding nor, as far as I can see about black holes at the centre of galaxies. From the mass of the star that collapsed to form the black hole. (And, in that highly speculative, purely theoretical paper, they would be 4D stars.) Mass is ejected from the accretion disk around black holes, not from the black hole itself. None of this seems to have any connection with the topic of the thread. It seems to be pure speculation by Itoero.

Is anyone pretending it isn't? You seem to be pretending that it is the only message. And, just to be really clear as you seem to have your anti-religion blinkers on, Christianity and other religions also teach mercy, forgiveness and redemption. And that is also part of the history of the judicial system in most Western countries. Most of whom have abolished capital punishment, for example. The abolition of which is often campaigned for(*) by religious people. (*) and, to be balanced, against. (Similarly, there are people from the political left and political right on both sides. And people with blue eyes and brown eyes.)

Ludicrous exaggeration and caricatures are not a great rhetorical technique. I only need one example to show you are wrong... http://biologos.org (And, of course, there are non-religious people who reject evolution.) Whoosh. Or are you just pretending to miss the point. Oh, the irony.

Here take this stick. No, not that end!