zapatos

Everyone on this site believes in something. If you are broken for believing in God then you are broken for believing in anything else that could turn out to be untrue. Anyone here believe in string theory? The Big Bang? Life on other planets? That we have been visited by aliens? That your spouse would never cheat on you? That man came out of Africa? That they know what the interior of the earth is made of? What level of evidence is enough to make you believe in something? What did the scientific minds believe in 1000 years ago, or 500, or 50? Something you believe in right now will turn out to be wrong. When it does you will realize you did not have sufficient evidence to believe, but that you were willing to believe anyway. If theists are broken, then so is everyone else.

The escape velocity is the velocity you need to achieve to break free from the gravity of a body without any further propulsion. By 'break free' I mean that once the escape velocity is achieved, the gravity of that body will never be able to pull you back to it. The closer you are to the center of mass of the body, the higher the escape velocity. The further you are from the center of mass, the lower the escape velocity. If you maintain a continual upward thrust of 4 kph you will eventually break free from the gravity of earth. The distance from the earth where you break free is the distance at which the escape velocity is 4 kph, which would be somewhere far out in space. It is much more efficient to break free from the gravity of the earth at high speeds rather than a continuous slower speed, because at the slower speed you have to lift the rocket just as far, but you have to provide fuel to fight gravity for a longer time. Because it is more efficient to 'sling' the craft into space, that is the way we do it, and that is why the text books speak in terms of escape velocity.

Yes. The other difference of opinion is that the ontologists think the scientists should agree with the ontologists, while the scientists don't care if they agree or not.

Are your folks also the ones who described to you the horrors of pro-girl sexism?

Try Googling 'documentaries about american jews'. Quite a few came up.

Yes, I have a question. What evidence do you have that those products were developed from extraterrestrial technology?

How are these companies any different from, say, Google? Is it really a new kind of company of just those that happen to be good to their employees? Some of the benefits at Google: http://www.google.com/jobs/lifeatgoogle/benefits/ I picked Google as my example because it was an easy pick, but there are plenty of good companies to work for. I'm trying to understand how those you describe are different or better.

Are you saying this because it is impossible, or are you saying this because it is exceedingly unlikely? If two black people each had one white and one black parent, isn't it possible, however unlikely, that the offspring of those two black people could inherit only the genes of the white grandparents?

Just as an aside, I once had a doctor tell me that everyone would die of cancer if they lived long enough.

Well, in response to your "So what?" When you say "you have the freedom to kill", and that "Laws are not created to take away those freedoms", you are saying there are no laws created to take away your freedom to kill someone. I gave two examples of laws (conspiracy and attempt) that were created that take away your freedom to commit murder. These laws do not wait for a murder to occur before coming into play, thus falsifying your original assertion. Putting you in jail for conspiracy to commit murder is not an 'incentive' to not commit murder.

I beg to differ. Laws are created to both punish and prevent. You don't have to kill someone to have broken a law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_(crime) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempt

Explain WHERE. For christ sake I only get these vague comments about me being wrong, when I'm asking as much as I can for people to tell me where and more importantly how. You would think on a forum that prides itself in logical thought that it wouldn't be this damn hard to accomplish. Justin, Look at the sentence you left out of the quote: Which directly referred to: At which I shrug my shoulders and think "that is the price we pay for freedom". I never said the cost was cheap did I? The intellectual dishonesty was in not addressing my comment, but instead dismissing it under the pretext that requiring money from citizens to fund some aspects of society is an infringement on 'freedom' and therefore not a valid argument. As I said, I don't object to you having that opinion, but to dismiss it as you did rather than offering some justification that this particular government requirement is more onus than other government requirements was my objection. And while you probably did not intend it this way, your off handed dismissal of my comment was taken by me that my comment was not worth your consideration, thus resulting in my rather poor response back to you. My bad on that.

What I said was "Rather than being a man and taking a critical look at your own country... (on this issue)." I did not call you "less than a man". If you are going to quote me, please quote what I actually said. And your opinion of whether or not I am much of a man aside, the manly trait I had hoped to elicit from you was not one of idle threats, but of honesty, integrity, and compassion. I don't object to your opinion, but what I do object to is your apparant lack of intellectual honesty and integrity in arriving at that opinion. Dismissing the comments of others with a shrug and a cry to 'freedom' shows neither honesty nor integrity.

Rapscallion

Enough already! How many times are you going to tell us all this stuff? We get it. You don't have to keep repeating it.

Food, water, air. Food. All humans are recycled. Your atoms will eventually be a part of something that is not you. While I have no evidence, I'm going to go ahead and definitively say no.

hot diggety dog dressed to the nines the cat's meow the bees' knees a dirty copper my dogs are killin' me heebie jeebies a cup of joe what a tomato! he's light on his feet

Ok, that is fine. Getting back to my first question: So the body does not match the brain regarding gender. On what basis have you determined that the brain is at fault and not the body? How have you determined that it is a mental illness and not a body illness? In other words, from a scientific perspective, how did you determine that in a MTF transgender person, that the brain was wrong to think of itself as female? Couldn't the brain be correct in thinking of itself as female, but the body did not develop as expected? There are obviously many cases of bodies not developing to plan. The reason I ask is because labelling someone as mentally ill without evidence would probably be considered reckless.

Well, in my scenario, I am the one who is invincible, not you. And it's not punishment, just the price you have to pay in order to open another thread on pro-girl sexism.

I think I would make you do the cleanup from the Boston Molasses Disaster, including helping all the pretty girls clean off their shoes, before you are allowed another thread regarding "pro-girl sexism".

So the body does not match the mind. On what basis have you determined that the mind is at fault and not the body? If a person has decided that while capable of reproducing, they choose not to, are they also mentally ill?

Actually I thought up the sarcastic cheerleading on my own and did not duplicate iNow. It wasn't until I got to the line of USA! USA! that I realized I had already seen it in this thread and decided I should acknowledge iNow for thinking of it before I did. But I was not trash talking this country, I was trash talking you by mocking your pathetic cheerleading of this country. I made a point of how preventive medicine costing $0.03 per day could save the healthcare system in the US hundreds of thousands of dollars. Rather than being a man and taking a critical look at your own country, you chose instead to shrug your shoulders and cry Freedom. As if the price of freedom is $0.03 per day. As if we would not have freedom in this country if we modified our healthcare system. As if shifting how money is already collected and distributed is somehow an attack on freedom. As if freedom has anything at all to do with what I said. I thank God our founding fathers consisted of the men we had rather than the sniveling apologetics today who don't have the balls to question their own country. They think they are supporting this country but are in reality doing it a great disservice. I can still hear the crowds chanting USA! USA! when Bush 'explained' the Iraq war by saying that Iraqis 'hated Freedom and freedom loving Americans'. Pathetic. Both Bush for saying it and the crowds for accepting it and not requiring anything further. I only feel bad that I didn't think of the sarcastic cheerleading before iNow did.

Har! I'm a poet and I didn't even know it.

I think you misinterpreted the replies.