John Cuthber

Resident Experts
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


John Cuthber last won the day on September 23

John Cuthber had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3488 Glorious Leader


About John Cuthber

  • Rank
    Chemistry Expert
  • Birthday 11/10/1965

Profile Information

  • Location
  1. Has science failed to recognize morality as lifesaving?

    That same designer also ensured that (1) they were susceptible to being led astray by serpents and (2) there was a serpent there, programmed to lead them astray thereby ensuring that they would be led to eat the fruit. Seriously, putting the serpent in the garden (knowing what would happen) was the cruelest thing ever done. I really can't understand how anyone would worship the perpetrator of such an act. So, that pretty much eliminates the Word of God as a useful source of morality. (Unless, of course, you consider setting up those weaker than you to fail in a way that leads them to eternal damnation and torment, is a morally acceptable way to behave. Your morality may vary) So, back at the topic, There are plainly occasions where science has seen the importance of morality- they use ethics committees, for example.
  2. There's no reason to think that gold helps your brain (or anything else). It is toxic. Colloidal gold gives rise to this which is similar to this in one important way. Do you want to turn blue?
  3. Has science failed to recognize morality as lifesaving?

    I never saw those. The ones I saw had stacks of problems + inconsistencies.
  4. Has science failed to recognize morality as lifesaving?

    I blame the designer...
  5. Turn male into female instructions below

    It's not chemistry. I'm not a geneticist, molecular biologist or medic, and I spotted that ... it had issues. Why not google it (like I did) and find out that they won't (by an order of magnitude or so), rather than posting stuff that's meaningless? And bacteria don't. I not only read it, I quoted quite a lot of it. Please take time to make a cursory check on the possibility of your ideas before posting them. You won't do that by posting stuff that makes no sense.
  6. Alloys to store hydrogen?

    An engine runs hot.
  7. Has science failed to recognize morality as lifesaving?

    I don't know. But people seem to let it. As has been pointed out, many people seem to have linked the two. You are correct; there is no logical link. Indeed, the link goes the wrong way. If you really want to cut down on the number of terminations, the best way to do it is to ensure that contraception (and advice) is readily available. There do not seem to be many groups advocating that view.
  8. In principle, I want receipts. In practice, the one for a bar of chocolate is a waste of paper.
  9. Space in journals is limited. Space on-line is almost free. Could journals publish a "fully annotated" version of their articles on the web? I rather suspect that you would need a lot of (virtual) paper to explain anything published in today's maths journals in such a way that "the man in the street" could follow it. and, if you did so, I think the audience would be practically nil. so I guess you are only expecting enough scaffold for those who already know a lot. Where do you draw the line?
  10. Turn male into female instructions below

    It won't fit. A typical virus has about 100,000 base pairs. You are trying to stuff in a thousand times more. It seems to have escaped your notice, but we are more complex than a virus. Nor does anyone else. There's no virus that targets every cell in the body. The immune system would be fighting against this. How? Magic? "Attempt" is probably the right word. How? Every cell in the body has a set of the instructions for that body, including the relevant bits for male or female. But no cell in the body has the genetic information that codes for the "half way" stage- whether that's with both sets of bits, or neither. So there's no instruction set to follow to bring about the change. Essentially, there's no genetic code for "the willy drops off". So your idea is doomed to fail.
  11. What is this logical fallacy called?

    That's all very well, but it loses sight of the feedback. It is certainly plausible that (1) The police, for some arbitrary reason- possibly sheer chance, arrest a disproportionately large number of black people. (2) As a consequence of that, the arrest rates are higher for black people. (3)The police interpret that as implying that black people commit more crime (which should be a valid implication). (4)On that basis, they target black people for "suspicion" (Again, this should be a valid way to act; if you see some group as being more likely to be involved in committing crime, it makes sense for the police to target that group) and, (5) as a consequence of spending more time looking at black people, they arrest disproportionately more black people. (and, yet again, that should be a sensible outcome) (6) And that drives the arrest rate for blacks up still further. Nobody, as far as I can tell, has made a logical error except in failing to check the statistical (and other) validity of the first step. In reality, it's possible that part of the reason for the initial high arrest rate is racism, but it's not necessarily the cause. The real problem is that an arrest rate should be an indicator of criminality, but it may not be.
  12. So, what you are saying is that only the shop should have proof of purchase. Doesn't their money already give them enough of an advantage? On a related note
  13. Has science failed to recognize morality as lifesaving?

    Because the people who advocate on seem to feel they should advocate the other. If you can find a group that opposes abortion, but promotes the use of condoms then you have found a group that's either irreligious or rather rare.
  14. What is this logical fallacy called?

    But the (assumed) view of the police is that blacks are violent. and that's why they arrest so many of them. That factor is inherent in the process of arrest. So, it's a self fulfilling prophecy. Looking at arrest rate as a proxy for criminality should be reasonable, but, if (as we suspect) the police are biassed then it's no longer valid. If you use that measure of criminality to drive the arrest rate then there's a feedback loop. Essentially they are arrested for being black, so they are arrested for being black.
  15. A question about Noryl's alloy

    Water containing materials that attack noryl is not drinking water.