John Cuthber

You failed to answer the question.

What do you think bricks are made from? Science and the law both reject hearsay; for the same reasons.

And, from time to time, the "laws" get overturned as Relativity did with Newtonian physics. Which is why science has the sense to say that (outside of maths) nothing gets proved. It may be that we simply haven't done a clever enough experiment yet. The law has similar understanding, whence the phrase "beyond reasonable doubt".

Ruins this joke https://imgflip.com/i/wa6ee More importantly it ruins what is seen as part of the "unique selling point" of Christianity. Their prophet was special- conceived through God. (Yes, you and I know it's not remotely unique, but the early Christians put a lot of effort into suppressing that sort of knowledge in order to seem "special") Archaeology is science, but the dead sea scrolls are hearsay. Science can't even tell us that Mary was real. The scrolls tell you what was said, but not what was true. She might have been a virgin; we don't know. But , if she was, you would have thought they would have mentioned it in the scrolls.

On a good day, "straight down" is the direction in which something in free fall accelerates, but it's seldom the direction in which it moves.

"using this new method man doesn't need an intelligent robot to come up with theories or invent" Man never did need an intelligent robot.

No. That's silly. All poodles are dogs but not all dogs are poodles. A number base is a positive integer. But not all positive integers are used as number bases. I have already pointed out a good place to start- twice. It's clear that you are refusing to learn from it or you are not bright enough to understand it. Which is it? Why are you stubbornly failing to learn?

"Why are numbers between 0 and 1 fractions?" Because they are what you get if you take a whole something, and fracture it.

If your teacher did not realise that people with higher IQs usually get paid more (and thus suffer less if they plan badly), then your teacher is an idiot.

I think that makes you double second cousins. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin#Multiplicities

I think you are "second cousins". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin Strictly speaking, your question is ambiguous. You don't say who the "we" are in Do you mean you and your mum, you and your dad or you and the children of the... whatever On a related note...

Petrol in the UK is about £ 1.12 which is equivalent to about $1.50 per litre. Water is delivered by pipe- it isn't normally metered; you pay for the connection rather than per litre. The cost is about £1.00 per day and you can use as much water as you need. If you want to, you can get a water meter fitted and pay for it by volume. The typical cost is about £1.90 per 1000 litres. It's not very helpful to compare prices unless you also compare incomes. Average salary in the UK is about £35,000 per year. I think that's a bit more than 3 times the average salary in Iran but the exchange rates vary with time and the tax systems are different.

Then you have a potentially explosive mixture in a place that is not designed for it. That's a bad idea. It's probably going to invalidate your insurance too. In the UK, the incentive to use LPG as a vehicle fuel is that it's cheap. The conversion cost- which is about £2000- is recovered because LPG is roughly half the price of petrol. But if you live somewhere where all fuels are cheap, you will never cover the cost of doing the conversion properly. When your petrol is nearly as cheap as mineral water, why bother with the risk and hassle of converting?

In what way? He's not someone I know. Has he indecently assaulted women and then tried to pas it off as a joke?

There really is a difference between hype and, for example, DT's claim of electoral fraud- for which there is apparently no evidence at all.

If President Trump let the electoral system fall into disrepair on his watch, to the point that he doesn't believe it gave the right result, then he deserves to lose anyway.

That's reasonable hyperbole given that Romney thinks that supporting workers rights "actions contravene the rule of law". https://www.economist.com/united-states/2011/12/31/workingmans-blues

Well... maybe he should just tell the truth about Republicans. Or he could point out that Americans really like Socialism. Socialism built roads. (Yeah, sure, and schools and libraries and the internet and stuff- but Americans really love cars). If he spends 4 years explaining that, then the next time the Republican candidate "accuses" someone of Socialism- it won't have so much effect. Who knows? In maybe to or three presidential terms you could end up with a politician who would look "normal" elsewhere in the world, rather than extreme Right wing .

Something puzzles me. Trump barely won the 2016 election and he did it even though he lost the popular vote. He has had 4 years to sort out any issues he saw with the electoral process, and didn't so I guess he accepts that the results in 2016 were pretty much a reflection of reality. He won that on essentially a single issue campaign; "Build a wall". He didn't build the wall. He's the ultimate "You had one job" meme. Obviously, that's not going to go down well with the people who voted for him. In the meantime, he also oversaw the unnecessary deaths of more US citizens that the Vietnam and Korean Wars put together. Overall, 4 years ago he had less than 50% support, but fluked a win. Since then he has screwed up virtually everything he has tried to do. Why would anyone think he was now more popular?

I think he probably understands it well enough that he doesn't want to go to gaol.

Why else would he have packed the Supreme court? Hillary knew that she wasn't actually facing jail time; Trump is. She was accepting the outcome of a job interview; he is stalling about his freedom.

When they finally shoehorn Trump out of the WH, those faithful public servants will carry on actually running the place until Biden catches up.

Hate isn't really the problem. As Alex pointed out, this is https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/12/trump-election-concede-republicans-democrats They are cooly and calmly plotting how to get round the vote which they know they lost. And if the Dems let them, they might just manage it. Reminding the population that Trump never tells the truth is a reasonable policy.

That should be a massive problem but... how much do you miss if Trump doesn't tell you what he thinks about a scientific/ economic problem? Yes, but I'm beginning to think he should be a bit less "statesman" and a bit more "He lied about the wall, he lied about the swamp, he lied about mexico, he lied about the virus and... guess what... he lied about election fraud too". I think the Dems need to push back a lot harder. Maybe counter-sue Trump for defaming poll counters.

That video is nonsense.