MigL

Well, since Markus has expressed his desire to join a Monastery, I think that definitely answers the OP question. But, some words to Markus... ( no offence meant, just trying to lighten the mood ) A young monk arrives at the monastery. He is assigned to helping the other monks in copying the old laws of the church by hand. He notices, however, that all of the monks are copying from copies, not from the original manuscript. So, the new monk goes to the head monk to question this, pointing out that if someone made even a small error in the first copy, it would never be picked up! In fact, that error would be continued in all of the subsequent copies. The head monk, says, “You make a good point, my son.” He goes down into the dark caves underneath the monastery where the original manuscripts are held in a locked vault. Hours go by and nobody sees the head monk. The young monk gets worried and goes down to look for him. He sees him banging his head against the wall and wailing. “We missed the R! We missed the R! We missed the R!” “Father!” cries the young monk. “What’s wrong?” The head monk with tears in his eyes replies, “The word is CELEBRATE!"

Sorry MSC. I mistakenly quoted your reply to Pussstmpy. ( I just fell off my nit-picky high horse )

It IS currently inhabitable and will remain so for some time, as it means 'suitable to live in'. You probably meant uninhabitable ( unsuitable to live in ). I think most understood what you meant, but I'm feeling nit-picky today.

Just how big Black Holes can get. Massive enough to affect galaxies in a cluster. And possible effects of Dark Matter in their creation. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/weather/topstories/monster-black-hole-is-caught-feeding-off-galaxies-trapped-in-its-spider-s-web/ar-BB19LywO?ocid=msedgntp

When did the Bible become 'the word of God' ? It is simply an imperfect interpretation by men, sometimes centuries later, of events. Religions ( most ) have constantly changed through the ages; so has the interpretation. I am not a believer, myself, but don't look down on believers. Science is based on facts and observations. Religion relies on an entirely different thought process; it does not require explanations or experimental observations. It relies on FAITH. Science does NOT.

And you have never disappointed. Looking forward to continuing the discussion.

Sorry, edited my post to add content. I most certainly did not mean support as in charity. I have given examples of emotional support that Religion gives the believer in previous posts. But then you'd have to actually read the whole thread to find out where people like Zapatos and I stand on the issue. Incidentally CV is Latin fo Curriculum Vitae, or 'course of life' literal translation. Otherwise known as an elaborate Resume, which typically means 'Summary' of relevant education and work history.

Neither is Religion mandatory, Joigus. Most of us on this forum chose to abandon Religion. I grew up Roman Catholic, and received the sacraments of Baptism, First Communion and Confirmation; I've managed to avoid Matrimony and I'm hoping to put off Last Rites as long as possible. My parents were not very religious, and I soon found that I didn't need Religion; I had a strong family for a support system whenever I was troubled. The fact that I personally don't need the support that Religion gives some people, does not give me the right to deprive them of whatever support the Church may give them. Live and let live, seems to be a fitting motto in quite a few situations. Mine is Dirty Harry getting ready to shoot someone. Does that make me a murderer ??? ( the rest of your post is nonsense also )

What a difference 35 years make ... 1982 2016 Now that Jimmy showed me how its done. Thanks Jimmy, you're a saint. ( how does Benedict Cumberbatch always manage to look so damn cool ! @ 56 sec in the 2016 video )

I don't fear Religion. There is no thought police, and people will think and believe whatever they wish. I fear people who use Religion to instill fear in others for their own ends.

That list you presented, Joigus, along with many other reasons you left out, are why you ( and many of us also ) have no need for Religion, and see it as something that has caused more harm than good. And it is easy for us to be so rational when our life isn't falling apart But what about the parents with a sick child, who is going to die from cancer ? If religion ( and 'false' hope ) gives them reason to keep going and not lose their minds, who are we to take that comfort away. That is one example of many I could give you. If people 'believe' there is a higher purpose, even one they are not aware of, they are more inclined to keep trying in the face of adversity. Hope, even false hope, inspires and drives people. For us, we realize it's just a 'crutch' to lean on, but none of us know if we'll need one also when we're in their shoes. ( and I hope you never have to find out )

If Religion is what makes you feel good about yourself, should we question that, or consider it psychological abuse ? How is it different from a person who feels they are one gender trapped inside the opposite gender ? The scientific markers and evidence are there that you are one particular gender, yet that person 'feels' better about themself as the opposite gender. And, as a society, we've decided that that's OK, and beneficial to express and act ( sex reassignment surgery ) on those feelings. Why is Religion then, with all scientific evidence against it also, psychological abuse that people need 'help' and 'advice' with ?

It wasn't that long ago that Religious people were asking themselves that same question regarding non-believers. And they sent out Missionaries to convert them. Is that what you had in mind ?

That's the problem with Religions ( aside from political commentary ) and reminds me of an Emo Philips joke Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, “Don’t do it!” He said, “Nobody loves me.” I said, “God loves you. Do you believe in God?” He said, “Yes.” I said, “Are you a Christian or a Jew?” He said, “A Christian.” I said, “Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?” He said, “Protestant.” I said, “Me, too! What franchise?” He said, “Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?” He said, “Northern Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?” He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?” He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region.” I said, “Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?” He said, “Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912.” I said, “Die, heretic!” And I pushed him over. ( reading it back to myself, it does seem much funnier in an Emo Philips voice )

UNofficial jokes go in the .science sections ( usually Physics or Biology ). It's hilarious what some people try to pass off as science.

Haven't you guys ever heard of Lyme Disease ? Stop playing with ticks.

You're such an optimist … I only recognize degrees of uncertainty.

OK. Ken Wilson : When you subtract the infinite virtual chickens that went everywhere, you're left with the renormalized chicken across the road. and Why does a hamburger have less energy than a steak ? Because it's in its ground state.

Evolution of a Physics problem through the ages... WHY DID THE CHICKEN CROSS THE ROAD ? Aristotle: It is the nature of chickens to cross roads. Isaac Newton: Chickens at rest tend to stay at rest, chickens in motion tend to cross roads. Albert Einstein: Whether the chicken crossed the road or the road moved beneath the chicken depends on your frame of reference. Werner Heisenberg: We are not sure which side of the road the chicken was on, but it was moving very fast. Wolfgang Pauli: There already was a chicken on this side of the road.

Ooooow ! Wives, sisters, and girlfriends maybe. But mothers and daughters are off-limits.

Sorry Koti. I wish Venus was like it was depicted in 1930s pulp sci-fi also. ( Edgar Rice Burroughs novels ) PH3 is a strong reducer ( stronger than ammonia ) and readily oxidized ( actually burns ) to Phosphorus Pentoxide, or to Phosphoric acid if water is present , so it doesn't last long. Since the Venusian atmosphere is strongly acidic, the other method for producing large amounts of Phosphine ( if actual, much higher than in Earth's atmosphere where it is due to bio-decay ), by reaction of white Phosphorus with Sodium/Potassium Hydroxide, is probably a non--starter. Thanks for the link, Area54

Yeah, I make Phosphine ( see my profile ). I won't go into specifics, but it involves the continuous conversion of white Phosphorus to 20-25% red Phosphorus ( with heat ), and then reacting the slurry in very high strength Phos acid at temps of 300 degrees with superheated steam sparging, according to this patent https://patents.google.com/patent/US3371994A/en None of the required conditions seem unlikely to be found on Venus, so I would suspect a geological process, rather than bio-decay, as the cause ,IF it does turn out to actually be Phosphine.

I find your post funny, because I can relate. ( my friends would think I was a pompous ass if I used those words in conversation ) Looks like you've mastered the art.

That's the problem with conspiracy theorists... They will not be educated, making fun of them re-enforces their beliefs, and if you ignore them, they run wild. It's settled, then. Off to concentration camps with the lot.

As with all conspiracy theories, people who 'THINK' they understand, ARE the problem. No evidence, just 'coincidences and a gut feeling' ??? I thought we didn't do conspiracy theories on SFN. And with crap like this, the more exposure they get, the worse it becomes. ( I'd actually consider shutting down the thread, but that would be censorship )