thedarkshade

Meaningful (IMO) means making sense, fitting logic. But facts (truths) don't necessarily need to fit logic!

Care to share a link?

There is something funny I have to mention. Last Xmas except my X 360, I got also a book, a very good book, and guess which was it.. "The God Delusion". What a perfect present for Xmas! Jeeeez!!!!

Huh? Devastating consequences, that means loss of lives. The concern is related to the "fight for survival". There is nothing special about this either.

Why would philosophy be able to give more interesting answers? It is scientists that are directly studying life and all the processes that life carries, and it science that provides the right answers.

Well neurons make up the control center of the organism, they control everything, the release of hormones too. Everything just turns out to be controlled by brain, where the neurons are. So I think that any kind of evolution of intelligence should probably start with neurons.

There is no absolute anything! But if we compare our levels of development in those three criteria that determine intelligence (according to you), then our level of intelligence is quite absolute compared to the majority of animals. This is not underestimation of any kind!

Well it is much much better then the other "Procaryots somehow in some moment became ekucaryots" view!

If it's up just to that, pick which one you want and see which one works better:-).

Well I think that would be because there is no elementary mass, just like there is elementary charge ([math]1.60217646 \times 10^{-19} C[/math]), which is the charge of an electron. If we took the mass of the electron ([math]9.10938188 \times 10^{-31} kg[/math]) as the elementary mass, perhaps we could reach a sort of balance between the two.

I know this is round and round, but what the heck! I don't know if you seem to understand this is the right way, but dimensions existed even when man was far far away to come into existence. Length, width, height did exist before man, be because they are the three spatial dimensions we know, and in which every single physical thing lies in. But miles, feet, kilometers are only concepts, units that man has create to measure those dimensions. Man created the concept of time, not time. There was time even when man wasn't there, and all that man did is give it a name, concept, TIME.

Why diving by zero seems to be a problem, it just tends toward infinity

Shape infinity:rolleyes:

It is actually the electricity flowing through a conductor that creates a magnetic field. It isn't really the same thing.

Gravitational force is the weakest from all four, and that is by an exponential factor!

Your first need to know what is the oxidation number of the elements. For example, why do we write [ce]H2SO4[/ce] and not [ce]HSO4[/ce]. Well it turns out that there is a reason. You know that the sum of oxidation numbers in a compound must be zero. H is 1+, S is +6 (though it can change), and O is -2. So in [ce]H2SO4[/ce] we have 2*(+1) + (+6) + 4*(-2) and all that equals 0. In [ce]HSO4[/ce] the sum would give us -1, that's no good, that only happens when it forms salts. Let's take a reaction, a neutralization reaction [ce]2NaOH + H2SO4 -> Na2SO4 + 2H2O[/ce] you know that [ce]NaOH[/ce] decomposes in [math]Na^+[/math] and [math]OH^{-2}[/math] and [ce]H2SO4[/ce] in [math]Na^+[/math] and [math]SO_4^{-2}[/math]. Now the [math]OH^{-2}[/math] combines with [math]H^+[/math] forming water and [math]Na^+[/math] with [math]SO_4^{-2}[/math] forming the salt, sodium sulphate.

Why would that be? Would you like to share those particular comments and tell us why do you think are embarrassing to read? Because I really want to know if Dawkins screw anything up in there (which I doubt) or was it you that screw it up by misunderstanding it!

The general resistance of the circuit of the alternative current represents impedance. It is marked with Z and it is: [math]Z=\sqrt{R^2 + (R_L - R_C)^2}[/math]. You can derive this equation from the graph which contains all the three thermogenic, inductive and capacitive resistances, and by applying Pythagoras theorem in that. If you want to calculate the intensity now it goes like: [math]I_0 = \frac{U_0}{Z}[/math] and now it looks like: [math]I_0=\frac{U_0}{\sqrt{R^2 + (\omega L - \frac{1}{\omega C})^2}}[/math]

WOW!But who's the idiot here?!?!

[ce]KMnO4[/ce] and [ce]MnO2[/ce] and generally substances with high oxidative characteristics reacting with [ce]HCl[/ce] with give chlorine.

But isn't tolerance the same as respect?

Umm... the point of it!

Oh pleaaseeeeee! What if there is no one at the top of the ladder?! This is so naive!

A great share Lance, thank you very much. And still I just don't see how creationists can back up themselves when saying evolution is wrong:rolleyes:

iNow, YDOAPS, respecting someone else's beliefs doesn't mean believing in what they believe too, it just means don't argue about it, just let it blindly believe, no matter what it is. Suppose I meet a priest, a very devoted one, and he starts telling me stuff about how the world was created, how everything came into existence just because some supernatural being wanted it to be that way and stuff like that. That of course is completely on the other side of the road of what I think, but it's impolite and meaningless to reply to him "That's bullshit! There's no such thing as a God and you guys have all been brainwashed and don't even know what you're talking about." That is what I think but I don't necessarily need to tell this to him. I can disagree and not accept his point of views, but I cannot deny to him what he believes, so I'll just respect his beliefs. I know that believers do not really respect our point of views, and don't even try to understand why we deny such thing as "supernatural creator", but this does not mean that we should disrespect them too. And this respect that we are giving to them is not because they are religious and believe in God, but because of our human and friendly side.