DrP

....and the very next sentence:- ....which is preaching. I don't care personally - I like discussion about such things. It is against the forum rules though to just assert what you believe as a fact without supporting evidence. The bible is not supporting evidence of itself - it can't be. So by trying to discuss revelation with the only provided evidence is from revelation then that is just going to go in circles if it was allowed.... so they shut it down before it does. Revelations was a book written by (supposedly John?) a man who was hallucinating after been locked away in a prison for years on an island. Why would any suspect there is any sense in it 2000 years on after it was written. There are always wars and rumours of wars... there have been for 1000s of years. After 35 years or so of living with that fear.... get the truth - the truth will set you free (from the fear). Fuck that backward barbaric religion and live you life in love and peace, caring for you fellow man and yourself.... not living in fear because of some book of fairy tales written 2000 years ago. I feel we could have a really interesting conversation, but it probably won't be allowed if you claim victory after every post by insisting that 'the scripture say x,y,z,' so x, y ,z is true regardless of whatever evidence we have for or against it.

How would Paul have carried the gospels? His journey started just after Jesus died no? The gospels weren't even written until years later. Is this some new holy ghost revelation you've been given or something? Please explain. If the god was real and alive in side of you then why would he allow this kind of statement from you. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I guess that 'religious groups' could jump on the band wagon and say that because he is an evil atheist without god in his life he was easily lead into sins such as rape... This is proof in some of their minds he can't be trusted and his arguments about evolution and the BB should be ignored in favour of creationism? I guess creationists feel he is the enemy driven by satin because he propagates his views on the BB and the cosmos and thinks 'creation' is a myth in a story book. Of course this would be ridiculous as there are many within the churches systems themselves that are guilty of far worse he is accused of without trial.

so basically 'shut up, do as your told, don't ask any questions and you'll be happy'.

No idea I am afraid - you asked about the chemical difference.... I would guess at molecular weight. Speculating.... if it is digested in the stomach then I guess it is broken down further anyway so there might not be much difference between the two with regards to nutrition. How do you mean healthy? What does it do for the health? - reading about a bit it is used as a surfactant in foods and in eye medicine to keep the solution in contact with the eye (like a surfactant again). I also read a lot about it being 'suspected' to help with dementia and other illnesses - but it also states that none of this is supported with any testing... in fact - testing seemed to show no improvement with dementia.... although this is just a new paper article, nothing scientific. https://www.webmd.com/vitamins/ai/ingredientmono-966/lecithin

Yea - but the chemical difference is just the length of the chains though yea? I don't know much about lecithin so I am just assuming this based on what I know about other oligomers/short chained polymers. I would assume that if the same thing comes in both an oil and a solid that the solid has the higher MW.

I would guess that it would have something to do with molecular weight or chain length. The higher MWs being a solid powder and the lower ones being an oil... not certain though that would be my first guess.

How? To ask if JK Rowlings is real is to ask if the Harry Potter books are true? How so? - I'd have to agree with TenOz here:

It was an attempt at humour... with a small friendly dig. true dat (+1) - but it was in their own interests too of course - they didn't join the war to save their old pals the Brits, lol, they joined it because they were attacked on their own mainland by the Japs. If this Ukraine thing starts a war between the EU/UK and Russia.... will the US step in to help or will they say that they want to stay out of European affairs? I know some of those in the US are not a fan of the EU. I think it is for the same reasons a third of the British public voted for brexit... they are voting for brexit based on what they think they know about the EU based on what they have read in the Sun and the Daily Mail.

Thanks.... Do you see my point though? It is clearly a fictitious place.

OK -- So what is the best way to Mordor?

Being fair - she was the one asking for evidence for human accelerated climate change in the OP.

I thought they focused on this when the 'invading' species is thought to cause harm to the native wildlife. Like the bulltoads in Australia that ate other species to extinction or the grey squirrel in the UK that has nearly wiped out the native red; or the rabbits that ate all the crops on some islands... these species, some that were introduced to fight a problem, sometimes turn out to be worse than the problem they were bought in to solve.

yea? Keep on embarrassing them with your clean air, free and happy life style, good manners, good international relations, great care for your ex military, care for the mentally ill, low crime, high public safety, recycling, inclusion of minorities, open immigration policy, blindness to skin colour and homosexuality etc.. I'm sure they will need to wipe out that kind of commie socialist dystopian BS at some point before they are made to look TOO dumbass. ;-)

Yea ....and if the bible is true then the holy ghost in side of him should be able to give him wisdom and knowledge to just answer these questions correctly without any research or reading - yes I agree. But... his failure in this respect is further proof that the book and his belief is nonsense/delusion.

Wot are you on about? I said I was NOT a climate scientist... so why would you expect me to be able to explain it? How do YOU explain the knee in the curve? What is the cause for the 'sudden' increase in speed of warming? It isn't a religion.... I used to be far more sceptical about it than I was now. If people didn't think it would destroy the planet then I wouldn't give a shit about it. I used to be very sceptical about it... mainly because my pastor at church said it was a conspiracy... but the more I read about it the more I 'think' they are probably right. Religion...? nonsense.

You'll need a climate scientist to explain it properly then... but since the industrial revolution I think there has been a kink... a knee in the curve upwards that points to FASTER climate change since we started burning fossil fuels. It is actually a lot more complex than that... but in short - scientist known that climate change has always happened, that's not in question.... it's the acceleration of this change brought on by anthropological activities that people are pointing out. That's my take on it anyway - you might need to discuss it with those that have studied the science better for more details and actual references - I know there are those that have them to hand and know the best references.

Can they make anti-matter ions and trap them? (Actually - as I write I assume they have tried this already).

From memory:- According to Jesus it is 'to love the lord your god with all your heart and mind and soul and to love your neighbour as yourself'.... and then taken further ' to give all of your possessions and money to the poor, because it is harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven that it is for a camel to fit through the eye of the needle'. According to Paul?... I cannot remember if the specific question was put directly to him... There are parts of his writing that suggest faith alone is enough... that your belief is enough to save you (as per John 3:16) through gods grace and there are writings of his that suggest works of spreading the gospel are necessary I think.. I am un aware from memory what he states are the required preparations. There seems to be some debate around Paul's writings though as to whether you need faith alone through grace or Christian works to be performed for one to be saved. being fair he may not know if there is a difference. You might think the holy ghost would just give him the words to say to answer the question correctly (blah, chapter blah, verses, blah to blah...'when you stand before men to witness for me do not prepare your words, rather, let the holy spirit give you the words you need as you require them...' or something like that)

Well - the OP askes what good the scriptures are what ones Paul had. So - what good are they? Many would argue against this but I believe their are good moral guidelines in there - but you have to sift through the rubbish - the Christian pastor would word it differently of course.... he would say that you have to read it being lead by the holy ghost so as to wheedle out the nonsense put in by man from gods message... 'that those with ears would listen'. However... 'what good are they' if they are fiction is debatable... and there are those here on this site who would demonstrate a spectrum of opinions on the subject. What isn't up for discussion as you put it is whether the bible is true or not - we all know it is fiction, unsubstantiated beyond the ramblings of people claiming personal testimonies (which always turn out to be delusions or misunderstandings of probability and co-incidence). What did Paul have? - I always thought it would be the Torah - but I am not an expert. I'm not sure it's relevant exactly what he had anyway - he'd have had whatever all the other Pharisees carried with them at the time, which I thought would have been the Torah - which is clearly fiction as it describes talking animals and a small boat with magic internal dimensions that supposedly took every living animal on board two by two along with many other impossible things - not of which there is any evidence for and in many circumstances evidence against. But it is updated when new evidence comes to light (as you have pointed out for us above).... unlike the bible which continues to claim fiction as truth.

People have been saying that for generations. 1000 years ago people were convinced it was the end times... they are still saying the same now and, if nothing happens, will say the same in 1000 years time (unless the human race realises it's pointless superstition to be what it is). You can read anything into vague prophetic ramblings. It has actually shown much of it to be complete fiction. There are contradictions too - which shouldn't have been allowed into the book if god was as it is described in the book. Basically - once again - your entire argument depends upon the bible and nothing else.

None of that addresses Eise's question from what I can see.... you have just quoted some scripture. Your faith is in the book. What happens if/when you find out the book is fiction?

I wouldn't put too much weight on their names... I think the people who named them probably just named them nominally after their favourite chocolate bars.

But those back drafts are no where near enough to lift anything, let alone a huge metal saucer. So how is it like acoustic lift if it doesn't generate any lift at all?

Ah well - that clears that up then.