beecee

Thanks for that.

But you also know very well, that everyone is not as strong willed as you. And myself of course, having never ever partaken in any illegal drug, and would still refuse to partake even if made legal. I simply don't nor ever will, need that type of crutch. I have a built in "contentment with life" metre and don't need artificial means. While someone as perceptive as yourself, may say, ahh but you drink beer, for the same reason! Not really, firstly I never drink alone outside my home, and in my home may indulge in 1 or 2 VB's while watching the footy, for taste and lubrication reasons. Like I say, a social necessity particularly with company.

Madam Curie and her husband Pierre Curie, imo will always go down as the epitome of hard working scientists. There back breaking work in extracting Radium and Polonium in minute amounts from tons of Pitchblende ore is the stuff Of legends. After winning the Physics Nobel with Pierre, Maria carried on their work winning the Nobel prize in Chemistry also. Their daughter Irene, went on to win another Nobel in Chemistry along with her husband Frederick Joliet. Other women were not as fortunate as Curie and her daughter...... https://phys.org/news/2022-05-women-scientists-forgotten-history.html The women scientists forgotten by history: French doctor and researcher Marthe Gautier, who died over the weekend, was one of a long line of women scientists who greatly contributed to scientific discovery only to see the credit go to their male colleagues. Gautier, who died at the age of 96 on Saturday, discovered that people with Down's syndrome had an extra chromosome in 1958. But when she was unable to identify the exact chromosome with her lower-power microscope, she "naively" lent her slides to geneticist Jerome Lejeune, she told the Science journal in 2014. She was then "shocked" to see the discovery of the extra chromosome 21 published in research six month later, with Lejeune's name first and hers second—and her name misspelled. It was not until 1994 that the ethics committee of France's INSERM medical research institute said Lejeune was unlikely to have played the "dominant" role in the discovery. more at link........................ Others of note down through the ages are................... Rosalind Franklin: and the discovery of the DNA double helix. Jocelyn Bell Burnell: and radio Pulsars. Lise Meitner: Nuclear Fission. Chien-Shiung Wu: The conservation of parity.

No, I am at home on my own computer Phi, and actually forgot to sign out last night and found it still on this morning. Certainly no danger or concern about anyone backtracking my history. Just an inconveneince I suppose?

Couldn't have said it any better. Heard that also. Perhaps it may give some Russian citizen reason to take him out. Let's hope so. What sort of cancer is it? Great if it is highly aggressive type with 100% death rate in a short space of time!

😉 I eat with the Mrs all the time. Guess what? She doesn't drink alcohol and never has! I also understand that Muslims don't drink alcohol and the Koran forbids it. Obviously I am speaking of westernised societies. I also interesting just came across this which did surprise me...... https://www.google.com/search?q=societies+today+that+don't+consume+alcohol&rlz=1C1RXQR_en-GBAU952AU952&oq=societies+today+that+don't+consume+alcohol&aqs=chrome..69i57j33i160.1454j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 According to the World Health Organization, US has the lowest rate of alcohol dependence with only 1.93 per cent. It was. My apologies for any aspersions on your character. That may or may not be the case, but I still reject any logical connection between racism and banning drugs. Just because history "maybe" entwined with some racism, does not validate that banning drugs and racism is a fact. And while the link you gave was not working in my area, I did find others that support that hypothesis. Again, I find the connection fragile at best, and probably wrongly formulated by some lazy acadamics trying to be controversial, in the same vane as that Peterson character..

I may have suggested this a couple of years ago, but I believe it should be reconsidered. On rare occasions, particularly when I am a busy little beaver, I sometimes forget to sign out. Put it down to being an old bastard if you like. 😉 Is it possible for one of our IT experts to add a automatic sign out procedure after say 2 hours inactivity?

Would that remain as is if legalised and readily and freely obtained? Just another aspect, regarding drinking and driving, and taking cannibis and driving. One can have a heavy drinking session and be OK to drive and within the 0.05 limitation 24 hours later. Drugs though, particularly marijhuna, can stay in the system above the 50ngs/ml range for 3 or 4 days. These are the figures applicable in NSW. We err on the side of caution? Here is where I differ. Whether less addicitve and/or toxic, if legalised could mean more experimentation and increased useages, and lessen one's reasonable judgement calls, and be a reson for further experimentation into even harder and more dangerous drugs.

Not at all. I have far more interesting and logical things to do. Nice try though. 😂 😄Whatever. You're getting quite good at playing he victim card my friend. Like I said karma is a myth, Definition of karma 1 often capitalized : the force generated by a person's actions held in Hinduism and Buddhism to perpetuate transmigration and in its ethical consequences to determine the nature of the person's next existence Each individual is born with karma, the residual from past lives that must be resolved :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Actually closer to woo then even myth!!😆 Do you have evidence that karma works exclusivey? or that there is anything scientific about karma, or are you able to tell us all what it even is? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma Karma (/ˈkɑːrmə/; Sanskrit: कर्म, IPA: [ˈkɐɾmɐ] (listen); Pali: kamma) means action, work, or deed.[1] For the believers in spirituality the term also refers to the spiritual principle of cause and effect, often descriptively called the principle of karma, wherein intent and actions of an individual (cause) influence the future of that individual (effect):[2] Good intent and good deeds contribute to good karma and happier rebirths, while bad intent and bad deeds contribute to bad karma and bad rebirths.[3][4] For the believers, the concept of karma is closely associated with the idea of rebirth in many schools of Indian religions (particularly Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism),[5] as well as Taoism.[6] In these schools, karma in the present affects one's future in the current life, as well as the nature and quality of future lives—one's saṃsāra.[7][8] This concept has also been adopted in Western popular culture, in which the events which happen after a person's actions may be considered natural consequences. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: What I do suggest is avoiding your concepts that anyone disagreeing with you or your beliefs is belittling you. You have the right to believe in karma, rebirth, goblins, ghosts, or whatever you like. When you raise it for discussion on a science forum, I have the right to discredit anything that I see as unscientific, myth, or simply based on faith. OK? 😉

I am pretty sure that it is simply an effect caused by the narrow gorge opening. https://kimberley-australia.com/kimberley-attractions/horizontal-falls/ Although they are called waterfalls, this natural phenomenon actually consists of intense tidal currents hurtling through two narrow coastal gorges. Massive tidal movements create a waterfall effect as water banks up against one side of the narrow cliff passage, to be repeated again on the turning tide. The twin gaps are part of the McLarty Ranges, which have two ridges running parallel approximately 300 metres apart. The first and most seaward gap is about 20 metres wide and the second, most spectacular, gap is about 10 metres wide. It is possible to drive boats through the two gaps to the bay behind. The tides in this area have a 10 metre variation which occurs over six and a half hours from low tide to high tide and vice versa. The effect of the waterfalls is created by the tide building up in front of the gaps faster than it can flow through them and there can be a four metre high waterfall between the bays.

Irrespective? verifiable? banning alcohol and drugs and racism???🤪 Sorry, I reject that soft science speculation. I am reasonably confident I am, for the reasons stated, and the possible dire consequences makes trying your methodology as beyond reason. eg: I have a mate who can't see the validity and logic in the climate change evidence. He appears fair dinkum, so my reply is simply, if we are possibly going to err, isn't it wise to err on the side of caution? The rest of your paragraph is fairy tales. I think you know what my stance is, and this playing ignorance is sometimes tiring. But anyway, my stance is that alcohol has been and always will be a social necessity and as much a part of society as is eating. The dangers etc of excess alcohol intake should be part and parcel of the primary education system, and taught to our young. Legalising more potentially dangerous drugs that are at present illegal, for free and easy obtainability and use, is imo couter-productive and dangerous. Is that clear enough?🙄 I'm sure I have made that clear throughout this thread. I have already agreed that perhaps some less dangerous and habitual drug/s could be decriminalised, not legalised. I would think that any Doctor prescribing unecessary prescriptions to anyone prosperous or otherwise, would be leaving himself open to conviction.

But worth considering that the reason for such beliefs, is the awe and wonder of the universe, as well as life around us, which can be explained reasonably well by science, at least back to about t+10-35th seconds...admittedly the closer we get to t, the less certain we are of the evidence. And of course overall with evidence for evolution and the BB, being so convincing, that even the Catholic church in their "cunningness" see no problem with that, but put both down to the work of God.(WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE OF COURSE 😉)

How's this for tidal effects.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_Falls The Horizontal Falls, or Horizontal Waterfalls, nicknamed the "Horries" and known as Garaanngaddim to the local Indigenous people, are an unusual natural phenomenon on the coast of the Kimberley region in Western Australia, where tidal flows cause waterfalls on the ebb and flow of each tide. The Lalang-garram / Horizontal Falls Marine Park is a protected area covering the falls and wider area.

OK, OK I'm convinced!!!😁

Neither have I re highlight. Yes our own indigenous population, having never had experience with alcohol, also suffered devastatingly when plied with it by European settlers. Your link fails to work in my area. Irrespective, I find that claim hard to believe and more opinonated then anything else, and possibly applicable over an extremely narrow application . My moral stand on this issue, is not politically motivated. I offer an opinion based on my moral standings alone, and with consideration for those with less strength of will, then I, or with other problematic issues. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jan/22/drug-deaths-at-music-festivals-one-overdose-victim-took-up-to-nine-mdma-pills Drug deaths at music festivals: one overdose victim 'took up to nine MDMA pills' NSW coroner told different circumstances led to the five deaths, including one victim who was drinking as well as consuming MDMA Charts, like polls can be wrong, insufficient data and bias. How do you know it wouldn't? Something that is illegal and hard to get, will imo shy more people away then towards it. Plus I have already mentioned that decriminalisation would be OK in a post to Phi....but decriminalisation is not legalisation. Well we disagree (shock, horror) on that score, and I use the freely available and legal status of alcohol, plus the many more deaths and detrimental effect with alcohol shown in charts, to support my stance.

Perhaps with some, not with me. Decriminalising you are suggesting? I am not against that actually, and certainly for rehabilitation and education. Firstly I don't see how the highlighted bit follows. We have gullible, foolish peoplein any society, as we have wrong doers in any society. And I have already and always supported better education re alcohol. My old man, bless his soul, gave me my first beer, but at the same time, gave me a lecture about those dangers. No, I did not completely adhere to his advice, and on occasions suffered for it. My Son started drinking without my knowledge. When I found out, (his Mother already knew) I had the old Father and Son talk with him. Thankfully, mostly he drinks in moderation. Great!! Are you reading my posts? I am all for education, and your suggestion, along with others that I have, would be great for the primary school curriculum. +1 Not legally though. Which is what I was inferring. I'm not sure that comparing that which is widely legal and available, (alcohol) with something that is illegal and not as available, is a valid scenario.(mushrooms, the magic ones and peyote) Again, how do you know prohibiting them hasn't contained the detrimental effects from wider usage? All law enforcement measures are necessary evils. If we could have no morally corrupt people, misfits, wrong doeres and evil arseholes, there would be no need for them. because I don't believe that making other current illegal drugs readily available is morally correct. Why add more problems to be readily obtained? But they are not being legalised! They are being decriminalised. We don't jail people for minor traffic infringements, but it is still illegal. Make it legal and what do you think will happen? As I believe I have made clear, I simply do not see making other stuff that maybe detrimental, to the easy obtainable list. The coffee and tea mentions, were certainly a case of going from the sublime to the ridiculous, but by the same token, speaking of banning alcohol that has been legal for yonks, and part and parcel of society and a social necessity, is equally crazy as I stated before. Riots without doubt would eventuate.

I don't believe we could (or should) ban alcohol as I am pretty sure we would have full scale riots on our hands to deal with. So yes, you are essentially correct. I don't believe that this would ever have any chance of eventuating, as the general rioting, would deter any government from ever attempting to ban alcohol. It's far more powerful then tax revenues from alcohol, as it is now (and has been for many many years) a well established social necessity, that is as much a part of society, as is eating. We all sit here pontificating about the detrimental side of alcohol and banning it, then in the next instant, we pontificate about adding even more detrimental drugs to the list. Makes no sense to me. Plus why would you need to divert people from alcohol, by making "magic mushrooms and peyote" (Don't even know what peyote is) How do you know by legalising this stuff, and making it more available like alcohol, that the detrimental effects and death from it will not sky rocket? I prefer to stay with the devil we know, considering the possible consequences.

Listen matey, I'm only a poor old retired maintenance Fitter/Machinist/Welder, who has always had a great interest in cosmology and astronomy, but was having to much fun as a hairy arsed kid to do too much about it. If you want to gain knowledge in that arena, but havn't the qualifications, start by reading some reputable books....I started many years ago with Stephen Hawking's Brief History of Time....somewhat dated now though, but there are many others...The First Three Minutes by Stephen Weinburg...anything by Carl Sagan of course...Lawrence Krauss and Neil DeGrasse-Tyson are other notable authors of late.

I'm not at all denying that alcohol has resulted in far more deaths then other illegal drugs. But it is legal, and available to all and sundry and being the "social necessity" that it is, is certainly impossible to ban. Plus I like my weekly six pack of VB! If other current illegal drugs were made legal and equally available, who is to say that deaths from those drugs will not sky rocket? That is my reasoning. Why add more temptation particularly for our young? It may appear circular and perhaps even hypocritical, but the adverse consequences it seems to me anyway, far outweigh the circular and possibly hypocritical aspects. Like I said, I have not even ever had a cigarette to my mouth and never partaken in any other illegal drugs. And again, how far do we go into supposedly banning other stuff like coffee and tea? "Tea contains a poisonous substance called tannin and coffee contains a poisonous substance called caffeine. When these stimulants go inside our body, they directly go to the area of our brain and they control the two glands concerned with our sleeping." WIKI Damn!! I almost forgot!!! I do partake in another "legal" drug, although now generally only at ceremonial and traditional Fijian gatherings and turnouts. 🤤 It is the traditional Fijian drink named yaqona or commonly called kava. It is though seen as non adicitve and is more soporific than anything else...and legal of course!

No probs! Cosmology/Astronomy as Carl Sagan said at the end of his "pale blue dot" narrative, "astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience". I would add awesome and mind-blowing to that description.

Unlike you, I won't dance around the question, I will answer it. I don't see criticising your passive unworkable philsophy as belittling. I'm expressing the feelings of most in a westernised democratic society, and more importantly, my own views, based on much evidence. Two different things, but again, I'll answer for you. I live my life by reasonable moral values, and do the best for myself, my family and friends, and toleration of others, including respect when earned. On the second rather weird question, I'll ask you one...Do you know anyone ever having come back from being dead? or come back after the total cessation of life? Evidence shows that when life ceases, the body decays, are you claiming then the unscientific concept of a soul that continues? This of course gets back to myth, doesn't it? Or more to the point, do you know what a scientific theory is? BTW, I'm not belittling you for your beliefs in the afterlife, karma or any other mythical concept, just that it is unscientific at best, and no alternative has ever been shown. Not into, nor ever was into Bruce Lee...to violent for me. 😉 Some martial art expert come poor actor was he not? sheesh! Plus I already gave you a more accurate definition of rational.... Rational = A belief based on reason, logic and evidence. https://www.google.com/search?q=rational+foundations+of+religion&rlz=1C1RXQR_en-GBAU952AU952&oq=rational&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0i67i131i433j0i67j0i67i131i433j69i60l3.2928j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 "Rationalism holds that truth should be determined by reason and factual analysis, rather than faith, dogma, tradition or religious teaching" If I need to give you one defining irrational, it would be...."lacking usual or normal mental clarity or coherence. (2) : not endowed with reason or understanding. b : not governed by or according to reason irrational fears. c Greek and Latin prosody. (1) of a syllable : having a quantity other than that required by the meter". or if you like the irrational concept in the bible of at least two individuals coming back from the grave, or walking on water, or a flat Earth, or the three persons making up the one God, or the seven days that created the universe, or talking snakes, or burning/talking bushes, or parting seas, or turning water into wine, and it goes on and on and on and on and.......

The other "mood alterers" are already banned, and have been for ages. I've given my reasons why I believe that to be morally correct and I stand by that. Sometimes being in the middle, gives one a better view of the extremes that may exist both left and right. Perhaps I did. So let's be clear...are you saying alcohol should be banned? or that other already illegal drugs should be legalised and made available? Or are you questioning that coffee and tea are also drugs? I'm saying I am with the status quo, as is in my country.

Try banning religion, which is also pleasurable to many and been with us a long time. The proper answer of course is that rightly or wrongly, alcohol is accepted, and as long as we (society) educate the existng dangers of alcohol when taken to excess, particularly for our young. I just don't accept in adding other potential harmful drugs to the legal list. Coffee and tea are also classed as drugs...sugar is another. We can go from the sublime to the ridiculous... I'm all for that. Treatment that is, and we have free adequate treatment centres in Australia. And while being illegal hasn't worked, I still believe being illegal has deterred many anyway. I also accept that "being illegal" (which they are in Australia) also brings out the criminal opportunist to take advantage of that illegality, which ironically speaking, validates another point I was making to a couple of others, re evil/misfits/criminals/wrong doers, being part of any society. I will add though, being an old bastard, that I maybe stuck in my old traditional ways, but equally, I do not see any advantage, particularly for our young, in legalising any of the drugs currently illegal. That can send a message, that it is OK to do them.

My two cents worth..... Alcohol has been with us for eons and along with being pleasurable, is also a social necessity in this day and age. Most societies recognise those facts, but at the same time also publicise the effects and damage of drinking to excess, and especially drinking and driving. Drinking in moderation is the key. Tobacco? Have never ever had a cigarette/cigar to my mouth, even as a hairy arse teenager. Yuk!!! And of course is now discouraged as probably cancer causing. All other illegal drugs I am pretty ignorant about, and again, like tobacco, have never participated in indulging in such fantasies, although the opportunity did confront me once at about the age of 26....I politely declined. But am of the opinion in this day and age, that they all should remain illegal, as the consequences of taking them, and of overdosing is not condusive to one's well being, to put it mildly. And of course in this day and age again, why would we/should we, legalise anything that just adds more complications and problems to good living, and the problems that even the established, conventional alcohol can have when taken to excesses. My only exception of course is for medical reasons.