philh

"So I can take a gallon of sterile water, put it into a sealed container inside of a vacumn and life is eventually going to spring forth? Life must exist for life to continue. After that, all conditions that this life form needs to exist must remain constant or it will not thrive. What's that survival rule about air,water, food? " Now you are changing the subject from, is there life on other planets?to what models explain abio genesis? These are seperate issues. But since you bring it up, Rresearchers are currently exploring a aumber of theories on abio genesis, which include the iron-sulfur world, rna world etc you can read more about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_life#Eigen.27s_hypothesis Although there is currently no consesus none of the scenarios being explored involve your ridiculous straw man scenario. No one is suggesting that life just suddenly formed in the silly children story like way you might read in the bible. Instead gradual changes moved matter from inorganic to organic. One example of this can be read here: http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20020330/fob1.asp This research shows that amino acids and other organic molecules can form on icy asteroids in space. In another experiment scientists fired amino acids in a gas gun simulating asteroid impacts on Earth, what happened to theese amino acids? They fromed more complex molecules called peptides, the building blocks of proteins. You can read more about it here: www.llnl.gov/str/September02/pdfs/09_02.1.pdf if you had a serious critique of some of the models being explored you could perhaps publish them in a proper sceintific journal. But even if you are correct in your criiticisms that would only show that our current models are wrong, and thats a big if. It wouldt shine any light on what really happened and your straw man criticism would still remain as ridiculous as it was to begin with.

"No, but I was called a dumb ass for not spouting the party line about the Big Bang. What's the difference? " Most scientists dont accept the big bang because it is the party line, they accept it becuase it has evidence. Thats the difference between their beliefs and those of religion. "You mean such as the possibility of life on other planets or in other solar systems? Thanks for making my point. " To suggest that life on other planets is possible is not an article of faith. Its based on observations that life thrives in very harsh conditions. Biologists have observed that the only ingrediient that is chemcially necessary for life is water. So to say that where there is liquid water there is likely to be life is not an artciel of faith. Of course to say life on other planets is possible or even likely is different from saying its definitley true. I have heard people saying its very very likely , I have not heard anyone say its defintiely true. So i think you are making somethign of a straw man. The burden of evidence,as has been said many time b4, is on those making the claim. If I say there is life on other planets, then I am making the claim and I need to provide evidence. Such a statement whilst not being really solid is not a complete article of faith becuase of the observations of the ease of life and the large number of solar systems. However the picture you paint is not accurate. Most astro biologists dont say there is life on other planets they say there is likely to be life on other planets, you realy need to understand that distinction. As for god there is no evidence whatsoever, any belief in her is pure faith.

"Does the universe go on forever or is there a finite border? Why do you believe what you do and can you prove it? What does your gut tell you? Whatever you believe about it is totally done by faith. " i dont know whether the universe is finite or not, unlike religious people I dont jump to conclusions and have strong beliefs without eveidence, dont you get that?

"There is one thing say there is no evidence. and there is another to say there is evidence to the contrary. " People often use this to justify not calling themsleves athiests when they doubt god. They might say "there is no evidence either way on god , you cant prove him, you cant disprove him.So Im on the fence as to whether he exists or not. " I hope you will realise how silly this argument is when you replace the word god with say Santa Claus, invisible pink unicorns, the flying spaghetti moster, a teaport orbitting the sun, Zeus etc No evidence= no belief, simple. People generally agree with that until you insert the word god then logic often falls out the window. Its impossible to prove a negative. I cant prove Santa Claus or the orbtting tea pot dont exist; but I dont have to . The burden of proof is on those that establish propositions, not those that deny them.

"I wanna hear some explanations form you Christians/ Muslims/ Hindus/ Atheists etc. We need to start worshiping our planet and our star that we call the sun, these are the things that have given and supported our life. " As one of the atheists on this forum Im not sure what Im supposed to explain exactly. If you want an explanation for the atheists position, I can give that. there is no evidence to believe in god so we dont believe in god. Pretty simple really. As for worshipping the Earth and the Sun, well I hope you are talking metaphorically. It would be silly to worship a big ball of hydrogen and helium or a rock made of iron,oxygen etc.

"Al Gore said it , I believe, that settles it. " Easy to crticise a percieved superstition when its not your own, right ? However Al Gore sometimes provdies evidence for his case, bible bashers dont.

I care what others believe, because pervasive beliefs have effects on society. If everyone believes the bets way to deal with an infectious disease is to gather together in a church and pray then its more likely thhat disease will spread. the attacks of 9/11 didnt come out of a vaccumm, they came from a belief that Islam is the one true faith and that its worth killing others to spread it. Its not just Islamisst that have shared this view. Thats why I care.

First off, if youve studied any economics you will understand David Ricardo's Principle of Comparative Advantgae and understand that trade in theory benefits both parties. In practice look at economies that we trade with that use their low cost wages as their advantage; such as China, Thailand, india etc they have all improved their economic situation since, exactly as economic theory would predict.

is water not a checmical?

I read the bees have advance warning of of an alien invasion and are leaving the Earth on their spaceships

"it seems to be a dose dependent thing" All toxins are dose dependant. Everythign is toxis at a certain level, even too much water will kill you. So the claim that its dose dependent is irrelevant. " never said it was the cause, or the only cause." You said you had read it was the leading candidate. What you have red is not correct. Entymologists dont know what the casue is. As I said its a gr8 oppurtunity for pseudo scientist to blame their pet peeve, wi fi, pesticides, GM foods whatever. So far no one knows.

I agree with you, i fpeople are being used as slaved that is dispacable and we should boycott any produce from such a supplier. But one hsould distinguish between slavery and low wage work. They ar enot the same at all. What seems like low wage work to us is not necessarily perceived the same way for others. As long we are agreed slavery should never be accepted , but the same does not ring true for low wage work then there is no debate here.

"Exactly. The difference is, in this day and age the sensible majority of Christians (along with a little assistance from we pagans) keep the radical right Christians in line. " I agree 100% . I think the rise of Islamic extremism is one very good example fo what can happen when religious beliefs go unchecked and unquestioned.

I just checked out your first link and wonder wehther you yourself read them, heres the text form your own link: "Many studies have been conducted beginning around 1998 to determine if imidacloprid is related to the bee population decrease and subsequent decline in honey production. However, after much testing, there is no definite data to show that this material is harmful to bees, or related to the bee loss. Tests designed to show that bees lose their orientation and cannot function normally have been inconclusive, and tests designed to test bee kill have had contradicting results. Imidacloprid is sold in nearly 70 countries, and many of these areas report no bee losses." thats pretty much repeated in your second link , Wikipedia comented on the commision which inestigated the issue and stated "The commission concluded that it had no serious indicators suggesting Imidacloprid might be dangerous to bees."

"the leading theory is that a widely used insecticide is causing the problem (imagine that, an insecticide killing bugs!). " How is this the leading theory?Sounds like perfect time for the quack pseudo scientists to give us their pet theories without real evidence. this is what Science magazine had to say: Little consensus about the cause of CCD emerged at the meeting, which the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in Beltsville, Maryland, convened. It could be a variety of factors, notes Jeffery Pettis of the USDA bee lab in Beltsville, Maryland: “At this point, we’re proceeding not knowing which causes might be more important.” In fact, given that there are so few data on the health of domesticated honey bees–and even fewer on wild populations–many scientists aren’t even convinced yet that what’s going on is really a new phenomenon. Last I heard was this: "So this is a real issue but we have not identified exactly what is involved - some beekeeprs have not been affected but others like the University and this larger Delmarva beekeeper have been seriously impacted. We are working on determining solutions but have not found what is negatively affecting our bees as of yet." Dewey Caron, Professor of Entomology, Univerisyt of Deleware

"Organic in the intended sense is no human driven artificial process," Surely all agriculture involves some human driven processes?

Having helped plan the war in Iraq, its utterly disgraceful that he had the job in the first place. Im very glad hes lost it.

What seems like abuse to us only seems like it because of the high standards of living we have created. These high standards of living didnt come out of a vacuum, before we had what we have now we also had no child labour laws.We have them now because we can afford them. If we withdrew our factories from Africa or Asia those who are there would be worse off, not better off, you would be taking them down one step on the ladder. It may seem noble, but then the road to hell is paved with good intentions. If you would like to read more on this I reccomend Why Globalisation Works by MArtin Wolf http://www.amazon.com/Why-Globalization-Works-Martin-Wolf/dp/0300102526

"Here is another issue regarding the same question. If Organic food was treated with radiation to keep it fresher for longer it wouldn't be able to be sold as organic (would it?) but one hours flying time exposes organic material (including us) to roughly the same amount of ionising radation as a chest X-ray. So food that is air-freighted for several hours say from one continent to another has been exposed to a significant dose of ionising radiation. Should it still be labled as organic? " Thats very interesting, do you have a source for this information?

Staright away this article is suspect because it does not give a static defintion of poverty. In fact it does not define it at all. Having not defined poverty it does not provide any statistics to back up the claim that poverty is increasing. Quite frankly this is the sort of thinking even a child should be able to rise above.Perhaps with meanigfully defined statistics we can start a meaningful dicsussion on the topic. Without that, its a big waste of time.

"Wrong, the US needed to flex muscle on the international stage and picked just about the only repressive Islamic country that it didn’t (recently) give million in weapons to. " Did it give millions in weapons to Syria, Iran, Libya the Plaestianian Authority? No it didnt, Afghanistan was by strange co incidence the country that happened to be hosting the terrorists that had declared war on the West. Somoneone who perhaps was more informed of the situation would know that many in the idiot Bush administration wanted to go after Iraq straight away and were not conrcnered with Afghanistan. They were persuaded by their miltary and security advisors that this was nuts as it was clear the terrorist organisation that attacked them was based in Afghanistan. "They offered several times to try him in court and also delegates of the Taliban were willing to negotiate through Pakistan, negotiate as in provide evidence and all that other crazy diplomatic stuff that can happen when you don’t bomb a country in under 30 days. " I have prodivded you with the quotes by the Taliban that said quite clearly they would not give him up under any circumstances, that is why offers to try him were not taken seriously and quite rightly so. Furthermore do you really feel Taliban Islamic courts give fair trials? Let me remind you the Taliban punished those that didnt march "death to America", so you really think there would have been a fair trial and not a delaying tactic? I Agree OBl is not Afghanistan but I have provided you the evidence of the effective fusion of the Al queada and the TAliban and you have chosen to ignore it , thats your decision but people who live in the real world may chose the opposite. "I haven’t even mentioned the “enemy” and that is obviously one of the problems you have with discussion, reading what people say. "In fact I do believe I have mentioned that there is a small section of Jihadists that target the west but the Taliban, the rulers of Afghanistan, were not concerned with that. " Why do you need to mention "the enemy" for me to acknoledge that we have one? Do you agree or not agree that Islamic jihadists especially AQ are our enemies or not? Yet again I point to the evidence that I have already shown you that support that proposition that AQ and the The Taliban were "joined at the hip". "Do you absorb propaganda through an IV straight from the fox network? None of them have the power to install Islamic theocracies across the world, this isn’t Nazi Germany you need to relax. " Thanks for the personal insult .Just for your guiide I dont live in the USA and so dont watch the Fox network, I very much enjoyed the book "Lies and the Lying Liars Whoe Tell Them" by Al Franken which was a very funny critique of it though. As to the substance of your argument - that Aq are not likely to install Islamic governments around the world. Well, I cant predict the future. Few people predicted in 1932 that within ten years the Nazis would rule almost the whole of Europe. Few people predcited in the mid 1980's that USSR would not exist within 10 years.few people precicted in the 1970's that China would embrace an enterpirse culture. I cant predict the future and neither can you. The important point is that Aq have stated a world wide imbarce of their style of Islam as their motivation and we know they are keen to kill as many innocent civilians as they can to acheive it . Whether they succeed or not in their goals is beside the point. "well so far Osama is at about 3000+ an African embassy or two and meanwhile the US is what? tipping half a million?" I think you are the one swalling the proaganda now. Whilst the inavsion of Iraq is something we agree was unjustified. It would be crazy to attribute all the deaths there to the US, which is the implication of your above comment. Perhaps you might want to consider who it is, that is targetting innocent civilians with the bombs in crowded markets, attacking shi ites as they prey etc Thats Aq mate and Iranian factions seem to be doing something simialr. Thats not to impy that US is blameless in Iraq either but I have never been anything but critical of the US in Iraq and so we are agreed on that. But if you imply that Aq has no blame in the thousands that have died in Iraq then you are seriously misguided individual. "I doubt you have ever looked passed a television with your lack of understanding about Islamic western aimed jihad and in particular the ridiculous amount of power you attribute to it. " Actaully I hardly ever watch tv, but yet again thanks for the insult. If you read my posts you will see I dont attirbute any particular power to the jihadists. I have not assumed they are about to install Islmic theocracies around the world, I have merely pointed out that is their motivation and they have no qualms in targetting as many innocent civilians as they can in their attempts. That is why they pose a significant threat, that is why we have to fight them, what would you do? Nothing?

"All things being equal, the person who puts themselves voluntarily into positions where they have a chance to succeed will do better than those who sit on their ass and dream. " I agree with that,it appears the makers of the movie "The Secret" dont. Sitting on your arse and dreaming is exactly what they are selling and its selling like hot cakes.

Doribe posted a very intelligent response to you so called mystery and you havent addressed thsoe resposnses at all . if Doribe want to remain anonymous then why should bothe ryou. It is the argument you have to address not the person behind it.

"In essence you look at people who are successful, analyse how they got where they are and what makes them good and then emulate. It's no secret" Do you have any evidence that this process is more of a determining factor than other processes eg genetics, social group, peer groups, luck etc ? Look at actors, Id be amazed if most of them dont try startegies like you suggest, but most fo them are unemployed. Wheres the evidence the deployment of strategies like you outline are mmore important than thhe other processes i mentioned?

"That all pretty much amounts to nothing as far as why you attacked Afghanistan. " It wasnt me that attacked Afghanistan it was NATo forces, Im not even a member of any armed forces, let alone the NATo armed forces that attacked Afghanistan. The reason for the attack on Afghanistan was simple, the US was attacked by terrorists who were in alliance with the Afghan government, terrorists who had declared war on the USA and were in allaince with the ruling government of Afghanistan.So NATO deployed troops to remove that government from power and capture the terroisst who were bent on destroying the Western way of life and replacing it with an Islamic theocracy. What would be the point of wasting time showing the Taliban the evidence against BIn Laden when they categorically stated they would not hand him over under circumstances? Ill remind you of OBl himself says was his number one request for the West. Was it withdrawl fo troops from Arabia? No . Was it to stop support for Israel? No. Was it to end the sanctions against Iraq? No Was it to end the sanctions against Afghanistan? No Was it to stop propping up the oppressive house of Saud? No. Here in his own words is his number one demand: It was written in a letter to the West following the 9/11 attacks. "The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam. (a) The religion of the Unification of God; of freedom from associating partners with Him, and rejection of this; of complete love of Him, the Exalted; of complete submission to His Laws; and of the discarding of all the opinions, orders, theories and religions which contradict with the religion He sent down to His Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Islam is the religion of all the prophets, and makes no distinction between them - peace be upon them all." Whats his number 2 demand? Again in his own words: "The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you. (a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest. " So you can fantasise all you like about the nature of the enemy, that they are simply trying to stop Americas bully boy tactics and imperialism, but its a fantasy none the less. They have stated clear as day what their motivation is, it is for all of us to accept an Islamic theocracy.They are prepared to kill as many innocent people as it takes to get what they want. This is an enemy we need to fight. Or should we just sit back and wait for the next attrocity ?I doubt if even a few nuclear bomnbs going off in the West would be enough for you to see the reality of this.