[No, the existence of iron ore shows otherwise. It precipitated out of the seas when oxygen started building up in the atmosphere; in an oxydizing atmosphere there could never have been enough iron in the oceans to for the massive deposits we actually find.
BTW, I learned this a while back by spending a very little time with google. Make sure you're not getting all your "facts" from creationist Web sites.]
Make sure that what you read is up-to-date. Most scientists now believe that it was not reducing.
"However, most of the scientific community now believes that the early Earth's atmosphere was not reducing. Instead, scientists beleive the atmosphere was full of oxidants, such as CO2 and N2. An oxidizing atmosphere is essentially neutral, and does not permit organic chemistry to occur." --http://www.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/Exobio logy/PBearth.html As for your banded iron formations evidence, in many of these formations there are also less oxidized forms underneath (eg magnetite below hematite).
Nowadays there are alternate theories-for example, thermal vents, panspermia, frozen ocean (3 billion years ago the sun was 30% less luminous; Jeffrey Bada estimates that a 300m thick layer of ice would have covered the earth).
[Another hypothesis is that both orientations were once used by life forms, but that the luck of the draw meant one crowded the other out. (You get that kind of thing in hereditary systems; a long time ago Scientific American had an interesting article about how surnames dissappear from populations over time due to differential breeding rates and essentially random factors.]
Sure, now if both were once used, and given that genetic information coded for some D forms, why could they not continue using them? A just-so story of the genetic material converting into coding for all L?
I think that the CH2O it is referring to is the empirical formula for glucose, dextrose, and fructose. Formaldehyde is an antibacterial (it is used in cattle dairy or beef production to prevent microbes degrading high quality food protein).
How about touchpowder? Touchpowder is nitrogen triiodide. You can make it using NH3 and I2. Make sure you make it in a solution, as the water prevents it from exploding. When the water dries, merely touching the powder gives it enough energy to explode. Neat stuff. Make sure you make only a little of the stuff however. Really dangerous (and loud!) stuff.
Most scientists nowadays agree that the atmosphere was not reducing. Take a read of the following: -
For a long time it was thought that the early Earth had a reducing atmosphere. A reducing atmosphere contains reductants, or molecules saturated with hydrogen atoms, which are able to reduce other molecules. Many scientists believed that the atmosphere consisted of CH4, NH3, and H2. This is the mixture of gases Miller and Urey used in 1953 to mimic the conditions of the early earth. Their experiment showed that abiotic molecules could be used to create important biotic compounds thought to be necessary for the origin of life.
from http://www.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/Exobiolo gy/PBearth.html
What would happen, say, when you got a cataract or got some bleeding in the eyes? Or terrorists say that they have those kinda eye problems? How easy is it to fake an eye? I remember articles talking about how easy fingerprint scanners can be faked with some gummi stuff. And are everyone's retinas different? Could people have the same retinas?
I totally disagree. The most effective changes in government have occurred because of NONVIOLENT resistance. Boycotting of businesses. Strikes. Refusal to co-operate. Calling for sanctions. All you need to take a look at is in Africa and apartheid. Contrast what happened when the resistance tried to use force and nonviolence methods. Contrast what happened in ~1905 in Russia than ~1970. Take Gandhi in Africa. There are many other examples.
If the resistance uses violence, the government troops will all the more likely use force back. If peaceful protesters are non-violent, troops just will not shoot. They have a conscience. If they are violent (ie they have weapons), the soldiers will have no qualms about killing them. Thousands upon thousands of lives were lost before resisters learnt this lesson.
You mean like e=mc2+1?
That would be pretty hard to measure. Like 1g of matter when turned into energy doesn't turn into 90 000 000 000 000 000 000J but rather 90 000 000 000 000 000 001J. That small a difference would be quite hard to measure.
So are you saying that throwing bullets cause more damage than using a gun?!Wow, hey Israel and Iraq, start chucking bullets at each other instead now!
No, not really...
For example, take the Gulf war.
It was supposed to be a high tech war, using "smart" weapons. In actual fact, later on a senior US military official admitted that only 7% of the weopons dropped on Iraq during the war were "smart"... and from other documented sources, 70% of the not "smart" weopons missed their targets completely causing "collateral" ie civilian casualties. From journalists such as the famous John Pilger in his hidden agendas book, we find that in fact during the Gulf war over 250 000 people died, of which only a fraction were military, the rest civilian.
When I talked to a sales person about what the Hawk planes do, and many other weopons, they had such stuff as copper dust which is meant to be inhaled into the lungs to kill lots upon lotsa people, Napalm B is made from benzene, polyethylene which burns on contact with skin and almost impossible to get off, killing slowly and painfully. And u call this saving people's lives? more like torturing the remnants of their lives.
Won't trying to see whether windows can be stripped down actually make Microsoft in the future make its components even more integrated into windows? Then it'll be even harder to use other programs for other countries....
They should not go after bnetd... after all, many of the people who use bnetd are people who bought the software.
They should go after the people who pirate the software instead. I mean, its not bnetd's fault is it? It just gives extra functionality. They should go to the root of the problem, instead of finding ways to degrade the end product for their customers.
- why do laws allow them to prosecute something that improves the functionality of the software for their customers, instead of making them go after the real culprits?
Quantum entanglement is basically splitting up a photon into 2 parts. These 2 parts are quantumly entangled, so when you measure one, you would get exactly the same result on the other as a result of them being entangled. The supposed ability to transport particles is not true. It is only able to allow measurements on one particle to be duplicated on the other. So, if we ever get this to work on large objects such as humans (!) you wont get teleported. There'd only be a duplicate of you on the other side. And in the act of measuring the state of all the particles of your body, you'd probably be dead too. I wouldnt care to have a duplicate of me on the other side, because you'd still be dead.
Of course, they could have only evolved that way if evolution is true in the first place. Along with the many pieces of evidence for it, theres also a lot of evidence against it:)
try http://www.answersingenesis.org
and http://www.trueorigins.org
for some interesting evidence against evolution:)
Slashdot Mirror
[No, the existence of iron ore shows otherwise. It precipitated out of the seas when oxygen started building up in the atmosphere; in an oxydizing atmosphere there could never have been enough iron in the oceans to for the massive deposits we actually find.
o logy/PBearth.html
BTW, I learned this a while back by spending a very little time with google. Make sure you're not getting all your "facts" from creationist Web sites.]
Make sure that what you read is up-to-date. Most scientists now believe that it was not reducing.
"However, most of the scientific community now believes that the early Earth's atmosphere was not reducing. Instead, scientists beleive the atmosphere was full of oxidants, such as CO2 and N2. An oxidizing atmosphere is essentially neutral, and does not permit organic chemistry to occur." --http://www.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/Exobi
As for your banded iron formations evidence, in many of these formations there are also less oxidized forms underneath (eg magnetite below hematite).
Nowadays there are alternate theories-for example, thermal vents, panspermia, frozen ocean (3 billion years ago the sun was 30% less luminous; Jeffrey Bada estimates that a 300m thick layer of ice would have covered the earth).
[Another hypothesis is that both orientations were once used by life forms, but that the luck of the draw meant one crowded the other out. (You get that kind of thing in hereditary systems; a long time ago Scientific American had an interesting article about how surnames dissappear from populations over time due to differential breeding rates and essentially random factors.]
Sure, now if both were once used, and given that genetic information coded for some D forms, why could they not continue using them? A just-so story of the genetic material converting into coding for all L?
I think that the CH2O it is referring to is the empirical formula for glucose, dextrose, and fructose. Formaldehyde is an antibacterial (it is used in cattle dairy or beef production to prevent microbes degrading high quality food protein).
You take out your mobile phone, put in the coordinates of your destination, then brrrrp brrrrp... brrrrp brrrrp... "Hello? Who is this?"
How about touchpowder? Touchpowder is nitrogen triiodide. You can make it using NH3 and I2. Make sure you make it in a solution, as the water prevents it from exploding. When the water dries, merely touching the powder gives it enough energy to explode. Neat stuff. Make sure you make only a little of the stuff however. Really dangerous (and loud!) stuff.
In the future: Insurance companies asking for a copy of your DNA CD when applying.
Most scientists nowadays agree that the atmosphere was not reducing. Take a read of the following: - For a long time it was thought that the early Earth had a reducing atmosphere. A reducing atmosphere contains reductants, or molecules saturated with hydrogen atoms, which are able to reduce other molecules. Many scientists believed that the atmosphere consisted of CH4, NH3, and H2. This is the mixture of gases Miller and Urey used in 1953 to mimic the conditions of the early earth. Their experiment showed that abiotic molecules could be used to create important biotic compounds thought to be necessary for the origin of life. from http://www.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/Exobiolo gy/PBearth.html
What would happen, say, when you got a cataract or got some bleeding in the eyes? Or terrorists say that they have those kinda eye problems? How easy is it to fake an eye? I remember articles talking about how easy fingerprint scanners can be faked with some gummi stuff. And are everyone's retinas different? Could people have the same retinas?
I totally disagree. The most effective changes in government have occurred because of NONVIOLENT resistance. Boycotting of businesses. Strikes. Refusal to co-operate. Calling for sanctions. All you need to take a look at is in Africa and apartheid. Contrast what happened when the resistance tried to use force and nonviolence methods. Contrast what happened in ~1905 in Russia than ~1970. Take Gandhi in Africa. There are many other examples. If the resistance uses violence, the government troops will all the more likely use force back. If peaceful protesters are non-violent, troops just will not shoot. They have a conscience. If they are violent (ie they have weapons), the soldiers will have no qualms about killing them. Thousands upon thousands of lives were lost before resisters learnt this lesson.
Where's the obligatory Beowolf Cluster comments?
You mean like e=mc2+1? That would be pretty hard to measure. Like 1g of matter when turned into energy doesn't turn into 90 000 000 000 000 000 000J but rather 90 000 000 000 000 000 001J. That small a difference would be quite hard to measure.
that last year Optus lost $400 000 000... what do you expect? If they have to survive, they have to post a profit. They need to cut costs.
So are you saying that throwing bullets cause more damage than using a gun?!Wow, hey Israel and Iraq, start chucking bullets at each other instead now!
Ummm... "There are six types of quark: up, down, bottom, strange and charmed." is only five. You forgot the top quark.
No, not really... For example, take the Gulf war. It was supposed to be a high tech war, using "smart" weapons. In actual fact, later on a senior US military official admitted that only 7% of the weopons dropped on Iraq during the war were "smart"... and from other documented sources, 70% of the not "smart" weopons missed their targets completely causing "collateral" ie civilian casualties. From journalists such as the famous John Pilger in his hidden agendas book, we find that in fact during the Gulf war over 250 000 people died, of which only a fraction were military, the rest civilian. When I talked to a sales person about what the Hawk planes do, and many other weopons, they had such stuff as copper dust which is meant to be inhaled into the lungs to kill lots upon lotsa people, Napalm B is made from benzene, polyethylene which burns on contact with skin and almost impossible to get off, killing slowly and painfully. And u call this saving people's lives? more like torturing the remnants of their lives.
Francium's the most active metal... i wonder why they named it after France... maybe becoz French ppl have the most... ummm... fun? action?
For that amount of money, I could buy around 500 decent houses... how much rent per week could you get? around $100 000...
Won't trying to see whether windows can be stripped down actually make Microsoft in the future make its components even more integrated into windows? Then it'll be even harder to use other programs for other countries....
Erm... you call that a UFO? Looking at the picture, it looks more like a kite/toy or something...
Hmmm, how bout instead of using optical cryptography how bout using the photons for quantum cryptography?
They should not go after bnetd... after all, many of the people who use bnetd are people who bought the software. They should go after the people who pirate the software instead. I mean, its not bnetd's fault is it? It just gives extra functionality. They should go to the root of the problem, instead of finding ways to degrade the end product for their customers. - why do laws allow them to prosecute something that improves the functionality of the software for their customers, instead of making them go after the real culprits?
'¥F×ÁÄg_̱é==^{íií/ðLÇW"FgÑçRHC~èÛq' 'x!OEÅ'õ(TM)úNa÷yi(p}Wúsñ±òn^0ÆéÁ`EÇ[@ß@'Ê CÔúk&¾Ê'-zb|ïXY0ÜOîGÈrfè½x(M3®%'à½ÂS pËsQ£z7óó®0ÏÕFÝrS'Q7aüÐ p8Ã$î'ÉNsÕxvcûûêPÒT'TÐdÐ8MsØÔJݼ`Ö[ÊqÎ 61oer'f},©ÐíÖÆÕÀÁòr EA3×íN29JâçÛ¥G--zÇZléÁ½l©f'í|=noÚhmZ0ÚvpLÌ sâg@L@îAsKõôfv,já(ãÐs>ESuÄLûõj ëíðqDoeo...½RÐÑÅa] 'ÈjõooWæ\#$ØÇM0Âr¼
The A HREF="http://www.fsgs.net" software does practically the same thing as bnetd doesnt it? so if u cant use bnetd, just go and use fsgs software.
If you travel faster than light, then you are also travelling back in time. Basic relativity hmmm?
Quantum entanglement is basically splitting up a photon into 2 parts. These 2 parts are quantumly entangled, so when you measure one, you would get exactly the same result on the other as a result of them being entangled. The supposed ability to transport particles is not true. It is only able to allow measurements on one particle to be duplicated on the other. So, if we ever get this to work on large objects such as humans (!) you wont get teleported. There'd only be a duplicate of you on the other side. And in the act of measuring the state of all the particles of your body, you'd probably be dead too. I wouldnt care to have a duplicate of me on the other side, because you'd still be dead.
Of course, they could have only evolved that way if evolution is true in the first place. Along with the many pieces of evidence for it, theres also a lot of evidence against it :)
try http://www.answersingenesis.org
and http://www.trueorigins.org
for some interesting evidence against evolution :)