Prev: How small must the chance of error be before we accept something as true and certain?
Next: Moonless Night
From: Smiler. on 3 Aug 2010 22:32
Jimbo wrote:
> On Aug 2, 11:02 pm, "Edmond H. Wollmann" <arcturian...(a)earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>> "Jimbo" <ckdbig...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:35d49815-ac94-4b41-8d64-001c0043dcc7(a)i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>> On Aug 2, 9:58 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> According to atheists, we PERCEIVE it as sweet so our ancestors were
>>> more likely to consume it for energy to pass on their genes!
>>> Did you even take a science class during your time in reform school?
>>
>> Did you ever figure out what's on God's mind?
>
> What god?
>

Indeed. Also: What mind?

>>
>> sugar is part of it, it's The law of expansion.

--
Smiler
The godless one.
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all made to perfectly
fit the prejudices of their believers.


From: nuny on 4 Aug 2010 07:38
On Aug 3, 5:32 am, Excognito <stuartbr...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 3, 12:48 pm, "n...(a)bid.nes" <alien8...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 2, 6:58 pm, "|-|ercules" <radgray...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > According to atheists, we PERCEIVE it as sweet so our ancestors were
> > > more likely to consume it for energy to pass on their genes!
>
> > > But that would mean chicken, lamb, mustard and every taste is purely
> > > manufactured by our brains to give it some functional relevance.
>
> >   Why do you believe hot peppers are "hot"? Many people, including me,
> > make a point of eating them not because they're nutritious (they
> > happen to be extremely so) but because we like the heat.
>
> > (froups trimmed randomly coz stoopit Google Gropes only allows xposts
> > to five at a time)
>
> >   Mark L. Fergerson
>
> 1a.  to appeal to macho types, giving them greater chick appeal.

Wow. I've never been called (even by implication) macho before.

> 1b.  to eliminate the stupid by:
>  - 1b1 direct elimination of those who can't take a hint from the
> plant's defences (although it has failed to take out at least one
> stupido before it bred - tabasco & habenero sandwiches, lovely grub)
>  - 1b2 signalling to chicks that the potential mate is either grossly
> insensitive or lacks the intellectual tools necessary to avoid
> unnecessary pain.

I see that you associate what I call "heat" with "pain". Since you
are apparently a totally non-macho wimp who never got over your first
taste of "hot" food, let me assure you that pain is not the object for
me; I just like the taste. Peppers of different varieties have
different, complex complements of flavors.

Yeah, there are those who seek out the hottest possible peppers for
macho points, but I don't care about that silliness. Any woman who is
impressed with that sort of behavior is... not to my taste.

> 2.    to allow the chicks to disguise the taste of unpalatable food
> (eg, rotting meat or fresh vegetables (tricksy hobbitses can keep
> nasty cabbage)) and giving the macho types no choice but to eat it
> (else they be accused of wimpishness)

Gosh, have you heard of "refrigeration"?

So basically, you're claiming that eating hot peppers is "unnatural"
for humans?

Why?


Mark L. Fergerson
From: Frederick Williams on 4 Aug 2010 08:56
|-|ercules wrote:

> It's [water's] unique Hydrogen bond giving the characteristic bend in the molecule ...

What utter rot.


--
I can't go on, I'll go on.
From: |-|ercules on 4 Aug 2010 16:52
"Frederick Williams" <frederick.williams2(a)tesco.net> wrote
> |-|ercules wrote:
>
>> It's [water's] unique Hydrogen bond giving the characteristic bend in the molecule ...
>
> What utter rot.
>


I'm sure my Chemistry teacher said the class of molecule water falls into it should be a gas.

What causes the bend then? Even though it's not necessary for the sugar argument.

Herc

From: Frederick Williams on 5 Aug 2010 07:57
|-|ercules wrote:
>
> "Frederick Williams" <frederick.williams2(a)tesco.net> wrote
> > |-|ercules wrote:
> >
> >> It's [water's] unique Hydrogen bond giving the characteristic bend in the molecule ...
> >
> > What utter rot.
> >
>
> I'm sure my Chemistry teacher said the class of molecule water falls into it should be a gas.
>
> What causes the bend then? Even though it's not necessary for the sugar argument.
>
> Herc
>

See Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water#Chemical_and_physical_properties:

"The four electron pairs surrounding the oxygen tend to arrange
themselves as far from each other as possible in order to minimize
repulsions between these clouds of negative charge. This would
ordinarily result in a tetrahedral geometry in which the angle between
electron pairs (and therefore the H-O-H bond angle) is 109.5�. However,
because the two non-bonding pairs remain closer to the oxygen atom,
these exert a stronger repulsion against the two covalent bonding pairs,
effectively pushing the two hydrogen atoms closer together. The result
is a distorted tetrahedral arrangement in which the H-O-H angle is
104.5�.[12]"

And reference [12]: http://www.chem1.com/acad/sci/aboutwater.html

The "bend" as you call it may facilitate hydrogen bonding, but not vice
versa.

--
I can't go on, I'll go on.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: How small must the chance of error be before we accept something as true and certain?
Next: Moonless Night