I addressed the ki-has-many-meanings arguement at some length. Perhaps you did not see it. Breifly, I said ki-believers only evoke this arguement when challenged by skeptics. When speaking amongst themselves, ki-believers use the word "ki" freely w/o ever specifying which definition they intend, yet somehow no confusion results. My suspicion: the so-called "silly New Age" definition of ki is THE definition of ki and the ki-has-many-meanings line is a just a smoke screen to throw off critics.

And I don't know how the trick with the boiling water was done. But I also don't know how world-famous stage magicians Penn & Teller perfrom a trick where they appear to shoot at each others heads and catch the incoming bullets in their teeth. What I do know--in both cases--is that it MUST be a trick, because such feats are not humanly possible.

If you want a short but thorough dissection of the global-warming-is-a-myth hoax, start here:



I dont think I need to read up again on global warming.
I would much rather see a persons opinion, with the "for" and "against" after they have reached a conclusion based on their own findings than be given something to read written by someone else.

I have enough answers to form my opinion on global warming. Here it is for what it is worth.

The very nature of what the Earth is makes for the greenhouse effect. Man adds to the effect with different emmisions from products and the manufacturing of products. If it is deemed what he does is making the planet warmer then, as is happening in certain countries, the correct steps are being taken. Apart from other countries that refuse to comply.

The Earth has gone and will indeed go through severe changes from natural events such as the difference in presumed orbit's around the Sun etc etc (according to some scientists).

Earth has had severe changes in the past (according to some scientists) with out mans input.

Certain politicians have a vested interest in not "considering" the future of the planet.

The boiling in water trick done by magicians?

If I stated that then I think I would be looking for a
method that they use otherwise I wouldnt negate some ones statement, but that is your choice.

It is easy to state off the cuff negative arguments but then they have little value unless they have a reason.

One thing I have learned about this forum is there are people who argue. From some of these arguments a lot can be learned. Negative off the cuff statements is anybody's choice. But without reason they lead no-where.
I might at one time have been guilty of the same thing. The difference is, I like to think that I learn.


Edited by jude33 (01/03/08 04:19 PM)