It will eb a rider for the "protect the orphan of our military anti-porn act 2013" or some other rider in a bullshitty law nobody can refuse.

At a shed , one being for the tractor the other for the plant. Having two chemical substance which when mixed can cause explosion and a few electronic part means *nothing* without a context. The question is : do the authority exagerate the context to make a case, or was it a real plan from a disturbed teenager, or was it a disturbed teenager which would never have gone further but now whatever MAY happen will be forever marked as that "insane guy which wanted to explode a school" ? Wihout further info none of us are able to say. But I am willing to bet there will be a media circus.

I mean, I hate sex offender (the real one, not the one caught pissing in a backstreet 380 yard from a school), but this is what ? Double punishemnt ? or even tripple punishment ? First they get the prison treatment, then they are difficult to employ or get a flat (can#t be within XXX yard of a school which cut off a lot of possible work or living place) then they get kicked out of many stuff now. If you want to punish them for life then give them life in prison. this type of triple punishment whammy is "cruel and unusual". Once out they should be OUT.

Ban alcohol.

Also the shooter probably watched sexual/violent/whatever TV program. ban TV. ooooohhh this is a fun game ! Can I participate too !?

The bible "allows" murder in the name of Yhwh, it allows for slavery and forced mariage/rape, and various other disgusting stuff (old testament) even the new testmaent has a lot of disgusting stuff like slavery, or even women being inferior and not beign allowed to speak up unless their man allow it (in chruch for example, corinthian), not even counting that it is "You shall not covet your neighbor's wife" and not , say , husband or significant other.

Furthermore the moral code do not come from bible or whatever, they were there before (ex. Amurabi code) and even before as soona s we were socially grouped, they are a Necessity for a stable society or group. Heck charity is even one of those. In small group you will be far more likely to help somebody not related to you, charity is only an extension of that, and is practised by non religious.

The bottom line is that the bible bring nothing new or special to the morality of its reader And as somebody said (was it hitchens) "show me any moral act which are practised by religious people and *ENEVER* practiced by any Atheist whatsoever". You won't find ANY such act. You are as moral as you as human are, and religion don't make you more or less moral. You will simply recognize YOUR morality INTO the religion.

"In any event by suggesting that those books are *not* inspired by God (which according to current scientific knowledge may or may not exist) you are taking a position that is not supported by established facts"

Two things wrong here.
The default hypothesis, the null, is that there is no such things as unicorn, faery, gods until an evidence is provided for their existence, which is why science DOES NOT look at the existence of god AT ALL, not even throwing a may or may not. It is up to the CLAIMER to provide evidence of existence. But even if you were to add god to the equation, it is still the null that every book/document were written by men and inspired by men. It would be up to the person claiming isnpiration or divine origin to provide evidence for it as the NULL is : no inspiration all human origin. There is a good reason to use the null : shift the burden of proof on the positive claimant (inspired by gods) rather than shift the burden on an impossible to prove task (was not inspired by gods).

We did send 2 radio signal which will reach beyond the 1LY (and are by now around 30-40 LY can't remember if they were sent in the 70ies or 80ies). Each signal was a few minutes long. The reason we don't do it is not out of fear but out of uselessness. To send a signal without being rapidely attenuated and disappear udner the galactic noise for that frequency, we have to do it very directional, and very powerful. That cost money to do. And you can only reach a tiny tiny spot in the sky. And it travel at light speed. To do the whole sky would be an enourmous amount of energy to spend, and you would have to wait dozen , hundred and maybe thousand of years until it raches a destination (depending on the star/galaxy you target). And when it reaches there it will be of minuscule intensity at best. So sending is not done out of fea, but out of horrendous cost and are no better than dart in the dark.

None of our radio signal is/has been detectable beyond a few 1 to 10 AU and nothing was above noise beyond 1 light year, except for 2 intentional signal of 2 minutes long. The problem is the inverse square law , as distance increase your intensity drop by the square of the distance (imagine a point light, it generate a spherical wave, but as the distance increase the sphere surface increase on the square of the radius, since the intensity stay constant , each square unit on the surface get an intensity which dwindle by the inverse of the suqare of radius). The only exception were direction signal sent with intent.

We could ahve a high technological civilisation on that planet and each other NEVER know about each other despite doing radio transmission up the wazoo into space (which we don't anymore by the way we have much better way to transmit info). Each of our signal would be indistinguishable from galactic noise rapidely. And we would never know about each other. Heck even if they were on alpha centauri, 4 LY away we would not know until they intentionally send a *directional* signal in our direction powerful enough.

All those radiation are in the same "nature" they are electromagnetic radiation, or better called photon. They differs in *energy* and thus in effect. Simplifying, Microwave will excite barely rotational level in molecules, Infra red is akin to vibrational levels in structure/molecules, and short infrared/color/UV is electron excitation from an outter shell level to another. Xray more or less is excitation from the inner core shell level. Gamma is even more, can only be gotten IIRC thru nuclear reactions. But they are the same in nature, only the different energy level and the quantic nature of matter make the effect different.

For every application where you will say it is useful over metric, you will only show that you have ingrained the imperial system and do not want to move on. order of magnitude to compare to human size stuff ? metric (centimeter / decimeter / Kg / Tons / liter etc...) gives an immediate gut estimate (i often see the cited example of "it is easier to use 4 foot 11 inches than 150 cm if you were used to it you would say 1.5 meter pronounced "1 meter 50" which is as easy than 4 foot 11 inches and much easier to use if I have 6 yards of clothes how many 5 foot 8 inches guy can I cover ? if I have 6 meter of clothes I just say 6/1.5=4 guys good luck with the example of yard/foot/inches without doing complicated conversion compared to a direct division). Conversion ? metric don't need them as much as imperial. So where the hell does it makes sense to use imperial ? There is a good reason the whole world moved on. The SI is as easy to grasp for people as any other system, but easier to teach, easier to use, and easier to NOT make error with.

So again *WHICH* advantage has imeprial over metric (except that you are used to it) ? before you answer about a particular felt flaw of metric, please google around to make sure it is a real flaw. Good luck on that.

You are using the structure made available with tax and you get a free ride. but i do not accuse the user of tax avoidance, I accuse the government responsible for setting up the tax and letting the whole gaping hole, and never being bothered a second that some big company seems to never have tax report in the same level as their profit. *THEY* , the politician , have a lot to explain. not the company using it.

You missed the point utterly. Atheist *do* have charitable contribution. You pretend that they "don't" but it is untrue. Therefore atheist have the same morality as christian do. You would have a point if religious people were doing something moral that the atheist *never* do. But that does not happen. ALL moral act practiced by religious people are also practiced by atheist. There is NO EXAMPLE of moral act NEVER practiced by atheist. As for being "more" moral religious people commit as many crime as atheist, break mariage vow as much as atheist, when all comfounding factor are counted. What religion help more is not on the morals, but on the comforting zone. But then again in many case a puppy or kitten help even more. That still won't make me start praying to my kitten overlord.

Do you understand now hitchens point ?

Byt the way moral has long been due to be social pressure , it is just in the nature of any animal group stability to not attack or kill each other if they form a community. So frankly I am not sure what you are arguying.

Why the fuck is that even allowed in any sane democracy ?

868 people out of 968K comes out at roughly ~0.09% got the cancer. If the heavy coffee drinker had a 50% lower risk then naively we got 289 heavy coffee drinker and 579 non coffee drinker. Or a risk of 0.058% for non coffee drinker and 0.029% for heavy coffee drinker. Put in perspective you have 1 chance of out 1700 to get the cancer, and you lower it to 1 chance out of 3400. Not worth being forced to drink the filthy filthy thing.

That's not me stating that but nintendo europe by restricting the adult content for every user beyond 11pm (when presumably kiddy are in bed) to 3am. Meaning in their mind only kids use those console 3am to 11pm. (what happened to have a parental lock?). Thanks Nintendo I now know as an european I don't need to check your offering , because mostly by 11pm either I am going out, or I am asleep at home. And just a wild stab in the dark, but it will be the same for most adult having a job.