http://www.newscientist.com/channel/space/mg18524911.600

1 The placebo effect
2 The horizon problem
3 Ultra-energetic cosmic rays
4 Belfast homeopathy results
5 Dark matter
6 Viking's methane
7 Tetraneutrons
8 The Pioneer anomaly
9 Dark energy
10 The Kuiper cliff
11 The Wow signal
12 Not-so-constant constants
13 Cold fusion


Still many mysteries to solve...... :cool:
Any ideas? ;)

Simple.
Deja vu.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=45783

Is cold fusion really a mystery to be solved?

People would like to have cold fusion, but can't make it work. That is not a mystery, that is just incompetence, or having wrong ideas on the nature of fusion.

Simple.
Deja vu.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=45783
Oh my God!!! That thread is 2 days old!!!!!!! :rolleyes:

Is cold fusion really a mystery to be solved?

People would like to have cold fusion, but can't make it work. That is not a mystery, that is just incompetence, or having wrong ideas on the nature of fusion.
Or not being profitable for the greatest corporations in the planet, who happen to be heavely dependent on oil........ :rolleyes:

Btw, I'm asking if anyone would have a suggestion on how to solve any of the mysteries.... :rolleyes:

But, of course, we are unfortunately talking about sciforums......... :rolleyes:

There are actally some people here that are more than competent enough to give it a try. Unfortunately, many of the most regular posters do not belong on the former group....:rolleyes:

1, 4, 6 and possibly 8 can be solved by the application of money.

Oh my God!!! That thread is 2 days old!!!!!!!

So?

magnetism solves 2, 5, 7 and 9

How?

So?
Exactly.... :rolleyes:

Stop polluting my threads. It's just a waste of time and space. :bugeye:

So glad you've finally come to the realization that your threads are a waste of time and space...
ha!

(Lay off the smileys. Do you think they help your case?)

Anyway.
I had a simple thing to say. That there was already a thread on this subject and I provided a link. You didn't need to respond to my statement. Yet you did. What's even funnier is that your only response to this thread has been to me and to none of those who decided to post in this thread as opposed to the original thread.

But this is even funnier:
Exactly....

Because we all know that we both meant exactly the same thing... right?

Let me break this down for the conceptually challenged (you).

You post a thread. There is already a thread on this subject. This exact same subject. The exact same text.

I post a link to the original thread.

You retort with this "That thread is two days old!!!" Evidently you think that the fact that the thread is only two days old is some kind of... mitigating circumstance (I think that the other thread that was months old is more pardonable than this one.)

I respond with "So?" Meaning that your statement about the other thread being 'only two days old' is pointless and I'd like you to try to explain how that makes this thread not a duplicate.

You respond with "Exactly..." as if I were commenting on my own point rather than yours. As if I were saying "So? Why did I even bother posting the link to the other thread, O great TruthSeeker? I am such a waste of time and space and yet you are such a worthy hero of the age especially because of your acquaintanceship with the noble Jack Layton." However. You are wrong. And you know you are wrong. So. Blah.

So glad you've finally come to the realization that your threads are a waste of time and space...
ha!
Duuuuuuuhhhh! I clearly said that you are wasting my time and my space in this threads.

(Lay off the smileys. Do you think they help your case?)
No, they just highlight your ignorance.

Anyway.
I had a simple thing to say. That there was already a thread on this subject and I provided a link. You didn't need to respond to my statement. Yet you did. What's even funnier is that your only response to this thread has been to me and to none of those who decided to post in this thread as opposed to the original thread.
Because your are spamming in my threads!!! :bugeye:

Because we all know that we both meant exactly the same thing... right?
No, because it proves your ignorance.

You retort with this "That thread is two days old!!!" Evidently you think that the fact that the thread is only two days old is some kind of... mitigating circumstance (I think that the other thread that was months old is more pardonable than this one.)
I was being sarcastic, mentally challeneged creature... :rolleyes:

You respond with "Exactly..." as if I were commenting on my own point rather than yours.
Whenever I say exactly, followed with rolleyes, it obviously means that what you said somehow proved what I said, usually in an indirect way.

As if I were saying "So? Why did I even bother posting the link to the other thread, O great TruthSeeker? I am such a waste of time and space and yet you are such a worthy hero of the age especially because of your acquaintanceship with the noble Jack Layton."
I have many acquaintances.... :rolleyes:

You are wrong. And you know you are wrong. So. Blah.
Yes! I'm wrong because __. Brilliant argument!

Duuuuuuuhhhh! I clearly said that you are wasting my time and my space in this threads.

Oh? So I should have then responded with "Exactly.... :rolleyes:" Would you then have understood?
(Psst. Look underneath where I say "Ha!" That should give you a clue.)

No, they just highlight your ignorance.

I'm sure.

Because your are spamming in my threads!!!

No. I'm responding to you, the thread starter, directly. My original appearance in your threads were merely to point out that both of them (this one and the brain cell thread) were duplicates. I provided links. I was done. However you couldn't help but respond to me. If anyone is spamming your threads, you are.

No, because it proves your ignorance.

Let me use a brilliant argument used by someone I respect and admire greatly: "Yes! I'm wrong because __. Brilliant argument!" Change wrong to ignorant and you'll get my point.

I was being sarcastic, mentally challeneged creature...

Sarcastic? How so? You mean you were admitting even with that first response to me that this thread is a useless duplicate? You were being sarcastic to yourself? Interesting.

Whenever I say exactly, followed with rolleyes, it obviously means that what you said somehow proved what I said, usually in an indirect way.

It obvously means that you're stumbling around bumping into walls again.

I have many acquaintances....

I'm sure you do. Why don't you start naming a few? You seem to think it important.

Yes! I'm wrong because __. Brilliant argument!

You are wrong because this thread is a duplicate thread because there is another thread which I linked to on the exact same topic that was only two days old.

You are wrong because my "So?" was how I explained it to be and not how you tried to pretend it to be.
(Did you, by any chance, happen to read the part that led to the phrase "You are wrong"? You know. The explanation of how you were wrong? Hmm?)

You are wrong because you are wrong because you are wrong.

Mysteries.. mysteries.

This has to be the worst display of intelligence I've ever seen. Does anyone have anything that can top this? (That is a challenge)

Here is the biggest mystery.

Why are humans so god damn stupid....?

why did even bother writing into this thread ?

Here is the biggest mystery.

Why are humans so god damn stupid....?

d))Not ALL humans are. Stupid people believe stupid thangs

why did even bother writing into this thread ?
only you can answer that question

should we add ufos to that list? or is that a "stupid" thing?!

I am not saying that they are real (maybe they are just USA secret experiments) but the evidences are there. Why not include ufos? i think that many people still look to that phenomenon as a weird and ridiculous topic....

ufos should not be on the list... as no scientific research is worth putting into them... i meen so what their from another planet... if they thought it was worth coming here to annoy farmers in texas or people laightly released from insanasilums i really wouldnt want to meet them nevermind putting billionsi nto research.

as for super energetic rays there is an explination, same for not-so-constant constants which have been researched by two people I know; they all posses some inperfections.

the wow! signal makes me laugh though as it makes me remember "the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy"...