text:
Update: A summary of this article's thesis has been formally published as "On Defining Naturalism as a Worldview" in Free Inquiry 30.3 (April/May 2010), pp. 50–51; and has been formally employed by Yonatan Fishman in "Can Science Test Supernatural Worldviews?" in Science & Education 18 (2009), pp. 813–37.
There is a trend in science and law to define the word "supernatural" as "the untestable," which is perhaps understandable for its practicality, but deeply flawed as both philosophy and social policy. Flawed as philosophy, because testability is not even a metaphysical distinction, but an epistemological one, and yet in the real world everyone uses the word "supernatural" to make metaphysical distinctions. And flawed as social policy, because the more that judges and scientists separate themselves from the people with deviant language, the less support they will find from that quarter, and the legal and scientific communities as we know them will crumble if they lose the support of the people. Science and the courts must serve man. And to do that, they must at least try to speak his language. And yet already a rising tide of hostility against both science and the courts is evident. Making it worse is not the solution.
As I argue in Sense and Goodness without God (pp. 29-35), philosophy is wasting its time if its definitions of words do not track what people really mean when they use them. And when we look at the real world, we find the supernatural is universally meant and understood to mean something metaphysically different from the natural. I could adduce many examples of the bad fit between real language and this ill-advised attempt at an "official" definition, but here are just two:
- The underlying mechanics of quantum phenomena might be physically beyond all observation and therefore untestable, but no one would then conclude that quantum mechanics is supernatural. Just because I can't look inside a box does not make its contents supernatural.
- Conversely, if I suddenly acquired the Force of the Jedi and could predict the future, control minds, move objects and defy the laws of physics, all merely by an act of will, ordinary people everywhere would call this a supernatural power, yet it would be entirely testable. Scientists could record and measure the nature and extent of my powers and confirm them well within the requirements of peer review.
I define "nature" in Sense and Goodness without God (on pp. 211-12, with a little help from pp. 67-69). But I explain this in elaborate detail, with considerable supporting evidence, in my Secular Web article Defending Naturalism as a Worldview (2003), to which I referred readers in my book. After this, and the publication of Sense and Goodness, I defined the natural-supernatural distinction even more rigorously in the joint statement of the Carrier-Wanchick Debate (2006). Anyone who wishes to interact with my definitions of natural and supernatural must read these two articles.
In short, I argue "naturalism" means, in the simplest terms, that every mental thing is entirely caused by fundamentally nonmental things, and is entirely dependent on nonmental things for its existence. Therefore, "supernaturalism" means that at least some mental things cannot be reduced to nonmental things. As I summarized in the Carrier-Wanchick debate (and please pardon the dry, technical wording):
If [naturalism] is true, then all minds, and all the contents and powers and effects of minds, are entirely caused by natural [i.e. fundamentally nonmental] phenomena. But if naturalism is false, then some minds, or some of the contents or powers or effects of minds, are causally independent of nature. In other words, such things would then be partly or wholly caused by themselves, or exist or operate directly or fundamentally on their own.Despite all I have written on this, several people have had difficulties understanding how to apply my construction of these terms, so I thought I'd have some extended fun. Analogies and concrete examples always do a better job getting across to people what we're talking about, so that's what I'm going to do today. With a bit of fantasy, I'll show how my natural-supernatural distinction can be used to tell the difference between a natural and a supernatural explanation (a metaphysical question), and how we can know when one or the other actually is true (an epistemological question). I take a look at supernatural beings, substances, powers, properties, and effects, and we'll get to see what natural explanations of similar observations would look like, and how they would be different.
Before we can get to that, we need to get past one other important distinction: the meaning of paranormal.
I don't know if there has been any consistency in common practice, but I have always maintained a distinction between the paranormal and the supernatural. In my parlance, a paranormal phenomenon or explanation can be either natural or supernatural. What makes something paranormal is the fact that it exists outside the domain of currently plausible science. As such, it could just be a natural phenomenon we don't yet understand or haven't yet seen. But it could also be something supernatural. Or an entirely bogus claim. We won't know until we have enough evidence to make a determination. But either way, the category of "paranormal" can be applied to phenomena (hence the mere claim that something happens or exists can be paranormal) as well as explanations of that phenomena, i.e. paranormal hypotheses.
Typical example: alien abductions. There is no scientific evidence this happens, nor any scientific evidence that it's even plausible to suppose it happens. There is even, now, scientific and historical evidence that the phenomena offered as evidence of alien abductions are actually nothing of the kind. Back in the middle ages it was faerie and demon abductions. The monsters abducting us curiously change appearance, equipment, and tactics with the times. But even if we didn't have evidence confirming, for example, hypnagogic and hypnopompic hallucination, the claim that aliens abduct people remains outside the realm of scientific plausibility.
That alone doesn't mean it's scientifically impossible or inexplicable or even false. It's just paranormal. If we gathered enough scientific evidence to confirm it was true that aliens really were snatching people, then it would cease to be paranormal. It would then enter the realm of normal scientific fact. Moreover, the fact that extraterrestrials were abducting people, using ordinary, though highly advanced technologies, would not be supernatural. It would be an entirely natural phenomenon, as natural as the CIA abducting people off the street and whisking them off in helicopters to secret medical labs in Detroit (ooooh, scary!).
On the other hand, some Christians have proposed that these abductions really do happen, but the abductors are not really aliens but demons from Hell flying magic Satanic saucers, working their evil mischief on earth by snagging and buggering the locals (see Close Encounters: A Better Explanation). This would be a supernatural explanation of the same phenomena. Thus, a paranormal explanation can amount to a natural or a supernatural claim, depending on what kind of metaphysical entities are evoked. That something is paranormal is a separate distinction from whether it is natural or supernatural.
Another example: David Hume listed "fire burning under water" among the things he regarded as impossible and therefore unbelievable, owing to vast human testimony to the contrary. If someone told Hume, "Hey, I saw some wizards in Spain carrying torches to light their way in underwater caverns!" Hume would say, "Poppycock!" For this would be, for him, a paranormal claim, beyond the bounds of what was then scientifically plausible.
But Hume wasn't entirely dogmatic about this. Hume himself used the example of water turning into a white powder when cold: someone from a region where temperatures were always high would rightly regard "snow" to be a paranormal phenomenon. Until, that is, they were presented with adequate evidence to warrant believing it really does happen: water really does turn to white powder when sufficiently cold (at least, if you whisk a lot of air into it as it freezes, otherwise it turns into a glassy rock, which would sound even weirder to someone who'd never seen this). Hence Hume granted that, with sufficient evidence, the once-paranormal can become a normal fact: a desert native can come to a reasonable belief in snow and ice.
The same would then follow for the Spanish wizards. It turns out fire does burn under water. You just need the right chemicals or equipment. Napalm burns under water because it chemically contains its own oxygen. Magnesium flares burn under water by actually breaking the molecular bonds of water and consuming the oxygen released. The Olympic Torch was carried under water by using a welding apparatus that supplied fuel and oxygen under high pressures. And, of course, there are always flashlights, arc welders, glowsticks, volcanic magmas, and so on.
Regardless of what Hume may have written, if Hume saw these wizards himself, or heard reports from several eye-witnesses whom he trusted, whose trustworthiness in every relevant respect was abundantly supported by evidence available to Hume, then the phenomenon of underwater fire would no longer be paranormal. But any proposed explanation would still be paranormal, if it wasn't based on plausible science.
"Some unknown chemical reaction is occurring" would not be a paranormal hypothesis, because even in Hume's day there was a good grounding in established science to make that kind of hypothesis plausible. But "the wizards impregnate the wood with the element of fire" would be a paranormal hypothesis even in Hume's day, because there is and was no properly scientific basis for such a claim. However, if it turned out to be true, and fire really was an irreducible element that could be absorbed into a stick, that would be a paranormal but still natural explanation, until scientifically proved, or grounded in supported science, the way "chemical reaction" explanations now are. Then even this bizarre claim would become natural and normal. On the other hand, "the wizards cast a spell on the sticks" would be a hypothesis both paranormal and supernatural, and if this theory were scientifically proved, though it would cease to be paranormal, it would remain supernatural.
The same thing could be said about ESP or crystal healing or Big Foot and so on. These are definitely paranormal claims, at least at present (there is no scientific reason to consider them plausible). But each could still be explained either naturally or supernaturally. For example, ESP could be a natural phenomenon of human brains producing and transceiving radio waves, or it could be a supernatural power that doesn't involve any such mechanism. Crystal healing could be the operation of unknown physics or chemistry, or it could be a supernatural power. Big Foot could just be a rare but perfectly natural species of hominid, or the supernatural victim of an evil sorcerer's spell. Confirming the existence of any of these phenomena would remove it from the category of the paranormal ("ESP exists," "crystal healing works," "there is a Big Foot"), but how one still chose to explain it would still be paranormal if you appealed to concepts that are currently groundless or scientifically implausible. But even a supernatural explanation would cease to be paranormal if it was scientifically confirmed.
So the question is: What really is the underlying difference between a natural and a supernatural explanation? What follows now presupposes all I've said above.
Let's start with supernatural beings. You know, like God. Or gods. Or demons, angels, faeries, or ghosts. Or invisible pink unicorns or flying spaghetti monsters. You get the picture. These are all supernatural if they have any mental property or power that is not reducible to a nonmental mechanism. If, however, all of their powers and properties can be reduced to nonmental mechanisms, then they are not supernatural beings after all, but natural ones.
In the most obvious case, the God of traditional theism is a pure mind, composed of nothing else but mental powers and concepts. That is indisputably supernatural. So is the ability to cause things to happen in the universe merely by willing them to happen, since that means there is no nonmental mechanism (like arms and nervous systems or graviton rays) mediating between the act of will and its realization. Such direct mental causation is certainly supernatural. And so on. Of course, just because you see God does not entail the God you are seeing is disembodied, or omniscient, or omnipresent, or omnipotent, or anything else supernatural. You would need additional evidence to confirm each of those attributes. Hence it's possible to find evidence that the God you just saw is not supernatural after all, but some sort of natural being.
How would a natural God be different from a supernatural God? Well, he would have a body of some kind, and all his thoughts would be the product of a machine of some sort, like a brain, and he would only be able to realize his will by initiating a chain of causes-and-effects that is entirely reducible to nonmental events. A hypothetical analogy would be the God proposed by various Stoic theologians of the Roman era. The Stoics were not always clear or in agreement on every detail, but I shall describe here the most naturalistic conception imaginable on Stoic principles.
For convenience I'll call this naturalistic Stoic God "Theostoa." Theostoa is composed of a superfine material called pneuma, which is indestructible, invisible, and indivisible but elastic, which permeates the entire universe, like gravity or dark matter. So this God is the same size as the universe and located in every part of it, and thus "naturally" omnipresent, and because of his material composition he is "naturally" invincible and immortal. His pneumatic body interacts physically with all other matter and space, like a gigantic machine, and thereby produces all physical laws and effects, and this conversely operates as God's sensory apparatus. Since he is in contact with every piece of the universe, he is "naturally" omniscient and "naturally" omnipotent (obviously both in a certain qualified sense). This pneuma also physically stores and generates the thoughts and memories and ideas of God, and thus serves as his brain.
If Theostoa's entire mind (every thought, every memory, etc.) is entirely reducible to a system of nonmental pneumatic particles interacting together, and Theostoa's ability to perceive and affect the universe is entirely reducible to a system of nonmental interactions between these pnuematic particles and everything else, then Theostoa is not a supernatural God. But if any part of Theostoa's mind or activity is irreducibly mental, then despite everything else, he is still supernatural. I would then call him Supertheostoa.
But though entirely natural, the existence of Theostoa would still not be compatible with naturalism unless Theostoa's origin was also completely reducible to natural causes. If Theostoa evolved through some nonmental cosmological process, entirely without intelligent design or any mental causation at all, or was intelligently engineered by entirely natural beings, then Theostoa would be compatible with naturalism. In fact, we can vaguely imagine the possibility of mankind technologically creating a deity somewhat like this at some point in our distant future. On the other hand, if Theostoa had no origin but existed eternally, fully-formed, the issue would no longer be his temporal origin, but his ontological foundation, i.e. why he exists. This could have a natural or a supernatural answer, depending on whether this foundation were fully explicable without appealing to anything irreducibly mental about the nature of existence.
Therefore, only an evolved or accidental or naturally inevitable Theostoa would be compatible with naturalism, and this is the only sense in which naturalism could ever include something near to a traditional God. Of course, no one on earth believes in a God like this, and for good reason: there is no evidence of it, and it's highly implausible. So we have no reason to believe it. But if he did exist, we could (in principle) demonstrate his existence scientifically in the same way we can demonstrate the existence of any other embodied person: we could develop instruments capable of detecting, documenting, and measuring the existence and properties of his pneuma, and then use these instruments to communicate with his mind, learning things about him in the exact same way we learn things about people, through sciences like psychology and biodynamics.
The rival philosophy of Epicureanism offers another example. In Epicurean theology, there were many gods, but all were naturally evolved aliens of naturally superior substance and abilities, who resided far away from earth without any concern for us. We only know they exist because very fine atoms coursing through the universe bounce off their bodies, fly through space in the same pattern that they struck, and collide with our brains, causing us to "see" them in our dreams and sometimes in waking visions. Like Theostoa, these gods have no supernatural cause, no supernatural powers, and no supernatural properties. Their origin is a series of unguided, unintelligent, mechanical collisions of atoms. Their composition is a mindless substance, just atoms in space. Even their ability to appear to us in dreams and visions is entirely explained by the causal interactions of a mindless mechanism, just atoms bouncing around.
Obviously, these gods are not supernatural. They are just very odd, very lucky extraterrestrials. But notice how they are very different from what most people mean by "gods," so much so that most people today would not even call them gods. Nor would any Christian acknowledge Theostoa as a proper God. Hence there is a clear difference here between a "natural" god and a properly supernatural god. That difference is meaningful, metaphysical, and substantial.
The same things could be said of demons and angels and faeries, for example. They could be just like Epicurean gods, maybe even living in alternate spatial dimensions and using natural physics to travel to and from (thus "Heaven," "Hell," and "Faerie" in naturalistic terms), in which case they would be entirely natural beings. Or they could have some irreducibly mental property or power (like the ability to transport from one dimension to another by a mere act of will), which would make them supernatural. And even if they were entirely natural, if they had a supernatural origin (e.g. "God willed them into existence" rather than "they evolved by mindless processes"), then naturalism would still be false.
Note again how this differs from the epistemological question. If you dink around with a freaky puzzle box and Pinhead steps out of your wall and you beat the shit out of him and haul ass out of there, you probably won't have any reason to doubt you just beat the shit out of a demon. The characters in Hellraiser had plenty of evidence they were involved with demons. But were these just twisted, interdimensional aliens, or real supernatural demons? That's another question altogether. But regardless of whether you can know the difference, there is still a difference.
Likewise, if ghosts exist, they could be explained supernaturally, or by some Epicureanesque physics. Since ghosts are usually regarded as human souls divested of their mortal bodies, if these ghosts did exist and were supernaturally created or composed, then this would mean even humans are supernatural beings. Our flesh-and-blood bodies would not be supernatural, but our souls would be. Which brings us to our next category...
A supernatural substance is any substance (or any comparably definable point or volume of space) imbued with mental properties or powers. For example, is our "mind" the product of a brain or a soul? If the mind is entirely caused by a mindless mechanism like the brain, which is just a system of mindless cells causally interacting with each other, then our mind is just a brain, which is a natural substance, since no part of it is irreducibly mental. It only produces mental properties as a causal consequence of a system of interacting nonmental parts. But if our mind could depart our brain, and survive and think without any material to sustain it, then just like a disembodied God, our mind would be supernatural, since it would then be irreducibly mental.
But even if our soul was a substance, it could still be a supernatural substance. Most Christians, Jews, and pagans in antiquity understood the human soul as a body composed of pneuma, an ultra-fine, indestructible substance, which inhabits our body of flesh until we die, and then leaves, and physically flies up to heaven, or descends into hell, or rests inside the corpse until the resurrection, or hovers around the graveyard, or whatever. In some accounts, this soul-body departs the corpse-body and takes on a shape more like a ball of light, though still bearing a vague stamp of a person's physical features, but all invisible to ordinary people. In our terms, we could say soul-bodies radiate and reflect light only in frequencies, or only of a sort, that normal human eyes can't detect.
Suppose this were true, and we found a way to detect these soul-bodies with instruments and track them as they left the corpse, even ascertaining their physical properties, like their mass and volume and elasticity and so on. If these soul-bodies retained mental function through some naturalistic mechanism, so that all mental powers and properties were still completely reducible to the mindless interaction of particles (like another brain made of soul-stuff, comprising, let's say, a system of mutually interacting particles of dark matter), then as strange as this soul-body would be, it would be a natural body. It might yet have a supernatural origin, but that's a separate question. The body itself, the substance, would not be supernatural.
However, if this soul-body turned out to have no relevant sub-structure, if in fact it simply carried a person's "mind" with all its functions and powers and properties, all as an irreducible "property" of that soul-body, and not as the product of any system of interacting parts within it, then this soul-body would be a supernatural substance. What distinguishes this supernatural soul-body from a natural soul-body is the same thing that distinguishes mind-brain physicalism from traditional notions of a soul: just as mind-brain physicalism entails that all mental powers and properties are fully caused by a functioning collection of neurons called a brain, so a natural soul-body entails that all mental powers and properties are fully caused by an analogously-organized soul-brain made of ethereal substances that can float free of the flesh-and-blood brain. But in a supernatural soul, there are no interacting parts that fully explain how the soul produces mental powers and properties. It simply possesses them, as innate properties of the substance. That makes it supernatural.
We can imagine other supernatural substances. A typical example would be a magic love potion. A drink that causes someone to fall in love could be a natural substance, if the potion contained chemicals that got into the blood, and from there into the brain, and were of just the right construction as to have all the right causal effects in all the right places there. In other words, it could, for example, be an incredibly advanced nanorobotic saline solution designed by clever futuristic brain scientists.
But if the love potion contained no such chemicals, but was simply imbued with the property of "causing love" and had this effect directly, by possessing no other structure or properties except that innate power, then the potion would be a supernatural substance. This is because the idea of love is a mental property, which in this case would not be reducible to any nonmental system. That a potion would just "know" it was in a human body and "know" where their brain was and "know" precisely how to affect and reorganize that brain so as to cause the person to fall in love (much less with a specific person), is all impossible without a causal mechanism. So if the causal mechanism in the potion consists solely of the mental property of just "knowing" all these things and then directly causing them on contact, with no underlying or intervening mechanism, we're talking about a supernatural potion.
Surely you can see by now that metaphysically there is a huge difference between a natural substance (whether a soul or a love potion) and a supernatural one. That difference derives from whether an irreducible mental property or power is possessed by that substance, or whether, instead, everything that substance does (mental or not) is entirely the product of nonmental mechanisms operating in a causal system. This still leaves open the epistemological question of how we could tell the difference between a natural soul and a supernatural one, or between a natural love potion and a supernatural one. But already you may be starting to see how that might be done.
Supernatural beings and substances are basically just beings and substances with supernatural powers or properties. However, we could make a further distinction between an ordinary substance that is imbued with a supernatural property, and a substance that always has a supernatural property by its very nature. The latter would be a proper case of a supernatural substance, while the former would be a substance that can have a supernatural property added to it and taken away. For example, temporarily imbuing someone with the supernatural power of flight or giving a broom the supernatural power to chase down Jehovah's Witnesses and thwack them on the head until sunset.
A popular example is the Ark of the Covenant. There is nothing inherently supernatural about its construction or composition. It's made of ordinary wood and gold, in an ordinary way. But it was then imbued by the will of God with supernatural powers: it inflicts boils and mice upon anyone who steals it, instantly kills anyone who touches it, dries up or burns away any obstacles to those who carry it, gives advice to those who consult it, and various other things, generally nasty.
For all these powers to be natural, they would have to be fully caused by some mechanism. Some machine, some interacting system of nonmental parts, would have to be able to detect and calculate when it's touching a person or facing an obstacle or in the hands of a thief or being asked a question, and then activate its powers appropriately. Then some other mechanism would have to be able to cause mice to reproduce or boils to appear on human skin or rivers to dry up or brambles to burn away or snakes to die, and so on. But no such machine would be needed if these powers were supernatural.
We can certainly imagine a super-advanced technology that could accomplish all this in a compact portable form that would look deceptively like an ordinary Ark, but it would still have all that internal structure (computers, sensory systems, particle emitters, etc.), which would in principle be detectable. Likewise if all these powers were effected from, say, a spaceship in orbit, and only made to appear as though they were coming from the Ark, even then, all the same technology would exist and could in principle be found, as happened, for instance, when the crew of Picard's Enterprise discovered how Ardra was pretending to be Satan with supernatural powers. If she needed no spaceship and thus no mechanism or technology to work her miracles, then her powers would have been supernatural. Thus Clarke's Third Law ("any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic") is only, at best, an epistemological principle, not a metaphysical one. Metaphysically, magic and technology are very definitely always distinguishable.
Thus if the Ark of the Covenant had no internal structure at all, just ordinary wood and gold arranged as the bible describes, yet could do all these things on its own, actually knowing when and how, then these would be supernatural powers. For then there would be something fundamentally and irreducibly mental about its ability to know when to perform certain miracles (like knowing when it was stolen and who the thieves were), and to know what miracles to perform, and where. So, too, for its ability to cause intelligent effects without any underlying mechanism. Like a love potion, for the Ark to "cause death" to anyone who touches it, the Ark would have to be imbued with the idea of death, and the idea of a person and of touching and of causing and so on. If these concepts are not realized by an underlying mechanism in which no single part knows anything about death or persons and so on, then these concepts can only be realized supernaturally. In other words, they would have to be irreducibly innate to the object.
Another way to convey this distinction is to contrast the underlying metaphysics implied in Forbidden Planet and Harry Potter. In Harry Potter's world, a wizard speaks a word and something happens. A single word causes a wand to generate light, another word causes objects to move wherever the wand points, and so on. Suppose this really happened. There is no doubt we could document the hell out of it scientifically and thus confirm beyond any reasonable doubt that the effect exists. That's why in Harry Potter's world entire agencies are vexed with the task of trying to prevent this evidence from getting to the public (like, say, photographs of flying cars over London). So we can scientifically test for its existence. But would the phenomenon be natural or supernatural? That depends on what really is happening.
In the film Forbidden Planet (and similarly in other books and movies since) whatever a man dreamed, happened. Of course, this meant his nightmares caused monsters to appear and ravage and kill. It was subsequently discovered that the entire planet had been hollowed out by an ultra-advanced alien civilization and filled with a gigantic machine that used futuristic technologies to scan his mind and then mechanically generate (with particle beams and so forth) what his mind was thinking. The effects were therefore entirely natural. But in the Harry Potter world, there is no gigantic machine inside the earth scanning the air for spoken words and sending out particle beams to construct what is requested. There is no comparable or analogous mechanism behind what happens at all. The universe itself simply responds to spoken words.
In a similar fashion, in the novel Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, the rocks and trees and winds respond to verbal commands, despite having no brains or ears or nervous systems, or anything structurally analogous to these. Therefore, magic in the Harry Potter and Jonathan Strange universes is genuinely supernatural. It relies on irreducibly mental powers and properties of the universe. Words directly cause what they request, without any mindless mechanism connecting the spoken word to the realized effect. Such a universe would have to be fundamentally supernatural, because it would be fundamentally mental to some extent.
Similarly, the Force in the Star Wars universe would be supernatural, unless it was entirely caused by nonmental mechanisms of some kind (whether natural or technological), which mediate between what one willed and its effect. Likewise, an innate force of love in the universe would be supernatural, if it actually had causal effects and was not solely the product of a nonmental mechanism like a brain. For example, if the mere act of loving someone directly healed their wounds or illnesses, or the amount of love in a community caused crops to grow, or the power of love in the cosmos caused cruel animals to go sterile and kind animals fertile, so evolution proceeded according to survival of the kindest instead of merely the strongest. And so on. You get the picture.
Last but not least are supernatural effects. Anything that is the effect of a supernatural cause is a supernatural effect, even if the effect itself is not supernatural. Thus, in the Belgariad when Garion created a new species of flower by simply willing it into existence, the flower itself was entirely natural, but its existence was a supernatural effect. Indeed, given everything Garion observed in the Belgariad saga, he would have no reasonable doubt that naturalism was false and that the universe contained supernatural powers. Even his wife Ce'Nedra could talk to trees and make them move. If these trees had no brains or muscles or nervous systems, or anything causally analogous, then trees in Garion's world must also have supernatural powers. So when these trees supernaturally bend their limbs, though a bent tree limb in and of itself is not supernatural, this particular bending would be a supernatural effect. The same distinction can be made between the effects of Harry Potter magic and the phenomena of the Forbidden Planet.
I shall end my examples with the mother of all purportedly supernatural effects: the claim that Jesus was raised from the dead. Contrary to what some have inferred, I have never said naturalism, if true, entails that Jesus did not rise from the dead. Aliens, for example, using advanced but perfectly natural technology could have done it, like Gort in The Day the Earth Stood Still. Heck, we could do it now, with a defib kit and modern drugs (and I've said this before: see The Event is Not Proportionate to the Theory, part of my old Secular Web article Why I Don't Buy the Resurrection Story).
If you accept the probable truth of naturalism, this only leads to ruling out supernatural causes of resurrections, not resurrections themselves. Hence in The Empty Tomb I argued that the inference to naturalism only supports arguments against a supernatural resurrection (p. 370, referenced on pp. 196-97, 364). Moreover, not only are natural resurrections possible (thus an inference to naturalism is not alone sufficient to warrant disbelieving in the resurrection of Jesus), it is also possible to have enough evidence of a supernatural resurrection to actually refute naturalism. I have never claimed otherwise.
So, applying to this all I've surveyed above, it follows that if "God" were actually an organism like Theostoa, entirely produced by the interaction of mindless building blocks much like we are, and if he needed chemicals or machines of any sort to raise Jesus from the dead, then he is not a god in any traditionally accepted sense, and certainly not any kind of supernatural being. Moreover, even if this being retained some supernatural properties (if he was a faerie, say, or a wizard), but still needed natural mechanisms to raise Jesus, then the resurrection would still not be supernatural even if it occurred. Therefore, when I say naturalism rules out supernatural explanations of what happened in Jerusalem two thousand years ago, I am obviously not including mechanical pseudo-gods. Such entities would fall closer to the "aliens did it" category of explanations, which naturalism does not address, nor does it need to. Good old fashioned inductive logic already does away with them.
Ultimately, since The Empty Tomb was not written to address such fringe hypotheses (after all, Christian apologists are not claiming aliens or a mechanical God raised Jesus), it would be rather silly to expect a chapter or even a paragraph in The Empty Tomb debunking such theories. This would be as silly, in fact, as devoting even so much as a sentence to debunking the theory that Simon Magus supernaturally raised Jesus by casting a spell. Obviously, when "resurrection" is the theory we are responding to, everyone knows we're not talking about aliens, mecha-gods, or spellcasting, but an immaterial God directly willing a man back to life. And that is most definitely a supernatural claim.
Clearly there is a metaphysical difference between the natural and the supernatural, and it tracks the reducibility of phenomena to the nonmental. This must not be mistaken as requiring any particular form of physicalism or reductionism. Naturalism does entail causal physicalism and reductionism, but only in the very broadest sense of these terms (see what I say about this in Sense and Goodness without God, pp. 130-34, with pp. 143-44 & 224-25). But whatever the essential metaphysics of naturalism and supernaturalism may be, the epistemological question remains: even supposing the supernatural is possible, as something metaphysically distinct from the natural, does this distinction entail that the supernatural is untestable and therefore unknowable?
I don't see how. There is nothing inherent in either my definition of the supernatural or in the definition of scientific method (see Sense and Goodness, pp. 214-26) that leads to any such entailment. And all of the examples I have given are clearly capable of scientific test and empirical demonstration. The claim that supernatural hypotheses can never be verified or falsified, are untestable, and therefore unknowable, is therefore not tenable. With sufficient evidence I am certain any reasonable scientist would be persuaded to believe any of the supernatural scenarios I have described above. In fact, with sufficient standards and documentation I am certain I could get them into any peer reviewed scientific journal.
Hence I reject radical methodological naturalism, which holds that science can only investigate natural phenomena. Nonsense. Science would have no special problem investigating the supernatural. If there were any. But I do embrace pragmatic methodological naturalism, which holds that supernatural phenomena have been shown to be so scarce (in fact, as far as we can tell, non-existent), and therefore so improbable, that it is a waste of time and money to investigate supernatural hypotheses, or any uncorroborated paranormal claims. Science should only investigate the paranormal when there is sufficient reason to believe there is really something that needs explaining, and even then should only bother testing natural explanations first. This is a pragmatic position, not an epistemological one. If someone wants to spend his own time and money testing supernatural hypotheses and claims, then all the power to him. If they exist, he should be able to find them, and confirm them scientifically. Good luck.
The objection I usually hear is that though science could prove, for example, the existence and efficacy of Harry Potter magic, and even analyze in scientific detail its properties and limitations, science can never really establish that there wasn't some natural explanation underlying it all. For instance, there could be a gigantic machine inside the earth making it all happen with particle beams, and we just haven't found it yet, nor detected any of its scanning or constructing beams or anything else. But I can say exactly the same in reverse: no matter how much evidence we get that aerodynamics causes airplanes to fly, there could still be supernatural sky faeries keeping planes in the air and we've just not detected this yet.
Hence this "could be" argument is an unreasonable demand that no scientist would accept in any other context. Obviously we can always not know something that would change our conclusions. Science actually embraces this fact, and gets past it, by concluding that we can arrive at confident conclusions anyway, so long as we remain open to new evidence that could prove us wrong. Scientists rightly accept that there comes a point when it is unreasonable to hold out for alternative hypotheses, until new evidence arrives.
In the case of Harry Potter's magic, for example, it would be absurdly unreasonable to claim there is an undiscovered machine behind it all. Yes, there could be. But we would have no reason to believe there was. When we've conducted a detailed investigation and all we have left that actually carries substantial predictive success is a supernatural hypothesis, then science has established the latter as well as it could any other theory. Science can therefore prove the supernatural. It just needs damned good evidence. And yet like all science, even this conclusion would be revisable, if we discovered new evidence of a natural cause after all. But it would be irrational to hold out for that evidence. This would be as irrational as holding out for evidence of sky faeries rather than accepting the conclusions of aerodynamics.
By analogy, it is always possible that there is a gigantic machine inside the earth that is changing the course of photons approaching the earth, fooling us into thinking the earth revolves around the sun. In this way the heliocentric theory could actually be false. But no scientist would claim we have not proven heliocentrism merely because of possibilities like this. Yet if a scientist will not tolerate such objections to heliocentrism, he cannot tolerate methodologically identical objections to any supernatural hypothesis that is as well established as heliocentrism. Therefore, this is not a valid objection to allowing supernatural hypotheses into science.
If the supernatural existed, we should be able to accumulate evidence in support of it just as we have accumulated evidence of heliocentrism. Indeed, if the universe were as blatantly and pervasively supernatural as we have found it, instead, to be natural, then naturalism would be as untenable as supernaturalism is now. Supernaturalism would then be the default worldview. But even if the evidence was not that overwhelming, just as for heliocentrism, at some point the evidence could accumulate so high that you will have to admit a supernatural explanation is the best explanation there is. In fact, eventually the evidence could stack so high you will concede it's the best explanation by far. It's not reasonable to say "possibly, therefore probably" something else is going on. This is as irrational for a creationist to maintain against evidence for evolution as for a naturalist to maintain against the same quality of evidence for supernatural creation. If there were such evidence. It just so happens there isn't. But no one should confuse an actual lack of evidence for the theoretical impossibility of having it.
Thus, for example, if Biblical Creationism were true, by now we should have accumulated tons of scientific evidence that the entire universe is less than six light days across and the earth is at the center of it, all fossils and rocks radiologically and stratigraphically date no older than six thousand years, the fossil and DNA records confirm that all species appeared simultaneously six thousand years ago and have not substantially changed since, and much more. For further examples of how the evidence should have turned out if creationism were true, see The Original Christian Cosmos, the last part of my Secular Web article Why I Am Not a Christian (2006). But alas, the data didn't come out that way. But if it had, supernaturalism would have been as scientifically established as naturalism is now.
Many naturalists have a poor conception of how to define naturalism or the supernatural. They might know it when they see it, but when they try to capture in words what exactly it is they are talking about, they often come up with a badly worded travesty. I've done what little I can to remedy this by developing and testing a precise definition of naturalism and the supernatural, providing a sensible and usable natural-supernatural distinction, which also happens to align adequately well with how people use these words in practice (as I believe our terminology ought to do as much as possible). And now I have amplified my past work on this by surveying numerous hypothetical examples of how my proposed distinctions can be applied.
In defining the words "natural" and "supernatural" as I do, I differ from the legal and science community, as exemplified most recently in the Kitzmiller v. Dover case. There, Judge Jones was bound by legal principles to follow case precedent and the professional standards of established industries. Following the 1982 McLean decision he found the courts had defined "supernatural intervention" as intervention that "cannot be explained by natural causes, or be proven through empirical investigation, and is therefore neither testable nor falsifiable." Jones further cited the official statement of the National Academy of Sciences, which declares "claims of supernatural intervention...are not science because they are not testable by the methods of science." Thus we see the same trend in both the legal and scientific communities, to veer away from metaphysical distinctions and in favor of purely epistemological ones, but as my articles, and now examples, have shown, this does not track the real-world use of the word at all, which can tend to no good.
I think the legal and scientific communities are on a bad track with this (hence the barely coherent discussion of the supernatural in Wikipedia), especially since the same point can be made without abusing the word "supernatural." It is enough to say, for example, that creationism isn't science, not because it is supernatural, but simply because it is untestable (assuming you can prove it is). There is no need to conflate the two.
Though I understand their reasons for wanting to keep metaphysics out of it (since both enterprises are more fundamentally epistemological), I disagree with their attempted solution of coopting and changing the meaning of a popular word. That's the wrong way to go about it. Hence I believe a paradigm shift is needed in those communities regarding how the word "supernatural" is defined and applied. Both law and science must get back in line with ordinary English and real-world language, ideas, and concerns.
My discussion of this issue has been continued on this blog and in print. See Defining Naturalism and Defining Naturalism II.


text:
What is Virtual Data Center?
Setup a high-performance cluster of servers whether it is Linux or Windows Machines within an hour. These reliable servers designed to help you grow and scale your business quickly and easily. With industry-leading SLAs and 24x7x365 Support, Cloud Infrastructure is a smart choice for your cloud computing needs.
Connect the servers and create a private network parameter then setup VPN for your users to securely access your critical business applications. When the business demand comes, no problem, pre-define auto-scaling of your CPU, RAM and disk resources so that no business transactions will ever be missed.
Use our Cloud API to automatically spin up resources making it hands-free and transparent to system administrators saving time and energy. It also gives your users an enhanced experience.
Prices Start from
- 2 vCPU Cores
- 60GB SSD HA Storage
- 3TB Traffic Transfer
- VLAN Tag
- RESTful APIs
Main Benefits
High Availability
No more hardware woes. Automated fault tolerant design specifically for critical applications.
Kernel Access
Get full control and customize server settings using your own kernel access.
Unified Security
Security connect using VPN from anywhere. Protect your data with enterprise grade virtual appliance.
As your servers are now virtual, it is simple and easy to set-up new ones as your business needs dictate.
Energy Savings
Running a datacenter eats up a lot of power, not least to keep everything running cool. You will be saving a great deal of money on your power bills.
Disaster Recovery
By storing data off-site, you are mitigating the risk of loss of data in the event of a critical incident affecting your business premises.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
MusicCast WXA-50
Simple and Flexible, for Ultimate Listening Freedom
Product Informatie
MusicCast WXA-50
The WXA-50 is a new-concept audio component that goes beyond conventional audio thinking. It let you access a wide variety of audio content such as music from streaming services or stored on a smartphone, and enjoy high quality sound and style thanks to the ability to network with Yamaha's exclusive MusicCast multi-room audio system. High functionality and performance bring you musical enjoyment just the way you want it.
- Simply by adding to your speaker system, enjoy streaming music or a full MusicCast (multi-room audio) system
- 2.1-Channel powerful sound
- --- 90 W per channel (6 ohms, 1 kHz, 0.9 % THD, 1-ch driven)
- --- 70 W per channel (6 ohms, 20 Hz-20 kHz, 0.06 % THD, 2-ch driven)
- Compatible with all types of music sources and services, such as streaming services
- MusicCast App for easy operation. The app lets you control other MusicCast-compatible components
- One push play — Pressing any button turns the unit on and initiates playback of the previously selected source
- Retro modern and superior quality
- 48-bit digital volume control is far greater than the input signal bit resolution, achieving high quality control
- Supports DSD 5.6 MHz and FLAC / WAV / AIFF 192 kHz / 24-bit for high resolution reproduction
- Compact body only 214 mm (8-3/8") wide fits in any convenient location, can be used horizontally or vertically.
- Easy installation - Suitable size for 1U rack with a width of 214 mm (8-3/8") and height of 42 mm (1-5/8") (without feet).
- Low standby power consumption: 1.8 W
The colors and finishes shown may vary from those on the actual products.


text:
Herbolax is recommended for chronic and acute constipation and it can be used as part of an effective detoxification program. |
Common Use
Herbolax is recommended for chronic and acute constipation, food allergies, gallstones, chronic headaches and ineffective bowel movements, and it can be used as part of an effective detoxification program.
Herbolax provides a non-addictive, non-irritating combination of synergistic herbs known for their ability to stimulate normal bowel function through their action on the liver, gall bladder and intestines.
The product is not for use by pregnant or nursing women or by children. If you are taking any herbal supplement consult your physician before use. Discontinue use and consult your physician if any untoward reactions occur. Do not use if seal is broken. Diabetics, hypoglycemic and people with known health conditions and/or taking supplements should consult with a licensed physician and/or practitioner prior to taking herbal supplements.
No absolute contraindications.
Possible side effects
Herbolax is not known to have any side effects if taken as per the recommended dosage.
Missed dose
If you miss a dose of this herbal supplement and you are using it regularly, take it as soon as possible. Do not take 2 doses at once.
If you suspect that you overdosed the herbal supplement, look for the urgent health care help.
Store at the room temperature away from moisture and sunlight. Keep out of the reach of children.
All products presented at this site are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Don't hesitate to consult your health care practitioner before taking any dietary supplement.


text:
Kunoichi s a modern term for a female ninja or practitioner of ninjutsu (ninpo).
The term is thought to derive from the names of characters that resemble the three strokes in the kanji character for woman (女 onna); said in the order they are written: ku (く) – no (ノ) – ichi (一). Early literary quotes include Enshū Senkuzuke Narabini Hyakuin (遠舟千句附并百韵?) (1680) as well as Maekuzukeshū (前句付集?) (1716), which specifically associates the word with the kanji 女 supporting the etymology. The "くノ一" writing requires the use of one character from each Japanese character set – first hiragana, then katakana, then kanji. While hiragana and kanji can exist in the same word, katakana generally cannot appear in conjunction with the others. There are exceptions to this, for example in "ゴミ箱" and "消しゴム".
Female ninja are mentioned in Bansenshukai, a 17th-century Japanese book compiling the knowledge of the clans in the Iga and Kōga regions devoted to the training of ninja. According to this document, the primary function of female ninja was espionage, finding legitimate service positions in the households of enemies, to accumulate knowledge by gaining trust or overhearing conversations. One historically accepted example of this is Mochizuki Chiyome, the 16th century noblewoman with ninja roots who was tasked by the warlord Takeda Shingen with recruiting women to create a secret network of a few hundred female spies.
Sometimes if you just put on one item, you immediately get an idea what you want to do with it… I am sure all of you had that happen at least once. Something like this happened to me when I put on the "Isis" collar and skirt from [sys].
When I put it on, I immediately had the vision of a ninja/asian inspired look. I remembered the awesome "Mei" hair from EMO-tions – that was sold on the south-asia inspired round of On9 – which I decorated with the cool "Albedo Horns" from Ayashi.
To cover my chest, since the feathers of "Isis" collar did not reach down far enough, I used the "Tigress Top" from Apple May Design. As it is a mesh body applier it fit perfectly under the feathers. Certainly a tattoo cannot miss when I style something like this :p This time I wanted something special and so the silver "Genius" tattoo from White Widow was the perfect match. I never made a secret out of it, that White Widow is my favourite tattoo brand… did I? *grins*
I thought a little bit until I got the idea… but certainly a warrior needs some armor 😉 At least some that looks great for the pictures*giggles*
[LAB737] makes the most amazing armor parts I ever saw. So detailed and as well used looking makes them very realistic and I could not resist to add parts of the "Dragoon" armor to my left arm.
Now the most complicated to get good pictures – I needed a good Katana and as well cool poses which did not just look like fighting. Certainly I could have sat hours and hours and make me some but then… still the good Katana would be missing since I just had som super old prim ones who kinda looked disgusting for nowadays standard. So I did what I usually do when I am looking for something special… I went to SL Marketplace 🙂
I found a very little store, with just a few items for sale on MP and instantly fell in love with the "Katana Pose Collection". A whole set with many variations of 10 different poses and 2 amazing handcrafted Katanas. Even more I was surprised that they were made for a female warrior, so exactly what I wanted. The poses do look more show or performance like than, fighting itself and so they were the perfect animations for the pictures.
First I tried to build me a photo set, but soon I realized – I do not have the right items nor the knowledge of buildings and sceneries, that would suit the ideas and satisfy the styling. I jumped into the SL search and looked for places with key words like: japanese, warrior, ninja, katana and many more until I found "Kowloon", a little island, which was empty when I arrived but the buildings and the garden was incredible beautiful. While I was shooting, the sim filled up more and more, but I did not see anyone around me and I became curious. I started to cam around, to spy silently, when I found an arena with a hell of a lot people who had begun a fight. I was so excited to see that, to see them fighting with Katanas and all kind of asian weapons, that I stopped shooting for a bit and just watched without disturbing them. I had so much fun watching them, that I nearly forgot to finish my shooting. It was an amazing afternoon and as well a lot of fun and I enjoyed the trip to a past time, that is totally new to me.
Outfit: [sys] – "Isis"
Top: Apple May – "Tigress Top" (mesh body applier)
Hair: EMO-tions – "Mei"
Horns: Ayashi – "Albedo Horns"
Armor: [LAB737] – "Dragoon"
Shoes: [MODA] – "Erica"
Tattoo: White~Widow – "Genius"
Makeup: Madrid Solo – "Raven's Fight"
Lipstick: blackliquid – "Lip Line"
Poses & Katana: [Quixotica] – "Katana Pose Collection"
Location: Kowloon
Model & Photographer: Wicca Merlin


text:
Table of Contents
There are many configuration parameters that affect the behavior of the database system. In the first section of this chapter we describe how to interact with configuration parameters. The subsequent sections discuss each parameter in detail.
If you see anything in the documentation that is not correct, does not match your experience with the particular feature or requires further clarification, please use this form to report a documentation issue.


text:
Skip to Main Content
Skip to Navigation
Your Account
Pedagogy in Action
Domains of Learning
Domains of Learning
Initial Publication Date: October 4, 2005
How We Learn
Humans are lifelong learners. From birth onward we learn and assimilate what we have just learned into what we already know. Learning in the Geosciences, like all learning, can be catagorized into the domains of concept knowledge, how we view ourselves as learners and the skills we need to engage in the activities of geoscientists. As early as 1956 Educational Psychologist Benjamin Bloom divided what and how we learn into three seperate domains of learning.
Cognitive Domain
Cognitive Domain - This domain includes content knowledge and the development of intellectual skills. This includes the recall or recognition of specific facts and concepts that serve developing intellectual abilities and skills. There are six major categories, starting from the simplest behavior (recalling facts) to the most complex (Evaluation). The University of Washington's Geography Department website Major Categories in the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives has a detailed explanation of Bloom's
Six Levels of Cognitive Development
This site may be offline.
Affective Domain
Affective Domain- How does one approach learning? With confidence, a can do attitude. The Affective domain includes feelings, values, appreciation, enthusiasms, motivations, and attitudes. The University of Dayton, School of Law
Affective Domain
website describes each catagory in the domain and provides illustrative examples and keywords for the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains.
Psychomotor Domain
Psychomotor Domain- The psychomotor domain includes physical movement, coordination, and use of the motor-skill areas. Development of these skills requires practice and is measured in terms of speed, precision, distance, procedures, or techniques in execution. For a more detailed treatment of this domain see the Penn State Teaching and Learning with Technology website
Psychomotor Domain Taxonomy
Connecting Learning and Assessment
To see how assessments are built from these domains of learning and to learn how to build effective assessments go to the
Hallmarks of Effective Assessment
Bloom Benjamin S. and David R. Krathwohl. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York, Longmans, Green, 1956.
« Previous Page
Next Page »
Pedagogy in Action
Domains of Learning
Hallmarks of Effective Assesment
How Learning and Assessment are Linked
A Short Glossary of Assessment Terms
The Functions of Assessment
How to Use Assessment Strategies
Assessment in Various Learning Settings
Calibrated Peer Review
Campus Living Laboratory
Classroom Experiments
Classroom Response Systems
Coached Problem Solving
Conceptual Models
Context-Rich Problems
Cooperative Learning
Developing Quantitative Reasoning
Developing Strong Writing Assignments
Documented Problem Solving
Earth History Approach
Experience-Based Environmental Projects
Field Labs
First Day of Class
Gallery Walks
Guided Discovery Problems
Indoor Labs
Interactive Lecture Demonstrations
Interactive Lectures
Interdisciplinary Approaches to Teaching
Inventing and Testing Models
Investigative Case Based Learning
Just in Time Teaching
Lecture Tutorials
Mathematical and Statistical Models
Measurement and Uncertainty
Peer Review
Peer-Led Team Learning
PhET Interactive Science Simulations
Process of Science
Process-Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning
Professional Communications Projects
Quantitative Writing
Role Playing
Socratic Questioning
Structured Academic Controversy
Studio Teaching in the Geosciences
Teaching Quantitative Reasoning with the News
Teaching Urban Students
Teaching with Data
Teaching with Data Simulations
Teaching with GIS
Teaching with Google Earth
Teaching with Learning Assistants
Teaching with Simulations
Teaching with Spreadsheets
Teaching with SSAC
Teaching with the Case Method
Teaching with Visualizations
Testing Conjectures
Undergraduate Research
Using an Earth System Approach
Using Issues to Teach Science
Using Media to Enhance Teaching and Learning
Engaged Pedagogies
Spatial Reasoning with GeoClick Questions
Teaching with Data (TWD)
Pedagogic Service
Search the Site


text:
Another spectacular wedding from 2015! Tantawan Bloom brought it again, this time to Cipriani 42nd Street. Alison and Milosz magical kingdom vision came to life with stunning cherry blossom branches throughout the ceremony and reception. A classic palette of white enhanced with plenty of candlelight made it an enchanted elegant night to remember.
Special Thanks to:
Photography: Fred Marcus Studio
Venue: Cipriani 42nd Street
Wedding Planner: Ellen Sidekick Events
Stationary: Judy Chamlin


text:
Washington State places restrictions on teenage drivers that many parents and young drivers with intermediate licenses are not aware of before it is too late. Intermediate drivers are more often aware of some of these restrictions (nighttime driving, driving with passengers, and use of cell phones), but not others. The others that I am referring to involve serious consequences … [Read more...] about Restrictions for Teenage Drivers
The Law Offices of Dan Samas
Washington Traffic Ticket Defenses You Probably Shouldn't Use
As a metro Seattle Traffic Ticket Lawyer, I have seen many motorists represent themselves. While some are successful, this is often despite of what they say before a judge. Sadly, I often see motorists incriminate themselves. With this in mind, I thought it would be helpful to list some traffic defenses that generally do not work and may even end up hurting your case. The … [Read more...] about Washington Traffic Ticket Defenses You Probably Shouldn't Use
Check Your WA Department of Licensing Record Periodically
The premise of this article is simple- I recommend that WA state drivers check their Department of Licensing (DOL) records periodically. There are all sorts of advertisements urging individuals to check their credit scores, however most people do not take the time to check their WA DOL records. Why should you check your driving DOL record? From my experience, the records are … [Read more...] about Check Your WA Department of Licensing Record Periodically
Why it makes economic sense to hire the Law Offices of Dan Samas
I have been asked a number of time by prospective clients why should I hire the Law Offices of Dan Samas to fight my ticket in a situation where the ticket amount is less than the cost of attorney representation. Here are the facts based in a study published in 2020 by Forbes Forbes Article How Much Will My Insurance Go Up. The list shows 20 violations that will increase … [Read more...] about Why it makes economic sense to hire the Law Offices of Dan Samas


text:
Welcome to the forum. :-)
I will try to answer you question.
I think LSF is LFS ie local fish store.
1.Where all my shrimp? (is anything okey?)
Possible all gone(dead/food for fish) or hiding in the plants.
2.I bought a turbo snail.and they always dead in my tanks ,hiks Why
Water condition could be very bad.
3.I cut all my big leaf of a.crispus because they all eaten by snail,but why the big leaf never grow again(seems it becomes dwarf or whatever)
Likely your plant go into a state of stunk.
4.The gravel looks so dirty!how to clean it?(with fish?)
Any picture to show?
5.my moss turn brown!why?
Fish load is too high. :-(
6.My Big SpatterDog suddenly dead n only the small leaf are comes?why?
Not too sure about this question.
7.is anything wrong with my tank?i haven't check my Ph n Kh n i dont use any CO2 indicator
I don't check my CO2/PH/KH/GH/NO3/NO4/NH4 at all.
Cause can't find a good one to get good reading.
8.oh yah!my tank is smell so fishy(likes the skin of fish)i don't know that word in english,hehe....whats the problem....
Could be cause by fish waste.
How long you have the setup?
Was tank cycled?
9.what about LSF in spore?are there good n professional?
Yes there are.
how many LSF specialiting in aquascape are there in spore?
(in my city,Bandung..theres only 5 LSF that sell aquascaping tools n plants
Not too sure how many.
Hope it help you.


text:
1. Introduction
Our website (hereinafter: "the website") uses cookies and other related technologies (for convenience all technologies are referred to as "cookies"). Cookies are also placed by third parties we have engaged. In the document below we inform you about the use of cookies on our website.
2. What are cookies?
A cookie is a small simple file that is sent along with pages of this website and stored by your browser on the hard drive of your computer or another device. The information stored therein may be returned to our servers or to the servers of the relevant third parties during a subsequent visit.
3. What are scripts?
A script is a piece of program code that is used to make our website function properly and interactively. This code is executed on our server or on your device.
4. What is a web beacon?
A web beacon (or a pixel tag) is a small, invisible piece of text or image on a website that is used to monitor traffic on a website. In order to do this, various data about you is stored using web beacons.
5. Cookies
5.1 Technical or functional cookies
Some cookies ensure that certain parts of the website work properly and that your user preferences remain known. By placing functional cookies, we make it easier for you to visit our website. This way, you do not need to repeatedly enter the same information when visiting our website and, for example, the items remain in your shopping cart until you have paid. We may place these cookies without your consent.
5.2 Tracking cookies
We use tracking cookies to optimize the website experience for our users. With these tracking cookies we get insights in the usage of our website or across several websites. We ask your permission to place tracking cookies.
5.3 Marketing/Tracking cookies
Marketing/Tracking cookies are cookies or any other form of local storage, used to create user profiles to display advertising or to track the user on this website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes like remarketing.
5.4 Social media/Tracking cookies
On our website, we have included content from Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn to promote web pages (e.g. "like", "pin") or share (e.g. "tweet") on social networks like Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. This content is embedded with code derived from Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn and places cookies. This content might store and process certain information for personalized advertising.
Please read the privacy statement of these social networks (which can change regularly) to read what they do with your (personal) data which they process using these cookies. The data that is retrieved is anonymized as much as possible. Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn are located in the United States.


text:
Cleft Lip and Cleft Palate
Cleft lip and cleft palate are two common but markedly different birth defects that affect about one in every 700 newborns. These developmental deformities occur in the first trimester of a woman's pregnancy; cleft lip in week seven, and cleft palate in week nine. Cleft lip and cleft palate occur simultaneously in about half of all cases, and separately in approximately a quarter of all cases.
A cleft lip is essentially a separation of the two sides of the lip. In many cases, this separation will include the bone and gum of the upper jaw. A cleft palate occurs when the sides of the palate fail to "fuse" as the fetus is developing, which results in an opening in the roof of the mouth.
The cleft deformities are categorized according to their location in the mouth and the size of the defect.
Unilateral Incomplete: A cleft on only one side of the mouth that does not extend as far as the nostril.
Unilateral Complete: A cleft on only one side of the mouth that extends into the corresponding nostril.
Bilateral Complete: Larger clefts affecting both sides of the mouth which each extend as far as the nostril.
Microform Cleft: A mild case of cleft lip which may simply form a bump on the lip, or a small scar line extending toward the nostril.
Reasons for cleft lip and cleft palate correction
Cleft lip and cleft palate are highly treatable deformities, though it may take a whole team of different specialists to fully treat the condition. The prognosis for sufferers who receive corrective treatment is excellent; medically, physically, dentally, and emotionally. There are however, a series of risks for those who do not receive corrective treatment:
What does cleft lip and cleft palate treatment involve?
Initially, surgeons will work to close the cleft openings in the first six months of the child's life. Unfortunately, this does not cure the dental problems that occur as a result of cleft lip and cleft palate defects. The dentist will perform a thorough examination of the teeth surrounding the deformity. Panoramic x-rays will generally be taken to allow the dentist to determine the best course of treatment.
The dentist may implant teeth to fill resulting gaps, and/or place braces on the teeth in order to correctly align the upper arch. These treatments will restore functionality to the jaw and improve the aesthetic appearance of the smile. Dental restoration work can generally be performed under local anesthetic and will not require an overnight stay.
If your child was born with any cleft deformity, we strongly encourage you to contact our office to schedule a consultation.
Healthy Smiles
What does your smile say about you? Let us help you radiate confidence with a healthy smile.


text:
Can't unveil the Hotline's postseason projections without a quick refresher on the new postseason structure.
The top four teams in the nation, as determined by the 13-member selection committee, will participate in the College Football Playoff. This season, the Rose and Sugar bowls will host the semifinals on Jan. 1, with the title game at Cowboys Stadium.
If the Pac-12 champion doesn't qualify for a berth in the playoff: It will be placed (by the committee) in one of the three non-contract bowls — the Fiesta, Cotton or Peach — with preference given to geography and matchup.
It's also possible that a second team from the conference will be deemed worthy of playing in the Dec. 31/Jan. 1 triple-headers. Heck, the league could send three to the festivities. (Unlike the BCS, there's no cap on the number of participants from a single conference.)
The bowl-eligible teams that aren't involved in the Big Six bowls will be available, as usual, for the Pac-12's contracted games.


text:
by T. S. Eliot
Mungojerrie and Rumpelteazer were a very notorious couple
of cats.
As knockabout clown, quick-change comedians, tight-rope
walkers and acrobats
They had extensive reputation. They made their home in
Victoria Grove--
That was merely their centre of operation, for they were
incurably given to rove.
They were very well know in Cornwall Gardens, in Launceston
Place and in Kensington Square--
They had really a little more reputation than a couple of
cats can very well bear.
If the area window was found ajar
And the basement looked like a field of war,
If a tile or two came loose on the roof,
Which presently ceased to be waterproof,
If the drawers were pulled out from the bedroom chests,
And you couldn't find one of your winter vests,
Or after supper one of the girls
Suddenly missed her Woolworth pearls:
Then the family would say: "It's that horrible cat!
It was Mungojerrie--or Rumpelteazer!"-- And most of the time
they left it at that.
Mungojerrie and Rumpelteazer had a very unusual gift of the
They were highly efficient cat-burglars as well, and
remarkably smart at smash-and-grab.
They made their home in Victoria Grove. They had no regular
They were plausible fellows, and liked to engage a friendly
policeman in conversation.
When the family assembled for Sunday dinner,
With their minds made up that they wouldn't get thinner
On Argentine joint, potatoes and greens,
And the cook would appear from behind the scenes
And say in a voice that was broken with sorrow:
"I'm afraid you must wait and have dinner tomorrow!
For the joint has gone from the oven-like that!"
Then the family would say: "It's that horrible cat!
It was Mungojerrie--or Rumpelteazer!"-- And most of the time
they left it at that.
Mungojerrie and Rumpelteazer had a wonderful way of working
And some of the time you would say it was luck, and some of
the time you would say it was weather.
They would go through the house like a hurricane, and no sober
person could take his oath
Was it Mungojerrie--or Rumpelteazer? or could you have sworn
that it mightn't be both?
And when you heard a dining-room smash
Or up from the pantry there came a loud crash
Or down from the library came a loud ping
From a vase which was commonly said to be Ming--
Then the family would say: "Now which was which cat?
It was Mungojerrie! AND Rumpelteazer!"-- And there's nothing
at all to be done about that!
Last updated May 02, 2015


text:
It is now official get out of your RSS reader day. Take a few minutes to check out the new photomatt.net and browse around a bit. This is, I believe, the fifth major iteration of the design here but it's the first one since 2003. When I last freshened the paint around here it got a link from Zeldman saying "lucky in redesign" and I figured I would never be able to top that, so I left the design the same for years. The only major change was the introduction of Asides in 2004.
Well I couldn't top the last design, but Nicolò Volpato had no trouble creating something beautiful I started coding up earlier this weekend. Nicolò is still working on mocking up a few of the pages, and in the meantime I've been working on a little additional functionality around the site, particularly with photos.
Here are a few things you might notice so far: related posts on entry pages, recent entries shown in the sidebar on entries older than 2 weeks, when a blog is from the same day as a photo album random photos from that day are shown at the bottom, and likewise a photo will show when there's a post that day.
The main goals of the photo integration were to enable a little more serendipity. There are a lot of other little Easter eggs, but those will remain an exercise for the reader.


text:
Now showing items 1-1 of 1
GPR Investigation of the Great Dune Ridge, Naglių Nature Reserve, Lithuania : A Historic Landscape Threatened by Natural and Anthropogenic Causes
Since the beginning of the 19th century, aeolian sand dunes, which are piles of loose sediment, have dominated the Curonian Spit. The sediment in aeolian dunes has been eroded and transported by wind. The World Heritage ...


text:
Telematics continues to evolve in insurance
Telematics technology has proven benefits when it comes to encouraging more responsible driving, with research indicating better driver behaviour is one of the main advantages in using this innovation.
Black box or telematics technology is a way for businesses to collect data on how their employees are using company vehicles. Using telematics, businesses can collect information such as whether drivers are speeding or driving dangerously, as well as how long they spend on the road. This is important, as research indicates driver fatigue is one of the main causes of road accidents.
According to the most recent Telematics Benchmark report, improved driver behaviour, peace of mind and regulatory benefits are some of main pluses to using telematics. The research found when drivers use telematics devices, businesses achieve peace of mind knowing where their vehicles are on the road and can also plot more efficient routes, leading to reduced costs such as lower fuel bills.
Importantly, data shows businesses that use telematics can improve the safe driving record of their vehicles. Mercurien Insurance specialises in providing insurance to businesses that use tools such as telematics to manage their fleet of vehicles. One of its clients, a not-for-profit organisation with a vehicle fleet, saw speeding events per kilometre drop from 0.14 to 0.07 across two-and-a-half years. Additionally, at fault claims fell from just over 60 to just over 20 a year thanks to telematics.
As this shows, businesses that use telematics may experience a commensurate improvement in driver safety. As a result, some insurers look favourably on businesses that employ telematics in their vehicles.
Businesses collect the data and may provide it to some insurers, who then use it to make decisions on the policy and its conditions. Insurers may approve more favourable policies, including more cost-effective premiums, based on data showing better driver safety.
Turning to the public sector, the National Transport Commission is reviewing how telematics is used across the transport industry, especially among vehicles that are required to comply with the Heavy Vehicle National Law, as well as vehicles that are required by law to use telematics, such as taxis and buses.
Michael White, Steadfast's Broker Technical Manager, explains telematics may be used by businesses to better manage how their fleets are operated and to also provide this information to their insurer.
"In the case of heavy motor vehicles, telematics can provide information on how the vehicle is being driven, speeds, how brakes are used and whether drivers comply with road rules," he says.
Zurich Motor Fleet Underwriting and Risk Engineering is one insurer that has a telematics-based insurance policy. Zurich Fleet Intelligence (ZFI) uses telematics data gathered from its policyholders vehicles through black box technology. Subsequently, Zurich uses this information when assessing insurance policy applications and claims.
Often, Zurich's clients already have devices in place in vehicles so they can monitor vehicles for logistics purposes. ZFI can draw on this data to assess how individual drivers behave when they are on the road. The technology also provides information to drivers about their driving performance, online and in real time.
However, another insurer, QBE, has exited the market, closing its Insurance Box product it launched in 2014. This technology provided people with a Drive Score and helped them become better drivers, by providing feedback on driving habits and tips on how to improve driving performance. It was the first product of its kind in Australia but will no longer be offered as a standalone product.
Despite QBE streamlining its telematics offering, this technology is likely to become more popular with insurers, businesses and regulators as it becomes more sophisticated over time.
Important note – This article is provided by Steadfast.
The information provided here is general advice only and has been prepared without taking in account your objectives, financial situation or needs. Steadfast Group Ltd (ABN 98 073 659 677, AFSL 254928)


text:
Continuing from
In Tolkien's very earliest stories dating from 1917, now published as The Book of Lost Tales volumes one and two, framing device was a mariner called Eriol who found his way to Elfland, and heard the stories sung and recited in The Room of the Log Fire, in The Cottage of Lost Play.
This Eriol was therefore the link between the ancient legendary or mythic world - and the modern world; and over the next decades Eriol became variously re-named and transmuted through AElfwine in the early versions of The Silmarillion in the 1920s and 30s, through the Lost Road fragment of 1936 and the Arundel 'Arry' Lowtham character of the Notion Club Papers of 1945-6 - all of whom were mariners who reached Elfland (Tol Erresea) and brought the ancient legends back to Middle Earth (i.e. the British Isles).
But in the end, it was Bilbo Baggins who did this job - as described in the Prologue: concerning Hobbit to the The Lord of the Rings ^
So Eriol = Aelfwine = Arundel = Bilbo.
Cottage of Lost Play = Elrond's House in Rivendell
Room with the Log Fire = Hall of Fire
^By the end
of the first century of the Fourth Age there were already to be found in the
Shire several libraries that contained many historical books and records.
The largest of these collections were probably at Undertowers, at Great Smials,
and at Brandy Hall. This account of the end of the Third Age is drawn
mainly from the Red Book of Westmarch. That most important source for the
history of the War of the Ring was so called because it was long preserved at
Undertowers, the home of the Fairbairns, Wardens of the Westmarch.
was in origin Bilbo's private diary, which he took with him to Rivendell.
Frodo brought it back to the Shire, together with many loose leaves of notes,
and during S.R. 1420-1 he nearly filled its pages with his account of the
War. But annexed to it and preserved with it, probably in a single red
case, were the three large volumes, bound in red leather, that Bilbo gave to
him as a parting gift. To these four volumes there was added in Westmarch
a fifth containing commentaries, genealogies, and various other matter
concerning the hobbit members of the Fellowship.
The original Red Book has not been preserved, but many copies were made,
especially of the first volume, for the use of the descendants of the children
of Master Samwise. The most important copy, however, has a different
history. It was kept at Great Smials, but it was written in Gondor,
probably at the request of the great-grandson of Peregrin, and completed in
S.R. 1592 (F.A. 172). Its southern scribe appended this note:
Findegil, King's Writer, finished this work in IV 172. It is an exact
copy in all details of the Thain's Book in Minas Tirith. That book was a
copy, made at the request of King Elessar, of the Red Book of the Periannath, and
was brought to him by the Thain Peregrin when he retired to Gondor in IV 64.


text:
Sod Installation Service in Melbourne
If you're looking for new sodding for your lawn, look no further than Prolawn Turf & Landscape Management, Inc.. We are Melbourne's top choice for sod installation services. We offer fast installations, quality sod, and quality customer service—all at a fair price too. Friendly, professional, and dependable, we are your best bet for local sodding services.
To schedule a consultation, give us a call at (321) 863-5296 today.
Get A QuoteMelbourne's Local Sodding Experts
We're proud to be a local sodding company committed to benefitting the local community. We give it a hundred percent to please our customers, always going out of our way to lend a helping hand.
With our sodding services, you can always expect:
- Speedy service
- Qualified crew members
- A range of sodding options
- Transparent quotes
- Extended warranties
- Customer satisfaction, guaranteed
When you choose us, you get a team that gives it their all and always uses the very best tools and equipment to install lawn sod. You get a team that always shows up on time, and doesn't quit until you are completely satisfied with our work. We clean up after ourselves and double-check with you to make certain you're happy with what we've done. We do it all to give you the quality work you deserve.
Assessing Your Lawn Sod Needs
At Prolawn Turf & Landscape Management, Inc., we strive to build your trust by proving our worth and value.
That's why we're offering you a no-obligation consultation. You can learn about us, our options for sod, and experience the value of our services for yourself. The best way to get exactly what you want is with one of our handy consultation sessions.
Contact us, and we'll be happy to set up a no-commitment-necessary appointment with one of our expert lawn sod professionals. They'll fully inspect your property and give you a fair assessment of the services you need. We won't try to sell you on unnecessary services or stack on unneeded work—we just give you fair and honest opinions and work with you to find a lawn sod plan that fits your budget.
The Benefits of Our Sod Installation Services
Our lawn sod installation service is the fast and easiest way to get the lawn you've always wanted. It's natural, safe, and effective. But that's only the beginning of the many great benefits you get from choosing our services. In addition, you can also expect:
- Instant results
- Superior lawn health
- Greener, better-looking lawn
- Less upkeep
- Quick turnaround times
There are so many great reasons to choose our services. Don't delay—get started today.
For Local Sodding Services, Choose Prolawn Turf & Landscape Management, Inc.
We're confident we're the top team for local sodding. Our services are affordable, our staff professional, and our work second to none. Clients near and far have come to benefit from our services. They've all appreciated our commitment to quality, and we know you will too.
Why wait? We're ready to amaze you with a new lush lawn you're sure to love. All it takes is for you to get in touch with us.
Contact us to schedule a consultation.


text:
Vivienda 4 Luxury Development, Madrid by A-cero Architects
The Vivienda 4 development was completed by the Madrid based studio A-cero. This modern complex consists of 30 luxurious homes, located in Pozuelo de Alarcón, a suburb near Madrid, Spain.
Vivienda 4 Developement by A-cero Architects:
"The initial idea of this project is to integrate the house in the natural environment of the residential area in which it is. In that way, the house looks to the fantastic views of lakes and green extensions that spread over the common areas of the estate.
The structure's house is based on game of two rectangular volumes. They are solving with clean finishes, good materials and exclusive qualities. The verandas and the pergolas, elements as volumetric as the housing, give personality to the facade.
The covering as such disappears turning into a flat roof as expression of the evolution of the creative process. The forms purity moves to the constructive scheme, to the materials and to the environment impelling the union between the building and the context where it is located. The housing, of 800m2 of surface, develops in a height. The principal access adapts itself to an area of average slope. Inside the following stays are located: foyer, room of kitchen is, dining room, office, larder, a cleaning of courteousness, seven bedrooms (with his respective baths, two dressing-rooms and a patio.
In the later part, across big large windows, there is lounge that is opened for the garden, the swimming pool and for the natural scenery that offers the urban development. It surrounds itself with a landscaping realized with attractive interventions composed by lakes, birds and a big arboreal extension. In the exterior the pedestrian ways and the central landscaped area incorporate a vegetation of indigenous character, resistant to the climate of the area. The stockades of every plot and the trees and shrubs planted along the same ones, they delimit perfectly the transit between the private ownership and the community one."