secrets of ancient alchemy revealed!

[kudakitsune23]

Anyone have any idea about the powdered white gold that was mined in ancient egypt? apparently it is basically gold except instead of melting when heated, it becomes a white powdery substance. This powder was baked into breads in the past and used in alchemy. Recent studies have found that it may actually have properties that could lead to longer lifespans, and maybe even possibly cure cancer! I'll look for the links I have about it and post it here later.

[tatsuya1221]

Anyone have any idea about the powdered white gold that was mined in ancient egypt? apparently it is basically gold except instead of melting when heated, it becomes a white powdery substance. This powder was baked into breads in the past and used in alchemy. Recent studies have found that it may actually have properties that could lead to longer lifespans, and maybe even possibly cure cancer! I'll look for the links I have about it and post it here later.

Another reason alchemy>chemistry.

It's a derivative off of the elixir of life from the old civilization, eternal life isn't immortality after all.

The materials were even in water a long time ago, but man's stupidity obviously caused it to be lost for the most part, now humans only live 125 years at max.

[kudakitsune23]

found a good link about monoatomic gold.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FT_zxNhd11U

enjoy :D

[teridax]

gotta wonder what the negative side-effects had been though

[Aravisian]

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/monoatomicgoldthinktwice15aug05.shtml

http://www.davidicke.com/content/view/47/51/

The negative side effects can be quite severe.
Additionally, there is ZERO supporting evidence that it can cure cancer. At All. It can, however, kill you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_cyanidation

You might want to read up on the Reality, not folks dreamy hopes.

Be VERY weary about homeopathic claims. There's an old saying, "A fool and his money are soon parting".
Citations included:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy
Claims of homeopathy's efficacy beyond the placebo effect are unsupported by the collective weight of scientific and clinical evidence.[8][9][10][11] Supporters claim that studies published in reputable journals support the efficacy of homeopathy; however, there are only a handful of them, they are not definitive, and they have not been replicated.[12] Several high-quality studies exist showing no evidence for any effect from homeopathy, and the few positive studies of homeopathic remedies have generally been shown to have problems that prevent them from being considered unambiguous evidence for homeopathy's efficacy.[8][10][11][13][14]

Also check:
http://www.quackwatch.com/

Alchemy is NOT the equivalent of chemistry by any means whatsoever.

Fantasy and fiction are fun. They are a great and entertaining escape from reality. But a person must always remember to separate fantasy from reality.

[tatsuya1221]

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/monoatomicgoldthinktwice15aug05.shtml

http://www.davidicke.com/content/view/47/51/

The negative side effects can be quite severe.
Additionally, there is ZERO supporting evidence that it can cure cancer. At All. It can, however, kill you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_cyanidation

You might want to read up on the Reality, not folks dreamy hopes.

Be VERY weary about homeopathic claims. There's an old saying, "A fool and his money are soon parting".
Citations included:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy


Also check:
http://www.quackwatch.com/

Alchemy is NOT the equivalent of chemistry by any means whatsoever.

Fantasy and fiction are fun. They are a great and entertaining escape from reality. But a person must always remember to separate fantasy from reality.

And so you start this again, look, trying to show scientific evidence in this is one thing, however do not insult anyone's views again.

[Aravisian]

And so you start this again, look, trying to show scientific evidence in this is one thing, however do not insult anyone's views again.

Man, whatever, You will stop at nothing to accuse me. It is not a matter of views if a rock is hard, water is wet or if cyanide can freaking KILL you. It is a matter of the Properties of the substances. And they are not going to change their properties for you or anyone else.

Refute the scientific evidence (independently verifiable and well supported by testing and observation) or retract your claims.

[tatsuya1221]

Man, whatever, You will stop at nothing to accuse me. It is not a matter of views if a rock is hard, water is wet or if cyanide can freaking KILL you. It is a matter of the Properties of the substances. And they are not going to change their properties for you or anyone else.

Refute the scientific evidence (independently verifiable and well supported by testing and observation) or retract your claims.

Not happening, for one reason, your rules are wrong in my eyes, so if i proved it, it would be false to you because it's not what you believe in, and yes, that's all it is, is faith in scientific law.

[Aravisian]

Not happening, for one reason, your rules are wrong in my eyes, so if i proved it, it would be false to you because it's not what you believe in, and yes, that's all it is, is faith in scientific law.

Not at all. What a catch 22 you present.

If you provide scientific evidence to support your claims, then your claims will have weight and merit for me to consider them.

If the evidence supports your claims, then I must accept your claims as having merit.
Which is not something one can do with faith, now is it?

You refuse to provide evidence. you refuse to support your claim. Therefor, no one reading the thread has any reason whatsoever to accept your claims as valid.

I will make a claim too.

"I am actually a dragon in human form and I catch elves with a glowing fish hook that grows out of my skull." I just made that claim. By your standard, Tasuya- It's my right to make these statements- they are my views and I will take ANYTHING you say in response to it as "insulting my views."

That said, I will refuse to support my claim on the basis that it's my prerogative to believe what I just claimed and I cannot support the claim because someone else may present evidence that demonstrates that I am in error- thus shattering my belief and reducing me to tears.
If you show me evidence that my "views" are in error, I will accuse you of attacking me and insulting my views.




SHEESH!

Catch 22- damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[tatsuya1221]

Not at all. What a catch 22 you present.

If you provide scientific evidence to support your claims, then your claims will have weight and merit for me to consider them.

If the evidence supports your claims, then I must accept your claims as having merit.
Which is not something one can do with faith, now is it?

You refuse to provide evidence. you refuse to support your claim. Therefor, no one reading the thread has any reason whatsoever to accept your claims as valid.

I will make a claim too.

"I am actually a dragon in human form and I catch elves with a glowing fish hook that grows out of my skull." I just made that claim. By your standard, Tasuya- It's my right to make these statements- they are my views and I will take ANYTHING you say in response to it as "insulting my views."

That said, I will refuse to support my claim on the basis that it's my prerogative to believe what I just claimed and I cannot support the claim because someone else may present evidence that demonstrates that I am in error- thus shattering my belief and reducing me to tears.
If you show me evidence that my "views" are in error, I will accuse you of attacking me and insulting my views.




SHEESH!

Catch 22- damned if you do, damned if you don't.

So you want to pick up where we left off?
Ok let me put it into perspective for you.

From what i've seen, scientific law is false for the most part, however, since unless it follows scientific law it's wrong, then there is your catch 22, i have my proof, but what i view as a flawed system is pointless to debate with, since you have too much faith in scientific laws.

[GameGeeks]

That's the thing with science. Most of it is theories. Yet they have no evidence. We're constently looking to prove theories. There have been theories for hundreds of years that where recently proven to be true. We just may not have the technology to prove everything right now. Recently a new element was given a name since it was proven to exist. It had been on the pariodic table for a while without a name and it wasn't till recently that we where able to create an molecule of it. Belive it or not, science is effected by current technology.

[Aravisian]

That's the thing with science. Most of it is theories. Yet they have no evidence. We're constently looking to prove theories. There have been theories for hundreds of years that where recently proven to be true. We just may not have the technology to prove everything right now. Recently a new element was given a name since it was proven to exist. It had been on the pariodic table for a while without a name and it wasn't till recently that we where able to create an molecule of it. Belive it or not, science is effected by current technology.

let me explain to you what a theory is.


A theory starts with a Hypothesis.
That hypothesis is then tested and observations made. The result of that is not proof. The result is a THEORY.

So your statement is completely incorrect.
Theory IS supported by observational evidence.
Without observational evidence, a theory is not a theory. It's just a hypothesis.


No theory is ever "Proven" nor can a theory be proven. Proofs ONLY exist in mathematics.

The thing you said about the periodic table was in error as well, by the way.



From what i've seen, scientific law is false for the most part, however, since unless it follows scientific law it's wrong,

Show me evidence to support this claim...
It should be EASY to do- for a supposed 26,000 year old self claimed IMMORTAL.

ETA: the word you want is Scientific Principle. not law.

ETA 2 (Thanks Klendathu- I was off here for a while and forgot about that issue.)

[GameGeeks]

A theory is a prediction and yes it can be proven/disproven. And like tatsuya has said before, don't insult other members.

[tatsuya1221]

let me explain to you what a theory is.


A theory starts with a Hypothesis.
That hypothesis is then tested and observations made. The result of that is not proof. The result is a THEORY.

So your statement is completely incorrect.
Theory IS supported by observational evidence.
Without observational evidence, a theory is not a theory. It's just a hypothesis.


No theory is ever "Proven" nor can a theory be proven. Proofs ONLY exist in mathematics.

The thing you said about the periodic table was in error as well, by the way.



Show me evidence to support this claim...
It should be EASY to do- for a supposed 26,000 year old self claimed IMMORTAL.

ETA: the word you want is Scientific Principle. not law.

ETA 2 (Thanks Klendathu- I was off here for a while and forgot about that issue.)

Again, you pull something out of nowhere that is completely ignoring what i said, i'm ending this conversation, i don't like talking to brick walls.

[Aravisian]

A theory is a prediction and yes it can be proven/disproven. And like tatsuya has said before, don't insult other members.

A hypothesis is a prediction.

A theory is a Model. A model used to describe reality. Using the best observations.

Theories can be shown to be in error. Absolutely they can. And that's a great thing. It enables us to theorize stronger and more accurate models to describe reality.

Without this ability, we would be back in the Dark ages. We would not have this technology you referred to. We would not be talking with these computers. You would not have air conditioning on hot summer days.

Without observation and theory as to how cooling works, how computers work, you would not have these things at all.

I am a scientist. I do know quite well what a theory is and what it is not.

Please do not insult my intelligence.

The difference between us here is:
I can support ALL my claims with good solid evidence.

You cannot.

I can examine evidence and admit to being in error or even to being wrong if the evidence demonstrates that I am wrong.

Failing to provide evidence or flat out refusing to provide evidence by adding more baseless claims is not productive at all. It helps no one. No one can examine the issue and decide what is best supported by the evidence.

In this topic, someone mentioned a homeopathic treatment for gold that is extracted using cyanides. Ignorance about such a topic can be hazardous to a persons health, don't you think?
Isn't it WISE to examine the evidence (The same process that gave you computers and air conditioning and medical care) in order to make a wise and healthy decision about using a homeopathic care?

Again, you pull something out of nowhere that is completely ignoring what i said, i'm ending this conversation, i don't like talking to brick walls.

I was clearly addressing GameGeeks post.

[tatsuya1221]

^^I was addressing what you posted to me, not GG, even though your still not listening to him either.

Anyway, locked for request.

Arivasian, again, learn that opinion does not = fact.