What in this world of science and new technology do you still consider magical and why?
Clouds. Theyre always there above you
they can be destructive such as tornadoes or they can cleanse the earth such as rain… they cleanse me
science and technology ARE magical. (not literally, of course. i mean they inspire awe and admiration)
back in alchemy the two were the same… i think
the world loses its wonder and mystery when you can look at it and say “a wizard did it” (dat’s what christians say, if you didn’t catch that)
i gochu lol i love saying to christians who you tryin to convince me or you?
Science and technology are magical, and not colloquially. Science never inspires awe.
never? NEVER? sorry, but you’re mistaken. maybe it never inspires your awe, but you can’t speak for everybody.
…wait …what? “Magic” is colloquial. Are you suggesting magic is an objective property of a thing?
Shit, science inspired awe in me just the other day! Is that bad?! Can I get sick from that?!
…not sure if he was suggesting that or not…but either way it seems that you are not aware (by the way in which you asked) of the strange quark for instance?
God bless
-hth
Strange decay is not “magic”, it is “strange” (perplexing). Now, if the quark were employing slight of hand techniques to produce an illusion of supra/supernatural manipulation, then maybe they would have termed it the “magic quark.” As for now, however, I think the current description quite adequate.
lol statiktech…are you sure you know anything about strange matter? you do realize the “strange quark” implies that everything eventually decays into strange matter not the other way around 
…are you aware of what that would mean as well?..it could definitely be considered “magical” until it is at all understood- the fact that one may have a “strange quark” within a temporary existence and may also have an entity that shows nothing of the “strange quark” (in other words it is only proven through particle physics) is rather strange no? does magic not have the charicteristic of strange? therefore it is not completely nonsensical to refer to the strange quark within science when someone wants to refer to magic within science…that is all that i am saying…you seem to see no relation with magic and science and it seems the strange quark should have at least come to mind amongst other things in science but yet with you it seemed nothing came to mind and in fact you were able to make no relation whatsoever by showing of this statement…
…i simply pointed out your ossification.
-hth
God bless
No. You?
Not only do I fail to realize, but also to care (for now at least).
“Magical” is not synonymous with “mysterious”. Magic has no correlation to understanding for the observer, it is intentionally illusory.
Zeno’s paradoxes are “strange” too – logically perplexing. That doesn’t make them magical.
No, it is completely nonsensical to refer to science in terms of “magic” at all, ever.
Refer to previous statement. That is why nothing came to mind.
You pointed out my process of laying down new bone material by cells called osteoblasts?
do not kid yourself statiktech 
…remember one can see what i have written
God bless
-hth
What does that even mean?
I want whatever you’re on.
he’s high on god, bro, the single most damaging drug in history. his brain has turned to mush. at least it doesn’t make his teeth rot though, so it’s got that on cigarettes!
Haha!
Leave me with my cigs.
I hate to say it, again, but I’m with Humpty on this one. 
Well, he was quite obviously referring to “magic” colloquially, which I don’t have a problem with. Now literally attempting to draw a corollary between science and magic (as a ‘thing’, not a description) is absurd.
Technically, I will admit that speaking of science in terms of magic, at all, irritates me. And I personally think it a bit fanciful, but language is a matter of context and preference I suppose.