Slashdot Mirror

The amount of Anonymous Cowards posting the same couple lines makes it obvious. This thread is being astroturfed.

Women are making more money than men for the same job and same amount of work today, especially in cities. Stop reading a bogus 30 year old paper crafted for a narrative and check current reports. or This or This or This and of course This Interestingly most of these are LEFT leaning sites, not Right/Conservative.

PolitiFact has given you the nuts and bolts about the 77 cents statistic -- you can read the two most important works in this area here and here. Basically, there is a wage gap, but it tends to disappear when you compare women and men in the exact same jobs who have the same levels of experience and education. (emphasis mine)

Just like 60% of all College students are women, 56% of all College graduates with advanced degrees are women. Yet we continue to hear that we need more women in college.

I'm an egalitarian, not a MRA. I also happen to believe in Socrates' definition of Philosopher, who must seek truth even at their own peril. Sadly the left avoids all truth and distorts everything they can for division and agenda.

There are about a dozen companies using licenses from one or the other to develop products. Including Editas which was oddly founded by Doudna of UC Berkley AND Zhang of the Broad institute

Not sure there's any CRISPR products for sale yet because research doesn't move as fast as the legal system does, but it's definitely not patent trolling. Almost every molecular biology lab is starting to use crispr in some capacity, So there should be applications coming out eventually.

There are supposedly some edited dogs in china I guess?

The UK should take itâ(TM)s paltry aid shove it up itâ(TM)s ass as asked by the Indians in 2012 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new... very recently India offered Afghanistan $1 bn in fresh aid https://tribune.com.pk/story/1... India has massive problems but itâ(TM)s not like it is begging the Brits and it is making massive progress by itself..

The Democrat party is the owner of slavery, eugenics, segregation, and the KKK.

Technically true! But also completely disingenuous.

For any continuously evolving entity such as a nation or political party, there must reasonably be a statute of limitations on claiming either debts or credits for past actions.

The GOP of 2017 can no more claim to be the party of Lincoln than the Democrats of 2017 can claim to be the party of Jefferson, although they both do. The Democrats of today are no more responsible for FDR's interning of Japanese American citizens during World War II than today's Republicans are responsible for the Teapot Dome Oil Scandal or Watergate. The Democratic Party of today would be as unrecognizable today to Strom Thurmond in 1935 as today's Republican Party would be to Horace Greeley in 1866.

Think about the same time frame that you're talking about holding today's entity responsible for yesterday's actions (1865-1964?). Is the Trump US government of 2017 morally liable for paying reparations to the descendants of slaves? Is Angela Merkel's German government morally responsible for unpaid reparations for Kaiser Wilhelm's invasion of neutral Belgium? Are today's management or shareholders of IBM or Ford morally liable for their WWII involvement with the Nazis? Do you think that the Disney Corporation of today stands for everything portrayed in Song of the South? No, of course not. Institutions stay but the people behind the actions die or leave, and the credit or blame leaves with them.

Institutional memory has its place, but only within reasonable time limits. The only place you can draw a meaningful lineage is where the institutional principles remain the same. And if you consider that, I think you'd be hard pressed to make the same argument.

Tim Cook has announced a new Mac Pro, Mac Book Pros will come with a 99 watt-hour battery and the Mac Mini will be updated. Oh, wait, no he didn't. He's doing something much more important.

Well, only if you consider 50 times the normal thyroid cancer rate being harmless. But what would I know, I only had a girlfriend from Belarus who had her thyroid removed thanks to Chernobyl.

Yeah, all the radioactive waste has short half-lives and by 2016 they'll be able to clean up the mostly harmless waste. [sarc]

Seriously though, Tepco lied and said the reactor cores didn't melt down, so what else have they lied about.

We're told the clean-up is safe and no-one is getting ill. Then we're told the Yakuza are in charge of hiring, they're hiring homeless people and workers rights are being ignored. That doesn't sound like a recipe for safe working conditions to me.

How the Yakuza went nuclear

Atomic mafia: Yakuza âcleans upâ(TM) Fukushima, neglects basic workers' rights â" RT News

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sci...
https://www.theguardian.com/me...
And from NYU http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/apps...

The really big deal is that Twitter loses money and has no real plan to ever make any. What the current shareholders need is an idiot to buy them out for too much money.

This guy would do nicely.

Anyone remember this from 4 years ago? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tec...

I'd say this was fair game for Google :)

It has been shown in the past that Monkeys, Small Children, and even random number generators are better than most investors at picking stocks and shares to invest in ...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

http://www.automaticfinances.c...

Mobile pirate sites in Swedish waters are already subject to Swedish law.

I'm pretty sure it's already a felony.

- Green-card holders included in ban.
- Muslim travellers turned away from US after Donald Trump's ban as Google 'recalls overseas staff'.
- President Trump's Muslim ban excludes countries linked to his sprawling business empire.
- Donald Trump bans citizens of seven Muslim majority countries as visa-holding travellers are turned away from US borders.
- In Twitter, #muslimban has been quite active during the whole day (although its worldwide trend status is a bit unstable).

Without coming into the assessment of all this (including media coverage), my point is that things can happen very quickly and with the sole participation of Trump.

I have already written a lot (other comments in this thread) and think that my position is very clear. So, I hope that you will not mind me stopping the chat here.

Manning leaked a lot more than one video. One of the others, for example show US soldiers murdering an Al Jazeera journalist and laughing about it. Other leaks by her revealed the torture happening in Abu Ghraib which put an end to that travesty.

I have to ask; what kind of crack are you on?

The reason I ask is because Abu Ghraib was exposed in 2004, and Manning didn't even enlist until 3 years afterwards. Furthermore, you're going to have to be specific about the soldiers supposedly laughing as they murder somebody because I'm looking at a list of Manning's leaks and nothing like this is mentioned among them.

Even if you think that "that" video has visible weapons (which somehow nobody else can see - and kind of disputed considering we know from other evidence they were ambulance workers) that doesn't mean there wasn't a public interest in the many other atrocities she revealed. Or are you denying those as well ? Was Abu Ghraib just harmless fun by horny girl soldiers who liked any excuse for showing their genitals to strangers ?

It's documented that they were in fact carrying weapons. Furthermore, Assange himself even admitted to editing the video in order to manipulate the public:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tec...

What Assange is up to is more prosaic. He hit the big time with his video entitled "Collateral Murder" that used footage, shot from a US helicopter, of the killing of alleged insurgents and two Iraqi employees of Reuters, to accuse the American military of a war crime.

Oddly enough, it was Stephen Colbert, ostensibly a comedian, who skewered him. "There are armed men in the group. They did find a rocket-propelled grenade among the group. The Reuters photographers who were regrettably killed were not identified as photographers.

"And you have edited this tape, and you have given it a title called 'Collateral Murder'. That's not leaking. That's a pure editorial." Assange admitted that he was seeking to manipulate and create "maximum political impact".

In other words, you're full of shit.

The sad thing is that patriotism and nationalism have become dirty words on the left. It's even worse in Europe, though. Members of the "Britain First" movement are being arrested and persecuted pretty heavily. Shit, you can get into serious trouble there just for selling stuff with the British flag on it. Such is the insane world we live in.

I'm politically independent, and I watch this battle from up on the hills, and I see the Democrats' true colors shining. Look at the rioting and destruction in the US capital. I don't think it's sad at all- they've helped me see truth.

The sad thing is that patriotism and nationalism have become dirty words on the left. It's even worse in Europe, though. Members of the "Britain First" movement are being arrested and persecuted pretty heavily. Shit, you can get into serious trouble there just for selling stuff with the British flag on it. Such is the insane world we live in.

It can be far more strange as well.

There's a village in the Domican Republic where some girls "grow" penises when they hit puberty and basically switch genders. I believe this is about as strange as it can get (even having both sets of genitalia is rather passe in my opinion).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sci...

I read about this in the latest Nat Geo just last week.

Pan Am flight 103 would like a word with you.

Have you seen British teeth in recent decades? Theirs are nicer than those of us who live in the US, now.

Maybe nicer, but only if can pay out of pocket, or you can find an NHS dentist...

Brexit may exasperate this probably as many dentist in the UK come from EU countries...

On the flip side, Brexit will bring a need for more dentists.

I think dentistry is a fine profession, something that is unlikely to be replaced by AI any time soon. Having a high-paying vocation that students can strive for seems like it would be a win for any Brits who have children.

Your view of Brexit, that all the dentists would flee the UK leaving no one to care for peoples' teeth, seems a bit unrealistic.

Have you seen British teeth in recent decades? Theirs are nicer than those of us who live in the US, now.

Maybe nicer, but only if can pay out of pocket, or you can find an NHS dentist...

Brexit may exasperate this probably as many dentist in the UK come from EU countries...

What other science allows you to edit historical data to make it fit the trendline of your model instead of editing your model to make it fit the historical trendline?

What other science allows you to edit historical data to make it fit the trendline of your model instead of editing your model to make it fit the historical trendline?

This one actually explains that the expected explosion occurred sometime in the third century since the star is 1800 light years away. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sci...

Wow. Just wow. Where do I start? How about the MIT paper - written in 2005, so before Al Gore and other's claim that GW is causing them. Never the less, we have a lot more CO2 in the atmosphere and we have fewer. You like NOAA's stuff - http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/climo/ . Look towards the bottom for a bar graph. If I were to take 2000-today by year and mix it up the years by that decade with say the 1950s randomized in the 1950s (so it's not obvious which one is which, however with correct data for that decade) and see if you can tell which one is which, I bet you'd lose that one. Unless you really studied the data carefully. I honestly don't understand how you can say there are more and they are worse. The NOAA graph just doesn't show that, at least not yet. Maybe next month it will after they "adjust" it so it's not a problem anymore like they're doing with the other stuff.

(previous stuff I showed you) You looked at the graphs, saw the data was different and that didn't concern you? The "adjustments" are always in favor of GW. If you're a TA or a Professor going over someone's scientific work, that is one of the things you look out for. Faked or wrong data. The fact NASA has been caught red handed changing this stuff REALLY should bother you.

Here are some references, but look below
https://wattsupwiththat.com/20...
You like the telegraph?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

Here's one for you and you can see it with your own (as the Eagles would say - lying) eyes - Hansen's page (He no longer works for nasa BTW)- http://www.giss.nasa.gov/resea... . Not as I remembered it. That's because they keep changing it - http://web.archive.org/web/*/h... Check out the 2007/2/24 version to today. Wow, same page where he admits in 2007 that the 1930s was the hottest decade on record. Now 1930s looks a lot colder. I don't think anyone would say the 1930s was the hottest on record as Hansen had to admit to in the early 2000s looking at the new graph. He claimed 1990s were until he was shown to be wrong. He claimed it was a Y2K bug. I don't think anyone believed that one.

Greenland - what about Venice Italy? It wasn't just Greenland, it was global.

To me this captain obvious moment (shown by the documented change in web page above) really should concern you, and make you mad that you've been lied to all of this time. Could go on and show you page after page or as that other site did, he overlaid them for you. Not that you seem to care, or perhaps you don't understand the material. I'm reminded a lot that other people aren't like me. Things that are painfully obvious to me aren't obvious to others.

Now, about concensus? http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB... Yea, not so much.

Well I've enjoyed going down memory lane a bit here if you're not persuaded by the very definitive evidence I've shown you, you probably never will be. I understand I'm asking a lot because a great deal of money has been spent to make you believe, change data, and so on. MMGW is all about making a bunch of money and control.

The comparison to tobacco is disingenuous BTW. I was a scientist back in those days, in the 1970s. I felt it was clear. Again, I could find where the tobacco industry had faked data and weren't being honest. It wasn't hard even without something like the Internet. This in a time when science wasn't so good, calling a lot of things cancer causing that weren't. Showing other people without something like the Internet was just about impossib

From The Telegraph, Mark Zuckerberg reveals he is no longer an atheist:

The Facebook founder [...] said he believed religion was "very important". It comes after a year in which Zuckerberg, who was raised Jewish, met the pope and [...] praised the Buddhism of his wife Priscilla Chan, posting a photo of himself praying during a visit to a pagoda in Xi'an.

Last week, Zuckerberg posted a message on his own Facebook page wishing followers a Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah. In response to a comment asking if he was atheist, he said: "No. I was raised Jewish and then I went through a period where I questioned things, but now I believe religion is very important."

This makes perfect sense for a wannabe politician: A 2012 Gallup poll concluded that potential voters were more likely to refuse to vote for an atheist candidate (43%) than a candidate that was Muslim (40%), gay/lesbian (30%), Mormon (18%), or Jewish (6%). Similar results were found in a 2014 Pew survey that found 53% of those surveyed would reject an atheist presidential candidate, leading "never held office" (52%), age 70-80 (36%), adulterers (35%), and gay/lesbian (27%). Both polls concluded that being atheist was among the least positive aspects as well (Gallop had atheists at the bottom of the list with 54% positive, beating Muslims (58%) and gay/lesbians (68%), while Pew had atheists as tied with gays/lesbians at 5% positive, with the only less supported group being adulterers (2%).

The Gallup poll also tracks favorability of these traits over time, demonstrating that support for an atheist presidential candidate is very slowly improving from 1978's 40% to 1999's 49% to 2012's 54%. Contrast that to the support for a Jewish presidential candidate, which has grown from 82% to 92% to 91% in the same respective polls. They also break these figures down by political party: Republican voters care more about these sorts of things, and their atheist/Jew favorability gap (48% vs 95%) is far greater than the Dems' (58% vs 92%). The GOP's 95% willingness to vote for a Jew is even larger than their willingness to vote for a woman (92%).

Zuck may milk the Jew+Businessman stereotype for personal gain but he is also showing his diversity through the aforementioned visit with the pope. Expect to see similar press-friendly stories on his 50 state tour, whose primary objectives will probably be publicity and then research for where he wants to align his political platform.

I listened and looked. Trouble is, I don't think you do. The second one with the news reporter is just damning if you bothered to watch it. So I'm disappointed, however not surprised.

Let's look at your link to hurricanes. To preface it, have you ever read the book "how to lie with statistics." I still own the copy I bought when I was in college in the 1980s. Lend it out from time to time, however I see it's online as a PDF now. You should read it. You really should read it so you know when you're being lied to. So what does the article say? Really not a whole lot, it also begins in the 1970s. Ok, this is your first major indication you're being lied to. Why just the 1970s? If they go further back, it disproves what they're trying to indoctrinate you with. They'd have you believe that bad storms never happened before. Hogg wash. In fact HOGG Island, NYC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... 1890. Yes, 1890. I can cite plenty of other storms past that. So no, they are not stronger and they are not more frequent, and they know it. If they really were, oh boy - you'd really hear about it I'm sure. They would be in our face.

Your first citation about rising global temperatures. Here's a spot that I think you don't realize or understand. Things are warming up. We're not denying that. In fact, if you go back to Venice, you'll see water was rising up in the 1300s when they were trying to keep the Adriatic out way back then. Then we hit a little ice age - which we're coming out of right now. We are in fact going back to where we used to be before the little ice age. Please consider this article - http://www.livescience.com/143... . So this is showing you that Greenland was MUCH warmer than it is right now, and not that long ago (geologically speaking). At this point you should understand that this Man Man GW is almost certainly just a scam.

As for the fuel companies, do you really think that? You think that they won't adapt? Those guys will make a bunch of money either way. It's a red herring argument to fool people. What I can show you is Al Gore makes a boatload http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new... . I think it's been well documented on /. that in "science" you want to show MMGW - lots of funds. Want to show MMGW is a scam - you'd get tarred and feathered. You won't get a dime. It clearly isn't what a Democratic administration wants. It's all about control and money.

However plenty of real scientists throughout the world are speaking up. That's why they are having such a hard time. There just is no legitimate science behind it. Again, my citations and you can look up what they're saying like I did.

So just because I showed you in an easy to understand video you don't believe it? ok.
1) Algore was a D student in science at Harvard - http://www.cnsnews.com/news/ar...
2) Teacher was Roger Reville, who told him he was wrong - https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Yea, I know, a youtube video, it's actually a transcript from a chemical film based motion picture back in 1980. The citation also goes into Mr. Armstrong, and so on.

There are plenty of other citations about the same thing if for some reason you don't like cnsnews or the youtube transcript.

Could go on. However one thing is very clear to me - if Prof Reville where here today, he's say it's not a factor. That's what the real numbers show. The numbers before they are "adjusted". That other citation I gave you shows that graphically.

So where am I wrong? Algore didn't really have Reville for a professor at Harvard? He didn't really get a D? He hasn't systematically set up condi

If you want to test this theory, you could try posting this.[nsfw, but not goatse, but is a goat.)

I am really appalled at how many people don't take the Russian interference seriously and blame it on some kind of Democrat/Obama conspiracy. This has been happening in eastern European countries for decades and Russia has now been targeting also western Europe since the annexation of Crimea and the war in Ukraine. Russia is funding right-wing populist parties and helping them out with propaganda all across the western hemisphere in an attempt to discredit our democracies and our free press.

Don't believe it? Google "russia populist funding". Here are the top three links:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
http://www.economist.com/news/...

It's really scary how much success they are having in sowing distrust in our institutions and our free press. Every time I read someone here decrying some mayor western news outlet as "Fake News" I am reminded of the effectiveness of Putins troll army.

telegraph has a really good article about the concept, exploring how even our current understanding of consent could maybe be improved, but it also ultimately comes to conclusion it shouldn't be considered rape or assault any more than lying about your job or income is, but rather a new class of offense.

they suggest the term sexual fraud, but they also point out its rather unexplored territory right now legally.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/wom...

They were given the figures on immigrants being less likely to claim benefits then natives, but ignored them.

Figures I've seen were largely based on Eastern European immigration. What you're ignoring is the relatively recent massive influx of Muslims, and any statistics I find on that group are appalling. The most unemployed, the most claiming disability, the most on public housing, the most in medical costs. And this is hardly unique to the UK.

Here's a recent left-wing source:

"The high proportion of the Muslim prison population (13%) and the proportion of Muslims in social housing (28%) is also a "cause for concern", the report's author said."

Here's an older source, and things have surely gotten worse since then:

"Muslims households were the least likely to be homeowners (52%) and are the most likely among all religious groups to be living in accommodation rented from the council or housing association (28%); 4% live rent-free. [..] 63% contained at least one dependent child, and 25% contained three or more dependent children. [..] Muslims between the ages of 16 and 24 had the highest unemployment rates at 28%; 11% of Muslims over the age of 25 were unemployed. [..] Muslims were most likely to be unavailable or not actively seeking work due to reasons such as disability, being a student, or looking after the family and home. 31% of working-age men were economically inactive, as were 69% of working-age women."

Not only is the massive Muslim immigration into the West a security risk, it's a massive failure economically.

Those who voted Remain have a vision of the big international banks in the City fleeing the nation, that is the image they were sold by Project Fear. The reality is that less than 10% of London City trading requires us to be in the EU. More than 90% of it is UK domestic and non-EU trade. EU passporting could be maintained merely by having a satellite office in Dublin with a couple of dozen staff.

In the meantime the Dutch bank ING is actually moving staff INTO the City from Belgium in case Brexit stops it being able to trade in the UK.

Do you actually believe that more than 90% of climatologists have somehow been bribed to lie?

Why not over half of Americans thought The Wicked Witch of Benghazi would be a good president and almost as many thought Trump would be.

As Dr. Raymond Stantz said in "Ghostbusters", "Have you worked in the private sector? It's horrible, they expect results!" And from the "weather is not climate department", it snowed in the Sahara!

because it demonstrates a significant lack of appreciation for the text, spirit, or values enshrined in the Constitution

Overall, I find the lack of appreciation for same by the other party to be far more discontenting. It is the Democrats, who wish to:

• Illegalize "hate speech", contrary to the First Amendment;
• Illegalize weapons — from knives and brass knuckles to firearms, contrary to the Second Amendment;
• promote Affirmative Action — contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment;
• abolish Electoral College and otherwise diminish the role of the member-States in the Union;

But those threats to the Constitution do not worry you, only Christianity does?..

the survey you cited includes no evidence that American Muslims agree with Sharia Law

Seriously? Are you that dense? The article I linked to is called (emphasis mine) "Muslims and Islam: Key findings in the U.S. and around the world". What does it tell you, that, while it has Sharia-support figures for about 20 other countries — and even a graphic showing same — the figures for the US are omitted? Ok, maybe, my growing up in the USSR gave me the ability to read between the lines, that the blissfully naive Americans do not possess. Fine. Let's look for other sources:

According to the just-released survey of Muslims, a majority (51%) agreed that “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.” When that question was put to the broader U.S. population, the overwhelming majority held that shariah should not displace the U.S. Constitution (86% to 2%).

and:

nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, “It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.”

Now, these results are politically inconvenient to the still-prevailing dogma, so, as could be expected, the study is denounced (such as here) as "deeply flawed". But what better rebuttal could there be, than offering results of your own study contradicting those of the "flawed" one? And yet, none of the critics could cite their own numbers. Does that not tell you something?

a completely made up story

Once again, it is not "made up" at all — and certainly not completely made up. It is a real problem, and not just in the US (for which we, curiously, do not establishment-blessed figures at all), but also in Canada, UK, and Norway...

Quit denying it — makes you look stupid. You'll get better mileage out of arguing, "it is nothing to worry about" instead.

Justly rated "troll" right now. Kohath's "evidence" is simply doing a search using his unsupported statement, but look at the actual results of his search and his claim immediately collapses into smoking ruins. That's why he didn't post any of them.

The query will of course tend to bring up *any* similar claims, rather than tending to bring up objective rankings, but only one single source of this claim appears in the top 20 search results - an unscientific (i.e. self-selected) poll by Chief Executive magazine. That's it. No other source making this claim. (CEOs as a group, it should be noted, have a high proportion of sociopaths - or worse - a fact that should be born in mind when considering CEO opinions about things).

But of the eight or so independent state rankings that show up in this search, none of them places California at the bottom. It is 8th from the top on one, and in the middle of several others. Not even the one-note Tax Foundation, that uses only a single metric for rating everything (low taxes on businesses = heaven, high taxes on businesses = hell, nothing else matters) places California on the bottom of their list.

"You've got a bunch of folks with PHds, usually with a heavy emphasis on math and statistics, but the implication I get again and again from folks is that they're somehow trying to cheat us all for the mountains of grant money."

Because it's been proved (at least as well as AGW)?

- http://a-sceptical-mind.com/th... That trickey 'hockey stick' graph that so motivated the world?
- http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.... "We don't have the original climate data"
- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com... and
- https://notalotofpeopleknowtha... Massive, and repeated 'creative' manipulation of the data;

http://www.nber.org/digest/dec...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

Who builds them now? Foxconn's suicide rate is lower than the US.

Yes, because Europeans are inherently all honest and Americans are all t'ieves aren't we?

Self-service checkouts turn honest shoppers into thieves, warn criminologists

The study involved data from nearly 12 million shopping trips from four major British retailers as well others in the US, Belgium and Holland between 2013 and 2015

The researchers found that introducing self-checkouts raised the rate of loss by 122 per cent to an average of 3.9 per cent of turnover.

It is also difficult for retailers to identify whether a customer wilfully took items without scanning or were simply absentminded.

I'm in the US and I must plead guilty to being absentminded and "stealing" a loaf of bread once. It was very crowded and I just wanted to get the hell out of there. After I exited the store I noticed it sitting there in the lower basket of my cart (not scanned or paid for). I briefly thought about going back inside and paying for it, but then I thought of the crowds and the time it would take.

I figured I could just make it right the next time I shopped there. I never did.

I've also seen, but never taken, the opportunity to mis-enter the codes for my produce. Am I buying the expensive apples or the cheap ones? Hmmm....I could easily claim it was an honest mistake.

I don't do that because the risk is not worth the few pennies I might save. I also consider myself honest, but I guess I'm not that honest since I never made good on that loaf of bread.

And they don't always watch given that I sometimes have to track down an employee when the self-checkout thinks there's a problem. Usually they just clear the register without checking to make sure I didn't cheat.

I believe that Honesty through paranoia is a real thing. Of course sometimes they really are watching. You can never know for sure unless you try, right?

Of course that's not going to stop everyone. Even before self-checkout some people would switch price tags, barcodes or just stuff more expensive merchandise into cheaper packaging. And then there's what's called "sweethearting" where the cashier just cooperates with the thief and doesn't ring certain things up properly if at all.

Don't kid yourself. Shoplifting and other forms of theft are a real problem all over the world. There are people who actually make a living at it.

I was rather more hoping for a summary than a direct link to the 2007 report.

If I were a global warming scientist, I would already have read through those hundreds of pages. As a non-scientist, with things I need to do, I somewhat rely on news stories, like this one:

One of the central issues is believed to be why the IPCC failed to account for the âoepauseâ in global warming, which they admit that they did not predict in their computer models. Since 1997, world average temperatures have not shown any statistically significant increase.
The summary also shows that scientist have now discovered that between 950 and 1250 AD, before the Industrial Revolution, parts of the world were as warm for decades at a time as they are now.

Despite a 2012 draft stating that the world is at itâ(TM)s warmest for 1,300 years, the latest document states: âoe'Surface temperature reconstructions show multi-decadal intervals during the Medieval Climate Anomaly (950-1250) that were in some regions as warm as in the late 20th Century.â

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/climatechange/10310712/Top-climate-scientists-admit-global-warming-forecasts-were-wrong.html

And then I read through the PDFs at this site:

http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming/

The tone is rather tendentious (especially the second PDF) but I find the arguments compelling. As I understand it, the CAGW theory is that feedbacks will cause the warming to "run away" precipitously once we reach a cruical tipping point, but the PDFs have graphs showing the Earth once had a significantly higher CO2 concentration than currently without turning into another Venus. The annual news stories about "the previous year was the warmest on record" don't seem to mention error bars, and when I tracked some down I was astonished to see that the margin for the "warmest" claim was a small fraction of the uncertainty interval. And in my original post, now modded down to 0 score, I provided the link to an article with graphs comparing the predicted temperature increases with what actually were recorded.

I have seen proposals for a carbon tax that was intended to take trillions of dollars out of the economy. (The authors of the proposal viewed this as a feature: trillions of tax dollars of additional revenue for the US government! I personally don't think you can get something for nothing, so I worry about the harm that would occur if that level of tax was levied.) I think that this level of tax should require a high level of confidence, and I personally am not at that level yet.

Thank you for responding politely. You haven't convinced me and I likely haven't convinced you, but I hope you at least believe that I'm genuinely skeptical and not just trolling or trying to flame people about this.

Where did you get these figures?

You've clearly more informed about Muslim attitudes in the UK than I am, and I live there!

From your own media. You are paying attention right? The 40% of muslims wanting sharia was in the UK press a bit ago. The others? Just dig through the news over the last 2 years, you'll find the polls.

Unable to follow the line of statements? 40% of muslims in UK want sharia law Sorry you're going to have a hard time finding Christians wanting to ban same-sex marriage, or take the gay-away rights, or womens bodies pretty much anywhere in the west. Even in the US, you're going to hear a lot of whining and that's about it. When was the last time you saw "Christian purity patrols" on the streets? Never. But I can walk through central London today and see the "Sharia police" which MET has said they're cracking down on, but that appears to be very ineffective.

What part of " to lead government-wide efforts to identify propaganda and counter its effects." don't you understand?

They are not restricting anyone's right, even foreigners such as the Russian troll factory to lie their asses off.

What they are doing is the same thing anyone else would do if repeated lies and falsehoods were put forth: countering the lies.

Oh, and speaking of the Ministry of Truth, Putin has that covered. He has made it illegal for Russian mothers to speak out about their son's deaths in Ukraine, including contacting other mothers to form groups and compare notes on how many soldiers Russia has lost during its invasion of Ukraine.

What part of " to lead government-wide efforts to identify propaganda and counter its effects." don't you understand?

They are not restricting anyone's right, even foreigners such as the Russian troll factory to lie their asses off.

What they are doing is the same thing anyone else would do if repeated lies and falsehoods were put forth: countering the lies.

Oh, and speaking of the Ministry of Truth, Putin has that covered. He has made it illegal for Russian mothers to speak out about their son's deaths in Ukraine, including contacting other mothers to form groups and compare notes on how many soldiers Russia has lost during its invasion of Ukraine.

I could maybe accept that argument if Trump were saying things that were truly racist, sexist, etc

If you don't understand that Trump has said and done HUGELY racist and sexist things then you don't understand what the words mean.

I'm pretty sure you don't appreciate people on the right labeling all Clinton supporters as "baby murderers" because Hillary Clinton said she supports abortion, do you?

If you'll notice I mentioned that you have to own ALL of the positions of the person you vote for. That applies to anyone.

That said your example is utter nonsense and it certainly isn't an equivalent argument. If the fetuses and embryos were actually babies they might have a point. They aren't. They are a fetus or an embryo and they don't become a baby until they are actually born. Until the fetus is sufficiently developed to survive outside the mother there is no credible argument that they are a baby. Until then they are nothing more than a mass of growing cells little different from a cancer biologically speaking. Arguing against abortion and/or contraception is to argue that women have no right to control their reproductive system which is to argue that they are not allowed to control what happens to their body. It's an absurd infringement on a person's rights that we do not condone in almost any other circumstance. We can't even harvest organs from a dead person without their prior consent and yet we don't consider that murder despite the fact that there is a shortage of donor organs and the fact that people WILL die because of it. You can't have it both ways.

The bizarre joke here, is that a while back, Greeks were worried that they would be kicked out of the Euro, and the "New Drachma" replacement would be sharply devalued. So Greeks with cash on hand were looking for some tangible assets, that would hold value over time. So the Greeks bought a lot of cars . . . their favorite brands are German:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fin...

Not allowed to deviate from GPS?? so the uber auto drive car will just drive

Into a sand pile? http://www.news.com.au/lifesty...
drive down boat launch into lake https://youtu.be/a2QIH2uz3p8

drive into Pacific Ocean https://youtu.be/h89RT_dc-v0 http://www.redlandcitybulletin...

drivers off cliff https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

follows directions onto railroad tracks http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

follows GPS down flight of steps http://croatiantimes.com/?id=5...

directed to wrong part of Italy http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

takes goat trail up mountain http://metro.co.uk/2010/09/28/...

  into Tree http://news.softpedia.com/news...

crash after GPS orders U-turn http://www.expatica.com/fr/new...

Not allowed to deviate from GPS?? so the uber auto drive car will just drive

Into a sand pile? http://www.news.com.au/lifesty...
drive down boat launch into lake https://youtu.be/a2QIH2uz3p8

drive into Pacific Ocean https://youtu.be/h89RT_dc-v0 http://www.redlandcitybulletin...

drivers off cliff https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

follows directions onto railroad tracks http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

follows GPS down flight of steps http://croatiantimes.com/?id=5...

directed to wrong part of Italy http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

takes goat trail up mountain http://metro.co.uk/2010/09/28/...

  into Tree http://news.softpedia.com/news...

crash after GPS orders U-turn http://www.expatica.com/fr/new...

All that is happening now in the US has happened before in Europe. You need evidence? Just google "Putin far right funding" or "Putin Trolls". Here, let me give you a hand:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
http://www.businessinsider.de/...
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

Putin is leading a full-scale propaganda war against the west, intended at undermining trust in our democarcies and our institutions.

Time to wake up, America.

This might also interest you in particular:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

All that is happening now in the US has happened before in Europe. You need evidence? Just google "Putin far right funding" or "Putin Trolls". Here, let me give you a hand:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
http://www.businessinsider.de/...
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

Putin is leading a full-scale propaganda war against the west, intended at undermining trust in our democarcies and our institutions.

Time to wake up, America.

This might also interest you in particular:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

All that is happening now in the US has happened before in Europe. You need evidence? Just google "Putin far right funding" or "Putin Trolls". Here, let me give you a hand:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
http://www.businessinsider.de/...
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

Putin is leading a full-scale propaganda war against the west, intended at undermining trust in our democarcies and our institutions.

Time to wake up, America.

This might also interest you in particular:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...