Well, for one thing, there was/is no hunter/gatherer equivalent of a millionaire or billionaire. The wealthiest man imaginable might have 4 knives (Not actual literal figure) rather than 38 billion times the wealth of the losers. (Actual literal figure) http://www.primeeconomics.org/...
Hmph. Fossils show that fauna have been becoming extinct for millions of years, therefore it can't be anthropogenic. It's just part of cyclical nature. Did these so called scientists ever investigate whether the sun was the cause of these extinctions? No, that would be too simple and obvious and would not fit their predefined liberal antihunting agenda. This is just a ploy by the paleontologists to keep the grant money coming in. They can't explain why there has been a pause in the extinction of megafauna for 16 years now.
How would you know if you observed it in a human female who was sexually active? In fact, even if it did happen to a woman who had not had contact with any sperm, nobody would believe her.
Yeah, and it's related in a way to the "life begins at conception" argument.
The conversion from haploid (one set of chromosomes) to diploid (two sets of chromosomes) occurs normally when the sperm delivers the second set, then the ovum starts developing and dividing.
But these are really two separate phenomena, which are linked by a mechanism which presumably evolved. The first sperm's contact with a specific receptor on the ovum triggers a big influx of calcium into the cell, which causes it to shut down all the other sperm receptors, absorb this sperm and transport its chromosomes to the nucleus, and start dividing.
But we can mimic the process (not in humans yet, afaik, mostly for technical reasons) by just injecting calcium into egg cells, which then start up dividing. And since they only have one set of chromosomes, one of the cells produced by that first division ends up with none and does, but the second one just has two copies of the one set that was in the ovum to begin with, and develops from there normally. No sperm required, i.e. parthenogenesis in vitro.
And, biology as organisms do it being a messy business full of errors, I would not at all be surprised if it happens normally "in the wild", although I can't even guess vaguely at the frequency. And in such cases, if there were any legal recessive genes, the embryo would die, often within the first couple of divisions; but that's not directly relevant to the point, which is that parthenogenesis requires nothing more than the occasional ovum accidentally swallowing a dose of calcium.
And no, that can't possibly explain Jesus, because of you think about it, it can only produce females. (In mammals anyway; not every creature does the thing with the y chromosome.)
Indeed. I once had an illuminating discussion with a creationist who was intelligent (as distinct from an intelligent-crestionist); believed in microevolution, i.e. within each species, but not macroevolution, i.e. from one species into another. He said, as usual, "Where are all the intermediate forms of species evolving to others?" And I replied, as usual, "Well, look at how the horse evolved from Eohippus; we're lucky enough to have a pretty good fossil record of that case." Then he asked, "What makes you say that's evolving from one species into another, rather than just one species evolving over time?" And you know, I don't have a good answer for that. Mind you, I do still believe in macroevolution and there are plenty of other arguments, but on that one point, I think he was right; if we can't demonstrate that the one species at some point becomes two distinct species which simultaneously exist, then it's just an argument over the definition of species. Too bad, because I really enjoyed trotting out that evolution of the horse argument.
Life is just a term for reducing entropy locally by increasing it globally by a greater amount. Given how fond the universe is of increasing entropy, it will keep producing these things.
Evil things happen because humans have free will, and sometimes make choices which are mistakes, or even wicked, and these lead to suffering.
In Heaven, of course, there is no Evil, and no suffering.
Therefore, in Heaven there is no free will. QED.
Me too on this. Do they have big pig farms in India where this woman got the disease? Where they pump antibiotics into the animal feed like they do here? For that matter, do they feed pigs in this country carbpenem antibiotics? The stuff ain't cheap like generic ampicillin or whatever they buy by the gallon.
You're not going to convince an idiot by providing evidence that he doesn't understand.
Due to climate science being too complicated to wrap up in one or two security blanket statements consisting of a pithy statement, we are all doomed to suffer the consequences. How many sheep carcasses, wolf tracks and turds do we need to find before people start actually doing something about the wolves, despite not seeing them personally?
"CO2 absorbs energy at the frequencies the earth emits."
If that was enough for Svante Arrhenius, it should be enough for anybody else who feels qualified to have an informed opinion.
5. It's too late to do anything useful, so there's no point in doing anything.
And the stages of metadenialism:
1. It's not happening.
2. Nobody's saying it's not happening, just that it's not our fault.
3. Nobody's saying it's not our fault, just that our contribution isn't significant.
4. Nobody's saying our contribution isn't significant, just that it's not going to be that bad.
5. Nobody's saying it's not going to be that bad just that it's too late to do anything useful, so there's no point in doing anything.
6. Nobody's saying it's too late to do anything useful so there's no point in doing anything, just that the liberals and scientists are to blame for politicizing the issue.
The fun part is that they are currently saying all of these, simultaneously; in the apparent belief that they all agree with each other and form a coherent plan.
Slashdot Mirror
"Have a friend throw a sack of cement at your legs" Hey, I quit that job last year.
38 million not billion, sorry.
Well, for one thing, there was/is no hunter/gatherer equivalent of a millionaire or billionaire. The wealthiest man imaginable might have 4 knives (Not actual literal figure) rather than 38 billion times the wealth of the losers. (Actual literal figure) http://www.primeeconomics.org/...
Hmph. Fossils show that fauna have been becoming extinct for millions of years, therefore it can't be anthropogenic. It's just part of cyclical nature. Did these so called scientists ever investigate whether the sun was the cause of these extinctions? No, that would be too simple and obvious and would not fit their predefined liberal antihunting agenda. This is just a ploy by the paleontologists to keep the grant money coming in. They can't explain why there has been a pause in the extinction of megafauna for 16 years now.
I'll tell the bison it's not our fault if you tell the passenger pigeons.
Sustainable electricity produced by burning tobacco. Everybody happy.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/m...
Alternately, people who let wild birds into their houses.
I am in favor of Wyoming banning any shortsighted effort to generate electricity by large scale harnessing of cats. http://www.catpowermusic.com/
Also, having lungs, birds have certain issues with coal plant emissions.
"How's your wife?" "Leaks a bit"
How would you know if you observed it in a human female who was sexually active? In fact, even if it did happen to a woman who had not had contact with any sperm, nobody would believe her.
The baby sharks were secretly adopted from the mother shark's niece, who got pregnant out of wedlock.
Yeah, and it's related in a way to the "life begins at conception" argument. The conversion from haploid (one set of chromosomes) to diploid (two sets of chromosomes) occurs normally when the sperm delivers the second set, then the ovum starts developing and dividing. But these are really two separate phenomena, which are linked by a mechanism which presumably evolved. The first sperm's contact with a specific receptor on the ovum triggers a big influx of calcium into the cell, which causes it to shut down all the other sperm receptors, absorb this sperm and transport its chromosomes to the nucleus, and start dividing. But we can mimic the process (not in humans yet, afaik, mostly for technical reasons) by just injecting calcium into egg cells, which then start up dividing. And since they only have one set of chromosomes, one of the cells produced by that first division ends up with none and does, but the second one just has two copies of the one set that was in the ovum to begin with, and develops from there normally. No sperm required, i.e. parthenogenesis in vitro. And, biology as organisms do it being a messy business full of errors, I would not at all be surprised if it happens normally "in the wild", although I can't even guess vaguely at the frequency. And in such cases, if there were any legal recessive genes, the embryo would die, often within the first couple of divisions; but that's not directly relevant to the point, which is that parthenogenesis requires nothing more than the occasional ovum accidentally swallowing a dose of calcium. And no, that can't possibly explain Jesus, because of you think about it, it can only produce females. (In mammals anyway; not every creature does the thing with the y chromosome.)
Indeed. I once had an illuminating discussion with a creationist who was intelligent (as distinct from an intelligent-crestionist); believed in microevolution, i.e. within each species, but not macroevolution, i.e. from one species into another. He said, as usual, "Where are all the intermediate forms of species evolving to others?" And I replied, as usual, "Well, look at how the horse evolved from Eohippus; we're lucky enough to have a pretty good fossil record of that case." Then he asked, "What makes you say that's evolving from one species into another, rather than just one species evolving over time?" And you know, I don't have a good answer for that. Mind you, I do still believe in macroevolution and there are plenty of other arguments, but on that one point, I think he was right; if we can't demonstrate that the one species at some point becomes two distinct species which simultaneously exist, then it's just an argument over the definition of species. Too bad, because I really enjoyed trotting out that evolution of the horse argument.
Life is just a term for reducing entropy locally by increasing it globally by a greater amount. Given how fond the universe is of increasing entropy, it will keep producing these things.
Evil things happen because humans have free will, and sometimes make choices which are mistakes, or even wicked, and these lead to suffering. In Heaven, of course, there is no Evil, and no suffering. Therefore, in Heaven there is no free will. QED.
John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt?
Me too on this. Do they have big pig farms in India where this woman got the disease? Where they pump antibiotics into the animal feed like they do here? For that matter, do they feed pigs in this country carbpenem antibiotics? The stuff ain't cheap like generic ampicillin or whatever they buy by the gallon.
Note the part of the CDC report that mentions it being reported in 28 or some such number of states. In the United States.
You realize this woman wasn't immigrating, right? Been in India, came back? Going to outlaw that, are we?
You're not going to convince an idiot by providing evidence that he doesn't understand.
We're pretending that he cares about the evidence are we?
No. Like everyone else over there, he decided it wasn't true the moment he decided he didn't like it. End of fucking story.
"What you're saying may paint a overwhelmingly convincing picture, however I am being paid to believe it is not true"
You're not going to convince an idiot by providing evidence that he doesn't understand.
Due to climate science being too complicated to wrap up in one or two security blanket statements consisting of a pithy statement, we are all doomed to suffer the consequences. How many sheep carcasses, wolf tracks and turds do we need to find before people start actually doing something about the wolves, despite not seeing them personally?
"CO2 absorbs energy at the frequencies the earth emits." If that was enough for Svante Arrhenius, it should be enough for anybody else who feels qualified to have an informed opinion.
Ah, yes, the stages of denialism:
1. It's not happening.
2. It's not our fault.
3. Our contribution isn't significant.
4. It's not going to be that bad..
5. It's too late to do anything useful, so there's no point in doing anything.
And the stages of metadenialism:
1. It's not happening.
2. Nobody's saying it's not happening, just that it's not our fault.
3. Nobody's saying it's not our fault, just that our contribution isn't significant.
4. Nobody's saying our contribution isn't significant, just that it's not going to be that bad.
5. Nobody's saying it's not going to be that bad just that it's too late to do anything useful, so there's no point in doing anything.
6. Nobody's saying it's too late to do anything useful so there's no point in doing anything, just that the liberals and scientists are to blame for politicizing the issue.
The fun part is that they are currently saying all of these, simultaneously; in the apparent belief that they all agree with each other and form a coherent plan.
Sorry, the rate of natural oil production is actually about 10 barrels per day.
Mostly in kids going through puberty.