"on bell peppers at $4 each" holy crap. That must be based on location and not deficit spending and quantitative easing.
My kids love Bell peppers so I buy them regularly. Never seen them higher the 2 dollars, and that's in a bad year off season. Lets forget personal anecdote and look at the numbers: http://www.bls.gov/ro3/apmw.htm
Hey, food prices are down in the US. There was a spike in 08/09. then slight trend down.
But you keep going on about how your preceived food increase is the fault of thank deficit spending and quantitative easing
But handling raw chicken with the virus can cause it to spread. So mutation can happen from preparing infected chicken.
". IT CANNOT STAY LURKING FOR A LONG TIME OUTSIDE IT'S PREVIOUS HOST UNTIL IT MEETS A NEW ONE." If you are going to be presenting your self as knowledgeable on the subject, then you need to refrain from saying 'long time' it's vague. It can last for days, depending on many factors. The number one way ti's transmitted bird to bird is through shared drinking water.
Eating properly prepare chicken is safe, preparing the chicken has risk. Slight risk, but risk none the less. A risk spread out of 10's of million of opportunities.
" (it was already a big amount of luck that the *bird* virus managed to infect a human. Jumping from that point onward to another human *again* is like winning a lottery 2 times in a row: *very* unlikely)." no. It's a numbers game, not 'luck' it will happen. And it's a lot more likely then winning the lottery.
Chicken sluaghter in mass to stop a epidemic from spreading further aren't slaughter with any care toward the fact that people will be eating them.
The virus can also live on the chicken product, so you mus take proper precaution. Proper precautions happen to also be the same recommend for general handling of chicken. Killing the chicken doesn't kill the virus. Proper disposing disposing of the carcass does.
So to stay safe, the advice is the same for protecting against any infection from poultry:
Wash your hands with soap and warm water for at least 20 seconds before and after handling raw poultry and eggs. Clean cutting boards and other utensils with soap and hot water to keep raw poultry from contaminating other foods. Use a food thermometer to make sure you cook poultry to a temperature of at least 165 degrees Fahrenheit Consumers may wish to cook poultry to a higher temperature for personal preference. Cook eggs until whites and yolks are firm.
how much would they really save? And why? just to serve over cooked chicken? And wouldn't there be a cost in just moving a wedding date so suddenly? Wouldn't that be considered rude?
Becasue organic produces less yield and kills people.
You note that pasteurization kills this. As we have known, organic milk is a huge risk. I could go on with numbers and figures and facts, and studies, but you probably wouldn't understand them, so I will sum up: A) Shit flows down hill. B) the udder is under the ass.
They don't. Some do. There is a lot of research is specific bugs. Why do you think it's only one or the other?
"then a cocktail containing two antibiotics should have a probability P^2 no. Not even close.
Not only is it economically good, it can be scientifically good becasue often one bug follows another, and it's better for the patient if it is stopped before it becomes a physical issue.
The largest contributor to resistance strain is people not finishing there antibiotic regime, or not taking proper care of the medicine.
Except there has been no recorded case of a resistant strain being developed due to antibiotics used on cows. ALL of them started in humans, and mostly becasue people don't finish there antibiotic regime.
But hey, it'[s easy to use a myth to pin the blame on some one else. right?
What you mea is what he says to jive with your political view. Otherwis why would you hate somene who has been pretty much correct? Read his blog starting in 98. What we ahve is an expert that gets demonized because loud mother poundits with wide audiences don't like what he says, even though nhis track records is excellent.
That is what matters. Not you , or my, political views. If you, or I, or anyone, don't change are views when new and accurate data come sin, then we might as well start living in the dark ages.
Sorry, but when someone applies an economic theory to a situation to forecast an outcome, and the outcome is pretty much correct, then that person is probably correct. YOU need to change your perspective.
We see this a lot more now then ever. The republican echo machine gets turned up louder and louder every time someone can show that a social policy works. Look at the 2012 election. The statistic from actual experts all showed it wasn't going to really be a close race. And when the actual experts where correct, all the people who were loud to be heard, but not actual experts, were stunned. Did they say 'maybe I was wrong?' no. The turned up their echo chamber even louder letting the same experts make all kinds of stupid reason why they where wrong, how it wasn't there fault, and the republican media just agreed.
tT's a fucking disgrace. You are better then that, please apply rational and critical thinking.
"it is reason it is forbidden in the first place" no. It was forbidden becasue lies were spread about it and ignorant parents became scared and politicians just outlawed it instead of getting actual data and presenting it to the public. It was outlaws do to perception of an issue.
"main reason doctors still recommend not to legalize it completely" Repeat after me: Doctors aren't scientists Doctors aren't scientists Doctors aren't scientists
The only reoccurring issue in studies is poor schooling facilities... and while reoccurring, better studies should be done. My vested interest is in good data.
"is probably not the best thing for a developing brain" speculation. " It's also a socioeconomic red flag " nope. But please, constinue with your wild ass statemnets based from 1950.
" these kids came from the wrong side of the tracks" define wrong side of the tracks.
" they've had crappy and neglectful parenting" Based on.. what? Oh right, the do pot therefore they were neglected and drop outs.
WTF?seriously, did you just crawl out of a rock from 1950? You sound like an episode of Batman. "You can't blame them Robin, there parents are divorced, so there is no hope for them."
The other thing they have in common is that they are from a place were it's more socially acceptable to smoke pot.
Have you been reading the lies being spread from CALM?
Studies in the use of Marijuana have a tendency to support whatever the researcher was looking for. See Selection Bias.
Auto insurance isn't mandatory? Home owners insurance isn't mandatory? you really underscored you ignorance and stupidity just to make an incorrect dig at Obama. You should take a good look at yourself and decide if you want to wallow in ignorance, or light the candle of knowledge.
"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." wrong. Hitler attack Germany first by making an internal enemy.
A) they aren't climatologists They are meteorologist. Those STILL aren't the same thing.
B) The article is horrid. It's quote mining and cherry picking. C) They contradict themselves. first this: "The researchers acknowledge that human activity has led to an increase in carbon dioxide being released into the Earth’s atmosphere and an increase in average temperature." then: "Hurricanes draw their power from warm ocean waters," Clearly they don't understand AGW. AGW forecasts that as the overall volume of ocean ice decrease will will see an increase in ocean temperatures. For the area of research they are in, CO2 numbers only matter when trying to forecast ocean temperatures. You can not use CO2 in the air to directly predicts cyclone events.
D) The confuse cycle with overall trends. The paper clearly shows that increase in THC seems to mean more hurricanes, BUT they only use 20 year pieces and do not trend the overall hurricane numbers. E) the limit them selves to hurricanes the hit land fall in the US. With warming temperature will will see overall hurricanes number go up, not juut US land fall numbers. We will also see in increase in every other type of cyclone event. Tropical storms and so on.
And you little ad hom clearly demonstrates you don't actually know anything about AGW. Not that it will stop you from spouting ignorant opinion and cherry picking data. You are so bad, you have gotten to cherry picking from people who are experts in OTHER FIELDS. That is pretty much the best AGW deniers can do. You might want to take a more careful look at the facts regarding the climate. There is a reason theory is scientific consensus on this issue.
" "climate change" or "global warming" " yes, change the names once to reflect a broader understanding of the topic is now 'changing the name every week'
Have been taking climate change data and model predictions into account for years. Quite accurately, and quite successfully. This alone should have convinced the non educated cynic..but it involves math, and math is hard so we will just deny anyways.
Slashdot Mirror
Why? it's full of hyperbole, isdirect and lies, all wrapped up to scare you.
Like Super Size me, and Gasland.
"as U.S. food prices have skyrocketed"
what?
"on bell peppers at $4 each"
holy crap. That must be based on location and not deficit spending and quantitative easing.
My kids love Bell peppers so I buy them regularly. Never seen them higher the 2 dollars, and that's in a bad year off season.
Lets forget personal anecdote and look at the numbers:
http://www.bls.gov/ro3/apmw.htm
Hey, food prices are down in the US.
There was a spike in 08/09. then slight trend down.
But you keep going on about how your preceived food increase is the fault of thank deficit spending and quantitative easing
But handling raw chicken with the virus can cause it to spread. So mutation can happen from preparing infected chicken.
". IT CANNOT STAY LURKING FOR A LONG TIME OUTSIDE IT'S PREVIOUS HOST UNTIL IT MEETS A NEW ONE."
If you are going to be presenting your self as knowledgeable on the subject, then you need to refrain from saying 'long time' it's vague.
It can last for days, depending on many factors. The number one way ti's transmitted bird to bird is through shared drinking water.
Eating properly prepare chicken is safe, preparing the chicken has risk. Slight risk, but risk none the less. A risk spread out of 10's of million of opportunities.
" (it was already a big amount of luck that the *bird* virus managed to infect a human. Jumping from that point onward to another human *again* is like winning a lottery 2 times in a row: *very* unlikely)."
no. It's a numbers game, not 'luck' it will happen. And it's a lot more likely then winning the lottery.
Chicken sluaghter in mass to stop a epidemic from spreading further aren't slaughter with any care toward the fact that people will be eating them.
The virus can also live on the chicken product, so you mus take proper precaution. Proper precautions happen to also be the same recommend for general handling of chicken. Killing the chicken doesn't kill the virus. Proper disposing disposing of the carcass does.
So to stay safe, the advice is the same for protecting against any infection from poultry:
Wash your hands with soap and warm water for at least 20 seconds before and after handling raw poultry and eggs.
Clean cutting boards and other utensils with soap and hot water to keep raw poultry from contaminating other foods.
Use a food thermometer to make sure you cook poultry to a temperature of at least 165 degrees Fahrenheit Consumers may wish to cook poultry to a higher temperature for personal preference.
Cook eggs until whites and yolks are firm.
how much would they really save? And why? just to serve over cooked chicken? And wouldn't there be a cost in just moving a wedding date so suddenly?
Wouldn't that be considered rude?
What is wrong with you, and why are you here?
Becasue organic produces less yield and kills people.
You note that pasteurization kills this. As we have known, organic milk is a huge risk. I could go on with numbers and figures and facts, and studies, but you probably wouldn't understand them, so I will sum up:
A) Shit flows down hill.
B) the udder is under the ass.
Wow, I love that sentence.
Hey, look at that, before wisdom takes an quote out of contexts it and spins it .. imagine my surprise~
They don't. Some do. There is a lot of research is specific bugs.
Why do you think it's only one or the other?
"then a cocktail containing two antibiotics should have a probability P^2
no. Not even close.
Not only is it economically good, it can be scientifically good becasue often one bug follows another, and it's better for the patient if it is stopped before it becomes a physical issue.
The largest contributor to resistance strain is people not finishing there antibiotic regime, or not taking proper care of the medicine.
But we don't have too many humans. You can put us all in texas and it would have the same population density as new york.
You implied that it's not natural and therefor wrong. Which is stupid.
Except there has been no recorded case of a resistant strain being developed due to antibiotics used on cows. ALL of them started in humans, and mostly becasue people don't finish there antibiotic regime.
But hey, it'[s easy to use a myth to pin the blame on some one else. right?
What you mea is what he says to jive with your political view. Otherwis why would you hate somene who has been pretty much correct? Read his blog starting in 98.
What we ahve is an expert that gets demonized because loud mother poundits with wide audiences don't like what he says, even though nhis track records is excellent.
That is what matters. Not you , or my, political views. If you, or I, or anyone, don't change are views when new and accurate data come sin, then we might as well start living in the dark ages.
Sorry, but when someone applies an economic theory to a situation to forecast an outcome, and the outcome is pretty much correct, then that person is probably correct. YOU need to change your perspective.
We see this a lot more now then ever. The republican echo machine gets turned up louder and louder every time someone can show that a social policy works. Look at the 2012 election. The statistic from actual experts all showed it wasn't going to really be a close race. And when the actual experts where correct, all the people who were loud to be heard, but not actual experts, were stunned. Did they say 'maybe I was wrong?' no. The turned up their echo chamber even louder letting the same experts make all kinds of stupid reason why they where wrong, how it wasn't there fault, and the republican media just agreed.
tT's a fucking disgrace. You are better then that, please apply rational and critical thinking.
that IR 4 is robotics. Not that robotics are a continuation of IT.
"The connection has been known"
Citation needed, becasue I have read some of the best studies and there is no obvious connection.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2910149/
"it is reason it is forbidden in the first place"
no. It was forbidden becasue lies were spread about it and ignorant parents became scared and politicians just outlawed it instead of getting actual data and presenting it to the public.
It was outlaws do to perception of an issue.
"main reason doctors still recommend not to legalize it completely"
Repeat after me:
Doctors aren't scientists
Doctors aren't scientists
Doctors aren't scientists
The only reoccurring issue in studies is poor schooling facilities. .. and while reoccurring, better studies should be done.
My vested interest is in good data.
US didn't loose becasue there was no clearly defined Win.
It's just a pointless circle of action.
Myth.
http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/fed-data/stronger-weed.htm
No...
Why to they try it? how does it effect other aspects of their life. Those are the questions.
"is probably not the best thing for a developing brain"
speculation.
" It's also a socioeconomic red flag "
nope. But please, constinue with your wild ass statemnets based from 1950.
" these kids came from the wrong side of the tracks"
define wrong side of the tracks.
" they've had crappy and neglectful parenting"
Based on.. what? Oh right, the do pot therefore they were neglected and drop outs.
WTF?seriously, did you just crawl out of a rock from 1950? You sound like an episode of Batman.
"You can't blame them Robin, there parents are divorced, so there is no hope for them."
The other thing they have in common is that they are from a place were it's more socially acceptable to smoke pot.
Have you been reading the lies being spread from CALM?
Studies in the use of Marijuana have a tendency to support whatever the researcher was looking for. See Selection Bias.
Here is one of the best reviews of the literature to day:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2910149/
"So it's not especially surprising or interesting "
yes, it's not surprising your wrong assumption meet your conclusion.
the data was inconclusive; which means exactly that.
Auto insurance isn't mandatory? Home owners insurance isn't mandatory?
you really underscored you ignorance and stupidity just to make an incorrect dig at Obama.
You should take a good look at yourself and decide if you want to wallow in ignorance, or light the candle of knowledge.
"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
wrong. Hitler attack Germany first by making an internal enemy.
http://hurricane.atmos.colostate.edu/Includes/Documents/Publications/grayklotzbach2012.pdf
That's the paper.
A) they aren't climatologists
They are meteorologist. Those STILL aren't the same thing.
B) The article is horrid. It's quote mining and cherry picking.
C) They contradict themselves.
first this:
"The researchers acknowledge that human activity has led to an increase in carbon dioxide being released into the Earth’s atmosphere and an increase in average temperature."
then:
"Hurricanes draw their power from warm ocean waters,"
Clearly they don't understand AGW. AGW forecasts that as the overall volume of ocean ice decrease will will see an increase in ocean temperatures.
For the area of research they are in, CO2 numbers only matter when trying to forecast ocean temperatures. You can not use CO2 in the air to directly predicts cyclone events.
D) The confuse cycle with overall trends.
The paper clearly shows that increase in THC seems to mean more hurricanes, BUT they only use 20 year pieces and do not trend the overall hurricane numbers.
E) the limit them selves to hurricanes the hit land fall in the US.
With warming temperature will will see overall hurricanes number go up, not juut US land fall numbers. We will also see in increase in every other type of cyclone event. Tropical storms and so on.
And you little ad hom clearly demonstrates you don't actually know anything about AGW. Not that it will stop you from spouting ignorant opinion and cherry picking data. You are so bad, you have gotten to cherry picking from people who are experts in OTHER FIELDS. That is pretty much the best AGW deniers can do. You might want to take a more careful look at the facts regarding the climate. There is a reason theory is scientific consensus on this issue.
" "climate change" or "global warming" "
yes, change the names once to reflect a broader understanding of the topic is now 'changing the name every week'
Fucking idiot.
Have been taking climate change data and model predictions into account for years. Quite accurately, and quite successfully.
This alone should have convinced the non educated cynic..but it involves math, and math is hard so we will just deny anyways.
Since every person I know with a windows 8 machine has no problem figuring anything out on their own, I don't see that as an issue.
Why can't it have a ID 10T error>
Did you mean PEBKAC error?