So you have no data at all, you are just lying. And then you demand an apology. Sure. By the way, the ad hominem fallacy means attacking the messenger regardless of his message to make the content of said message less believable. That is somewhat different from calling a liar a liar, now is it?
Try lying harder? When exactly was the ozone hole made to be a reason for a cooling spell? The concern about stratospheric ozone was always about increased UV and thereby increased cancer risk. We happened to do something about it that worked by the way. Care to provide any source for your claims?
Does it actually hurt when you lie that badly? I'd really like to know, never been there. In case you are actually honest and not just a lying scumbag, would you mind to provide data?
Who is ignoring solar forcings? They are in basically every model. Straight out denial that ignores basically the whole literature on the subject is not "healthy skepticism"; by the way. Calling it such besmirches the name of every true skeptic out there.
The trolls, don't feed them. You only create an environmental boundary condition that leads to the evolution of more trolls, who thrive in that particular ecological (or in this case memetic) niche. As for the GP, suffice to say that microevolution" - a concept completely made up by the creationist/ID crowd - obviously includes everything obeserved and conclusively proven to the point where you simply can't deny it. Everything outside of that, they call macroevolution. Of course, if anything previously filed under "macro" gets conclusively shown in the lab, it is re-filed under "micro": Gotta keep these goalposts moving after all.
From a "selfish gene" perspective, there should be an optimum regarding the rate of mutations passed on to offspring. Zero obviously has your germline severly limited in terms of adaptability, too high a number would be detrimental for obvious reasons, and further to that, as you say dilute our "selfish gene" out of existence. As usual, evolution tends to settle into local optima - "good enough" is all that it takes.
As for the stress factor - sounds plausible on the first glance, however, stress response leads to a profound and measurable change in gene expression - upon cellular stress, genes coding for the DNA repair system tend to be expressed more strongly. So actually, mutation rate might be even lower under stress response. I don't have quantitative data at hand, though.
Hook, line and sinker. Wish the trout were that cooperative these days. Now, to finish off your ramblings, take into consideration the fact that social security is not, and was never meant to be an investment scheme.
To be honest, I am not particularly interested in the American constitutional folklore of "state rights". Can we discuss the issue on an abstract level, not specifically tied to the US? Because, frankly, I still have no idea what you mean by "more rights than they should be allowed by the Constitution". From the examples you cite i can only glean that spending for the military is fine, but healthcare is out. So again, we are not looking at a matter of quantity, we are looking at a matter of quality.
I'll admit to the fact that bitcoins are not a ponzi scheme as soon as I get an open admission that neither is social security by one of the notorious conservatrolls here.
Mu. Great way of clearing up that the "big government" rah-rah crowd has no idea what it actually means by it, except for "government not ran by us and not funneling money into OUR pockets".
So can we finally settle on the fact that bitcoin is not only bullshit, but obviously plain stupid bullshit and move on, stopping with the spam about a meaningless circlejerk by some basement dwellers that have no clue about economics, except for maybe profiteering from a ponzi scheme?
Again, a reasonable position. However, the people usually ranting about "big government" seem to be of the opinion that slashing social programs would be the cure-all to make it "small" again. I don't usually hear about the military from those...
Didn't say that I see anything wrong with those. Just some geneticists having some fun while still making sense - isn't that the best kind? Personally, I come from the NMR spectroscopy business, so don't let me get started on the HOHAHA, HEHAHA and HIHAHA pulse sequences...
Just out of interest - what is big government? What would be small government? At what point does small government become big government? Or is there an intermediate government in between?
Didn't realize that you where the GP himself. Well, what are you railing about then, with all that the "minorities taking away the rights of the majority" then? As far as I can tell from the previous posts, the law in question wasn't about the prohibition of rape, it was about prohibiting taking up an anti-rape clause in contracts. Why would anyone be against that?
As for the racism card, please, feel free to state what those minorities are that steal from you, go ahead.
Now what's wrong with latin? (ignoring the fact that squarepantsii is standard latinizing anyway). Personally, I feel it is a shame that today's scientists, including me, are not fluid in latin any more. I used to be, but lost all of it over the last one and a half decades.
Probably. Don't want to rant about this right now, I am not feeling zealous enough...;) For the benefit of the doubt, I offer the concept that Switzerland is just smaller.
Slashdot Mirror
So, show me your data. Show me any data that supports your position. So far, you only engaged in poisoning the well.
So you have no data at all, you are just lying. And then you demand an apology. Sure. By the way, the ad hominem fallacy means attacking the messenger regardless of his message to make the content of said message less believable. That is somewhat different from calling a liar a liar, now is it?
Try lying harder? When exactly was the ozone hole made to be a reason for a cooling spell? The concern about stratospheric ozone was always about increased UV and thereby increased cancer risk. We happened to do something about it that worked by the way. Care to provide any source for your claims?
Does it actually hurt when you lie that badly? I'd really like to know, never been there. In case you are actually honest and not just a lying scumbag, would you mind to provide data?
Who is ignoring solar forcings? They are in basically every model. Straight out denial that ignores basically the whole literature on the subject is not "healthy skepticism"; by the way. Calling it such besmirches the name of every true skeptic out there.
The trolls, don't feed them. You only create an environmental boundary condition that leads to the evolution of more trolls, who thrive in that particular ecological (or in this case memetic) niche. As for the GP, suffice to say that microevolution" - a concept completely made up by the creationist/ID crowd - obviously includes everything obeserved and conclusively proven to the point where you simply can't deny it. Everything outside of that, they call macroevolution. Of course, if anything previously filed under "macro" gets conclusively shown in the lab, it is re-filed under "micro": Gotta keep these goalposts moving after all.
From a "selfish gene" perspective, there should be an optimum regarding the rate of mutations passed on to offspring. Zero obviously has your germline severly limited in terms of adaptability, too high a number would be detrimental for obvious reasons, and further to that, as you say dilute our "selfish gene" out of existence. As usual, evolution tends to settle into local optima - "good enough" is all that it takes.
As for the stress factor - sounds plausible on the first glance, however, stress response leads to a profound and measurable change in gene expression - upon cellular stress, genes coding for the DNA repair system tend to be expressed more strongly. So actually, mutation rate might be even lower under stress response. I don't have quantitative data at hand, though.
Hook, line and sinker. Wish the trout were that cooperative these days. Now, to finish off your ramblings, take into consideration the fact that social security is not, and was never meant to be an investment scheme.
I suppose Ween will do anything as long as you can label it "Far out, man"...
How could anyone write a lengthy article about a new mushroom without once mentioning what it tastes like?
If it is a proper shroom, it'll taste purple with a slight whiff of G-minor, of course.
Perhaps we should fix that by teaching people about the muses instead of going on about spongebob, though...
To be honest, I am not particularly interested in the American constitutional folklore of "state rights". Can we discuss the issue on an abstract level, not specifically tied to the US? Because, frankly, I still have no idea what you mean by "more rights than they should be allowed by the Constitution". From the examples you cite i can only glean that spending for the military is fine, but healthcare is out. So again, we are not looking at a matter of quantity, we are looking at a matter of quality.
I'll admit to the fact that bitcoins are not a ponzi scheme as soon as I get an open admission that neither is social security by one of the notorious conservatrolls here.
Why yes, yes it was. Do you have any idea how rusty my latin is?
Mu. Great way of clearing up that the "big government" rah-rah crowd has no idea what it actually means by it, except for "government not ran by us and not funneling money into OUR pockets".
So can we finally settle on the fact that bitcoin is not only bullshit, but obviously plain stupid bullshit and move on, stopping with the spam about a meaningless circlejerk by some basement dwellers that have no clue about economics, except for maybe profiteering from a ponzi scheme?
Again, a reasonable position. However, the people usually ranting about "big government" seem to be of the opinion that slashing social programs would be the cure-all to make it "small" again. I don't usually hear about the military from those...
Smaug obviously is the supressor for nanos, the dwarf gene. (just for clarity, not made up - it's how it works, Smaugbinds the nanos mRNA).
Didn't say that I see anything wrong with those. Just some geneticists having some fun while still making sense - isn't that the best kind? Personally, I come from the NMR spectroscopy business, so don't let me get started on the HOHAHA, HEHAHA and HIHAHA pulse sequences...
Well, constitutionality is a reasonable requirement, I give you that - how does following the constitution correlate with size, though?
Just out of interest - what is big government? What would be small government? At what point does small government become big government? Or is there an intermediate government in between?
If you absolutely positively need it classified under the Linnean system before sunrise...
Didn't realize that you where the GP himself. Well, what are you railing about then, with all that the "minorities taking away the rights of the majority" then? As far as I can tell from the previous posts, the law in question wasn't about the prohibition of rape, it was about prohibiting taking up an anti-rape clause in contracts. Why would anyone be against that? As for the racism card, please, feel free to state what those minorities are that steal from you, go ahead.
Now what's wrong with latin? (ignoring the fact that squarepantsii is standard latinizing anyway). Personally, I feel it is a shame that today's scientists, including me, are not fluid in latin any more. I used to be, but lost all of it over the last one and a half decades.
Probably. Don't want to rant about this right now, I am not feeling zealous enough... ;) For the benefit of the doubt, I offer the concept that Switzerland is just smaller.