The BBC website has a Wi-fi health fears are 'unproven' story which addresses this. My favourite quote, from Professor Will J Stewart:
"This is not to say that all electromagnetic radiation is necessarily harmless - sunlight, for example, poses a significant cancer risk; so if you are using your laptop on the beach make sure and get some shade."
Why do I get the feeling that this won't put a dent in your delusion that you're more of an expert in this subject than the climatologists who actually study it for a living?
Even further, Hollywood is compelled to continue making sequels until they are so bad they stop making money.
Hah! So true! It's like a variation of the Peter Principle. Write up a wikipedia entry on it, edit the Peter Principle page to link to it, and you've just invented the Hoggoth Principle. Congrats!:)
I have, and I've clearly made a different decision than you about the importance of human life versus toeing the "silent spring" line.
You've decided that you prefer to believe the lie that DDT was ever banned so that you can be a martyr to the sufferings of the millions? Oh, OK.
he link you provided was not a rebuttal, it was just a glib dismissal.
You really have some problems with this whole "World Wide Web" thing, don't you? There's a link at the end of each myth. You click it. I'll make it easier for you and link directly, since you're a bit slow. CLICK HERE!!. With any luck you'll get it this time, but I'm not holding out much hope...
Rachel Carson managed to get millions of people killed with junk science
It's difficult to believe there are people who just blindly accept whatever propaganda they're fed, without checking to see if there's a different view. Here. A game for you.
Don't spew garbage about the U.K. either, I have a few ex-patriate friends living there who has mentioned how terrible it is.
You know, I usually like your posts, even though I rarely agree with them (I do on copyright and patents) but I'm getting a bit tired of this uninformed nonsense about the NHS in the UK. Fair enough, you're probably getting bad info from your whiny friends so let's introduce some facts into this (note that I'm comparing the CURRENT system in the US with the UK; not your idea of a totally free market health system).
Firstly, access to the NHS. Contrary to popular belief, you don't have to wait months to see a doctor: you call up in the morning and make an appointment for the following day (if it's an emergency, go directly to A&E and be seen immediately). There are waiting lists for non-critical operations, because urgent operations take precedent. Not good if you happen to be the one waiting, but I'll get to this later.
Secondly, some figures (from 2003; latest I could find; all prices from now in in USD):
UK government (NHS) spending was $2,231 per capita on healthcare (ignore the US figure as that's private spending too)
So we actually pay less in tax for a far more comprehensive service!
"Ahh, but what about those horrible waiting lists?" I hear you cry. According to http://www.preferredmedical.co.uk/ I can get private cover and avoid mixing with the proles for less than $80 a month for the Comprehensive Cover with No Excess. If I want to get the medium one with $400 excess, it would cost less than $50. What's more I know I always have the NHS to fall back on should something happen that means I can no longer afford the insurance. Prescriptions here cost $14 per item. Can you seriously tell me that the US system is better? Have the other posters been lying about extortionate insurance costs, horrible prescription costs, and the risk of becoming uninsurable?
So the next time your friends complain about the NHS, ask them if they're really so cheap that they can't afford to pay $50 a month.
And next time you're posting about healthcare reform, maybe you should be more along the lines of "even the nasty, socialist UK NHS is better than our current mess". Since you're a Libertarian, it should sound pretty powerful coming from you.;-)
Atheism is as much a religion as not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Good point! On a related note, have you read Richard Dawkins' new book "The Philately Dissipation"? I believe there's a TV series to go along with it...
No paranoia here. You make a claim that flies in the face of common experience, and you don't bother providing a link to back it up when it should be trivial to do so. The simplest explanation for that is that you're lying. Still, since you say you do contribute to newsgroups etc, I'll assume you weren't lying, so mea culpa.
I still think you're out of line with criticising the Ubuntu forums though. No doubt there are *some* problems they can't fix, but it's certainly not the general case. If you don't want the forums in your results use "-ubuntu" in your google search.
"Contact information"? What are you talking about?
Since you're having trouble understanding me, let me put it more clearly. I constantly hear these whines about poor support on forums, yet the whiner (in this case, you) never provides a link to the thread illustrating his point. And when I go to the Ubuntu forums what I see is useful advice being given to help people solve their problems. You'd think if there were so many threads where no help was given, you'd manage to link to at least one or two, no?
I think you just make this crap up, frankly. And you've done it again with your Nvidia error post. Maybe that is a true story, but I seriously doubt it since you can't even get it straight in your own post (how was it that he "refused to understand" something, when he never had any replies?)
Do you get some weird pleasure from denigrating the work of volunteers, or are you just generally a miserable sod?
by Pope (17780)... All the more reason to round up the superstitious idiots in the world and turn them into an organ bank. -- "Virii" isn't a word, you frigging morons.
You know, I don't think you're really the Pope at all...
The link you gave was about methanol. The alcohol you drink is ethanol. Does heating wine convert the ethanol to methanol or something? (I'm not being sarcastic; I've just never heard of such a thing and would genuinely like to know if this happens).
why in hell haven't we evolved past needing sleep yet?!
Evolution is all about who gets to have sex. It's no coincidence that we refer to having sex as sleeping with someone. Presumably if you don't sleep you don't spend the social time going to sleep that encourages sex. Just a wild guess, I have no evidence for this theory, but I haven't heard a better one (feel free to contribute!)
No big deal. If I've included a Spinal Tap (mis)quote in my post, it's safe to assume it was meant light-heartedly. "Bible" meaning "book" was a simplification. If you're interested, the wikipedia article has a more detailed explanation (which is accurate...or, at least, agrees with the OED).
Again? I've been hearing that this is the year of the Linux desktop since 1996!
Really? Two years before KDE 1.0 was released and three years before Gnome 1.0? What nutters do you listen to anyway? It isn't that many years ago that you'd hear the Microsofties on here saying that a hobbyist OS like Linux would never be used in a serious company. Not on the desktop, mind, they meant as a server. Now, the cry is that Linux will never make it on the desktop. Well, we'll see...
Religion on the other hand is based on faith and "books" that aren't going to change over time.
There's no need to put "books" in quotes: they really are books! Take the Bible for example. It's really a book. It has pages and words and everything. It's often referred to as "The Good Book". If you have a look at the list of best selling books, there it is at the top. The name "Bible" comes from the word for book. It's like, how much more book could it be? And the answer is none. None more book.
I know a lot about British pop music of this era and I have to admit I was just crushed to read that as I know nothing about Ken Dodd. Never heard of him.
Ken Dodd was famous for being a comedian (and, later, for being tight-fisted), not as a singer. I didn't know he'd ever had success with a song and I'm from the UK.
It's pretty old. In its entry for pirate (in this sense) OED has:
1603 T. DEKKER Wonderfull Yeare sig. A4, Banish these Word-pirates (you sacred mistresses of learning) into the gulfe of Barbarisme.] 1668 J. HANCOCK Brooks' String of Pearls (Notice at end), Some dishonest Booksellers, called Land-Pirats, who make it their practise to steal Impressions of other mens Copies. 1703 D. DEFOE True-born Englishman in True Collect. I. Explan. Pref. sig. B3v, Its being Printed again and again, by Pyrates.
Land is the biggest cost in the production of food in the US. I can't imagine why you don't think it's a factor.
I'd assumed that farmers actually owned their land and didn't have to pay for it every year. Or is there some massive tax on land? Why tax the land if you're then going to subsidise it?
Well, I meant for a government to do it. Maybe it is possible though.
Individuals certainly can but the vast majority won't. Still, when civilization collapses, and my tribe is out searching for food, we now know to hunt down a Mormon!:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Except, of course, that solar output hasn't been higher.
Why do I get the feeling that this won't put a dent in your delusion that you're more of an expert in this subject than the climatologists who actually study it for a living?
Firstly, access to the NHS. Contrary to popular belief, you don't have to wait months to see a doctor: you call up in the morning and make an appointment for the following day (if it's an emergency, go directly to A&E and be seen immediately). There are waiting lists for non-critical operations, because urgent operations take precedent. Not good if you happen to be the one waiting, but I'll get to this later.
Secondly, some figures (from 2003; latest I could find; all prices from now in in USD):
UK government (NHS) spending was $2,231 per capita on healthcare (ignore the US figure as that's private spending too)
US government spending was $2,548 per capita
So we actually pay less in tax for a far more comprehensive service!
"Ahh, but what about those horrible waiting lists?" I hear you cry. According to http://www.preferredmedical.co.uk/ I can get private cover and avoid mixing with the proles for less than $80 a month for the Comprehensive Cover with No Excess. If I want to get the medium one with $400 excess, it would cost less than $50. What's more I know I always have the NHS to fall back on should something happen that means I can no longer afford the insurance. Prescriptions here cost $14 per item. Can you seriously tell me that the US system is better? Have the other posters been lying about extortionate insurance costs, horrible prescription costs, and the risk of becoming uninsurable?
So the next time your friends complain about the NHS, ask them if they're really so cheap that they can't afford to pay $50 a month.
And next time you're posting about healthcare reform, maybe you should be more along the lines of "even the nasty, socialist UK NHS is better than our current mess". Since you're a Libertarian, it should sound pretty powerful coming from you.
No, that's the Enterprise version. The free version is called opensuse.
No paranoia here. You make a claim that flies in the face of common experience, and you don't bother providing a link to back it up when it should be trivial to do so. The simplest explanation for that is that you're lying. Still, since you say you do contribute to newsgroups etc, I'll assume you weren't lying, so mea culpa.
I still think you're out of line with criticising the Ubuntu forums though. No doubt there are *some* problems they can't fix, but it's certainly not the general case. If you don't want the forums in your results use "-ubuntu" in your google search.
"Contact information"? What are you talking about?
Since you're having trouble understanding me, let me put it more clearly. I constantly hear these whines about poor support on forums, yet the whiner (in this case, you) never provides a link to the thread illustrating his point. And when I go to the Ubuntu forums what I see is useful advice being given to help people solve their problems. You'd think if there were so many threads where no help was given, you'd manage to link to at least one or two, no?
I think you just make this crap up, frankly. And you've done it again with your Nvidia error post. Maybe that is a true story, but I seriously doubt it since you can't even get it straight in your own post (how was it that he "refused to understand" something, when he never had any replies?)
Do you get some weird pleasure from denigrating the work of volunteers, or are you just generally a miserable sod?
Hey, since we're not providing any links, we can just make up any old crap, yes? Oops! Did I just give away your secret posting technique? Sorry...
You probably missed my response since you're busy answering physics questions, but do you mind answering my chemistry one please?
It's pretty old. In its entry for pirate (in this sense) OED has:
1603 T. DEKKER Wonderfull Yeare sig. A4, Banish these Word-pirates (you sacred mistresses of learning) into the gulfe of Barbarisme.] 1668 J. HANCOCK Brooks' String of Pearls (Notice at end), Some dishonest Booksellers, called Land-Pirats, who make it their practise to steal Impressions of other mens Copies. 1703 D. DEFOE True-born Englishman in True Collect. I. Explan. Pref. sig. B3v, Its being Printed again and again, by Pyrates.
Well, I meant for a government to do it. Maybe it is possible though.
:-)
Individuals certainly can but the vast majority won't. Still, when civilization collapses, and my tribe is out searching for food, we now know to hunt down a Mormon!