Mostly because people stumbled on shale gas, which replaced a bunch of coal. There's no real policy behind it, and it can easily reverse again when the gas starts running out.
Repeatable experimental observation that can factually prove or disprove a hypothesis is a good basis for science.
Suppose, for instance, some scientists claim that we need to build a higher levee around a lake to reduce the risk of catastrophic flooding. What would be the appropriate response from the lawmakers ?
Science is not just about objective facts. It's about theories that explain these facts. Different scientists can, and have, propose different theories for the same facts.
Right, but you also need to account for time required to upgrade grid and replace all existing transportation. Also keep in mind that wind/solar installations start with the best locations, and that subsequent expansions have to move to poorer places, limiting their growth rate.
It is obviously not square, since the earth casts a circular shadow during a lunar eclipse.
Nothing obvious about it. The mental gymnastics required to explain every day phenomena like sunsets and time zones can also explain a circular shadow from a square object.
It also helps to have a ratio of 10 women for each man. I hasten to add that since each man will be required to do prodigious...service along these lines, the women will have to be selected for their sexual characteristics which will have to be of a highly stimulating nature.
It's much easier to get all the nutrition out of meat. It's the herbivores like gorillas and rabbits that have to eat their poop, because the bacteria that help with digesting cellulose are in the colon where it's too late for the intestines to extract all the nutrients.
Meat is broken down and digested in small intestine. If you eat too much meat, the intestines can just go slower to give it more processing time. Slowing down is not an option for cellulose diets because energy density is too low.
$40, and the much more robust boots, especially waterproof boots, as at least $130. A 4 to 1 ratio of their durability is not unexpected
It's also not impossible for cheap stuff to outlast expensive things. I carry around a $25 Nokia cellphone that has lasted me longer than most iPhones last. In general, it's hard to make good things cheap, but it's easy to make shitty things expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
Great 'Murica has kept coming down in CO2
Mostly because people stumbled on shale gas, which replaced a bunch of coal. There's no real policy behind it, and it can easily reverse again when the gas starts running out.
There are plenty of theories that are not validated, like string theory.
Repeatable experimental observation that can factually prove or disprove a hypothesis is a good basis for science.
Suppose, for instance, some scientists claim that we need to build a higher levee around a lake to reduce the risk of catastrophic flooding. What would be the appropriate response from the lawmakers ?
It depends. A big factor would be how the laws affect other states and countries.
Science is not just about objective facts. It's about theories that explain these facts. Different scientists can, and have, propose different theories for the same facts.
How do you people do this without brain damage from all the cognitive dissonance?
You are accusing a diverse group of people from having different opinions ? Or are you talking about a person in particular ?
The instant you start rolling out "pretty much all" or "97% of scientists" say, you're INSTANTLY anti-science.
Please explain how lawmakers should use scientific findings, if not going by consensus ?
The problem is Republicans are afraid of the reality becoming known and accepted
Why ? Reality hasn't stopped them before, so what's different this time ?
Also if they have expertise and the means, I don't see what the problem is, even if it's not within the exact original scope of the organization.
Feel free to go ahead and develop your own internet, then.
Want mine? Open your checkbook. I don't buy in to your communistic approach to products (plasma) that I generate with my body.
Especially since there are companies making good money on selling blood and plasma. It's only reasonable if the actual donor gets a cut.
Doing pushups is mostly anaerobic, so depends more on muscle mass than oxygen/energy flow.
And anybody claiming to be a "critical thinker" should first be critical of their own assumptions.
Right, but you also need to account for time required to upgrade grid and replace all existing transportation. Also keep in mind that wind/solar installations start with the best locations, and that subsequent expansions have to move to poorer places, limiting their growth rate.
I don't trust any of the fact given that I can't proved myself.
But you can easily prove yourself that the Earth is round, using nothing more than common household items.
Therefore by 2040 we will be able to source all our current use of electricity by renewables plus a lot more.
Electricity generation only accounts for about a quarter of total energy use, and it's the easiest to replace by renewables.
It is obviously not square, since the earth casts a circular shadow during a lunar eclipse.
Nothing obvious about it. The mental gymnastics required to explain every day phenomena like sunsets and time zones can also explain a circular shadow from a square object.
Not at all, you just need to declare all evidence contrary to your beliefs as being "fake".
You have be very creative to explain a sunset as "fake" when you can witness it yourself.
Also, treaties are upheld only as long as it makes sense.
It also helps to have a ratio of 10 women for each man. I hasten to add that since each man will be required to do prodigious...service along these lines, the women will have to be selected for their sexual characteristics which will have to be of a highly stimulating nature.
It's much easier to get all the nutrition out of meat. It's the herbivores like gorillas and rabbits that have to eat their poop, because the bacteria that help with digesting cellulose are in the colon where it's too late for the intestines to extract all the nutrients.
Meat is broken down and digested in small intestine. If you eat too much meat, the intestines can just go slower to give it more processing time. Slowing down is not an option for cellulose diets because energy density is too low.
Nope. You're just being facetious because you're lacking real arguments, I suppose.
I've met quite a few poor people (even some in my family), and not a single one wasn't making bad choices with their money.
$40, and the much more robust boots, especially waterproof boots, as at least $130. A 4 to 1 ratio of their durability is not unexpected
It's also not impossible for cheap stuff to outlast expensive things. I carry around a $25 Nokia cellphone that has lasted me longer than most iPhones last. In general, it's hard to make good things cheap, but it's easy to make shitty things expensive.
Phone calls are allowed, but only with simulated latency.
Right, but energy is easier to understand than "delta-V", for someone who thinks you can push things into the Sun.