Seeing as it's perfectly logical to believe in science, as it is something which can (and does) exist, I'd probably have a larger problem with people who see the word "believe" and think "I believe in my religion, therefore anything anyone else believes in must be a religion". Also you are confusing the teaching of science with the endeavour itself. Please don't.
"Race" has no scientific definition and can mean pretty much anything shared amongst a group which they did not actively seek to bring upon themselves in order to identify as. It can stretch to some superficial similarities in genome, to shared tradition, to shared culture, to religion. So yeah, "Islam" can be a race, as can "Mexican".
Also, your first 3 sentences can be ignored as they are based on absolutely nothing but your assumptions. The generalisations they contain inherently preclude them from being logically sound. Which is not surprising as you then went on to try to defend a bunch of racist muppets. Yay you.
It's not just abnormal, it's illogical. "Race" is not a scientific term and can mean anything you choose it to. Also, you will find people of greatly differing cultures in a single country, so this idea there is "one culture" representing a country is also ridiculous. And people with no known Japanese ancestors indeed can - and frequently do - become Japanese.
You don't seem to understand what "gender is a social construct" means, and that it does not imply it is a choice in any way, shape, or form. If we take that bit out of your argument, the rest falls apart rather quickly...
It's quite possibly that "going against the grain of [someone's] biology" is a really neat excuse for racists/misogynists/whateverists. "I'm not actually hate-filled, it's just going against the grain of my biology, so I'm going to react to it in precisely the same way that a racist/misogynist/whateverist would react, but I'm different and should be respected!"
It does have that functionality. Seemingly not in the devices you purchased, but it exists, so you should blame the products (or the purchaser thereof:-P) instead of bluetooth...
You are forgetting the atmospheric mess they release, which is not factored in to the prices. If fossil fuels included all their costs in their product they wouldn't be nearly as competitive.
Luckily the scientists have the drop on you and have been working for decades to answer those questions. Their answers exist, and are available to everyone and anyone wishing to read them, but you are having too much fun pretending to want to care to read them.
Then why does internet access suck so badly in many large cities? Your argument doesn't hold water. Just look at Europe - larger than the US and still doing better. Clearly there is something more to it than just size or density...
The US does have ridiculous regulations, but it's not their magnitude but their direction which is bad. Don't equate all government regulations as equal when clearly they can vary massively depending on the government which introduced them. The fact there are many European countries with telecoms regulated incredibly strongly, and yet with well-priced ISPs. Clearly your point needs some work.
They're not claiming that, so who is stupid? They are banning diesel passenger cars, not freight and busses. It might help you to learn the details of something before assuming you do and condemning people based on your faulty understanding. It doesn't portray you in the most intelligent light.
We are talking about four large cities nowhere near you, where you don't drive. Your opinion is meaningless in this discussion as it has nothing to do with it at all.
That's why only 15% of Americans live in actual rural settings. Hurrr. You should stop speaking for other people - it's not doing your argument any favours! The fact American public transport in dense cities and corridors is still usually lacking isn't the fault of Europeans telling you you're doing it wrong.
What the hell does you living in a tiny town have to do with whether cities are sensible in banning diesel engines from their centres? They're not saying "ban diesels the world over", just "we don't want them in our specific cities".
And when you sell that fake Rolex for thousands to some guy whose only error was to believe you and the name on the product, nobody loses? Sheesh. Consumer protection laws exist for a reason.
Slashdot Mirror
Seeing as it's perfectly logical to believe in science, as it is something which can (and does) exist, I'd probably have a larger problem with people who see the word "believe" and think "I believe in my religion, therefore anything anyone else believes in must be a religion". Also you are confusing the teaching of science with the endeavour itself. Please don't.
And there he is - I thought you were dead or something - I've not read your mindless drivel on here in ages! I'd say "welcome back" but you're not.
"Race" has no scientific definition and can mean pretty much anything shared amongst a group which they did not actively seek to bring upon themselves in order to identify as. It can stretch to some superficial similarities in genome, to shared tradition, to shared culture, to religion. So yeah, "Islam" can be a race, as can "Mexican".
Also, your first 3 sentences can be ignored as they are based on absolutely nothing but your assumptions. The generalisations they contain inherently preclude them from being logically sound. Which is not surprising as you then went on to try to defend a bunch of racist muppets. Yay you.
It's not just abnormal, it's illogical. "Race" is not a scientific term and can mean anything you choose it to. Also, you will find people of greatly differing cultures in a single country, so this idea there is "one culture" representing a country is also ridiculous. And people with no known Japanese ancestors indeed can - and frequently do - become Japanese.
You don't seem to understand what "gender is a social construct" means, and that it does not imply it is a choice in any way, shape, or form. If we take that bit out of your argument, the rest falls apart rather quickly...
It's quite possibly that "going against the grain of [someone's] biology" is a really neat excuse for racists/misogynists/whateverists. "I'm not actually hate-filled, it's just going against the grain of my biology, so I'm going to react to it in precisely the same way that a racist/misogynist/whateverist would react, but I'm different and should be respected!"
It does have that functionality. Seemingly not in the devices you purchased, but it exists, so you should blame the products (or the purchaser thereof :-P) instead of bluetooth...
If you assume they all blare out radiation as much as they can as often as they can, sure...
You are forgetting the atmospheric mess they release, which is not factored in to the prices. If fossil fuels included all their costs in their product they wouldn't be nearly as competitive.
Science, unlike you, is not ignoring anything. You seem to have missed out on a few decades of findings.
It is a democracy - a representative democracy. It's not particularly well functioning, but it's a democracy.
Luckily the scientists have the drop on you and have been working for decades to answer those questions. Their answers exist, and are available to everyone and anyone wishing to read them, but you are having too much fun pretending to want to care to read them.
Then why does internet access suck so badly in many large cities? Your argument doesn't hold water. Just look at Europe - larger than the US and still doing better. Clearly there is something more to it than just size or density...
Hosts files don't block inline spam, such as yours, which also wastes bandwidth.
The US does have ridiculous regulations, but it's not their magnitude but their direction which is bad. Don't equate all government regulations as equal when clearly they can vary massively depending on the government which introduced them. The fact there are many European countries with telecoms regulated incredibly strongly, and yet with well-priced ISPs. Clearly your point needs some work.
That used to be the case, yes. However language changes, including these distinctions.
So you are ignoring the facts and instead basing your argument on your feelings towards history. Gotcha.
They're not claiming that, so who is stupid? They are banning diesel passenger cars, not freight and busses. It might help you to learn the details of something before assuming you do and condemning people based on your faulty understanding. It doesn't portray you in the most intelligent light.
We are talking about four large cities nowhere near you, where you don't drive. Your opinion is meaningless in this discussion as it has nothing to do with it at all.
That's why only 15% of Americans live in actual rural settings. Hurrr. You should stop speaking for other people - it's not doing your argument any favours! The fact American public transport in dense cities and corridors is still usually lacking isn't the fault of Europeans telling you you're doing it wrong.
What the hell does you living in a tiny town have to do with whether cities are sensible in banning diesel engines from their centres? They're not saying "ban diesels the world over", just "we don't want them in our specific cities".
To you. You seem to be assuming that you experience the world the same way as everyone else.
And you'd be wrong. Just think about it - if you were right, everyone would be dead or Muslim. As that's patently not the case, you are incorrect.
You misheard the lyrics. Try again.
And when you sell that fake Rolex for thousands to some guy whose only error was to believe you and the name on the product, nobody loses? Sheesh. Consumer protection laws exist for a reason.