There is no difference between macroevolution and microevolution. It is a false dichotomy invented by creationists, i.e. all evolution that has been observed in recorded history (and there is a lot) and all evolution that can be tested in a lab (which has been done) is called microevolution, and therefore macroevolution is by its very definition not verifiable. But the definition is bullshit.
The article also mentioned the constant automated negative feedback from the scanner. I would think that would be hard to take too, and not the same as other warehouse jobs.
To go hunting and foraging you need to own the land or have the permission of someone who does. Even on public lands such activities would be restricted. You might get away with breaking the rules for a long time, but that doesn't mean it's allowed. Owning land requires money which requires some job other than hunting and foraging. Also there is absolutely no way that this planet can support 7 billion people (or even 1 billion) via hunting and foraging.
Superconductors are a verifiable fact. An object moving in a vacuum also exhibits perpetual motion. And there is no law of physics that prohibits perpetual motion, as long as no energy is being removed from the system. Claims to perpetual motion machines are scams because they involve drawing infinite free energy from the machines (violating the first law of thermodynamics, conversation of energy) or converting heat to useful work (violating the second law of thermodynamics, entropy).
In day-to-day life you have to trust almost everything to get anything done, but the GP was talking in particular about trusting new scientific results. Even then if several independent scientists have verified it I can trust it without verifying it myself, but trusting an initial scientific finding that no one else has verified is just foolish, no matter how smart and established the original scientist is. There are different levels and meanings to the word "trust", and as GP pointed out there has to be a certain level of trust for anyone to even bother to try verifying or debunking a result (because there are far too many crackpots out there to deal with them all).
This is not squandering, this is a good use and a great example of why we should not be squandering our helium reserves. And you could probably make a 100 drives for the amount of helium in 1 birthday balloon (the open space in a drive is a rather small percentage of the drive, which in turn is much smaller than a balloon).
Wind turbines don't "slice up" birds. The blades move far too slowly. Occasionally birds die because they fly into them, but total bird deaths is petty tiny compared to electrical transmission lines, windows, hunting, cats, and just about anything else associated with civilization. Not that they don't have environmental impact, but the environmental costs are all up front. The mining of rare-earth minerals for the magnets is pretty horrid.
Astronomy came after farming. Farming came after hunting and gathering. But prostitution may have occurred any of them. Chimps exchange sex for food. But what do you consider a profession? If you do one thing as your primary source of wealth and barter for other things you need that is a profession. Early farmers more or less took care of all their own needs, but bartered some with the blacksmith, miller, cobbler, etc. Unless you are talking about extremely early farmers. Priests may have been one of the earliest professions (and not that different from prostitutes, they take money to make you feel good about yourself).
They are tidally locked to Jupiter, not the sun. Which means all sides should get an equal amount of sunlight, with a "day" being roughly 3.5 days for Europa and 7 for Ganymede. Plus the side facing Jupiter would have a long eclipse at noon each day and a lot of reflected light from Jupiter at night. The other side would have neither, but I don't think it would make a big difference in the total mount of light.
1) Not all religions postulate an omniscient deity. 2) Even if they do, omniscience could refer to knowing everything past and present, but not future (because the future doesn't exist yet, so there is nothing to know about it).
By the way, the same argument applies to time travel, i.e. it is incompatible with the existence of free will.
If you are trying to fill your belly with nutritious food while reducing calories, the fact that kale costs more per calorie is not a negative factor. That's only a problem if you are trying to maximize your calories.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no difference between macroevolution and microevolution. It is a false dichotomy invented by creationists, i.e. all evolution that has been observed in recorded history (and there is a lot) and all evolution that can be tested in a lab (which has been done) is called microevolution, and therefore macroevolution is by its very definition not verifiable. But the definition is bullshit.
The article also mentioned the constant automated negative feedback from the scanner. I would think that would be hard to take too, and not the same as other warehouse jobs.
To go hunting and foraging you need to own the land or have the permission of someone who does. Even on public lands such activities would be restricted. You might get away with breaking the rules for a long time, but that doesn't mean it's allowed. Owning land requires money which requires some job other than hunting and foraging. Also there is absolutely no way that this planet can support 7 billion people (or even 1 billion) via hunting and foraging.
Superconductors are a verifiable fact. An object moving in a vacuum also exhibits perpetual motion. And there is no law of physics that prohibits perpetual motion, as long as no energy is being removed from the system. Claims to perpetual motion machines are scams because they involve drawing infinite free energy from the machines (violating the first law of thermodynamics, conversation of energy) or converting heat to useful work (violating the second law of thermodynamics, entropy).
In day-to-day life you have to trust almost everything to get anything done, but the GP was talking in particular about trusting new scientific results. Even then if several independent scientists have verified it I can trust it without verifying it myself, but trusting an initial scientific finding that no one else has verified is just foolish, no matter how smart and established the original scientist is. There are different levels and meanings to the word "trust", and as GP pointed out there has to be a certain level of trust for anyone to even bother to try verifying or debunking a result (because there are far too many crackpots out there to deal with them all).
It's huge in Cuba. Of course we don't let them travel to the US to compete.
This is not squandering, this is a good use and a great example of why we should not be squandering our helium reserves. And you could probably make a 100 drives for the amount of helium in 1 birthday balloon (the open space in a drive is a rather small percentage of the drive, which in turn is much smaller than a balloon).
"founded in reality"? You are advocating a technology that no one has ever successfully built, despite a huge amount of effort.
Wind turbines don't "slice up" birds. The blades move far too slowly. Occasionally birds die because they fly into them, but total bird deaths is petty tiny compared to electrical transmission lines, windows, hunting, cats, and just about anything else associated with civilization. Not that they don't have environmental impact, but the environmental costs are all up front. The mining of rare-earth minerals for the magnets is pretty horrid.
Astronomy came after farming. Farming came after hunting and gathering. But prostitution may have occurred any of them. Chimps exchange sex for food. But what do you consider a profession? If you do one thing as your primary source of wealth and barter for other things you need that is a profession. Early farmers more or less took care of all their own needs, but bartered some with the blacksmith, miller, cobbler, etc. Unless you are talking about extremely early farmers. Priests may have been one of the earliest professions (and not that different from prostitutes, they take money to make you feel good about yourself).
We have observed chimps exchanging food for sex. No civilization, farming, or even language necessary for prostitution.
They are tidally locked to Jupiter, not the sun. Which means all sides should get an equal amount of sunlight, with a "day" being roughly 3.5 days for Europa and 7 for Ganymede. Plus the side facing Jupiter would have a long eclipse at noon each day and a lot of reflected light from Jupiter at night. The other side would have neither, but I don't think it would make a big difference in the total mount of light.
Eventually it will be weakened, and have to be replaced, and have to go *somewhere*.
10 years old is plenty old enough to ask children to think about those issues. We expect far too little from kids.
Doesn't amount to much. Wikipedia puts worldwide annual helium production at around 32 million kg.
Neutron capture. The walls of container, the water you heat to run the turbines, etc, will absorb neutrons and turn into radioactive isotopes.
You look like you're causing a meltdown. Would you like help?
1) Not all religions postulate an omniscient deity.
2) Even if they do, omniscience could refer to knowing everything past and present, but not future (because the future doesn't exist yet, so there is nothing to know about it).
By the way, the same argument applies to time travel, i.e. it is incompatible with the existence of free will.
it probably just stores the URL, which it stores anyway as part of your history. Not much in the way of resources.
tried it, doesn't work on Safari on a Mac. But good old command-Z does.
If you are trying to fill your belly with nutritious food while reducing calories, the fact that kale costs more per calorie is not a negative factor. That's only a problem if you are trying to maximize your calories.
(replying to negate an accidental mod, sorry)
The Institute of Pulling Numbers Out of Our Arse. We are responsible for 95.3% of the statistics available on the internet.
And by "very large percentage" you mean 7%.
(hey, I'm a big OS X fan myself, but describing its market share like that is pretty baffling)
Tank Farm Dynamo by David Brin (1983)