Never said that. As a libertarian I want the most granular, effective, filtering possible, but fully empowered to turn it on, off, and tweaked exactly to my liking. No one else should make those decisions aside from the individual, and the children they are responsible to protect. Everything should be at parental discretion. Everyone has the right to fuck up their own life. Generic filters donâ(TM)t give you that flexibility. Sure, you can turn them on and off, but they lack the granularity.
You must be young if you believe that. Unrealistic would not be the word I would use. Someone calling themselves a social conservative these days are trying to preserve social norms from the 50s. To call it unrealistic implies fiction or something that never existed, when clearly it did. You could use words like archaic, outdated, even backward thinking and still fall within the realm of civil discord. Unrealistic does not exactly fit here. Most were raised in a 3day per week church-going household that still lived by those social norms. So to them its very real and proven to have worked at one time.
Whereas, for a âprogressiveâ(TM) type liberal, unrealistic does work as a description since its based on ideas not yet fully vetted. They are pushing society toward an goal of what they think a utopia represents to them, but clearly has not manifest or passed a test of time.
See the difference here? I really dont identify with either. Im not religious but i think a society based on minority rule is going to fall apart exactly like it did for anchient rome. My generation used words like conservative and liberal to describe fiscal responsibilities, it was never used to describe social norms. I think it does a better job in that context.
no, but they could give her a very, very, unrealistic outlook on sex, one in which she believes her only worth is how much she can give away in order to gain affection. its not entirely harmless. if you arent aware of some of the sick shit out there, free content no less, I guess thats a good thing, for you anyway. But its there, and maybe if you check out some of the videos, you might agree that perhaps some filtering is definitely not a bad thing.
as a 15/16yr old my dad gave me a subscription to playboy, but he wasnt about to spring for other mags like hustler or those lesser known, more graphic types. Playboy didnt pose women into purely objectified things. It was a bit more like a model posing for a portrait than simply open crotch shots and cucumber insertions.
on this I can agree, there should be tiers of nude content ratings. Just naked body parts being on the low end, where rape/snuff being at the highest end. Maybe not get so uptight on a nip slip or seeing a woman step out of a shower naked, whereas maybe still say no to open crotch shots.
as a libertarian Im all for having more tools, as a parent, to decide what is and what is not ok. Obviously there are some good things to the internet in terms of research power, etc. And there is a whole lot of bad shit too. The more granular and more power I have to exempt or ban specific things that slip through, or get caught by, a filter is never a bad thing. Having the tools gives the parents to choose how much or how little to implement. Ultimately its still their choice. If letting your 6yr old watch the original Jurrasic Park (R) in the theatre because its about dinosaurs is ok with you, well Im not the one who has to deal with the kids traumatized with nightmares. Thats on them. Me, well I'm trying to keep my kids maintaining a healthy baseline of normalcy without trying to stiffel them more than absolutely necessary to prevent them obtaining some unhealthy or unrealistic view/opinion on things.
so your ok with kids stumbling onto a free porn site of fake snuff films where burglars choke, rape, anally rape, and eventually strangle-to-death their victim? Its going to give the kids some really really fucked up outlook on the whole sex-relationship thing. That shit is out there too. Very few free porn sites are just "breasts and penis'". There is no sick thing you can think of that is not already made into some 5min video on pornhub or something. Kids do NOT need to stumble across shit like that 2-girls-1-cup video everyone thought was funny to send to their friends and record their reactions.
well porn on the internet has definitely degraded from just naked people to some pretty dark shit. When I was a kid the 'porn' we watched was staying up late to see some cinemax (skinimax) r rated movies where its rated R for 'nutidy, and strong sexual content', commonly referred to as a tenage-fuck-flick.
the shit they watch now is stuff you do once you've burned through all the lighter porn content and you need something stronger to keep you from getting burned out. Not exactly the things kids should _start_ with. Hell some shit on the internet includes simulated rape and sometimes rape with some strangulation and fake killing at the end. Thats pretty scarring shit to see for a lot of people, but especially someone in their mid teens. Not really a great idea to let kids get exposed to that. So I'm ok with the porn filters. If they want to learn about sex they can hit up netflix with their parents profile and watch some r rated fuck-flicks like we did or ask their parents about more normal sex questions.
I wouldn't mind more filters to rate violence in videos to have a finer grain of control. Its harder to filter written content since there are way too many ways to game the system anway. If your filter is just based on key words they always find a way around it. Its the same reason why you still get spam despite having spam filters.
As true as that may be, I still fear a world where all speach is censored much more. We just need a/. Option to make AC posts not visible, and make it the default setting.
They post AC for basically 1 of 2 reasons.
1) they are using a mobile device and hate logging in practically every time they click a link from a response notification
2) they lack the spine to stand by whatever hatefull, moronic, outlandish, or downright retarded bullshit they drivel.
#1 is a technological issue and could be fixed with development of better tools.
#2 just needs to be fixed with some chlorine dispersed in their gene pool.
Games purchased thru their store, DLC, and other add-ons are account based. Your annual subscription for PSN is also tied. It could be financially a mess if you have spent a lot of money on non tangible products and unlock codes.
I am not a fan of owning a game without a corresponding disk. Some games like fortnite and battlefront also do the whole âbuy goldâ(TM) model to alter appearances or unlock weapons.
I could see how this could be a disaster if your identity got stolen. Posession is 9/10ths of the law, so they say. Not much proof without something tangible to back up.
also wanted to point out that using solar/wind/etc to produce power and some of that is used to make hydrogen, then the hydrogen can be exported elsewhere to generate electricity where wind and solar are not feasible, such as Anchorage or Juno.
well the nice thing about hydrogen, so ive been told, is that any car can actually be converted relatively inexpensively. That might be a low hanging fruit of its own. How to make the hydrogen without consuming fossil fuels is another matter entirely. However, even if they were consuming fossil fuels to produce the hydrogen, a fixed plant has more options for scrubbing co2 than a small vehicle.
most of the oil industry has already diversified into other energy production. So they're going to make money no matter what kind of electricity you're buying. But demand keeps trying to outpace supply. We cant have any sort of limits on fossil fuel consumption as long as stupid shit like crypto mining exists. It wastes energy for the pure purpose of wasting energy. In a single day, it consumes more power globally than a small island the size of Puerto Rico could reasonably consume in a year. The massive heat that comes off these devices is unreal, its like leaving the stove running all day with its door left ajar. Eliminating wasteful energy consumption is just as important as boosting non-fossile-based power production. We need to revisit hydrogen as a means of energy transportation because some renewable energy sources are highly geographically limited.
Really?? What if your consituents keep voting you back and yet you actually do keep breaking the laws and the constitution you're sworn to uphold? How about the fact that they tracked the posting of the names and addresses of republican senators to Feinsteins office? Or when they leak classified information to the media? Yet voters keep voting them back?? I believe you're looking for a different process than leaving it up to the voters in that case. Leaking classified information is a violation of the espionage act. That should require a senate trial and if proven beyond reasonable doubt with a preponderance of evidence, should result in forced removal. There have been senators removed from office. They threw out Al Franken WITHOUT due process, and it was not his constituents that did that.
they can be impeached just like a president, but he would have to be found guilty of a crime. Being believed to be partisan describes every damn justice up there. They already have a tally of who they think will vote each way.. that doesnt come from a crystal ball. Kennedy was just one considered a swing voter. You dont get a nickname like that if this court is as partisan free as you seem to think.
its way worse than that. They took an oath to uphold the constitution. SEVERAL went on TV and made these statements like "We already know he is guilty". That is a direct violation of due process. They are directly acting AGAINST the constitution and are guilty of Treason. They should be removed and charged as such.
thorough? She has how many degrees in psychology?? How smart is her Hipocampus? Yet she took a polygraph THE DAY SHE BURIED HER Grandmother. She KNOWS that makes it inconclusive. Its too easy to FAKE when your emotionally compromised. Not only did she not suggest waiting a week, she intentionally witheld that information from the polygraph interviewer. That person would have insisted she could not take it. She hoped nobody would realize this. Even a Bachelors in psychology knows this. How many PHd's does she have again??? She claims she gave WaPo a transcript of the 2012 shrink session. Under oath she claims she cant remember if it was the actual transcript or a handwritten (by her) summary. This was just 5 weeks ago! Then she turns around and REFUSES to give the investigation an actual copy of the session so that it remains privileged conversation. I think it never existed in the first place. Exactly what do you mean thorough?
She went on a limb, didnt realize the scrutiny would be this bad. Had NO idea that this would not just make him ineligible but now Maryland thinks they can go to trial with no evidence and a report by a 30yr sex assault prosecutor who said no prosecutor would _ever_ take a case like this to trial. Now she's in way over her head and Feinstien, who orchestrated all this, is trying to cover her tracks and is leaving Ford out to hang so that it doesnt get back to her.
you fucking retard, the accuser that accused him of GANG RAPE has been proven to be full of shit even by MSNBC.
her sworn statement taken by the stormy daniels attorney DOES NOT MATCH her written statement to MSNBC which also DOES NOT MATCH her on camera interview
she gave a SWORN testimony he put Qualudes in her drink and GANG RAPED her..... this eventually turned into : I saw him by the punchbowl standing there He was at the party and laughing with some other guys
And lets not forget that the Ex Boyfriend had filed a RESTRAINING Order against her for threatening him, his soon to be wife, and future kids, saying she will accuse him of rape.
Lets not also forget that her former employer FIRED her for sexually harassing clients, and then tried to claim it was the clients that harassed her.
But you want to pretend Kavenaugh is a gang rapist without one shred of evidence nor trial. This is what we call PROJECTION in psychology terms you gang raping AC fuck.
belligerent tantrum? you be accused of deliberately putting qualudes in drinks and gang raping people based on a statement of an accuser that even MSNBC has had to say is full of shit. Lets compare you to Bill Cosby (someone who actually HAD a trial) so that your life is permantly ruined. Lets have your family receive death threats because someone intentionally leaked information to commit character assassination against you. Now see how belligerant you get? Your very life is being threatened because someone was afraid you'd overturn Roe v Wade, and that was enough to incite such a riot your life and your families life is now destroyed. You cant keep your temper on Slashdot which is why you post AC 90% of the time.
the state of Maryland was trying to make the ford incident a fellony so they could take him to trial as of last Friday. Read the Rachel Mitchel report. She said, after 30 years prosecuting sexual crimes, that NOBODY would ever consider going to trial with this. But apparently the DA of Maryland is extra fucking stupid.
Zuckefuck should FIRE a handful of people that are 'outraged'. Get the fuck out and dont let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. In this country we have a system of government that adheres to Due Process, which includes, at the very heart of it, PRESUMED INNOCENCE. They are complaining because they have already decided Kavenaugh is guilty, despite the 2 later witnesses testimonies falling apart entirely. The last one, the one represented by Stormy Daniels attorney, you know, the Jerry Springer of attorneys, was even discredited by a left leaning (MSNBC) news station. Getting back to the original accuser, Did you read the Rachel Mitchel report? Lets set asside the obvious inability to recall the time and place, or how she got home. Lets set aside the fact that she had amazing detail about hiding in a bathroom but not going outside and somehow getting home (decades before cell phones). Lets set aside her best friend she claims was there, denies ever being at the party, and if she was there, would clearly notice her friend suddenly go missing. Remembering events from 1982 can be hard. Remembering events from 2 months ago... NO. She could not remember whether she gave WaPo an actual transcript of her 2012 psychiatric session or her own handwritten summary and has REFUSED to release the actual summary to any investigator. She also, according to the report, could not remember if she took her polygraph test the DAY OF or the DAY AFTER her grandmothers funeral. It goes on to say it is HIGHLY inappropriate to administer a polygraph while grieving. Ask ANY bachelors of psychology and they will say it renders it inconclusive. But Ford isnt just a bachelors in psychology, she has several PHd's in the field. At no time did she suggest waiting a week to avoid ambiguity other emotional issues that would affect the results. She spent an entire day testifying just how smart her hipocamus is. It was smart enough to game a polygraph and make it look like the mention of an alleged/fake rape was emotionally traumatizing. Rachel clearly said no prosecuting attorney would _ever_ go to court with a case like this.
So they should be fired for violating due process. The accusers that are discovered to have filed a false assault claim and managed to get the masses to find him guilty without trial, should be charged with Treason. Nothing is more treasonous to the constitution itself than the intent to eviscerate DUE PROCESS. Selling nuclear secrets to the Russians would be less treasonous than the actual destruction of the constitution itself.
This bullshit about 'every woman has the right to be believed' also translates to 'he is guilty without evidence or trial'. I might be willing to believe something bad happened to you, but that does not mean that the person you're '100% sure' did it actually did. Too many DNA cases prove eyewitness testimony is crap, esp one that you didnt remember until some 'memory regression therapy' in 2012 (if that even really happened, she claims to share it with WaPo but never under sworn oath?)
I thought Methane was a 1000x more of a greenhouse gas than CO2? Nothing is leakproof. Over time little gaps in seals are going to go unnoticed. Is the small leaks in methane > than the bulk of the total CO2 removed in terms of greenhouse impact?
hurry up nano-assemblers..... pure carbon would make great diamond structures or graphite/graphine stuctures.
Slashdot Mirror
Never said that. As a libertarian I want the most granular, effective, filtering possible, but fully empowered to turn it on, off, and tweaked exactly to my liking. No one else should make those decisions aside from the individual, and the children they are responsible to protect. Everything should be at parental discretion. Everyone has the right to fuck up their own life. Generic filters donâ(TM)t give you that flexibility. Sure, you can turn them on and off, but they lack the granularity.
You must be young if you believe that. Unrealistic would not be the word I would use. Someone calling themselves a social conservative these days are trying to preserve social norms from the 50s. To call it unrealistic implies fiction or something that never existed, when clearly it did. You could use words like archaic, outdated, even backward thinking and still fall within the realm of civil discord. Unrealistic does not exactly fit here. Most were raised in a 3day per week church-going household that still lived by those social norms. So to them its very real and proven to have worked at one time.
Whereas, for a âprogressiveâ(TM) type liberal, unrealistic does work as a description since its based on ideas not yet fully vetted. They are pushing society toward an goal of what they think a utopia represents to them, but clearly has not manifest or passed a test of time.
See the difference here? I really dont identify with either. Im not religious but i think a society based on minority rule is going to fall apart exactly like it did for anchient rome. My generation used words like conservative and liberal to describe fiscal responsibilities, it was never used to describe social norms. I think it does a better job in that context.
no, but they could give her a very, very, unrealistic outlook on sex, one in which she believes her only worth is how much she can give away in order to gain affection. its not entirely harmless. if you arent aware of some of the sick shit out there, free content no less, I guess thats a good thing, for you anyway. But its there, and maybe if you check out some of the videos, you might agree that perhaps some filtering is definitely not a bad thing.
as a 15/16yr old my dad gave me a subscription to playboy, but he wasnt about to spring for other mags like hustler or those lesser known, more graphic types. Playboy didnt pose women into purely objectified things. It was a bit more like a model posing for a portrait than simply open crotch shots and cucumber insertions.
on this I can agree, there should be tiers of nude content ratings. Just naked body parts being on the low end, where rape/snuff being at the highest end. Maybe not get so uptight on a nip slip or seeing a woman step out of a shower naked, whereas maybe still say no to open crotch shots.
as a libertarian Im all for having more tools, as a parent, to decide what is and what is not ok. Obviously there are some good things to the internet in terms of research power, etc. And there is a whole lot of bad shit too. The more granular and more power I have to exempt or ban specific things that slip through, or get caught by, a filter is never a bad thing. Having the tools gives the parents to choose how much or how little to implement. Ultimately its still their choice. If letting your 6yr old watch the original Jurrasic Park (R) in the theatre because its about dinosaurs is ok with you, well Im not the one who has to deal with the kids traumatized with nightmares. Thats on them. Me, well I'm trying to keep my kids maintaining a healthy baseline of normalcy without trying to stiffel them more than absolutely necessary to prevent them obtaining some unhealthy or unrealistic view/opinion on things.
so your ok with kids stumbling onto a free porn site of fake snuff films where burglars choke, rape, anally rape, and eventually strangle-to-death their victim? Its going to give the kids some really really fucked up outlook on the whole sex-relationship thing. That shit is out there too. Very few free porn sites are just "breasts and penis'". There is no sick thing you can think of that is not already made into some 5min video on pornhub or something. Kids do NOT need to stumble across shit like that 2-girls-1-cup video everyone thought was funny to send to their friends and record their reactions.
well porn on the internet has definitely degraded from just naked people to some pretty dark shit. When I was a kid the 'porn' we watched was staying up late to see some cinemax (skinimax) r rated movies where its rated R for 'nutidy, and strong sexual content', commonly referred to as a tenage-fuck-flick.
the shit they watch now is stuff you do once you've burned through all the lighter porn content and you need something stronger to keep you from getting burned out. Not exactly the things kids should _start_ with. Hell some shit on the internet includes simulated rape and sometimes rape with some strangulation and fake killing at the end. Thats pretty scarring shit to see for a lot of people, but especially someone in their mid teens. Not really a great idea to let kids get exposed to that. So I'm ok with the porn filters. If they want to learn about sex they can hit up netflix with their parents profile and watch some r rated fuck-flicks like we did or ask their parents about more normal sex questions.
I wouldn't mind more filters to rate violence in videos to have a finer grain of control. Its harder to filter written content since there are way too many ways to game the system anway. If your filter is just based on key words they always find a way around it. Its the same reason why you still get spam despite having spam filters.
As true as that may be, I still fear a world where all speach is censored much more. We just need a /. Option to make AC posts not visible, and make it the default setting.
They post AC for basically 1 of 2 reasons.
1) they are using a mobile device and hate logging in practically every time they click a link from a response notification
2) they lack the spine to stand by whatever hatefull, moronic, outlandish, or downright retarded bullshit they drivel.
#1 is a technological issue and could be fixed with development of better tools.
#2 just needs to be fixed with some chlorine dispersed in their gene pool.
Games purchased thru their store, DLC, and other add-ons are account based. Your annual subscription for PSN is also tied. It could be financially a mess if you have spent a lot of money on non tangible products and unlock codes.
I am not a fan of owning a game without a corresponding disk. Some games like fortnite and battlefront also do the whole âbuy goldâ(TM) model to alter appearances or unlock weapons.
I could see how this could be a disaster if your identity got stolen. Posession is 9/10ths of the law, so they say. Not much proof without something tangible to back up.
also wanted to point out that using solar/wind/etc to produce power and some of that is used to make hydrogen, then the hydrogen can be exported elsewhere to generate electricity where wind and solar are not feasible, such as Anchorage or Juno.
well the nice thing about hydrogen, so ive been told, is that any car can actually be converted relatively inexpensively. That might be a low hanging fruit of its own. How to make the hydrogen without consuming fossil fuels is another matter entirely. However, even if they were consuming fossil fuels to produce the hydrogen, a fixed plant has more options for scrubbing co2 than a small vehicle.
the population problem seems to be self correcting
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/...
most of the oil industry has already diversified into other energy production. So they're going to make money no matter what kind of electricity you're buying. But demand keeps trying to outpace supply. We cant have any sort of limits on fossil fuel consumption as long as stupid shit like crypto mining exists. It wastes energy for the pure purpose of wasting energy. In a single day, it consumes more power globally than a small island the size of Puerto Rico could reasonably consume in a year. The massive heat that comes off these devices is unreal, its like leaving the stove running all day with its door left ajar. Eliminating wasteful energy consumption is just as important as boosting non-fossile-based power production. We need to revisit hydrogen as a means of energy transportation because some renewable energy sources are highly geographically limited.
and I actually liked quite a few of their boards.
Really?? What if your consituents keep voting you back and yet you actually do keep breaking the laws and the constitution you're sworn to uphold? How about the fact that they tracked the posting of the names and addresses of republican senators to Feinsteins office? Or when they leak classified information to the media? Yet voters keep voting them back?? I believe you're looking for a different process than leaving it up to the voters in that case. Leaking classified information is a violation of the espionage act. That should require a senate trial and if proven beyond reasonable doubt with a preponderance of evidence, should result in forced removal. There have been senators removed from office. They threw out Al Franken WITHOUT due process, and it was not his constituents that did that.
they can be impeached just like a president, but he would have to be found guilty of a crime. Being believed to be partisan describes every damn justice up there. They already have a tally of who they think will vote each way.. that doesnt come from a crystal ball. Kennedy was just one considered a swing voter. You dont get a nickname like that if this court is as partisan free as you seem to think.
its way worse than that. They took an oath to uphold the constitution. SEVERAL went on TV and made these statements like "We already know he is guilty". That is a direct violation of due process. They are directly acting AGAINST the constitution and are guilty of Treason. They should be removed and charged as such.
thorough? She has how many degrees in psychology?? How smart is her Hipocampus? Yet she took a polygraph THE DAY SHE BURIED HER Grandmother. She KNOWS that makes it inconclusive. Its too easy to FAKE when your emotionally compromised. Not only did she not suggest waiting a week, she intentionally witheld that information from the polygraph interviewer. That person would have insisted she could not take it. She hoped nobody would realize this. Even a Bachelors in psychology knows this. How many PHd's does she have again??? She claims she gave WaPo a transcript of the 2012 shrink session. Under oath she claims she cant remember if it was the actual transcript or a handwritten (by her) summary. This was just 5 weeks ago! Then she turns around and REFUSES to give the investigation an actual copy of the session so that it remains privileged conversation. I think it never existed in the first place. Exactly what do you mean thorough?
She went on a limb, didnt realize the scrutiny would be this bad. Had NO idea that this would not just make him ineligible but now Maryland thinks they can go to trial with no evidence and a report by a 30yr sex assault prosecutor who said no prosecutor would _ever_ take a case like this to trial. Now she's in way over her head and Feinstien, who orchestrated all this, is trying to cover her tracks and is leaving Ford out to hang so that it doesnt get back to her.
you fucking retard, the accuser that accused him of GANG RAPE has been proven to be full of shit even by MSNBC.
her sworn statement taken by the stormy daniels attorney DOES NOT MATCH
her written statement to MSNBC which also DOES NOT MATCH
her on camera interview
she gave a SWORN testimony he put Qualudes in her drink and GANG RAPED her.....
this eventually turned into :
I saw him by the punchbowl standing there
He was at the party and laughing with some other guys
And lets not forget that the Ex Boyfriend had filed a RESTRAINING Order against her for threatening him, his soon to be wife, and future kids, saying she will accuse him of rape.
Lets not also forget that her former employer FIRED her for sexually harassing clients, and then tried to claim it was the clients that harassed her.
But you want to pretend Kavenaugh is a gang rapist without one shred of evidence nor trial. This is what we call PROJECTION in psychology terms you gang raping AC fuck.
belligerent tantrum? you be accused of deliberately putting qualudes in drinks and gang raping people based on a statement of an accuser that even MSNBC has had to say is full of shit. Lets compare you to Bill Cosby (someone who actually HAD a trial) so that your life is permantly ruined. Lets have your family receive death threats because someone intentionally leaked information to commit character assassination against you. Now see how belligerant you get? Your very life is being threatened because someone was afraid you'd overturn Roe v Wade, and that was enough to incite such a riot your life and your families life is now destroyed. You cant keep your temper on Slashdot which is why you post AC 90% of the time.
you mean like this kid? whose accusers finally admitted faking the whole thing, and NO consequences for them?
https://triblive.com/local/reg...
the state of Maryland was trying to make the ford incident a fellony so they could take him to trial as of last Friday. Read the Rachel Mitchel report. She said, after 30 years prosecuting sexual crimes, that NOBODY would ever consider going to trial with this. But apparently the DA of Maryland is extra fucking stupid.
Zuckefuck should FIRE a handful of people that are 'outraged'. Get the fuck out and dont let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. In this country we have a system of government that adheres to Due Process, which includes, at the very heart of it, PRESUMED INNOCENCE. They are complaining because they have already decided Kavenaugh is guilty, despite the 2 later witnesses testimonies falling apart entirely. The last one, the one represented by Stormy Daniels attorney, you know, the Jerry Springer of attorneys, was even discredited by a left leaning (MSNBC) news station. Getting back to the original accuser, Did you read the Rachel Mitchel report? Lets set asside the obvious inability to recall the time and place, or how she got home. Lets set aside the fact that she had amazing detail about hiding in a bathroom but not going outside and somehow getting home (decades before cell phones). Lets set aside her best friend she claims was there, denies ever being at the party, and if she was there, would clearly notice her friend suddenly go missing. Remembering events from 1982 can be hard. Remembering events from 2 months ago... NO. She could not remember whether she gave WaPo an actual transcript of her 2012 psychiatric session or her own handwritten summary and has REFUSED to release the actual summary to any investigator. She also, according to the report, could not remember if she took her polygraph test the DAY OF or the DAY AFTER her grandmothers funeral. It goes on to say it is HIGHLY inappropriate to administer a polygraph while grieving. Ask ANY bachelors of psychology and they will say it renders it inconclusive. But Ford isnt just a bachelors in psychology, she has several PHd's in the field. At no time did she suggest waiting a week to avoid ambiguity other emotional issues that would affect the results. She spent an entire day testifying just how smart her hipocamus is. It was smart enough to game a polygraph and make it look like the mention of an alleged/fake rape was emotionally traumatizing. Rachel clearly said no prosecuting attorney would _ever_ go to court with a case like this.
So they should be fired for violating due process. The accusers that are discovered to have filed a false assault claim and managed to get the masses to find him guilty without trial, should be charged with Treason. Nothing is more treasonous to the constitution itself than the intent to eviscerate DUE PROCESS. Selling nuclear secrets to the Russians would be less treasonous than the actual destruction of the constitution itself.
This bullshit about 'every woman has the right to be believed' also translates to 'he is guilty without evidence or trial'. I might be willing to believe something bad happened to you, but that does not mean that the person you're '100% sure' did it actually did. Too many DNA cases prove eyewitness testimony is crap, esp one that you didnt remember until some 'memory regression therapy' in 2012 (if that even really happened, she claims to share it with WaPo but never under sworn oath?)
I thought Methane was a 1000x more of a greenhouse gas than CO2? Nothing is leakproof. Over time little gaps in seals are going to go unnoticed. Is the small leaks in methane > than the bulk of the total CO2 removed in terms of greenhouse impact?
hurry up nano-assemblers..... pure carbon would make great diamond structures or graphite/graphine stuctures.
Fine! I'm gonna take my ball and go home...