Leaderboard

Have you seen such a label in a restaurant? "Figures suggest that the percentage of people who fall ill with food poisoning annually is up to ten times higher in the US than the UK." from https://www.sustainweb.org/news/feb18_US_foodpoisoning/ And, not to put too fine a point on it; I'm not very concerned about chlorinated chicken; I'm concerned about chlorinated chicken sh1t.

Sounds similar to not wanting to teach children about contraception due to the concern that it can tempt teens to be sloppy with their behavior, who may act that way on the basis that any sperm will be captured by condoms anyway. 😀 Is there any evidence that American poultry workers are indeed sloppy in their methods, or that any sloppiness translates into poor health outcomes? Yep, that looks pretty damning.

It’s been taken care of.

Since your constant attacks are stressing me out, raising my blood pressure and increasing the risk of a fatal stroke or heart attack, will you cease your immoral posting immediately? If not, what is your defence? P.S. My grandmothers died in 1948 and 1962. They now lie beyond your logic.

Why tell that lie? Thank you for clarifying the extent of your understanding of the issue. The issue is also about labelling and animal welfare. Did you realise that? There is no reason to assume it will be cheaper, but typically, the people will be in more poverty.

Yes, I should have said contracts. That is the only comment, nothing about the fact that both time and length 'accumulate'? You are not trying to understand, you are trying not to understand. So I suppose you will spend the next 20 years not understanding. Whatever floats your boat.

You seriously have been trying to understand special relativity for 20 years, and you still say things like this? Maybe you should give up. Seriously, at some point you need to realize you're wasting your time.

Did a little research. Oddly enough there is a non-binding rule, called the Biden rule ( from 92 ), which suggests that, if there is going to be a change in the Presidency, then the people's will should be followed, and a wait for the new President is suggested. This was the case in 2016, as B Obama could not be President in January 2017. In this case, the argument is that D Trump may still be President in January 2021, so he shouldn't have to give up his Constitutional powers to appoint SC justices. Looks like D Trump will get another nomination ( although he's been quiet on the matter ), and, barring quite a few defectors, the Republican controlled Senate will ram it through.

These next 45 days until the election are only going to get even uglier and more vicious than they’ve already been. McConnell has already issued a statement that he WILL bring Trumps replacement nominee to the floor for a vote (despite the Merrick Garland episode, hypocrisy has never stopped him before). Trump will be flogging this issue and fanning the flames with his own list of nominees to drive up what’s been lukewarm and tepid support among evangelicals. This will also offer a lifeline to republican senators in close elections. They waited 400 days after Scalia died to allow a vote on replacement bc of “the election.” Now they won’t even wait 45 days after Ginsberg died. Its not just Justices who are dying, but our democracy and justice itself. .

I don't think that's true. I don't see a single reply here from michel123456 that relates to trying to understand any of the answers and explanations given. No asking for further details. No working through a solution. Every reply is a justification of not making an effort to learn, an argument of why the explanations can be ignored. Literally 10 years ago he was asking about the same "problems" he had with relativity. 10 years from now, he'll have a similar list of "problems", after thousands of attempts by people to explain it to him, after 0 attempts to work through it. What he's good at, is asking questions that makes one think he's interested in learning about relativity. But look at the replies. The only interest is in what doesn't make sense to him. Anything making sense of it is ignored. That's the only answer he's interested in: that it doesn't make sense. All his questions are phrased as if the answer he expects is that it can't make sense, never a question about how the resolution to the problems work out correctly. So I think he's soapboxing, getting much better responses by stating "relativity is nonsense" as a question. Edit: To be fair, page 1 of this thread is full of counter examples to what I said, including asking about specific examples and numbers and their explanations. I don't know how we got from that on page 1 to page 2 with:

Who is forcing grandma to get in the car, against her will, without her regard for risk? Aren’t they the immoral one? If she drives of her own volition and accepts the risk, where is the immorality? She made the choice.

Wealth attainment is the over arching motivation for a lot of people in American society. Many view attending University as just a platform to a good paying job, deify business owners because they provide jobs, and many even project positive traits upon those who merely inherited their wealth. The fixation on money supersede all else. In U.S. politics Environmental discussions are nearly always boxed into economic discussions centered around jobs and costs. If even one Billionaire might get their wings clipped by a policy, no matter what the science says, it is a hard stop politically. Likewise for Healthcare, nutrition, public safety, etc. Economic concerns take precedence and it often isn't even close. Of course its short sighted. Long term economic outlooks would be improved by following science. Not just that but money is worthless if humans extinct ourselves. However when it comes to money real time generally satiates ones passions greater than future potentials. I think if given the choice most people would take a millions dollars today over $2 million ten years from now. That is where I see the real battle existing. People already see the jobs related to Oil & Gas. Already understand the economic benefit. To accept the science the damage burning Oil is doing to the environment there needs to be an equal economic impetus people can see in real time. America isn't divorced from science America can't divorce science from money.

The one thing all life has in common is that it eventually ends. I’ll repeat my previous point. This is just stupid trolling.

Being alive is dangerous. What value is there in living if one cannot enjoy life in the manner they prefer, within the bounds of behavior permitted by society?? Total Deaths in 2018 were over 2 million. Motor vehicles are a minor component of the risk of living.

The specific is a pivot to the general unless you are selfish. It surely mandates someone's grandma's death, and you should not care less if she isn't your grandma. Answer the question, would you be OK with it if your grandma died? I ignored the rest of your post since it's riddled with excessive paranoia.

Photons are only a model created to fill our incomprehension. We do not know what light actually is. We create models based on our analysis. And analysis on light showed us something we cant really understand so we called it photons. Dont be a fool, create new models come on.

This is great news for the Republicans. I am sorry that a human being died, but everyone dies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPIdRJlzERo