zapatos

Well then there is no reason to believe such an outlandish assertion, is there?

Can you please provide a citation?

None of the links provided by beecee and tim.tdj support the assertion that "some people are saying that alleged victims of sexual abuse and rape should be automatically 100% believed without doubt." beecee's links are examples people apparently being falsely accused of crimes and suffering the consequences prior to being released. Sad but doesn't directly address the assertion. tim.tdj's link seems to refute his own assertion: ""don't assume women as a gender are especially deceptive or vindictive, and recognize that false allegations are less common than real ones."

Do you have evidence to support this claim? I didn't get into a college I applied to and did not feel I had been discriminated against. I didn't find anything unjust about them using academic qualifications at certain schools.

You seem to have a non-standard definition of the word "discrimination". Discrimination involves unfair or unjust behavior.

I was just thinking of things I've left in caskets. They didn't belong to the person who died, but rather they were in some way a representation of that person.

Random would be odd, but it seems odd to bury perfectly good tools just because someone used them. I imagine that people who hunted to live may not have had too many valuable possessions and would not part with them lightly. I think things are probably buried with people because they are associated with those things. In the case of a big-game tool that could be because you used that tool, but it could also be that you manufactured those tools, or perhaps were part of a family known for hunting prowess. Maybe something is special to you because it belonged to your father. I know I'm just throwing out random possibilities here, and am just trying to get a feel for this very interesting finding.

Hadn't thought about it that way before but it makes sense that humans could not afford to entertain gender (or other) biases until they could sustain a surplus of food. Once you have a surplus then any shortfall you encounter because you make choices based on gender is not obvious. Do you know if there was any skeletal evidence of hunting in either sex, such as enlarged bones in the throwing arm?

Interesting find. I suppose the big-game hunting tools buried with the females does not necessarily indicate that they were the ones who used them. Given that men have a huge built-in advantage over women when it comes to activities that benefit from strength and speed, I'm curious to know why women may have been doing the hunting, if that indeed is what happened.

One of the things that caught my eye during the storming of the Capitol were the videos of people walking through The Hall of Statues. While there were obviously rioters at work, many of the people looked like tourists, politely staying behind the ropes indicating where visitors were allowed. It was a surreal scene.

I'm unsure how much of a difference a Trump statement to halt violence will make. I suspect the Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, anarchists, etc. are using Trump's rhetoric as a convenient and acceptable reason to wreck havoc. If Trump tells them to stop I don't think they would as they have their own agenda. Trump just makes it easy for them to come out of hiding. The thousands of Trump supporters who showed up at his rally but then went to buy a churro instead of storming the Capitol after the rally may listen to him, but they are not the main problem.

Sorry for the frustrating responses so far Promachos. There are people here who can help you out. Once they see your post I'm sure they'll respond.

My understanding is that they can do exactly that. They cannot refuse service based on race, color, religion or national origin. Nor can they refuse service based on other specific state anti-discrimination laws (sexual orientation is getting more protection lately), but other than that they pretty much have free rein.

Today I learned the US Civil War was not as far back in history as I thought. https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/civil-war-veteran-widow-helen-jackson-030518406.html

Go at it from many directions. Classes, free online training, join a science forum (check that one off your list!), read books, subscribe to magazines, etc.

Absolutely! What about family? Friends? Doctors? Memories? Jobs? Familiarity? Food? Goals? Favorite restaurants and parks? Culture? The list goes on forever. How very paternalistic of someone to read an article about something bad in my country and suggest I leave everything I know because what they have to offer is so much better.

"Why can't the USA offer transportation of the entire population of Hong Kong to the vacant housing units in the USA" is on par with: "I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning, because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs." Both start with an observable set of facts and then immediately jump into the deep end with no ability to keep your head above water.

There is no reasoning. At all. You do no research and cite no sources. You simply blurt out preposterous scenarios and fail to address the many issues with your proposals when people point them out to you.

"Mad" Mike Hughes created a steam powered rocket so that he could get enough altitude to prove the earth was flat. Didn't turn out too well for him. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51602655

I can't believe you are allowed to keep posting this garbage.

Are you under the impression that ozone layer has only gotten better in 2020? Any data to support this or are you just guessing? No.

How do you explain the improvement to the ozone layer since the addition of CFCs to the atmosphere has been reduced?

Maybe by you. Don't project onto others. She loves it. She has found it much more satisfying than research. Her doctorate in cellular and developmental biology worked quite well for her in a hospital setting. Many people get degrees to complement their career choice rather than to define their career choice.

In this post you claim Islam is responsible for these good things. In this post you claim Islam is not responsible for these bad things.

What I said was the "dearth" of discovery. You pointed out that Islam was so good because it covers nearly all aspects of life. You used discoveries in the middle ages as evidence. As Islamic countries now lag the Western world in discoveries I was wondering why you didn't also suggest Islam was responsible for that.