zapatos

Haha. I pictured swans with a nasty THC habit.

And with a snap of the fingers you have managed to summarily dismiss the feelings and pain of millions by telling them they have yet another weakness that isn't even worthy of your consideration. Everyone's feelings are genuine to them whether you care to address them or not. Please try to see things from their perspective.

The carbon that went into manufacturing my third vehicle is a sunk cost, so to speak. I did not go to the dealer and buy three new cars. Rather than trade in my ten-year-old minivan when it was time to buy a new car I converted it to use for hauling hay, compost, lumber and other items.

My goodness you are rude. Can you please explain to me how people are wasting 'double+' amount of fuel if they own more cars than there are people in their household? You are exaggerating the extent of the problem San Marino has 1,263 cars per 10,000 people. But so what? Is their situation the same as that of France? Yes, because all US citizens live in New York City or Chicago apartment buildings and have ready access to mass transit. Do you know by what circumstances I came to own three vehicles? Do you know what my third vehicle is used for; whether its function can be met by the other two vehicles? Yes, my wife and I really should use the mass transit that is so readily available in rural America. No, it mostly sits by the barn except when needed. Look, you made a factually incorrect statement in your zeal to condemn others. I simply corrected it. I do not appreciate your 'holier than thou' attitude and using me as your foil while you go on a rant about how worthless we Americans are. If you must paint with such a broad brush please use someone else for your target.

I'm curious what kind of article you'll write when you only asked for "yes/no/it's complicated" type of responses.

My wife and I have three vehicles between us. We would be hard pressed to use the same amount of fuel in the third vehicle as we use in the first two, as we can only drive one car per person at a time. About the only waste of extra resources is the money we have to spend on insurance for the third vehicle.

It is not so much that people won't recycle plastics, but that most plastics are not recycled whether we put it in the recycle bin or not. Laying the responsibility on consumers simply lets the manufacturers crank out all the plastic they want. https://www.livescience.com/how-much-plastic-recycling.html https://www.npr.org/2020/09/11/897692090/how-big-oil-misled-the-public-into-believing-plastic-would-be-recycled

You can interpret what I said that way, but it requires you to ignore the first part of the sentence I wrote. You cannot be a consumer and reasonably avoid plastics or a carbon footprint. If manufacturers are responsible for reducing the use of plastics and recycling the plastics it will have a much larger impact than if you lay the responsibility on people. In California a law was just signed that will outlaw the sale of gasoline engines in products such as lawn mowers, chain saws, trimmers, etc. You can ask people all you want to reduce their use of gasoline engines, but it will not nearly have the impact of simply enforcing a ban on their sale.

IMO the responsibility to address the carbon footprint and recycle has been laid in the wrong place; with consumers. Very little plastic gets recycled, and when it does it is 'down-cycled'. To make real change we need the manufacturers of plastics to take responsibility. We can drive fewer miles but we still have to drive the cars that were manufactured. We need the manufacturers to make more efficient vehicles. This is not to say that people can't do their part, but if you really want to have an impact, stop looking at what you can recycle/reuse/reduce and put your effort into influencing governments and corporations.

So you were being "figurative" when you said... Yeah, I'm calling BS on that.

In what country did that happen?

What concerns do you have that makes you doubt it is 'scientific'?

LOL! +1

Philosophy involves a specialized skillset to address complex questions. People who do not have this specialized skillset may still be pretty good at addressing these questions but the average philosopher will do a much better job at doing so than the average non-philosopher. Similarly the average carpenter may do a pretty good job at designing a house that is structurally sound but an engineer and his skillset is on average age going to be better at seeing all the issues and addressing them clearly, resulting in a better design.

That is not what I was suggesting. For example, consciousness is likely a trait of chimpanzees also. What I was suggesting was that your definition of consciousness was too broad as it included trees, and it is not generally agreed upon that trees are conscious. If consciousness is simply a biological response to stimuli, I don't see how consciousness produces a mind. It is within the brain that the mind is produced. Consciousness (as you defined it) may be a component of the mind, but it did not produce it and I'm unsure consciousness even needs to exist for the mind to exist. For example, someone who is deprived of all sensory input can still be conscious.

I think Phi's point was that if you have to ask if a high school diploma is enough education to pioneer transgender women pregnancies, then perhaps you are simply trolling us.

I'm not sure why you think we should all agree to this definition. It is far from accepted that a tree is conscious even though it responds to stimuli.

Today (well, recently) I learned how to hard boil an egg. I've often had issues peeling hard boiled eggs as sometimes the shell would strongly adhere and I ended up taking off the shell in about 100 tiny pieces. Found an article that said the difficult peeling had to do with rapid cooling of eggs after cooking, or even with the boiling itself. I always used the 'cold water' method which involved boiling and rapid cooling afterwards. Now I bring the water to a boil, put eggs in a steamer basket, insert basket, cover and steam for 13 minutes. (I'm using duck eggs so chicken eggs would probably be around 11 minutes.) Once the 13 minutes are up, remove basket of eggs from steam and let cool at room temperature; no rapid cooling in cold water. I no longer have issues peeling hard cooked eggs! Only took me decades to learn!! 😃

Have you ever been in the eye of a hurricane? Unless your attached blades are about 40 miles long I don't think they are going to encounter much in the way of wind to turn them.

I'm done here.

I feel like you are always more interested in sparring than discussing.

Depends on who you ask. At least that is what you said earlier.

AFAIK, no one at all refers to Cornwall as a country.

Northern Ireland.

Welcome to the party!