MigL

I've often wondered why no-one has tried to introduce cyanobacteria, not to Mars, but to Venus. A small amount, to see if they can survive, even as an experiment on Earth.. Then, after the introduction to Venus, evolve and start changing the atmospheric composition. Who knows, in a couple of million years, Venus might resemble an Edgar Rice Burrows novel

I don't blame C Blasey Ford who, according to Ten oz's account, took the polygraph test on Aug 7th. This is over two weeks after contacting Senator D Feinstein and over a month after contacting A Eshoo ( who referred her to D Feinstein ) I would think she was advised on how to best make her accusations public. IOW so as to have the most impact. I would assume C Blasey Ford would know about the uselessness of a lie detector test, but would be 'advised' that it would make a great impact on the public at large. From what I've read, D Feinstein isn't above planting disinformation. There are very few, if any, politicians who haven't contributed to this mess.

I can't believe I'm encouraging you... Was it EXACTLY 46.000000 % and 54.000000 % ? Keep in mind millions of people voted. So yes, there would be quite a few decimal places. ( this little side argument is probably destined for the trash )

You forgot the decimal on your 8 points, Ten oz. Yes I'm being sarcastic that you are quibbling over this when you know I provided rough figures.

And the same data indicates that, if SOME people did not interpret it that way, Swansont, SOME OTHERS did.

The point I was making Rangerx, is that if the FBI investigation is curtailed, we may never know who actually committed a crime as C Blasey Ford has no interest in further pursuing the matter and filing charges. And unlike you, I don't assign guilt or innocence based on appearances, only evidence and facts. Except for a few people, the partisanship evidenced by these hearings is disgusting, and proves nothing. And as Sting Junky pointed out, the numbers of Americans choosing sides are nearly equal, because of the polarization of their political system. IOW, its all politics, not justice. Half of American VOTERS voted for D Trump. They wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on the ass. ( fixed it, are you happy now ? ) And while we are at it, what does belief or disbelief have to do with due process. Due process means keeping an open mind until all evidence and facts are presented beyond a reasonable doubt, before convicting someone. Why this rush to assume the worst about a person based on partisan hearings ? ( hell, even I've made that mistake; based on appearances, I believe C Blasey Ford and dislike B Kavanough based on his political leanings )

Really, Rangerx ? Half the country voted for D Trump. They wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on the ass.

So now what ? This isn't simply about the Supreme Court nomination anymore. Half of the country believes he's a drunken sexual predator while the other half thinks she's a lying vindictive b*tch ? And nothing gets settled ? Nobody wants answers ? No-one cares ? At least one of the two is a victim of a crime. What about justice ?

Wow. M curie won the Physics Nobel in 1903. And the Chemistry Nobel in 1911 ?

I didn't give you the -1, BeeCee. But if we gave people a chance and were not so quick to assume the worst, some of those newbies might stick around. We were all newbies at one time, and I know I asked silly questions.

How is unjustified generalizations about a certain demographic any different than unjust generalizations about poster's intentions ? The OP was before the above exchange, so one can't be used to justify the other. Let's give everyone the benefit of the doubt until they actually cross the line.

A Canadian ( U of Waterloo, originally from Guelph ) woman, Donna Strickland, is only the third woman ever ( first in 1903, second was back in 1963 ) to be awarded the Nobel prize in Physics for her work in high energy lasers. The methods she helped develop while doing her PhD in the 80s, 'chirped pulse amplification', reconciles the requirements for short pulses and high power ( without blowing up the laser ). Especially significant for me; she is my age , so we probably attended ( different ) Universities at the same time. Glad that the Nobel Committee is recognizing women's accomplishments in Physics. ( but do they need to wait 60 yrs in between ? )

Well since this thread has evolved from its original intent to whether B Kavanough is suitable for the Supreme Court... I do believe both Political Parties have played games with people's lives. The Democrat senator who originally received C Blasey Ford's letter sat on it for two months until the time it would have the most damaging effect on B Kavanough's nomination, and then leaked to the public against C Blasey Ford's wishes. I don't particularly think his responses were out of line; I might be just as embattled if I was being accused of such a thing. That being said, neither story passes the 'smell' test, but if I had to 'judge a book by its cover', I would tend to believe C Blasey Ford's version of the events. At this point, if B Kavanough has any integrity ( and cares about his country ), he should withdraw, and let the Republicans and Democrats sort out their mess. If he believes himself to be innocent of the charges brought against himself, he is then free to pursue defamation and libel charges against all parties concerned. This whole mess of appointing Supreme Court Judges who lean 'left' or 'right' is at the root of the problem. Politicians pass laws without doing due diligence, and then let the courts decide on the interpretation. We have the same problem here in Canada, laws which directly affect you and me, are decided by appointed ( for life ) judges, not elected politicians, who can , at election time, absolve themselves of any responsibility for bad laws, and get re-elected. But that is probably best left for another thread.

As Swansont said... "That's true of anyone accused of a crime. What do we do — stop prosecuting crimes based on eyewitness testimony, because it could be mistaken? People have been wrongly convicted of crimes and paid a much higher price than Kavanaugh will." That is why I don't like accusations and allegations made online, trough the press, or in 'job interviews'. This subverts Due Process as the rigor of testimony can't be directly challenged. On both sides. If you know the incident happened then file criminal charges We might actually never know if this particular incident happened or not.

This was my comment on the first page... "But maybe you're right, B Kavanough is a bad example to use because he might not get the appointment for other reasons." These political topics, however, seem to take on a life of their own and go in differing directions. But we're here now, so we'll make the best of it. Even though this is not a trial, and he won't be doing jail time, is his life not adversely affected by these allegations ? And is that fair if that is all they ever turn out to be ?

I will re-iterate my position... I don't like B Kavanough. I find C Blasey Ford much more likable and sympathetic. And I don't think he would be a good candidate for the Supreme Court. But that has nothing to do with which story is more 'robust' and guilt/innocence of the allegations. Justice should not be subjective.

I must have mis-read this, Swansont. "But if it were, a judge would instruct the jury that if they find a witness to not be credible, they may dismiss all of their testimony. Since Kavanaugh was evasive and untruthful, that would be grounds to do exactly that"

Only the last paragraph ( added in an edit ) was addressed to you, Ten oz. The first two were addressed to Swansont.

Tried to read your post. Got a headache> Gave up.

But it was you, Swansont, who brought up the analogy to a court case, by saying B Kavanough's testimony would be disallowed by a trial judge on the basis of his being an unbelievable witness. If you're going to open the door, expect me to walk in. I believe I've commented on her selective memory, where only the event is remembered, not the corroborating circumstances which would allow for fact checking, as the basis for for disallowing her testimony. IIRC R Reagan and O North provided that same kind of testimony in the Iran-Contra affair. Did you consider them truthful also ? I agree Ten oz, I'm hoping the FBI can get the therapist's notes. That would certainly get rid of the notion that this is a Democrat plot.

Justice and innocence/guilt has nothing to do with being likeable. We can all agree that C Blasey Ford is more likeable, and that B Kavanough's ideology, or political leanings, don't sit well with most of us ( yes, that means you Swansont and Ten oz ). But she doesn't remember when the party occurred, how she got there or how she left. The people that she remembers being there can't ( or won't ) corroborate her story. The only thing she is sure of is that B Kavanough tried to rape her when they were teens. If this was a real court case, her story would have holes big enough to drive a truck through. I'd be willing to bet the judge would instruct the jurors to disallow HER testimony.

Seems Airbrush has a new way of determining guilt or innocence. He doesn't need to give anyone the 'benefit of the doubt', or presumed innocence, if they are "pompous, privileged, spoiled boy, who actually looked drunk , belligerent, and hyper-partisan". Again, evidence ? Who needs evidence ? American jails would be a lot more full than they currently are. ( I wonder how he would react if he was being accused of sexual misconduct ??? ) Seems everyone is throwing around the distinction that this is a 'job interview' for B Kavanough, Who gets asked these kinds of questions for a 'job interview' ? Did any of the previous Supreme Court appointments get asked if they like beer ? And what, then, was the C Blasey Ford interview ? These interviews were little more than standard protocol; the vote would have gone down exactly the same even if there was no accusation made. Such is the partisan state of American politics.

Hope you washed your hand before you started typing your post. And, yes it can be unhealthy. But only if you have feelings of guilt and shame associated with it.

My gorilla friend says... "Its not the size; Its how you use it." What, I'm gonna disagree with a gorilla ?

This is not a complaints forum. You are here voluntarily.