iNow

Be specific. Name one single climate model which can be falsified because they used anecdote instead of evidence. I dare ye.

Yeah, it was a bit of a spin on something done on the colbert report. They come up with a question which is pretty clearly agreed to, spin it the other way, and ask it as a joke. Such as... Creationism: a) Great scientific theory b) The greatest scientific theory This was my spin on it, part venting, part trying for a cheap laugh. George W. Bush: a) Worst US President ever b) Worst US President ever Everyone's a critic.

First, if he were Muslim, why does that matter? Second, he's not Muslim, so clearly Physia is not paying attention to fact, but instead being spoon fed lies and regurgitating them here. Nice quote, bascule. Clever.

I do not believe that assuming the tree is in good health offers anything substantial to the parameters of your question. Flavor is greatly impacted by environmental conditions and what is being absorbed in the roots. An easy example of my basic point is orange trees in Florida. They taste better in Florida than in other parts of the country because of the soil and weather conditions. Also, if it was a cold winter, the oranges tend to be sweeter, and it has very little to do with the vague idea of "tree health." Do you follow my reasoning on this? It's not the natural versus cultured distinction that matters... not at all. The flavor of the produce depends only on strain and environmental inputs. It's a bit like nature/nurture for fruit. If you think cultured fruit doesn't taste as good, it's not because it was "cultured," it's because of the conditions the people who cultured it setup... conditions which can be adjusted and improved.

I stand corrected. I missed the fact that this was split from another thread, and while I still strongly disagree with Riogho, his position on this issue, and also his method of presenting it... I was mistaken when I suggested he clicked the "New Thread" button. Thanks, IA.

Then, how about you try that before you continue making all of these conclusions? No, it's not. Let's see some numbers.

"They," huh?

While I'm laughing, that's kinda shitty.

Try not to forget, he also let Sammy Sosa go to the White Sox.

So, let's vote. That's what Democracy is all about, right? http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=164519&title=recessional-terms http://thousandreasons.org/ http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushresume.htm

So, you can't support your claim about how much more likely some is to "experience a death" if they buy a pitbull as opposed to a dog of another breed? It's fine if you cannot. I'm just asking.

Doesn't that sort of depend on a) where the wild fruits were grown and what environmental conditions they experienced, and b) where the cultured fruits were grown and how they were cultured. I must say that I don't think there's enough info to address your question, but I might just be being a hard ass.

Good luck!

Ermm... Actually, yes, you did... the moment you clicked "New Thread."

Thanks for the quote, but I do not think it means what you think it means. Your appeal to authority is great, especially since I am a big fan of ole dick feynman, but when he said, ... I read that to mean that, "one cannot reach absolute zero," not "atoms will still vibrate when at absolute zero" as you've clearly and intentionally implied with your post above. Farm boy, polish my horse's saddle. I want to see my face shining in it by morning.

This doesn't sound right, as absolute zero is the complete lack of kinetic energy and is not reachable ta boot. Can you source your comment that atoms would still be moving even if they reached absolute zero? It seems very contradictory, and I'd like to read more.

Is that "far more" on the metric system, or IU? How about you quantize how much "more likely" a person is to wind up with a death on their hands if they buy the pit bull, eh? Are we talking 90% more likely, or 0.00002% more likely? If the latter, I can hardly agree with your use of the term "far more likely," but I'll keep an open mind while I wait for you to show some actual numbers. Fair?

All this talk of ripeness... Has no one ever experienced the deliciousness which is a fried green tomato?

antimatter, Don't forget that each of the planets also make their own "indents" in spacetime, and those "indents" need to be considered, as the planets are not going to slide toward the sun as if on some flat smooth surface.

The JPL press release on this was good. http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2008-046

Yeah, I have little preference either way, as I almost never buy music. I see your original question as presenting a bit of a false dichotomy. I think the more likely trend is that people will just share files for free... I appreciate that this doesn't address the challenge of how you distribute new music, but once a single person has the source file, it spreads like wildfire...

If you look and see who is actually credited with coining the term/idea, you'll notice that you're in pretty good company.

You were able to make that post, weren't you?

Whatever happened to allowing natural selection?

For those who may have missed the speech, or who have only had the opportunity to view pre-filtered soundbites, you can watch it in it's entirety here: