Comment Re:The perception of "drone" is powerful (Score 0) 272
Because I'm the guy flying over my neighbors' swimming pools to take pictures of people in bathing suits.
Because I'm the guy flying over my neighbors' swimming pools to take pictures of people in bathing suits.
Science-deniers, particularly those seeking to deny science based on statistics, frequently cherry pick statistics. That's how you get the whole "18 year no warming" claim.
I don't care about your excuses. I think you should be banned from flying over a property if the property owner deems he doesn't want you flying over his property, and further, I think a property owner should have the right to shoot your toy out of the sky and send you a bill for the bullet. I'd actually make it a criminal charge with a minimum $50,000 fine. I'd make it so expensive and difficult for you to play with your little kiddy toys over my property that you'd finally just go fucking home.
Self entitled assholes like you have made it clear the only way to deal with drones is to make it so damaging for assholes like you to even fly one that you find some other toys to play with
In New Zealand, as in other Commonwealth Realms, public land is owned by the Crown, so the Queen in Right of New Zealand, can set any regulations it wants on who can fly over Crown land.
Sooner or later it's going to happen elsewhere. The extraordinary lack of etiquette and basic decency among some drone owners is steadily going to make the public outcry to do something about the problem greater and greater.
Stop flying your fucking toys over my fucking property.
Except that also means other insects we like a lot less are also likely evolving resistance, which means we'll produce even nastier toxins and start wiping out bee populations again.
Because the poor will be greatly benefited by rain belts shifting away from them, or being knee deep in water.
And where exactly will the US get its grain from when the rain belt ends up in northern Canada?
The Beringia hypothesis has the advantage of not invoking a paleolithic ship construction industry. I know this is all very romantic, but for the moment, there is little evidence beyond some chicken bones that even Polynesians, within the 1,300 to 1,500 years (the settlement date of Easter Island) made it in any significant numbers. The simplest explanation is that multiple groups, some with different genetic heritages, went across the land bridge, some basically settling there until the end of the glacial maximum, and others possibly coming later. Multiple waves don't require multiple routes.
I'm thinking the worst aspect of that higher gravity would be a much denser atmosphere. We certainly could survive in 1.6g environment, but we couldn't survive the crushing weight of that atmosphere.
Well, bully for you. I bet you feel all special posting this here. Makes you feel superior and important I bet.
For the moment, I think we need to point to the simplest hypothesis, which is these genes were present in at least of the proto-Indian populations that went over the land bridge. That's not to exclude the possibility of new evidence pointing towards some sort of trans-Pacific input into the Americas, but the evidence, as small a body as it is, simply does not support that conclusion. More studies will be needed to determine if there are other loci for these genes, in the hopes of establishing at least the rudiments of a migration pattern.
This does not appear to be the claim. If I'm understanding the research, it's likely that this as yet unidentified progenitor population existed long before the entrance into the Americas, and may be a signal of a very early modern human population in Asia.
More samples is good, but I question your statement that the sample size in question isn't large enough. The fact is that the DNA is present, it shows a link to a previously unknown Asian progenitor population, a population that also bequeathed their DNA to some south Asian populations and to indigenous Australians. Better sampling may identify other areas of the Americas where these genes ended up, which would help understand migration patterns not only from Asia to the Americas, but also within the Americas themselves.
That you're imagination is so limited should not reflect on science's need for basic research. Unless you have a crystal ball that accurately reports what basic research taking place now is going to blossom into value further down the road, all you have is a pretty goddamned mindless anti-intellectual rant.
My understanding is not that an Austro-Melanesian population contributed to American Indian DNA, but rather that some progenitor population in Asia bequeathed their DNA to both groups. This puts a somewhat different hide on the cat, underlining that the Paleo-Indians were not a homogeneous Siberian population, but rather themselves were descended from a patchwork of groups in Asia who entered and likely interbred for centuries in Beringia.
Money is the root of all evil, and man needs roots.