That you equate those things is exactly the problem. Thanks for your cogent, if unwitting, demonstration of the problem that female victims of sexual assault face. Hint: women are not going around screaming "rape me".

What you are suggesting is literally as ridiculous as shutting down California because of a school shooting in New York.

Nobody objects to women learnng useful skills like self-defence. What they object to is lack of such skills being used to blame the victim: "she shouldn't have waked down that street at that time of night".

Though it's also possible for the supplier to be a pain in the ass if they so choose. Turning round and threatening to sue for breach of implied contract and refusing to allow access can fuck up the upstream chain quite badly, especially if production is sufficiently specialised.

A small study with interesting effects is necessary before you carry out a large study. But since you're such an expert, it's likely that you knew that, because of correlation.

Yes, but it's difficult to argue for a big study without a small study that suggests there may be an effect worth investigating. Also, we have statistics to tell us how likely it is the pasta-lovers all ended up in one group.

Major sports teams tend to be clothing companies with a nice line in football(/baseball/basketball/etc).

And you did no worthwhile research either. Yes, recombination is a thing. However, it only happens between sufficiently similar DNA sequences. Ebola and rhinoviruses share very little common DNA and the chances of any sharing happening and producing something that did anything biologically interesting are, to put it mildly, low.

As for your/my attitude, grow up. Speculating wildly with no clue what you're talking about it is liable to get people taking the piss out of you. In this case you literally had to type a question into Google and click on the first link to come up. Instead you had to waste mine and everyone else's time with your nonsense.

Lord knows. I can't imagine a stupider or more pointless question. Is stupid fucking lawyering *really* the most important thing about this whole issue? Who the hell gives a shit? And we wonder why women have a problem with /.

Yes, the reason being you're a fucking idiot with no idea what you're saying.

Getting to the Met involves a lot of things, only one of which is vocal skill. A random adult would not have a lifelong network of contacts, experience, acting skills, and a depth of knowledge of the repertoire that someone who grew up doing it would. And there are certainly arguments that brain plasticity and physiology plays a part in developing talented child musicians in a way that may not be replicable in adults.

But that aside, yes, an adult can be trained to a high standard of opera singing, sufficiently so to take on significant roles in commercial productions. Bearing in mind, of course, that we are talking here about 5-10 years worth of daily training - but it is possible. Just rare.

"fast"=/="good", but even leaving that aside, I'm sceptical. Fast solos on guitar don't involve that much lefthand speed in absolute terms. I suspect it is something about the way you practice or think about your own performance. Musicians are their own worst enemy when it comes to improving their skills and a large part of my job as a teacher is breaking down roadblocks so that you can actually improve. A lot of teachers don't recognise this (and I suspect it's worse for instruments like electric guitar where teacher training may be, well, variable).

Considering you have a range bigger than that used by most male opera singers, yeah, I'd say that's respectable. Also, G6...why, just why?

Sure, everyone has physiological issues to deal with - this is why the best sprinters are the best - but I don't think it negates my point all that much. Also I bet a good vocal tutor could get you two and half octaves if you wanted to :)

Hello flamebait mod, care to justify your moderation?