We are talking about politicians here, what they say and what they do are completely different things. The best way of describing most of them is duplicitous — regardless of country or party.

Well, we all have retroviral genes in our genomes; so in one way there certainly has been "mergings", at least at the genetic level. But the nature of the two organelles being referred to; mitochondria and chloroplasts, in indeed different. Mitochondria originated as free-living Alphaproteobacteria that could, apparently, produce ATP through oxidization. Chloroplasts are the descendants of cyanobacteria, who could produce ATP from photosynthesis.

Both mitochondria and chloroplasts weren't merely enveloped by more primitive eukaryotic cells, they're division and reproduction is timed to that of the host cell, so that when the host cell divides, so do to these organelles. Additionally, both mitochondria and chloroplasts have lost a lot of genes over the 1.5 to 2 billion years that they have been incorporated into eukaryotic cell lines. Another critical aspect of both these types of organelles is that their genomes are not merely honed down to what look like the essentials for producing energy, but that those genomes are very conserved even as compared to the host cells.

If this is the case, even it's early in the evolution of this endosymbiotic relationship, it is a significant discovery.

Or even abuse it seems.

That's the exact opposite of how it actually works. Fertility rates tend to be highest among socioeconomically challenged groups, and lowest among high earning groups.

I've never had a problem reading Chinese or Japanese books or watching movies. Yes, translation of idioms is always problematic, particularly from languages that are not related to our own, but a good translator can usually deal with that. For me, the problem with The Three Body Problem was the loopy plot, shallow characters and the author's abrupt genre jumping. I'm reasonably familiar with the Cultural Revolution and its profound effect on Chinese society, so ironically, reading the first chapter was the best part of the book. There was an interesting story there that wasn't a science fiction story.

I think realistically most people that read a lot have moved onto e-books. Just like physical copies of video games or music are dying, so are physical copies of books. Not only is it convenient, but realistically the cost to "publish" an ebook is effectively nothing.

Aside from proximity, Mars is better suited to colonization than the moon.

There's a minor atmosphere that makes traditional flight possible, and evens out the temperature swings a bit.
The day/night cycle is nearly identical to Earth so solar arrays are more practical (compared to lunar days lasting 28 Earth days).
The gravity is higher (38% of Earth's gravity compared to 17%), so muscle atrophy and general disorientation should be less severe compared to the lunar surface. On the other hand this does make it harder to get back off the surface and into orbit again.
While both likely have "enough" water, Mars has more.

The only thing the moon offers that's better is for resupply or emergency scenarios, Earth is just a hop and a skip away.

I agree. Some of it, I suspect, is that I've just read so many books now that I'm in 50s that when I read a trope-driven genre novel (SF, Fantasy, Mystery, Thriller, whatever), I rapidly feel like I've read this story before. I've gotten to the same place with TV and movies. Both mediums really suffer from a lack of any kind of originality, or even attempts at quirkiness. It all just feels like Thomas Kinked-esque cookie cutter.

I've started reading a lot more non-fiction, mainly history. Ironically, there's a lot more originality there than in most of the modern fiction I read.

I read the first Three Body Problem novel, and I thought it was crap. Some of that might have been the translation, although I've read other translations from Chinese without that much of an issue. The plotting was terrible, the characters flat. I finished it more because I kept expecting it to eventually turn around, breaking my rule that if I don't like a book in the first three chapters, I won't finish it. In the end, I couldn't imagine why I would want to read any more of it.

Does it have the intro "Imagine Bash, but object oriented and with function call names so long they would drive a Java developer to madness. Brought to you by the author of Microsoft Bob and Clippy, psychopaths that infect your computer with their dead-eyed smiles comes Powershell."

As an owner of the complete History of Middle Earth series, these books are not for the casual fan, or probably even the average fan. They really are more designed for Tolkien scholars, and anyone picking up The Nature of Middle Earth expecting ripping yarns filled with Hobbits and wizards is going to be very disappointed.

So rather than them hating each other, they'll be united in their hatred for the UN.

Nobody wants anyone coming into their home and telling them what to do. The issue between Israel and Palestine is that both of them consider the land theirs, and and foreign interference that sides with one side will be hated by the other, and any that supports neither side or both sides equally will be hated by both sides.

The reality is that the elites of both sides want to fight . . . but realistically Israel is the side that will come out on top militarily, so the Palestinian leaders have to be willing to come to the table and negotiate. They're not getting one state, and they're not getting any historic territory back - not without land swaps anyways.

Come to the table. Draw up official borders and have nothing to do with each other. Israel doesn't control what goes on in Gaza's borders and they become an independent state (maybe united with the West Bank, maybe West Bank becomes its own separate country - who knows). After that though, any attack from EITHER side against the other is an act of war. There is no more fighting, no more trying to reclaim ancestral lands - you have your territory and you stay there in peace.

So you would be happy driving a car that is, to an extent, built using slave labour ? I suspect that the answer would be "yes" if it means that it costs you less — just as most people are happy wearing clothes similarly made using slave labour, but this time in Bangladesh & similar.

Can you suggest a better method ? At least it is better than religion which works by making assertions and then continuing to hold them even when there is evidence to the contrary.

the younger kids (college age) feel the need to rebel. that's universal.

however, they are extremely uninformed and are siding with the WRONG side.

islam has no ceasefires. they only have 'temporary reloading' periods. this is in their holy books, look it up. if you dare to find the truth about islam.

islam is not compatible with the west. the longer we keep putting off the big fight, the worse its going to be.

I have zero patience for so-called 'smart googlers' who cant even see that the islamic way of life is 100% counter to everything they VALUE in the west.

in short, they are idiots. how they got into google - that just means google has no clue about actual people's views and only cares about 'how fast can you code nested procedures?'.

again, I have very little respect for googlers. they are the most spoiled brats I've ever seen in my life.

let them lose their jobs. that would be some justice.

when they get 20 or 40 years older, they'll change their views. we all do. but for supposedly smart geniuses, they sure act like little clueless children.