Comment Re:Most Compelling Reason to Doubt "Consensus" (Score 1) 31
ANNNNNND of course you're modded Flamebait.
I guess you hit a nerve.
ANNNNNND of course you're modded Flamebait.
I guess you hit a nerve.
If America had just allowed free trade with Cuba the inflow of US culture into the country would've long turned it into a pro-US state
Just like China, right? Or every nation in the middle east (except for one).
Ad hominems aren't valid arguments.
Face it, you lost. Crawl back into your hole, AC.
The bank a check is drawn on generally doesn't do much more than see if the account has enough funds
That's exactly the scenario I'm talking about. There is little in the way of banks knowing that the account the (substitute) check is drawn on has the funds. I'm not addressing possible reversals. Yet, we seem to hear about people having checks clear-- that is, a full business day has passed-- and somehow they don't know if the account has money or not. Why are they allowed this subterfuge? Because Check21 is not subject to ACH rules. That's B.S.
Natural gas is a great improvement over oil, in both efficiency and the environment, and it works EVERYWHERE for EVERYONE NOW. Not 10 years from now, not for skyscrapers in the cities, not only in remote areas or on shorelines, not for the rich elitists, but EVERYWHERE for EVERYONE NOW.
It costs less, helping low income people to heat their homes, and while fracking itself is a concern I think the reduced pollution and carbon dioxide emissions balance it out.
But some jackass who modded me down doesn't understand that. Hopefully, you do.
Your statement should apply equally to pedestrians and cyclists. However, pedestrians aren't the ones arguing that they'd be safer walking down the middle of the road than on the sidewalk.
Neither cyclists nor pedestrians travel down the middle of the road.
Because most pedestrians that are hit by an automobile are not on the sidewalk, they're in the road.
As I said, only a small fraction of cyclists are hit while traveling down the road not near an intersection.
At an intersection, by definition, YOU'RE IN THE ROAD, whether you had been on a sidewalk or not. Now read that last sentence again, because you seem to be incapable of understanding that simple geometric fact.
The issue is that motorists rarely look for objects moving faster than 0.5mph coming from a sidewalk. Maybe instead of making cyclists stop and dismount at every goddamned driveway as you want, we should address the original source of the risk and institute a nationwide comprehensive 15 mph speed limit.
I never suggested they didn't get killed by cars all the time. I said they manage to handle intersections just fine. That is, with an acceptable surivaval rate.
Where did you come up with that idea? Pedestrians are routinely killed at intersections, coming from sidewalks. Where do you get the idea that that's acceptable?
I don't hear nearly as much whining from pedestrians rights groups as I do from cyclists rights groups, so I assume that pedestrians have greater success in intersections than cyclists do. Of course, it's possible that cyclists are more whiney. Could go either way.
Maybe they're whiny because they hear unsubstantiated crap like this all the time from ill-informed people like you.
A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson
