No it doesn't. I have had things published in these journals. We do most of the work, the rest is reviews and editors give a few comments etc. There is very little editing anymore these days.

Most people don't. They assume its something the "evil" banks do to steal your money. Bitcoin fans seem to have even a poorer grasp that others on average. And yet one of the main bitcoin faqs points out that fractional banking is quite possible with bitcoin.

Well a 1 km cubic detector is not small, or the 20km particle acceleration to make the neutrinos. And after all that you going to have a very poor bit rate. Of course it still won't work since the sun pumps out a lot of neutrinos and that would kill the already very poor S/N ratio. The can go right through the sun... they can also go right through the detector.

And all that radiation goodness? What about that?

I am on these said papers so look them up yourself. And your still an idiot and have no idea what the scientific method is or how its applied outside myth busters. Try reading a bit of philosophy in science.

I find this whole debate silly. Who is liable when breaks fail? when tires blow out? These things have happened and its has killed people. This is hardly a new precedent.

That "requirement" is ridiculousness. By that requirement we have never observed any particle's outside protons and electrons. We have never observed current (only indirect effects) ... etc. Its stupid.

We can use polymerize outside the cell, we can see the happen errors. I can't watch with my eyes... But if your going to say "that only real time counts" or some other absurd direct observation requirement whatever that means. Well there is about 98% of current "science" that hasn't even been observed and never ever will be.

Yes we have. Yes we do. We even have experimental evolution experiments now days.

True that.

The rules for that sort of thing are ridiculous. Its more or less impossible for the armature. Better off getting cosy with the local university or something.

You know i had this problem when i wanted 50% H2O2. The lab supplier said no, regardless of what paper work i came up with. But the industrial suppler was like "We don't sell one liter bottles, but 25kg is $50", which was about the same price as 1 liter from the lab suppler. I asked about permits etc. All i needed was a dangerous good vehicle if i was transporting more than 100kg. They also sold me some red fuming HNO3.

Turns out at least in some countries there is a lot of "assumed" laws that don't exist. And lab suppliers seem to be paranoid.

Very little science is done to 5 sigma, in fact almost none at all. Most is done to the classic 5% significant level, if that.

Where is that written. Not so long ago most families lost at least one child at young age. So its not even remotely historically accurate.

And at a primary school its very distracting from basic education.

This is in fact quite difficult. Sure in some sci fi story it works because you just arm wave all the details away. But when it really comes down to what can really work its more limited. First off methane is a poor universal solvent compared to water. This already makes things much more difficult. Second even the basic idea of a bi-lipid membrane doesn't even work in methane (its a non polar solvent). Its cold so reaction rates are low... etc....

Different building blocks is even more difficult. The classic argument is something based of silicon. If you have silicon you have carbon and carbon can just form so many more stable compounds that anything else, and vastly more than silicon. Life as we know it uses most of the periodic table. The is a really good argument to be made that life will be chemically similar to us. (ie water is the solvent, things based around carbon, some sort of information store like DNA).