Until not that long ago women were not supposed to run marathons either... because their uterus might fall out (among other stupid assertions).

Technically most phone GPS apps would be illegal even if you weren't entering data since they get the map data over the internet. This whole nonsense is a slippery slope, why is it safe to use the car's built in GPS, but not the phone? Should it be illegal to adjust your climate control knobs? What about chewing gum? You can't legislate away stupidity.

Selectivity is not *the* problem, but it is the reason they can't find people. The main reason the number of qualified applicants keeps shrinking is because obesity is out of control, our country is turning into a bunch of lazy fat asses.

No I'm pretty sure the main problem is the requirements I mentioned above coupled with the raging obesity epidemic which continues to spiral out of control. The number of people who can fit the requirements keeps shrinking because we are a bunch of lazy fat asses.

Those are general requirements. The chances of someone with 20/50 vision actually being made a fighter pilot as opposed to some other role are basically zero unless they have absolutely amazing abilities otherwise. They'll tell you anything you want to hear during recruiting, but you have almost no chance no matter what they say.

They don't have to be musclebound freaks. They need to have exceptional vision, hand-eye coordination and other sorts of spatial awareness aptitudes. It is a different set of physical requirements from what you are thinking of.

Many many people desire to be fighter pilots. The problem is not a lack of people wanting to sign up. The problem is that the USAF is highly selective about who can be a fighter pilot. You need to meet all sorts of physical requirements, then you need to meet very high academic standards, then you have to meet a whole bunch of psychological/personality requirements, etc, etc. By the time they go through the pool of applicants there is nobody left.

You shouldn't assume BMW and Mercedes drivers paid a lot for their cars. I paid only $16k for my used Range Rover. Way better vehicle than other comparable used vehicles and pretty much the same price. It is 10 years old still looks brand new (despite harsh new england winters), there isn't a single rattle, the interior is still flawless (I clean it once in a while but I'm not a neat freak). Granted, someone did pay about $90k for it originally. I would love to thank them for taking the depreciation hit for me :)

The only way this might be true is if you are going really slow (i.e. walking/jogging speed). At 25 mph which most cyclists who are in decent physical condition are more than capable of riding, you won't be able to react as easily as you think. Far, far safer to ride with traffic the same as other vehicles and OBEY the traffic laws... it is unbelievable how many riders I see running stop signs and lights, making illegal turns, etc, etc... it is so dangerous. Just get mirrors to see behind you. Mount on handlebars and/or helmet.

It is all kinds of dangerous to ride on the wrong side unless you are going no faster than a walker/jogger. If you want to see what is going on behind you get mirrors on your bike and/or helmet. Problem solved.

That said... if I were buying a new vehicle today, I'd buy a Jeep Grand Cherokee with the new diesel engine option. The Range Rover outside the US has a fantastic diesel as well but due to the stupidity of Americans, we can't get that option here. The Jeep is fairly close to the capabilities of the Range Rover and that diesel (made by Mercedes) should last many years while only sipping fuel compared to my V8 in the current vehicle. Remains to be seen how the interior of these new Jeeps will hold up over time, but so far the reviews are looking good, they've really improved quality in recent years.

And I might also add that although I only have about 150k miles so far, I know several who are well over 300k, some as much as 500k with the original engine... most of those guys who are over 200k have replaced the transmission once or twice though. The newer models have better transmissions though and probably would last longer than the one I have, but there is no point in getting another new one when this one is still in such good condition.

Clearly you have never actually owned one. I've had mine for 10 years so far (and perform all maintenance myself, the money pit reputation is because of the rates the dealers charge for parts/labor) and never had a single problem. It still drives exactly as it did when it was brand new, and it can take me anywhere I want to go including the house in the wilderness which is only accessible by 4x4. Not a single rattle, interior still looks great, no rust, I see no reason it won't keep going another 10 or 20 years.

What if I keep my bullet proof range rover for 30 years, while the crappy prius quickly falls apart and makes it economically unviable to keep any longer? You also have to factory in all the energy and resources used to manufacture 2 or 3 cheap shoddy vehicles instead of one well made one which will last much longer. Might not be as much of an issue with the Tesla though if the reviews about its build quality are true.

This is a simple logic problem, I don't know why so many people struggle with it.

Atheism literally means "without theism". An atheist is someone who does not accept, as true, claims that assert the existence of gods.

Considering the claims regarding the existence of a god, there are two possible claims:

1. 1. God exists
2. 2. God does not exist

For either claim, there are two positions one can take with regard to belief:

1. 1. belief or acceptance of the claim
2. 2. disbelief or rejection of the claim

For claim number 1 (God exists), the theist's position is one of belief, while the atheist's position is one of disbelief. For claim number 2 (God does not exist), the theist's position is one of disbelief, while atheists can hold either position.

Capisci?