Not sure how much weight a tranny can carry.

Also known as steganography.

The current rail service is, for all practical matters, just for freight. The only passenger services is on that money losing AmTrak and some tourist trips here and there.

Rail carries gazillions of tons of fright now in multi-modal containers.

Self Driving Trucks that can't handle local traffic are useless.

Yeah...fuck that.

Holy Hell...

Freight Trains, you know, the topic of this entire article?

This issue is something not addressed by Obamacare and is actually completely different from the question of how people get insurance.

One of the fundamental flaws in the old and current system is that it is completely opaque as far as costs go. People needing non-emergency care have no way to determine which provider has the best prices and what they will be charged for. It's like buying a car..you get one price from the Salesman but when you get back into the finance office, you have all this other crap added on that you aren't sure you need or even what it is.

Until this crap is straightened out, consumers will never be able to make informed choices and the people paying the bills, insurance companies or government, will never really know what they are paying for.

Fix this and you are a long way towards a better solution for all involved.

You go ahead and live in your little 1000stft apartments, riding on filthy subways, walking in the heat and the rain from the station to your work/home, getting mugged (by the cops or the bad guys), never really seeing the sun, etc.

I'll stay in my 2,400 sqft home, with deer in the back yard, a nice greenbelt in the neighborhood (where you don't get mugged), the smell of wildflowers, a 10 minute commute (5 minutes to the grocery store), and low crime.

If it needs a human in "more populated areas" it's no better than putting trailers on a train and having local drivers pick up the loads there.

Of course trans are more economical and I expect more "environmentally friendly".

CRM Dynamics suck donkey balls..seriously.

Shitty Outlook integration, the security is a nightmare. It can't even handle multiple domains. Our company had them working our installation for 3 months straight trying to get it to work.

Stay away from it.

Oh, I see, so now FOIA-requests are bad too — EPA certainly would be far more affected by such "harassment" than US Marshals Service or any other agencies using Stingray for example.

Or am I missing some giant dollop of sarcasm here?

That is precisely why I am not arranging the links in the pretty little table you want.

Yeah, right. If the links really existed — as you claimed the do — you would simply listed them in the format requested — I am not asking for anything particularly complex — instead of posting yet again to explain, why refuse to do it.

Anyone who has made the least effort to study [...]

Gee, right. One would've thought, Hans Christian Andersen dealt with this kind of argument once and for all back in the 19th century, but, behold, yet another "scientist" tries to use it...

(a) we are dumping a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere

Maybe.

(b) higher CO2 concentrations will cause the planet to warm

They will? By how much?

(c) significant warming could cause serious harm

And you could save 15% of more on car insurance — your statement is just as non-committal as Geico's "promise".

My "if" condition is satisfied: there is substantial evidence that people are causing climate change and that climate change could cause significant harm.

Well, if there is such evidence, I'm yet to see it. You made claims, but you have not offered evidence. Maybe, this is not the right forum for such. I would've taken a scientific argument for it. However, being able to make real predictions is one of the requirements for a scientific discipline. Yet, you would not (or, as is rather evident by not, can not) offer any meaningful predictions, that have come true. Ergo, whatever it is you are practicing, is not science.

At this point, the burden of proof is on you.

Thank you for admitting, you have no proof.

Now, if you had a shred of common sense left still, you should be asking yourself this question: how come there are no obvious ways to satisfy this obnoxious guy's seemingly simple request? That's the only way for a healing to begin...

Every one of the links in this thread points to an easy-to-read article referencing a mainstream prediction

If this were true, you would've had no problem enumerating the pairs in the form I asked for. That you didn't do so suggests, it is not there. That you later try to switch the topic confirms the suspicion.

you will enjoy my challenge to you

Sorry, I don't feel like it. But I don't have to prove anything to you — I am not asking (much less demanding) you change your way of life to suit my views.

If there is substantial evidence that people are causing climate change and that climate change could cause significant harm

Begs the question, does not it? A giant "if"...

The only sound argument for inaction would be compelling evidence that harm will not occur

I see. So, unable to prove your contention, you are demanding, the opponents prove the opposite. Nope, not going to work. The burden of proof is on you. Put up or shut up.

Supernova observations can't be reproduced.

Nor can a particular rat be brought back to life to have an experiment reproduced on the same animal. But whatever conclusions you make from observing one supernova (or rat), better be supported by observing another.

Did you really something so obvious spelled-out for you, Mr. Scientist?