That's certainly not my intent to imply. I'm speaking from a practical standpoint, and it may apply less to climate science than say to quantum physics. There is some rigor behind the work, and those who have studied the field are the only ones who can really evaluate the work for validity (peer review). The rest of us are left to rely on that process is all I'm pointing out. I feel that I can stay informed but I cannot fully evaluate the work. I know a lot about computer models and their shortcomings, but without being an expert in the field I am left to either believe or not their conclusions. Note that I am not talking about al gore or any political "solutions".

For the climate scientist it is a matter of science. For all others it is a matter of belief (in what the climate scientists tell you is happening). Whether or not you decide to believe the consensus of the experts (climate scientists) is up to you . . . some do, and some don't.

I would guess (hope really) that the bank transfer is what Verizon is pushing people towards, rather than pay with a credit card on the web site. The bank transfer is probably not getting billed the $2 fee.

What is disgusting about it is the fact that it is the government forcing you to buy a product from a commercial interest. Think about it. I agree with your assertion about the single payer plan, but what we have now is far worse than what we had before we "reformed" it. One of the last powers we have is to vote with your dollar (that is, only buy things from companies you wish to support, and do without where there are no good alternatives). This option has now been removed from the health care equation. I personally have found the industry to be completely corrupt, and have chosen not to partake. I find it very offensive to be forced to give money to them.

Agreed. The spectrum belongs to the public and private companies should not be allowed to buy and sell it.

I'm not sure if your a very clever troll or simply misinformed, but since you're currently modded to +5 posting what is just wrong I can't resist replying. I would suggest you look into bio-intensive gardening. John Jevins has written several very good books explaining the various techniques like double digging (not tilling), companion planting, cover crops, etc which lead to improving soil conditions and production from year to year, without the use of pesticides or external fertilizers. You can use this technique to produce the necessary nutrient intake for 4 people with a 4'x4' garden plot (this is not full caloric content however, but still impressive). It is a labor intensive process and does not scale to the level of industrial agriculture. I personally think this is a good thing because it supports a more regional and community based small farm agriculture model.

My kingdom for a mod point you funny funny coward.

I like the short stories in the new yorker. If you enjoy short stories I would also recommend those by tc Boyle and Kurt Vonnegut.

I worked on a grant looking at math skills and correlating with language, gender, age, and other factors amongst three population groups (white, hispanic, and navaho). We followed a group of third graders through the fifth grade, and a group of sixth graders through the eighth grade. Very interesting stuff, and at least in my corner of the US it was very obvious that as students moved on in school they liked math less, felt it had less value, and also performed worse on the tests. In the third grade group almost everyone believed that math was important, that they would use it in their jobs, and stated that they liked math. By the eighth grade only a few still felt this way, and of those almost all were boys. I was the programmer, created the test instruments, database for the results, etc, so I never saw the entire set of results, but heard that the young cohort pretty much proved that there was very little gender or cultural bias against math aside from poverty (which interestingly seemed to indicate a dislike of it).

What you have there is grossly oversimplified. To start to get at the nature of the problem, I would put forth that while everyone is doing and has done 3b, and the trick is to start doing it so that a) you can reduce how unfair it is because the unfairness is not sustainable (ie, leads to rather large revolts), and b) do it so that you are not undermining your own economy and security as a result. The US might be going down the same path as others before it, and what the leaders need to realize is that ultimately the path leads to a pretty big fall.

Except the fair use doctrine allowed for copies to be made. You were allowed to make a tape copy of an LP for your own use (this was challenged by the record companies of course).

I'll second this. I have always found that the act of writing the notes goes a long way towards remembering what was written. I will rarely need to refer back to the notes. I tried taking a laptop for a while and typing the notes but for me this did not have the same effect, and it would often take me a long time to find what I had typed (somehow it was context free, whereas when I did have to find something in my written notes I would know what part of the page it was on).

Agreed with your position on the counteroffers, but I think the parent meant that you have an offer in hand in the likely (because of the jerk factor) event that he gets shitcanned. I do think that in this case if I were in posters shoes, I'd go to the top and let them know why I was leaving, without trying to negotiate for more money or status. If you do it right (ie, without personal attacks) you can garner more respect. Some people will say that you should just say thanks for the job and get out, which also has its good points.

The thing is what google is doing is making something that was intended for audience A to be expanded to audience A, where audience A == the public. I do use facebook (a little bit) but keep everything "private" (for certain values of private). Facebook could always screw me over and do away with the private setting, which I account for and really only post things that wouldn't hurt me if they did become public. But posting things as "public" comes only with the expectation that they will be public. If you are having a conversation in public, it is best to not say things that you wouldn't want made public (like not talking about your PIN for your check card), as you should expect to be overheard. Otherwise go to a place where being overheard is not expected. With that said I would still not like to be followed, recorded, and have those recordings made available on the internet, but that is not what is being discussed in the story.

It would be unfair to a lot of christians to say that christians believe the earth is only 6000 years old. I have known many in my life and only 2 (a couple) claimed to believe that. In my experience the majority of christians see science and religion (age of the universe, evolution, etc) as compatible, and simply believe that "God" somehow set it all up. There are a vocal minority of evangelists who seem to carry the banner for the perception of christianity from outside. I am surprised that more christians don't come together to denounce it.