My view is that even though you might not need these skills, the very act of attempting to learn them alters the way your brain is capable of solving problems in a way that is indispensable.

My company is already using IPv6 addresses. All of our sites have public addresses... as well as all of our desktops. All of our users now use Facebook and Google over IPv6. So... nothing will help me adopt it. Already done.

It also reports on her saying she intended to give it to her cousin in Iran as a gift. So she admitted it to the news station.

What did the employee hear her saying in Farsi? Got me, but if it was that, then he seems in the clear.

Most of us are agnostic atheists. Including Dawkins, Hitchens, and the rest. You may have missed that.

a-theist means without God. One who does not accept that God exists is an atheist. One does not need to also hold the positive belief that God does not exist.

I'm going to disagree with you. It's true that propositions that are at least plausible testable are more likely to be true than those that aren't, but the fact is you're trusting the scientists to do the tests, and accurately report their findings.

Which I'm fine with. Trust in science itself can be built on the overwhelming number of things that science does that are testable by you right now. Such as whether your cell phone turns on or not. Whether GPS works. Or by your personal experience with the results of other science: understanding electricity, and thus running your tests by wiring a lightbulb.

Both sides of thinking are useful. But useful does not automatically translate into correct.

All of my office machines have public IPv6 addresses. It's quite awesome. Makes so much stuff so much easier.

Well, the "theory of evolution" does exist, and would include natural selection as one of the mechanisms to shape change. There's also simple drift.

It's still valid to refer to it all as the "theory of evolution", or "evolutionary theory", or some such.

Since it's also observable, it's also a fact.

Evolution is still a theory. And a fact. The terms aren't exclusive.

Modern physics (astro included) is about formulating theories that CAN be tested. Not sure why you'd think otherwise. String theory too.

Thanks for proving the point with "as science finds out more." You see, nothing else has been shown to do that. Yeah, science might be wrong. But it's the only human endeavor to obtaining knowledge that actually gets better. The alternatives seem don't have that track record.

Not really. He said we're 200 years into a 1000 year cycle of reversal. That means we're 1/5th through it. So they would point 1/5th of the way to south.

If the PP is even correct, which I am neither arguing for or against.

I understand where you're coming from. So I'll question it.

Science helps us determine that something will cause issues for everybody in the country down the road. The country is tasked with protecting the people within it. Science has determined a threat, so the government is tasked with helping eliminate, reduce, or avoid it.

Okay, done.

MS SQL is a better product, all around. Both as an engine, and the management UI. The integrated security features, integrated XML support, and of course the GIS functions.

But it costs money.

Cost benefit, dude. That's all there is to it.

Global warming is trivially demonstrated. The globe used to be cooler. Now it is warmer. That was easy.