I've collapsed, and I can't get up!

If someone discovers a heat source at the center of the Earth that has been increasing its heat output lately, then yes, they will have found out that it wasn't caused by human activity.

The point being made was that it's very difficult to predict what discoveries will be made in the future and change our understanding of some scientific topic.

Depending on your point of view, that's actually either a better analogy than you thought, or the complete opposite of what you intended to mean. While no reasonable person would question the existence of gravity, there still isn't a satisfactory explanation for how gravity works.

I certainly didn't mean to imply that it necessarily has to be the FDA. You're certainly right that this would be outside of the FDA's typically mandate. My point was just that the decisions should be made by people with the appropriate education and experience, which isn't the DEA. One post farther up this chain mentioned the FDA and AMA, but I don't think the AMA has the legal authority, which is why I also mentioned the Surgeon General. I'm not sure exactly which agency within the Department of Health would be the best for this.

No, it isn't a good fit at all. There's a huge difference between "Hey, your models aren't making perfect predictions. It's possibly that you're incorrect about something." and "Climate Change is a liberal conspiracy to turn the fine God-fearing people of the United States into a bunch of commies."

The solution is simple, though. Congress can write a law that says that the FDA and/or Surgeon General decides how to classify drugs, and the DEA can only enforce those decisions. If the DEA really needs emergency classification authority, such a decision can be limited to a duration of 1 year before it must be approved by the FDA (of course, I can't think of why the DEA would be better equipped than the FDA to make emergency decisions).

Now if only something this logical had any chance of getting done by Congress.

You've never seen anyone high before, have you? Detecting such drivers won't be any more difficult than detecting drivers who are drunk. The same laws most likely apply, as well, since "Driving Under the Influence" probably isn't specifically limited to alcohol.

So what you're saying is that it isn't really a failure of the DEA, but a failure of Congress?

Dude, "wearable augmented reality drone" sounds like a fucking awesome product.

I wonder if it depends on your age. I'm in the age range where I was in grade school during the breakup of the USSR, so it was a big deal to learn all of the former USSR states. People older than me might not have learned about the individual states within the USSR.

That ship sailed decades ago. We used to be surprised at how well-behaved our high school class was if we made it through the year with only a couple bomb threats.

See, that part of the agreement has been working just fine.

You know what, forget the DNS and blackjack.

Of course we would. We might even end up with quite a few internets. The downside, of course, is that the Internet would be kind of broken.

Those of us who consider fuel efficiency or handling to be part of the functionality wouldn't be driving minivans.