Well, you find some things funny, I find other things funny. Why can't this guy just see the joke in being arrested, losing his job etc etc? I find it hilarious! Oh, it is alright to threaten people in public jobs with their lives as a jest BUT an account losing his job is not funny?

Maybe both YOU and this account should FIRST learn a bit about tolerance yourself AND not immediately resort to threats of violence just because you don't get your way. Or the cops are called in and they really like a good laugh.

Real story, over entitled prick of an accountant can't keep his mouth closed and gets in trouble for it. Hands up who does not give a fuck. Whoa! HURRICANE!

Sorry but you NAV was made in Thailand... its a He/She!

Of equal relevance, we have spent endless hours here cheering the creation of a $25 laptop in India and the Khan Academy in the Silicon Valley in the hopes of providing a future of enlightenment and self determination for societies steeping in ignorance and superstition. Here is the need, hand out, eye wide open. Perhaps this is the time and and place for people to say to those who would attack innocent girls for improving themselves, This is unacceptable behavior.

Clearly you understand neither carbon nor ocean salinity. Human beings have in fact decreased the overall salinity of the ocean and raised the sea level as well as dramatically increased the CO2 levels in the ocean as carbonic acid. We can measure those things. CO2 occurs naturally in the atmosphere. If by human enterprise and the act of burning materials with carbon in them, you dramatically increase the CO2 in the atmosphere, you have polluted the atmosphere by definition. When human activities produce byproducts that impact the normal function of an environmental process or ecology, that is called pollutions. Even if the stuff you're polluting with may have value in say Scotland becoming a wine growing region. It's going to promote wildfires in say someplace like Minnesota and other places that aren't typically noted for wildfire, and worse promote the conversion of global rainforests into desserts. I can take perfectly good clean water. Put it where it will cause an environmental disaster, lets say in some fragile but vital dessert habitat. I've now made that habitat great for old men in golf shoes and lounge singers, but I've destroyed the natural habitat that was already there, and that could be called pollution. It depends on who wins, who loses, and who's getting paid. When Los Angeles sucked the Owen's Valley dry in the early 1900s. L.A. would say they were building a dream. The farmers in the Owens Valley who were wiped off the map would describe it as a nightmare.

Using you salt example, If I dump a billion tons of salt into the San Fransisco bay, the way California agriculture interests did when they tried to flush the salt out of the central valley from years of indiscriminate irrigation, then salt would become a pollutant. By the way, it had tragic consequences killing millions of birds and other local animals as well as ruining a number of estuaries along the Sacramento Delta, essential for fish reproduction. That pollution had profound economic and environmental impact. We addressed that by improving irrigation techniques and preventing the dumping of contaminated salt water into our lakes and waterways.

We need to manage CO2 in exactly the same way (and yes, that includes removing it from industrial exhausts.) The good news, is that a lot of bright folks see industrial exhaust as a gold mine for the production of biofuels. See, cloud has silver lining... just bring adequate technology to the party.

See that's the problem of if I can't see it, its not happening. Or worse, if I don't understand it, its not a problem. There are a million things that depend on precise balance and happen in infinitesimal quantities. NO2 happens in the junctions of your synapses in mind numbingly small quantities and lasts as NO2 for only nanoseconds. However, without that happening you cease to function. 1 pound of botulina toxic properly distributed is enough to kill the entire human population several times. You haven't the foggiest clue which species or processes are critical to the continued function of our ecosphere, how can you begin to measure what is or isn't significant without understanding that living things have indirect and profound impacts and implications.

Our planet functions on virtually countless feedback cycles, so when something over here shifts another system over there picks up the slack and tends to recenter the system. Increase the heat, more clouds and earth reflects more sunlight. Up to a point. Once you exceed the normal capacity for the "Global System" to absorb more energy/ CO2/ heavy metals/ plastic... whatever, then old systems breakdown and subtle but significant shifts begin to make themselves evident as fundamental perturbations in the existing system.

The change in carbonate vs carbonic acid in the ocean is telling (and making life for carbonaceous shelled sea life growingly more difficult.) The loss of glaciers and polar marine ice while possibly enhancing navigation, is already having significant impact both in rising sea levels and changes in ocean salinity. In fact a recent report suggests that as much as 40% of the increased sea level and reduced salinity is directly attributable to human enterprises over the last 2 centuries.

CO2 is in fact toxic, but not in the quantities one is likely to see on an earth that isn't in catastrophic environmental meltdown. I don't see such a meltdown happening in my lifetime of that of my grand children's. However there is a potential avalanche of greenhouse gases soon coming where the warming caused by CO2 triggers a sudden explosion of methane from decaying permafrost in the high latitudes and potential release of massive methane ice seeps in the ocean. Its all tied together. Its a little like someone saying I need some wire while driving a truck, and having your passenger go under the dashboard and cut you some. You might get away with that for a little while, but sooner or later something really nasty will happen. Why would anyone, keep cutting. Its silly. There's no need. The only folks who would truly suffer are the incredibly rich executives at companies that sell us our fossil fuel fix (and by the way the warnings of jobs are coming from the folks who I would suggest are far more worried about their golden parachutes and fat campaign contributions.) Let's simply make the move to saner energy sources, by all means nuclear, solar, wind, geothermal, add OTECs, Tidal hydro generation, new hydrogen technologies. Nobody can tell me that it would be more difficult to build a sustainable energy economy than to send a man to the moon 1960. We actually have sufficient technology to resolve our own problem today, all we lack is the leadership and will to implement it.

MAYBE if you actually read a book you might learn WHY Muslims have such high need of FEMALE doctors. That is because female patients have to be seen by a female doctor or not at all. The statistic sounds so nice but underneath it is a regime of segregated care where QUALITY of care was of no importance whatsoever.

And 60% of doctors also tells you nothing of the total number of doctors available OR that women (childbirth) need doctors a LOT more then men.

Careful with your statistics young one, they can be tricky things and easily be used to fool you.

I'd outlaw sexual intercourse for Rick Santorum, until he stops trying to legislate everyone else's sexual practices.

Hey Beavis... he said Wang... Huh,huh,huh,huhuhuhuh.

A breath mint and some hand sanitizer. Ewwww.