You, uh, realize we pay for that anyway? No federal TLA actually needs to worry about things like balancing their budget - The more they pay, the more you and I pay!

So no, I actually do not feel okay about giving an extra chunk of my salary to Utah. Fuck you, Utah, make your money back from the fundies and your crappy low-alcohol liquor, and leave me out of it!

Oh, I'm going all MythBusters and mounting the spear on a JATO rocket.

Well actually there are some elements of rocket science in spear throwing. It's just that the method of propelling them has changed.

I.e., in S/370, invalid signs in decimal numbers suppressed, rather than terminating, the operation? (A change not unique to ZAP.)

Several times since the Revolutionary War, nutcases have tried to rise up in armed resistance to the U.S. government.

...Whereas in the Revolutionary war - The nutcases fucking won, against the world's greatest superpower at the time.

And idiots like me trying to call them out on it. :)

Of course the OP's statement was unfounded speculation with no basis behind it. The papers and researchers in question are all known so it should be possible to determine if he is right but it just sounds like hyperbole to me.

The article said the plants wouldn't germinate. Light is not required for germination, just water.

Absolutely. And extend that into the early 21st century.

Impossible for scientists to ignore, not that tough for the general public to ignore as most of the changes so far have been subtle, especially in the US. But as I said that's changing.

"Come to Jesus" was probably the wrong term to use (obviously it was with you). What I meant was that conditions will change in a way that forces more and more to confront the reality of climate change. Like I say I may be too optimistic about that. We'll see.

Nothing assumed about it, the term Anthropogenic Global Warming asserts that some portion of it is caused by human actions. The estimate is something between 80% and 120% of the warming is caused by human influences.

"I wonder what it would look like if it explodes"

Nope, it was most definitely "I wonder what it will look like when it explodes" and I found thinking it that way to be jarring in its own right. Ten minutes later I had the answer. Large numbers of people were watching and it caused a level of intensity of emotion and feeling among large numbers of people that the intensity was enough to function at a different and atypical energy level.

"Perhaps you should consider studying in the field of neuroscience, or perhaps deep in to the fields of physics"

I'm too old to change career tracks, I have absolutely zero interest in working in the repressive hamster cage necessary to do research in those fields, living in an ivory tower or playing research paper games. Those fields require a lab, equipment and a lot of money. As soon as you hit string theory and multiverse we simply don't have any way to do experimental research because everything is at a level beyond our current ability to measure anything.

Probably the only ones doing viable research on the subject are Zen masters, though they may also be masters of self deception.

I'm just not opting in to the reductionism that thinks just because we have huge digital computers that they are the right tool to simulate biological intelligence. You might actually be able to fake some of the mechanics but its going to be wildly inefficient and contrived, and I think critical peices will be missing, probably the parts that we call "soul".

Actually I think that the first 2 years of high school should focus on things you will need to survive: money management, how financing works and why revolving credit is not a good thing; reading and writing.
The second 2 years should allow either continued academic *or* tradescraft. fo you go the tradescraft route you'll get two years focused on only the stuff you need for a particular field. Plumbing: math and geometry (drain slopes), chemistry (solvents and glues, interaction with metals), and of course hands on.
-nbr

FTFY

The question is were the 66% of papers that expressed no opinion on anthropogenic global warming doing so because they are truly neutral or simply because it wasn't germane to the subject of the paper and they weren't just going to add it gratuitously?