I have a new disciplinary policy I'd like to institute called "No Child's Left Behind". You spank them, but you can only hit their right butt cheek.

I'm pretty sure space combat would consist of humans trying to kill each other in space considering if there are aliens, we are unlikely to ever meet them, and if they make it this far, they aren't going to waste their precious resources trying to kill us.

And as far as mankind on mankind action, I'd guess it would amount to throwing small masses at high velocity at each other (throwing rocks in a glass house).

3) forget the EULA... For the love of god, why the hell do I get a new icon on my desktop every time I update Adobe Reader. Forget that no one launches Adobe Reader from the icon, but lord almighty, if you don't bother asking me during the original install and I delete your damn icon, why would you put it back again during an update?

Climate science is not science, it is the equivalent of voodoo. A bunch of superstitious beliefs built around rituals of illusion, deception and desire.

Feel free to try and identify a control group for climate, if you can.

Exactly this! I don't think anyone denies climate change... Climate has never been and will never be constant. The earth will get colder in the future, it will get hotter in the future. Which way are we going? How far will it go? Are we affecting it significantly? Those are the questions people argue about.

However, the questions I want answered that no one will seem to address are: Which way is better for human life? If the earth is going to get colder or warmer in the future and we can affect it, which way should we be affecting it? If we can affect it and push it in a certain direction, what should we be doing that has the least consequences to human life?

Personally, looking at the globe and seeing where land is situated on earth and which parts of it have more prolific life, I tend to think a warmer planet will increase human life.

Umm citation? Isn't he the one who says it should be up to the states? I'm pretty sure that's what the Constitution says. Something like the 10th Amendment...

Annex Canada? Obama just told them to sell their oil to China. We don't want to pipe it through our country! Maybe politicians like war, and the oil just gets in the way?

If oil money is so important to politicians, then why can't we drill in Alaska, or in the Gulf, or build a pipeline to bring in oil from Canada? Oh right, because politicians are assholes and incompetent. Maybe they like war for war's sake and the oil is just an excuse?

In 20 years, data will be the way data is... Observable to everyone. No one owns data, it simply exists. In the same manner that you can do an experiment and find data that already existed and someone else can do the same. In 20 years, privacy will only exist in your bedroom and your bathroom. Anything you make digital will be public. However, there will be so much data that no one will access yours unless they are specifically looking for it.

I'm not sure how you think electricity generation works... The coal power plants are not throttleable. They don't produce power on demand, they just produce power. So if you are putting energy back into the grid, and the power plant is already producing more than the demand, the energy is wasted. Maybe if there are enough solar panels and it offsets the total peak need, then less fuel could be used, but in that case, wouldn't the market offer you some value for the sold energy rather than the government mandating that power companies HAVE to pay you for energy pushed back to the grid?