Please... you don't need a UPS (which is for computers) in a major storm outage.

Agreed, completely.
I could easily go a few days stranded in my house without electricity, except I would love to have some water to flush the toilets (drinking water I have), which, in my case, would require electricity for the well pump.

Interesting link. The Relativity Deniers in that article sound an awful lot like the Global Warming Deniers of today, not so much like the authors of the abstracts evaluated by the study in TFA.
However the conclusions broadcast by TFS and TFA have too much spin. They throw out those that did not take a stance one way or the other on the reality of global warming, and then took the "percentage" agreeing from only the remaining.

True, but when the government decides to regulate corporations, they have a right to speak, like the individual person does.

Corporations can't speak, though the people associating through them do have a First Amendment right that they can exercise through the corporation..
Those people do not have an inherent right to limit their liability to the assets of the corporation, though. So I suggest that they give up limited liability if they want to use the corporation to make campaign contributions.

What are the measurements where the ice is now

According to TFA, above 400ppm.

Daily peak is not the same as daily average.

. . . we aren't anywhere near peak oil, and there is likely vast amounts of oil not yet discovered.

Peak oil is when we extract oil faster than the proven reserves grow. The rise in prices allowed advances in fracking technology to be economical, which have gained us 10 years or so. Similar advances in the future are sure to gain us more. Nothing will prevent peak oil from being hit in the relatively near future, and in the meantime it will only get more expensive to extract oil.

Isn't it amazing that we had 16 years of growth before Clinton, and 7 decent years under Clinton before the .Com Bubble burst and 9/11 happened and yet it is all GWB's fault

It is obviously not all G W Bush's fault. However, Reagan's first years were in a recession, and so were the last year or so of George H W Bush's term, so we obviously didn't have 16 years of growth before Clinton. (also, the .dotcom bust didn't really have a great effect on the economy beyond the tech bubble - at least those were some of the busiest years in my career)

In a natural market when there is high unemployment there is a high interest rate.

Interesting that you should say that, since, in my experience, economists have said basically the opposite. In the late 70s & early 80s we simultaneously had double-digit unemployment and double-digit inflation/interest rates, and it was described as something that shouldn't happen. (A significant factor was that capital was being greatly restricted by the Fed in order to squeeze out the inflation. And it worked, too, though it caused a lot of harm to individuals caught in the squeeze. Of course, Reagan and the Republicans took all the credit when the economy inevitably recovered.)

The photo in TFA clearly shows scales, not feathers.

oops, mis-moderated

My old boss helped design a system like that, maybe 50 years ago (before my time) It had a tube to each seat hooked up to a central supply fan, with some sort of odor sources that emitted the smell into the inlet of the fan, timed to coincide with the movie. I'm not sure whether it had to have timers set up ahead of time, or it received a signal from the projection system. But either way, the problem was that there was a delay between releasing the odor and it getting to the seats, and you had to not only time that delay, you had to balance the airflows so that every seat got the smell at the same time. Apparently it was a real pain in the ass for him. I'm guessing that modern smell-o-vision could have an individual odor emitter at every seat or two to reduce those delay problems.

I don't know about your particular case, but you'll find that a lot of farm country has no building codes for what the farmers can build. A friend of mine built a house and workshop in rural Wisconsin, and they definitely had no code to follow, "as long as it wasn't commercial or industrial".
Also, the IBC is definitely not the code used everywhere in the US. Some states, like Illinois, have their own codes. Large cities, like Chicago (separate from the state code), often have their own code (and some smaller towns, too). The Uniform Codes are still popular, especially the Uniform Plumbing Code and especially in the West. NFPA and NEC are often enforced. Most authorities promulgate amendments to the standard codes they cite, often significantly changing parts of the standard code.

What they have, instead of zoning, is a lot of restrictive covenants attached to the real estate deeds. So you can't just up and build a fertilizer factory in your back yard, because, even if the lack of zoning laws would allow it, your deed, and the neighborhood association groups that often enforce the restrictions, wouldn't allow it. Restrictive covenants also used to be popular to prevent you from selling to Jews, blacks, and other minorities, but those restrictions have been ruled unlawful. Nowadays they can be used to prevent you from painting your house garish colors, limit the types of fences you can put up, etc.

Sorry for replying to myself, but I messed up the quoting.

I believe it actually means that the building's structure and appearance should not be based on precedent, which could constrain how it could be built and used, but, rather, the building's service and performance should inform the building's structure and appearance.

You really need to look up this phrase. It means a buildings appearance should be based on a buildings intended purpose (I.E. an apartment block looks like an apartment block, not a crushed coke can).

I believe it actually means that the building's structure and appearance should not be based on precedent, which could constrain how it could be built and used, but, rather, the building's service and performance should inform the building's structure and appearance.