You are putting agnostics and atheists into one basket which makes as much sense as putting you in a basket with the fundies (you sound like a reasonable person). Even if you can't prove a negative, the onus is on the religious to provide infallible proof. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

A paste apparently: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peanut_butter

They do this in the HK MTR system.

WHOOSH

They obviously have to teach the controversy.

At the risk of WHOOSH....FTFY

...or maybe social etiquette is just changing.

You're argument is deeply flawed. Guns could've quite easily made things worse by the same people being stupid enough to loot also being stupid enough to shoot people without good reason. How many people were injured/killed in the New Orleans flooding during the looting?

Saying it's absurd doesn't make it so.

Fortunately for us, science >> your opinion

Just saying that the efficiency is probably less doesn't make it true. As far as I can tell its a trade up between... gasoline refining + transport to filling station + losses in internal combustion engine versus burn in power station (more efficient that small scale internal combustion engine) + transmission losses (6.5% from wikipedia) + losses in electric motors (less than internal combustion engine) ...so I disagree.

Horse?

Wtf? Any more info on that rape/cellphone logs/DNA testing business? I'd never heard that one before.

7 mins by car is surely doable by bike no?

....and that the accident rate increases when people get lighter? Simple solution - all Americans should get fatter! Oh wait....