Well to be fair, people probably think trans girls in female sports make since because they have a whole spoon with of plastic in their brain.

Because it's about a namespace of unique identifiers being used up. It's a very special time.

Without commenting on this situation in particular, generally it should be reasonable to assume that the comments of the astronauts are also obviously politically motivated and represents the view that their employer wants them to a represent and not some genuine expression of their lived experience.

Don't you just need a picture of the stamp? You could make a little slot with a camera where people insert the stamp to validate. You could even have the stamps keep their physical form, and add an RF tag to the stamp for a more fancy id if they were so inclined.

We know that the protein spike can cause DNA damage, from that alone it'd be reasonable to hypothesize the vaccine version of the spike protein might do the same. Here's a paper on one mechanism known mechanism: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915...

Also, DNA damage is happening all the time, so it's not a bold claim to say any particular drug is causing DNA damage. It's of course a matter of degree.

Today we probably know 1% of what we will eventually know about this virus and the vaccines. There are so many complex interactions at play.

Baseload is the reality of the world that we live in as it's running and must be taken into account. If we're going to get rid of it a sane transition plan would be required. And it looks to me like right now we are suffering from a lack of such a plan, and it seems like that will only get worse, especially in the short term. Let's wait until we get rid of it to say it's an outdated concept.

One (two?) reason that you might not want to live in your world of pure overbuilt renewables is the land use and scale. That world presumes that we won't be radicly increasing our energy use. This is ridiculous, there are all kinds of useful things we could do if we consumed 10x, 100x more energy. We could do large-scale carbon scrubbing of the air, large-scale removal of heavy metals from the water, and more complete energy expensive recycling, and of course less use of any process (especially industrial ones) that currently relies on burning hydrocarbons.

It doesn't matters who you're with, if you don't negotiate a way to run your lives together that you're not both happy with, you will both be miserable and resentful.

The buckets are clearly labeled "all purpose". I don't see what the issue is here.

Doesn't this mean that you can immunize people against cancer?

That might be true, but biological systems are in a lot of ways very much more complex than just about anything else think we understand. I'm not convinced that your can really have a meaningful resolution to address this complexity in the average high school biology class. I see teaching biology with that resolution as similar in difficulty as trying to teach high school students chemistry by starting with the schrodinger equation and having them derived how chemistry must work based on how quantum mechanics causes atoms to from in a certain way which causes electrons to have certain properties and so forth. That's great and all, but it might be a bit unrealistic to expect from a single high school class.

I know I am quite ignorant about biology, I studied physics and I don't really care to dedicate time to learning any advanced biology, its way down my priority list. That being said everyone seems to make this claim that Evolution is some amazing concept that is vital to the understanding of _Everything_ in biology. I just don't see how it can be that important. Evolution is a model that has been used with success to describe our surroundings, but I have never seen the theory used to make predictions. There is not even an attempt to have a mathematical construct that will try to model and predict how species will evolve on a macroscopic scale. Now I know that this is in part because biology is so complex and maybe one day we'll get there, but the other side of that is that Evolution formalized as a general guideline; a set of generalizations that match observation and is therefor limited in its usefulness as a theory. It reminds me of string theory, it can model the things around us, but is also so flexible as a theory that it is "impossible" to prove it wrong, and it doesn't make any useful predictions.

But again, I'm no expert, at the very least it is obvious to me that if evolution does have some irreplaceable critical role in understanding any biology then the community has not done a good job of communicating this. Maybe if they focused more on teaching people about evolution and spent less time demanding that they must be taught it this wouldn't be an issue. In science, good theories have a way of standing on their own and over time wining out no matter how much resistance there is. If evolution is a 'good theory' I think it will eventually speak for itself.

I agree in general that Evolution plays a role in Biology, but I disagree with the magnitude depicted in the OP. It is nowhere near as important conceptually as multiplication, the Periodic Table, or the American Revolution. These subjects are arguably objectively more important by themselves, and are certainly more import relative to their fields.

The "agenda" is bad because these two parties are sucking down huge amounts of energy to fight about something that I think is really not very important. Our schools suck in America and teaching Evolution wont all the sudden turn them around, but this fight is what the vast majority of energy is poured into. Granted, teaching Creationism instead of Evolution in a biology class would make them worse but would Americans really be that much more scientifically illiterate than they already are?

Why aren't physicist demanding we teach the Big Bang? The Big Bang is _way_ more substantiated with evidence and has even made testable predictions for us, something Evolution has not done with anywhere near the level or granularity.

So no, I really don't think it matters if our scientifically illiterate populace (were 30% are stupid enough to be fooled that we didn't go to the moon because of the Van Allan belt radiation) believes we came from monkeys or God. They will still be stupid either way.

It's always amusing when people force a label on you so that can attack it with ad hominem.

Yeah, I'm not sure you have much of an understanding of Biology OR math AND chemistry AND History. When I took biology in high school ~2003 evolution nor ID was taught and they managed to fill up a curriculum just fine. We learned about you know, genetics, micro biology, organic chemistry, cellular structure, and a few other fun useful much better substantiated representations of reality. I think that's way it should be. Biology is not so much like Physics where you build on fundamental concepts, it is more of a collection of useful interesting observations. I think the evolution and ID people both have an agenda their are pushing and they are both damaging to the education of our children.