Leaderboard

Hi. I have this product with no use for it, but mailing would be too expensive at today rates. 😡 Perhaps you can find it in UK. Perhaps a do-it-yourself here :---> https://www.ecosia.org/search?q=diy hydrophobic

The two ways I've tried to this, in neither case from scratch I have to say, were reproofing a Barbour jacket with wax ( a tricky process involving melting a tin of proprietary wax in hot water and applying it with a cloth) and spray proofing a raincoat with Scotchgard, which I think is a silicone. It sounds as though with your gloves going the Scotchgard route would be the thing to try. I found it needed several applications to be fully effective and even then was not 100%, but it's a lot better than nothing.

Arguably the vice tax on cigarettes helps pay for the extra public health care required. Though of course not directly.

I live in tropics, and we have rainy season. The rainy season is wet, but certainly not cold. I often sit under a tree and enjoy the sound and the smell of rain.

External parasites are indeed one of the hypotheses. Another one is sexual selection. The others have been previously mentioned. By taking into account where our ancestors (australopiths) lived it was suggested that heat load reduction is more important when foraging in tropical habitats. There is also a suggestion that bipedalism evolved because of thermoregulatory benefits (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2016.02.006). These were more important to our ancestors as they moved from forest environments into more open habitats. Conversely it would mean that clothing likely only became more relevant when moving out of tropical climate zones. There are a range of suggestions on what behavioral adaptations might have occurred to protect from cold, but they appear to be fairly minor, especially concerning our physiological abilities to deal with heat. So far the strongest evidence we have point toward thermoregulation as one of the major influences.

Really? From this: Just aim at the central star then, instead of the individual targets. It will take a larger mass and higher speeds, but it’s still doable. I understood that you "simply" elaborated on how to actually and effectively strike/kill "hopefully all the aliens". You never elaborated on how to defend from such a strike. Maybe a space "Patriot" missile system, or some kind of super powerful laser, or particle beam + a large array of detectors? You also could but didn't elaborate about how to keep radio silence and, closer to the topic, how aliens did it, if they exist close enough to be otherwise detected. You, and others, didn't elaborate about the possibility that alien civilizations may be much more improbable/scarce that we thought. As far as I know we don't completely understand our brain, and its evolution, so maybe inteligent beings are less probable that we thought. Also, due to evolution, all the species are more of less prone to fight (for food, for survival, to mate), and this may lead to annihilation, when the technology is powerful enough (like our MAD). Also, the huge distances are also important, because it would take many lifetimes between departing the home planet and arriving at an uncertain destination. How many would risk such a trip? And last, but not least important, we humans, as we got more civilized, we reduced the number of off-springs, so it is possible to observe rather a decrease of population, not an urge to fill with humans all the available space in galaxy, as the game theory suggested (otherwise why anyone would eliminate all the aliens?).

In Thai and Chinese, as well as some other Asian languages, verbs are not inflected at all, and pronouns are used only if absolutely necessary to avoid misunderstanding, ie if the information is not already implied by the context. So for example, in Chinese, 去 might mean “to go”, “I go”, “we went”, “you’ll go” etc, depending on context. These languages thus simply express the idea of “going from here to someplace else”, and leave the rest up to context. You can, of course, add specifics if you want to, but unlike in many European languages, those are optional. In Thai in particular, there’s quite some emphasis on not being specific, unless strictly necessary.

Yep, "Papier hier" is correct. Phonetically you are very close with "Dank u Vell", correct spelling is "Dankuwel". Not so extreme as in German, but in Dutch we also glue words together.

Any number of ways I would imagine. Perhaps when they were losing hair the elements were not harsh enough to make having hair a significant advantage. Perhaps a loss of hair eliminated a significant cause of death due to vermin. Perhaps the loss of hair was a byproduct of a genetic change that enhanced survival to an extent that outweighed hair loss. Perhaps hyperthermia death outweighed hypothermia death. I don't think we can just pick one without evidence simply because it sounds good us.

Where would it stop? Almost everything is poisonous or venomous, or will eat you (or your baby)

I heard that Walmart needs people who can give their customers the right amount of change from their purchases..

It might be a bit extreme, but where's the evidence it doesn't work? A friend of mine worked in Saudi some years ago, and currency traders would sit on the pavement, with great wads of cash of different currencies surrounding them. Nobody ever robbed them. And one murder doesn't mean that people aren't deterred by the death penalty. (although I'm against it) It might have deterred 19 out of 20, how can you be sure?

I do remember other people being under neg-rep attack, and reporting accordingly. I know I've been protected when I was under fire for no other reason than disagreeing with someone. I like communities that are self-correcting to some extent. A judicious combination of refereeing and community awareness.

This, if I recall my college philosophy courses well enough, was one of the major objections to Descartes' cogito. Descartes posited that some "mischievous imp" could deceive us about any aspect of the physical world (hello, The Matrix) and we could only be certain of our own existence in that given moment as a self that thinks. His later critics pointed out that even the self, the "I," could be illusory and therefore there was only warrant to say that consciousness happens. The only epistemically confident statement would then be "there is thinking, therefore something exists." Pretty hard to argue with that. 😀 Starting from that seed, the discipline of phenomenology proceeds, trying to understand experiences as they present to consciousness and how consciousness is directed at apparent objects. Fellows like Brentano and Husserl got the ball rolling with the idea that consciousness is always about something, a quality that is known in philosophy as intentionality.

We only ever get information about 'reality' by interacting with it. Whether by touch, sight, or our other senses, or, by the use of instruments to augment our senses. This is especially true of Quantum Mechanics, which tells us that there is no 'reality' until an interaction/observation defines or fixes a state. IOW, we can never know what 'reality' is, only how it is affected, and responds, to our prodding interactions.

ROFLMAO!

Genetically-inferior men may still have sex with mutually-consenting women as long as they get a vasectomy beforehand to terminate their inferior genes for good. Geneticallly-inferior means having a family history of known hereditary health issues.

And do their kids sleep outside in the rain, in the cold rainy season? Some of your posting is sadly lacking in logic.

Yeah it's physics cause it's energy that is the reason it gained carbon and intend to use this knowledge for a craft to get me to space.