StringJunky

The difference is that there will be no consequences to answer to after the event, so, there'll be no resentment.

I'll choose to be ignorant

It has a very well-established and pretty much irrefutable answer: yes. Seems strange to be asked to do research about something that is not difficult to query and show the affirmative.

Did the planet-buster slip through the detection systems unnoticed? Best to be ignorant I think otherwise the last week will be pure anarchy everywhere.

You stick with your cats. Temperament can be be messed up but staffs are amiable by default, mostly. They wouldn't have the overall friendly reputation if it to be trained into them.

Only you can decide to make your self-fulfilling prophecy not be realised.

I'd sooner let the experts deal with it and if they can't then I will seek my own answers. As i have experienced myself recently, the causes of something can be what appears totally unrelated, to the untrained mind. I'm of the opinion that an intelligent person will see a doctor first before attempting to self-diagnose.

You picked a girl that didn't reciprocate your interest; that happens to everybody.

That's for the patient's medical team to worry about. I think it boils down to which is the lesser evil in some cases. If there is a risk of death from doing nothing then risking those organs may be worth the risk and they will mitigate it as far as possible.

But being neuroscientist he is is familiar with the foibles of the human sensory system, so even on a macro level he could show you where we fail in recording reality. For example: when you see a wall full of bricks you don't see every individual brick, the brain takes a sample of an area then clones them across the area that is the wall. The perception of reality is constructed.

The question of existence is a rabbit hole that you don't want go down.

He is quite strong on physics and trying to bring physics into the neuroscientific domain and vice versa. He should be pretty good at analysing the observer effect.

Fighting dogs were bred to act aggressively to other dogs not people; they had to be handled so a dog that wasn't comfortable in human company had a bad trait.

You can just see the tension in their muscles poised to attack. No, a very large section of the normal UK dog owning community, not just yobs:

It's got Little Dog Syndrome like some men of short stature have Little Man Syndrome; both feel the need to assert themselves more aggressively than those of average or greater size. If some of the little breeds were big they'd be downright dangerous and make pitbulls look soft in comparison.

If you are in direct sight of the sun it is daytime. You need to be on the dark side of whatever body you ate standing on - in shadow - for it to be night. The sky will be dark, with stars visible, if you are out floating in free space but you and any objects around you will be lit up. Edit: I suppose one could argue there needs to be a dense enough atmosphere to scatter sunlight to create the daytime conditions we experience on Earth and, therefore, it's always night without one.

Come down harder the stupid ones. You created a dichotomy where there needn't be one.

Ignorant arseholes, quite frankly. . Staffordshires are people-loving dogs by default; they are even called "Nanny dogs" because of their generally good reputation with children; they have, on average, a high tolerance for rough play with them by children relative to other breeds. If there's any dog I had to put trust in and the least likely to snap or bite, it's them. It's people that train them to be nasty. I've known loads of them and only one or two was a bit grumpy and snappy but that was down to the owner. It's the little breeds that tend towards nasty more often in my experience.

Here's the instruction about that in a user manual about one:

I think we'd all know about it if it had.

Another way to put it: because the light intensity range from darkest to lightest is too wide for a camera to record faithfully in circumstances like that, you have to choose which element you want properly exposed and leave the others pure black or pure white with no detail, hence, the featureless, black sky because the Earth was the desired feature in those pictures to be recorded properly.

A BMI of >18? That just about covers all adults except anorexics.

You could try Googling reviews on the model you want. Put the name of the model then reviews. Better to get opinions from the people that have bought them.

No problem. I Googled sample online discussion if you want more information.

Here's a sample online discussion: http://www.centenarycollege.edu/cms/en/academic-services/blackboard-guidelines/sample-online-discussion-guides/ More samples and guidelines in this link: http://www.educationcoffeehouse.com/writers/high_quality_discussion_posts.html