zapatos

No, absolutely not. Please quit implying such things. If you want to make an argument then do so with data, not with supposition.

No, it wasn't that one particular song was monotone, but that one song sounded similar to the next song. It reminds me of electronic dance music, where all the music has a similar beat, percussion, and electronic sounds.

Didn't mean to knock it. I'm from the Midwest in the United States. Music that is very different from styles I've grown accustomed to are usually hard for me to appreciate. I've listened to some of the videos you've posted and have liked some of it, but for some reason they really do start to sound the same to me. Probably doesn't help that I can't follow the story they are telling either! 😃

I watch a number of them but I've come to be pretty selective. A lot of what Moontanman posts Ill watch. And most anything that is Blues. This Arabic Pop and Rap all sounds the same to me and is not my style.

I believe this happens regularly all over the world. There is a huge industry around supplying and verifying that labs have access to rodents that are appropriate for scientific studies. Sure. This is also studied all the time. A couple of well known examples that come to mind are Colony Collapse Disorder in honeybees and Tasmanian devil facial tumor disease. Of course. They don't just spend money for the hell of it. My dogs are vaccinated against rabies for instance.

Non sequiter. I can't believe you are even suggesting that someone choosing French over physical education proves sports are not fun. You've brought this up twice now. No one here is doing that. I'm not even sure what you are trying to convey with your "unfalsifiability of deterrence" complaint. iNow's point was that you cannot just have a tarp over your head to prevent ill effects of windchill. You basically need to build a tunnel out of your tarps.

You mean those who do those things for competition? 😃 Perhaps I misunderstood you. When you mentioned those things originally you were talking about getting exercise by doing those things. That is what I don't think most people would consider sports. While you may get five different answers from five different people on what "sport" is, I believe most will include the aspect of competition. Football? All five will say yes. Chess with your sister? Four of five will say no (if not all five). Chess as part of the high school state finals? We'll get more of a mix. Tennis? All five will say yes. You may get a lot of aspects that people associate with 'sport', but I'm guessing that "competition" is going to be the most common, probably followed by some kind of physical exertion.

I'm not sure many people consider hiking, running or working out to be sports.

About 100 years of data. https://www.amnestyusa.org/a-clear-scientific-consensus-that-the-death-penalty-does-not-deter/ My opposition to your plan was less based on the number of bike paths in Manhattan and more on the unacceptable risk of having children race bicycles on the streets of Manhattan. Hmm. I put a heavy-duty tarp over some firewood outside. Lasted about three years. I'm not sure I would call the purchase of tarps a "one-time investment". You also failed to factor in the cost of cameras, recording devices, monitoring, maintenance, etc. I don't know. You should investigate that if you would like your proposal to be accepted. I'm pretty sure rural America existed before oil even began to flow. Sports are fun. Riding your bike to school in the snow and rain is not.

In Manhattan? In Montana where the school is 20 miles away? Kids with disabilities? Not cost effective, especially when compared to, say, organized sports. Perhaps after they finally pay for actual school supplies. I guess that is why there is no murder in places that have the death penalty for murder... Do you have a citation for that claim or did you just make that up?

Not all kids have bikes. Not all schools have buses. Not all neighborhoods are safe. Bikes cannot be used in all weather. Not all kids can ride bikes. Not all parents would let their childs participate. Not all neighborhoods have bike paths.

So if I decide my child should have black hair and brown eyes and above average height... we run the risk of him losing touch with nature? Can you explain please? Well hell, using that argument maybe we should have an outside limit on age. Say, if you haven't already died by your 73rd birthday, we put you on an ice flow. So, if you are 20 years old and confined to a wheelchair, you'd rather be dead?

You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din.

Uh huh.

Yeah, I figured you'd just dismiss the possibility that you could be part of the problem. Oh well.

Let's be objective here. There is a disconnect between your data/approach/theory/whatever, and the way things are done around here. That should be clear by now. You can continue to beat your head against the wall in an effort to get everyone here to come around to your way, or you can come around to the way things are done here. The only other way I can think you'll find success is to try a place that is more in line with your approach. Good luck.

That's correct. There is only one apical meristem at the end of the shoot. Other things you see at the end would be newly forming leaves, axillary buds, etc.

I think plants always have more than one apical meristem at any given time. They exist at the tips of shoots and of roots. If you have a branching tree (think 'oak') then you have apical meristem at the tip of each branch and the roots. If you have a single trunk (think 'larch') then you have apical meristem at the tip of the trunk and the roots. It has been a while since I studied this so take my comments with a grain of salt.

If you don't get people to accept your musings in this thread perhaps you should open a third thread on this topic. I'm sure by then we'll all be willing to accept your word on this. You may also want to try out your face screen in another science forum. It's probably just us at this site who aren't giving your idea the credit it deserves. You always fall back on this. Given that the face screen is your assertion, the idea here is for YOU to convince US that YOUR explanation is correct. If we are unable to convince you of the current science, that in no way proves your assertion is correct.

You argue against decades of empirical data with an at-home exercise of describing how something appears to you and then you elevate it the same level. Observe Mars. See how it periodically goes backwards? Obviously proof of epicycles!!!

You already do; a screen embedded in your face.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Ehret