zapatos

Seems rather pedantic. I guess we can no longer say "what does science tell us about climate change?" After all, science doesn't "tell" us anything, it is just a process we use for learning. Or, we can choose to interpret the statement in the way the speaker intended. .

Not quite sure what you mean by that, but science seems to have a lot to say about human activities. For example 'don't hunt bald eagles', 'don't hunt whales', 'don't pour raw sewage into rivers'.

Are we? In what way? It looks to me as if we are simply dealing with issues as we've always done by putting power lines back up, burying the dead, moving, gutting your house and rebuilding, etc. Is there anything we are doing proactively, or that is unique to dealing with global warming?

Is it? Is it cost effective at 60%? Why not build it elsewhere if that is all you are going to get? It's not as if China doesn't have land available.

Then back to Sensei's point, Beijing cannot join in.

Only if a decrease in fossil fuels accompanies the increased use of solar. Has the world seen less smog since we began using solar?

Perhaps you are talking about synesthesia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia

no

Never have I ever seen a character such as you be allowed to remain on this forum for so long.

Another good Christian on Science Forums.

And now I've reported this post for the personal attack.

Nope, that was me, another one of iNow's sock puppets.

Increased deaths will result in fewer people adding greenhouse gasses.

No. Not even close. You think we would choose sides based on language? Canadians are our brethren people, not English-speaking Canadians. Who give a rat's ass what language people speak?

Where have we hunted invasive species to extinction? I know we've removed invasive species from the place they've invaded, but that is hardly the same as hunting them to "extinction". Typically invasive species are removed from an ecosystem because their lack of natural predators in their new environment allows them to do undue harm to the existing and/or desirable ecosystem.

Sounds rather clinical and sterile. I agree you don't want people rubbing up against each other, but like all things, flirting comes in many flavors. We don't take the cafeteria out of the building because some people chew with their mouths open and pick their teeth. Similarly, I don't think flirting needs to be verboten just because a few hormonally enhanced peers don't know what is and is not reasonable.

I agree with both you and Ten oz regarding subordinates. However, if you are looking for someone with similar age, education, etc., those at work are often the largest single pool of potential mates you are likely to find. No one wants to watch co-workers flirt at a meeting, but most professionals know that and would be discreet in their own best interests. I've know quite a few people who met their mates at work.

Not flirting at work sounds like a bit of an overcorrection.

That young girl yodeling was awesome! Thanks!

Interpreting the hidden meaning behind a person's statements is a fool's errand. His comments could have been exactly the same whether he is innocent or guilty. No matter what he says, some will believe him, some will not. Some will think it is thoughtful, some will think he is being aggressive. Some will find him credible, some will not. Discussing whether or not we believe him or what his intentions are may be an enjoyable pastime, but we shouldn't make the mistake of believing that after a long discussion we will be any closer to knowing the truth.

You are acting like having limited knowing about something that makes up of 96% of the universe means we don't know 96% of what there is no know. That is like saying a computer scientist doesn't know 70% of what there is to know about his computer because he doesn't understand the 70% of it that is the plastic case.

You need math to know physics. Biology, chemistry, etc. function as they do because of physics. I stand corrected. It is only "two" things.

Look into physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, medicine, engineering, and mathematics to get a small idea of what we know. No one is claiming we know everything. Pointing out a few things we don't understand and then claiming that makes us tiny-brained ignorants of only .000001 of what there is to know, and therefore not worthy to comment on anything at all, is a ludicrous proposition.

I never understand people who act like our understanding of how the universe behaves is so negligible, and how humans are such pathetic components of the universe.