zapatos

Interesting, as the wood from Sweet Track is soft and degraded, and cannot be easily handled unless first preserved.

Which brings up another good point, and one that seems to weigh on the mind of John Roberts; the power of the Supreme Court comes from its acceptance by the people. The Supreme Court has no power to enforce its decisions. If people don't believe the Supreme Court is a valid institution worthy of respect then they begin to lose the ability to be the final arbiter of constitutional issues. https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/history2.html

I think judicial philosophy is also critical. For example strict constructionist vs originalism vs judicial activism. In addition, I think 'depth in a particular area' goes beyond legal depth, and should include human experiences. Poverty, racism, mental health, child abuse, sexism, disabilities, etc.; they all bring a perspective that helps bring a well-rounded and thoughtful insight to justice. For example, if you've only seen America from a white perspective it is difficult to recognize the racism that is built into our laws.

Very interesting article @studiot, thanks! As I couldn't imagine how a wooden walkway could remain intact for that long I did a little more research and found that the picture depicts a replica (in case anyone else was confused like me). Most of the walkway is still contained in damp peat on site although some has been removed and preserved. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweet_Track

The UK has invaded all but 22 countries in the entire world. Does that ring a bell? Not that this has anything to do with what you said, but then neither did your statement have anything to do with what I said. Perhaps it would be best to try to stay on topic.

LOL! And you call me ignorant of history. Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan, Ukraine? Any of those ring a bell?

Guess it is time to rewatch Wag the Dog. https://www.imdb.com/video/vi920715545?ref_=tt_pv_vi_aiv_1

I'll go along with "psychological", although it seems more likely it might be portrayed as a ticking time bomb only for political purposes. As far as I know NATO doesn't have a big history of invading Russia, whereas Russia/Soviet Union has a long history of invading its neighbors. If anything Putin may not like it because another NATO country simply means one less country he can reasonably get away with attacking.

Not that it is difficult to see many of the US failures, but curious which moral high ground you are referring to here. In what way? Are any of the other NATO countries ticking time bombs?

Yeah, that was real specific. We're done here.

You used the term. Why is it that you won't define it? Is it a secret? Please be specific who you are talking about on this forum? I get tired of the guys on this forum who seem to have come to the conclusion that vague terms and dodging questions is a valid form of debate. It's not acceptable in the science threads, why is it acceptable here? You can really be condescending some times.

If you cannot define 'best' then using that as your selection criteria doesn't really accomplish much.

Why? Because they are not otherwise qualified? The only person whose definition of "best" really matters at this point is Biden's. If "best" in his opinion includes "woman of color", then as swansont pointed out, ONLY women of color qualify.

Please define "best" as you used it in this sentence.

"Best qualified person" is a myth trotted out every time a white man doesn't make the cut. How would one define 'best qualified' in the first place? Is a conservative approach to jurisprudence better/worse and a liberal approach? Can you be the 'best' if you lack perspective? Does everyone take a qualification test prior to being nominated? Were any of the previous justices considered 'best' by everyone? If two judges disagree is one 'right' and one 'wrong'? You pick a person who you hope will do well while following an ideology that you agree with, and then you live with the results when they do as they please.

Jeez. That's embarrassing! 🤪 I knew I shouldn't have lit that second bong... I heard that cosmetic surgeons are using foreskin for eyelid replacements. Unfortunately the recipients turn out a bit cockeyed.

What does that mean?

Given the advances in technology I would assume much of the difference in 'power' between the two telescopes has to do with differences in the quality of the mirrors, computer software, sensors, reduction of dust and gas in front of the telescope, handling of diffraction, and the many other things I'm blithely unaware of regarding optics.

No. If Hubble could see every star is galaxy 'x' for example, Webb will see the exact same number of stars in that galaxy. However, if Hubble could not detect a given star because it was half as bright as Hubble was able to detect, Webb will be able to detect it.

QFT

WARNING: Off-topic rant about to begin. Feel free to ignore. <start rant> It is all just so stupid that I think people fight against mandates not because of something they believe in, but because they enjoy being angry about something. I laugh every time I see a video of someone on a plane who sits in their assigned seat, makes sure their tray table is secured & their seats are in the upright and locked position, has their approved-size carry-on luggage properly secured in the overhead or under the seat in front of them, turns their cell phone to airplane mode, opens their window shade, fastens their seatbelt, then throws a hissy fit because they are asked to wear a piece of cloth over their nose and mouth. Clearly it is not personal freedom they are fighting for, but the right to berate flight attendants who didn't make up the rules in the first place. Same thing with vaccine mandates. People who don't want a business owner to be able to require they meet safety standards insist business owners should be able to deny serving people who are gay. Vaccines make your balls shrink, they cause more deaths than COVID, they don't work, they were developed too quickly, they are an unproven technology, they'll cause your workforce to quit, they'll result in Armageddon! Are people who fight against vaccine mandates also fighting against training mandates, hand washing mandates, speed limits in the hospital parking lot, uniforms, complete documentation, and the literally thousands of mandates from government that cover hospital operations? These people exhaust me. <end rant>

Don't keep us in suspense. Where do you fall on this issue?

I agree they should face mandatory vaccination. My wife worked at a Children's Hospital and was always required to have flu and Tdap vaccinations. They were also tested annually for TB. I'm sure that hospital now requires COVID vaccines. When your customers are some of the most vulnerable in the population to health issues, it only makes sense to ensure your staff takes all reasonable precautions against making things worse.

What behavior did you find arrogant?

I believe this to be true. Look at the vaccine skeptics who come down with COVID and how as soon as they are off the ventilator, they and their families are telling anyone who will listen that they should get the vaccine.