Phi for All

That makes him a bad editor, not a hypocrite.

Do you think it would use less fuel for him to *drive* where he needs to go instead of flying? I doubt if his schedule allows even waiting for commercial jet clearances and delays. And aren't there security issues like Secret Service attendants for a former VP that necessitate that big SUV? If you accept their help you accept their rules. You need a big engine to haul all that armor plating around. Sometimes the chance NOT to look hypocritical is taken away from us by circumstances.

Thread closed temporarily. You're all in the doghouse.

Don't be so hard on yourself. That's what we're here for.

That's all I meant by my comment. You left out what Occam's Razor tells us is probably the right answer. However unlikely you may think it is due to circumstances, a human is still, by far, the most likely suspect. Well I, for one, didn't try to reach any conclusions with my comments. Since there isn't any evidence that can pass peer review, we're left to fall back on skepticism. I'm not convinced enough by anecdotal claims and unsubstantiated sightings of Bigfoot, Nessie, or UFOs to leave the comfort of my home, where I have access to all the current studies on these "phenomena". Of course, short of actual capture or the finding of a deceased specimen, I'm not sure anything would convince the scientific community that Bigfoot exists. Maybe some fur we could test for DNA. Anyone ever found a tree Bigfoot rubbed up against?

... or a human. And don't forget that with all the tens of thousands of Nessie, Bigfoot, Yeti and UFO hunters worldwide, NOT A SINGLE ONE has ever gathered any evidence that would pass review. Believers aren't necessarily hoaxters. They often just really want to believe.

They're definitely real but whether thay are what their discoverers say they are is still in question. Here is a fairly recent study (2007).

[quote name=LaurentG;401106...How and why the Earth gravity has necessary changed. The first cause was the meteor collision. Are you saying the impact affected the spin of the Earth and therefore it's gravity? Are you saying gravity was increased and that's why the larger dinosaurs died out?

Is an enhanced picture worth *more* than a thousand words?

We go to that museum in the story a lot. I can't wait to run into one of those tours so I can have a lengthy (and louder than usual) talk with my daughter about the awesomeness of the evolutionary process.

Geologic forces. Not splashy, not quick, not man-made, but totally awesome in their scope and majesty.

A few days ago I was having some work done at my local garage. A blonde came in and asked for a seven-hundred-ten. We all looked at each other and another customer asked, "What is a seven-hundred-ten?" She replied, "You know, the little piece in the middle of the engine. I lost it and need a new one. I don't know exactly what it is, but this piece has always been there." The mechanic gave her a piece of paper and a pen and asked her to draw what the piece looked like. She drew a circle and in the middle of it wrote 710. He then took her over to another car which had its hood up and asked, "Is there a 710 on this car?" She pointed and said, "Of course, it's right there." If you're not sure what a 710 is...http://www.hotautoweb.com/cogifs/710.jpg

iNow has it right. It's too subtle for most people but those who use it appreciate the appreciation. You do the same thing I do. Whenever I criticize other's spelling, I invaryably misspell something.

Science doesn't argue against the bible as a whole. Science can point out flaws in reasoning, physiology, biology and other scientific fields and show where the bible is inaccurate, but for the most part science is not a good tool to use on something that is inherently supernatural, such as God. "From all flesh with the spirit of life in it" probably wouldn't include animals that had been extinct at the time of the flood. Remember, creationists claim God put dinosaur bones in the ground to fool the unbelievers into thinking the world is very old. To hear some tell it, it was because God knew that someday humans would turn to science and away from faith, so He played the omnipotence card and made everything appear geologically to be billions of years old, so the faithful could do the math from the bible and figure out that God was just tricking *us*.

It's purpose is positive feedback. Many people don't reply in a thread but they read them. This is a way to say "Great job, I enjoyed the post!" And for those who have trouble remembering the posting personalities and knowledge of over 10,000 members, there's the reputation system. It's a purely positive thing, I don't see why you have a problem with it. Ignore it if you think it serves no purpose. There are those who find purpose in it.

I'll bite. Why do you think so?

The bill is called the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and according to the Center for Constitutional rights:

I agree the terminology is all wrong. This is a case where the administration did something on an assumption that it was legal and now that the assumption proved wrong, they're trying to pass a law to cover themselves. It is NOT a pardon. I wish we knew the outcome but I didn't find where that bill passed. I still think there would be no problem admitting that they acted on bad information and by the time it was pointed out, they'd already done the deed. Hell, they did the same thing with the whole Iraq invasion, why wouldn't we forgive them a little torture?

So the possible outcomes of our decisions on global warming are a) Global economic depression due to costs of mitigating global warming, b) Status quo, or c) Cataclysmic disasters made worse through unpreparedness. I still agree that action needs to take place but this argument is going to lead most people to choose b).

I wonder if the tire dust we create in North America drifts elsewhere? Something like 40% of the dust we get in the summer in Colorado has actually blown over from the Sahara in Africa and parts of Asia! I've heard this dust affects coral reefs adversely, so I wonder if our tire dust is affecting organisms outside our country where we're more likely to consider it Somebody Else's Problem.

What I don't get about his grid is why would the costs spent on solutions cause global depression if they weren't needed, but wouldn't cause global depression if they were? Whether they are needed or not, it's still a cost no matter what. Do we miss a depression just because we're happy being right? I agree that the only responsible action is responsible action, but I felt his logic break down there.

Don't mistake skepticism for snobbery. Forums are for tossing ideas around, and in science forums, those ideas are going to be pulled apart and analyzed, critiqued and either thrown away or pushed upward on the ladder of viability. Ideas are like biological units; if they don't have what it takes to survive, they die off without producing anything. If they're strong and their flaws don't stop them, they will live to spawn and continue evolving.

*Gasp!* Many people, for whom a scientific concept doesn't come intuitively, feel this way. It doesn't make sense to you immediately so you assume that thousands of people over millions of man-hours of research and experimentation must be wrong. When someone else posts a thread discussing mainstream ideas, you have repeatedly posted responses with your own ideas, which aren't mainstream, causing people to correct you, or refute you, or deny you. Since that wasn't the purpose of the thread, you are off-topic and in violation of our rules. The membership is doing that quite well, only you aren't listening because you have pulled the Galileo martyr hat down too low and it's blocking your ears.

I just recently saw a study cited that shows US youth is putting off losing their virginities later than previous generations. I'll try to find it and post it.

That's a 28 million-year-old fossil whale. How are they afraid it's going to damage creationism any more than it already does? Alright, but I want you to know I'm thorough in my research. This could take a while.