Phi for All

I suspect ulterior motive whenever someone joins just to lead us to his own site.

Too bad you can't make it past that third day. Your body will have flushed most of the nicotine from your system by that time so the cravings change from physiological (your body wants you to smoke again) to psychological (your mind wants you to smoke again). Why wonder? Is it that expensive? More expensive than smoking or dying of cancer or emphysema? Try some. Quitting now increases the chances you won't get a cancer that usually attacks smokers. Every day you don't smoke increases your odds. Think of it that way. I'll tell you how I quit. I smoked for 20+ years, 1-2 packs/day. I just stopped one day (I picked a special day for me; for you you should pick a day when your chest is really hurting) and told myself smoking was no longer an option. Like you, I would quit for a bit and then go back to it like a crutch. Metaphorically, when I stopped I didn't just shut the door on smoking. I didn't lock the door and throw away the key. I ripped out the door and put a nice blank wall where the smoking door used to be. Smoking was no longer an option for me. It's a crucial distinction, imo. This allowed me to go out and enjoy friends and family who were still smoking. I was no longer eying someone else's cigarette and wondering how long I could hold out before asking for one. I moved on. Once my health returned it was easy to justify the choice I'd made. I felt great, like air had just been invented, that food was better tasting and mornings weren't all about coughing and emptying stinking ashtrays. I made a list of all the crap I no longer had to deal with, from the expense all the way down to wiping that scummy film off the inside of my windshield. It's easy to justify a smart decision. I think you should see a doctor about the way you feel. Better to know the truth than to imagine all sorts of horrors. The doctor may have some tips as well on how to quit. Best of luck

Use the fireworks for entertainment; 6 kilos of your chili should be enough to incapacitate Parliament.

You must first reach into the Sack of Communication before you can make yourself understood using the Sack of Argument. I'm giving you just a pinch from Pity's Sack so you'll know I'm sincere.

Vigilance is necessary. There are some cultures that are being exploited. Often, though, we hear about someone being paid $3/hour and we transfer ourselves into that situation without realizing it's more money than the individual has ever made and he supports several family members very well on $3/hour in his culture.

Conclusion: Title Case Rots the Brain.

Hannah looks great but you should have made more of an effort to dress up, YT.

I think Americans who fear globalization worry about what they have to offer the world. Any job that involves a computer has the capability of being done by anyone in the world. For a while there will be money to be made in arbitrage between differing economies. Companies that outsource their marketing to call centers in India or China save money so they can expand their operations in the US, purchase competitors or pay key workers more money (the best US companies these days are building performance bonuses into pay structures). Non-essential services like bookkeeping are outsourced to reduce overhead (not always with foreign firms either). New markets and profitability points are recognized (did you know that an architectural firm can make more profit with a new blueprint plotter than they can with a new CAD technician?). On the other side of the world, foreign workers making more money demand more US goods. They go to see US movies and buy clothes and accessories from US companies who've placed their products in those movies. Instead of whining about globalization we should embrace it and lead by example. Don't gripe that another job got outsourced, be glad that a US firm was able to make a profit by using smart, strong strategies that actually created three jobs for the one it outsourced.

I think science should ignore both groups. Creationism defines itself in terms science is unprepared to measure. GW deniers attempt to reinterpret what science has measured and experimented with to get a different answer. Both groups are misusing what science is trying to offer them in order to create a False Dilemma.

Typically an objection is made to a Staff member other than the one who made the decision. The Staff member then alerts one of the Admins (assuming it wasn't an Admin decision in the first place). The Admins discuss a solution and bring in the Moderators if they feel a need for more input. Then the Admins give their assessment to our Supreme Leader who makes the final decision.

I might open an old closed thread for Physia if (s)he reduced the type size in her signature. I dislike being distracted by disturbing displays (sorry if it seems like I'm dissing you).

macman, we have a Politics section which you will be eligible to post in after 50 posts. Don't start political threads in Ecology and the Environment or any of the other science subforums. And when you start a thread anywhere, ask yourself if others will know what you mean by your choice of words. "They" is so vague as to be meaningless. "Give up" meaning voluntarily or forcibly? "Give up" their weapons to who? "Weapons" is also a very broad term that needs to be specified to limit the discussion.. And for the love of all that is good and pure, *please* use a spell checker on your posts before you post them. A few errors are no big deal but most of your posts are unreadable without spending undue amounts of time on deciphering them. "I suck at spelling" is no excuse for letting the condition persist. Thanks for understanding. We can't see you so your words are more important than usual.

This request is not acceptable. If you can't get what you need from a public library or university library please don't ask members here to abuse copyright laws.

Occasionally the cattle will catch me talking to myself, eliciting cries of snobbery. It's just a habit of the wise to speak to the most intelligent person in the room.

We used to enjoy smaller homes, with more socializing at each other's homes and theaters and parks and restaurants. We read or watched our news from journalists we trusted more, there was less professional spin to wade through, and we had more live discussion about politics and social issues with co-workers, friends and family because we had more time. Before personal computers and cable TV brought us access to an abundance of information, we were focused on fewer things. I started hearing about gangs and gang culture back in the eighties and many in the middle+/- classes started fearing for the safety of their own neighborhoods. Community designs changed to fit a fortress mentality. We suddenly became all about security and convenience. We demanded massive designer spaces that can house home theaters and gyms and offices. Kids bedrooms now come standard with cutouts for computer desks, televisions and stereos. We've saved ourselves all that nasty "going out of the house" time and that equally nasty "relating with other members of the family" time. We use that extra time to work harder to buy all the equipment we used to rent, and once we're done with our 10 hours of work / commute and 4 hours of home / family time we take the 2 hours left to utilize / process all that extra input we have access to. Everyone's knowledge becomes more specialized and varied as more input / data is made available to us. We've created our own little kingdoms where it's easy to let our internal politics take precedence over national politics. We'll allow politicians more and more slack as long as our own fortress is not too badly or immediately compromised. Whoa, sorry, blah blah blog. Had to get that off.

I took the Katrina reference the same way, with Gore stating that the number and severity of storms rises with the global temperature (whatever the cause), causing problems similar to what happened in New Orleans. Is this not the case? And the part about potentially “shutting down the Ocean Conveyor”, what exactly is "very unlikely [to happen]"? I recall him saying that it had already happened once before. Was that not true?

Bluff techniques like this are so powerful they don't need to be legal to be effective. A friend worked for a major software maker and her division was told that management was having a weekend retreat to figure ways to cut expenditures. The bluff was spread that they had been told to fire two people or come up with equivalent annual savings. On the Monday morning after the weekend retreat everybody came to work to find all the free coffee stations in the break rooms dismantled. On Tuesday morning, everyone showed up with their Starbucks in hand, ready to work. Nobody, in the whole office, voiced a single word of complaint.

If I had an employee in a non-sales position who posted questionable material about themselves on the web I would consider it none of my business. If that same employee mentions where they work in the posting it suddenly becomes my business, literally. Sales positions are different, imo. A salesperson creates relationships which tie their name together with the company they sell for. The two become synonymous if the salesperson is doing their job right. If I knew one of my salespeople was creating an incompatible image for their name (or their face, if the salesperson meets clients face-to-face) outside of business, I would question how effective they could be for me *in* business. I wouldn't consider firing the salesperson until this other image became a problem but I would certainly keep an eye on the situation.

If this is caffeine or Obsessive/Compulsive Disorder related, press 3 repeatedly.

When starting threads it's a good idea to give your readers a reason for discussion, rather than just stating a premise. Remember that you're not here to teach ideas, you're here to discuss ideas. Fred56, are you suggesting that everything is predetermined? Or are you postulating that some basic form of matter or energy connects us to every other form of matter and energy? Also, can you explain your phrase, "...every photon of energy and wave of matter is where it is now, at the end of the next comma,..."? I found the next comma but a search for all the matter you promised proved fruitless.

Nice.

TZH, you joined a science discussion forum. All of your posts direct us to the same place. We are not here to help you promote your website. Feel free to put a link to your website in your signature and join in the discussions but please stop spamming us with your advertising. Thanks for understanding.

I think this is what fosters a lot of bad journalism. You don't like the man so you shoot down his work. Never mind that he is raising awareness in a way that few can (how many 100% scientifically accurate global warming documentaries would you expect the general public to "warm up" to?). Blame him for driving a big vehicle but ignore the fact that his Secret Service detachment probably won't let him drive a Prius.

While I can appreciate Pangloss' concern over scaring away smart judges, I always think it's good to bring questionable decisions on the part of elected officials to the public attention. Even though we elected them we need to keep tabs on their actions. My biggest concern is that these tactics will find their way into the hands of those who want certain judges (and their judgments) discredited so they can reach into their pockets and pull out a different judge. Also, everyone makes mistakes but the media has a way of making it seem like one mistake is just the tip of the iceberg ("Is this just a one-time slip-up or is someone hiding the truth behind this judge and his errors? Tune in at 10 for the whole story").

Anecdotal, but a friend's cat used to pounce on mice and hold them down with her teeth and paws until they died, then bring them to her owner. My friend always thought it was cute whenever she witnessed it. One time the cat bit a little too deeply and got a taste of blood. The cat messily devoured the whole mouse and my friend stopped getting presents from her cat from that day forward.