Acme

No worries.

Humor is always a risk. What is funny to some is not funny to others. What is funny in one culture is not funny in others. Nonetheless, humor is common to all people and on the whole relieves more tension than it creates. No doubt you and your friends have jokes that your parents and teachers don't get or find rude. Humor is as humor does. A person without a sense of humor is like a wagon without springs. It's jolted by every pebble on the road. ~ Henry Ward Beechersource

When you post to a thread it is automatically added to your Follow list. The above is how to add a thread that you haven't posted in to the Follow list. To see a list of threads you follow, click on your name at the very top right of the screen and a pull down menu appears with a Content I Follow choice. You can edit the list there and choose options for each topic you follow.

Navigate to the thread and near the top on the right is a button marked Follow This Topic. Click on that.

I love it because I read the whole paper and as I pointed out before to you the author says we need to know more about how Earth's rotation influences convection in order to account for the apparent discrepancy. I also suggest -for the 3rd time- that you write to that very author and give a summary of your ideas and ask for his input. Given that you cite him as an authority that supports [some aspect of] your hypothesis, contacting him for his affirmation/approval seems only logical.

Good on you. Lesson learned and on to the next thing life has to challenge you with.

That's right; they learn it. And that learning is how they develop intuition just as humans do. Yes, but birds learn other things like where & how to find food and how to avoid predators. And again, this learning allows them to develop intuition. Well you can't tell a rat anything so that's a weak argument. As I said I'm not claiming human's aren't unique in many ways; I'm just saying other animals have [some] analogous behaviors when it comes to learning and intuition. Keep in mind humans evolved long after other animals were learning and being intuitive. Evolution simply happened to gift us with some enhanced abililities. Well, I think you misjudge what wolves are doing then. I think many animals do this; it is not unique to humans.

Define 'obliterate'. Setting fire to the wood is an exothermic reaction According to the interweb there is "Between 25.8 and 36.6 million btu per cord, depending on type and condition". A ton of oak is about 1/2 cord. Mean BTU's in 1/2 cord=15.6 million Converting BTU to Jules is 16458871301 Jules/ton. How high from what altitude on what planet? Work done @ Wiki

Roger that. Perhaps the original poster will return and inform us what they were thinking.

Sorry; I meant to say click inside the reply box at bottom of thread and then the edit menu with toggle appears. I took some screen shots and annotated them. Yes; will work with Windows 7. I learned all this the hard way. Back on topic, feel free to click my green arrow.

searching 'joules in a ton' #1 4,184,000,000 joules in 1 ton of explosive. Convert ton to joule - Conversion of Measurement Units #2 Coal produces heat energies of 28 million to 38 million joules per 2.2 pounds Energy in a Ton of Coal @ The Physics Factbook [so mean =33 million joules and 2,000lb/ton divided by 2.2lb=909 33000000*909=29,997,000,000 joules/ton of coal #3 1 ton of oil equivalent = 41,868,000,000 joules Tons of oil equivalent to joules (TOE to J)

Ton of what? Oil? Coal? Explosive? Anti-matter as Sensei says?

You're welcome. As to the interesting two-in-one, the forum software automatically puts multiple posts within a certain time together into one post. I don't know what the time setting is however. To get the quoting to work: first just click the general thread reply button, then click on the little toggle-switch icon in the upper left of the edit box menu. The menu items will gray out. Then go and click on the quote button in the post you want to quote and the quoted post will appear in the edit box in text format and displaying BB codes. For adding more quotes, character formatting, or URL links you then type in the appropriate BB codes. Here's a list of the forum BB codes: >> ScienceForum BB codes

I think the others explained the rep issue. As to the quote not working, it may be due to the browser you are using. If you are using Internet Explorer the forum software doesn't play well with it. There are workarounds. Here's a thread on the subject including links to other threads on the problem. >> Quoting in windows 8.1

You make my point well enough by questioning my intellectual prowess as well as my honesty. And nothing is out of context.

There is a certain hypocrisy between behaviors promoted here and behaviors promoted elsewhere by some behavior promoters. Assign whatever number you like to it.

Rapid reproduction and per se evolution in overwhelming numbers.

Well, enjoy your view then. It was a failed attempt at humor. I thought the laughing face would make it clear I was joking. It was a failed attempt at repartee. I thought the absence of emoticons would make it clear. As to the OP, predictions are hard to make especially when they deal with the future. For today I agree we should leave the whales alone excepting for using them in cartoons which suggest we should leave them alone.

Well, enjoy your view then.

Wolves hunting in a pack consciously judge the risks of attacking large prey and work as a group to reduce those risks. I do not contend that non-human animals have all the same capabilities as humans, but that does not mean non-humans animals do not share some characteristics. This is why rats learning mazes are used in experiments.

That's all well and good. I notice a few of your comments in the ban thread take the tone of insults, but as those are the end of people and their conversation I can see why that's OK.

Can it be so? Reasonableness of the politico-climate climate? I feel warmer, if not fuzzier, already. Republican EPA chiefs to Congress: Act on climate

Continuing the thread on a conceptual level, there is a tacit acknowledgement in all this that there is no keeping the personal out. Attacking an idea is -as the title suggests- inherently an attack on the person who puts forward the idea. Nowhere is this made more obvious than in the rules of the Philosphy and Religion section. To whit: Philosophy and Religion Rules So by the very rule I have bolded it is understood that attacking the idea is an attack on the idea-haver, but we are all to just ignore it. Presumably this applies to members and staff alike. It then comes down to the fact that this is not a democracy -discussed in other threads- and whatever interpretation the divine error-free staff agrees to is what rules the day regardless of any contradictions in reason or rule. Pay no attention to the people behind the curtain. So gird your loins then ladies and germs and arm up with your euphemisms, subtle sarcasm, and innuendo just like everyday life. What's good for the goose is a good polite chop to the throat by the gander. I can live with that complexity.

Acknowledged. Whole libraries have yet to sort any of it out. Suggesting that more books will do the trick strikes me as wishful thinking. Folks within similar religions can't even come to agreement, so why expect any agreement among or between those outside of religion? I hear that. It may be easier on a religious forum but I don't frequent them so I simply don't know. But carrying on religious discussions on a science forum is as productive as whacking a hornets' nest with a stick. I'm sure the folks here have good intentions in establishing a religion section, but given the track record I don't see any wisdom in it. Now that sounds like solid reasoning to me.

Since non-human animals take the ultimate risk of death, then it is baseless to say humans take more risks than other animals. Moreover, learning is learning no matter to what degree and learn 'better' is an arbitrary and subjective phrase that explains nothing. If you read the article then you know that the 'how' humans and animals evolved risk-taking behavior is unknown and just beginning to be investigated. I found that article searching evolutionary advantage to risk taking and the search returns many other hits that you can investigate.