Credo

6 hours ago, Tug said:

Ron desantious response dident seem like anything other than a very tepid cowardly dance around the core issue because he’s obviously terrified of any backlash to me personally it displays a flaw in his character ie cowardice he certainly doesn’t have the proper character to lead this great nation in my humble opinion 

Although I totally agree with you, anybody with an ounce of common sense would much rather sit on a cactus while petting a skunk that run afoul of vulgar-mouthed Trump.   

This is interesting.  I wonder if it means that the building blocks of life actually exist on other planets and accidentally ended up here?  Where did the asteroid actually originate?   

It's sad when this happens in an institutional setting.  I would expect people to be much better prepared to deal with these situations.   

7 hours ago, RichardColeman said:

I disagree - while back they were saying the virus was about as near to animal virus's  as humans were in DNA to something like a fish ! Would you be happy classifying something 97% as near to human as human ? 

 

They have never found the intermediary animal.

 

'My opinion' it came from the Wuhan lab to the market. 

 

Matters little in my opinion, China were totally to blame for the pandemic, by knowing of its existence and still exporting people to the world, they should not so much be sued for making it or be responsible for it, but for destroying evidence, withholding evidence and exporting it and killing millions after knowing of its existence

 

 

I don't quite understand what you are saying about the DNA of viruses being about as near to animal virus's as humans were in DNA to something like a fish.  Most viruses do not have DNA.  They have RNA.  Covid-19 virus is an RNA virus.   

Genetically, the closest virus being worked with in the lab that we know about is the bat virus, RaTG13, which is 96% identical to the human Covid.  96% is really a long way to get to Covid.  Most virologists want to see a 99% similarity to make the genetic jump to another species.  Genetically, it seems that the Raccoon dog appears to be a better fit.  

Scientists and researchers will continue to look at all the genetic changes that led to it being infectious to humans.  Thus far, this doesn't seem to lead to the Wuhan lab.   In addition, nothing very likely or plausible leads from the lab to the outside world.   

The lab is a bit of a black hole because it is large, it is hard to know everything they were doing, and the Chinese gov't may have thrown a veil over the information that would either exonerate or show a link to the virus.

8 hours ago, Keep Right said:

So who caused climate change millions of years ago when the earth was warming and cooling before man was even created? Maybe it had to do with the Sun which is really the cause of the earth climate change.

The sun has well known and well documented cycles that do affect climate.  This is not what we are talking about, any more than we are talking about the tilt of the earth is responsible for seasons. 

Go back to the early beginnings of life -- and you can look at the gas formations caught in rock formations. 

Ancient Earth had an atmosphere 70 percent carbon dioxide approximately 2.7 billion years ago. CO2 and its ability to trap heat kept the earth warm. The earliest life forms used CO2 (much like plants today), they also gave off O2 which was toxic to early life that gradually evolved to tolerate O2. Prior to life, there was no free O2 in the atmosphere. 

Oxygen, as you probably know, is highly reactive. Much of it reacted with elements such as iron and formed rust. At the earliest times, it quickly combined with carbon to form CO2 and with hydrogen to form water. As the earliest life forms ate up huge amounts of CO2 and expelled large amounts of O2, the atmosphere begin to have lower levels of CO2 and low, but increasing amounts of O2.  As CO2 levels dropped, so did temperatures.   

The increasing levels of O2 led to life forms that were able to breathe and use it, just like we do today. But in order for O2 levels to increase, carbon levels needed to decrease because left on its own, oxygen will combine with carbon to form CO2. Over time, more and more carbon was taken out of the air and buried in the form of coal and oil. This left more O2 and eventually the earth reach a state of homeostasis in which the plants using CO2 were in balance with animals using O2 and much of the excess carbon being tied up in the earth to eventually become oil and coal and large amounts tied in plants such as trees. 

So, now we are releasing huge amounts of carbon back into the air and it is doing what it does and combining with O2 to become CO2, which is a greenhouse gas and thus we have Climate Change.

The US is in a precarious situation with everything from the economy to the culture wars, and yet the  right-wingers think they can legislate an answer to a question that may take many years to unravel.   

The most likely and plausible start of the virus is a jump from animals to humans at the wet market.  That doesn't eliminate any of the other possibilities.   It's not even known if it originated in bats.  Bats are just one of the animals that has a long history of being able to harbor and live with Coronaviruses.  

Researchers are still uncovering information about the Spanish Flu epidemic and about the Plague.   

It sounds like the racketeering charges from RICO are a reality.  

It sounds like some of the NATO members need to up their game when it comes to military performance.  These are troubling times.  You want good soldiers, well-trained and able to engage any enemy.  For that, you do need to make sure they have all the equipment, arms and ammunition they need.

I find it amusing that they pass a law, but won't prosecute the person who actually breaks the law and has an abortion.  I wonder how that works other than to scare the <deleted> out of any medical personnel from providing any care.   

So, a Wyoming lady crosses a border, gets the prescription and then goes home and takes it.  There isn't much they can do.  

This does not bode well for Climate Change in general.  The area in the Arctic is very sensitive.  

This is another tragic event that was preventable.  It's sad to see so many people being treated as poorly as cattle headed to slaughter.   

3 hours ago, AndyFoxy said:

 The Americans don't even recognise the court's jurisdiction. A big nothing burger

What does America not recognizing the Court's jurisdiction have to do with anything?   This is a major court, and being charged is both serious and embarrassing for Putin.   Let's see where he goes the next time he leaves Russia.  His circle of places to go is limited, and most of the places he would be safe traveling to are not going to raise his profile on the international stage.

He's a pariah.  

2 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

I agree it is up to them if they call themselves a man, that they shouldn't be discriminated against, and I'd have no problem having them as a friend. I have a close gay couple as friends who I think take it further and identify as this and that and I let them define away. The difference though is where, say, political parties or governments or other people in positions of authority say that, as a matter of course, we all should, and it is right to, abide by the new definitions established by the minority. I work in a  govt department - no letters can have Mr or Ms or she or he - fair enough - but some of the emails that come from up high on inclusiveness and acceptance and behaviour I think go beyond their authority. Let people be but don't <deleted> with my brain. 

My comments above too were not talking about posters here but some things I see in Australia and the states. 

Working in something like a government office (and a lot of large companies) makes it a little more relevant and scary to navigate.  Those further up the line tend to err on the side of caution.  But we've always had something that needed to be dealt with.

58 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

Your experience is the same as mine. I think most of the concerns are silly.

I think though, that certain definitions or norms, including the definition of man and woman, are deep in our psyches. To play with them, to suit one or other minority, is a reasonable concern for people to have.

Saying a trans person is a higher risk to the public is in my opinion cobblers - but saying a man can get pregnant because of a new dictionary definition is going too far.

I feel people have the right to call that out as woke - I think definitions do matter - but at the same time let people do their thing based on their preferences and feelings.

I am not suggesting being trans is not a real thing, but that if, say, you have a biological female who likes living how men tend to live, that it makes it appropriate and necessary to call them a man. And this is important as, though change is good sometimes, not all social norms are bad and redefining words based on feelings and personal preferences is problematic.  

Some democrats, in attempting to be fair, can be seen to stray into self righteousness superiority, as though the opposing opinion does not get the points made, and smugness. Sometimes such a reaction can seem to be justified, with the extreme right, but politically it doesn't help the cause.  This post involves politics so I feel people have to be smart about what they know and what they don't know and to be careful about changes to definitions on what can seem like a whim or to allow people to feel good about themselves. 

As an aside I think many Republicans are overplaying the woke hand, and are using it to describe situations that clearly don't apply to, and that some on the right might start to tire of the nonsense use of the word. 

 

I tend to agree with much of what you are saying, but I think the definition of a man/woman becomes legal and political.  People's gender identity is something that is highly personal.  I don't worry about it because I don't think it's a common situation or one that is going to be somehow disruptive.  So a trans person with intact female reproductive organs decides she is a man, then that's up to her.  They shouldn't be mistreated or discriminated against.  Whether you or I decide they will be in our social circle is up to us.   We don't individually have to accept these things that we don't like, but we can't stop people from being and feeling the way they do and wanting to be able to express it.  

9 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I never understood people that do not care about things because it does not affect them directly.

 

I know a lot of people that don't have children, but most all of the seem to care about children. If there is a kid being tormented in a classroom, should I not care as long as it's not my child? 

None of the groups discussed are any danger to children.  None.