The111

And yet the average person still claims on a regular basis that scientists are wrong. Therein lies the heart of the issue. There is some weight to the idea that nobody can be an expert in all disciplines. Science is a heavily connected thing, where all disciplines rely on each other. And if there truly is some massive conspiracy and they are all liars, then we truly are fucked. But if that is the case, again we hit the circular dilemma of how do you really know that? Because some other scientist told you? But you don't trust scientists! If those who we rely on for the truth (outside our areas of expertise) are all lying, to us and to each other, then we can never known the truth, and calling them liars is a waste of breath. If you call somebody a liar, presumably you know the truth, so presumably you ARE a bigger expert than them. While not everybody can be an expert, everybody can get enough basic education to recognize bullshit from a mile away. And it's painfully evident that many people today do not have that basic education, and yet still love to call bullshit on meritorious topics, and likewise share conspiracy theories as gospel. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

But that assumes those implementing a process allow the data to logically confirm/deny hypotheses and reach conclusions (or allow things to be inconclusive) and not fudge results to "prove" a prior assumptions. My point was that you don't have to rely on "those implementing the process." The process is for you. Sure, Alice can lie to Bob about what is inside the box she's holding. But Bob can also just take the box and look inside of it. The entire premise behind the OP relies on mental laziness and feigns reliance on others. Science is an interactive thing. Get involved if you think scientists are lying to you. Prove them wrong. Or just bitch about it and satisfy your angst by reading shitty opinion pieces. (Note, the "you" used in this post is the generic you, not necessarily directed at the post I'm responding to) www.WingsuitPhotos.com

The piece posted is so bad in so many ways. It claims that science is "broken" because there has been dishonest research done somewhere. Then it mentions studies that uncovered this dishonesty, yet fails to attribute these studies (or to attribute anything period, for that matter, which is the essence of the article's horribleness). And even if it had attributed them, they are by nature scientific studies, and science is broken, so we can't trust them. So after attacking the validity of research as a general strategy to determine truth, it uses "research" to "prove" this very point. Better article title: Circular Logic is Broken. Is every scientific researcher in existence 100% honest? Of course not. But claiming that science is "broken" because of this is a very poorly veiled attempt at justifying the idea that whatever you want to believe is equal to the truth, because there is no truth, because truth can't be known. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

If only there was some kind of process that people could use to reach conclusions logically without needing to involve beliefs. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

A subsidy is not the same as a deduction, take a class. It boggles the mind that a person can have such strong opinions on a topic and simultaneously dodge simple questions on that same topic. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Now is long before. And why is "run out" in quotes? You seem to be acknowledging it is a real thing that will happen, while simultaneously treating it as a ridiculous hypothetical. Which is it? And since you failed to give me a straight answer as predicted, here's a more straight question: if all government subsidies were dropped, would you have an issue with companies and consumers pursuing renewable energy? And a corollary: do you think subsidies should be dropped for oil companies too? www.WingsuitPhotos.com

There is no need for subsidies. They are incentives, but I agree with billvon's idea of removing subsidies for all sides of the energy industry. I'd like to nail down your position though. A few posts ago you believed oil was practically inexhaustible which implied no need to move to smarter energy sources. Now you seem to acknowledge that need, but only have a problem with the government incentivizing people for making that move. Is this accurate? Surprise me and give a straight answer.

In every way! Except, of course, orders and orders of magnitude. Humans could set a goal today of burning every drop of oil that can possibly be squeezed out of the earth and at some time within a century or two they would realize that goal. It would take an estimated 5 billion years to even come close to exhausting the Sun. It's more fundamental than magnitude, which you illustrated perfectly with your post. We don't consume "sun reserves" by harnessing its energy. The same cannot be said about oil. It's almost like the phrase "renewable energy" actually means something. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Emphasis mine. I notice you added a qualifier to the statement. That turns the statement from a statement of objective and absolute fact into a statement of highly subjective opinion. Practically = within our lifetime. Aka fuck the future. Thinking anything is too big to fail (i.e. be exhausted) has never been a good bet. Everything is finite in this universe. The game is resource allocation. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Yes, that's what I'm doing. I'm not concerned with it shutting off once it's on my head. I'm concerned with the hassle of doing in-camera trim on the long file, after every jump, but I deal with that hassle for now. Other options: 1) Mirror on alti (this cam has a red light on front when recording) 2) Light relay cable for above mentioned light Both of those options require touching record button yourself, which I have no issue with. I've just been too lazy to set up either of those options. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

No, the people who are scared of all muslims because of Islamic extremists are called paranoid xenophobes. Fine, and those that are scared of Trump and all his supporters are paranoid bigots. It is a trivial effort to find a comment thread on a popular right wing site, where not just some, but the majority of all comments wish death upon all Muslims. I linked to one such thread earlier in this thread, and interspersed with the "death to all Muslims" comments were an equal number of "Trump 2016" comments. Please find the equivalent on different message board, a thread with hundreds of posts, with every other one being (a) death to all Trump supporters and (b) Our Candidate NotTrump 2016. Fear is one thing. Wishing death on all who slightly resemble what you're afraid of is... scary. I'm afraid of that. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Except the things you described can not be seen. Where in the video are they racing, block traffic, doing donuts, etc? You're calling them out for what you think they would do, based on how they're dressed. If you want to do that, cool. But don't say you saw them doing something that you didn't. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Forgot that part. I didn't forget it. I just agree with it.

We get it. You won't give up your preconceived notion of a stranger, despite agreeing multiple times to lack of any evidence. Cool! Next time you meet somebody who refuses to let go of his preconceived notions of cops, think about how much you and him have in common! www.WingsuitPhotos.com

A non-Bible verse: Verily I say unto thee: ostracize thine enemies. Treat unfairly those with different skin colors and beliefs, drive them from your villages. Or at least make their lives difficult. Maybe, sell them shit at unfair prices, you know, for their "kind" only. Unless they convert to your belief system, then you can treat them like humans again, maybe even feed them BBQ. An actual Bible verse: But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you... The guy who said that was known for hanging out with whores and criminals. He would be ashamed of anybody who drove people away just for being different. The irony of doing just that and claiming it is because of your relationship with him... www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Correct. Also correct. But what are the two wrongs that the video shows? I only count one. Did the second one occur before or after the video? Because we both agree that is unknown. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Those bikers? The bikers in this video, i.e. the only ones you should be referring to in the context of this incident, were not doing any of the things you mention. Were they? I hate jerks on bikes too, as much as I hate jerks in cars, and jerks on unicycles. But a bike does not a jerk make, nor a car, nor a unicycle. Nor does a badge. If I wanted to exercise the same line of thought you did above, I could look down my nose at every cop I see for the rest of my life, saying "those guys with badges spray pepper spray on innocents." But I wouldn't make a silly generalization like that. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

probably some......but not all you can't have a conversation if you label everyone that does not agree with you as an ignorant racist True, though those who support Trump have to be either a racist or ignorant. If they don't believe his racist comments, they have to be pretty ignorant to support a guy who is very openly making racist comments. Couple more options, but none are very pretty: a) racist b) ignorant of Trump's racism c) indifferent to Trump's racism but like something else about him (god knows what) d) don't think Trump is racist www.WingsuitPhotos.com

You don't have to wonder, they make it very clear in their comments online. Terrifying to read any comment thread on americannews.com. Below are just a few of many instances I see regularly of people wishing "death to all Muslims" or even to Obama (you know, the king of the Muslims). I personally think all religion is dumb, but I don't wish death on anybody, especially not the leader of my country. Even if that was Trump. And yet somehow those who get rowdy at protests are the ones with their behavior being criticized a few posts up. Give me a choice between murderous wishes and riotous passion... easy choice. Especially when the riotous passion is aimed in the direction of where the murderous wishes generally come from. Some random snippets from here: The only good mussie is a dead one -David Rickard the only good Muslim would either be a true Christian Jesus follower or a dead onw -Simeon Hammans TRUMP 2016! -Jim Hart Hard to keep my pistol in it's holster. -Michael Callahan Trump 2016...get rid of that terroist muslim mole in the W.H. -Donna Mack Louden I too would gladly pitch in for a one way ticket up Iraq for the ignorant woman. I would also pitch in for a bomb to be sent her way once she is home God bless America!!! -Guy T Clintsman Why send the bomb AFTER her? Put her on it and send it!! -Diana Coats Long Live the Trump -Robert Curtis Williams every time I am near one of these women hand ready to pull out my weapon and shoot your sorry ass! Go home you ungrateful beech. -Beth Luby Luebehusen Mr.donald trump for the president of the u.s.a white house. Scew muslim,s. Go back to your land. S and. Live take boat. Ride too hell -Dan Fossett www.WingsuitPhotos.com

+1 to everything you said. Also, you'd look stupid. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

I don't think I've made any freefly jumps with it, nor am I a great freeflyer. But I'll bet you'd find somebody who has made some freefly jumps with some camera with BOSS, even if it's not this one. I'm pretty sure I've read somewhere that BOSS cameras work great for all flight modes (unlike earlier attempts at OIS as you mention). www.WingsuitPhotos.com

If a QR encoding is made of a cryptic redirecting URL, that is a function of the person who made the URL, not the QR encoding (since QR can contain over 4k chars). So if the person who likes to share cryptic redirector URL's decides to not use a QR code but share the link as text... it's still a cryptic redirector URL. I agree with the rest of your post though. I don't personally use QR codes, I don't even think I have anything installed on my phone that can handle them, unless it's built in to the OS. But I'm also not afraid of following one that is given to me by a trusted party. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

It's very easy to read the content of the link before actually following it. And once you do read the link, it could still take you to malware, just like any link you could read in the first place. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Not a Prodigy or any PF suit. Reminds me of early Tony Intro, but who knows what it really is. www.WingsuitPhotos.com

Which wording specifically? And if the NSA has cracked our strongest encryption, why does this topic exist?