Azalin

Don't interrupt him - he's got his pom poms out.

He's not wearing his usual orange? He must be serious. He's stepping down, and as one last act of kindness he's banishing you to Siberia?

1) Yes. Halo 4 to be specific. The beta for Halo 5 Guardians just ended this past Sunday. I'm a Halo nerd. 2) I already have baby carrots, so they're the vegetable du jour. I do love me some asparagus, though. David Warner FTW - I love this episode. If I can rig something up, you'll be the first to know.

This law would make me want to drive wearing a feed bag, just to make a point. BTW, does Chipotle have real barbacoa? I only ask because here in Texas it's made from cow faces (they boil down the head and pick the meat from the cheeks).

King Arthur's men certainly felt that way over the French hurling a cow at them from the castle wall.

'But don’t you worry; Uncle Joe knows a few tricks with strobes that’ll get the crowd going'.

He has a point (no pun intended ), but I would lump all firearms - long & short range, artillery, mines, grenades, etc into that group. Sadly, we're really good at killing each other. Without a doubt. 95% of all internet douchebaggery would vanish if such comments and discussions were made in a face-to-face environment.

There was nothing of my 'political outlook' in anything I said. All I did was explain the rationale for my skepticism. You can agree or disagree - I couldn't care less. And yes, I doubt any conclusive statements on both climate change and humanity's direct influence on it, both pro and con. Both deniers and alarmists are basing their conclusions on incomplete science.

I remember reading that that was pretty much the attitude towards firearms in general when they were first introduced on the battlefield. They didn't require the skill that a swordsman needed to have, and could kill from a safe distance, without having to directly face your opponent.

I'm afraid that I'm going to miss it. I'll be dining on a petit tenderloin in red wine/tomato sauce with baby carrots & playing halo.

You're entitled to interpret what I'm saying any way you choose, but if you care to understand what I'm saying, let me put it another way: scientists, no matter how talented or brilliant they may be, can not reach an accurate conclusion with regard to climate change when they draw the baseline from presumed numbers representative of a time more than a century before their own means of measurement was ever developed. In addition, I am always skeptical of studies that are funded by grants or outside agencies, due to the possible interest on the part of the organization funding the study, and the disincentive to those conducting the study to reach a conclusive end to the project, shutting off the need for further funds. And to focus on consensus is a waste of time. Consensus is not conclusive, except to the intellectually lazy.

I did. And I would add that the consensus here is not one of denial, but one of skepticism. If I was a NASA scientist assigned to work on a project attempting to prove that GW was a direct result of human activity, I would be inclined to dismiss contrary data since I might wind up putting myself out of a job. GW deniers may well have similar biases. And as I've already mentioned, climate science in still pretty much in its infancy, and uses hard data gathered now and compares it against a questionable baseline of presumed data from many years ago.

Unless it goes against 'the consensus'.

Based on his continued bypassing of congress by way of executive action, I'd say he already has.

I didn't even know they're musicians - I've never heard of any of them.

Nope, just 3.5.

That's exactly how I interpret it.

My guess is that she's 3.5 times hotter.

Then by all means, keep the kids in the game, and accept the outcome without complaining that you got beat so badly.

I think everybody here agrees that the coach of the winning team is a jerk for running up a score like he did. My only point is that under circumstances like that, the coach of the losing team always has the option to forfeit. Where is the virtue in allowing yourself (or in this case, school children) to be completely mauled by some SOB who is intentionally humiliating you? Do the kids really learn anything by keeping them in the game and letting them get their butts shredded like that? Teach the kids the value of living to fight again another day, and to know there will be certain circumstances in life where the best option is to cut your losses and concede with dignity. It seems reactionary to me to place all the blame for that score on the winners.

I was somewhere between fordrunken and bumpsy, but I can't remember for being too tap-shackled.

I suppose I could understand more easily if the hands had been simply removed, but substituting them with 200 year-old skeletal hands? Where do you even get 200 year-old hands from? and please don't say that the CIA keeps them because they may come in handy.

WTF is up with 200 year-old hands?

You make the losing team sound as if they are victims. They were obviously over matched, but why is the winning team the villain? If it's truly that traumatic to lose that badly, then the coach of the losing team should have ended the game at the half.

I couldn't have said it better myself.