i dunno...

i have a 100gl saltwater reef tank and a 50gl fresh water tank.

this woman just looks like a customer who has little knowledge or know-how in regards to fish.

i suspect this video starts near the end of the argument,because it is common practice for pet stores to request a water sample.though her putting the dead fish IN the water sample is contamination and will result in a false reading.

i also suspect that this customer has been back with multiple dead fish,and has little understanding the basic tenants of good husbandry,and the owner is just at the end of his rope having to deal with woman over and over again.

sadly many people who decide to start a fish tank do not do their due diligence,because owning a successful fish tank takes a LOT of time,research and dedication.

meh...i am making a ton of assumptions here because the video does not make the actual conflict clear.

the woman should just get a betta,or a goldfish.those bad boys can live through anything.

One thing they didn't mention that I'm really not convinced about is how impairing weed is, for how long, and how much it contributes to auto accidents. In recent years there's been a big spike in the proportion of drivers involved in fatal accidents who tested positive for marijuana :

https://www.merryjane.com/news/weed-related-car-accidents-increase-raising-more-questions-about-legal-limit

Of course that doesn't mean it caused the accidents, if people are just smoking twice as much nowadays, even a random sample would show a big increase. But it seems like the research on this is lacking. Does anyone know of any government that has science based guidelines for a sensible blood-pot content limit?

If interested in the horrors that was the Q&A, here's a sampling

Correlation and causation is distinguished by controlling for variables directly where the list of possible covariates or confounders is known & limited, or when it is not, using say machine learning techniques to infer a model from the data and repeatedly cross validating it with different test and training samples to ensure that it is rigorous. Read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation

There is nothing about repeatability.

Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-validation_(statistics)

Repeatability has nothing to do with testing for correlation / causation. Okay, you repeat an experiment. It looks like X causes Y, like in the first test. But it turns out that Z (that you didn't consider or can't measure) is acting on X & Y at the same time, creating the appearance of a relationship between X & Y where none exists. Read:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding

If anything the political hype is underblown. Politics deals with the immediate, tangible and the "what directly helps me now." With the financial crisis, politics in the US has decreed that any action on climate change that might marginally impact wages or living standards is out of bounds.

If we assume the risks are real - polluting has specific benefits (cost reduction to polluters) and incredibly dispersed costs which are almost imperceptible for decades while the damage is being done. It requires global coordination for a cost on carbon to be politically feasible. And the effects are seen at least 40 years into the future:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/Climate-Change-The-40-Year-Delay-Between-Cause-and-Effect.html

That's the problem, by the time the effects are obvious, it will be too late to react. In the meantime, you have massive amounts of money, interest groups, politics and delayed effect all acting against any action being taken.

Apparently when she passed the pre-audition, they asked her religion. She said 'none' and then she thinks the judges scripted it so that she would be made an object lesson.

Here is a sample of her singing.

For what it's worth, as an Irish whiskey drinker (in both senses of the phrase) I can tell you that the nicest whiskeys I've tasted from outside Ireland and Scotland are Japanese, including a Santori whose name eludes me.

In case you're interested, next comes Indian (a lovely tipple called Amrut Fusion), followed by a few nice American samples... I'm not a big fan of bourbon, hence the placing.

As for the spelling thing, yes, usually Whisky is Scotch and Whiskey is Irish, but that's not 100% true, and if that's your worst spelling mistake after a few then you're doing well.

I think I will got with the opinion of the US intel community on this one, over Assange. I don't think he has quite the same level of investigative power.

Sample article, not definitive.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/russian-intelligence-hacked-dnc-emails-says-top-u-s-official-n618936

Helpful writing , I was enlightened by the info - Does anyone know if I could access a sample Form an llc document to fill in ?

Good point.

I don't dispute racism exists, and its effects are amplified by power and reach. There is a difference between quality and quantity when it comes to racism. Western racism seems of a low quality, but it generates a high quantity due to pragmatic reasons. Strangely, perhaps, I find this less reprehensible than high quality of racism that is mitigated by distance or political clout. That's definitely a bias I have.

EDIT:
I think the above video and my response to it demonstrate some of the problems in that stance. Akala confidently lists a collection of events that he clearly considers egregious. A subset of those I've addressed in my criticism, to varying extents. If detecting racism in our culture is disagreeing about how effective a foreign navy should be in it's coast guard duties on a foreign shore, perhaps we're disappearing down the rabbit hole. If detecting racism in our culture means finding a sub 1% discrepancy in prison death rates in a small sample size, then it could be we're missing the forest for the trees.
It isn't to say that there aren't still problems in western culture, but we are teaching ourselves to cry wolf constantly, and we know where that leads.

Well that's a stupid thing to believe isn't it?

Do you think a fair sample of members of the KKK will be identically as moral as an equivalent sample of, to pick an organisation entirely at random, Helem?

Do you think some ideas are better than others?

One sample "weird chicken behavior" is psychotically aggressive bantam (miniature) roosters.

Too small and ill equipped (not much spur, etc.) to do any damage to a human, but they *act* like they think they are velociraptors or something. Bring food in, fill their water, get vaguely close to them ... they attack your feet. My dad taught me to put my shoe between their legs and lift/kick them into a wall -- pretty hard. Stuns / dazes them for a minute or so -- long enough to fill their feed or whatever. But stay longer than that and they'll be right back to attacking your feet.


On the female side, hens sometimes choose very bizarre locations to lay their eggs. We had a metal cylindrical feeder thing with a tray at the bottom -- fill cracked corn or whatever into the cylinder (open on top), and it will gravity flow down as they eat some out of the bottom tray. We had one hen that liked to jump in the top of that cylinder (maybe 10 inch diameter) and then lay eggs on top of the food in there. Extremely tight fit, no room to move -- like putting your arm in a Pringles can. Sometimes she got stuck if the surface of the food was too far down.

I've even seen a hen that sat on the surface of a bough in a cedar tree. Enough branch and cedar foliage to hold up the hen's body, but then we found an egg right under her on the ground -- not dense enough material to actually keep the egg from falling through. The egg was broken, but the hen just stubbornly sat in that tree for a day or two, not realizing what had happened.

I wonder if the Collector's Edition comes with a small sample of mustard gas...

Anyway, enough people have badgered Ian to comment on this, so he did.

The title (even on YT) says "wrote", but the examples in the video were "sampled" or "influenced". Did I miss something?

I stood as a candidate in the 2015 UK General Election and have to say seeing the process from the inside was quite impressive. We got to monitor the count and have teams making our own tallies of votes as the paper ballots were being counted by looking over the counter's shoulders. We could then predict how each candidate was doing from our sample and verify that the final result fell within our predictions. In all I came away very satisfied that the final tally was indeed a true reflection of the voter's intention.

A good tip if you want to voice your frustrations at the candidates: Just write it down on your ballot paper. It will likely spoil your ballot, but everything you write will be read carefully by the returning officer and all of the candidates to see if everyone agrees it constitutes a valid vote. If you clearly voted for a candidate and didn't write anything that could be personally identifiable it may still be counted as valid anyway.

I didn't win by the way, but did pretty well.

There are some schools like this in Germany as well. Usually children that have issues like attention deficit disorder or do not fit into a normal school (problem child) will attend to such a "Forest school" (Waldschule). There are studies that it benefits development as the change in scenery from the busy city life helps the children adjust. It is definitely not very common and children still need to attend regular classes.

To say it has a flair of "anti science" is a bit far fetched as these schools often teach a lot about the local flora and fauna, do stuff like looking at water samples under a microscope or take earth probes. Sure it is not super scientific, it probably compares to what most kids would do as boy scouts - except it's part of the school's education program. For some kids this approach is better at fueling their scientific curiosity than in a regular school environment where they have many other issues to deal with.