dflocks80

An ecology class does a lot to humble the lowly organism. They teach you that an organism is merely a small part of an entire ecosystem. They further this to apply to humans. They say the earth is billions of years old, and relative to this, human existence has been short. They teach you of the vast size of the earth, and state that human reign will be but a short chapter of this planet.

All of the above is fine and well with me.

However, the same ecology class will teach you this:

The CO2 emissions of the human population are leading to a rapid and dangerous rise in the earth's temperature. Glaciers will melt, sea levels will rise, and climates will be thrown out of whack. The balance of the earth is in our hands.

Now, I am not against being nice to your environment. However, which is true? Are we just small players in the earth's long history, or the only things ever to inhabit the earth that have the ability to control its very existence?

What difference between the Southern Black Widow (Latrodectus mactans) and the Western Black Widow (Latrodectus hesperus)? I know their geographic ranges tend to be different, but I've heard of them overlapping.

I am also a conservative, but I think that I may feel different than most of the party when it comes to my view on smoking. Although I feel that people have the right to smoke if they want to, I think it should be banned in public places (such as college campuses). I can't stand to be stuck behind a smoker when I am walking to class on campus. Not only does it smell bad, but it impeded my breathing and I know that I am breathing unfiltered carcinogens. That person has the right to smoke, but don't I have the right to breathe clean air?

I am buying shocks for my 1989 Jeep Grand Wagoneer, which can use the same type of shocks for both the front and back. The man at the store suggested putting a stiffer shock in the front to balance out the engine weight. Is this a good idea, or am I better off with the same stiffness in the front and back?

I was driving, when I heard one of those stupid Obama commercials on the radio, one where they fail to mention any of his plans to be an effective president, but have young people talk about how he was against the war from the begining, is "connected to our issues," "can offer change," "can be believed in," and "can fix our nation." It was at this moment it hit me: Obama is trying to appeal to the young/new voter base, because he feels they are too stupid to understand politics, and therefore would vote for him. Does anyone agree?

Wouldn't it make more sense for officers to constantly patrol the street instead of hiding and hoping to catch speeders? Their presence would stop speeding before it started. Speed traps allow speeders to speed anyway until they are caught. Why use this practice?

The man is an idiot. I am a conservative myself, but he still scares me.

Democrats claim they are the party that looks out for the "common man." How exactly is imposing heavier government control on the individual (whether it be socialized medicine, an increased welfare system which furthers dependence, wanting the government to further regulate the economy, disallowing the public practice of religion, blatantly violating the second amendment, or punishing the successful), really looking out for their needs? Shouldn't people be allowed to have freedom in all these areas? Don't they all directly violate "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?"

Even if externally you took the appearance of a male, or had the female organs removed?

A large insult to the Fair Tax plan is that it promotes saving, and discourages spending. Critics argue that spending is the basis of the American economy, and therefore the Fair Tax would not be suitable for the United States. Could this discouragement of spending help to discourage illegal immigration though? My theory is as follows: a lack of spending would result in job cuts on the lowest economic level. This would be where most of the illegal workers reside. The illegals would lose their jobs. This would overall make America less appealing for any hopeful workers who have not yet immigrated. What do you all think?

I've heard that the Chevy trucks of this generation had a defect that made their fuel tanks suspicable to exploding if the truck was hit in the side. I've found figures on the internet and such pertaining to this issue, but I've never heard of anyone experience this problem. I happen to drive an 86 Silverado. In a day and age when cars are much smaller and lighter built, would driving one pose a hazard to me?

In no way do I denounce the contributions of soldiers to this great nation. I support them. I don't thank God for IED's. However, considering we don't draft anyone, I find myself annoyed when I hear higher-ups in the military jowling about how much greater and tougher they are than me because they fight for our freedom. Most Americans put equally great contributions into this country! We all pay taxes on our checks! Hell, we bought the weapons they're using! I understand their job is tough, but damnit, it's their job. I understand veterans of wars past carrying this status, because they were forced to fight.

Many times, religious people are labled by the non-religious as ignorant and self-righteous because they attempt to push their beliefs onto others. Aren't the many Atheists who plague this site with haughty "God doesn't exist, and those who believe are ignorant," type messages doing the same thing they denounce?

We never have observed the changing of one species into another, so the finding of ancient bones is not a valid argument for evolution. Likewise, there is no way to physically prove God created the Earth. Answer with these facts in mind.

I hear this mostly from African-Americans. Why do people think this? It doesn't say much for that race.

Have you had it up to here with people saying that the death penalty is racist? Please say yes.

I heard it at school today, can anyone verify that?