Brad

I will admit a video catches my attention, perhaps in part because of the novelty. I also think they are often used to offer reassurance that the poster is legitimate and not just using false pictures.

Nice one, Notch :)

Interesting question. No, I don't think it would bother me, at least generally speaking. As mentioned, though one can be discrete I typically imagine it's safe to assume ladies all have their own life! But I suppose discrete is the right word here. A few photos here and there like anyone would have is one thing. I do like to keep each other the focus of our attentions, so if you had a three foot tall portrait of your boyfriend/hubby hanging up on the wall staring down at us that might hurt the atmosphere a bit. ;) Nice of you to consider what other's would feel, but of course at the end of the day it truly comes down to what you're comfortable with. It's your life and house after all.

.

.

Stevemcqueen, I don't think you're asking unreasonable questions, and I do agree it's generally healthy not to take things at face value. You certainly seem to have given it thought rather than just a knee-jerk reaction one way or another. However, I don't think that because scientists have got it wrong in the past is necessarily a great reason not to act based on the current consensus. Science as a process is always questioning and examining and seeking more evidence to strive towards knowledge. And sure, I can't claim it's not possible that it will turn out to be wrong in regard to the current understanding of climate change, but (in my view) a rationale person goes based off the best evidence currently available. The overwhelming consensus and current evidence is that human activity is the driving force behind the current climate change. True, there are papers and individuals and Internet articles to the contrary, but they are given a disproportionate amount of attention by outlets with a specific agenda, which make the general population more doubtful than is warranted. I don't know enough about cars to speak in detail about why my breaks might not be working. But if 99% of mechanics who have spent their lives training and studying the matter all agree on what the cause is, I'm going to act under their guidance, even if it's tempting to go with the 1% who says everything is actually fine and I should just keep coasting downhill (or claim even if there is something wrong with them it's out of my control so I shouldn't let it inconvenience me...) Basically, I grant our current understanding (of all things!) is constantly evolving and being refined or corrected, but the only thing a rational person or species can do is act based on the best evidence they have at the time. I suppose we may disagree on what the best evidence is in fact pointing to. It's my belief people give disproportionate weight to arguments against human-driven climate change because (consciously or unconsciously) we don't want to think it's our fault or that we have to make meaningful changes to fix things. I do like some of your other points. It makes me think it's worth asking what's to lose by assuming it's human-led and seeking solutions to limit our pollution... If climate change is as drastically dangerous and human-led as the consensus of scientists agree, then we may just save our planet and species. If climate change is in fact going to be minimal or isn't human-caused, then we may put ourselves through some needless economic woes trying to curtail it, but will still have a healthier, cleaner environment. Purely from a risk-management standpoint, it seems worth taking it seriously. Anyway, I agree with you I think our best chances will be technology led (interesting we have faith in that science! :)).

Conclusions made by scientists do turn out to be mistaken of course, and science is meant to work based on new evidence. That is, as new evidence is discovered the conclusions will change. Science is a process of discovering what is most likely the truth, but must by its own definition always be open to new evidence. That said, I can't think of any other topic where scientists have such a consensus of opinion but the general population balks at it, or clings to a very small dissenting opinion. Perhaps the only comparison I can make is the distrust people have for vaccines because they believe a few celebrities and a discredited study over a mountain of evidence and legion of scientists and doctors. Being a skeptic and a critical thinker is one thing (and a positive thing) but I think in this case the doubt people have mostly comes down to the fact they don't want to believe we're at fault or responsible.

You may, but not everyone does. And so the scam works. It's really unfortunately that simple.

.

Enjoy a talented (and rather lovely!) cosplay body paint artist here: http://www.boredpanda.com/body-art-superhero-paintings-kay-pike/

.