Is anyone else amazed that we have a preexisting satellite communication network in place on Mars?

Wait, there was someone who didn't think Pastor Steve ordered the sausage lovers?

Yep, I agree. That's the biggest beef I have with paleo diets; there needs to be a lot more bugs.

Well, without qualification it generally means any animal tissue. Pork and chicken are more efficient than cattle, but fish is highly inefficient, because the tasty ones are at a high trophic level - you have to feed them animal protein to farm them.

Which is why they don't say red meat. I believe paleo diets call for occasional big meals of red meat, with leaner meats the rest of the time.

That's rather monstrous. Are you volunteering for the cull?

Free range meat is most certainly healthier than what comes out of a factory farm, but we couldn't feed 7 billion people on it, let alone the 10 billion projected peak population.

We're all going to poke it with a stick and laugh, right?

That doesn't seem like a great long term solution.

The solution to CCD is not to ban random things you happen to dislike.

We do ban some, but modern agriculture does need pesticides. The people going on about CCD have some very woolly headed ideas (or none at all) about how we'd grow food without pesticides. Particularly, they're usually the same sort that don't want GMO crops.

Sure, there is a middle ground, but that's not "ban all the pesticides because reasons".

That's really not true. Yes, for the most part bees will leave you alone if you do likewise, but that doesn't mean it's safe to leave a hive where you're going to be poking about.

You really don't want to live in a pre-industrialized agriculture world.

Actually, it's been happening since the early 70's, so your argument supports a natural cause.

There's precedent.

I don't know about that. It strikes me as the sort of leapfrog technology that cheap cell phones are. You see those in places where people don't even have an electrical grid, and ereaders are only two halfings away from the price of those. Certainly anyone in the developed world, no matter how poor, could scrape…

That sounds like they're effectively agreeing with the O'Neill study then, as the margin for error in that sort of thing would be well above 5%.

Your link doesn't seem to be comparing like to like, but is rather an overview of the entire economic output of all women vs. all men, at best looking at all women vs. men in a given field without correcting for other differences.

This is the paper in question.