Now Mann and another set of colleagues (PDF) make what appears to be the exact opposite assumption in a paper just out in Nature, that landfalls are «in rough proportion» to overall basin activity: (blogs.nature.com)
I looked at both Mann papers and I don't see this «exact opposite assumption». (blogs.nature.com)
If it is not our collective business to settle theological arguments, why are we creating statutes and committing state resources in support of a practice that rests on the opposite assumption — the assumption that there is no God, or at all events no God who would object to suicide, assisted suicide, and euthanasia? (firstthings.com)