Christopher, could you give a reference for your use of "Null hypothesis"? ------------------------------------- The following was stated: "Henry's science background is in Chemistry. Mine was originally Animal Science for Pre-Vet, then a recent "second time around" at college for Psychology and Physical Anthropology, with special interests in genetics, ethology, and a dash of neural and hormonal influences on behavior. So neither of us is really the one to ask about plant viruses. That person would be Dr. Malcolm Manners." ------------------------------------------------------------ H.Kuska comment. A Ph.D degree in Physical Chemistry is expected to prepare a scientist to investigate the physics, and chemistry involved in understanding nature. It is a very broad theoretical based major in nature understanding. Some examples can be found in the following links: http://degreedirectory.org/articles/Colleges_with_Physical_Chemistry_Degree_Programs_FAQs.html "Physical chemistry seeks to understand the physical and scientific basis of molecular properties and chemical phenomena. It can be used to understand how proteins fold, how nanostructures form and why holes in the ozone layer originated" http://degreedirectory.org/directory/category/Physical_Science/Chemistry_Sciences/Theoretical_and_Physical_Chemistry.html ----------------------------------------------------- Regarding Dr. Manners knowledge and my knowledge of rose viruses. In almost any field there are more than one Ph.D. scientist that can contribute to the field. This is illustrated in this particular situation by the citations in one of the most recent rose viruses reviewed published scientific papers. Dr. Manners is cited for his: " Manners MM (1997) Effects of rose mosaic disease on performance of hybrid tea roses in Florida. Proc Fla State Hortic Soc 110:118��"121" This is the context for the use of his presented paper: "Previous reports have shown that symptom expression, virus distribution and virus detection can be influenced by several factors including cultivar, changing seasons/weather and growing conditions (Manners 1997; Sala-Rejczak and Paduch-Cichal 2005; Sertkaya 2010; Wong et al. 1988)." -------------------------------------------------------- I am cited for the following paper: "Kuska H (2003) Can North American rose hybridizers use pollen from virus infected roses? Rose Hybridizers Assoc Newsl 34:7��"10" This is the context for the use of my paper: "PNRSV is known to be transmitted mechanically, by root grafting and by seed (Abdel-Salam et al. 2008; Golino et al. 2011). The virus may be transmitted by pollen in rose although this hasn’t been fully ascertained (Kuska 2003)." AND "Reports of pollen transmission of ApMVin rose are inconclusive (Kuska 2003), but in view of the characteristics of other ilarviruses, it is possible that ApMV could be dispersed by pollen." I feel that the appearance of any reference (unless being attacked) in a reviewed scientific journal means that the authors, reviewers, and editor feel that it has scientific merit for being included. Here is a link that might be useful: link to recent rose research virus paper This post was edited by henry_kuska on Fri, Dec 26, 14 at 10:53

I usually try to avoid commenting on these situations but I couldn't bite my lip here. I guess I have a few other thoughts on it. First a disclaimer: I have problem with the way divorce has become so commonplace and people have chosen to re-write their vows (remember them?) to be "till irreconcilable differences do we part". To me, divorce is acceptable in a very small percentage of cases so perhaps it would taint my view. I'm bothered when someone questions how a person can live with themself for not walking out, yet no problem living with themself as a liar. And now that I've offended 2/3 of the married populace, I'll move on. That said, IMO you gave wise advice to think it over and she surely should consider all points, and not just the financial. Is she using the term "revenge"? If so, it says something. No, revenge won't make you feel better and if you're leaving for revenge, you'll likely only hurt yourself. Just as he's damned by his non-denial (but with this limited info, he didn't admit to it and we don't even know what the allegations are), she is equally damned by acquiescing to and thereby condoning his alleged discretions in the past. Now she wants to go back in time and change her mind on her decisions made way back when. Wouldn't it be nice if we could all go back and change our minds? I surely would have invested in Microsoft, bought an oil company, not dated ____ and well, needn't say more. That was then, this is now. The allegations are important. And by the sound of things, they're probably relatively minor and to blow it out of proportion isn't sage advice. Let's face facts, if he raped the co-worker, there'd be a termination and criminal charges. Likewise if he grabbed her inappropriately (as in assault/battery), yet no mention of charges so likely there are none. Actually, he KEPT his job and that says a LOT. What does that say? In today's society, with the fear of legal liability, political repercutions and otherwise, few companies would stick their neck out to keep an employee that would be a liability. If it was something truly serious the boss wouldn't have just said "don't do it again". If the boss said not to do it again, it sounds like it was possibly something lik a verbal issue, possibly something that could have been taken wrong or was tasteless or whatever. The term "sexual misconduct" is an explosive term as evidenced here. But it's also a blanket term. Emailing someone a cartoon of a vision-impaired caterpillar propositioning a french fry can be construed as "sexual misconduct" and would probably result in someone being similarly disciplined as what happened here. So to everyone charging forth with the torches, pitchforks and nooses, I'd urge some calmness before selecting the tree. The consensus is that the lack of sex is because he's been fooling around. Interesting. She had nothing to do with it? It takes two to tango and again, we know NOTHING and what we do know is clearly one-sided. Perhaps there's more to this story. Perhaps a LOT more. I'm not going to go on, I'm sure I've ruffled enough feathers. But I will say she needs a good friend and you are that. But she also needs to confide in someone trusted to give her counseling while knowing as much as possible (perhaps both sides), and very possibly it takes a professional view. Clearly so with the legal issues if she should decide to proceed. Without knowing what the situation ACTUALLY IS, there's no way to give sound advice other than what she's received. I think the best advice is to be there for her but be careful on advising without knowing all the facts. My best to her and her husband and I hope I have caring friends like you who I can talk to if I have a troubled situation.

Thanks Dave for bringing this ripping off the conumer again to our attention.

Both times we have done ikea kitchens, there were ultimate mix ups - either missing parts, incorrect parts, damaged parts, or too many parts. For the latter three categories, no problem - we returned them and got our money back. For the first category, we were told we were out of luck - that because we didn't flag it within 24 hours (? 48 hours?) of delivery, we were not entitled to any refund or replacements. The first time we did a kitchen (in high gloss white), one of the door fronts had a scratch down the front. We took it in to get a replacement and they refused because we were out of the 48 hour window. $178 for a new door. The second time we did a kitchen (same high gloss white), they delivered a total random high gloss grey end piece that had random drill holes in it. We technically couldn't return it because of the drilling holes (24 hours had passed since delivery, so at that point they'd just say that we were the ones who drilled it) so we were the terrible people who returned it in the box without pointing out the holes. Got our money back ($150). Feel bad but clearly that's what the last people did too, or otherwise it wouldn't have ended up in our kitchen.... And it was a lot of money.