Slashdot Mirror

Karl Marx intended terror and mass-murder. His writings condemn private property, free speech and freedom of religion as "bourgeois freedom". He put forth his own perverted vision of "freedom", defined in such a way that Cambodia under Pol Pot (the purest Marxist ideologue of them all) would have been a bastion of "freedom".

But then, you probably believe Pol Pot's Cambodia with the killing fields and Ho Chi Minh's North Vietnam with 5 percent execution quotas were both bastions of "true freedom".

100 millions is an obvious lie. Almost no people were killed (i.e. hundreds or thousands at most) during forced collectivization.

You're a commie democide denier, no better than a Nazi holocaust denier.

Referring to the Soviet genocide of peasants during the 1930s collectivizations, R.J. Rummel writes:

The Soviets now appear to admit to this genocide. In the Moscow News, a Moscow published, English language newspaper, was recently written: "In what amounted to genocide, between five and ten million people died during the forced collectivization of farming in the early thirties." (Ambartsumov, 1988)

According to Rummel's midrange estimates, 1,733,000 were killed by the Great Terror (though a Wikipedia article on the Great Purge claims that the Memorial Society released the names of 1,345,796 specific victims), 1,400,000 in deportations, 3,306,000 in and during transit to camps, and 5,000,000 through famine during the 1930s.

The absolute lowest estimated total for all murders committed by Marxist states is 40,472,000. Of that, the table states that the USSR alone was responsible for 28,326,000 of those deaths. Rummel remarks that it's highly unlikely that the total for Soviet democide is so low. The figure of 100 million dead due to communism is given by Rummel as a most likely estimate.

The totals themselves were compiled by Rummel from numbers given by respected writers and historians. For the USSR, this includes Robert Conquest and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. A breakdown of the Soviet democide estimates, along with their sources is here, with the methodology for these estimates given here.

You are brainwashed by your school, by the media, by the politicians.

I learned very little about the crimes of communists in school, and next to nothing about it from politicians and the major media.

You are a total and utter moron, I feel sorry for you. However, I am not angry at you at all, because it's not your fault that you are so stupid and you are not the only one. Many (most?) Americans (and many Europeans as well) are taught lies in schools and grow up to believe them. You don't know anything true about history, just fabrications and, alas, you appear sadly unable to free yourself from this cage of lies.

You are psychotically disconnected from objective reality.

I've backed up my statements with citations traceable directly back to their original sources. You, on the other hand, present nothing but ad-hominem attacks.

I suspect you are either a troll, the privileged child of some hard-line former member of the CPSU or other nomenclature, or simply a blood-crazed psychopath.

Karl Marx intended terror and mass-murder. His writings condemn private property, free speech and freedom of religion as "bourgeois freedom". He put forth his own perverted vision of "freedom", defined in such a way that Cambodia under Pol Pot (the purest Marxist ideologue of them all) would have been a bastion of "freedom".

But then, you probably believe Pol Pot's Cambodia with the killing fields and Ho Chi Minh's North Vietnam with 5 percent execution quotas were both bastions of "true freedom".

100 millions is an obvious lie. Almost no people were killed (i.e. hundreds or thousands at most) during forced collectivization.

You're a commie democide denier, no better than a Nazi holocaust denier.

Referring to the Soviet genocide of peasants during the 1930s collectivizations, R.J. Rummel writes:

The Soviets now appear to admit to this genocide. In the Moscow News, a Moscow published, English language newspaper, was recently written: "In what amounted to genocide, between five and ten million people died during the forced collectivization of farming in the early thirties." (Ambartsumov, 1988)

According to Rummel's midrange estimates, 1,733,000 were killed by the Great Terror (though a Wikipedia article on the Great Purge claims that the Memorial Society released the names of 1,345,796 specific victims), 1,400,000 in deportations, 3,306,000 in and during transit to camps, and 5,000,000 through famine during the 1930s.

The absolute lowest estimated total for all murders committed by Marxist states is 40,472,000. Of that, the table states that the USSR alone was responsible for 28,326,000 of those deaths. Rummel remarks that it's highly unlikely that the total for Soviet democide is so low. The figure of 100 million dead due to communism is given by Rummel as a most likely estimate.

The totals themselves were compiled by Rummel from numbers given by respected writers and historians. For the USSR, this includes Robert Conquest and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. A breakdown of the Soviet democide estimates, along with their sources is here, with the methodology for these estimates given here.

You are brainwashed by your school, by the media, by the politicians.

I learned very little about the crimes of communists in school, and next to nothing about it from politicians and the major media.

You are a total and utter moron, I feel sorry for you. However, I am not angry at you at all, because it's not your fault that you are so stupid and you are not the only one. Many (most?) Americans (and many Europeans as well) are taught lies in schools and grow up to believe them. You don't know anything true about history, just fabrications and, alas, you appear sadly unable to free yourself from this cage of lies.

You are psychotically disconnected from objective reality.

I've backed up my statements with citations traceable directly back to their original sources. You, on the other hand, present nothing but ad-hominem attacks.

I suspect you are either a troll, the privileged child of some hard-line former member of the CPSU or other nomenclature, or simply a blood-crazed psychopath.

Karl Marx intended terror and mass-murder. His writings condemn private property, free speech and freedom of religion as "bourgeois freedom". He put forth his own perverted vision of "freedom", defined in such a way that Cambodia under Pol Pot (the purest Marxist ideologue of them all) would have been a bastion of "freedom".

But then, you probably believe Pol Pot's Cambodia with the killing fields and Ho Chi Minh's North Vietnam with 5 percent execution quotas were both bastions of "true freedom".

100 millions is an obvious lie. Almost no people were killed (i.e. hundreds or thousands at most) during forced collectivization.

You're a commie democide denier, no better than a Nazi holocaust denier.

Referring to the Soviet genocide of peasants during the 1930s collectivizations, R.J. Rummel writes:

The Soviets now appear to admit to this genocide. In the Moscow News, a Moscow published, English language newspaper, was recently written: "In what amounted to genocide, between five and ten million people died during the forced collectivization of farming in the early thirties." (Ambartsumov, 1988)

According to Rummel's midrange estimates, 1,733,000 were killed by the Great Terror (though a Wikipedia article on the Great Purge claims that the Memorial Society released the names of 1,345,796 specific victims), 1,400,000 in deportations, 3,306,000 in and during transit to camps, and 5,000,000 through famine during the 1930s.

The absolute lowest estimated total for all murders committed by Marxist states is 40,472,000. Of that, the table states that the USSR alone was responsible for 28,326,000 of those deaths. Rummel remarks that it's highly unlikely that the total for Soviet democide is so low. The figure of 100 million dead due to communism is given by Rummel as a most likely estimate.

The totals themselves were compiled by Rummel from numbers given by respected writers and historians. For the USSR, this includes Robert Conquest and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. A breakdown of the Soviet democide estimates, along with their sources is here, with the methodology for these estimates given here.

You are brainwashed by your school, by the media, by the politicians.

I learned very little about the crimes of communists in school, and next to nothing about it from politicians and the major media.

You are a total and utter moron, I feel sorry for you. However, I am not angry at you at all, because it's not your fault that you are so stupid and you are not the only one. Many (most?) Americans (and many Europeans as well) are taught lies in schools and grow up to believe them. You don't know anything true about history, just fabrications and, alas, you appear sadly unable to free yourself from this cage of lies.

You are psychotically disconnected from objective reality.

I've backed up my statements with citations traceable directly back to their original sources. You, on the other hand, present nothing but ad-hominem attacks.

I suspect you are either a troll, the privileged child of some hard-line former member of the CPSU or other nomenclature, or simply a blood-crazed psychopath.

Then the design of the telescope, this is very uncommon to keep costs down: First of all the telescope cannot cover the whole sky, it has a fixed elevation (something like 40 degrees?) and can only rotate around its vertical axis. This saves of course a lot of mechanics and has as an added benefit that the structure will have a constant sagging due to gravity. The cost you pay is of course a limited view of the sky, but there is plenty to see in the part that is visible.

The second innovation is that the shape of the mirror is not parabolic, as in most telescopes, but spherical. This has two benefits: first, all the mirror segments can be produced with the same curvature, which is cheaper than custom segments as for Keck. Secondly, you can change the elevation of your telescope (over a limited range) without moving the main mirror by rotating the rest of the optics from a point in the center of the sphere (this is possible because of spherical symmetry of the mirror). The downside of the spherical optics is that the optical aberations of the system are more severe than for a parabolic mirror, so you need to add some extra optics to compensate. This is no big problem since HET and SALT are not built for making nice pictures, but primarily for spectroscopy, for which a big light collecting area is more important than the best possible imaging system.

You should have paid more attention.
Such telescopes exist.

Is it really 'a tenth cheaper', i.e. 10% cheaper than its nearest competitor? I somehow get the impression that the submitter meant 'a tenth the cost of its nearest competitor, i.e. 90% cheaper.

Neither seem correct, as Keck cost $ 140M for two telescopes with a similar diameter.

Lenin and Stalin certainly intended totalitarianism, as communism/socialism is inherently totalitarian. Being the single most murderous ideology in human history, over 100 million people were killed as a result of forced collectivization and trying to destroy private property rights in the means of production.

Between 1917 and 1987, the USSR murdered 54,769,000 people in domestic democide, and murdered around 10,000,000 people in genocide.

From 1949-1987, PRC China murdered 35,236,000 people in domestic democide, and 375,000 people in genocide.

Cambodia's Khmer Rouge, led by the purest Marxist ideologues of them all, was the most violent communist regime, having murdered 2,035,000 people - around 28 percent of the Cambodian population.

Most of the rest of your post is bullshit, falsely portraying the USSR as a "world leader" in science and education (it wasn't), and a place where people could "develop his/her potential without limit", (it certainly wasn't). Especially absurd was your assertion that the Soviet Union "supported global peace". Try telling that to people who lived in Czechoslovakia and Hungary during the Soviet dominations, or any other place where the USSR supported totalitarian regimes.

Lenin and Stalin certainly intended totalitarianism, as communism/socialism is inherently totalitarian. Being the single most murderous ideology in human history, over 100 million people were killed as a result of forced collectivization and trying to destroy private property rights in the means of production.

Between 1917 and 1987, the USSR murdered 54,769,000 people in domestic democide, and murdered around 10,000,000 people in genocide.

From 1949-1987, PRC China murdered 35,236,000 people in domestic democide, and 375,000 people in genocide.

Cambodia's Khmer Rouge, led by the purest Marxist ideologues of them all, was the most violent communist regime, having murdered 2,035,000 people - around 28 percent of the Cambodian population.

Most of the rest of your post is bullshit, falsely portraying the USSR as a "world leader" in science and education (it wasn't), and a place where people could "develop his/her potential without limit", (it certainly wasn't). Especially absurd was your assertion that the Soviet Union "supported global peace". Try telling that to people who lived in Czechoslovakia and Hungary during the Soviet dominations, or any other place where the USSR supported totalitarian regimes.

Lenin and Stalin certainly intended totalitarianism, as communism/socialism is inherently totalitarian. Being the single most murderous ideology in human history, over 100 million people were killed as a result of forced collectivization and trying to destroy private property rights in the means of production.

Between 1917 and 1987, the USSR murdered 54,769,000 people in domestic democide, and murdered around 10,000,000 people in genocide.

From 1949-1987, PRC China murdered 35,236,000 people in domestic democide, and 375,000 people in genocide.

Cambodia's Khmer Rouge, led by the purest Marxist ideologues of them all, was the most violent communist regime, having murdered 2,035,000 people - around 28 percent of the Cambodian population.

Most of the rest of your post is bullshit, falsely portraying the USSR as a "world leader" in science and education (it wasn't), and a place where people could "develop his/her potential without limit", (it certainly wasn't). Especially absurd was your assertion that the Soviet Union "supported global peace". Try telling that to people who lived in Czechoslovakia and Hungary during the Soviet dominations, or any other place where the USSR supported totalitarian regimes.

Lenin and Stalin certainly intended totalitarianism, as communism/socialism is inherently totalitarian. Being the single most murderous ideology in human history, over 100 million people were killed as a result of forced collectivization and trying to destroy private property rights in the means of production.

Between 1917 and 1987, the USSR murdered 54,769,000 people in domestic democide, and murdered around 10,000,000 people in genocide.

From 1949-1987, PRC China murdered 35,236,000 people in domestic democide, and 375,000 people in genocide.

Cambodia's Khmer Rouge, led by the purest Marxist ideologues of them all, was the most violent communist regime, having murdered 2,035,000 people - around 28 percent of the Cambodian population.

Most of the rest of your post is bullshit, falsely portraying the USSR as a "world leader" in science and education (it wasn't), and a place where people could "develop his/her potential without limit", (it certainly wasn't). Especially absurd was your assertion that the Soviet Union "supported global peace". Try telling that to people who lived in Czechoslovakia and Hungary during the Soviet dominations, or any other place where the USSR supported totalitarian regimes.

Unless pornography containing people below a particular age line deemed to be illegal magically works differently than other porn, it probably is theraputic (study demonstrating that pornography is correlated with a significant decrease in sex-related crimes).

...Ten meters in diameter, the mirror is composed of 36 hexagonal segments that work in concert as a single piece of reflective glass. http://www2.keck.hawaii.edu/geninfo/about.php

Keck is almost a meter larger, my strong suite isn't in astronomy, but it's my favorite backyard pastime. So I'm not sure about the tilt systems.

I got a nice reflector though. :)

We play with lasers over on Mauna Kea, too... like this nice 20-watt sodium dye one. Which, for topicality, is located at the world's current largest optical telescope...

We play with lasers over on Mauna Kea, too... like this nice 20-watt sodium dye one. Which, for topicality, is located at the world's current largest optical telescope...

(can't do ir/uv in atmosphere, but some radio could help)

Most of the Mauna Kea Observatories - basically all the ones on the ridges - are either visible-optimized with infrared capabilities, infrared-optimized with visible light capabilities, or dedicated infrared.

(can't do ir/uv in atmosphere, but some radio could help)

Most of the Mauna Kea Observatories - basically all the ones on the ridges - are either visible-optimized with infrared capabilities, infrared-optimized with visible light capabilities, or dedicated infrared.

Hmmm... the GMT site seems to indicate that the mirrors either are hexagonal or are round but in hexagonal frames of a sort. I don't see how this would result in hexagonal holes, though. In the case of the Keck design, the hole to the cassegrain focus is hexagonal because there's one hexagonal segment "missing" to make the hole - but Keck's segments are only something like 1 meter each. In the case of the GMT, the segments are so large that it's simpler to just have a round hole in the middle of one.

And of course the GMT is being built as a single scope with one focus, while things like the VLT, Keck and LBT use interferometry to get sharper images.

(And adaptive optics! I want telescopes with frickin' laser beams strapped to their heads!)

There are around 60 million people who would disagree with your assessment.

In fact, I bet a lot of the Islamicists don't support terror and murder for its own sake, but as a means to an end. Your distinction says nothing.

When the Islamicist Taliban was firmly in power in Afghanistan with all resistance from the opposition crushed, the terror and murder increased rather than stopped, as was the case in the various socialist terror states. When the Taliban invaded a village, they bulldozed every building, cut down every tree, and filled every well with either dirt and dynamite, or the dead.

I get my history largely through having lived through it. There was no way in which the Sandinistas were worse than the Contras who the US backed.

The Sandinistas murdered at least ten times as many people as the Contras. The Contras also stopped the war once they managed to force democratic elections on the Sandinistas at gunpoint.

We see who Nicaraguans prefer, as the current president made it a point to associate himself with the Contras as part of his campaign, while Ortega gets votes only by desperately trying to disassociate himself from his communist past.

Pinochet was far worse than anything Allende could have done.

Pinochet murdered around 3,100 people.

Given that Allende was rapidly consolidating power, imposing socialism in violation of Chilean law and had begun escalating the use of violence necessary to impose socialism, it is very highly probable that he eventually would have murdered at least one order of magnitude more people had he been allowed to remain in power.

Throughout the 60's and 70's, the US supported brutal military regimes against generally democratic socialist ones in Latin America. Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina - you can get this history without talking to Chomsky.

You get this history by reading garbage put out by socialists who operate in the same corrupt, dishonest manner as Chomsky.

The alleged support of the 1963 military coup in Brazil consists mainly of the US government sending money to opposition candidates prior to the election, and nodding in approval when Goulart was overthrown. The only connection with Uruguay is one USAID/OPS employee, Dan Mitrione, allegedly training interrogators in torture.

Wherever there actually was active support and aid from the US government, it was to those who were fighting against Soviet/Cuban-backed "democratic socialists" who had long ceased to be democratic, and who, being puppets of the Soviet Union, posed a real, imminent threat to the liberty and safety of Americans.

Maybe I missed something, but I thought the question was about making an map, some villages and roads kind of a thing, not a geodesic survey, and more likely not makeing a map but plotting some points on an existing map representing the present location of a village which will move around over long periods of time, and maybe some roads, two-tracks and trails which unless they are paved, deffinatly will move annualy and sometimes over-night with enough rain, or even dissapear; and the same holds true for rivers, creek and stream beds.
1. he should get a GPS and play with it a while, see how it works and how well before he hits the bush.
2. Get some books on land-navigation, Millitary or Civialian Orrienteering, and practice.
3. get a good compass, the US Army M2 compass is about as good as they get, better than the survey instruments used to survey in the 1800's.
4. learn to declinate the compass, magnetic north isn't geographic north and it does move, depending on where you are, magetnetic north can be 180 degrees from geographic north!
5. Get comfortable with the mill system 6400 mills = 2 pie radians, makes the math much easier.
6. learn to intersect and resect from know points
7. learn dead-reconning as a sanity check on everthing.
8. get GMT, Generic mapping tool, GMT it's about as good as it getts too, GPL runs on about everything.

always remember a stardard wood pencil lead can be 100m wide on a 1:50,000 map!

Keep that up every year as mandatory courses along with the other mandatory courses, and there won't be educational problems.

= 9J =

Although they may be "very excited and looking forward to the encounter", they won't be able to see the results very well.

I only know the whereabouts of one science team member on that fateful night - my colleague at U. of Hawaii's Institute for Astronomy, Karen Meech. She'll be at one of the observatories on Mauna Kea, which, like all the others up there, and at least one over on Haleakala, will be watching the impact in whatever wavelengths work best.

Given that the impact has been timed to make it observable from Hawaii, it's a fairly big deal out here. I'll be part of the public outreach program over on Maui that night, and my only regret is that I'll have to miss the program here in Hilo to do that.

(I wouldn't really be at all surprised if some other science team members are out here for the impact - I've seen more than one astronomer from far away point out that the advantages of siting telescopes in Hawaii include periodically having to take a trip to Hawaii.)

Although they may be "very excited and looking forward to the encounter", they won't be able to see the results very well.

I only know the whereabouts of one science team member on that fateful night - my colleague at U. of Hawaii's Institute for Astronomy, Karen Meech. She'll be at one of the observatories on Mauna Kea, which, like all the others up there, and at least one over on Haleakala, will be watching the impact in whatever wavelengths work best.

Given that the impact has been timed to make it observable from Hawaii, it's a fairly big deal out here. I'll be part of the public outreach program over on Maui that night, and my only regret is that I'll have to miss the program here in Hilo to do that.

(I wouldn't really be at all surprised if some other science team members are out here for the impact - I've seen more than one astronomer from far away point out that the advantages of siting telescopes in Hawaii include periodically having to take a trip to Hawaii.)

Linky

...it is a review by Peter Jasco, who is an independent reviewer.

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~jacso/

We just provide him the space to post his reviews.
As we do for several others...

http://www.galegroup.com/free_resources/reference/ index.htm

"Visit gale.com regularly to check out the latest reviews on reference resources by these prominent experts:"

Yackety-yackety-yack.

Get back to me when Union Carbide or Enron kills 625 million people like those "selfless" governments you trust so implicitly.

I'd wager a large sum of money that you couldn't give a coherent explanation of what Enron did to save your life (and no, Google doesn't count). All you know is that it's a "corporation", and corporations are "baa-d".

Stupid hippie.

Back when the WREK transmitter and antenna were located on the roof of the Van Leer(sp) Electrical Engineering building at Georgia Tech a few of us went up on the roof with flouresecnt tubes. Made dandy light sabres (long before star wars) as the RF got the atoms in the tube excited. Procol Harem or maybe a bit of Rossinni.

If you're gonna use flourescent tubes, it's probably easiest to generate some high voltage using an old TeeVee or computer display flyback transformer. Wear it in your pocket with a couple of pounds of Alkaline D-Cells. You can spiral a very thin wire around the outside of the tube and fix it with wide, clear, packaging tape. This will prevent injury from glass when the tune breaks.

Gasoline? Evolution in action.

IANAEE, I am not an electrical engineer but instead a wayward physics major about to head back to school after 30 years if they'll let me in.

Try GMT (Generic Mapping Tools) at http://gmt.soest.hawaii.edu/

Widely used by people in the geophysics field. It's open source, and for the basic linux user it can be a slightly fiddly to get up and running.

It's a collection of command line tools that generate postscript output. You can basically customise everything to your exact tastes, and re-use the scripts if you want consistent graphs and charts.

Check out GMT at http://gmt.soest.hawaii.edu/

Yes! Only governments should be able to kill people!

Sheep like you are dangerous to all of humanity.

Alas, I think someone else gets to operate that night on the one I run, so I guess I'll just go hang out and watch.

Alas, I think someone else gets to operate that night on the one I run, so I guess I'll just go hang out and watch.

Alas, I think someone else gets to operate that night on the one I run, so I guess I'll just go hang out and watch.

This is not bad journalism. It is a serious article about a serious problem. Take people who have never written a program and have never heard of program-design-101, give them a huge collection of poorly documented functions and tell them construct a large complex program to calculate a number. Just how much would you trust that number? It is not hard to imagine what the resulting spreadsheet looks like. Now suppose that number is, say, the value of a mine, or road, or company. If your number is too low, you miss a great opportunity; if your number is too high, you buy the asset and subsequently lose a lot of money. In either case, the loss is serious money- hundreds of millions or more.

I have spent the last two and a half years auditing spreadsheets for (1) complex financial transactions and (2) models for large public infrastructure projects. I work with a dozen other rocket scientists and actuarial types who specialise in this. My experience is consistent with "some professor from Hawaii", namely Ray Panko who is the world expert in the field. Almost every worksheet of every model I have audited, has been riddled with potential and actual errors- and these spreadsheets are written by professionals and have been already reviewed internally. Auditors like KPMG and PWC are interested in whether an error is "material", i.e. big enough to effect the client's ultimate decision on whether to proceed at a given price. The sample size of 54 is large enough to give overwhelming evidence of the large number of errors, and of the proportion of such errors which are "material".

All software has bugs when you write it. Reviewing your code, peer review, formal testing, code reviews help you reduce that. Even with this, how much released software is genuinely free of errors? I think perhaps TeX is. With spreadsheets, it is hard to write clearly and simply, it is hard to review, it is hard to test and you have no comments. There are going to be mistakes, and lots of them. If you are not seeing them, it is only because you are not looking. To make a spreadsheet (or any software) without errors you need to approach the problem like NASA. This, of course, requires a budget like NASA or a horde of open source zealots, and so PHBs and accountants need to decide when the cost of detection balances the risk of error.

john@xq.se

Max Henrion What's Wrong with Spreadsheets and Raymond R. Panko What We Know About Spreadsheet Errors.

It just says that the light wouldn't be as intense as in the cases where people have gotten in trouble with their laser pointers.

That seems a little hard to believe at first, since a green laser pointer's power is only something in the milliwatts, and the AOPA article mentioned in another reply (this is a fixed URL, incidentally) talks about a 1.5 watt laser. But that's reflected/diffused to create a 100-foot-wide line of light in a circle 10 miles from the laser, so I guess by sending the light off in all directions (not at all like your normal use of a laser) it's possible that it wouldn't be a problem.

Out here in Hawaii, the summit of Mauna Kea is an "informal" no-fly zone. There aren't any major flight paths that would cross it anyway, and since there are telescopes on it, folks have basically just agreed not to go flying over when we're trying to see things.

This has become a little more important in recent years, since the folks over at Keck use a laser to ionize stuff in the sodium layer of the atmosphere and create an artificial "guide star" that they can then measure the light from to correct for atmospheric interference. This is part of their adaptive optics, I think. That's a 15-watt laser, which could really ruin a pilot's day.

And Gemini North, across the summit from Keck, is about to start playing with a big bright toy too.

They've got a pool of "plane spotters" who spend half a night standing outside on the summit with a walkie-talkie. If they see any planes that look like they might get in the way, they radio in to turn off the laser before anything gets zapped.

I'm going to try to do that, one of these days. Goodness knows I'm up there enough as it is.

Hurricanes, Typhoons and Cyclones, which are all really the same thing, aren't really a problem at the equator...

http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/ASK/hurricanes.html

Here's an example of MLA's citation style for web sites:

http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/legacylib/mlahcc.html%2 3internet

this trade off?.

If you want water for outer-solar-system missions, it's a lot easier to just recycle urine than it is to chase down inner-solar-system comets, methinks. :)

This will hopefully bring to fruition the hard work of Jana and Audrey and all those other Honolulu-based astrobiology folks for whom I sometimes point this scope at comets.

Now I just have to remember to ask way far ahead of time to be running the scope around then. Or... maybe not. Maybe I should just drive up to the visitor station and kick back with their 16-inch Meade and some popcorn.

This will hopefully bring to fruition the hard work of Jana and Audrey and all those other Honolulu-based astrobiology folks for whom I sometimes point this scope at comets.

Now I just have to remember to ask way far ahead of time to be running the scope around then. Or... maybe not. Maybe I should just drive up to the visitor station and kick back with their 16-inch Meade and some popcorn.

This will hopefully bring to fruition the hard work of Jana and Audrey and all those other Honolulu-based astrobiology folks for whom I sometimes point this scope at comets.

Now I just have to remember to ask way far ahead of time to be running the scope around then. Or... maybe not. Maybe I should just drive up to the visitor station and kick back with their 16-inch Meade and some popcorn.

This will hopefully bring to fruition the hard work of Jana and Audrey and all those other Honolulu-based astrobiology folks for whom I sometimes point this scope at comets.

Now I just have to remember to ask way far ahead of time to be running the scope around then. Or... maybe not. Maybe I should just drive up to the visitor station and kick back with their 16-inch Meade and some popcorn.

This will hopefully bring to fruition the hard work of Jana and Audrey and all those other Honolulu-based astrobiology folks for whom I sometimes point this scope at comets.

Now I just have to remember to ask way far ahead of time to be running the scope around then. Or... maybe not. Maybe I should just drive up to the visitor station and kick back with their 16-inch Meade and some popcorn.

This will hopefully bring to fruition the hard work of Jana and Audrey and all those other Honolulu-based astrobiology folks for whom I sometimes point this scope at comets.

Now I just have to remember to ask way far ahead of time to be running the scope around then. Or... maybe not. Maybe I should just drive up to the visitor station and kick back with their 16-inch Meade and some popcorn.

A few pointers I figured out along the way:

1. It's very important to keep the camera angle the same. If you've got a tripod, this is a good time to use it.
2. Shooting perpendicular to the display (i.e. not at any sort of angle) is the simplest way of making things line up properly, since you don't have to stretch the backgrounds for perspective or whatever. (Some of the shots in the gallery are at angles and are very impressive in terms of difficulty.)
3. Backgrounds with lots of stuff in them look cooler than "gosh, the wall shows behind the computer" in most cases. Elements that extend from behind the screen, or wrap around to the side or front can also be fun.

Infrared pictures are just not as pretty as those made in visible light.

And all pretty cosmic phenomena Spitzer can see are also observable by the Hubble telescope.

That, and perhaps the fact that the revelation that starts are, indeed, hot, was not a groundbreaking enough discovery to move the Spitzer into the visible spectrum.

...in the same way that cockroaches scale well.

I work at place that has a million EDS idiots running around.
Meetings are a joke, you are on a conference call with 23 people and there are exactly 2 who are involved in actually doing the work.
They are a blackhole for money and only add negative value to any process they are involved in. As a previous comments says, be aware that your interests are no where on EDS's radar.

And don't forget EDS masterminds some of the techniques used by Enron to profit from the California Energy Crisis Hoax/Theft/Fraud/Conspiracy

One kilogram is equivalent to 1,000 grams or 2.2 pounds; the mass of a liter of water.