Slashdot Mirror

Embryos don't need a uterus. Just look at ectopic pregnancies. And then there are cases such as this. Anything that the placenta can feed off of is fine.

For anyone who wants the latest news, Russia has given up on trying to recover it, saying recovery is impossible and it will be left to break up in the atmosphere.

Whoa - throw away all of the scientific data, there's an anecdote here involving an TV show about an uncontrolled experiment whose data we can't see and whose name you can't even remember!

This is slashdot. It's filled with anecdotal evidence. This is no worse than any of the "evidence" from people who tell their personal tales that you accept that supports your position. This one doesn't.

I find it humorous that you are ranting about me for "anecdotal evidence" when you just challenged someone to "prove me wrong right now in just a couple weeks" by using the same kind of evidence. I guess they can't prove you wrong because they can't do the rigorous scientific studies that you rely on for your information, either "right now" or "in just a couple weeks".

The human digestive system does not throw away energy from digestible substances.

Uhhh, yeah, it can. Maybe there's more to this than you know? Ok, the digestive system may not, but the excretory system can.

It's energy in vs. energy out.

It is this simplistic view of the system that leads to vitriolic statements about those "fat bastards" who just need "to eat less". For your reference, here is just one link to the hatemonger who tried to prove how easy it was to lose weight and failed. Not even her friends could meet her goals for them and she was riding them pretty hard.

Yes, some evidence is anecdotal. But if something doesn't work for someone that might mean that the science that says it is supposed to might be wrong or incomplete. I think there's enough variance in humans that no single answer will be correct. That's why drugs come with side-effect warnings -- different people will react to different things differently. ACE inhibitors make me cough. They don't make everyone cough. I can switch into ketosis in a couple of days while it takes some people a week or more.

It is lunacy to proclaim one answer fits all for all humankind.

Execpt of course old blighty is the binge drinking capital of Europe: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

The results of the original Lancet paper was never refuted. All the co-authors (eg. Profs John Walker-Smith and Prof Simon Murch) were totally exonerated. Wakefield was accused of 'potentially competing financial interests' (eg. requesting funding from the Legal Aid Board).

MMR doctor wins battle against being struck off

US Court Awards Multi-Million Dollar Payouts To Two More US Children With Vaccine Caused Autism

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/n...

And when you mean real problems, you mean things like large drinks ?

UK news says yes

No, there is documentary evidence that the incumbent members of the justice administration consider it too humane.

How to kill a human being is a documentary where a prominent British politician investigates the commonly used methods of execution.

He concludes that the nitrogen method, used in abattoirs to kill pigs humanely, is ideal for human execution too. All the other methods have drawbacks. In particular, lethal injection is noted to be quite painful. In a country who's constitution forbids cruel and unusual punishment, this seems odd.

Several members of the incumbent correctional organizations express the opinion that nitrogen asphyxiation isn't cruel enough because asphyxia induces a brief, mild, state of euphoria before the victim loses consciousness. They also seem of the opinion that the execution should make the target suffer before death to provide a sense of justice to the family of their victim.

If the killers ... go out with a euphoric high, that is not justice [1]

(and it's rumoured that Oklahoma is actually taking up nitrogen as an execution method after seeing this documentary).

But there's only one issue with that...

How was that study conducted? Has it ever been reviewed by peers or successfully reproduced?

Screw Mars and Venus; men and women are from Earth

This would argue againstsegregation... But even that study shows ample differences between genders, and the article describing it (which is what you linked to) acknowledges ample earlier studies "that had shown significant, and often large, sex differences".

If you had a society where eating apples was something almost exclusively done by men

Most of the female chess Grand Masters (not to be confused with the WGMs) come from places, where views on gender-roles remain quite traditional — Georgia, China, Russia, or Ukraine.

This alone handily defeats the argument, that it is the dastardly "Victorian moral system", that keeps women from advancing in anything other than child-bearing and singing.

If a girl from Lviv can become a Grandmaster — her last opponent, incidentally, being a girl from Vladivostok, what is the excuse for a girl from Los Angeles? Sex-stereotypes are only wider-spread in the former USSR...

the very fact that historically there were fewer women in STEM (a legacy from the old Victorian moral system)

Citation needed.

Or, one can decide that having 50% of the human population having a solid interest in the sort of careers most valuable to the improvement of the human condition is a good thing

I'll see your 50% and raise it to 100%. You make even less sense with these slogan here, than you made earlier with attempts to remain scientific.

and maybe we should give a shot at remedying this

Rectifying what? Are there laws or even customs, that prevent girls from entering a STEM field and excelling in it? I am not aware of any such and I await your citations.

even if just on the "offchance" that it's not biological

But what if it is bilogicial — as seems perfectly probable? Would not your efforts to encourage people to do, what they have little aptitude towards, then be wasteful and, indeed, detrimental to that "improvement of the human condition"?

No, there are still plenty of men working middle-tier jobs in other fields, teaching isn't a special case when it comes to effort vs reward. Where it is a special case is the way it opens men up to gender-based discrimination (because if a man likes kids he's obviously a pedophile! Only women can like kids without it being sexual!) and that living under the constant threat of a single student's unsubstantiated and untrue claim of misconduct can and will cost you your career, your marriage, your friends, and possibly even your freedom.

Men have been teaching kids since teaching became a thing. We didn't just decide last week that we don't want to be teachers any more, we weigh the benefits against the risks and at some point it's just not worth it.

A few articles you may appreciate:
http://www.wsj.com/news/articl...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/edu...

Also, a candid discussion between male teachers:

http://www.reddit.com/r/teachi...

Was touted as the stop tooth decay for good http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new... 18 Feb 2002; but you never heard of it again.

Not expecting these Nanoparticles to be public anytime soon, if ever.

Hilarious!

The U.S. is helping China build a novel, superior nuclear reactor

Thorium Power Is the Safer Future of Nuclear Energy

China blazes trail for 'clean' nuclear power from thorium

Tell me more about Chinese renewables.

.

I wish we'd stop meddling...

Can't. The Russians will move in.

The Saudis know we're their bitch.

For 60 billion dollars I'll be their bitch! And right now we are making huge profits from both sides in the Saudi-Iranian proxy war in Yemen. We are repeating Iran-Contra all over again. Why would anybody let that market fall into the hands of a competitor?

Instead of puking, invest! War is good business, or it wouldn't be happening.

Bingo. This is nothing more than an excuse to pony up more money for research on "Climate change" or "Global warming"...or whatever the heck they are calling it now. Naturally, the Environmentalists and research scientists love this. Beats getting a real job I suppose...but I digress.

These climate models that this is based on are complete rubbish. There are so many variables that you can make them reach any conclusion you want simply by changing the values you input. We can't even predict an accurate weather forecast more than 10 days in the future. How could we possibly predict what the weather is going to be like in 100 years? Or 50 years? Or 1 year? Or even next month.

Don't take my word for it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com...

Have a read at that article.

I'm all for conservation and having more fuel efficient cars and less pollution and all that. I'm all for preserving the forests and ice caps. But let's not pretend that "climate change" is to blame for every drought or hurricane.

What are you talking about? Every self-respecting nerd should know that they're still here.

People need to stop picturing all dinosaurs as looking like some kind of leathery reptiles. I mean, we not only know now that velociraptor was feathered, but even how many secondary wing feathers it had (14). Jurassic park would have maybe not been as scary had their "raptors" looked like this. ;)

Meanwhile, some of their descendants today look like this and attack like this.

Both the American Psychiatric Association and American Psychological Association have declared this a solved issue since the 70's.

How the APA classifies it has zero to do with whether it is hereditary-- bringing that up is just a dodge. The fact is there is no smoking gun gay gene, and the general consensus is that it has many causes.

Heck, your own link specifically says the following:
What causes a person to have a particular sexual orientation?
There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.

That doesnt stop the false narrative that its 100% innate and unchosen, however.

But in this case they are only attacking those with an intrinsic attribute

Close, but fundamentally wrong. They are opposing a very specific lifestyle choice; by and large these businesses would have no issue with a homosexual not getting married, or getting married in a heterosexual marriage; likewise they would generally equally oppose a heterosexual person trying to form a homosexual marriage.

The fact that those scenarios are unlikely to arise is irrelevant; it demonstrates the crucial difference that the object of opposition is not the person, but their behavior.

You are essentially making an argument that if women were still not allowed to vote, it wouldn't be discriminatory because you are only against the behavior of women voting,

That is not at the sort of argument I am making. You would rightly note that our system calls for equal rights under the law, and that men and women do not have access to the same rights (voting).

In this case, homosexuals have the ability to marry just as heterosexuals do; they just prefer not to do the sort of widely and historically sanctioned form of marriage. YOUR argument is akin to saying that paedophiles dont have equal rights, because they prefer to have sex with children and society has arbitrary rules about that. Except, they are treated 100% equally under the law-- it is their ACTION that gets a different treatment, not anything innate to them.

I'm a pornography research addict.

I keep searching the Internet for peer-reviewed studies. Can't get enough of them. It started with the Meese Commission.

I just spent an hour on the NSPCC web site http://www.nspcc.org.uk/preven... trying to find a source that would meet the standards of an undergraduate psychology paper, and I couldn't find one.

Here's what they say about "online pornography". http://www.nspcc.org.uk/preven... OTOH they say that looking for sexual pictures on the Internet is "healthy sexual behavior" for 10-12 year olds. OTOH they go off on the dangers of Internet pornography. So they can't make up their minds.

They seem to have gotten these numbers from an online survey on their web site, commissioned and published in The Daily Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/wom... , which is campaigning for "better sex education," and endorsed by Claire Perry, Conservative MP and the Prime Minister’s advisor on children. Anybody know who she is?

I was looking for something that was published in a, you know, peer reviewed journal.

They look like they're trying to reconcile the demands of evidence-based research with the demands of charity fundraising and the political weather vane.

Maybe it's because I just saw the Alan Turing movie, but I don't have much confidence in the ability of the British legal system to deal rationally with sexuality.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/n...

http://www.thecommentator.com/...

Right = Individual liberty even when it hurts

Left = State control of the individual no matter what.

The Nazis were the epitome of the modern left. Just remember that next time you think about what you can and can't say and which group has more rights than you do.

I think it would be fascinating to spend an evening at the pub with you while you explain your thinking on this (over a few pints). Consider... During the Blitz, when German bombs were falling on British cities, who was being screwed? Was it the British government, or the ordinary Britons under the bombs? During the Troubles, when the IRA set off bombs in Britain, who was being screwed? Was it the British government, or the ordinary Britons near the bombs? During the 7/7 attacks who was being screwed? Was it the British government, or ordinary Britons near the suicide bombers? In coming years, when the Security Services are unable to read messages sent by those who plan to kill Britons, and as a result are unable to disrupt those plans as they have been able to in the past (resulting in many arrests and convictions), who is it that will be screwed? Will it be the British government or ordinary Britons near the bombs? Could you be one of those ordinary Britons?

Are your values such that it is ok for other ordinary Britons to be slaughtered en mass, just so long as it doesn't inconvenience you?

The security services are like a dam holding back waves of trouble. The head of MI5 has previously stated that they can barely keep up. That was before Snowden's theft and leaks had much direct impact. Now the leaks are having an impact and the security services are likely to be breached on a more frequent basis. When that occurs, who will be screwed? The dam holding back waves, or the Britons living "down stream"?

Snowden royally screwed Great Britain.

Speaking of royalty, as a patriotic citizen of the UK, can I get a "God save the Queen!" from you?

Shall we have Jerusalem ?

Our enemies are stronger because of Edward Snowden’s treacherous betrayal
Edward Snowden leaks have left Britain 'wide open' to terrorist attack warn spy chiefs

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

What did they do, look up the wikipedia article?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...

Or maybe this Encarta article from 2000
"The echolocation sounds of toothed whales, produced in their nasal passages, are focused into a narrow beam as they pass through the melon, a waxy, lens-shaped body in the forehead. The echoes are received by the lower jaw and pass through oil-filled sinuses to the inner ear, which is insulated from the skull by a foamlike pad that cuts out irrelevant noise. Upon closing in on their prey, both sperm whales and killer whales can produce pulses strong enough to stun their prey."
http://autocww.colorado.edu/~f...

Stories about using it to stun fish have been around for over a decade
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

Maybe the real news is that /. fell into a wormhole during the last outage and is reposting stories from 1999

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/mot...

Shock Jocks and Faux News are on privately funded, privately run radio stations, not on TV stations funded by money forcibly extracted from the viewers.

I think even Howard Stern would draw the line at some of the comments Clarkson has made.

see the real definition of 'left'.

#include "I_dont_think_it_means_what_you_think_it_means.h"

no one on the left would support a hate-bill like this. sorry, but you have no clue what left means if you think this.

I doubt you understand a word of what you are talking about.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/n...

And have no idea what the small government right in America is about, or what the totalitarian left are up to.

Imagine:

1. US/Russia/China

2. France/UK/Japan

3. Canada/Norway/Austria

4. Ecuador/Israel/Palestine/

5. Somalia/Bolivia/Vatican

Transparency?! Probably no. None of these would dare that at full speed ahead. Not even Norway.

Besides, many more countries have too many politically influential people which have "secret" money hidden, where an open source transparency may ultimately remove too many hidden money sources.

Here is an example researched by the New York Times, "Billions in Hidden Riches for Family of Chinese Leader".

Chinese leaders, however, deny (two years later) to be that rich, acording to an article, "China's former PM denies role in family's 'hidden riches'", in The Telegraph.

The Jeb B tribal/clan politicos? US is getting more inbred than Europe ever was at the political top :D



Tough fighting for open source at all levels? Yes. Just a guess.

No. You've never seen what happens to a wave when it hits a wall? All that energy has to go somewhere and if it can't move laterally it will move vertically. How's this for 0.51 meters? That's just a normal wave, not one with a wavelength of > 1 km like a tsunami.

Recently I was reading The Seven Day Weekend by Ricardo Semler on my day off. There's a chapter or so devoted to the Lumiar School he founded, which runs on a Mosaic curriculum—a curriculum which discards the traditional subject orientation for learning experiences. Here's an article written about it shortly after the school opened: Learn what you want.

What we need to change to go along with this (if we keep them) are the standardized tests (by subject). I think there need to be many questions offered, from which the student can choose, and the final score needs to be more like tower diving, where your score on what you attempt is presented alongside with the average difficulty rating. Brownose U. could prefer to admit students with a 100% score at the high-school senior difficulty level, while Speed College could prefer to admit students with an 80% score at the level of a third-year undergraduate (in their chosen major)—tailoring their environment appropriately. Survival of the fittest lacks vitality unless there's real diversity in the methods employed.

Once upon a time, the problem with taking this approach is that having some of your brightest students going deep into difficult sub-topics (such as a bright high school math student who takes a shine to number theory), was that too many students would get too far ahead of the teachers, because few high school math teachers (for example) would be able to ace the entire panoply of twenty offered questions.

With the technology of social networking, it's a solvable problem to hook bright students up with teachers with expertise in the subject area, no matter how deep and narrow. If there are ten high-school math prodigies in all of Brazil who take a shine to number theory, you just need one math teacher (available online) who is good at number theory to help shepherd their studies in a productive direction.

No matter what the child wants to learn, find the teacher who can teach it. In a system as large as Brazil (to continue with my Lumiar example) it can't be that hard to have a least one teacher who can keep up with a bright child no matter how unusual the learning passion (excepting all things Narnia, like astrology and phrenology and intelligent design).

We have far less excuse to funnel every child down the same subject-matter cattle chute than ever before.

>The warming data clearly indicates that rate of temperature of last 50 years is far higher than any other period in history

Of course - if you add a bit on the side of the more recent data set and subtract a bit on the older data set to get the 'correct' (or should we say 'corrected' results)?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/com...

"The only prisoners sent to Guantanamo were people known or believed to be members of al Qaida, or its affiliates."

Wow, I knew you were a shill but I wouldn't expect you'd stoop so low as to defend who all was captured and sent to gitmo. "Believed to be" al Qaeda? You mean, like this man and his three children, who were sent there because his surname *sounded similar* to that of an al Qaeda member?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

He didn't deserve gitmo, but you do, as you have a career of whitewashing and justifying the suffering of innocents.

I guess that's why she was such a crappy SecState...

Say whaaa??! You cannot be serious! Best Secretary of State Evar!, and I do mean Evar!

My life belongs to me, and if it sucks, I want to end it without any interference from religious morons and brainless public administrators like Ms. Barber. Removing the means of suicide does not solve or prevent the real problem: people have less and less reasons to live.

Why should I live and get education when engineering is off-shored to brainless indians and chinese?
Why should I live and contribute to knowledge if science and research is constantly mocked, ridiculed and deprived of funding?
Why should I live when I've been treated as a insignificant cog in a corporation (which is now true for everything - even universities are run like a business)?
Why should I live when some female bitch, whose mental capacity was enough only to graduate from an obscure secondary school in a german village, is sitting in EuroParliament and blathering about shutting down nuclear fission and fusion research?
Why should I live when postdocs are lasting months? What useful science could possibly be done in couple of months?!
Why should I live when even art and music became a commodity, and are forced to cater to lowest form of human waste?
Why should I live when imbecile politicians want to turn the whole country into a large maximum security prison?!

I want to kill myself not because I cannot cope with pressures and competition, but because stupid MBA morons hijacked the system and gained power over creative and talented people. Remember those socialized schmucks who bullied and ridiculed you in high school and universities? Now they are MPAs, MBAs and your bosses - they hate you and want to crush you, because deep inside they realize that they are worthless earthworms compared to creative people. I worked hard to solve difficult problems and hence earn my Ph.D. in electrical engineering, but thanks to banksters and businessdicks, the long-term postdoc positions have vanished and even short-term postodcs are nearly impossible to find anywhere in the world.

My life belongs to me - not to a district attorney or moronic MPA. And when I want to end my life, I want my decision to be respected. It is not difficult to implement: farmers already use Controlled atmosphere killing for animals slaughter - inhaling inert gas guarantees a painless and quick death within minutes. You don't even have to build any new buildings or suicide booths - morgues are perfectly fine and can easily cope with those who want to voluntary end their lives.

Instead of stupid regulations, how about giving more reasons to live and removing the reasons for suicide? Or at least simplifying the whole process of ending one's own life? It is harder than writing useless regulations, for sure, and requires substantially more brainpower than a typical MPA possesses, but we still have some smart, educated, thinking people on this planet, aren't we?!

Low Earth orbit Musk believes he can launch and maintain a constellation of 4,000 satellites in low earth orbit and still make a profit while others are pursuing simpler and cheaper broadband solutions, which can be deployed more rapidly and with less environmental impact and no one sees a problem in this?

It wouldn't be the first time that the US government recruited an eccentric billionaire as a figure head and funded his private enterprise through back channels to maintain the illusion of corporate independence.

Take a look at Iridium or GlobalStar, the only two Low Earth Orbit satellite phone companies I know of. How come do they keep on finding new investors when they have such a poor track record at making money?

I'm afraid you Huckleberry is the IPCC. Not Roy Spencer.

And you have to love the person at HopWhopper: "Update: Today Roy Spencer responded below. I've now written another article explaining his deception a slightly different way. "

LOL! Because she was fucking wrong in the first place! BTW, she's a blogger. If we are to go with the usual appeal to authority that comes from you people, she'd be dismissed out of hand.

https://www.google.co.uk/searc...

leads to:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

132.5foot = 40.4meters, that's a bit more than 0.9m or 12m. Normal waves can reach 10m in many places.

Perhaps you should 'shut-up' and check your facts.

And for good measure:
Pakistan-earthquake-2013-creates-new-18m-high-island-Gwadar-coast-Arabian-Sea

And
https://books.google.co.uk/boo...
""The trading towns of Pasni and Ormara, Pakistan, located 100 km away from the epicentre, were flooded by a ~15.0m high wall of water""

Still think it's a good place to put a nuclear reactor?

I thought she made a good Secretary of State, just for the record.

She most certainly did. One of the best evar! She is Superwoman! We have our new Henry Kissinger. Being president would be beneath her.

That's putting a lot of trust in the hands of one company. Even if Google is trustworthy, can the same be said about their algorithm?

I've seen so many unreliable search results for some terms that I can't say I really trust their search algorithm. Especially when you look up the newest fad in health care you see only results telling practically the same things, with no downsides and only positive life changing results. But I've seen many other examples (political ideas, shops, persons, ...).

Google is probably the best search engine that is available to us, but it's not perfect. Getting rid of DNS in favor of a secret search algorithm is in my opinion a slippery slope to a algorithm controlled society. Much like the funny stories about people blindly following their navigation system and getting somewhere completely else because of a spelling mistake (example: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new... )

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/n...

No the left likes to forget they laid the groundwork for Nazism, Italian Fascism and Communism.

This isn't the only instance.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

Sure.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

From TFA:

When future generations look back on the global-warming scare of the past 30 years, nothing will shock them more than the extent to which the official temperature records – on which the entire panic ultimately rested – were systematically “adjusted” to show the Earth as having warmed much more than the actual data justified.

It's telling that you can't identify anything that's actually inaccurate in my post.

You rattle off a number of statistics ("much better outcomes, much wider coverage, much more availability and it's cheaper ") that have nothing to do with what I was referring to: waiting times and poor service.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

But you still have to cling to your pitiful belief that you're paying 3 times as much as anyone else for *something* good.

Not at all: there are plenty of things wrong with the US health care system. But adopting the shitty British model is not the answer.

is he dead, or is he just meditating really really hard?

I read an interview with him where he said he'd only recently been able to finish reading a novel because of his dyslexia.

Telegraph story

Why is this an issue? Because he's apparently written 20+ best selling cookery books singlehandedly. Hmmm...

Jamie Oliver's butcher's forced to close after hygiene inspection

Key bits from the article: "the score for the January 8 inspection is listed as of 1 out of five with the comment: 'major improvement necessary'." and "one of only 19 out of 1,659 food outlets in the City to receive an 'A hazardous' rating".

This sounds pretty damning and pretty embarrassing. That said, there are some odd things. One of the complaints was mold on aging beef, but - depending on what you are doing - mold is part-and-parcel of the process (and the butchery claims that this was the case). Another funny point: the butchery voluntarily closed following the inspection to fix the issues mentioned. It reopened "several hours" later. If the issues could be fixed in a few hours, they were pretty much cosmetic problems.

So what to think? I figure it's 50/50 whether there were real problems, or whether this was a politically motivated inspection. Or maybe the inspector didn't get his free steak.

Ah, yes, that gospel of truth, The Daily Mail.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/...
http://www.independent.co.uk/n...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foo...
http://www.standard.co.uk/news...
http://www.theguardian.com/lif...
http://www.news.com.au/enterta...

EMV is hacked not because EMV is theoretically secure but the implementations of it are botched. Predictable unpredictable numbers, transactions not testing cypher validity or the incrementing number are hacks in widespread use right now. The easiest hack of all is to move the card number from europe to any country that does not yet use EMV. all the EMV cards work in those countries by reverting to just mag stripe signature cards. yeah you could implement geo-locking but once again, they haven't done the implementation right. Chip and pin on ATM cards is also being exploited by card snatchers in false facia of ATM machines (they video your pin, then physically steal the card unlike the mag stripe which don't have to be physcially inserted all the way into the machine to work).

http://krebsonsecurity.com/201...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

http://krebsonsecurity.com/201...

http://krebsonsecurity.com/201...

http://www.banktech.com/fraud/...

Q: Is the earth a closed system? A: No, therefore your first statement is invalid.

Q: Is it possible to reverse the process? A: Yes, return the faked weather data, some of which was uncovered this last week, back to what it was before they changed it to "prove" AGW and you've solved the problem.
article on it

Did I miss anything? Seems even easier to me.

Climate change science is kind of like that. Something bad is happening, and it is causally linked to our exponential spread over the earth's crust.

Or, more succinctly, "We're dumping more and more CO2 into the atmosphere. The temperature is going up. CO2 is a known greenhouse gas. Therefore our dumping CO2 into the atmosphere is causing the increase in temperature." Unfortunately, this is a post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy, demonstrated by the inability of the dozens of computer models used to predict temperatures to account for the lack of temperature increase across the last 18 years, and further demonstrated by the fact that temperature records published by institutions like NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Science back in the 1990s compared to the same temperature records published in the last few years show that temperatures prior to 1950 have been systematically adjusted down and more recent temperatures adjusted up in order to show a continuing temperature increase -- in one example, completely removing the severe cooling of the 'sea ice years' in Iceland in the 1970s that almost devastated the country's economy (reference). When the proponents of a position feel that they have to retroactively alter previously-collected data in order to have the data support their position, they're no longer presenting science; they're presenting dogma.

the extreme improbability of a kerosene-powered drone built by college students being able to make intercontinental flights

The Spirit of Butts Farm went 1888 miles.

The distance from the island of Agrihan to Pyongyang is 1839 miles. Not impossible, especially if you go with a plane heavier than 11 lbs. It's not intercontinental, but is possible to launch from a US territory. Scale down one of the Rutan designs and it may be possible to have global flight range, especially if augmented with solar.

We all know how UK love its citizens to be free of surveillance. After all, there is only one surveillance camera for every 11 people in Britain and UK data retention law protects the citizens of abuse.

how can you blame the republicans for the state of nasa? bush had the funding in place when he left office, obama gutted the program, and made one of NASAs missions, sorry their "formost" mission is making muslims "feel better". http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...

explain to me what reaching out to muslims have to do with space travel????

there is alot of blame to go around, but a lot of it belongs on obama

Are you fucking stupid or have you been living under a rock? Yes, it absolutely is legal for a husband to rape his wife in India.

http://www.salon.com/2014/05/15/marital_rape_is_officially_legal_in_india_partner/
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/india/140512/marital-rape-officially-legal-india
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/10824964/Rape-in-marriage-not-a-crime-Indian-court-rules.html

Go read and learn something, kid.