Slashdot Mirror


Brightest Moon Fallacy

theLunchLady writes "Unfortunately, on 22 December 1999 we will not behold the brightest moon in 133 years. An article in Sky and Telescope dispels this myth. BTW: the story about the American Indians conducting a raid under this moon 133 years ago, because it was so bright, is also a myth; the raid was conducted while that big fiery thing was in the sky. " While I'm unqualified to comment on both comments, I'm sure some of you have comments.

286 comments

  1. Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by seebs · · Score: 0

    More hacker folklore.

    --
    My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
    1. Re:Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by Eric+Clark · · Score: 0

      WHAT THE FUCK IS WITH THE +2?

    2. Re:Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by Myddrin · · Score: 1

      The guy has a +1 bonus for having a high karma.

      I do to, but I always turn it off.....

      --
      Myddrin
    3. Re:Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by PurpleBob · · Score: 1

      Welcome, newbie. People who have posted good comments in the past, giving them a high "Karma", which makes their posts start at +2 by default. It's possible to check a box that makes your comment start at +1 anyway, but IMHO that should only be used when replying to an offtopic comment, like I'm doing now.
      If that comment is really unworthy of a +2, the moderators will sort it out. Okay?

      --

      --
      Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
    4. Re:Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by Eric+Clark · · Score: 1

      You are confused on who the newbie is. Look at your user number, then look at mine.

      Karma is one of the reasons I hate the 'new' slashdot. Now days I only check it when someone tells me there is something worth reading.

      Sadly thats not very often.

    5. Re:Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that supposed to be rob@tucny.rr.com? I am not sure I got it right.

    6. Re:Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by jormurgandr · · Score: 1

      Whats wrong with you?!? Advertising your AllAdvantage ID on a /. thread. Man, you're sick. Sounds like something Dan Quale or Bill Gates would do...
      =======
      There was never a genius without a tincture of madness.

    7. Re:Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      twcny, not tucny.
      ~not rob

    8. Re:Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by seaportcasino · · Score: 1

      How many karma do you have to have to get the +1 bonus, anyhow?

    9. Re:Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by maxume · · Score: 1

      somewhere in the upper twenties...

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    10. Re:Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by seebs · · Score: 1

      Nothing wrong; I just ran into their VP of policy and privacy in an anti-spam context, and it turns out they're legit, so I'm boosting 'em if I can. :)

      --
      My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
  2. But What About... by chromatic · · Score: 1

    Don't forget, one of the manned moon missions left a mirror up there, on the light side. (If you believe that it wasn't filmed in Studio 51, that is.) I'm sure that it increases the moon's albedo by some non-integer percentage!

    Of course, that assumes that a maid comes by to dust every week. Nevermind.

    --

    1. Re:But What About... by Super_Frosty · · Score: 1

      I'd like to hear someone give a convincing argument that the Apollo missions were filmed in a studio. There's plenty of evidence that it was a real misson. There's lots of stuff on the surface of the moon - mirrors and scientific equipment, for example. Pictures from the moon, moon dust. A capsule full of dusty astronauts reentering Earth's atmosphere. Think of the thousands of people who would have to be involved. I just don't buy it.

      I don't believe everything that NASA says, however. I'm convinced that these probes for Mars were in fact military satellites destined for Earth orbit.

      --
      No comment at this time
    2. Re:But What About... by joshamania · · Score: 1

      Speaking of that mirror, I just saw a Discovery/Learning Channel thingy called something like "What if there were no moon?" I can't remember the specifics, I was a little inebriated at the time, but it was a damn cool show.

      Anyhoo, to get to the meat of my comment, the show tells us that the moon is moving away from the earth at a rate of about an inch or so a year. Could it be possible that NASA is testing their new laser propulsion system on the moon and pushing it away from us? ;)

    3. Re:But What About... by PD · · Score: 2

      This is easy.

      There was a movie starring OJ Simpson called "Capricorn One." It showed that it was possible to explain the moon landing as a Hollywood production. By Occam's Razor, we shouldn't add unnecessary complexity to our explanations if we don't have to. Why in the world would we need to introduce huge 30 story rockets, crazy moon cars, and a lunar lander that looks like a bug into the explanation? The simplest explanation is that the whole thing was filmed in Arizona.

      Probably the most unbelievable thing is that they expect us to believe that we'd spend so much money and 3 guys would risk their lives just to show some silly Russians that we're better than them. I mean come on people! The Russians are our friends! We've been friends with Eurasia, er, I mean Russia for centuries now!

      Sheesh.

    4. Re:But What About... by Myddrin · · Score: 1

      By Occam's Razor, we shouldn't add unnecessary complexity to our explanations if we don't have to

      Your kidding right?

      BTW, one of the main "arguers" for this view was a certain Mr. Andrew Kaufman. (Part of the reason for the name of the movie.) However it turned out to be one of his hoaxes. (IE. he didn't believe it himself.)

      --
      Myddrin
    5. Re:But What About... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did any one account for the opacity of the atmosphere? Then again alot more folks were heating with coal and wood the last time around.

    6. Re:But What About... by GMontag · · Score: 0

      "Don't forget, one of the manned moon missions left a mirror up there, on the light side."
      One of the most annoying misunderstandings about the moon, is that there is a "light" side and a "dark" side!
      No, you flaming idiot, there is a near side (the side facing earth) and a far side (the side not facing earth)and BOTH sides receive sunlight you MORON! Some small areas at the poles recieve no light, but when the moon is "dark" as seen from earth (no sense wasting technical terms here) the other side is illuminated by the sun you retard!!!!

    7. Re:But What About... by Myddrin · · Score: 1

      Gee, maybe he was just using the convention that the "light side" is the side tidally locked towards the earth and the "dark side" isn't.

      Gee, maybe that's it. Considering even NASA has used that terminology. Hell one of my Astronomy Profs used it when I was in college.

      I think you might want to cut down on the speed... err, coffee.

      --
      Myddrin
    8. Re:But What About... by Mr.+Flibble · · Score: 2

      You are probably correct about the albedo being increased by the mirror (to an insignifigant amount). I doubt however it will be increased in our direction, but towards the sun.

      The mirror that was left behind was a special kind made up of individual triangles that were attached at right angles to each other. Thus every 3 mirror triangles form a tri-right angle reflector. (If you have a bicycle, take a close look at the reflectors, you will see little pyrimids and valleys made of plastic, composed of triangles, this is the same thing.)

      The remarkable thing about this is that the mirror when made in this way is that it always returns light to its point of origin, despite the angle that it hits the mirrors from. A laser was aimed at the moon, and the reflection could be detected. Hence the exact distance to the moon could be measured.

      (Due to scattering of the photons, the laser while about 1mm in diameter on earth was about 1 Mile on the moon. Not important but neat nonetheless!)

      Now, the albedo has probably gone up due to reflections from right where YOU are, but if the place that you happen to be is emitting no light (hightly unlikely, must be VERY cold eh? :) The moons albedo will not have increased.

      --
      Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
    9. Re:But What About... by Myddrin · · Score: 1

      Oops. I guess a better way to put that would be
      Instead of "tidally locked towards the earth."
      put "faces the earth during most of the normal lunar cycle."

      Thank you....

      --
      Myddrin
    10. Re:But What About... by Pennywise · · Score: 0

      Some small areas at the poles recieve no light, but when the moon is "dark" as seen from earth (no sense wasting technical terms here) the other side is illuminated by the sun you retard!!!!

      By no stretch of the imagination am I an authority on this, but I'm not sure this makes sense. If the moon is "dark" as seen from the earth, then in order for the other side to be illuminated by the sun wouldn't the sun have to be on the other side, making it a Solar Eclipse?? Otherwise it would still be light out and the sun would be illuminating both the moon and the place I'm viewing it from ( it DOES happen ). I always thought that when you see a "cresent" moon it's due to the earth's shadow on it and when you get a new moon the earth's shadow completely obsures the moon.

      Can anybody POLIETLY confirm/deny this?

      --
      "The obvious is that which is least understood and most difficult to prove." -- A fortune cookie
    11. Re:But What About... by greenfly · · Score: 1

      Possibly they use "dark" as in unknown since until this century no one had seen that side. Kind of like they used to refer to the deep jungles of Africa as "Dark Africa". It is still sometimes referred to as the "Dark Continent", even though it receives it's fair share of sunlight.

    12. Re:But What About... by TheKodiak · · Score: 1

      I just want to say, "thanks," for actually using a more than marginally accurate stating of Occam's Razor. (And, for that matter, illustrating exactly how difficult it can be to determine what "necessary complexity" is - is a conspiracy of that nature more complex than a rocket? - especially when you are mistakenly applying Occam's Razor to human motivation.)

      --
      -=Best Viewed Using [INLINE]=-
    13. Re:But What About... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Couldn't help it... But is there really any "side" anyway?

    14. Re:But What About... by Kinthelt · · Score: 1
      I think the best way to explain this would be to experiment.

      Get a ping-pong ball and a flashlight. Find a nice dark room and turn on the flashlight. Now, put the ping-pong ball into the light. The flashlight would be the sun, the ping-pong ball would be the moon and your eyes would be the earth. Remember, the sun is much larger than the earth and the earth is much alrger than the moon. So the shadow cast by your head is going to be exaggerated a lot.

      Now comes the eclipse part. The moon does not orbit in the same plane that the earth orbits in. It is a few degrees off. So, when the moon is at its farthest away from the sun in its orbit (a full moon), the distance between the sun and the moon != (distance between sun and earth) + (distance between earth and moon). Just think of the earth, sun and moon as three points in a very obtuse triangle.

      --

      "Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

    15. Re:But What About... by PD · · Score: 1

      Oh man! You caught me! Yes, I was kidding. Thanks for the Kaufman reference. I don't know a lot about him, and now that you mention it I finally understand what the hell the "Can you believe they put a man on the moon" lyric is all about. I've always wondered, but didn't care enough to actually go figure it out. I guess Kaufman was a bit before my time, and probably someone I should learn about. Thanks.

    16. Re:But What About... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. A new moon is when the moon is between the earth and the sun, but not directly in front of it. A lunar eclipse is a full moon, where the earth is directly between sun and the moon. The moon's orbit around the earth isn't on the same plane as the earth's orbit around the sun.

    17. Re:But What About... by hubie · · Score: 1
      If we assume a "side" of the moon is a hemi-sphere (which is what we usually do), there is a "light" side and a "dark" side. The light side is that side which faces the Sun (and thus the dark side faces away). A full moon is when the Earth is between the Sun and the Moon, and a new moon is when the moon is between the Earth and the Sun. Most of the time the Earth and Moon don't obscure each other because most of the time the Sun-Earth-Moon bodies do not all fall on a line. The instances they do fall on a line is when eclipses occur. The kind of eclipses that occur depend on how well one body covers the other and where the shadow falls.

      For a nice explanation of lunar phases, see here .

    18. Re:But What About... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There were *a lot* less people on this continent 133 years ago too.

    19. Re:But What About... by robwicks · · Score: 1

      Don't forget, one of the manned moon missions left a mirror up there, on the light side.

      You mean the near side. They put the mirrors on the moon so we can bounce lasers off them and do neato things. My pet peeve is when people say light side and dark side, since the moon's entire surface gets light, but we only see one side due to tidal locking. There; I feel better.

      --

      Logic ... merely enables one to be wrong with authority. -- Doctor Who

    20. Re:But What About... by Calamari+Indigo · · Score: 1
      Does this mean Pink Floyd will have to retitle one of their albums, "The Far Side of The Moon"?

      Will Gard Larson stand for this?

  3. Slashdot takes up Urban Legend debunking? by Derek+Pomery · · Score: 1

    Well, I'd like to think most people here aren't
    that gullible, but p'raps they got a number of
    submissions about this.
    I know I've read a few comments in other
    articles bringing it up already.
    I'm still waiting for it to cross my spool...
    Merry Christmas...

    --
    -- perl -e'print pack"H*","6e656d6f406d38792e6f7267"' /. ate my old sig. Bastards.
  4. local moon IS brightest by slickwillie · · Score: 5

    Last night/this morning I woke up and thought "Wow, that moon really is bright", and went over to the window. It took me a few seconds to realize that it was my neighbor putting up Christmas lights, with the help of a 500 watt halogen work light aimed right at my window.

    1. Re:local moon IS brightest by dsplat · · Score: 2

      I guess you are as incoherent when you wake up as I am. After all, normally, any eyestrain associated with reading by the light of the moon should be the result of poor contrast in low light rather than the painful dazzling that transfixes many a woodland animal. Just a hint, if the "moon" has a twin, and makes a sound even vaguely similar to your neighbor's 4x4, go with your instinct and dive for cover.

      --
      The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
    2. Re:local moon IS brightest by donutello · · Score: 1

      This morning, while driving to work, I had my shades on, and looked at the sky and said "Wow, that's a big moon", until I realized that was the sun.

      No, I'm not making this up. It really happened. This morning. Blame it on too much caffeine, too little sleep and not seeing the sun in more than 2 weeks

      --
      Mmmm.. Donuts
    3. Re:local moon IS brightest by Katep · · Score: 1

      LOL! Hello Clark Griwald!

  5. More signs of the apoc^H^H^H^H^H^H nevermind by _damnit_ · · Score: 1

    The world could end, the moon is bright, Clinton asks crackers to play nice...
    jeez, what a strange way to end a year. (I omit mention of the millenium to avoid dumb flames about the milleniums true end next year.)
    My real worry is my co-worker who decided to spend the Holidays in Venezuela with his wife's family. I haven't heard from him yet. I'm not too worried yet as net access has to be pretty bad down there (especially during a disaster). Well, I'll pray to the extra bright moon or whatever.


    _damnit_

    --


    _damnit_

    It's my job to freeze you. -- Logan's Run
    1. Re:More signs of the apoc^H^H^H^H^H^H nevermind by irqzero · · Score: 1

      heh.
      and lo,
      the lion did lay down with the lamb.
      the hacker with the sysadmin.

      --
      this space intentionally left blank
    2. Re:More signs of the apoc^H^H^H^H^H^H nevermind by maxume · · Score: 1

      I used to be one of those people that said the true end of the millennium is next year, but that got too popular, so I now point out that the second millennium probably came to pass several years ago, due to errors made in adjusting the calendar. I believe that errors happenned somtime in the 12 or 1300's, but am not quite sure. Anyone have the full story?

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:More signs of the apoc^H^H^H^H^H^H nevermind by Royster · · Score: 2

      The error occurred in the 6th Century. Calendar research was done by the Church to solve the practical problem of calculating the beginning (and end) of Lent. Easter was celebrated on the first Sunday following the first full moon following the equinox. Because the season of Lent began 45 days before Easter, they needed to know this in advance. This mixing of solar and lunar calendars makes the calculation difficult. A 532 year cycle made the calculation easier. The year 532 A.D. was set at the end of such a cycle and the year 1 A.D. was inferred. It took several hundred years before the system was widely adopted. The Venerable Bede (8th c.) knew that the system did not give the right date for the birth of Christ, but thought that trying to fix it wold cause more problems than letting it slide.

      There is more in the Brittanica article on the calendar.

      The true end of "the millennium" really depends on which millennium is "the" millennium. Any period of 1,000 years is a millennium. The 2nd millennium A.D. ends on 12/31/2000. The millennium of four year dates beginning with 1 ends on 12/31/1999.

      --
      I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
    4. Re:More signs of the apoc^H^H^H^H^H^H nevermind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its also been said that the birth of Christ actually occured in 4 B.C., making it really 2003.

    5. Re:More signs of the apoc^H^H^H^H^H^H nevermind by TheKodiak · · Score: 2

      The Venerable Bede was obviously concerned about:

      >cal 1 750
      January 750
      Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa

      >

      But he was wrong to be concerned - no one complains about:

      >cal 9 1752
      September 1752
      Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
      1 2 14 15 16
      17 18 19 20 21 22 23
      24 25 26 27 28 29 30

      >

      Foolish Bede.

      --
      -=Best Viewed Using [INLINE]=-
  6. It'll still be "brighter" by lyonsj · · Score: 3

    As the article points out, the moon will still be at perigee (closest point in its orbit to the Earth) and it will be about 19% brighter than usual. To most of the people (who have received this email, and I know I've gotten it seven times so far) looking at the moon, this will not make a big difference. Full moons are always bright, and so they might *think* it's a lot brighter and then not bother to look next month to compare. Personally I observe the moon every month (leftover habit from astronomy classes) and I have noticed the slight difference, but yeah, it doesn't merit the bandwidth that's been wasted on this.

    I still think it's neat to have a full moon on the Winter Solstice, though :)

    1. Re:It'll still be "brighter" by nion · · Score: 1

      I still think it's neat to have a full moon on the Winter Solstice, though :)



      i'm with you there. the nakedness is entirely optional.

      --
      der dee der.
    2. Re:It'll still be "brighter" by terminal.dk · · Score: 1

      People also forget, that the earth in its orbit around the sun is getting about as close as it gets in the eliptical orbit. This also accounts for some of the global warming!

  7. .. In Discover tho? by Malachi · · Score: 3
    I didn't get the news by any email'd farmers almanac. I read it in last months issue of Discover.. now I'm not going to say they didn't pick up the scent somewhere, but another accredited agency has the other side.

    You choose who you want to believe.

    Malachi

    --
    "Life is all about strategy, mathematics and psychological perceptiveness."
    1. Re:.. In Discover tho? by klm20 · · Score: 1
      Discover? Yeah, there's a reliable source for ya...

      And the National Enquirer told me that if you look real close you'll be able to see the face of Princess Di and JFK Jr's love child on the surface of the moon.

      Sheesh...



      --
      I gave my boss a reality check. It bounced.

    2. Re:.. In Discover tho? by RobinH · · Score: 1

      Actually, my university astronomy prof sent me the email. It's scary how quickly just about anybody will believe a rumour. I believed it - if you can't believe your astro prof when it comes to astronomy, who can you believe? :-)

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
  8. Shoot... by Midnight+Ryder · · Score: 1

    Hehhehe - Ooops! I messed up on this one too - I took it at face value, and passed the same info on to my fiance. After all the times I've told people to check the facts before forwarding information, I end up doing it myself. *SIGH* Oh well...

    But, even if it isn't the brighest moon, it's still kinda cool that it's an event that won't occur again for a while (the entire set of events occuring in a 10 hour span) and hasn't occured in quite a while. Just happens to be there's nothing interesting to really watch...

    Midnight Ryder
    --

    Davis Ray Sickmon, Jr - looking for something to read? Check out my three free novels at MidnightRyder.org

  9. Oh ye of little faith by Bearpaw · · Score: 3
    From Sky and Telescope: "Most people won't notice a thing, despite the e-mail chain letter that implies we'll see something amazing."

    Call me cynical, but I bet that most people who've gotten the email will see that the Moon is brighter than usual ... because they expect to. Humans are notoriously poor observers, and will often see what they expect to see, whether it's there or not.

    On the plus side, maybe a few more people will remember to look up. Maybe it's partly because I live in a city, but sometimes I think I'm one of the few people who ever notices the sky.

    1. Re:Oh ye of little faith by Samrobb · · Score: 1

      My wife and I were outside at our farm last night, and I commented to her about how bright it was... she reminded me of this whole "brightest moon" event. Now, while I had seen it reported here, it certainly wasn't on my mind at the time... so it appears that the difference in brightness is noticeable (at least it was to me, out in the country in almost complete darkness.)

      I was in the Navy for a few years and had the chance to see many a full moon in complete darkness out at sea - bright enought to read by, with a little squinting on my part. This current moon isn't as bright as I remember under those circumstances, so I would guess that atmospherics and (lack of) proximity to other light sources makes up most of the perceived increase in brightness... particularly if someone who isn't used to seeing a full moon away from streetlights and the like makes the effort to do so.

      --
      "Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgement." Job 32:9
  10. What about the tides? by Chris+Brewer · · Score: 1

    Okay, the article says that the high and low tides are going to be a bit extreme because of the three events, but it doesn't say how much. 25% higher/lower than normal? An extreme neap tide?

    Or am I just semi-paranoid?

    --
    Consultancy: If you're not part of the solution, there's money to be made in prolonging the problem
    1. Re:What about the tides? by Spud+Zeppelin · · Score: 3

      For those of you who don't know, Excite lets you add tide tables as part of their customization. This is what mine currently looks like:

      Old Saybrook Point, Connecticut Tides
      December 21
      Low3:25PM -0.50
      High9:27PM3.08
      December 22
      Low3:23AM -0.31
      High9:49AM4.11
      Low4:23PM -0.58
      High10:28PM3.11


      These don't appear to be all THAT unusual to me at all....





      This is my opinion and my opinion only. Incidentally, IANAL.

      --

      MOO;IANAL.
      There used to be a picture linked here.

    2. Re:What about the tides? by AugstWest · · Score: 1

      Well, I'd imagine that the marshes are going to be nice and flooded, and Great Hammock Rd's gonna have that huge puddle by the town beach. :]

    3. Re:What about the tides? by Curious+George · · Score: 1

      Well, they are unusual to the point that the low tides are negative, meaning below the datum.

      Tides are based on the lowest point the water normally gets to. Which means that normally low tides will never go in the negative range.

      Of course, this being an equinox means that the range of tides will be larger than usual anyway so it's not all due to the fact that the moon is closest it's been in a while.

      --
      It's bad luck to be superstitious
    4. Re:What about the tides? by The+Cheez-Czar · · Score: 1

      This is my opinion and my opinion only. Incidentally, IANAL.

      shouldn't this be IANAA? or IANAO?
      who studies tides anyway? Astronomers ? Oceanographers? Really Bored People?

      --
      This Signature does Not Exist !! FNORD
    5. Re:What about the tides? by Spud+Zeppelin · · Score: 1

      Maybe IAAAA? (I am an amateur astronomer) :)

      Not that I've had my 'scope out in quite some time, but...



      This is my opinion and my opinion only. Incidentally, IANAL.

      --

      MOO;IANAL.
      There used to be a picture linked here.

  11. Brightness is relative by meckardt · · Score: 5

    Okay, maybe this isn't going to be the brightest moon of all time. I'm sure that the original information upon which the story that this refers to never claimed it would be. However, for those of us who are blessed with a clear sky tonight, the full moon should be brighter than we typically experience during a normal month.

    As far as stories of secret indian attacks carried out by the bright light of the full moon, it is about as plausable as the story about the Space Shuttle size being dictated by Roman Chariot wheel spacing. Sure, it sounds like a neat explaination, but that doesn't make it right. I'm not qualified to say whether its wrong.

    Regardless of the relative brightness of this full moon, I doubt if I will get to see it, based on the local weather. Anyway, this isn't the full moon I care about. Its Next Month's full moon that is something to look at. That is when we get to see a Total Lunar Eclipse. This event occurs on the evening of January 20, between about 9:30 pm EST and 2:30 am EST., with totality lasting from 78 minutes between about 11:00 pm EST and 12:20 am EST. Be sure not to miss this one, because we won't see another one in the us until May 16, 2003.


    Mike Eckardt meckardt@spam.yahoo.com
    1. Re:Brightness is relative by all4Tish · · Score: 1
      and a really cool thing about that, is that 20jan is also my (along w/ 1/365th (or about) of the world's population) birthday, too .... just kinda cool</semi-shameless plug>

      sorry for wasting the bandwidth on a semi-shameless plug

    2. Re:Brightness is relative by Eric+Clark · · Score: 1

      I've never heard the one about the Space Shuttle size, but I do believe its plausable that the distance between the rails in the US Standard Rail Gauge was dictacted by a Roman Chariot.

    3. Re:Brightness is relative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do you believe everything James Burke tells you?

    4. Re:Brightness is relative by TheKodiak · · Score: 2

      Then now would be a good time to go to http://www.qnx.com/~glen/deadbeef/1897. html or http://www.hmrs.org.uk/fourfoot.htm or http://csf.colorado.edu/mail/pkt/f eb98/0556.html.

      As for the Space Shuttle size, that one's rarer, but basically it goes on to say that because the SRBs (they're called something else, now, I think, but they're the long widgets that get it off the ground. not cranes) are transported by rail (they are!) through rail tunnels (probably) they are therefore only slightly wider than the rails (inasmuch as 12' is slightly wider than 5', yeah, I'll buy that) and therefore mankinds first method of transportation (horse's ass) determined important details of his most advanced (space shuttle). All very stupid.

      --
      -=Best Viewed Using [INLINE]=-
    5. Re:Brightness is relative by someguy · · Score: 1

      >my (along w/ 1/365th (or about) of the world's
      >population) birthday

      Just to be annoying, shouldn't you consider that births aren't uniformly distributed? I know there are some occasions and seasons which are more suited to getting it on than others..

      --
      A planet where apes evolved from men? Long live the apes.
    6. Re:Brightness is relative by Tardigrade · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that be one of the variables covered by the "(or about)" phrase?

  12. Milleniophobia!!! by mdvkng · · Score: 1

    Is it just me or is anybody else sick of all of the supersticious goo and various other scare mongering flying about just before all four digits in the Christian year flip?

    Isn't this just another symptom of rampant Milleniophobia? No matter how much it's debunked by Science, the supersticious apolcalyptophiles will still stick to their supersticions like flies to tape.

    *sigh*

    -M

    PS: What disappointed me most is that the nuclear waste dump on the Moon's Far Side didn't blow up in September after all. Moonbase Alpha is still safe.

    1. Re:Milleniophobia!!! by Bearpaw · · Score: 2
      Is it just me or is anybody else sick of all of the supersticious goo and various other scare mongering flying about just before all four digits in the Christian year flip?

      I could easily be wrong, but I'm not sure there's any more silliness than usual. Maybe you're just noticing it more because you're expecting it, and The Millenium is an easy thing to pin it on?

      [shrug] Or maybe you're right. But it's hard to know for sure.

    2. Re:Milleniophobia!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one know hundreds of Christians, and not a one believes the crap you just accused them of believing.

    3. Re:Milleniophobia!!! by TheGreek · · Score: 2
      I for one know hundreds of Christians, and not a one believes the crap you just accused them of believing.

      I do too. Many of them can also read English. Reread what he wrote and then try again, Sparky:

      Is it just me or is anybody else sick of all of the supersticious goo and various other scare mongering flying about just before all four digits in the Christian year flip?

      Isn't this just another symptom of rampant Milleniophobia? No matter how much it's debunked by Science, the supersticious apolcalyptophiles will still stick to their supersticions like flies to tape.

      He didn't say the people going around spreading this were Christians. He merely stated that the years were Christian years. And then he talked about "supersticious apolcalyptophiles." No mention of actual Christians there.

  13. I'm so alone... by DanaL · · Score: 5

    I haven't recieved the Full Moon Forward yet. I feel so isolated and lonely :)

    On the other hand, I have recieved Elf Bowling *seven* times, The Elf-Bowling-Is-A-Virus thing twice, and Christmas Carols for the Mentally Deficient 4 times.

    I think junk email distribution patterns would make an interesting area of study for Information Theorists :)

    Dana

    1. Re:I'm so alone... by GeorgeH · · Score: 1

      My mom keeps sending me the Elf Bowling thing (even though I tell her that my system can't run it (It said Windows 95 or better, so in theory Linux should run it (English should support nested parens))). Is it a virus or a virus hoax? Last thing I need is my Mom calling me up at 12:01 on 01/01/1900 telling me her computer has the Y2K virus.
      --

      --
      Why can't I moderate something "Wrong" or at least "Grossly Misinformed"?
    2. Re:I'm so alone... by Optical_Delusion · · Score: 2

      I think junk email distribution patterns would make an interesting area of study for Information Theorists :)

      Oh great, the next one just started.
      'This is part of a study looking at junk e-mail flow in modern society, please forward this on to whoever you usually forward this crap too.'

      =;-)

      O.D.

    3. Re:I'm so alone... by DanaL · · Score: 2

      The email is from just one guy who says he set the date to Dec 25, rebotted and his computer went down.

      I've got counter emails from people saying it it's a hoax, and I haven't heard anything from CERT, Norton or McAfee, so I am assuming it is safe.

      The email probably comes from a bitter, disgruntled player who kept getting lousy scores :)

      Dana

    4. Re:I'm so alone... by bmetzler · · Score: 2
      I've got counter emails from people saying it it's a hoax, and I haven't heard anything from CERT, Norton or McAfee, so I am assuming it is safe.

      It's a hoax. I got it too. Symantec has a write-up on it.

      -Brent
    5. Re:I'm so alone... by anishi · · Score: 1
      Here you go, now you can be happy. :-)

      For all you amateur astronomers out there:

      This year will be the first full moon to occur on the winter solstice, Dec 22, in 133 years. Since a full moon on the winter solstice occurs in conjunction with a lunar perigee (point in the moon's orbit that is closed to Earth), the moon will appear about 14% larger than it does at apogee (the point in it's elliptical orbit that is farthest from the Earth). The Earth is also several million miles closer to the sun than in the summer. Sunlight striking the moon is about 7% stronger. This makes it brighter. Also, this will be the closest perigee of the moon of the year (since the moon's orbit is constantly deforming). If the weather is clear and there isn't a snow cover where you live, it is believed that even car headlights will be superfluous.

      On December 21st, 1866 the Lakota Sioux took advantage of this combination of occurrences and staged a devastating retaliatory ambush on soldiers in the Wyoming Territory. In layman's terms it will be a super bright full moon, much more than usual AND it hasn't happened this way for 133 years!

  14. Another article, better reporting than the Almanac by Strauss · · Score: 1
    The Toronto Star for a slightly better report. At least the Star figured out the last real bright moon first, and so was correctly reporting 69 years.

    -Strauss

    --

    Trifle not with Dragons, for you are crunchy - and go well with catsup.

  15. Cosmo's moon... by LazyBoy · · Score: 0

    ...

    --

    If Chaos Theory has taught us anything, it's that we must kill all the butterflies.

  16. Why would they do that? by spaceorb · · Score: 1

    Could it be possible that NASA is testing their new laser propulsion system on the moon and pushing it away from us? ;)

    Assuming you weren't joking, going to the Moon to try that out would cost hundreds of millions (if not billions) of dollars more than just to do it in Earth orbit.

  17. Pagan Rituals Ruined! Goats will live.... by Hello+folks · · Score: 2

    How am I supposed to sacrifice my goats to the god reatsintpeont now that the celestial brightening will not commmence tomorrow...oh well..they're taking care of the garbage in my yard pretty well....i guess I'll leave them there.
    Until next time....then the celestial provocation shall commence! All shall fall to my feet!

    I'm serious. No, really, I am.....*snicker* DAMN! oh well. I guess you know the truth now.

  18. Re:brightest moon? by beagle · · Score: 1

    At least it's a lot easier to believe than "forward this to 50 of your friends and Bill Gates and Walter Disney Jr will give you $5k cash and a trip to Disney World" or "forward this to 90 people and get a free Honda Civic."

  19. You can't trust everything you read by CoughDropAddict · · Score: 3

    What amazes me is how people continually will believe anything they find in their inbox or on a web page. Our parents, our friends, even the news media (does anyone remember the Arizona news station that reported on a "Good Times"-like virus warning they got in their mailbox?)

    It seems so obvious, but so many people are led to believe that if it's in print and sounds semi-official, it must be true. People believe unless they have a reason to doubt, and on the net you don't survive unless you do it the other way around.

    1. Re:You can't trust everything you read by all4Tish · · Score: 1
      There was a really good (imho) fantasy book by terry goodkind, published by tor, called wizard's first rule , which covered this fairly well.

      the titchler phrase described the wizard's first rule as something similar to (i can't remember exactly) "people are stupid. they will believe anything they are told, so long as they have a reason to believe it, or even simply no reason not to believe it, or even if they are afraid it might be true" or something along those lines

      i'm sure someone else out there has read these, so if you have the time (i have to leave for work here in a sec), someone might want to look it up and post the actual phrase .... ta ta

  20. Re:Irrelevancy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's a fucking? And why would it want shit?

    In answer to your question, no, Obviously I don't give fucking shit, since I don't even know what a fucking is...

    Can someone enlighten me?

  21. psuedo solar eclipse by __aaijsn7246 · · Score: 2

    Someone tried to convince me that this was true today by arguing, 'Well, the moon is going to be really close to the earth and the sun's going to be directly behind it.' Hrm, sounds to me that it would be day if the sun was in the sky.. It's funny hearing how people get mislead and everything just propagates. Wish this got posted last night ;)

    A few folks said they heard it was going to be possible to drive without their headlights since the moon was going to be oh-so-bright... Let's watch for an increase in accidents ;)

    Oh well, we all know that night's when the sun goes to sleep anyway - 's why NASA's planning their Sun Polar Observer mission to land during the night...

    -keen

    1. Re:psuedo solar eclipse by softsign · · Score: 1
      +1 Moderation (Funny)

      ... if only I could ...

      I wonder if anyone will give you an "Informative" bonus for the tidbit about Sun Polar Observer landing at night....

      rofl...

    2. Re:psuedo solar eclipse by EyesOfNostradamus · · Score: 2
      >A few folks said they heard it was going to be possible to drive without their headlights since the moon was going to be oh-so-bright... Let's watch for an increase in accidents ;)

      Reminds of the Red Hat IPO last summer. On that day, people around here drove with their headlights on at noon, in order to celebrate this earthshaking event. No accidents though, but quite a few traffic jams.

    3. Re:psuedo solar eclipse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eh? How does driving with your lights on during the day cause traffic jams? You mean to tell me that daytime-running lights are the cause behind all traffic problems? thOSE bSATrADS at FOrD wERE bheEIND IT ALLA ALONG I KNEWIT!!@#&%&%^

    4. Re:psuedo solar eclipse by EyesOfNostradamus · · Score: 1

      Nobody said that the headlights were causing the traffic jams. Actually the traffic jams were probably caused by the many bozos looking at the sun. And the headlights by a darker-than-usual sun. Anyways, there must be great astrologers working for Red Hat (... or, for Goldman Sachs...)

  22. Not just the moon, Santa's test run too by hodeleri · · Score: 3

    The brightness will also be from Santa giving his test run about the sky. He'll probably be going about in his excercise clothes, shorts and tank-top. Due to the cold at the north pole, Santa will be white as a ghost, and make an excellent reflective surface to add the extra bit of brightness.

  23. Humans? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Humans are poor observers? Are you not human? You are Devo!

    1. Re:Humans? by Bearpaw · · Score: 2
      Humans are poor observers? Are you not human? You are Devo!

      [grin] I am human, and as a result I'm generally a poor observer. But it helps a little that I'm aware of it. Most people are under the delusion that they're good observers, and so they don't have any clue how many mistakes they make.

      (And don't even get me started about poor reading skills and lack of basic reasoning ability! Argh!)

    2. Re:Humans? by harhar · · Score: 1

      reason is relative & reality is fluid.

      --
      $var = &ltSTDIN>
      $var =~ s/\\$//;
      this is slashchomp
  24. Correct me if I'm wrong.... by Karellen · · Score: 1

    ...but doesn't the article then go on to say that it *will* be the brightest full moon in 69 years (since 1930)?

    So, it's not a *total* non-event.

    --
    Why doesn't the gene pool have a life guard?
    1. Re:Correct me if I'm wrong.... by Primis · · Score: 1

      I think a lot of people are missing the point here. It doesn't matter if it's 69 years or 103 or 2 billion...

      It was freakishly bright out here last night, and somewhat tonight here though not as noticeable. And I'm used to driving home in total and utter darkness from work, especially on overcast nights like last night.

      I don't care if it's a *yearly* event, but once again Slashdot users seem to be more interested in puffing up to see who's the biggest and the one with the Right Answer(TM), rather than enjoying the fact that something is happening and will happen that we normally don't get to see.

      And then you wonder sometimes why nobody takes you or Slashdot's forums seriously.


      -- Primis.

  25. Why would you bother asking such a question? by BadERA · · Score: 1

    Some people just don't have a complete grasp on the depths of profound sarcasm. Or, in some cases, not-so-profound, bluntly posed sarcasm.

    --
    I am, therefore you think.
    1. Re:Why would you bother asking such a question? by joshamania · · Score: 1

      Wink, wink, nudge, nudge, know what I mean?

  26. brightest moon-Stupid! by programmerguy · · Score: 1

    Why would any one have a raid under a bright moon? Did they want someone to catch them? I know the indians were much smarter then that. If we believe this then we are much more gullible then we get credit for.

    1. Re:brightest moon-Stupid! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go figure how the moon was, when US Forces&Allies started attacking Iraq in 1991

  27. Seen this too many times... by copal7 · · Score: 1

    um...what's with the chronic posts about how "perl sucks" and "tc shoves ____ up his ass"? i've never met him myself, but i would, honestly, like to know what the deal is. is he really that big of an @55#013 ??? and what the hell is your beef with perl? you're obviously on some kind of mission...so what is it that you're *for*?

    --
    @end

    big boys use bsd.
    1. Re:Seen this too many times... by copal7 · · Score: 1

      alright...no i *REALLY* have to know. is he just a complete narcicistic pr*ck? what happened when you met him (however many times that may be)?

      and what do you use for all of your administrative tasks? shell code? batch files? [GACK! just kidding aobut that one...hehehe.]

      i'm just curious...i've been up to my neck in perl code lately & to hear it so heinously denounced peaked my interest.....

      --
      @end

      big boys use bsd.
  28. Everyone's got it all wrong?! by Hrunting · · Score: 3

    See, I saw the e-mail and thought, 'Wow, what a funky hoax!' But then I realized that the e-mail is partially true. What's really the fact here is that this is indeed (at least in the northern hemisphere) going to be the darkest night. Why? Well, the night will be the longest of the year and thus, darkness will have a chance to soak in and penetrate everything. Couple this with a new moon and the moon becomes even brighter, because as everyone knows, light objects on a dark field are lighter than the same shade object on a lighter field (it's a perception thing). Thus, it's really about the darkest night of the year.

    As for the Indians, I thought the US's Thanksgiving was last month.

    1. Re:Everyone's got it all wrong?! by Syberghost · · Score: 1

      As for the Indians, I thought the US's Thanksgiving was last month.

      It was, but we let them off the reservation for an entire month now.

  29. semi-paranoid or just plain unobservant? by BadERA · · Score: 1

    As the article states: "Ocean tides will be exceptionally high and low that day" read the article -- THEN post. sorta like pull down your pants -- THEN take the dump.

    --
    I am, therefore you think.
    1. Re:semi-paranoid or just plain unobservant? by keyeto · · Score: 1

      Steady on there, the initial poster was asking for some precision. For sure, "Exceptionally" in this context means large, but still doesn't answer the "How much larger?" question with any precision.

      --
      -- "This is the Space Age, and we are Here To Go" - W.S.Burroughs
  30. Oops by DanaL · · Score: 2

    Oh great, the next one just started. 'This is part of a study looking at junk e-mail flow in modern society, please forward this on to whoever you usually forward this crap too.'

    I guess I'm going to hell now (if you're right, I'll deserve it!) :)

    Dana

  31. just plain unobservant? by BadERA · · Score: 0

    ok, let's try:
    Read the post. Then reply. Sorta like, check your foot out, THEN shove it up your a$$.

    my bad. flame away.

    --
    I am, therefore you think.
  32. End of days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So who's worried that this may be a sign of the Apocalypse? I'm not, not really .. after all, my soul is prepared, but the signs are still there. Yeah, I know that Sky and Telescope does a pretty good job of debunking the wild-eyed "brightest moon ever" claims, but it's still interesting to note that it talks about how the three events are unusually close together this time around. Doesn't anybody find the timing on this a bit, well, coincidental? Should we expect this type of thing right at Y2K? What are the odds?

    Hear me out. If it were just this moon thing, I'd not comment on its closeness to the year 2000. But there are other signs as well. It is well-known that there will be a rare alignment of the planets early in the year 2000, the effect of which is still not really known. While most astronomers I've read seem to think that the planetary alignment will not have any real effect on Earth, others are not so sure. Some have predicted tidal waves and other natural disasters. Still others have suggested that the gravitational effect of the planetary alignment could alter the orbit of the Earth, which would be disasterous .. we are in such a perfect position now that such an alteration would likely cause widespread climate change and mass extinctions. (Those who claim that there is no evidence for intelligent design of the universe conveniently ignore our optimal orbit.)

    So now we've got two rare astronomical events happing right at Y2K. Hmm. But it doesn't end there. Can anybody say Leonids? Here, at the very brink of Y2K, we were treated to the most violent Leonid storm in decades. And it goes on and on. Y2K is the host to a puzzling array of extremely unlikely cosmological occurences. Why? There comes a point when you can no longer simply wave your hand and dismiss them as being coincidence. Something is happening here, folks. Something big.

    But let's not forget about things here at home, either. How many major earthquakes have we suffered this year? And don't give me that "no more than usual" nonsense. Why, this year, do the major earthquakes decide to hit major population areas? Have you been watching the events in Venezuela? 20,000 dead? 70% of the nation's economy destroyed? What about the earlier typhoons in India that killed so many? And what about the impending threats of terrorism that we will clearly face? When the clock turns over, will the buildings crumble and communities disintegrate? Where will I be? Where will you be?

    If you ask me, I'm not gullible enough to believe that all of this is some sort of fantastically remote coincidence. Absolutely not. The end times were prophesied ages ago, and I firmly believe that we are living in them.

    1. Re:End of days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      > The end times were prophesied ages ago, and I firmly believe that we are living in them. Firmly enough to send me a signed contract assigning your worldly belongs to me as of 1/1/2001? After all, if you're right, you won't be needing them... Let's see you put your money where your mouth is.

    2. Re:End of days? by AugstWest · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... well, let's see... The universe, strangely enough, does seem to have an order to it, at least in the way celestial objects move.

      Oh, and calendars are generally based on lunar happenings, celestial ocurrences, etc.

      Why does this culmination surprise you? Why would even a coincidence surprise you?

    3. Re:End of days? by LostOne · · Score: 1

      Actually, the alignment you mention has happened in the past history of the solar system and the planets seem to have all survived the event. That is not to say that there were no unusual geological events and such, though.

      My take on the increased number of earthquakes and such hitting population centres is that major earthquakes occur a number of years apart along a given fault and either when the last ones occurred, nobody was there to measure them or feel them, or there was not a significant population there in the first place. We don't have accurate enough records for long enough to know what is "usual" for earthquakes and such over time. The other question is how many of these earthquakes were triggered by the daily activities of the populations living on the fault lines?

      Then there is the fact that the year numbering scheme we are using is essentially arbitrary. The choice of beginning of the year counting was made based on a significant event (and miscalculated, but that is another can of worms) so the fact that we have some extraordinary events happening all around Y2K is more of a fluke than anything. I suspect however that if we looked carefully, we would find a number of events that were unusual occurring fairly frequently; after all, there are a large number of things that do not occur all the time but do occur occasionally.

      Basically, my take is that there is no real significance to there events other than the fact they are rare.

      --

      If it works in theory, try something else in practice.
  33. Re:I Hope This Is True by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I apologize for slandering Larry. You are correct, Larry is a fine man.

    I also apologize for not slandering Tom enough.

  34. hemos by mjankows · · Score: 2

    your unqualified?

    1. Re:hemos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His "unqualified". Or do you also suffer bad grammar and mean "You're unqualified?" ?

  35. Non-executable email viruses: memetic parasites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3
    If you've been amused to see this and other email chain-letters mutate and reproduce - propagating in spite of their bullshitical nature - you might want to look into the emerging science of memetics and how it is applied to urban legends and to chain letters .

    It is easier to understand the proliferation of messages that communicate ideas that are contrary to the intent of their proliferators (in other words, people think they're spreading legitimate information but in fact are talking crap) if you see these communications as the result of natural selection rather than conscious creation.

    It's the same principle that has allowed us to make much more sense out of the natural world by trying to understand it as the product of evolution, rather than trying to interpret it as the residue of God's Plan.

    1. Re:Non-executable email viruses: memetic parasites by Enoch+Root · · Score: 1
      I see the whole theory is based on 'natural selection'; too bad... I think these memes are created by God! God created urban legends as they are, and spread them around without altering their forms; for God's creation is perfect, and thus would not be altered!

      I mean, did you ever find urban legend fossils? Besides, we all know the Internet was created by God 2 years ago, so these urban legends and chain letters claimed to date back before 2 years ago are lies! They have been put in your mailbox to test your faith!

      Next thing we know, people will be teaching this 'religion' of memes in public schools and corrupting the nation!

      (Whew! Alright, enough sarcasm. :) Great ideas!)

    2. Re:Non-executable email viruses: memetic parasites by TheKodiak · · Score: 2

      Man, do I ever wish I could still moderate this discussion. (+1, Funny), indeed.

      --
      -=Best Viewed Using [INLINE]=-
    3. Re:Non-executable email viruses: memetic parasites by Carmody · · Score: 1

      This posting on memes contained the new adjective "bullshitical." I pray that that particular meme does not see fit to propogate.

      --
      God is real unless declared integer
  36. Virus Hoax by GeorgeH · · Score: 1

    Replying to my own post, how chic.

    According to http://ciac.llnl.gov/ciac/CIAC Hoaxes.html#elfbowling it is a hoax, and my mother can go on enjoying life to its fullest, thanks to shockwave games.
    --

    --
    Why can't I moderate something "Wrong" or at least "Grossly Misinformed"?
  37. Clearing up that absurd email by Acrodizer · · Score: 1

    Yes, it will be brighter, but only 7% brighter than when the moon is FARTHEST AWAY! Which we hardly ever see anyway. Thus it will actuallu appear about 3-4% brighter. You think you could tell the difference?

    Also it is noted that it will appear 14% "bigger", but they dont tell you bigger than what. It appear to have a suraface area 14% larger than if it were at the FARTHEST POINT AWAY from the earth. Still, this means an actually "growth" of maybe 7-8%

    Doing the math in my head an thinking its correct, this translates to AT MOST a 5% increase in the width of the moon. Again, do you think you could tell?

    It's like that psychology test where the subjects say that thier lemonade is "twice as sweet" only after 16x the amount of sweetener is added. Simply put, we wont be able to tell.

    1. Re:Clearing up that absurd email by Leto2 · · Score: 1

      The point you make about the sweetener can be related to the fact that human senses seems to be interpreted logarithmically. That's why two airplanes/vacuumers don't sound twice as loud as one (it's only 3dB more, only if the decibel level was doubled, you would think of it as twice as loud).

      --
      <grub> Reading /. at -1 is like driving through Cracktown in a convertible that is stuck in 1st
    2. Re:Clearing up that absurd email by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't how often you look at the stars but to someone that looks at them every night, yes I can tell. And the difference with the size depends on how high in the sky the moon is. The closer it is to the horizon the bigger it looks. I doubt many people will notice either of these. But don't say that you doubt people can tell. When you stare at something all the time, you are able to see the slightest changes.

    3. Re:Clearing up that absurd email by SIGFPE · · Score: 1

      "only if the decibel level was doubled, you would think of it as twice as loud" Do you have a reference for that? And don't just say "Look in any psychology book". Do you have a reference to somewhere that says explicitly that doubling the decibel level doubles apparent loudness. I for one have never compared two sounds saying one is twice as loud as another. I have simply never used the word 'twice' in this way. I really would like to know what you mean. So please give a reference.

      --
      -- SIGFPE
    4. Re:Clearing up that absurd email by Acrodizer · · Score: 1

      First of all, this issue has nothing to do with the angle of the moon. Yes, it is larger towards the horizon because of scattering of light through our atmosphere, but that is not what we mean. We mean to say that it will be 14% larger at any point in the sky if compared to itself during apogee at that same location.

      Sorry pal, I am an avid sky watcher and a meteorologist in training, and I look up now, it looks like a normal friggin moon (besides the 22 degree halo, which is a local effect caused by high atmosphere ice crystals).

      The local newsreaders are talking about how bright it is... they never look at a full moon anyways, theyll see one in 4 weeks that it the same brightness and then maybe realize that tonights is nothing special.

    5. Re:Clearing up that absurd email by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I heard there is a guy who is calculating at least 24.8% more brightness. (If you take into account the amount of water vapor and temperature present in the air that is.) In the right amounts the vapor can actually magnify the light.

    6. Re:Clearing up that absurd email by Squeak · · Score: 1

      >Only if the decibel level was doubled, you would think of it as twice as loud.

      Normal quiet conversation is generally about 60-65dB. Concorde taking off directly overhead (which is LOUD) is about 120-130dB. There is more than a factor of two here.

      A factor of 10dB is a doubling in energy and apparent volume is related to the root of the energy, so doubles with every 20dB.

      --
      This sig is a figment of your imagination.
  38. Re:Another article, better reporting than the Alma by RabidMonkey · · Score: 1

    Yaaay for Canadian news sources :) I'm waving to the Star people right now .. excellent people all of them :)

    --
    We emerge from our mother's womb an unformatted diskette; our culture formats us. - Douglas Coupland
  39. Elf Bowling: Trojan or Time Waster? by llywrch · · Score: 2

    It's a hoax. Look at

    http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/y2kga me.hoax.html

    My guess is that someone noticed that the game tries to connect to the internet when the player wants to save the high score, & assumed the worst. I've played it enough times to seriously doubt that it's a trojan -- it's just a cheesy & fun little game.

    You can also follow the thread in alt.comp.virus, too -- although last I looked it had degenerated into a flamewar.


    Geoff

    --
    I think I see a trend here. Maybe for them it really would be easier to muzzle the entire internet than to produce p
  40. Explanation by EricWright · · Score: 5

    It is a common misconception that the winter solstice is on the day that the Earth is at perihelion (closest approach to the Sun). Actually, even more common is the belief is that the winter solstice is the day that the Earth is *farthest* from the Sun, but that's another matter.

    Anyway, "Perihelion Day" is actually sometime around the second or third of January (S&T's skygazer's almanac can tell you). This puts the Earth-Moon system closest to the Sun. The closer to a luminous object you are, the more of that object's light impacts your surface.

    During a full moon, the moon is directly opposite of the Sun (from Earth's point of view). The day in which the bodies line up Sun-Earth-Moon (ie. full moon) on which the Moon subtends the largest solid angle of the Gaussian sphere centered on the Sun is on "Perihelion Day". Making the assumption that the Moon's albedo is constant (a pretty good one), this is the set of circumstances that will maximize the amount of reflected sunlight from the Lunar surface.

    Thus, I believe the guys at Sky & Tel. After all, Discover is a general science/technology magazine. S&T specialize in this stuff.

    Eric

  41. Wow! A phase of the moon bug! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More hacker folklore. http://mail-abuse.org/rbl/ - kills spammers dead http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=HLW498 - Get paid to surf

  42. SCARLET LETTER POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a Scarlet Letter Post. Please do not reply to this post anymore. This post is hereby ignored by all who care to ignore it.

    1. Re:SCARLET LETTER POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh? I don't get it?

    2. Re:SCARLET LETTER POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this was in reference to the OPEN SOURCE MOON post . . . I think.

    3. Re:SCARLET LETTER POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ignore this, you whining sausage.

  43. Re:"American Indians": A Ludicrous Myth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get a clue - Columbus did not name the New World.

    A quick trip to Encarta online verifies that:

    In 1507 a German Cartographer named Martin Waldseemüller published a map of the world, a globe, and a treatise, Introduction to Cosmography, which describes the voyages of Italian navigator Amerigo Vespucci. These works apply the name America to the newly explored lands for the first time.
  44. You're joking, right? by stand · · Score: 0

    Darkness doesn't "soak in" to anything. If I turn out the light, it doesn't gradually get darker, it just gets dark. What changes in your eyes' adaptation to the dark.

    --
    Four fifths of all our troubles in this life would disappear if we would just sit down and keep still. -C. Coolidge
    1. Re:You're joking, right? by Kvort · · Score: 1

      Main Entry: satire
      Pronunciation: 'sa-"tIr
      Function: noun
      Etymology: Middle French or Latin; Middle French, from Latin satura, satira, perhaps from (lanx) satura dish of mixed ingredients, from feminine of satur well-fed; akin to Latin satis enough -- more at
      SAD
      Date: 1501
      1 : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn
      2 : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly
      synonym see WIT


      Props to Merriam and Webster, whomever they were.

      >>>>>>>> Kvort

      --
      -Don't mind me, I'm personality-deficient and mentally-impaired.
    2. Re:You're joking, right? by Hrunting · · Score: 2

      I guess I need to continuing putting my disclaimer on my posts ...

      NOTE: This post not for the humor (or humour) impaired

      And now, to bring this slightly back on topic ...

      "Hehe .. he said 'moon'."

  45. Still worked for me! :) by KlomDark · · Score: 1

    I'm glad I didn't get this news any sooner! I talked my wife into letting me open my Christmas present, a Meade DS 114 EC, early, so I'd have time to assemble and get used to using it, before the 22nd! So it wasn't all a loss! (Although she may make me pack it back up now :( )

    1. Re:Still worked for me! :) by iMoron · · Score: 2

      Even though the moon won't look much brighter than normal tomorrow night, it'll still be a good time to look at it through a telescope because it's a full moon at its perigee, so you'll be able to see an entire side and it'll be closer to Earth than it usually is. It's a good excuse not to pack it up. :)

  46. Microsoft?! LOL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Do you have any idea what sort of Human Resources policies are maintained by the Microsoft Corporation? Gay-friendly, multicultural, pure Liberal garbage. Gates in his charitable donations tirelessly supports "progressive" (read: LIBERAL) causes. It was recently announced that Microsoft's dictionary will support different "versions" (read: illiterate nonstandard dialects) of the English language in different localities. Microsoft is one of the most aggressively and destructively liberal forces in our society today. They spend more to support the Homosexual Agenda than all the other Liberals combined.

    It doesn't take much brains to see that your little "encyclopedia entry" is an Orwellian propagandistic whitewash. I, for one, am not fooled.


    1. Re:Microsoft?! LOL! by kerouac · · Score: 1

      I never thought i'd have to physically stoop to
      reply to a comment, but here I am...

      Well, as much as I despise Microsoft, I have to
      say that Encarta Online is no great tome of facts, but it sure beats the comic books that you've been using for reference.

      Grow up, stop whining, and try not to shoot yourself in the foot with that gun of yours. They are for responsible adults, not wanna-be adolescents, junior.

      I think you really are gay, and just can't stand the truth about yourself. Why else would someone
      be so vitriolic about something that has nothing to do with thier own sexual preferences?

      Just a straight person's perspective of your post.

      Oh yeah... your REAL daddy is black. Hope it hurts.

    2. Re:Microsoft?! LOL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does this mean that I have to start liking the Evil Empire? Sigh.......

  47. Re:"American Indians": A Ludicrous Myth by AugstWest · · Score: 1

    Holy mother of God, what did you do to so totally lose your sense of humor?

  48. syzgy xyzzy! by M.+Piedlourd · · Score: 3

    Not since 1866 have a full moon, the winter solstice, and lunar perigee been bunched so closely in time, within ten hours of each other. The Earth, the sun, and the moon will be in a straight line and the moon will be in perigee, circumstances that produce the highest tides.

    The situation is called a perigean syzgy, and it has dramatically affected weather patterns in coastal areas in the past. Storms that reach the coast during these times of unusually high tides have been known to cause sizable storm surges.

    But it'll still be pretty bright...

    1. Re:syzgy xyzzy! by thelonius · · Score: 1

      first of all, it's "syzygy", not "syzgy". and second of all, the situation won't be a syzygy, think about it: there are only two ways for the earth, sun, and moon to be in a straight line:

      sun, moon, earth - this is a solar eclipse.
      sun, earth, moon - this is a new moon, not a full one (on the moon side of the earth).

  49. Whine and cheese by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    1999-12-20 17:20:11 Big moon myth sweeps Internet (articles,news) (rejected)

    I guess I am not good enough.

  50. You won't be laughing for long. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    When the Federal Agents come to herd you and all your neighbors into a detention camp on New Years Day, you won't be laughing so hard any more.

    I advise you to forget your "sense of humor" and prepare to defend your rights with lethal force. That is, if you are a man and not a mindless hermaphroditic scavenger of garbage.


    1. Re:You won't be laughing for long. by ender- · · Score: 1
      That is, if you are a man and not a mindless hermaphroditic scavenger of garbage.

      Be careful. In these 'politically correct' times, you might get sued by a union of hermaphroditic garbagemen. Or you may have insulted a large number of low IQ, sexually redundant racoons.

      You never know. Stranger stuff has happened.

      Ender

  51. "...That big fiery thing in the sky." by Guppy · · Score: 1

    "That must be the Daystar. I've heard talk about it." :)

  52. Re:I'm so alone... no just isolated by passion · · Score: 1

    you're on the wrong geek mailing lists is all. You don't hear about the latest-and-greatest things that either are ripped off of /. or will shortly appear there.

    the lists that it sounds like you're on are the lists populated by people who probably aren't terribly computer literate, and so when they see some junk mail having to do with computers, they forward it on to you... their "computer" friend.

    This tendency is much like the "Computers for Dummies" x-mas gift that was fronted on earlier.

    --
    - passion
  53. Another Myth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What about the other Millenium astronomy myth? Namely: on May 5th 2000 the planets will all line up and destroy the earth. Well guess what? It bogus as well. www.relativedata.com has a nice shareware planetarium software that I like. You can see this alleged "lining up" and it's nowhere near a straight line. I think Sky & Telescope debunked this pretty well by showing that there have been half a dozen times in the last couple of centuries that we've had a tighter line up and we will on 5/5/2000 Remember about a year ago when the news was reporting that all the visible planets were "lining up" in the sky for a once in a lifetime event? Think about that folks: If they all orbit in essentially the same plane then they're ALWAYS in a straight line arn't they? The real story was that the planets were in the same part of the sky at the same time such that right after sunset you could see Mercury, Venus, Earth (look straight down for that one), Mars, Saturn and Jupiter. But then again, I'm too old to expect accuracy from the media. Rant off.

  54. YOU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    STUPID SPAMMER

  55. HAHA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HAHAHhehe.. I was a big space 1999 fan myself! good one

  56. Jeez.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..The planets line up fairly 'often', actually.

  57. A bright moon. Whoop-dee-doo. by Lurker187 · · Score: 3
    "To the average person, it's just going to be another full moon," said Bob Bonadurer, director of the Minneapolis Planetarium.

    That is from an excellent debunking and explanation of this e-mail, which can be found here, at the Urban Legends Reference Pages, an excellent source of well-researched debunking. (I was a couple of days shy of being the first one to debunk the violent kangaroo myth.)

    Apparently, the last time the moon was at perigee during the full moon was...last month. It just wasn't the solstice.

    Like I said, whoop. Dee. Doo. (I'll have to at least take a look anyway...I actually set my alarm to get up in the middle of the night to watch the Leonid meteor shower, which turned out to be a total bust.)

    --
    [command INSERTWITTYQUIP failed: insufficient wit]
  58. Re:well now!!!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huh?

  59. Fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aboriginal Americans. Stick that in your bong and smoke it!

  60. And sun is not "big firey thing". Fire==O2 combust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fire and burning are what happens when things react quickly with oxygen. The sun a big hot ball of gas with some fusion happening toward the center.

  61. You fail to grasp what I'm saying. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    There are no "aboriginal Americans". There never were any. I don't care what you call them. They are, and always have been, imaginary. This continent was totally uninhabited when the first Europeans arrived. You're such a mindlessly deluded and misled liberal pawn that you compulsively believe any Victim Story that you're fed. Naturally you never question them. Just as naturally, they're all absurd lies invented to cheat true Americans of their birthright.


    1. Re:You fail to grasp what I'm saying. by kerouac · · Score: 1

      wow. i guess you never went to a museum of history. (can you spell history?)

      If what you say is true, please cite a source that says that where these treaties got signed and why all these people are on reservations.

      I'm really curious.

    2. Re:You fail to grasp what I'm saying. by EyesOfNostradamus · · Score: 1
      > This continent was totally uninhabited when the first Europeans arrived

      You mean, in the tenth century, when the Vikings arrived? (who incidentally "discovered" America long before Chris Columbus did).

    3. Re:You fail to grasp what I'm saying. by kerouac · · Score: 1

      could you please tell me how you came to this conclusion? Most of the world likes accountability
      (i understand how this concept is lost on cowards), so how did you stumble upon this fact?

      If i'm brainwashed, then show me how the brainwashing was done. How did they get all these people onto reservations ( long before 1963 )?

    4. Re:You fail to grasp what I'm saying. by Super_Frosty · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, the Vikings were from Europe. :P

      --
      No comment at this time
  62. Moon cycles by Foogle · · Score: 5
    Actually, I'm at the UC San Diego talking to Professor Jakobson right now. He's the head of the astronomy department here, and tells me that the moon tomorrow will, in fact, be naked and petrifiend. There is also a slight chance that it may pour scolding-hot grits down it's pants. The Romans first witnessed this event and called it "Natalie Portman" -- today we know it as "Meept".

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

    1. Re:Moon cycles by Bombcar · · Score: 1

      And the Ptolemic epicycle for hot grits has the ratio of a point to the Bombcar. So what?
      http://www.bombcar.com It's where it is at.

    2. Re:Moon cycles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Had this been posted by an AC, it surely would have been moderated to -1, Troll.

    3. Re:Moon cycles by Foogle · · Score: 1
      Yeah, I actually was afraid of that, but hey, whatever :)

      -----------

      "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

    4. Re:Moon cycles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but Aristotle refuts you thusly: "Shutup Bombcar Kid. I'm jealous of your incandescent lights!"

  63. Re:Ven. floods fyi(off topic) by mackga · · Score: 1

    My ex-wife is from La Giuia (sp) where the airport was, and she has family there. East of the airport is gone - period. Catia La Mar is better (west of the airport), her brother is there and is realtively in one piece but w/o electricity. If your friends are in Caracas and staying anywhere away from the hills, they should be okay. It's a real mess there though. Road from the airport to Caracas is out, all the ranchos that surround the city are just gone. They do have some phone service and some 'net connections, but it's going to be bad for a while. I didn't hear how the airport fared, but my guess is that it's in pretty bad shape.

    --

    "shop smart:shop s-mart" ash

  64. About 7% brighter by staplin · · Score: 1

    This morning during my commute to work, the manager for the observatory at the University of Colorado was interviewed on the KBCO morning show. The observatory manager said that the moon should be approximately 7% brighter than average this solstice. A little bit brighter, but you probably won't notice unless you regularly track the moon.

    1. Re:About 7% brighter by Micah · · Score: 1

      I certainly noticed and I don't "track the moon". Actually it's amazing that it's visible at all. Washington State decided to clear up a bit for a couple days. :-)

  65. Re:Milleniophobia!!! [Fun math for millenianuts!] by Pont · · Score: 1

    MilleniumNut: The world is coming to the end!

    SanePerson: Why?

    MilleniumNut: Because it's the millenium, dude!

    SanePerson: And what does that have to do with it?

    MilleniumNut: It's been 2000 years since the birth of Christ!!!! ...and the Bible says quite clearly (when translated by babelfish from it's original text scanned in with a very bad OCR program and a lousy scanner) that the world is going to end 2000 years after the birth of Christ!!!!!

    SanePerson: Oh, well, did you know that the monk who calculated Jesus' birthday made a mistake and it was later calculated that his real birthday was around 3 or 4 B.C. That would mean that 1996 or 1997 was 2000 years after the birth of Christ. It doesn't appear that the world ended a few years ago.

    MilleniumNut: Well, there's going to be a really big Ricky Martin concert!!!!!!

    SanePerson: OK, that could cause the end of the world. I'll give you that one.

  66. Signing away your worldly belongings... by EyesOfNostradamus · · Score: 3

    Strange that you mention this. During the solar eclipse last summer, there was that bizarre cult built around a strange piece of computer software. The members of this cult did exactly that: many signed away most of their life savings to an obscure startup in North Carolina. Some even got upset when said startup wouldn't accept their pagan gifts.

  67. End of days or conspiracy theory? by stand · · Score: 1

    Isn't it interesting how the poster accepts the fact that the original story was wrong, but then latches onto the newly found facts to justify the end of days theory. Sure it's coincidental. Cool!

    He ignores the fact that rare events occur all the time. Selection bias and our natural propensity to locate patterns causes some people to cluster them around seemingly significant events. Yes there will be a close alignment of planets on May 5 next year, but close alignments of planets occur every year to varying degrees. Why is May 5 significant, anyway? Wouldn't January 1 be a better date for a planetary alignment signaling the end of days? What about the rare catastrophic hurricane in Central America that occured last year, or the impact event in Siberia back in 1907? Or how about that ham sandwich I had for lunch yesterday? What do these and other rare events portend?

    The significance of the impending turning of the celestial odometer is the result of a largely arbitrary decision made in the 16th century by the Roman Catholic church that (correctly) saw the need to standardize the calendar. They no more knew the exact date of Jesus' birth than you or I do. Oh yeah, there's also our long held custom of using a base 10 numerical system. That plays a part.

    If we had 8 fingers instead of 10, we'd be celebrating the year 3720.

    --
    Four fifths of all our troubles in this life would disappear if we would just sit down and keep still. -C. Coolidge
    1. Re:End of days or conspiracy theory? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He ignores the fact that rare events occur all the time.

      What on Earth? Rare events happen "all the time?" This makes no sense whatsoever. If they happen "all the time", then they cannot be rare (by definition!) What I'm talking about here is a conglomeration of these rare events all in a very small time frame. To ascribe this to chance is nothing short of pure, unadulterated lunacy.

      Why is May 5 significant, anyway?

      What sort of mind-altering inhalants have you been gorging yourself on? How is it significant, indeed. 5/5? 5/5? This doesn't strike you as at least a little bit coincidental? The chances of such a planterary alignment are already slim, but when you contrast that against the chances of a date with the same day and month number, it becomes astronomical. Take the already rare alignment event and fit it into a date event that happens only twelve times out of 365 days. Yeah, that's coincidence. Must be.

      Wouldn't January 1 be a better date for a planetary alignment signaling the end of days?

      Who are you to question the judgement of the Lord?

      Or how about that ham sandwich I had for lunch yesterday?

      I knew it. You, sir, are a damned sandwich-eating liberal. And you're the worst kind .. a ham sandwich-eating liberal. Pardon me, but you have lost all credibility with me. This dialogue can serve no further purpose.

    2. Re:End of days or conspiracy theory? by Kvort · · Score: 1

      He ignores the fact that rare events occur all the time.

      Rare events are common?

      *rotf*

      Not only is that the funniest thing I have ever read, but its also very Zen.

      I will remember this for the rest of my life, or at least until I fall asleep tonight.

      >>>>>>>>>> Kvort

      --
      -Don't mind me, I'm personality-deficient and mentally-impaired.
    3. Re:End of days or conspiracy theory? by TheGreek · · Score: 2
      Yes there will be a close alignment of planets on May 5 next year, but close alignments of planets occur every year to varying degrees. Why is May 5 significant, anyway?

      Ask any Mexican astronomer and he'll tell you. :P

    4. Re:End of days or conspiracy theory? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rare events do occur all the time.
      Let's suppose you threw a ball and it landed 7.913847218374218347459174592358972375 metres away from you (approximately). There's an extremely small chance that a ball would fly that far. In fact, statisticians would probably call that probability zero. Yet when you throw the ball, an approximately impossible event occurs. People are throwing balls and doing all sorts of things all over the world. Rare things are happening all the time.
      It is extremely difficult to win the lottery. I've heard it said (though I can't confirm it) that there is a greater probability of getting hit by lightning twice than winning the lottery. Yet people win the lottery all the time. Rare things are happening all the time.
      Take a look at your average day. What is the probably of knocking over your glass of orange juice in the morning? What is the probably of starting your car at between 7:13:53.17841247128755 and 7:13.53.17841247128756? What is the probability your friend saying the exact words he did in a conversation with you? What is the probability of the voltage to your house averaging 0.0193485V lower than it did yesterday? Yet all of these seemingly impossible things happened in a single day, in addition to literally infinitely more. Rare things are happening all the time.
      What is the chance of getting shot? Hundreds get shot every day. What is the chance of starving to death? Millions do every day. Hopefully you get my point. Rare events do indeed occur all the time.

    5. Re:End of days or conspiracy theory? by Kvort · · Score: 1

      *Sigh...*

      You're taking all the fun out of it.

      To use your example: Winning the lottery.

      The odds of winning the lottery are high. Lets assume that the odds if winning the jackpot if you play one set of numbers, is one in a million. That's pretty rare. Now, if one million people play the jackpot, then the odds that SOMEONE will win the jackpot are 1 in 1. Not very rare. The reason why the odds increase is because you've COMPLETELY CHANGED THE PROBLEM.

      Are you following this? Odds of X happening for each element in set Y: 1 in a million. Cardinality of Y: 1 million. Odds of X happening once in the set of Y: One in one. They are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PROBLEMS.

      I would draw you a Venn diagram, but I'm really pretty much done flaming you now. Sorry for the hostility, but I sort of needed to vent. :)

      >>>>>>>>>>>> Kvort, Lord High Peanut of Krondor

      --
      -Don't mind me, I'm personality-deficient and mentally-impaired.
    6. Re:End of days or conspiracy theory? by cananian · · Score: 1

      I'll give him a hint: why would a close alignment of planets on July 4 be interesting?

      --
      [ /. is too noisy already -- who needs a .sig? ]
    7. Re:End of days or conspiracy theory? by toast0 · · Score: 1

      alas, you're rounding, and measuring with imprecise measurement devices

      through a rather long stream of logic, it can be shown that there is a 0 probability of picking an algebraic number* at random... yet your measurements are all in algebraic numbers, other than the discrete ones (people getting shot, people dieing, etc) i highly doubt your measurement devices are precise enough to say without a shadow of a doubt that your numbers are algebraic rather than trancendental.


      *algebraic numbers are those that are the roots of polynomial equations with integer coeffectients, all others are trancedental.


  68. You're a flake by scheming+daemons · · Score: 2

    Why don't you go hide in the woods with the other nuts and eat your K-rations. The rest of us will live our lives realizing that there is no special significance to the year 2000. Keep in mind that: A. historians are in universal agreement that Jesus of Nazereth was NOT born 2000 years ago...but somewhere between 2002 and 2006 years ago. The bible says he was born during the reign of Herod...and Herod died 2002 years ago. So we already passed the 2000th anniversary of his birth. B. It is only the year 2000 for Christians. It is 57??-something for Jews and god-knows-what for the Chinese. For more than half of the world's population this year has no significance whatsoever. Christians like yourself have such a Christian-centric view of the world that they have lost their ability to think rationally. Hell....half the Christians I know think it's blasphemy to say that Jesus was a non-white Jew. The 'events' that you are giving such significance to are no more prevalent this year than in years past...you are just noticing them more because you are a flaky religious nut who has been looking for signs of the apocalypse ever since the day you were "born-again".
    -----------------------------------

    --
    "I have as much authority as the pope, I just
    don't have as many people who believe it" - George Carlin

    1. Re:You're a flake by gothyk · · Score: 1
      "So we already passed the 2000th anniversary of his birth."

      First of all, the original Anonymous Coward never claimed nor alluded to the idea that Jesus of Nazareth was born exactly 2000 years ago. You are stereotyping Christians by assuming that we all believe Christ was born 2000 years ago.

      "...historians are in universal agreement that Jesus of Nazereth was NOT born 2000 years ago...but somewhere between 2002 and 2006 years ago."

      You are correct when you say that Christ was born during the reign of Herod but be careful when you reference "historians" and in particular when you say that they are in "universal agreement". I'm willing to bet that they are not in "universal agreement". These historians of yours, were they secular Generalists or did any specialize in Bible History? How unbiased were these historians (either secular or non-secular) in presenting their arguments? Also, you might want to consider the evidence offered by Biblical Archaeologists (not specifically to the Birth of Christ, but in support of Bible history in general)

      "Christians like yourself have such a Christian-centric view of the world that they have lost their ability to think rationally"

      Hmmm...seemed like Anonymous Coward was thinking fairly rationally to me...I may not agree with all of his statements but he provided his hypothesis and supported it to the best of his ability. Seems rational. Are you sure that you did not mean to say "Christians do not think like I do so they must not be thinking rationally." Also...as often as you may say that I, or any other Christian for that matter, may have a Christ-centered view I can say that you have a Non-Christ-centered view. Of course, as a Christian, my viewpoint, and the viewpoint of Anonymous Coward, is Christ-centered. The worldview of any individual who holds to a system of belief (or unbelief) is going to be molded by that faith. Its called a Paradigm...

      "Hell....half the Christians I know think it's blasphemy to say that Jesus was a non-white Jew"

      Well...maybe you are talking to the wrong Christians? Not only that, but, and I mean no offense to my Christian brothers and sisters out there...but not all of us are right. The Bible tells us that "Many will be called, few will be chosen". The best answer I can give you is to read your Bible with an open-mind and an open-heart and see what you find there (I, for one, know that Jesus of Nazareth was, in fact, a Jew of the lineage of Abraham, Father of the Israelites and David, King of Israel -- his lineage is layed out at the beginning of the Gospel of Matthew)

      Christians are not infallible. We don't claim to be...in fact, as a Christian I admit that I fail too often and it is for that reason that I cling to Christ as my Savior. I'm not so egotistic as to assume that I have all the answers...so, on that, I would ask you the question: What if you are wrong?

      Our Bible tells us that we are living in the Last Days but it does not tell us from whose perspective those Last Days are. From the perspective of an immortal, omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent God, a few millenium is NOTHING...so over the last two thousand years maybe all of us have been right. Our Bible also tells us that Christ will return at a time that we know not... He'll come back when we least expect him and are not really looking for him (just the way he came -- that's why the Jews did not and do not (with the exception, I think, of the Messianic Jews) consider Jesus to have been their Messiah). Could be this year...could be next...could be 1000 years from now...we don't know.

      "...you are a flaky religious nut who has been looking for signs of the apocalypse ever since the day you were 'born-again'."

      And you, sir, with all due respect, are a religious bigot who should not throw about opinion as if it were fact! Remember, sir, that the Theory of Evolution.... is just a theory.

      My goal is not to incite a flame war here...just to express a point of view and to challenge readers to provide constructive, supported responses or to at least point individuals in the right direction.

      Constructive responses are always welcomed. Flames will be summarily trashed.

    2. Re:You're a flake by scheming+daemons · · Score: 1

      "So we already passed the 2000th anniversary of his birth."

      First of all, the original Anonymous Coward never claimed nor alluded to the idea that Jesus of Nazareth was born exactly 2000 years ago. You are stereotyping Christians by assuming that we all believe Christ was born 2000 years ago.


      The original poster gave credence to the "coincidences" that occuring around the year 2000 based on his Christian belief that we are in the end of times. So yes....I dont think it is a stretch to say he is basing his "theories" on the idea that we are celebrating Christ's 2000th birthday this year.

      "Christians like yourself have such a Christian-centric view of the world that they have lost their ability to think rationally"

      Hmmm...seemed like Anonymous Coward was thinking fairly rationally to me...I may not agree with all of his statements but he provided his hypothesis and supported it to the best of his ability. Seems rational. Are you sure that you did not mean to say "Christians do not think like I do so they must not be thinking rationally." Also...as often as you may say that I, or any other Christian for that matter, may have a Christ-centered view I can say that you have a Non-Christ-centered view. Of course, as a Christian, my viewpoint, and the viewpoint of Anonymous Coward, is Christ-centered. The worldview of any individual who holds to a system of belief (or unbelief) is going to be molded by that faith. Its called a Paradigm...


      The original poster was a lot of things, but one of them was NOT rational. Sorry, but a person who puts undue religious signifigance on astrological events that have been precisely predicted for decades (based on astral maps and scientific study) is not thinking rationally. He's thinking like a cult member who has no ability to process events rationally. He's another wacko who, in the days before the internet, would be on the street corner carrying a sign saying "the end is near!" There are Muslim wackos, Jewish wackos, Christian wackos, and athiest wackos....he's a wacko.

      "Hell....half the Christians I know think it's blasphemy to say that Jesus was a non-white Jew"

      Well...maybe you are talking to the wrong Christians? Not only that, but, and I mean no offense to my Christian brothers and sisters out there...but not all of us are right. The Bible tells us that "Many will be called, few will be chosen". The best answer I can give you is to read your Bible with an open-mind and an open-heart and see what you find there (I, for one, know that Jesus of Nazareth was, in fact, a Jew of the lineage of Abraham, Father of the Israelites and David, King of Israel -- his lineage is layed out at the beginning of the Gospel of Matthew)


      "half" may have been high. But I know lots of Christians who are offended by art that portrays Jesus as a person of color.

      "...you are a flaky religious nut who has been looking for signs of the apocalypse ever since the day you were 'born-again'."

      And you, sir, with all due respect, are a religious bigot who should not throw about opinion as if it were fact! Remember, sir, that the Theory of Evolution.... is just a theory.


      I never made any statement with regards to Evolution. Interesting comment you made there.

      My goal is not to incite a flame war here...just to express a point of view and to challenge readers to provide constructive, supported responses or to at least point individuals in the right direction.

      There is nothing "constructive" about idiots like the original poster who scream "The sky is falling! The end is near!" every time the slightest world incident occurs. He is the typical lost Christian who looks for signs of the apocalypse within normal everyday events. He thinks he is part of some lucky 144,000 who will ascend into heaven after the "rapture" since he claims to be "born again".

      I wonder....what are all the wacky fatalist Christian nuts going to do a year from now when they realize that the world DIDN'T end? Will they wonder what Pat Robertson did with their hard-earned money?

      I feel sorry for these people....you may not be one of them, but the original poster was. The arrogance to say "I am not afraid, because my soul is prepared!". Ranks right up there with tripe like "Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven."

      I'd like every Christian who thinks like the original poster to put their money where their mouth is: Send all your money to a worthy charity since you won't need it after you ascend into heaven during the "rapture" in two weeks.


      -----------------------------------

      --
      "I have as much authority as the pope, I just
      don't have as many people who believe it" - George Carlin

  69. Of course not... by Tower · · Score: 4

    Photons are just a fake concept to hide the truth from the common man. Light is just the absence of dark. Dark is spread by sub-atomic particles called "darktrons", and the effects you observe are easily explained. What we know as "lights" are really only darktron suckers. They remove the darktrons in a straight line from where they are. This is why you can put a piece of wood between you and the "light", and it is darker on your side - you are creating a dam for the darktrons. The "bending of light" effect is also explained by darktrons. The sucking power of these "lights" (notably the Sun) is strong enough to even pull some darktrons from around corners, which creates an slightly curvi-linear pattern. This is just another conspiracy by "The Man" and his white-lab-coated minions to deprive us all of the truth!!!

    So his comment about dark "soaking in" is perfectly ok - since the darktrons take time to replenish - in super slow motion you can actually see the dark making its way back towards the "light"... foolish mortals

    8^)

    --
    "It's tough to be bilingual when you get hit in the head."
    1. Re:Of course not... by GMontag · · Score: 1

      At long last! Someone has seen the conspiracy of geo-national physics
      that I saw years ago but I was too intimidated by the man to speak up
      .

      Now, onward unto my chillodynamics research with antiheat.

  70. Of brightness and magnitude by Zombieman · · Score: 3

    Yes, the moon will be 20% brighter than it has been in the last 60-odd years. This would be all the more interesting if the human eye reacted to light linearly, rather than logarithmically. (1/5th brighter... wow! Right? nope...)

    The moon has a "normal" magnitude (estimated brightness the eye perceives) of about -16.9 (the smaller the number, the brighter the object; the sun is magnitude -26.8).

    Increasing that by 20% - heck, let's be generous, 30% - gives us a difference in magnitude of roughly .3 (mA - mB = - 2.5 log (IA/IB)).

    So the apparent change in the moon's brightness - in its magnitude - will be from -16.9 to -17.2. This difference IS linear, so I'll let you do the math - not one heck of a difference, and not really enough to be seen with the naked eye.

    Just thought I'd clarify :-)

    1. Re:Of brightness and magnitude by Steve+Bergman · · Score: 1

      Does anyone else think that it is interresting that the number 10 comes up in so many facets of human anatomy and physiology? Ten fingers, ten toes, hearing and brightness sensitivity on a log10 scale. Probably coincidental, but interresting. Anyone know how close to true log10 these senses are? Also I would be curious about any info on the sensitivity curve for other senses.

      -Steve

    2. Re:Of brightness and magnitude by toast0 · · Score: 1

      i'm pretty sure log10 was just used as the scale for brightness because it was convienent....

      possible bs:
      if you graph the logN(x) without the lines indicating the x and output numbers, you'll notice its impossible to tell what N you're using.....

  71. Let's have a Rapture Pool! by Royster · · Score: 2

    Everybody put in everything that they own and the ones that don't get raptured get to split the pot.

    If you ask me, I'm not gullible enough to believe that all of this is some sort of fantastically remote coincidence. Absolutely not. The end times were prophesied ages ago, and I firmly believe that we are living in them.

    Really, people have been convinced that they're in the End Times in every generation for way more than 2,000 years. The "signs" you point to are just coincidences. An arbitrary number of "unusual" events will occur within any arbitrary time span if you have enough potential "unusual" events to choose from. Earthquakes, mudslides and random celestial events happen all of the time. Remember Odd Day?

    --
    I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
  72. In that case, I will shoot them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Sick mutants may not interefere with the right of a Free Man to speak his mind. Natural Law endows me with the right to defend my views with lethal force. This I shall do.

    I thank you for your timely warning.


  73. the joys of friends and co-workers by LadyNymphaea · · Score: 1

    I've received the moon one twice on mailing lists, and my co-worker keeps trying to send me Elf Bowling. She got the virus hoax letter and got real worried. I knew it was fake but didn't bother to tell her. I thought it served her right for running binaries from goodness-knows-where. I got kicked off a mailing list once for having the nerve to post links to urban-legend debunking sites after the 4th or 5th ill-considered chain mail. I hate chain mail on mailing lists. The Net won't collapse from Y2K, it will be from all the darn chain mail and forwards...

  74. It's all imaginary. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Treaties? Reservations? Pure nonsense. A made-up story. I read Dune, too. Are you going to tell me that that book is the truth? Obviously not. Anybody can make up a story.


    1. Re:It's all imaginary. by kerouac · · Score: 1

      and the people on the reservations? I live near one, please don't tell me that they are holograms.

      btw, i haven't seen you cite any sources to convince me that you aren't just making this up.

      care to enlighten me with these great texts that I haven't come across?

  75. nitpickers.. by kevcol · · Score: 1

    God-damnable eggheads with their facts and figures, but do any of them really know how to feel anything!?

  76. Driving by the light of the full moon by scruffy · · Score: 1
    Actually, you can.

    One night some years ago, there was a full moon on Halloween. I and two other teenage hooligans went driving around in the country turning a bunch of mailboxes 180 degrees. [Why? Because they were there.] I assure you that the full moon was more than bright enough to see where you were going.

  77. Astrophoto opportunity by B.D.Mills · · Score: 2

    There is one thing that the full moon at perigee provides, and that is an opportunity to photograph the full moon when it appears at its largest in the sky. Then the same photographic arrangement can be used in six months to capture the full moon at close to its smallest in the sky. If you then place the two photographs together side-by-side, the 10% size difference between the perigee full moon and the apogee full moon will be noticeable.

    --

    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
    1. Re:Astrophoto opportunity by toast0 · · Score: 1

      If you take the same pictures a few minutes from each other, one with use of the zoom lens, and one without, you will notice the same difference


      depending on what objects you have in your field of camera though, you may notice theres a size difference in those too, and then you would be found out to be a fraud :)

  78. SANDWICHES, God damn you, sir, God DAMN, you, sir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Sandwiches, as I say, are in innovation in technology which is blessed in the eyes of the LORD.

    And may ye rot in hell, and the Judges annoint thee with polo mallets for thy impertinense and thy aroma.

  79. Oops, dammit: "impertinence" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    The LORD failed to guide my hands as I typed. I must therefore atone.


  80. thank you!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    problem is, nobody will take you seriously. I was listening one afternoon to the gordon liddy radio show and he had a guest on that spent about an hour or so talking about how the liberals did stuff like this. it was back in the sixties, I think it was at berkeley or one of those other liberal liberal places .. they got together and decided that children would have to be taught certain things if they were going to grow up to be liberals. this whole native american thing is one of the things that they came up with. it's a bigger fraud than evolution. its also interesting to note that it was about this time that the liberals kicked GOD out of the schools to. the negative repsonse to your post only goes to show that they succeeded in their fight. *sigh*

  81. Inconsistent? by mmmmbeer · · Score: 1

    The 1912 event is undoubtedly the real winner, because it happened on the very day the Earth was closest to the Sun that year. However, according to a calculation by Belgian astronomer Jean Meeus, the full Moon on January 4, 1912, was only 0.24 magnitude (about 25 percent) brighter than an "average" full Moon.

    Call me an uninformed yokel if I'm wrong, but isn't Dec. 21/22 the day the Earth is closest to the Sun? I thought that was one of the main things about this so-called brightest moon. Sounds to me like the full moon in 1912 happened a couple of weeks later.

    1. Re:Inconsistent? by neopenguin · · Score: 1
      You are an uninformed yokel!

      Perihelion does not fall on the Solstice

      Lots of people believe that it does, but that just doesn't make it so...
  82. YOU ARE A PIECE OF SH*T by copal7 · · Score: 2

    how typical of a rich suburban porch honky to proclaim that we do not and never have existed...and do so as an "anonymous coward".

    more apropriately, you should have posted as "INSECURE WHITE BITCH".

    i knew once i saw this irrelevant story & it's mention of my people that some little culturally-deprived BOAT PERSON would try, yet again, to convince the world that we never existed so that YOU DON'T HAVE TO ACCEPT THE FACT THAT YOU ARE NOT NATIVE TO THIS CONTINENT. "scientists" have been trying for decades to convince the world to believe in the theory that we 'migrated' to this continent centuries ago from asia. too bad that theory is a load of shit. try reading "red earth, white lies" by vine deloria & you might start *admitting* that you've been lyed to all of your life, instead of passing on the tradition. your boat people predecessors came to this country to seek religious & political freedom from the cesspool that europe had become - even your history books don't deny that fact; but what happened was that they choose to persecute OUR ways of life. never mind the fact that the basic concepts of the u.s. constitution, which "give" you your way of life to this day, were based on the ideals of the iroquois. you can also forget the fact that if it weren't for MY PEOPLE, you wouldn't BE HERE...THAT'S WHY "THANKSGIVING" EXISTS: BECAUSE THE 'PILGRIMS' WERE ALMOST DEAD FROM STARVATION AND COULD NOT FIGURE OUT HOW TO OBTAIN FOOD WITH OUT DOMESTICATED ANIMALS AND LABORED CROPS...but we helped them.

    only to have them turn on us and act like we never existed.

    it's people like you that that this world would be better without. i try as hard as i can to see others as *people*, not *skin*. but when i hear sheltered ignorance spewed out as if it were fact, i cannot help but to lash out.

    maybe i shouldn't, though. after all- you really just are another pathetic product of what uncle sam wants you to be. of course there is barely any mention of us in your history books. why would he want you to know that this country was founded on theft, deceit, murder, rape, greed and corruption? we *all* know that that is exactly what runs the country today, but you never hear the government (in any form) admitting it, do you? no. so why is it so hard for you to realize that while society has made great advances, human nature never changes? those that kill and steal to gain power are not going to admit to the uninvolved (the little people- like you & me) that they ever did so.

    put down "the white man's bible" and pick up any book by vine deloria. pick up "bury my heart at wounded knee" by dee brown. read "in the spirit of crazy horse" by peter mattiessen. but i must warn you: you just might end up being ashamed of what you stand for right now. because you'll actually learn some of the brutal truth about "how the west was won", and how my people were slaughtered so that yours could fill thier pockets with yellow metal.

    ...now back to my hacking.

    --
    @end

    big boys use bsd.
    1. Re:YOU ARE A PIECE OF SH*T by LRJ · · Score: 1

      I'm totally with you on your rant. The Anglo/Saxon (which I have more than a little in my blood) and their religions have done more harm to this planet, and it's other inhabitants, than they will ever admit to (if they admit any) - and they show no signs of stopping. I have also never read the books you mention (though I plan on looking for them), but I do have one question - in reference to this line from your post:

      "scientists" have been trying for decades to convince the world to believe in the theory that we 'migrated' to this continent centuries ago from asia

      Why is it not possible that your people migrated to this continent as well (albiet much earlier than others)?

      --
      LRJ
    2. Re:YOU ARE A PIECE OF SH*T by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another good book on how the "Euroman" seems to destroy everything he touches is Iceman Inheritance: Prehistoric Sources of Western Man's Racism, Sexism and Aggression. Dam!! maybe y'all should let another race try running the world.

      P.S. and all the flames in the world can't rewrite his-story
    3. Re:YOU ARE A PIECE OF SH*T by LRJ · · Score: 1

      I don't think any race should run the world - let nature run the world. It did a fine job for many millions of years before we were here and it might take a while to get back on track, but I'm sure it will do a fine job once we're gone also.

      --
      LRJ
  83. No, you mindless liberal, 03718 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    1999 == 03717
    2000 == 03718

    And as any Christian knows without having to be told, octal contants are preceded by a leading zero so the compiler knows what it's looking at, just as hex constants are preceded by 0x.

    Your ignorance reveals you as the fool you are.


  84. Re:In that case, I will shoot them. [REALLY?!] by copal7 · · Score: 1

    WHY ARE ALL OF YOU PUSSIES POSTING ANONYMOUSLY IF YOU ARE SO READY TO DEFEND YOUR VIEWS WITH "LETHAL FORCE"?

    YOU HAVE NO GUNS. YOU HAVE NO BALLS. YOU HAVE NO PURPOSE.

    --
    @end

    big boys use bsd.
  85. They are figments of your brainwashed imagination. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    care to enlighten me with these great texts that I haven't come across?

    Texts? What texts? I am telling you about the absence of accurate or reliable texts which describe the bizarre fantasies in which you place such faith.


  86. Moonseroid by brettperson · · Score: 1

    I'm starting the net.rumor that the moon is going to collide with the Earth sometime tomorrow. This will , In addition to causing really big tides, also eliminate all the y2k problems we'll be facing in a little over a week. :-)

    I've pointed out to a few people that if NASA and astronomers knew this was going to happen they wouldnt tell the general population for fear of panic. :-)
    Love to scare the shit out of people. I think I was born to do this. :-)

    I'm so evil.

  87. Re:*sigh* christians by TheGreek · · Score: 2
    why didn't Hitler wipe out these goddamned xians off the face of the planet? fuck these bible fuckers.

    Probably because he was too busy going after the Jews. He was a "Christian" too, you know. He did, AFAIK, also persecute/imprison/kill a good amount of Catholics, but nowhere near the scale to which he persecuted/imprisioned/killed Jews.

  88. Re:They are figments of your brainwashed imaginati by kerouac · · Score: 1

    how about a text that shows me that the people that I have actually met never existed?

    texts that say how/why all this was made up.

    where did you get your information? i really
    am fascinated, at this point.

    surely there must be some document explaining how
    an entire world has been tricked.

    or are you saying that you figured this out on your own ( with the assistance of crack or PCP, i would assume)?

  89. Three body problem by coyote-san · · Score: 2

    The earth-luna system is *not* a tidy little two-body problem where every player always follows the same orbit. It's not even a pure three-body problem since any real solution must account for the earth's equatorial and tidal bulges (although they are often time-averaged into a single bulge).

    On earth, we get our angle of inclination bobbing around between 22-24 degrees (approx) *and* slowly drifting around the entire sky over tens of thousands of years. We also get slow changes of the earth's orbit due to the other planets; many people believe these changes are directly related to the ice ages.

    On luna, it gets an orbit which oscillates between nearly circular and slightly elliptical, all while slowly moving away from the earth as energy is lost raising the earth's tidal bulges. (Remember: less total energy = a *higher* orbit due to the tradeoff of kinetic energy for gravitational potential energy. It's only hard for us because we're coming up from the planetary surface and have no KE.)

    All of this means that lunar perigees are not created equal and the perigee tonight is *not* the same as the perigee last month or a perigee a month from now.

    More generally, the perigee is solely a function of the earth-luna system and a full moon is solely a function of the sun-earth system -- there is absolutely no connection between perigees and full moons. This means that perigees and full moons occuring at the same time are a statistical fluke - you're just as likely to have a new moon and perigee at the same time.

    Finally, the local newspaper reported that the full moon will be unusually high in the sky (in the NH) because of the solstice, but I'm not sure about their logic. If true, this full moon could very well light the ground better than average for the same reason our seasons are tied to the position of the sun in the sky instead of our orbital position.

    P.S., as other posters have commented the actual difference in the brightness of the moon is modest enough that few people will legitimately notice a difference. I don't know what the urban legend claims, so I can't answer it's claims, but the astronomy is solid and usually covered in any introductory astronomy class. If you've been "debunking" it, expect to eat plenty of pie, humble pie, over the next few weeks.

    --
    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
    1. Re:Three body problem by coyote-san · · Score: 2

      Upon reflection, I realize that I probably took too many shortcuts with the graduate-level mechanics.

      If you work through the Hamiltonian, tidal forces cause orbiting bodies to become tidally locked. Luna is tidally locked 1:1 with the earth, but long before the earth would be tidally locked with the moon (with month-long days) luna will cease orbiting the earth - it will be too far away. If you want the hairy details it's a fairly straightforward Hamiltonian calculation... if you consider PDEs "straightforward."

      On our timescale and orbital altitudes, we're mostly concerned with non-conservative losses (e.g., friction with the upper atmosphere) that eventually causes orbiting bodies to crash.

      As to my comments about PE and KE, forget them. Orbital mechanics are notoriously counterintuitive, so it's extremely difficult to forget the errors in your first textbook. :-( Unfortunately it's easier to remember HS textbooks than PDEs off the top of your head. (Yum. Humble pie.)

      --
      For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
  90. You're out of your mind. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    how about a text that shows me that the people that I have actually met never existed?

    Show me a text which proves that Moby Dick never existed. It's an absurdity. Who would even bother? The burden of proof is on you. Many things can be imagined which do not exist. In the absence of any reason to believe that the so-called "native Americans" did exist, I refuse to be conned by the silly stories I hear.

    Here's just one little fact which totally explodes and debunks all of your "Indian" stories: There is no way that they could have travelled, on foot, from the Middle East (where Man was Created) to America. It's just not possible.

    Satisfied?

    1. Re:You're out of your mind. by kerouac · · Score: 1

      Obviously none of you were born before 1963, or you wouldn't be so gullible.

      let me try this:

      "Hey anonymous coward- didja know that if you cut off your head, then it will grow back?"

      BTW, G. Gordon Liddy is a politician, too. Why do you trust him?

    2. Re:You're out of your mind. by kerouac · · Score: 1

      Obviously none of you were born before 1963, or you wouldn't be so gullible.



      let me try this:



      "Hey anonymous coward- didja know that if you cut off your head, then it will grow back?"



      BTW, G. Gordon Liddy is a politician, too. Why do you trust him?

  91. How were you able to get to this page... by kerouac · · Score: 1

    ...and post without the assistance of opposable thumbs?

    1. Re:How were you able to get to this page... by toast0 · · Score: 1

      i fail to see where opposable thumbs come into the process of browsing and posting on a web page...

      yes my thumbs hit the space bar (we usually only one, but sometimes i switch to get back at my typing teacher), but i don't think that it would be that much more difficult if i had no thumbs....

      perhaps it would be difficult to load an operating system (think, put disks in drives) without thumbs, put these days you can get a computer preloaded with an operating system ready to run on the internet, and even somebody to come out and plug all the color coded wires into the color coded holes

      as long as everything is in good working order, no thumbs are needed

      mice are usable without a thumb, but who would want to use a mouse?

  92. St. Brendan, 6th Century by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    There's sufficient evidence to consider seriously the possibility that he was here before the Vikings. It ain't conclusive, but it's real for what it's worth.


  93. Lest we forget... by AugstWest · · Score: 2

    With all of this misinformation floating around, I thought this would be a good time to learn about our solar system from the former national expert himself, Dan Quayle:

    "Mars is essentially in the same orbit. Mars is somewhat the same distance from the Sun, which is very important. We have seen pictures where there are canals, we believe, and water. If there is water, that means there is oxygen. If there is oxygen, then we can breathe."

    I know that there have also been a few questions about NASA and people possibly losing faith in them due to the recent problems with the Mars projects. Dan, once again, reassures us:

    "For NASA, space is still a high priority."

    Buck up, kids, as Dan says, "The future will be better tomorrow."

  94. It's still pretty damn cool by karma+vs+Dogma · · Score: 1

    Well, it's still a full moon/winter solstice, and that hasn't happened in a long time. And I'm still going to be at the Full Moon Cafe on Cherry Street enjoying a favorite brew and a plate of buffalo wings.

    --
    -Man cannot survive except through his mind. --Ayn Rand
  95. Of course it will. I have tested this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    if you cut off your head, then it will grow back?

    You are correct. I have God-given powers of superhuman regeneration. When in danger, I may shed my limbs to evade capture. This is a manifestation of God's special grace that has been granted to me. It has saved me from the jackbooted stormtroopers of the Liberal Occupation Forces on more than one occasion. They fear me, but still they pursue me. I know not why.


  96. Lunar eclipses by B.D.Mills · · Score: 2
    Be sure not to miss this one, because we won't see another one in the us until May 16, 2003.

    There's another lunar eclipse on July 16, 2000 that is visible from east Asia, Australia (best view), and most of the Pacific which is listed in the Guinness Book of World Records as one of the longest lunar eclipses. The same circumstances that make the full moon of December 22 worthy of Slashdot discussion also conspire to make the lunar eclipse of July 16 2000 noteworthy:

    • The full moon of July 16 occurs near lunar apogee, when it appears the smallest in the sky and the moon is travelling at its slowest in its orbit;
    • The Earth is near aphelion, which means the Earth is also travelling slowly around the sun;
    • The centre of the Moon will pass within 200 kilometres of the central axis of Earth's shadow cone.

    The apogee and aphelion combination makes the eclipse slow, and the really central nature of the eclipse maximises the duration. Together, this makes totality last for 148 minutes, the longest that lunar eclipse totality can last. This is probably the longest lunar eclipse of our lifetimes.
    --

    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
    1. Re:Lunar eclipses by Micah · · Score: 1

      Too bad solar eclipses can't last that long. *sigh*

      I'm waiting for the 6/21/01 total solar eclipse in Zaire/Zimbabwe/Madagascar. It *should* be a good one. In western Zaire totality goes right over a huge game park, with good weather prospects and almost 4 minutes of totality. I plan to be there, and can't wait!

      Micah

    2. Re:Lunar eclipses by kevlar · · Score: 2

      Anyone know where I can get some vectoring data on the moon and possibly other planets? The coordinate system doesn't matter, just as long as I can get accurate data.

  97. Learn your octal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you mean 03720 :P

  98. There are no reservations. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Hence, no people on reservations. Telling stories is cheap and convenient. All of your "history" textbooks are heavily doctored revisionist nonsense. You are living in a propagandistic netherworld hell of gibberish and unsupported assuptions and generalizations and axioms which represent the conclusions of chains of logic which are based on those selfsame axioms.


    1. Re:There are no reservations. by kerouac · · Score: 1

      old town, maine ( i lived there ).

      there is a reservation there. they make canoes.

      i have been there.

      ( so has your mom )

    2. Re:There are no reservations. by toast0 · · Score: 1

      the truth of axioms must be asumed in order for a theory to work.... if yo could prove the axiom, it wouldn't be an axiom.

      of course, should you wish to use the axiom to prove it self, it would of course be possible....

      euclid's geometry(which i'm sure you make a lot of use of, if not directly than through the work of others) used 6 axioms, and then later ppl decided that one of them was wrong and got new neat stuff out of it, but thats off topic

  99. Plugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing happens.

    1. Re:Plugh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hello, sailor!

  100. Friend in Venezuela by _damnit_ · · Score: 1
    For anyone who cares, my friend is alive and well. Here's his report via email to us in the US:
    The damage from the mudslide is horrible. Words cannot describe. The word is that a
    minimum of 20,000 people buried alive. Not to mention the terror of the ones that did
    survive. Whole cities getting swallowed by the mud. This just goes beyond imagination.
    Just wanted to let you all know at least that everybody we know are safe.
    Well take care of yourselves and your families. The life is precious.
    Everyone please remember that there are more important things going on in the world than kernel releases. Enjoy your families this holiday season.

    Merry Christmas and Happy Chanakah


    _damnit_
    --


    _damnit_

    It's my job to freeze you. -- Logan's Run
  101. Blame it on Pink Floyd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That misconception is probably Pink Floyd's fault. That's why this whole phenomenon should probably be referred to as a Pink Moon.

    But we all now know, in these enlightened times (14% brighter), than the moon has three sides. Your side, my side, and the truth. The moon is a three sided sword, best served cold. It is very cold in space, and no one can hear you scream.

  102. ARGH! You took me seriously. by chromatic · · Score: 1

    My astronomy teacher would have a fit. In my defense, may I excuse myself by saying that the near side is receiving sunlight right now, so it appears to be the light side?

    Or let's just say that the light side of the moon is the outside, 'cuz the inside doesn't get many rays?

    --

  103. Larry Niven, call your office by porges · · Score: 1

    I am reminded of Niven's story INCONSTANT MOON, about a night when the moon really does become amazingly bright. While most people are wandering around enjoying the spectacle, the ones who know science realize where moonlight comes from, and what must be about to happen when the Sun comes up in the morning.

    1. Re:Larry Niven, call your office by neopenguin · · Score: 1

      Thanks for reminding me of the title of this story. A version was recently shown on Showtine as part of the "Outer Limits" series and I remebered enjoying "Inconstant Moon" years ago.

  104. Too funny... by LRJ · · Score: 1

    this reminds me an oral report I heard in college once.

    This guy did his report on how flashlights don't really produce light - they actually suck dark. The batteries don't drain, they get filled with darkness.

    --
    LRJ
  105. Re:And sun is not "big firey thing". Fire==O2 comb by orcrist · · Score: 2

    From Websters:
    fiery:
    1: consisting of fire
    2: hot like a fire
    3: of the color of fire
    4: full of or exuding emotion or spirit


    I think your Physics is better than your English :-)

    --
    San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence
  106. Well, the Star Hustler disagrees... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See http://www.starhustler.com/scriptof theweek.html Down near the bottom at the transcript for the "Star Gazer Minute"

  107. Re:The big 99 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    You the MAN!!! Look how high Trollmastah and Mcdougal are!! THE ORIGINAL TROLLMASTAH, THE SECOND ONE TO COPY THE ALL KNOWING POSTMASTA WILL NEVER BE OUTDONE

    HA.. . . 223'RD POST!

  108. Bright enough to see the CHA etched on the face? by hangdog · · Score: 1

    ....bad The Tick reference! Sorry!!

    SPOOOOOON!!

  109. Yay! by DanaL · · Score: 2

    I feel so fulfilled now :)

    I think one of our local newspapers must have pretty much cut n' pasted this straight out of an email as used it as a story.

    Dana

  110. Even more offtopic, but insightful by Skevin · · Score: 1

    This could explain what really happened to the mars polar lander...

    Heuters December 20, 1999
    Key personnel at NASA have finally completed evaluations as to the true reasons behind the loss of the $165 million Mars Polar Lander.
    "Our graphics department did not meet our media deadlines," one NASA spokesman comments. "Some of the graphic artists we've hired have had the gall to claim that Maya and Bryce were inappropriate software tools for rendering a realistic representation of what the surface of the Red Planet might look like. Why, they didn't even have any preliminary prototype 3D models that we could just quickly shade and pass off to the American public! It is unfortunate that outside agencies do not realize the crux of NASA's funding resides in their continuing ability to dupe America into putting tax money into our 'space program'."
    "I don't know what NASA was thinking," reflects an animatronic Senator John Glenn from the dungeon-like interior of Disney Studios in Burbank. "In my day, we never relied on that fancy schmancy CGI stuff. We had real people, working up a real sweat, building a lifesize studio set that Neil and I could walk around. It was something you could see and touch, rather than the digital innards of some newfangled virtual environment... But I can't blame NASA: our greedy, self-obsessed government has slashed our funding over the years, and NASA's Special Effects Budget has been hit pretty hard. You always cut corners where you can, and we've had to slowly replace our nice set model workshop with a room full of contractors and one big Renderfarm. With that many computers, you have to fuck up somewhere."
    Glenn further adds that he would one day like to replace Abraham Lincoln at Disneyland.
    While it may seem improbable that, in a special effects production studio like NASA, the sudden cessation of a large scale project on the magnitude of the Mars Polar Lander would cost 165 million dollars, Heuters has questioned the contractors themselves for further answers. "They gave us crappy equipment," quotes Brandon Perlow, an astronomically expensive modeller/designer. "They promised me a really good Octane, or something that would have the Reality Engine logo on it... But [on] my first day at NASA, all I had to work with was this lousy POS O2! They gave a goddamn Toaster and expected me to do work on it! Sorry, gotta run: there's sushi downstairs."
    One NASA representative responded to the complaint by explaining that the refit cost of equipping every contractor with an SGI Onyx Reality Engine would run the department 65 million dollars.
    "We've already tightened our belts as far as they'll go," one representative intones from regret. "We can't ask for that kind of additional funding from a government that requires a blowjob from every female White House intern. We have no choice but to shut the project down and let all the contractors go."
    Then what of the remaining 100 million dollars?
    "That figure comes from all the projected merchandising profits prior to the cancellation of the Mars Polar Lander Project," concludes key researchers at NASA. "But that's just a rough figure - it's not like we're rocket scientists."



    Solomon Kevin Chang
    Database Design and Programming
    Disney Televentures

    --
    "Twice half-assed makes an ass whole." --Solomon K. Chang
  111. Heh! Informative? by Cattywampus · · Score: 1

    Boy, I sure wish I knew which addle-brained moderator tacked that up to "Informative". *grin*

    - C.

    1. Re:Heh! Informative? by Davorama · · Score: 1

      I don't have any points right now so I can't verify it, but isn't informative right next to funny in the selection list? I know I've made a slip once or twice when moderating. They are probably just addle-fingered.

      --

      Davo -- Free speech, free software, AND free beer.

    2. Re:Heh! Informative? by Zinho · · Score: 1

      Oh ye of little faith! I see that Tower has truly cast his pearls before swine. Fundamental principles are laid before you and identified as such, and you accuse the moderator of an input error!!! When will the world finally accept the truth???

      On a more serious note, I believe that informative is a wonderful moderator adjective for that post; if nothing else it exposes those who are unaware to the "darktron" theory of light bulb functionality. I should add that one of the proofs of this theory is the black residue in burnt out light bulbs - the bulb is saturated with darktrons and cannot absorb any more!

      And while this rates right up there with the "magic smoke" theory of computers, it is part of our geek culture. A part that we should cherish. Informative, indeed.

      "The scientific mind is open, if not fully ventilated."
      -Martin Gardner, from Scientific American

      --
      "Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
  112. Brightness doesn't diminish the value. by Jeld · · Score: 1

    I hope nobody forgets the meaning of this full moon being on solstice and during whatever that other thing was called in english to a scholar of occult traditions. It is still a very important happening from astrological point of view, and a good time to practice certain rituals dedicated to planets and planetary angels.

    --

    Everybody Lies. But it doesn't matter since nobody listens.

  113. Cinco de Mayo by forii · · Score: 1

    Actually, don't ask any Mexican astronomer, because most likely they won't care. May 5 doesn't signify an independence day, or anything else that would be really important to the generic Mexican. Instead, it merely celebrates a single victory, and is only really celebrated in the northern states of Mexico. Of course, Americans have picked up on it, and now it's probably much more popular in the states than in the whole of Mexico.

  114. careful... by Caled · · Score: 1

    Everyone remember to put on your moon goggles.

  115. Listening to Art Bell? by RayChuang · · Score: 1

    I have a question for you.

    Have you been listening to Art Bell a bit too much lately? What you just wrote sounds like the usual things we hear from Art and his guests.

    --
    Raymond in Mountain View, CA
  116. Assumptions by LinuxGeek · · Score: 2

    It seems that most people I see "quoting" the bible are merely paraphrasing what they have heard. I know the AC that posted this didn't really quote, but they did say "but the signs are still there." AC here is assuming the role of interpreter for those that read his post. Those that are interested may want to consider the following quotes. For those that are uninterested , then please ignore the following, it probably wasn't meant for you.

    Mark (KJV) 13:22-33
    22 For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.
    23 But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.
    24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light,
    25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.
    26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.
    27 And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.
    28 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When her branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is near:
    29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even at the doors.
    30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
    31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
    32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.
    33 Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is.

    Now, my interpretation is something like this:
    Man either believes or he doesn't. If you truly believe, then you will always be ready. The things I've read from the Bible, Torah, Koran and Book of Mormon are quite similar in concept. They all had a much richer meaning than the mis-quotes and incorrect paraphrasings conveyed from people who hadn't read much.

    For the curious, read for yourself and make an honest search for truth. I know people that are being seduced by much of the hype into believing that some things of momentous importance are going to happen on some particular day or time. Their faith will be damaged when the appointed time comes and goes without the promised event. What a shame, if they knew the books that their faith is supposed to be based on, they would understand the deceptions.

    A "generation that shall not pass" reference can be measured by the exodus from Egypt. The Jews saw fit to make the golden calf to worship and God said they would not be allowed to enter into the promised land before that generation had passed away. I am looking for some length of time shorter than forty years from now to hold some very terrible events for the earth and occupants. But when? I'm pretty sure it isn't going to be 1-1-2000. But, then again, I have no way of knowing for certain.

    --

    Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
  117. Re:Irrelevancy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think it was a rhetorical question. I mean, obviously people would never distribute their shit to unknown parties, especially those that are referred to as 'fuckings.'

  118. Spam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To answer your question in your tag. Yes, they do. I have seen some pretty good ones out there too. Ones that will read the messages it self and look for keywords like. "Remove the words NOSPAM to email me" or something to that affect. Plus, places like slashdot, remarq, and others try to do a "spam shield" and auto put the words NOSPAM in it. But, the bad things is that all messages written on remarq all say the same thing.

  119. 1st reply!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To 42nd post!!! Dont panic!!!

  120. Humans are innately trusting? by Anonymous+Shepherd · · Score: 2

    I don't know that it's such a bad thing that people tend to believe, rather than disbelieve. Do you know how much harder it is to prove, rather than disprove?

    IE, a disproof only requires a contradiction where a proof requires the lack of a contradiction, so it seems to make sense that people believe rather than disbelieve, because it's much easier to disprove to a person once the person believes, than it is to prove to a person once they don't believe.

    If the net is to be a viable, working, self-adjusting ecosystem/social system, I suspect it should also run on the 'tend to trust/believe' system, rather than the 'other way around' Sorta like credit cards online(unless someone can disprove me=), it's pretty safe if people trust the system.


    -AS

    --

    -AS
    *Pikachu*
    1. Re:Humans are innately trusting? by CoughDropAddict · · Score: 1

      IE, a disproof only requires a contradiction where a proof requires the lack of a contradiction,

      That's a very interesting standard of proof. You're saying that if I could come up with a theory that doesn't contradict anything (ie. completely coherent) then it's automatically true?

      I postulate that rational thought and human logic are not sufficient to yield absolute truth in any matter but in realizing their failings.

      According to your standard of proof, this must be true, because it contradicts nothing (it supercedes anything that could contradict it!)

      Anyway, what I was talking about is the basis for belief, which you've given me a great opportunity to demonstrate:

      Sorta like credit cards online(unless someone can disprove me=), it's pretty safe if people trust the system.

      We now have a reason to believe that using credit cards online is safe: it's undergone peer review, it's a common practice, and companies are held legally accountable and have other incentives for it to work right. There is basis for belief.

      But imagine the net 5 years ago. If an obscure online retailer asked you to fill in your credit card number and click the happy "Submit" button, would you have done it? I hope not. Where there's not the basis for belief, I think skepticism is the more appropriate response.

      How long did you believe in Santa before you realized you were being lied to?

    2. Re:Humans are innately trusting? by Anonymous+Shepherd · · Score: 2

      That's a very interesting standard of proof. You're saying that if I could come up with a theory that doesn't contradict anything (ie. completely coherent) then it's automatically true?

      No, just that it isn't possible to disprove it; I'm not one to believe in ultimate truth, so there is nothing that is automatically true.

      I postulate that rational thought and human logic are not sufficient to yield absolute truth in any matter but in realizing their failings.

      I wholeheartedly agree, unfortunately; no amount of human rationalization, logical thought, and reasoning will ever get us to any sort of truth because there isn't any sort of 'truth' in this universe; just existence or not existence. At least by my perspective.

      According to your standard of proof, this must be true, because it contradicts nothing (it supercedes anything that could contradict it!)

      Not that I necessarily think it must be true, but because I agree with with the sentiment, it's hard for me to argue against it. I'm not a firm believer in human rationality or logic except that they are useful tools.

      But imagine the net 5 years ago. If an obscure online retailer asked you to fill in your credit card number and click the happy "Submit" button, would you have done it? I hope not. Where there's not the basis for belief, I think skepticism is the more appropriate response.

      Of course; five years ago there wasn't a 'system' one could use, live in, trust. But today's fears of online credit card fraud seem funny to me when these same people willingly hand over their credit cards to waiters in restaurants; if I really wanted to commit credit card fraud, I'd be scamming credit card numbers from my workplace and then buying stuff online where *my* ID can't yet be verified.

      How long did you believe in Santa before you realized you were being lied to?

      I was never lied to; I was never inculcated into the Santa belief system. I'm curious why it's relevant for you to ask me this even?

      -AS

      --

      -AS
      *Pikachu*
  121. tracking email dist. patterns by decomp · · Score: 1
    I think junk email distribution patterns would make an interesting area of study for Information Theorists :)

    Yes, absolutely! In fact, I had assumed, given that this is so obviously interesting, that someone would have worked on this already and made an email distribution-tracking web site. Certainly such a thing exists. Please, someone out there in slashdot land tell us where to find it!

    Right now I'm interested in the whole Mahir Cagri "I Kiss You" website craze that was entirely fueled by email. Salon has followed this pretty closely, but, unfortunately, unlike some of their other decent writing, this thread of theirs doesn't provide much depth. I want to know why this silly website became popular and how (i.e, who started passing the url around?). The AP had a much more in depth article on the matter (weeks after the story broke, of course). Here's that link (you may have to tell the AP you're coming from one or another newspaper before they'll let you get to the article, but the link should work. For some reason, old NYTimes links to AP articles no longer work, they used to. Argh.)

    According to the AP story:

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Then, a month and a half ago, hackers invaded and embellished his site, spicing up the text with ``I like sex!'' and adding that Mahir enjoys taking photos of ``nice nude models.'' The hackers also moved it to a new location, and quickly spread the word about the site.

    Cagri soon became a most unlikely cyber-celebrity.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Yeah, it's a meagre excuse for an explanation, but it does more than the salon article, if I recall correctly. Ok, so I can understand stage 1: hackers [sic] mess up the site in fun ways. This is fun and amusing (though illegal, I assume). What I don't understand is stage 2-3: friend of hacker and friend of friend of hacker receive e-mail saying "hey check out this goofy site." Ok, I can see them checking out the site, but why oh why would they think it was funny enough to pass on to x of their friends (who obviously thought it was funny enough to do the same thing)? This really baffles me.

    It's amazing to see what has happened to this guy since his site got cracked. He's become an instomatic celebrity. The AP article says that Turkish tourism authorities are hoping that this will boost tourism. Whoa!

    So, someone needs to set up a where's george? type site where people can log on and track the flow of email explosions. Who passed what to whom? Trace it back.

    Ok, rant over.


    ______________________(
    // ///#\)

  122. URL to info on Fort Kearney Raid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/amh/AMH -14.htm

    It doesn't go into too much depth, but from the account there is no mention of raid by moonlight. -Only the refusal of an idiot to obey orders, who ended up marching into an ambush.

  123. I kinda like the idea too. by ploeg · · Score: 1
  124. tide info by PlaidLady · · Score: 1

    Actually, the tides will just be a slightly stronger-than-average spring tide. A spring tide occurs when the moon is at either the full or new moon position -- the sun and the moon are lined up which increases the tidal forces in one direction. (Neap tides occur at first and third quarter -- when the moon and sun are exerting forces on the Earth that are perpendicular to one another. Thus, neap tides are slightly less than regular tides.) There's a lunar perigee once a month, and you don't see any warnings of extraordinary tides. However, combined with the spring tide, docks and beaches might notice tides slightly more drastic than a normal spring tide.

  125. if...... by serialk · · Score: 1

    you believe they put a man on the moon

    heh

  126. Where ya been? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Ain't seen you in the thread. I dig the fat-time stories. Please do continue. And post links, for God's sake.

    1. Re:Where ya been? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can find a complete library of open source works at this private thread.

      here is a list of all fat-time posts:

      open source jbuilder
      open source sci fi
      open source wrist pain ii
      open source dna
      open source india
      open source aliens
      open source machete
      open source masslinux
      open source be

      thanks for the interest.

  127. big fiery thing by Dr+IOStream · · Score: 2

    "big fiery thing " uh...to the indians, thats probably what they thought the moon was

    --
    ~Jay (Negative Seven)
  128. Fuck a duck. You're right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    This is bizarre! I did it at work on the NT4 SP5 calculator utility. I specify so anally 'cause I'm home now and I just checked it on the win95 version, which agrees with you, and I checked it with printf( ) from mingw32 (gcc 2.8.1 with, IIRC, the MS runtime), and that agrees with you too. I'm not gonna boot into linux and Be just to make double sure with glibc :) Shit. I'll have to check that thing again tomorrow at work. I didn't do it by hand, I'm just not that energetic. "Trivial but tedious" spells "automate" to me.

    Weeeeerrrd. I've been trusting that damned calculator utility for a long time now. It can't be wrong, that's ridiculous. But am I really dumb enough to mistype "2000" and "1999" both off by the same amount? Er, that's a stretch. Damn.


    Hey, I was at least right about the leading zero! :)

  129. Nope, Minnesota. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Sorry. But do try to get your facts straight next time.


    :)

  130. TC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    (this is somebody else)


    is he just a complete narcicistic pr*ck?

    Only when he feels threatened, which is far more often than it really needs to be. He can really lash out at people for no sane reason. OTOH I've recently seen a couple of informative, polite posts from him on Slashdot. He's not 100% asshole at all, just a high enough percentage for me to take issue with it. And insert standard disclaimer about how he has by all accounts contributed a lot of good code and I wouldn't want to deny him credit, etc.


    and what do you use for all of your administrative tasks? shell code? batch files?

    Dunno about that guy, but I use batch files and awk. I do Win32 development for a living, gimme a break. I can see where Perl might be useful, but the syntax makes me hurl. It's a labyrinth. awk is a nice, reasonably clean, Turing-complete language with regular expressions and whatnot. I really like it, but this is coming from a C programmer and you know how we are about languages :) Gawk needs a module mechanism like Perl has. If it could dynamically load libraries it'd be fantastic. I've thought about hacking that in, maybe one of these days . . . Then of course I'd have to talk the maintainers into picking it up. I don't see anything like that in the Futures file, unless that's what "NLS" is.

    I know a lot of people love Perl, but it's just not my cup of tea.

  131. Maine's too far. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    I'm in Cambridge. Hell of a drive up there, and all for what? Trees. Moose. Buncha people who talk funny. E. B. White's long dead, otherwise I could see a point in it.

    You still haven't replied to my masterpiece! Damn, after I posted that one, I figured the whole thread was over. I thought that little number just wrapped the whole thing up real purty.


  132. "Your Brain": A Ludicrous Myth by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 2
    It never existed, and it does not now exist in any form. The so-called "brain" of this Anonymous Coward is a myth created by conservative so-called "Intellectuals" (moron Money-worshippers) and pro-wealth Fascists to create well-earned hatred in the minds of saner Americans and so persuade them to post on Slashdot. Christopher Columbus thought he discovered this Anonymous Coward's brain in AD 1492, and found no rational thought there. The revisionist version says otherwise, but if you do some research you'll find that there is not a single mention of that version in any publication prior to 1963. Not a single, solitary mention of "Anonymous Coward's brain" of any kind, anywhere. No "Neural networks", no "Synapses", nothing at all. No, the story was invented to discredit the smarter people amongst us by the same people who would want us to forget Germany circa 1939. Obviously Anonymous Coward was in denial, and he obviously knew it. This is why he refused to post under his real name, "Dickbag", instead using the faceless name "Anonymous Coward". This is simple and obvious logic, based on well-known facts, but logic and facts aren't worth much to Anonymous Cowards as we all know.
    --


    "One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
  133. "Trolls" : A Ludicrous myth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They never existed, and they do not now exist in any form. The so-called "Trolls" are a myth created by Liberal so-called "Slashdot Ubergotten" (pagan Linux-worshippers) and anti-wealth Socialists to create unearned guilt in the minds of Slashdot posters and so dissuade them from improving the level of unsupported facts.

    Rob Malda discovered this site in AD 1492, and found no human beings here. The revisionist version says otherwise, but if you do some research you'll find that there is not a single mention of that version in any publication prior to 1963. Not a single, solitary mention of "Trolls" of any kind, anywhere. No "First Posters", no "Anonymous Cowards", nothing at all.

    No, the story was invented to discredit the navigational and geographical genius of Malda by accusing him of believing himself to have been in a known hangout of trolls. Obviously he was not in Troll Land, and he obviously knew it. This is why he named the new continent by its correct name, "Slashdot", rather than referring to it as "Troll Land". This is simple and obvious logic, based on well-known facts, but logic and facts aren't worth much to a Liberal as we all know.

    Now you know the truth. It's up to you to do what must be done.



  134. Well, in the UK... by damyan · · Score: 1

    We had a very very bright moon last night. My girlfriend and I remarked on how bright it was and then I remembered seeing the headline on Slashdot.

    It shone through the clouds and there was a slight rainbow -- and I could read by it. So, for us in the UK it was exceptionally bright.

    1. Re:Well, in the UK... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I tell you - I'm suddenly realizing that these articles - either the original claims or the refutations - are not very scientific.

      1. Right now, it is the 22nd of December, although it was the 21st 30 minutes ago. I'm not sure if these articles are talking about tonight or tomorrow night. I may very well have not read them deeply enough to know if they indicated 24 hr times, but I didn't see such a thing.
      2. I found the negative articles more credible than the original, but that may have been due to the number of them that I received, which is definitely not a good measure in internet terms.
      3. The moon sure as shit looks brighter than normal to me right now (i.e. it looks like a damn headlight - I'm impressed), although that may be due to environmental conditions both internal and external to me.

      Anyone look at the moon tonight? I know I'm planning on a comparison view tomorrow.

  135. Life, the Universe and Everything by EVuL_C · · Score: 1

    I feel that I need to throw this in as a response to all the 'end times' and y2k crap I have been spoon-fed by the media this year.

    I am by no means an expert on anything, and I do not profess to be, but here's how I see things *right now*.

    Now, I cannot remember where I heard this quote first, but I do know I have heard it from many different places: "Humans live their life through misery".

    I think this is (unfortunately) the truest statement I have ever heard about the human race. Without something to be upset or worried about, people seem to have nothing to say.

    I don't believe there is any real 'religious' relevance to the Jan 1, 2000. If our maker (whoever that may be) wants to take us all down, does he really need to pick a visually prominent date? I know if *I* were the maker, I'd do it when I felt like it :)

    Combine the 'misery' with my twisted views on thought and creation, and you get one hell of an approaching mess.

    People will create problems because they 'need' something to happen to confirm their beliefs. No matter how warped they may be.

    What I believe is going to take place is this:

    1. People with strong religious conviction will see so-called signs of the coming apocalypse. They will believe it's the end. Some of them will act rashly and behave in a foolish manner in an attempt to redeem their souls before the 'rapture'

    2. Terrorist groups (aka religious fanatics) will bank on this assumption and wreak havoc without fear of retribution (in their minds there will be no one left to answer to). They will kill many innocent people.

    3. Microsoft will release an 'across-the-board' patch on December 29, 1999 for all windows platforms to screw up y2k compliance so you have to buy win2000 immediately (I AM JOKING HERE [If I am right though, I will laugh forever])

    4. People who have no real religious beliefs will laugh at all the fools jumping off buildings in fear of the coming rapture.

    5. Someone will react rashly to a terrorist strike and cause wholesale damage. They will kill many innocent people.

    6. Someone will have computer problems. They will panic. They will forget the fact that if they turn the system off, then back on followed by resetting the date and time they will be okay.

    7. Riots, LARGE riots. That's what happens when there is tension and anxiety in a large group of people. We all know where they will start. Where will there be large gatherings? Just watch.

    8. I will sit home with my family and friends. Drink. Laugh. Then after we are all sloshed, we will play twister. I will wake up the next morning, turn on my PC, then read Slashdot. Life will go on.

    If you are naive enough to believe there won't be any problems due to the coming new year, I pity you.

    I don't think you need to build a bomb shelter. Just make sure you have a baseball bat or some such thing by your front door for when the zealots come a-knocking.

    You could uninstall windows too... just to be safe ;)

    - C

  136. What a relief by Hard_Code · · Score: 2

    What a relief...I was so worried about whether the moon would be the brightest in 133 this December 22nd...I mean the anxiousness, and nervousness was gnawing at me, I could hardly sleep. I'm glad Slashdot has finally put this nagging enigma to sleep.

    Jazilla.org - the Java Mozilla

    --

    It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
  137. :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    The troll is delighted.


  138. Cool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    The troll is again pleased.


    :)

  139. '8' in octal?! I musta been drunk. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    (this is the same knucklehead who fucked up the octal)

    Jesus Christ! Did you ever come face to face with the possibility that you have a brain the size of a walnut, but empty? Ugh! If not, allow me to state that it's not a pleasant experience at all :(

    I did 1999 in octal and "added one". In so doing I forgot that in base fucking EIGHT, obviously there's no EIGHT for God's sake. So I didn't carry the one like Miss Foellner taught me to do in first grade. As you saw right away, obviously . . . But it took me a bit longer.

    Mea maxima culpa.


  140. Re:Bright enough to see the CHA etched on the face by x00 · · Score: 2


    There are no bad The Tick references....

    I still wonder why he only left enough space for the "CHA" on it though...

    --
    May contain traces of nut.
  141. Oh, by the way... by Andy_R · · Score: 1

    I know this is a bit off-topic, but did you guys know there is supposed to be an unusually bright full moon tonight? :-) - Andy R.

    --
    A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
  142. E-mail spreads like the flu? by unDees · · Score: 1
    I've always thought that if I went back for a graduate degree (*shudder*), I'd do a thesis comparing the distribution of jokes with the circulation of the flu. Jokes replicate verbally the way we wheeze on each other at work, and then the anecdote is sent via e-mail to distant continents--do microorganisms hitch a ride in the bloodstreams of transatlantic travellers?

    It would take a lot more work than I feel like doing without getting something for it (like a lot of debt and a Master's Degree), but the idea intrigues me.

    <sarcasm&;gt
    'Course, we could always wait for Microsoft and AOL to publish the results of that e-mail tracking system they're beta-testing. Come to think of it, I never did get my check for four thousand dollars....
    </sarcasm>

    unDees

    We have noticed a balance of $0.02 on your account. In order to continue receiving our quality opinions, please remit payment immediately.

    --
    "I call a baby goat a 'goatse.'" -- my non-Internet-savvy 6-year-old stepdaughter
  143. The "Moon": Absurd Liberal Myth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    There is no "moon". If it were moving that fast, it would fly off into space in a straight line. Even that is an absurdity, because so-called "space" is a liberal myth as well.

    You, sir, do not exist either.


  144. Based on a true story by veldrane · · Score: 1

    Well, coming from one of the non-existant, I will sincerely request that you prove beyond any doubt that homo sapiens was singularily "created" in the Middle East.
    When actual events such as (this could all be a lie) Marco Polo's trip to China and back (I'm pretty sure he didn't take a plane.) and Thor Heyerdal's (sp?) trip to prove that it was possible to sail a balsa raft from Ecuador to the Polynesian islands have taken place, it shouldn't be too much of a stretch to see the possibility of a group of people travelling large distances over x number of generations.

    I would guess that since you haven't claimed that humans first existed in Africa (most likely locale, based on real science) you are probably referring to some speculation based upon some claims in the "Book of Stories"...I mean the Bible.
    I'm sorry but I am NOT satisfied. You have the burden of proof and you cannot use the speculative claims from that book to prove your case.

    Fact cannot be built upon heresay. But stories and myth can...and they are.

    -Vel

  145. Natural Law by veldrane · · Score: 1

    Do you even know what "Natural Law" is?
    Perhaps your "Natural Law" is spewed out of some propaganda pamphlets.

    Your biggest enemy is "Natural selection."

    >;)