Sorry, you can't pigeon hole me into another person's argument. Why not argue with what I said instead of making up new claims that I never said.
You take nothing at face value? I call bull.
When I said "I take nothing at face value" I was talking about this report and many others that claim the demise of the Earth is nigh. But I will continue, just to prove how foolish you are, because you seem like the sort that needs proof.
Do you need to stick your hand in a flame to determine that it is hot? Is every flame hot?
Not all flames are hot, moron. You can stick your hand in many flames. That you don't know that speaks volumes about you.
Can you say with certainty that the laws of the universe don't change with every breath?
The laws don't change to be sure, but our interpretation of the laws change every day. Someone finds something that invalidates our previous understanding. Take an obvious recent case like Maybe - nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.
That certain gases will affect the heat retention in a gaseous mixture is a fact that you can confirm to your own personal belief. It's done all the time in school science fairs.
And only a moron, like yourself, would believe that an experiment at a school science fair accurately predicts how gas mixtures will radiate heat into space.
The amounts that are put into the air by humans, very well might have an effect in our atmosphere. That can be calculated.
This just is false. How do you "calculate" something that is not quantifiable? Nobody knows how much C02 the earth itself creates Without that, what the fuck are you doing?
So now we have something that is falsifiable, and possible avenues of refutation of the concept.
Sorry bro, AGW is not falsifiable. That is in fact the biggest issue I have with the theory. Can you tell me what "event" or "condition" would falsify it?
If global warming via human activity not causing the atmosphere to retain heat from insolation, what would be the mechanism that prevents the expected warming effect?
Because it can't possibly be wrong, right? Listen to yourself, you say in one breath it is falsifiable, then get within inches of realization then step back and say "well, it can't be wrong, we just haven't figured it out all the way".
Now we have something we can sink our teeth into. I can think of a few possibilities,
I noticed you omitted "we may be wrong". Sounds a lot more like a religion.
Duly noted that you didn't mention the anti - AGW crowd. Do you approve of their Intelligent design and Creationist type arguments for their position?
And why is it that I would talk about another group of people that have nothing to do with this argument? I'm sorry, did I say: "I am a priest" earlier? What makes you think creationism has anything to do with it? You know what, I'll bet these crazy creationists also think communism is bad, murder is bad and that you shouldn't paint your house magenta. I happen to agree with all of that. Does that somehow make me a creationist?
That American professor that they have been after, and has been cleared by multiple inquiries, but they just say the inquiries are flawed.
I'm guessing you're talking about Hansen. It may be stressful to you, but Hansen did get caught
Can't you Google Yellowstone Caldera? My point is, if you have nothing to measure against, what exactly are you getting at? Yes, there is unprecedented seismic activity in Yellowstone, but this does not mean there will be an eruption anytime soon... or maybe it does! Nobody knows! It's anybodies guess because we (the collective mass of human knowledge) cannot predict volcano eruptions any better than we can predict the weather. But to sit there an and shriek "Don't you think you should be alarmed!?!" without explaining exactly why I should be alarmed is just a waste of time and stupid. This is exactly like the chicken little story. In case you don't remember, chicken little got hit in the head with an acorn and took this portent to mean that the sky was falling. I fail to see the difference.
Yellowstone Caldera
Due to the volcanic and tectonic nature of the region, the Yellowstone Caldera experiences between 1000 and 2000 measurable earthquakes a year, though most are relatively minor, measuring a magnitude of 3 or weaker. Occasionally, numerous earthquakes are detected in a relatively short period of time, an event known as an earthquake swarm. In 1985, more than 3000 earthquakes were measured over several months. More than 70 smaller swarms have been detected between 1983 and 2008. The USGS states that these swarms could be caused more by slips on pre-existing faults than by movements of magma or hydrothermal fluids.[14][15]
In December 2008, continuing into January 2009, more than 500 quakes were detected under the northwest end of Yellowstone Lake over a seven day span, with the largest registering a magnitude of 3.9.[16][17] The most recent swarm started in January 2010 after the Haiti earthquake and before the Chile earthquake. With 1620 small earthquakes between January 17, 2010 and February 1, 2010, this swarm was the second largest ever recorded in the Yellowstone Caldera. The largest of these shocks was a magnitude 3.8 on January 21, 2010 at 11:16 PM MST.[15][18] This swarm reached the background levels by 21 February.
...we might reasonably expect to have seen them before, right?
True, but only if someone was observing and recording the data. All we know about "back then" is what we can infer from tree rings and ice core records. All we really know for sure about "back then" is that nobody was taking any sort of accurate measure of what was happening. We have a metric shit ton of anticdotal evidence that the ice sheets were not there as early as a thousand years ago (northern farms in greenland, Roman maps of an ice-free Antarctica) but since nobody bothered to write anything down it's anybodies guess. The issue is, some people are making guesses, admittedly educated guess, but guesses nonetheless, and then portraying them as actionable fact.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Educated guess+Computer modeling != extraordinary evidence let alone fact. Just do a word find for "fact" on this page to find the number of pro AGW guys claiming that AGW is a fact, these people are non-scientific zealots. These zealots are the face of AGW. I am not a zealot, I am a skeptic, I take nothing at face value, I question the existence of god. I use strong deductive logic to support my arguments. I am a scientist.
Your comment reminds me of the Sinfield episode where Jerry and Kramer are trying to train a fighting cock (named little Jerry) and they are timing his laps up and down the apartment hallway when George walks in:
Jerry:"Little Jerry can run down the hallway in 12.7 seconds!"
George:"Is that good?"
Jerry:"I don't know!"
They have been there for a thousand years, then they lose half their size in six years and you think that's nothing to worry about?
To quote David Putty: "Uh huh, that's right"
Did you know there's a caldera under Yosemite today that's causing some unprecedented seismic activity? Perhaps you would like to pose a rhetorical question about that: "It took 10,000 years for the caldera to build up and now in the last 50 years there's some yet-to-be-seen seismic activity and you think that's nothing to worry about!?". Maybe we can look at some heavenly bodies next and opine rhetorical about that.
If the rate of melting had been the same for those thousand years as it has been for the last six years that ice would be 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000006735 times the size it is now.
Now that's some real science! What is that the ja-billionth placeholder? More like the jabroni placeholder. I think you've got that ice down to the size of a flea's underwear. Maybe you should add a few more zeros just to help drive the point home. Take the advice of Mark Twain: "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
And you're surprised? They got a free ride by hijacking BSD to use in their desktop OS. They're using Intel processors after bashing them as inferior for more than a decade. I'm at a loss trying to think of any hardware that is truly innovative that Apple actually created themselves. I'm sick of hearing about how if I had an iPhone I could read my favorite books or video chat. I was doing that on my WM phone back in the 90's. Apple has absolutely no problem blatantly copying other people's ideas and portraying them as 1) their own creation 2) exclusive to Apple 3) a new technology when in fact all three are false.
My biggest problem with Apple is that they are so very deceptive in everything they do. Their ads 'infer' things that are untrue, insult competitors using false statements, and rely upon the ignorance of the general public to peddle their platform.
General public: Yes you can connect your non-iPhone to a TV. You can do it without a proprietary "Apple box" and most of the time over the air using open standards supports by many new TVs. Apple would have you believe you need to buy hundreds of dollars of proprietary hardware to do this, and the stupidest part is that Apple could do it without requiring the proprietary hardware, they just want to shaft you at every opportunity.
It's easier in windows for the same reason everything is easier in windows. There is a metric shit ton of hacking tools designed to hack that specific platform. Just off the top of my head I can think of at least three 'password recovery' floppy/CD images for windows that will just boot up and reset or grab the password off a windows machine, and I don't have to know how to do anything more than insert the disk and press the power button. I'm sure disks like this have been or will be made for any OS, but there is just so damn many for windows.
Same thing for just about anything else windows, for example, have you ever desired a waveform editor? A NES emulator? A file manager? There are a lot of options for shenanigans, but there are a lot of options for everything else too. It's organic to being the most widely used platform.
A SQL injection and Javascript hack? You obviously don't know what you're talking about. You don't hack a local computer with a "SQL injection attack". I mean, even if the guy had SQL server installed on his computer... oh wait, that's right, you're a moron, why am I trying to explain anything to you. I'm sure you'll "clarify" how a "SQL injection attack" would help compromise a local system.
Local is easy, If the disk isn't encrypted just reinstall the OS - no matter what OS you're using - now you have full ownership of everything.
Science is never theoretically settled, but I'm bored by people pretending that suddenly tomorrow gravity could become a repulsive force, or electrons could suddenly double their mass.
Who's making that argument?
If the earth began a 10 year cooling trend (falsifying AGW, if such a thing can be done) you would be as surprised that AGW theory was incorrect as you would be to find that the theory of gravitational attraction was wrong? I think not!
There are degrees of certainty, and there is a lot of uncertainty surrounding AGW theory. For one, it cannot be reproduced or tested in a laboratory. Gravity can. In fact, it cannot be reproduced or tested anywhere ever, doesn't that give you even a little bit of skepticism? There is just as much evidence to support the belief in ghosts using EMF meters as there is to believe in AGW using computer models. At best AGW is circumstantially correct, but it is far from being science, that horse left around the time of "Why would I give you my data when all you want to do is disprove my theory".
If you don't think scientists who get money by promoting AGW don't promote AGW than maybe there is no hope for you.
It's a moronic position when you consider that the same basic fact that no theory is complete applies to all theories, including theories like Newtonian mechanics and Quantum mechanics, both of which despite obvious missing pieces and flaws are among the most successful theories ever developed.
I'm not sure if you were aware of this, but Newtonian physics is wrong. And has been for quite a while. We don't use it for anything but simple computer simulations (video games) where accuracy (science) isn't an issue. Science is not cumulative. Parts of previous theories are not used to create new theories. When a theory is proven wrong a single time, like Newtonian physics, than it is no longer a valid theory. That you think that people are still trying to defend Newtonian physics speaks volumes about you. The moment a theory is falsified it is only useful in the study of the "history of science" an no longer useful in the practice of science. Read T.H. Khun's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions". He's the guy who created the word "paradigm" to describe these revolutions.
I don't know why I'm arguing with you about Riverside being rural or having a mass transit. You can read it yourself they are the largest exporter of oranges in all of CA, I've been there dozens of times. There is a city but it is surrounded by farms. You are not "suck on an island" in CA, mass transit will take you anywhere and you don't have to wait for more than 10 minutes for a bus to arrive, I don't know what you experienced but that is not the norm.
Is it true that you need a link to tell you what Head of Governemnt and Head of State mean?
Since it is so elementary why don't you explain it to me or provide a link.
Main Entry: state
Function: noun
often attrib 1 a : a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory; especially : one that is sovereign b : the political organization that has supreme civil authority and political power and serves as the basis of government —see also compelling state interest at INTEREST 3a, SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE c : a government or politically organized society having a particular character state>
2 : the operations or concerns of the government of a country : the sphere of administration and supreme political power of a country (as in international relations) state> state>
3 a : one of the constituent units of a nation having a federal government; specifically : one of the fifty such units comprising the great part of the U.S. —see also STATE LAW b : the territory of a state
I added the emphasis. So perhaps you are wrong? Maybe you can find an example somewhere on the internet that proves dictionary.com wrong?
And of course by biggest argument you ignore all together again. You are the subject of a king/queen in a monarchy and therefore not a free man. Why don't you feel like you have reconcile that? This will be the third time you ignored it so I have to assume I've hit a nerve.
The U.S. fought a civil war to throw off the democrats who were a) propagating slavery, b) propagating the law of succession, c) wanted a monarchy in the U.S.. Your current government does not believe that "all men are created equal". You have the law of succession which was abolished at the founding of the U.S. along with slavery. And maybe you forget that slavery was tomb stoned in the Constitution of 1778 nearly 100 year before the idea even occurred to the British the founders set a date for slavery to cease to exist. Indeed, by the time the British outlawed slavery the abolitionist movement was already in full force, all of the union states had already outlawed slavery and were in pitched battles to wipe it out.
Your government, today, believes that people of royal birth are inherently better than everyone else. You pay for their expensive cars and homes because why? Their blood is better than your blood? God favors the king? This sort of subjugation is almost as bad as slavery, you are still a slave and you don't even know it, and there's nothing you can do about it because your form of government considers this righteous behavior. At least someone must explain to me where and why my tax dollars are being spent, maybe I don't agree with the purpose, but we have universal suffrage, a recourse, something your country only plays lip service to, meaning: good luck firing the queen. Once your country throws off the monarchy, and only then, can call yourself civilized, "God save the queen" will never be an acceptable answer to an free person. I hope you feel the same way.
You are labouring under the delusion that no private healthcare is available to UK citizens.
Guess what? It is.
In the same way that your country has govenrnment funded education and private education.
The big difference is that the government doesn't take a portion of our pay and say it is for our medical care. Becuase of this our medical intitutions are much better financed, we don't have 50 year old EKGs etc. Consider this quote from wikipedia:
All Canadians have access to similar care at a considerably lower cost." There is "no question" that the lower cost has come at the cost of "restriction of supply with sub-optimal access to services," said Bell [President and CEO of University Health Network, Toronto].
Did it ever occur to you that "you get what you pay for"? We have a better health care system here in the U.S. because we pay a lot more for it. More new procedures and medical technology is developed in the U.S. than in any other country (Ask yourself why! Don't just ignore the fact! ) We keep our money and are able to spend it any way we like, on private medicine, or on a new computer, its called freedom, I hope it comes your way some day.
Thankyou for bringing up slavery. Abolished in Britain before the United States.
The abolitionist movement started in the U.S. long before it reached the U.K..
One of the first protests against the enslavement of Africans came from German and Dutch Quakers in Pennsylvania in 1688.
It wasn't until 100 years later that the British government even considered the question, and by that time slavery had been tomb stoned in the Constitution. Some people didn't like that, there was a war, the rest is history.
False. I have direct personal experience of this. A half hour walk to a bus stop...
Then I guess you should register one or more of the following domain names before the famous beer company realizes its oversight, some semi-nude woman just now told me godaddy will apparently give them to you for $7.99/yr. Or get over the sub domain thing and put a minus in the domain name e.g.: unrtst-leroy-miller.com. The list of options is almost inexhaustible. Add that to the fact that most people are not going to do this.
You are so uneducated that I almost don't want to reply. Conservative means the old way and liberal means the new way. That's not my opinion that is a fact. The Left vs. Right means the old guard vs. the new guard. It was coined in France, but the problem with your interpretation is that the old guard in France is pro monarchy while the old guard in the U.S.A. is pure libertarian. The republican party was founded on the abolition of slavery. Let's do a little more research to see where the democrat party comes from:
To discourage black voting, Southern Democrats resorted to violence. The white supremacist group Ku Klux Klan terrorized black political leaders to counter the Republican party's power base. Many blacks were killed (often lynched) for attempting to exercise their right to vote, for being members of political organizations and for attending school.
GOTTA LOVE THOSE DEMOCRATS!
Truman had to use a executive order to repeal segregation in the army because he knew it would be opposed by segregationist democrats in the south. One of the great democrat thinkers Pierre-Joseph Proudhon said famously "Property is theft!".
That you know none of this and you think that ""Liberalism" is the Enlightenment philosophy of individual liberty upon which the US was founded." proves to me that you are a product of our wonderful education system that is run by liberals. To help educate you: Liberalism is the push in the U.S. to bring European style socialism or communism to the U.S.A.
Republicans are a terrible party!To the extent that they are like the Democrat party.
I don't stand in defense of the "Republican" brand, and there is no written dogma for "Republicans". "Conservative" on the hand is an ideology, it has tons of written "law" that says "thou shalt have the smallest government possible", "thou shalt tax as minimally as possible".
Vote for the more conservative republicans in the primaries and kick the RINOs out, don't vote for communists or socialists then complain about the government making your life difficult. Some republicans want to shrink the size of government. For example Ron Paul (and there are many others) is in charge of oversight of the federal reserve and is the author of End the Fed and wants nothing more than to shut the fed down.
So your idea that "the two parties are the same" is just demonstrably false.
This is a fact that cannot be contested: A vote for a Democrat is a vote to grow government, raise taxes and increase the role of government in your life.
This is conservative law: The Law by Frederick Bastiat (1801-1850). It is very short. If you have a problem with anything in this essay than you have a problem with the ideology. Don't paint the entire "right wing" with the same brush.
I'm pretty sure the position of the "Conservatiods" is to not take your tax money in the first place. Anyone who says different isn't a real "Conservatiods"
Personal "mini" NASs already exist and have for several years, IPv6 works across most modern networks already. I think I was being generous in saying in 3 years we should see fully functional IPv6 networks across the global. Really, they are working right now.
Do you really think it will take 113 years to fully adopt IPv6? It only took 20 years to create the whole internet as we know it. It only took about 70 years to create computers, the internet and most all technological advances as we know them today.
In your opinion, what technological limitation is going to put a 113 year delay on this idea?
You could always use a number or geographic location in your name too. Like james.david.smith-socal.com or even use the TLD in a creative way. The number of combinations boggles the mind, you should have no problem finding an exact match or a one off (add a character). I'm sure a lot of the people asking "but what about my domain" are resourceful enough to figure out how to get a good domain name without sacrificing readability, and in the case of geographic location they may even add a little extra info.
That's pretty hard to believe. And there's nothing wrong with using a sub domain. Either you've got a spectacularly common name or you're just fibbing.
When IPV6 becomes more widely adopted and we dispose of all this NATting more devices will be on a classless network and this sort of service will be sold at best buy to run on your own mini-NAS build into your year 2014 computer.
Slashdot Mirror
When I said "I take nothing at face value" I was talking about this report and many others that claim the demise of the Earth is nigh. But I will continue, just to prove how foolish you are, because you seem like the sort that needs proof.
Not all flames are hot, moron. You can stick your hand in many flames. That you don't know that speaks volumes about you.
The laws don't change to be sure, but our interpretation of the laws change every day. Someone finds something that invalidates our previous understanding. Take an obvious recent case like Maybe - nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.
And only a moron, like yourself, would believe that an experiment at a school science fair accurately predicts how gas mixtures will radiate heat into space.
This just is false. How do you "calculate" something that is not quantifiable? Nobody knows how much C02 the earth itself creates Without that, what the fuck are you doing?
Sorry bro, AGW is not falsifiable. That is in fact the biggest issue I have with the theory. Can you tell me what "event" or "condition" would falsify it?
Because it can't possibly be wrong, right? Listen to yourself, you say in one breath it is falsifiable, then get within inches of realization then step back and say "well, it can't be wrong, we just haven't figured it out all the way".
I noticed you omitted "we may be wrong". Sounds a lot more like a religion.
And why is it that I would talk about another group of people that have nothing to do with this argument? I'm sorry, did I say: "I am a priest" earlier? What makes you think creationism has anything to do with it? You know what, I'll bet these crazy creationists also think communism is bad, murder is bad and that you shouldn't paint your house magenta. I happen to agree with all of that. Does that somehow make me a creationist?
I'm guessing you're talking about Hansen. It may be stressful to you, but Hansen did get caught
Yellowstone Caldera
True, but only if someone was observing and recording the data. All we know about "back then" is what we can infer from tree rings and ice core records. All we really know for sure about "back then" is that nobody was taking any sort of accurate measure of what was happening. We have a metric shit ton of anticdotal evidence that the ice sheets were not there as early as a thousand years ago (northern farms in greenland, Roman maps of an ice-free Antarctica) but since nobody bothered to write anything down it's anybodies guess. The issue is, some people are making guesses, admittedly educated guess, but guesses nonetheless, and then portraying them as actionable fact.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Educated guess+Computer modeling != extraordinary evidence let alone fact. Just do a word find for "fact" on this page to find the number of pro AGW guys claiming that AGW is a fact, these people are non-scientific zealots. These zealots are the face of AGW. I am not a zealot, I am a skeptic, I take nothing at face value, I question the existence of god. I use strong deductive logic to support my arguments. I am a scientist.
Now if only Norton would quarantine and delete itself upon initial post-factory bootup.
Jerry:"Little Jerry can run down the hallway in 12.7 seconds!"
George:"Is that good?"
Jerry:"I don't know!"
To quote David Putty: "Uh huh, that's right"
Did you know there's a caldera under Yosemite today that's causing some unprecedented seismic activity? Perhaps you would like to pose a rhetorical question about that: "It took 10,000 years for the caldera to build up and now in the last 50 years there's some yet-to-be-seen seismic activity and you think that's nothing to worry about!?". Maybe we can look at some heavenly bodies next and opine rhetorical about that.
Now that's some real science! What is that the ja-billionth placeholder? More like the jabroni placeholder. I think you've got that ice down to the size of a flea's underwear. Maybe you should add a few more zeros just to help drive the point home. Take the advice of Mark Twain: "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."
No, he ran over my FreeBSD OS and fucked my x86 architecture. And all after he promised that he wasn't at all attracted to that stuff!
Bulk erasure method using a .50 cal.
And you're surprised? They got a free ride by hijacking BSD to use in their desktop OS. They're using Intel processors after bashing them as inferior for more than a decade. I'm at a loss trying to think of any hardware that is truly innovative that Apple actually created themselves. I'm sick of hearing about how if I had an iPhone I could read my favorite books or video chat. I was doing that on my WM phone back in the 90's. Apple has absolutely no problem blatantly copying other people's ideas and portraying them as 1) their own creation 2) exclusive to Apple 3) a new technology when in fact all three are false.
My biggest problem with Apple is that they are so very deceptive in everything they do. Their ads 'infer' things that are untrue, insult competitors using false statements, and rely upon the ignorance of the general public to peddle their platform.
General public: Yes you can connect your non-iPhone to a TV. You can do it without a proprietary "Apple box" and most of the time over the air using open standards supports by many new TVs. Apple would have you believe you need to buy hundreds of dollars of proprietary hardware to do this, and the stupidest part is that Apple could do it without requiring the proprietary hardware, they just want to shaft you at every opportunity.
Apple users: Grab your socks.
It's easier in windows for the same reason everything is easier in windows. There is a metric shit ton of hacking tools designed to hack that specific platform. Just off the top of my head I can think of at least three 'password recovery' floppy/CD images for windows that will just boot up and reset or grab the password off a windows machine, and I don't have to know how to do anything more than insert the disk and press the power button. I'm sure disks like this have been or will be made for any OS, but there is just so damn many for windows.
Same thing for just about anything else windows, for example, have you ever desired a waveform editor? A NES emulator? A file manager? There are a lot of options for shenanigans, but there are a lot of options for everything else too. It's organic to being the most widely used platform.
A SQL injection and Javascript hack? You obviously don't know what you're talking about. You don't hack a local computer with a "SQL injection attack". I mean, even if the guy had SQL server installed on his computer... oh wait, that's right, you're a moron, why am I trying to explain anything to you. I'm sure you'll "clarify" how a "SQL injection attack" would help compromise a local system.
Local is easy, If the disk isn't encrypted just reinstall the OS - no matter what OS you're using - now you have full ownership of everything.
They make some pretty large zip lock bags, and they're great at keeping your cables from fornicating.
Who's making that argument?
If the earth began a 10 year cooling trend (falsifying AGW, if such a thing can be done) you would be as surprised that AGW theory was incorrect as you would be to find that the theory of gravitational attraction was wrong? I think not!
There are degrees of certainty, and there is a lot of uncertainty surrounding AGW theory. For one, it cannot be reproduced or tested in a laboratory. Gravity can. In fact, it cannot be reproduced or tested anywhere ever, doesn't that give you even a little bit of skepticism? There is just as much evidence to support the belief in ghosts using EMF meters as there is to believe in AGW using computer models. At best AGW is circumstantially correct, but it is far from being science, that horse left around the time of "Why would I give you my data when all you want to do is disprove my theory".
If you don't think scientists who get money by promoting AGW don't promote AGW than maybe there is no hope for you.
I'm not sure if you were aware of this, but Newtonian physics is wrong. And has been for quite a while. We don't use it for anything but simple computer simulations (video games) where accuracy (science) isn't an issue. Science is not cumulative . Parts of previous theories are not used to create new theories. When a theory is proven wrong a single time, like Newtonian physics, than it is no longer a valid theory. That you think that people are still trying to defend Newtonian physics speaks volumes about you. The moment a theory is falsified it is only useful in the study of the "history of science" an no longer useful in the practice of science. Read T.H. Khun's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions". He's the guy who created the word "paradigm" to describe these revolutions.
FTFY
Underestimating ice melting would mean not understanding temperature increases.
Since it is so elementary why don't you explain it to me or provide a link.
Wait, I'll provide one for you: From Dictionary.com
I added the emphasis. So perhaps you are wrong? Maybe you can find an example somewhere on the internet that proves dictionary.com wrong?
And of course by biggest argument you ignore all together again. You are the subject of a king/queen in a monarchy and therefore not a free man. Why don't you feel like you have reconcile that? This will be the third time you ignored it so I have to assume I've hit a nerve.
Your government, today, believes that people of royal birth are inherently better than everyone else. You pay for their expensive cars and homes because why? Their blood is better than your blood? God favors the king? This sort of subjugation is almost as bad as slavery, you are still a slave and you don't even know it, and there's nothing you can do about it because your form of government considers this righteous behavior. At least someone must explain to me where and why my tax dollars are being spent, maybe I don't agree with the purpose, but we have universal suffrage, a recourse, something your country only plays lip service to, meaning: good luck firing the queen. Once your country throws off the monarchy, and only then, can call yourself civilized, "God save the queen" will never be an acceptable answer to an free person. I hope you feel the same way.
The big difference is that the government doesn't take a portion of our pay and say it is for our medical care. Becuase of this our medical intitutions are much better financed, we don't have 50 year old EKGs etc. Consider this quote from wikipedia:
Did it ever occur to you that "you get what you pay for"? We have a better health care system here in the U.S. because we pay a lot more for it. More new procedures and medical technology is developed in the U.S. than in any other country (Ask yourself why! Don't just ignore the fact! ) We keep our money and are able to spend it any way we like, on private medicine, or on a new computer, its called freedom, I hope it comes your way some day.
The abolitionist movement started in the U.S. long before it reached the U.K..
It wasn't until 100 years later that the British government even considered the question, and by that time slavery had been tomb stoned in the Constitution. Some people didn't like that, there was a war, the rest is history.
A) Riverside is extremely rural B) There is tons of public transportati
Then I guess you should register one or more of the following domain names before the famous beer company realizes its oversight, some semi-nude woman just now told me godaddy will apparently give them to you for $7.99/yr. Or get over the sub domain thing and put a minus in the domain name e.g.: unrtst-leroy-miller.com. The list of options is almost inexhaustible. Add that to the fact that most people are not going to do this.
miller.net
miller.org
miller.info
miller.me
miller.mobi
miller.biz
miller.us
miller.com.ag
miller.net.ag
miller.org.ag
miller.com.bz
miller.net.co
miller.nom.co
It may shame to to read the history of the U.S.A. but you'll find that democrats were the slave owners, democrats were pro law of succession. Democrats were against the 3/5ths law. Democrats ruled for slavery in the Dred Scott case. After the civil war, democrats were pro segregation, democrats voted against every single civil rights act all the way up to the last one. Wilson, a democrat president segregated the army. Here's a fine quote for you
GOTTA LOVE THOSE DEMOCRATS!
Truman had to use a executive order to repeal segregation in the army because he knew it would be opposed by segregationist democrats in the south. One of the great democrat thinkers Pierre-Joseph Proudhon said famously "Property is theft!".
That you know none of this and you think that ""Liberalism" is the Enlightenment philosophy of individual liberty upon which the US was founded." proves to me that you are a product of our wonderful education system that is run by liberals. To help educate you: Liberalism is the push in the U.S. to bring European style socialism or communism to the U.S.A.
PLEASE EDUCATE YOURSELF! Read The Law.
Republicans are a terrible party! To the extent that they are like the Democrat party.
I don't stand in defense of the "Republican" brand, and there is no written dogma for "Republicans". "Conservative" on the hand is an ideology, it has tons of written "law" that says "thou shalt have the smallest government possible", "thou shalt tax as minimally as possible".
Vote for the more conservative republicans in the primaries and kick the RINOs out, don't vote for communists or socialists then complain about the government making your life difficult. Some republicans want to shrink the size of government. For example Ron Paul (and there are many others) is in charge of oversight of the federal reserve and is the author of End the Fed and wants nothing more than to shut the fed down.
So your idea that "the two parties are the same" is just demonstrably false.
This is a fact that cannot be contested: A vote for a Democrat is a vote to grow government, raise taxes and increase the role of government in your life.
This is conservative law: The Law by Frederick Bastiat (1801-1850). It is very short. If you have a problem with anything in this essay than you have a problem with the ideology. Don't paint the entire "right wing" with the same brush.
Than you use a prefix or suffix with your geographic location, area code, address, you name it. And I doubt that anyone has exhausted all of the TLDs.
I'm pretty sure the position of the "Conservatiods" is to not take your tax money in the first place. Anyone who says different isn't a real "Conservatiods"
Personal "mini" NASs already exist and have for several years, IPv6 works across most modern networks already. I think I was being generous in saying in 3 years we should see fully functional IPv6 networks across the global. Really, they are working right now.
Personal NASes
IPv6 adoption rates
Do you really think it will take 113 years to fully adopt IPv6? It only took 20 years to create the whole internet as we know it. It only took about 70 years to create computers, the internet and most all technological advances as we know them today.
In your opinion, what technological limitation is going to put a 113 year delay on this idea?
You could always use a number or geographic location in your name too. Like james.david.smith-socal.com or even use the TLD in a creative way. The number of combinations boggles the mind, you should have no problem finding an exact match or a one off (add a character). I'm sure a lot of the people asking "but what about my domain" are resourceful enough to figure out how to get a good domain name without sacrificing readability, and in the case of geographic location they may even add a little extra info.
That's pretty hard to believe. And there's nothing wrong with using a sub domain. Either you've got a spectacularly common name or you're just fibbing.
When IPV6 becomes more widely adopted and we dispose of all this NATting more devices will be on a classless network and this sort of service will be sold at best buy to run on your own mini-NAS build into your year 2014 computer.