Not to take away your point but I think You're talking about aprox. 1800. This was the peak of capitalism, when owning a one room home was enough to make you one of the 1% (actually higher then that) and relatively rich. As you pointed out, the average person could be executed for the smallest infraction and the well off actually used to go on about how hanging was too lenient. That is capitalism at its unregulated finest.
Yes, it is what the "free market" leads to. The free market says the most efficient players will do the best and it is always more efficient to pay the government for regulations then to innovate and create a better product. You just have to look at the amount of money being spent by "free enterprise" on the current American election with the most successful players spending money on both sides as whoever wins is a win for the capitalist.
Legislatures only appeared relatively recently. Some laws always existed. The law of gravity states that if you step off a high cliff, you die. The law about swimming too far also can have death as a punishment. The law about poking a sleeping bear says you better have a good defence or you'll suffer. The laws against murder and theft are similar, kill someone and their relatives will show up demanding punishment. Eventually wise people were asked to decide on the punishment, payment or even if the killing was justified, hence came common law. Finally legislatures wrote down the laws in statutes and then got carried away and invented more. The point being that laws at their core are just cause and effect.
Bad example considering they're both branches of the same religion with different interpretations of the same God. You should have said something like "Christianity and Hinduism aren't very closely related..."
Read it again, The last low-ice event related to orbital forcing (high insolation) was in the early Holocene, after which the northern high latitudes cooled overall, and note that the higher insolation was caused by variations in Earths orbit, not a hotter Sun. Whether summer in a hemisphere happens at apogee or perigee affects the climate.
Actually I should have been more exact, the majority of carbon in the lithosphere is bound in rock form. Wiki says 80% as limestone etc and 20% as oil and such. Most carbon is probably in the mantle.
Not to argue your point but I understand the majority of the Earths carbon is actually bound up in rocks like limestone. In geological time this is the natural way carbon is sequestered.
Bradly Manning was exercising his constitutional rights, namely the very first amendment to the Constitution that said that Congress can not pass any laws restricting speech. How you can damn someone for exercising his rights I don't know.
Huh? George the III was the rightful heir to George the II who was the rightful heir to George the first of Hanover. Now it can be argued about whether George the first was an usurper, but the only one with a better claim to the throne was James Stuart the III and VIII, a Catholic, after the English had a revolution to stop the Catholics from being King (they believed in the divine right of Kings, very un-british). The actual usurper was perhaps William of Orange, who was invited (with his wife Mary, daughter of the King) by Parliament to take up the Crown usurping James Stuart the II & VII.
'tis the common law, the laws that exist without the legislature legislating. To be exact, covering up what might have been considered to be collateral damage in wartime. The reason to cover it up is because the killers felt that they did wrong instead of a simple mistake.
Interesting read though I'd consider Gemini 8 spinning out of control to have been pretty close to killing astronauts, couple of years earlier too. Of course it was Neil who saved that mission as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_8#Emergency
The whole thing was a way for government to bypass the 4th amendment so it shouldn't be legalized. Just because when the Bill of Rights was written electronic papers and communications were unknown doesn't mean they shouldn't be covered.
The problem with Jupiter's large satellites is radiation. Ganymede might be doable but the rest are too radioactive. Titan seems the best bet, air pressure just a bit higher then Earths but you would need good insulation as it's damn cold.
The problem with Venus is a hydrogen shortage caused by the lack of a magnetosphere. Whether one would start up by cooling is very questionable as the planet is barely rotating and I don't believe the crust has anything to do with the magnetic dynamo operating thousands of miles below the crust. Would be interesting to land a few seismometers and get an idea of the internals of Venus. The assumption that it is similar to Earth is just that, an assumption.
Any practical method of destroying the world that is used will also probably be used to destroy any viable breeding populations off-world. At that, any off-world breeding populations will probably be very easy to destroy. Considering how war-like mankind is, it is really hard to imagine off-world populations lasting long term when you consider how vulnerable they'd be.
On a trip to Alpha Centauri, to take advantage of relativity, you'd pretty well need 1 G of acceleration. At 1 G for a year you'd be close to light speed and not even 25% there. A few more months ship time and it would be time to slow down. Perhaps 3 years ship time and 7 years Earth time. (Numbers pulled out of my ass but fairly close). Any less acceleration and you're not going to get much of an advantage from relativity. Any faster acceleration would be uncomfortable but even with inertia dampers so you can accelerate to 99+% of light speed instantly, it'll still mean less then 5 years passing on the Earth. That 1G acceleration helps much more on longer trips, 30 light years only takes perhaps a year more ship time and still only 33 years pass on Earth. There was a chart around that I can't find right now that showed trip times, if you just accelerate all the way it was something like 30 years to Andromeda and only 70 years ship time to the edge of the Universe. Of course by the time you got there the edge would be 27 Billion light years further away. One big problem is how do you protect your ship? At 90% C, hitting a grain of sand would be deadly and at 99.99999999% of C, light itself gets pretty energetic, little well a molecule.
The American Revolution forced other countries into being tobacco producers. England burned a lot of American tobacco and started importing from other countries and other countries were affected by the blockades. Tobacco caught on in Turkey in the late 17th century and I'd guess they were growing it as England was importing it from the middle east after the Revolution. You are right though about America being the major source of tobacco and farmers growing their own. Of course by the end of the 19th century more people were becoming urban and needed to purchase their tobacco. The question of whether lung cancer was very rare a hundred odd years ago may have been lack of diagnosing, it's hard to say. Same with whether it is tobacco additives or tobacco that causes lung cancer. I can think of studies that could be done but they're not practical. It's mostly just a thought. As is the idea that it is not tobacco that is bad, but cigarettes including the additives. The American Tobacco Co. got their monopoly honestly through a combination of luck (and taking advantage of it) and innovation. They (Duke Tobacco(?) at the time) licensed the first cigarette rolling machine then innovated the paper cigarette package at a time when everyone used tins and innovated heavily in marketing. They invented baseball cards, signed up all the major stars to exclusive contracts and marketed them to hell. They were successful enough to buy up most all the competition and became a monopoly. The justice department broke them up in the 1910's if I remember correctly. (actually 1911) I found out most of this when reading a history of baseball cards and haven't checked it out too much. Quickly looking at the entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Tobacco_Company#History_of_the_American_Tobacco_Company I don't seem too wrong.
Hard to find info on how much tobacco was consumed by individuals. It does seem it was immensely popular long before the WW I. Cigars were popular for a long time and one big cigar must be equal to a few cigarettes. Tobacco excise taxes accounted for a third of the American Federal governments revenue up till 1883, The rolling machine was invented in 1881. The American Tobacco Co. revenue went from $25 million in 1890 to $316 million in 1903. IIRC they also became a monopoly during this time so once again it's hard to say why revenue went up so much. This would be about 50 years before the '30's so it is quite possible that it was increased smoking that led to more lung cancer. Also possible that tobacco mixed with other carcinogens also led to raising lung cancer cases.
One more reason why I'm not voting. At this point I'm not choosing, I'm enabling.
Not voting just gives the message that you don't care. Is there no parties in the States like Canada's Rhinoceros Party? They were led by a real Rhino as
It declared that the rhinoceros was an appropriate symbol for a political party since politicians, by nature, are "thick-skinned, slow-moving, dim-witted, can move fast as hell when in danger, and have large, hairy horns growing out of the middle of their faces.
and truthfully promised not to keep any of their promises and they had some good promises. Winning the cold war by towing Antarctica up to Canada, ensuring we had all the cold. Ending crime by eliminating all laws. Annexing the States so our resources aren't controlled by foreigners. Shifting to driving on the left with a five year phase in. Declaring war on Belgium because Tintin killed a rhinoceros. Calling off the war if Belgium delivered a case of beer and some mussels to party headquarters (Belgium did). They did come in fourth in the federal election of '84 and in a few contests came in second. Voting for a party like them sends a better message then abstaining. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoceros_Party_of_Canada_(1963%E2%80%931993) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhino_party
Lung cancer was quite rare up till about the 1930's even though people had been smoking for hundreds of years and quite a few lived till their '70's. (All the lung cancer cases I've known have been in their mid 60's) While there is very good correlation between smoking and lung cancer there is still not as strong of a correlation between tobacco and lung cancer. There is a huge list of chemicals that are added to tobacco for flavour, even burning and even to make it more addicting. There is the polonium in the soil as a by-product of fertilizing. There is the residuals from the days when they used lead arsenic as an insecticide. As the saying goes, correlation is not causation.
You're getting mixed up between the King and Parliament. Parliament was and is supreme, with a couple of real revolutions to prove it. They actually cut off the head of one King and fired another to prove they were supreme. It is Parliament that has done taxes since the 13th century including taxing the American colonies. The French and Indian wars meant killing French allies and supporting English allies. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 granted natives certain rights to their land which upset American colonists, especially land speculators, who considered the land theirs by default. Any child in public school knows this was an important reason behind the revolt and is the reason that our Constitution includes the passage 25. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as to abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal, treaty or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the aboriginal peoples of Canada including
(a) any rights or freedoms that have been recognized by the Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763; and
(b) any rights or freedoms that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.
One of the ideas of the Americans was to improve government, with USA v1, then v2 with the hope that v3 would be better but considering how hard it was to get agreement on v2, v3 hasn't happened yet and the way things look to me, v3 will be a step backwards.
The constitution was ratified and came into force in 1789 while the bill of rights was added afterwards in 1791. Note also the bill of rights was only applicable to the federal government which meant it did not apply to the governments of the States.
We're talking about a bunch of land speculators who revolted when their King wanted to treat all his subjects equally. Or perhaps you don't consider native Americans to be people? The constitution like all good compromises was disliked by most all the signers and it was expected it would be replaced by a better document within a couple of decades.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to take away your point but I think You're talking about aprox. 1800. This was the peak of capitalism, when owning a one room home was enough to make you one of the 1% (actually higher then that) and relatively rich. As you pointed out, the average person could be executed for the smallest infraction and the well off actually used to go on about how hanging was too lenient. That is capitalism at its unregulated finest.
Yes, it is what the "free market" leads to. The free market says the most efficient players will do the best and it is always more efficient to pay the government for regulations then to innovate and create a better product.
You just have to look at the amount of money being spent by "free enterprise" on the current American election with the most successful players spending money on both sides as whoever wins is a win for the capitalist.
Legislatures only appeared relatively recently. Some laws always existed. The law of gravity states that if you step off a high cliff, you die. The law about swimming too far also can have death as a punishment. The law about poking a sleeping bear says you better have a good defence or you'll suffer.
The laws against murder and theft are similar, kill someone and their relatives will show up demanding punishment. Eventually wise people were asked to decide on the punishment, payment or even if the killing was justified, hence came common law. Finally legislatures wrote down the laws in statutes and then got carried away and invented more.
The point being that laws at their core are just cause and effect.
Bad example considering they're both branches of the same religion with different interpretations of the same God. ..."
You should have said something like "Christianity and Hinduism aren't very closely related
I thought the Chinese didn't circumcise.
Read it again, The last low-ice event related to orbital forcing (high insolation) was in the early Holocene, after which the northern high latitudes cooled overall, and note that the higher insolation was caused by variations in Earths orbit, not a hotter Sun. Whether summer in a hemisphere happens at apogee or perigee affects the climate.
Actually I should have been more exact, the majority of carbon in the lithosphere is bound in rock form. Wiki says 80% as limestone etc and 20% as oil and such. Most carbon is probably in the mantle.
Not to argue your point but I understand the majority of the Earths carbon is actually bound up in rocks like limestone. In geological time this is the natural way carbon is sequestered.
Bradly Manning was exercising his constitutional rights, namely the very first amendment to the Constitution that said that Congress can not pass any laws restricting speech. How you can damn someone for exercising his rights I don't know.
Huh? George the III was the rightful heir to George the II who was the rightful heir to George the first of Hanover.
Now it can be argued about whether George the first was an usurper, but the only one with a better claim to the throne was James Stuart the III and VIII, a Catholic, after the English had a revolution to stop the Catholics from being King (they believed in the divine right of Kings, very un-british).
The actual usurper was perhaps William of Orange, who was invited (with his wife Mary, daughter of the King) by Parliament to take up the Crown usurping James Stuart the II & VII.
'tis the common law, the laws that exist without the legislature legislating.
To be exact, covering up what might have been considered to be collateral damage in wartime. The reason to cover it up is because the killers felt that they did wrong instead of a simple mistake.
Interesting read though I'd consider Gemini 8 spinning out of control to have been pretty close to killing astronauts, couple of years earlier too. Of course it was Neil who saved that mission as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_8#Emergency
The whole thing was a way for government to bypass the 4th amendment so it shouldn't be legalized. Just because when the Bill of Rights was written electronic papers and communications were unknown doesn't mean they shouldn't be covered.
The problem with Jupiter's large satellites is radiation. Ganymede might be doable but the rest are too radioactive.
Titan seems the best bet, air pressure just a bit higher then Earths but you would need good insulation as it's damn cold.
The problem with Venus is a hydrogen shortage caused by the lack of a magnetosphere. Whether one would start up by cooling is very questionable as the planet is barely rotating and I don't believe the crust has anything to do with the magnetic dynamo operating thousands of miles below the crust.
Would be interesting to land a few seismometers and get an idea of the internals of Venus. The assumption that it is similar to Earth is just that, an assumption.
Any practical method of destroying the world that is used will also probably be used to destroy any viable breeding populations off-world. At that, any off-world breeding populations will probably be very easy to destroy.
Considering how war-like mankind is, it is really hard to imagine off-world populations lasting long term when you consider how vulnerable they'd be.
Need a pretty good shield even at 10% of C.
On a trip to Alpha Centauri, to take advantage of relativity, you'd pretty well need 1 G of acceleration. At 1 G for a year you'd be close to light speed and not even 25% there. A few more months ship time and it would be time to slow down. Perhaps 3 years ship time and 7 years Earth time. (Numbers pulled out of my ass but fairly close).
Any less acceleration and you're not going to get much of an advantage from relativity. Any faster acceleration would be uncomfortable but even with inertia dampers so you can accelerate to 99+% of light speed instantly, it'll still mean less then 5 years passing on the Earth.
That 1G acceleration helps much more on longer trips, 30 light years only takes perhaps a year more ship time and still only 33 years pass on Earth.
There was a chart around that I can't find right now that showed trip times, if you just accelerate all the way it was something like 30 years to Andromeda and only 70 years ship time to the edge of the Universe. Of course by the time you got there the edge would be 27 Billion light years further away.
One big problem is how do you protect your ship? At 90% C, hitting a grain of sand would be deadly and at 99.99999999% of C, light itself gets pretty energetic, little well a molecule.
The American Revolution forced other countries into being tobacco producers. England burned a lot of American tobacco and started importing from other countries and other countries were affected by the blockades. Tobacco caught on in Turkey in the late 17th century and I'd guess they were growing it as England was importing it from the middle east after the Revolution.
You are right though about America being the major source of tobacco and farmers growing their own. Of course by the end of the 19th century more people were becoming urban and needed to purchase their tobacco.
The question of whether lung cancer was very rare a hundred odd years ago may have been lack of diagnosing, it's hard to say. Same with whether it is tobacco additives or tobacco that causes lung cancer. I can think of studies that could be done but they're not practical. It's mostly just a thought. As is the idea that it is not tobacco that is bad, but cigarettes including the additives.
The American Tobacco Co. got their monopoly honestly through a combination of luck (and taking advantage of it) and innovation. They (Duke Tobacco(?) at the time) licensed the first cigarette rolling machine then innovated the paper cigarette package at a time when everyone used tins and innovated heavily in marketing. They invented baseball cards, signed up all the major stars to exclusive contracts and marketed them to hell. They were successful enough to buy up most all the competition and became a monopoly. The justice department broke them up in the 1910's if I remember correctly. (actually 1911) I found out most of this when reading a history of baseball cards and haven't checked it out too much. Quickly looking at the entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Tobacco_Company#History_of_the_American_Tobacco_Company I don't seem too wrong.
Hard to find info on how much tobacco was consumed by individuals. It does seem it was immensely popular long before the WW I. Cigars were popular for a long time and one big cigar must be equal to a few cigarettes. Tobacco excise taxes accounted for a third of the American Federal governments revenue up till 1883, The rolling machine was invented in 1881. The American Tobacco Co. revenue went from $25 million in 1890 to $316 million in 1903. IIRC they also became a monopoly during this time so once again it's hard to say why revenue went up so much.
This would be about 50 years before the '30's so it is quite possible that it was increased smoking that led to more lung cancer. Also possible that tobacco mixed with other carcinogens also led to raising lung cancer cases.
One more reason why I'm not voting. At this point I'm not choosing, I'm enabling.
Not voting just gives the message that you don't care. Is there no parties in the States like Canada's Rhinoceros Party? They were led by a real Rhino as
It declared that the rhinoceros was an appropriate symbol for a political party since politicians, by nature, are "thick-skinned, slow-moving, dim-witted, can move fast as hell when in danger, and have large, hairy horns growing out of the middle of their faces.
and truthfully promised not to keep any of their promises and they had some good promises. Winning the cold war by towing Antarctica up to Canada, ensuring we had all the cold. Ending crime by eliminating all laws. Annexing the States so our resources aren't controlled by foreigners. Shifting to driving on the left with a five year phase in. Declaring war on Belgium because Tintin killed a rhinoceros. Calling off the war if Belgium delivered a case of beer and some mussels to party headquarters (Belgium did).
They did come in fourth in the federal election of '84 and in a few contests came in second. Voting for a party like them sends a better message then abstaining.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoceros_Party_of_Canada_(1963%E2%80%931993)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhino_party
Lung cancer was quite rare up till about the 1930's even though people had been smoking for hundreds of years and quite a few lived till their '70's. (All the lung cancer cases I've known have been in their mid 60's)
While there is very good correlation between smoking and lung cancer there is still not as strong of a correlation between tobacco and lung cancer. There is a huge list of chemicals that are added to tobacco for flavour, even burning and even to make it more addicting. There is the polonium in the soil as a by-product of fertilizing. There is the residuals from the days when they used lead arsenic as an insecticide. As the saying goes, correlation is not causation.
You're getting mixed up between the King and Parliament. Parliament was and is supreme, with a couple of real revolutions to prove it. They actually cut off the head of one King and fired another to prove they were supreme.
It is Parliament that has done taxes since the 13th century including taxing the American colonies. The French and Indian wars meant killing French allies and supporting English allies.
The Royal Proclamation of 1763 granted natives certain rights to their land which upset American colonists, especially land speculators, who considered the land theirs by default.
Any child in public school knows this was an important reason behind the revolt and is the reason that our Constitution includes the passage
25. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as to abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal, treaty or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the aboriginal peoples of Canada including
(a) any rights or freedoms that have been recognized by the Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763; and
(b) any rights or freedoms that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.
One of the ideas of the Americans was to improve government, with USA v1, then v2 with the hope that v3 would be better but considering how hard it was to get agreement on v2, v3 hasn't happened yet and the way things look to me, v3 will be a step backwards.
The constitution was ratified and came into force in 1789 while the bill of rights was added afterwards in 1791. Note also the bill of rights was only applicable to the federal government which meant it did not apply to the governments of the States.
We're talking about a bunch of land speculators who revolted when their King wanted to treat all his subjects equally. Or perhaps you don't consider native Americans to be people?
The constitution like all good compromises was disliked by most all the signers and it was expected it would be replaced by a better document within a couple of decades.