They have to "spend millions searching for answers" so that they'll magic up answers that look "scientific" enough so that boards of education and States will allow the clap-trap to be taught in public schools.
It is a framework for a civilization, look at Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions, the bulk of what is carried forth by the majority of the adherents is the social structure and guidelines for living.
Dietary laws have a reasonable place in the historical context, as do laws of inheritance, taboo marriage, what is and isn't "clean".
Religion isn't as much about an invisible friend in the sky as it is a framework for a society with a set of rules that can't easily be overruled.
Umm, even with the worst case scenarios from GCC, theres no reason why more people will die from the changes that might happen than would die of normal weather.
First, storage of these extra satellites? Its not trivial and its not simple and they degrade over time.
Second, building generic sats that could be used for different roles, rather than building 2-3 extra specialized birds, doesn't work so well in practice.
Third, faster, cheaper, better didn't work out so well for NASA and ESA.
Fourth, as for fixing the space junk, how are we going to fix it? It seems like its an actual problem already now that satellites have been destroyed by it.
OK, what budget you going to cut to afford the extra satellites? And you know that orbits have finite spots right? So you are going to clutter NEO with extra birds and debris.
As a species, we've survived much greater climate changes than the worst case scenarios from global climate change.
This is not a serious setback for the species. Climates have changed for the last 4.6 billion years and have changed radically during our time as a species on this planet. Heck, things have changed dramatically while man has had civilizations here.
Can't call the 787 a success yet. It hasn't flown yet, hasn't proved to be safe, hasn't proven the new materials used in the manufacture. Same for the A350.
"The airship flew from March 1936 until destroyed by fire 14 months later at the end of the first North American transatlantic journey of its second season of service."
No, the 747 can not fly supersonic in level flight. Boeing thought the market was going to go to supersonics in the early 70s, so the 747 had a dual role of subsonic transport and cargo aircraft (in the C-X program vs the C-5 Galaxy).
The wings and fuselage of the 747 are not nearly optimum for transonic/supersonic flight, nor are the engines of the 747 for supersonic flight.
There has been alot of progress in aerospace since 1969. NASA lost an Apollo crew during a test, NASA nearly lost an Apollo on a moon mission - two major accidents in 16 manned flights, one crew lost on the pad in prep. NASA lost two shuttles over the course of 131 flights.
Go look at accident rates per 100,000 hours flown in military aircraft for an example of how much safer and reliable aircraft are today.
As for 747-100s compared to the current 747. Max range of the 1969 747 was 5300 miles, 747-400 has a range of 7260 miles. Engine thrust has gone from 207 kN-223 kN to 276 kN-282 kN per engine with much much lower MTBF rates
Because then the police have to go through a corporation. In a tactical situation, like Mumbai, making the police/first responders go through the phone tree at a corporation like a cell phone company defeats the purpose of speeding things up.
Every country in Europe was "involved" in WW2, some were just not belligerents.
"In times of war, belligerent countries can be contrasted with neutral countries and non-belligerents. However, the application of the laws of war to neutral countries and the responsibilities of belligerents are not affected by any distinction between neutral countries, neutral powers or non-belligerents. A non-belligerent may nevertheless risk being considered a belligerent if it aids or supports a belligerent in a way proscribed by neutral countries."
Iceland is considered an "European" country and it was not occupied by the enemy.
Slashdot Mirror
They have to "spend millions searching for answers" so that they'll magic up answers that look "scientific" enough so that boards of education and States will allow the clap-trap to be taught in public schools.
Religion does explain something.
It is a framework for a civilization, look at Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions, the bulk of what is carried forth by the majority of the adherents is the social structure and guidelines for living.
Dietary laws have a reasonable place in the historical context, as do laws of inheritance, taboo marriage, what is and isn't "clean".
Religion isn't as much about an invisible friend in the sky as it is a framework for a society with a set of rules that can't easily be overruled.
I've been bitten by a spider commonly confused for the brown recluse, the Hobo Spider, it has a much wider range.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobo_spider
I was bit on the face in December 2001, had a good bit of necrosis and nerve damage.
Something to remember...
You don't have to tell Police about anything you are doing when they ask.
Since I use the USENET all the time, find anything I want and get it fast, I agree with blhack.
Stay off the USENET!
Yea, cause its all the SUVs fault.
Umm, even with the worst case scenarios from GCC, theres no reason why more people will die from the changes that might happen than would die of normal weather.
OK.
First, storage of these extra satellites? Its not trivial and its not simple and they degrade over time.
Second, building generic sats that could be used for different roles, rather than building 2-3 extra specialized birds, doesn't work so well in practice.
Third, faster, cheaper, better didn't work out so well for NASA and ESA.
Fourth, as for fixing the space junk, how are we going to fix it? It seems like its an actual problem already now that satellites have been destroyed by it.
OK, what budget you going to cut to afford the extra satellites? And you know that orbits have finite spots right? So you are going to clutter NEO with extra birds and debris.
As a species, we've survived much greater climate changes than the worst case scenarios from global climate change.
This is not a serious setback for the species. Climates have changed for the last 4.6 billion years and have changed radically during our time as a species on this planet. Heck, things have changed dramatically while man has had civilizations here.
The Eastern Roman Empire, which truly was the "Roman Empire" later on, lasted until 1453.
Like the USB they standardized on back in 98? Or Firewire?
1936 is 11 years before 1947. Not 21.
Can't call the 787 a success yet. It hasn't flown yet, hasn't proved to be safe, hasn't proven the new materials used in the manufacture. Same for the A350.
20 years?
From your own link.
"The airship flew from March 1936 until destroyed by fire 14 months later at the end of the first North American transatlantic journey of its second season of service."
No, the 747 can not fly supersonic in level flight. Boeing thought the market was going to go to supersonics in the early 70s, so the 747 had a dual role of subsonic transport and cargo aircraft (in the C-X program vs the C-5 Galaxy).
The wings and fuselage of the 747 are not nearly optimum for transonic/supersonic flight, nor are the engines of the 747 for supersonic flight.
There has been alot of progress in aerospace since 1969. NASA lost an Apollo crew during a test, NASA nearly lost an Apollo on a moon mission - two major accidents in 16 manned flights, one crew lost on the pad in prep. NASA lost two shuttles over the course of 131 flights.
Go look at accident rates per 100,000 hours flown in military aircraft for an example of how much safer and reliable aircraft are today.
As for 747-100s compared to the current 747.
Max range of the 1969 747 was 5300 miles, 747-400 has a range of 7260 miles. Engine thrust has gone from 207 kN-223 kN to 276 kN-282 kN per engine with much much lower MTBF rates
Where in the US or State constitutions are the legal rights to phone privileges spelled out?
Because then the police have to go through a corporation. In a tactical situation, like Mumbai, making the police/first responders go through the phone tree at a corporation like a cell phone company defeats the purpose of speeding things up.
Every country in Europe was "involved" in WW2, some were just not belligerents.
"In times of war, belligerent countries can be contrasted with neutral countries and non-belligerents. However, the application of the laws of war to neutral countries and the responsibilities of belligerents are not affected by any distinction between neutral countries, neutral powers or non-belligerents. A non-belligerent may nevertheless risk being considered a belligerent if it aids or supports a belligerent in a way proscribed by neutral countries."
Iceland is considered an "European" country and it was not occupied by the enemy.
100 Predators or even 100 reapers couldn't take down a F-22
Five years? No way. Twenty years, maybe there'll be a UAV kill on a manned fighter.
The Federal bureaucrats don't live in DC and so, don't vote in DC.
Especially since they already use a VIP version of the H-3. I don't think the Kestrel will be a good fit to replace both the H-60 and H-3.
The fully operational VH-71B, won't be out till '17 at this timeline, why not just use a brand new H-60M till the CH-53K is out?
I trust United Technologies schedules more than LM's Kestrel schedule.
Yes, a CH-47 or why not a CH-53E Super Stallion variant?
The POTUS only visits major capital cities?
Huh, I've seen AFO in Portland back in '96 after the floods, then again in September '96 during the campaign. Also saw AFO in Phoenix AZ.
Those airports are not being adapted to A380.