Already there is a constant flow of detrius coming raining down on all ocean floors. Some of it is consumed and some of it becomes locked in the ocean mud floor. This mud may very well become anearobic, and thatis a good thing, because that will keep metabolic rates low so that the amount of carbon removed from the cycle increases. The dead zones you refer to happen in coastal waters and are most likely caused by argicultural runoff, causing a hypertrophy situation. If you apply your nutrients intentionally there is no reason why you could no monitor to prevent a hypertrophy situation and still increase the production of that patch of ocean.
So what is it exactly that google did that was illegal? paying someone for some adspace does not make you responsible for the rest of the page. Or does the RIAAmob think otherwise?
so true. And what is even more amazing, after logging in (with bugmenot) the beginning of the article makes no mention what the special feature of OOo actually isThe go straight into installing and building a db. No mention whatsoever what the problem area is and why his solution is a good one. That combined with the silly pageturning thing made me give up reading it.
Harvest the top layer of them, concentrate and convert them to biofuel using TCP (total conversion proces, a kind of wet pyrolysis) A biofuel tanker with the appropriate machinery would go out on the ocean with a load of iron (or iron rich earth), spread the iron and at the same time harvest the algae and convert them to biofuel. Since it injects more minerals than it harvests, more carbon will be removed form the carbon cycle than would be harvested with the biofuel. Just an idea I would not like to see patented.
The US was not forced into war, they were the invading party FFS! There were no weapons of mass destruction and there was no indication that Iraq had any. The US knew that at the time of the invasion that their intelligence reports about WMD's were wrong. Hans Blix was not welcomed with open arms in Iraq, but you cannot blame them for that. After the invasion no WMD's were found. When was the last time the US let international observers into their weapons facilities or palaces? Or even Elections?
Whilst I have not been afffected by this war, I have had relatives that have been casualties of other conflicts. War is an ugly thing and no one ever wins it.
Well good on you. Too bad you did not learn the complete lesson that war has to be avoided at all costs. Invading another country is not avoiding it at all. Is Iraq really better off now that it was under Saddam?
And what was the violation of those resolution that was/is maiming US invasion troops? There was no legitimate reason to start this war (USian hawks like to ignore/distort that fact), and no UN resolution to declare war. The US has all the nasty weapons that they accused Iraq from developing, violates human rights when they feel like it (guantanamo, reditions etc) and routinely kills their own citizens. If there is an axis of evil, is has the US at its center. There are hundres of civilized countries that can resolve their differences without resorting to violence. Why can't the US do that?
As Ghandi once said: I do like Christ, it's the christians i have a problem with. They act so much unlike him. Santaclause and god are equal: both cannot be proven to exist, and both have a large following of people that act out his rituals. If you think it is hypocritical to make a child believe in Santa, it should be equally hypocritical to make a child believe in your invisible friend named god. In your judgement you overlook how eager kids are to believe in anything 'supernatural'. You could use that tendency to let them experience for themselves how easy their own minds can be deceived. That will give them more perspective on other religions, and that is the reason christians oppose making kids believe in Santa: kids could use that knowledge against them too.
Hah, a true believer! No moses was a human, yet you do consider his words special because you are taught that he had some special relationship with your invisible friend. Because of this you consider his proof of the existance of said invisible friend to be absolute. Yet you cannot mention it here yourself but must refer to a circular reasoning? If you take everything that is written down for truth, then you will not get very far in life. That is written down, so it is an omen. Please don't procreate, ok?
Questions that one could never answer are not worth discussing. So why do you want proof that your invisible friend does not exist? But i can try nonetheless: the majority of humans is religious, but the god(s) they believe in differ very much, unless you claim that your god is the same as the flying spagetti monster or the norse pantheon. No religioun has ever given objective proof that their god does exist, so that offers no explanation at the existance of religions. One can assume though that a lot of people have religious/spiritual feelings. Another assumption to introduce is the tendency of people to dominate and be dominated by other people. With these assumptions that only include human traits, one can explain the existance of different religions with different gods. Those assumptions do not require the existance of anything unexplainable, while (your) religion does. Even if those explanations where equal(*), Ochams razor tells you to choose the simpler one, which means that humans created god(s). (*) ofcourse to both sides of the argment this is not the case, both sides will see their solution as the best one. Compare it to telling a child that santaclaus does not exist; some kids will get so distressed by that, that its just cruel to tell them their imaginary sugardaddy does not exist. Please excuse me for being cruel, then;)
So you say that because the republican part of your olichargy holds more than 1 third of the seat (one of them always will in your two party system) the president can order the gouvernment all illegal things he likes, because congress could never impeach him. So how are your militias going? It is time to feed the tree of freedom, and I nominate every congrescritter that opposes impeaching BabyBush.
Why would you trust a company that makes these opening moves? My take on it is that use as a selection method and what they most need is sheeple that do not squeal too hard when they get done in the *rse. By screwing them even before they take the job they are weeding out theones that would. But be shure to tell the recruiter that this is why you are declining his offer. If it was an honest mistake he should be able to get it fixed, otherwise he will just don't care.
Is that your political right wing (so right in fact they'd be titled neonazi in europe) realised some decades ago that the media did not favour their standpoints. So they set up an orchestrated campaign to get 'their' people in key places in the media. You can just outright buy a paper, but it is much more productive to go slow and support those few journalists that support your political views and use your influence to get these people into key places. Which is what they did. A few decades later, the middle ground has swayed so much to the right, that the rest of the world is afraid you will fall of the edge. Considering how fascitoid your gouvernment/country has become, it might have fallen already. (your sercret service commands you to attack this anti-american post as hard as you can. Do you pattriotic duty and defend our free nation against those liberal foreigners, support out troups!)
Please exlain what double standard you are talking about? Why should pointing out that the US lost that war and stating that any killing of humans be somehow 'letting the terrorists of scott-free'? Does your US-fanboiship make you see things that are not there?
The gouverning elite has a very high incentive to keep the status quo, or even widen the separation between the 'classes'. If the poor underclass is big, that means more options for the upper class to exploit that. The method to produce more poor is to make prevent less children from middleclass families to establish themselves as such, and to keep the children from poor families from rising the social ladder. (Talking about groups and averages here, not induviduals). Good teachers that teach to these classes of kids actually stand in the way of these objectives, as their aim is to have their pupils to achieve the best they can and get the best follow-up education, essentially raising their social status. So what needs to be done is to frustrate those teachers so much that they give up.
American civilians back home condemned the attacks on civilians, but only because they didn't understand the aforementioned. They still don't.
Meanwhile, American soldiers suffered abnormal psychological harm because their survival required them to begin killing 'civilians', including women and children. It ended poorly for everyone, although I suppose the VC regard it as a triumphant "peoples' uprising" or some such euphemism.
Well, it is not only the former vietcong that regards 'vietnam' as a major defeat for the US, and thus a bloody victory for Vietnam, the whole world (minus the US-minority) does so. As for understanding for attacks on civilians: none is ever justified. Not then in Vietnam, not now in Iraq. Killing people is always wrong, but killing innocents is even worse. What part of 'thou shalt not kill' do you not understand?
with 9 launches the rocket has quite proven itself, but why would they design a rocket with 4 stages? Or does that figure include the strap-on boosters? I would expect with material weight going down, it would be more economical to design a rocket with less stages, as 3 stages instead of 4 means 25% less points of failure. Or is life expectancy of their motors so low they need 4 sets to get into orbit reliably?
You obviously have no understanding of modern (food)technology. Something you do not understand does not make it magic, cause cancer and be evil. The lure of 'going back to nature' may look like an easy way out, but it is not. For one thing there would be no modern creature comforts and not enough food to feed the whole world. You need to be very smart to thrive as a selfsustaining farmer, something which you do not seem to be. How happy would you be to die in the first drought, unable to produce enough crop to feed your family and to pay off the morgage?
The percentage of stemcells in tumors may be higher, but if you only target the stemcells, the patient still has a tumor that keeps on growing. These tumors will not go away by themselves. On the other hand, if you assume that all cancerous stemcells are inside of the tumor, then attacking the tumor as a whole is a good strategy.
No, you did not read the article did you? The XO consumes between 350 milliWatt when only it's only meshing, and 5 Watt when it's doing heavy multimedia applications. It can be powered by handpower/solar/ or a generator running off all the hot gas you produce when you open your mouth.
That might be true, or the effect is the same (increases factor X in brain) but men and women react different to it because men already have a higher level of factor X in their brain. Like a little alcohol may make you more talkative/uninhibited/nice, but a lot makes you stupid or keel over. Btw: was the hetero remark to weed out the homophobes? you can never have enough enemies:)
What about no TV?
on
Plasma or LCD?
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Almost all content on your TV is produced by big companies. A lot of them have a political commercial agenda (fair and balanced anyone?) You can do without all that garbage. You can spend the time you save on meaningfull things like reading, socialising or programming. And the upside is that you wont consider it rude anymore if someone you visit keeps their dummyfier on.
The reason for the launchrail was that a plane that is designed to fly at 600+ km/h does not fly very well at 60km/h. Normal planes can do that, but these have flaps, slats and a pilot that knows how to regulate the Angle of attack. A mass produced simple plane piloted by a gyro does not have these things. That is why the plane had to brought up to a speed that was within the flight envelope. A chemical driven piston catapult does that job nicely.
Yes you are right, most processes would need to totally dry the influx yadda yadda yadda. man I need to sleep not argue on/. sorry to interupt you, it really was a nice argument I had prepared.
Me too never heard of it, and I don't think I will act on this info. Those pesky Buy-now items are bad as it is now, but I'd really like them to be siphoned off to where I won't see them.
Slashdot Mirror
Already there is a constant flow of detrius coming raining down on all ocean floors. Some of it is consumed and some of it becomes locked in the ocean mud floor. This mud may very well become anearobic, and thatis a good thing, because that will keep metabolic rates low so that the amount of carbon removed from the cycle increases.
The dead zones you refer to happen in coastal waters and are most likely caused by argicultural runoff, causing a hypertrophy situation. If you apply your nutrients intentionally there is no reason why you could no monitor to prevent a hypertrophy situation and still increase the production of that patch of ocean.
So what is it exactly that google did that was illegal? paying someone for some adspace does not make you responsible for the rest of the page. Or does the RIAAmob think otherwise?
so true.
And what is even more amazing, after logging in (with bugmenot) the beginning of the article makes no mention what the special feature of OOo actually isThe go straight into installing and building a db. No mention whatsoever what the problem area is and why his solution is a good one. That combined with the silly pageturning thing made me give up reading it.
Harvest the top layer of them, concentrate and convert them to biofuel using TCP (total conversion proces, a kind of wet pyrolysis)
A biofuel tanker with the appropriate machinery would go out on the ocean with a load of iron (or iron rich earth), spread the iron and at the same time harvest the algae and convert them to biofuel. Since it injects more minerals than it harvests, more carbon will be removed form the carbon cycle than would be harvested with the biofuel.
Just an idea I would not like to see patented.
The US was not forced into war, they were the invading party FFS! There were no weapons of mass destruction and there was no indication that Iraq had any. The US knew that at the time of the invasion that their intelligence reports about WMD's were wrong. Hans Blix was not welcomed with open arms in Iraq, but you cannot blame them for that. After the invasion no WMD's were found.
When was the last time the US let international observers into their weapons facilities or palaces? Or even Elections?
Whilst I have not been afffected by this war, I have had relatives that have been casualties of other conflicts. War is an ugly thing and no one ever wins it.
Well good on you. Too bad you did not learn the complete lesson that war has to be avoided at all costs. Invading another country is not avoiding it at all. Is Iraq really better off now that it was under Saddam?
And what was the violation of those resolution that was/is maiming US invasion troops? There was no legitimate reason to start this war (USian hawks like to ignore/distort that fact), and no UN resolution to declare war.
The US has all the nasty weapons that they accused Iraq from developing, violates human rights when they feel like it (guantanamo, reditions etc) and routinely kills their own citizens. If there is an axis of evil, is has the US at its center. There are hundres of civilized countries that can resolve their differences without resorting to violence. Why can't the US do that?
As Ghandi once said: I do like Christ, it's the christians i have a problem with. They act so much unlike him.
Santaclause and god are equal: both cannot be proven to exist, and both have a large following of people that act out his rituals. If you think it is hypocritical to make a child believe in Santa, it should be equally hypocritical to make a child believe in your invisible friend named god.
In your judgement you overlook how eager kids are to believe in anything 'supernatural'. You could use that tendency to let them experience for themselves how easy their own minds can be deceived. That will give them more perspective on other religions, and that is the reason christians oppose making kids believe in Santa: kids could use that knowledge against them too.
Hah, a true believer!
No moses was a human, yet you do consider his words special because you are taught that he had some special relationship with your invisible friend. Because of this you consider his proof of the existance of said invisible friend to be absolute. Yet you cannot mention it here yourself but must refer to a circular reasoning?
If you take everything that is written down for truth, then you will not get very far in life. That is written down, so it is an omen. Please don't procreate, ok?
Questions that one could never answer are not worth discussing. So why do you want proof that your invisible friend does not exist? ;)
But i can try nonetheless: the majority of humans is religious, but the god(s) they believe in differ very much, unless you claim that your god is the same as the flying spagetti monster or the norse pantheon.
No religioun has ever given objective proof that their god does exist, so that offers no explanation at the existance of religions. One can assume though that a lot of people have religious/spiritual feelings. Another assumption to introduce is the tendency of people to dominate and be dominated by other people. With these assumptions that only include human traits, one can explain the existance of different religions with different gods. Those assumptions do not require the existance of anything unexplainable, while (your) religion does. Even if those explanations where equal(*), Ochams razor tells you to choose the simpler one, which means that humans created god(s).
(*) ofcourse to both sides of the argment this is not the case, both sides will see their solution as the best one. Compare it to telling a child that santaclaus does not exist; some kids will get so distressed by that, that its just cruel to tell them their imaginary sugardaddy does not exist. Please excuse me for being cruel, then
If we're doing hitchhikers guide the sign should be in big flaming letters saying 'we apologise for the inconvenience'
Wouldn't that be a nice message from dog?
Btw: Hey Wow where is my insult?
So you say that because the republican part of your olichargy holds more than 1 third of the seat (one of them always will in your two party system) the president can order the gouvernment all illegal things he likes, because congress could never impeach him.
So how are your militias going? It is time to feed the tree of freedom, and I nominate every congrescritter that opposes impeaching BabyBush.
Why would you trust a company that makes these opening moves? My take on it is that use as a selection method and what they most need is sheeple that do not squeal too hard when they get done in the *rse. By screwing them even before they take the job they are weeding out theones that would. But be shure to tell the recruiter that this is why you are declining his offer. If it was an honest mistake he should be able to get it fixed, otherwise he will just don't care.
Is that your political right wing (so right in fact they'd be titled neonazi in europe) realised some decades ago that the media did not favour their standpoints. So they set up an orchestrated campaign to get 'their' people in key places in the media. You can just outright buy a paper, but it is much more productive to go slow and support those few journalists that support your political views and use your influence to get these people into key places. Which is what they did. A few decades later, the middle ground has swayed so much to the right, that the rest of the world is afraid you will fall of the edge. Considering how fascitoid your gouvernment/country has become, it might have fallen already.
(your sercret service commands you to attack this anti-american post as hard as you can. Do you pattriotic duty and defend our free nation against those liberal foreigners, support out troups!)
Please exlain what double standard you are talking about? Why should pointing out that the US lost that war and stating that any killing of humans be somehow 'letting the terrorists of scott-free'?
Does your US-fanboiship make you see things that are not there?
The gouverning elite has a very high incentive to keep the status quo, or even widen the separation between the 'classes'. If the poor underclass is big, that means more options for the upper class to exploit that. The method to produce more poor is to make prevent less children from middleclass families to establish themselves as such, and to keep the children from poor families from rising the social ladder. (Talking about groups and averages here, not induviduals). Good teachers that teach to these classes of kids actually stand in the way of these objectives, as their aim is to have their pupils to achieve the best they can and get the best follow-up education, essentially raising their social status. So what needs to be done is to frustrate those teachers so much that they give up.
Cynical? yes.
Well, it is not only the former vietcong that regards 'vietnam' as a major defeat for the US, and thus a bloody victory for Vietnam, the whole world (minus the US-minority) does so. As for understanding for attacks on civilians: none is ever justified. Not then in Vietnam, not now in Iraq. Killing people is always wrong, but killing innocents is even worse. What part of 'thou shalt not kill' do you not understand?
with 9 launches the rocket has quite proven itself, but why would they design a rocket with 4 stages? Or does that figure include the strap-on boosters? I would expect with material weight going down, it would be more economical to design a rocket with less stages, as 3 stages instead of 4 means 25% less points of failure. Or is life expectancy of their motors so low they need 4 sets to get into orbit reliably?
You obviously have no understanding of modern (food)technology. Something you do not understand does not make it magic, cause cancer and be evil. The lure of 'going back to nature' may look like an easy way out, but it is not. For one thing there would be no modern creature comforts and not enough food to feed the whole world. You need to be very smart to thrive as a selfsustaining farmer, something which you do not seem to be. How happy would you be to die in the first drought, unable to produce enough crop to feed your family and to pay off the morgage?
The percentage of stemcells in tumors may be higher, but if you only target the stemcells, the patient still has a tumor that keeps on growing. These tumors will not go away by themselves. On the other hand, if you assume that all cancerous stemcells are inside of the tumor, then attacking the tumor as a whole is a good strategy.
No, you did not read the article did you? The XO consumes between 350 milliWatt when only it's only meshing, and 5 Watt when it's doing heavy multimedia applications. It can be powered by handpower/solar/ or a generator running off all the hot gas you produce when you open your mouth.
That might be true, or the effect is the same (increases factor X in brain) but men and women react different to it because men already have a higher level of factor X in their brain. Like a little alcohol may make you more talkative/uninhibited/nice, but a lot makes you stupid or keel over. :)
Btw: was the hetero remark to weed out the homophobes? you can never have enough enemies
Almost all content on your TV is produced by big companies. A lot of them have a political commercial agenda (fair and balanced anyone?) You can do without all that garbage. You can spend the time you save on meaningfull things like reading, socialising or programming. And the upside is that you wont consider it rude anymore if someone you visit keeps their dummyfier on.
The reason for the launchrail was that a plane that is designed to fly at 600+ km/h does not fly very well at 60km/h. Normal planes can do that, but these have flaps, slats and a pilot that knows how to regulate the Angle of attack. A mass produced simple plane piloted by a gyro does not have these things. That is why the plane had to brought up to a speed that was within the flight envelope. A chemical driven piston catapult does that job nicely.
Yes you are right, most processes would need to totally dry the influx yadda yadda yadda. man I need to sleep not argue on /.
sorry to interupt you, it really was a nice argument I had prepared.
Me too never heard of it, and I don't think I will act on this info. Those pesky Buy-now items are bad as it is now, but I'd really like them to be siphoned off to where I won't see them.