"The supernova explosion occurred about 140 years ago, making it the most recent supernova in the Milky Way as measured in Earth's time frame. Previously, the last known galactic supernova occurred around 1680, based on studying the expansion of its remnant Cassiopeia A."
So if I'm understanding this, the supernova happened 26,000 years ago (give or take about 140 years, now...more give, granted), as according to the time frame centred on the area of space around the supernova - this is relative to ours, note.
However as far as our local space is concerned, the balloon went up 140 years ago (or possibly sooner). Where this is important is that there was a conjecture that there should be about 3 visible-to-us supernovas every century. There's been a lack of observed ones lately, so the boffins were wondering where they'd gotten off to. Hence the cake and party.
It may be worth it to clarify that the emblem that they're defending (the one backed by the Geneva Convention) is "five equal-sized red squares arranged in a cross pattern on a white background". It is not the Knights Templar cross, nor the Cross of St. George. Concerning the British and various other nations/religions/knightly orders that have commented on the idea of Amcross (or JnJ or the ICRC) defending a trademark over something that is also "theirs", mind that as I understand it, trademarking specifies a particular type of mark, not a general concept. They're not "fighting over your mark", they're fighting over theirs. Specifically, a trademark of five, equal-sized red squares arranged in a cross pattern on a white background. I would think that the Cross of St. George (since it seems to traditionally have its arms stretch to the boards of the shield/device/background) is sufficiently different. Ditto with the "latin" cross normally associated with Christianity (at least in North America, no offense intended towards any of the Orthodox/Papal groups)
The South Asian Tsunami was again a different sort of beast, since it was overseen by the ICRC (not Amcross). I can't back this up, since it's hearsay from someone with the CRC, but I had it explained to me that much of the money raised for the SAT was in fact sent to the area. I've have heard people complain that millions of dollars were spent on administration costs. This is true as well. I take it to be a matter of different POVs, since I understand the overhea
Slashdot Mirror
From the article:
"The supernova explosion occurred about 140 years ago, making it the most recent supernova in the Milky Way as measured in Earth's time frame. Previously, the last known galactic supernova occurred around 1680, based on studying the expansion of its remnant Cassiopeia A."
So if I'm understanding this, the supernova happened 26,000 years ago (give or take about 140 years, now...more give, granted), as according to the time frame centred on the area of space around the supernova - this is relative to ours, note.
However as far as our local space is concerned, the balloon went up 140 years ago (or possibly sooner). Where this is important is that there was a conjecture that there should be about 3 visible-to-us supernovas every century. There's been a lack of observed ones lately, so the boffins were wondering where they'd gotten off to. Hence the cake and party.
Ah, about that cross...
...and their explanations of their actions concerning not operating in New Orleans:
...and some other info at a glance:
From the Canadian Red Cross page on the Red Cross emblem:
http://www.redcross.ca/article.asp?id=000340&tid=0 19
It may be worth it to clarify that the emblem that they're defending (the one backed by the Geneva Convention) is "five equal-sized red squares arranged in a cross pattern on a white background". It is not the Knights Templar cross, nor the Cross of St. George. Concerning the British and various other nations/religions/knightly orders that have commented on the idea of Amcross (or JnJ or the ICRC) defending a trademark over something that is also "theirs", mind that as I understand it, trademarking specifies a particular type of mark, not a general concept. They're not "fighting over your mark", they're fighting over theirs. Specifically, a trademark of five, equal-sized red squares arranged in a cross pattern on a white background. I would think that the Cross of St. George (since it seems to traditionally have its arms stretch to the boards of the shield/device/background) is sufficiently different. Ditto with the "latin" cross normally associated with Christianity (at least in North America, no offense intended towards any of the Orthodox/Papal groups)
Here's the Wikipedia link on crosses (kinda nifty):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross
As for the other issues mentioned about Amcross, well, that's another kettle of fish. Here's a few links to audit-related articles about Amcross:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/07/29/eveningn ews/main516700.shtml
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/07/30/eveningn ews/main516886.shtml
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/07/31/eveningn ews/main517045.shtml
http://www.redcross.org/faq/0,1096,0_682_4524,00.h tml
http://www.redcross.org/news/ds/hurricanes/katrina _facts.html
http://www.redcross.org/news/ds/hurricanes/2005/fa cts.html
Here's some more grease for the fires. Rebuttals, anyone?
http://www.redcross.org/pressrelease/0,1077,0_489_ 5052,00.html
For the Americans, here's a link to what Amcross says they can do for you in case of a disaster:
http://www.redcross.org/faq/0,1095,0_378_,00.html
For everyone else, try www.redcross.(insert country code here). For us Canadians, it's http://www.redcross.ca/. Here's the disaster link: http://www.redcross.ca/article.asp?id=000302&tid=0 25
The South Asian Tsunami was again a different sort of beast, since it was overseen by the ICRC (not Amcross). I can't back this up, since it's hearsay from someone with the CRC, but I had it explained to me that much of the money raised for the SAT was in fact sent to the area. I've have heard people complain that millions of dollars were spent on administration costs. This is true as well. I take it to be a matter of different POVs, since I understand the overhea