I watched the video twice and it doesn't really need any explanation. When watching the video it is important to to not analyze it with hindsight. We know NOW that there were kids in the van, and this is pointed out on the video. However watching the video without that knowledge and it is extremely unlikely that it would be known that children were in the van, given the context of the situation. We also know (now) that one of the guys had a camera with a big lens on it. It's also clear from the video that other guys had weapons (AK-47, and what looked like RPGs, or a really big tripod) Context is very important, such as what's going on on the surrounding areas (not on the video), what had been taking place in that area in the preceding days (not on the video). The guy in the video was a bit callous but his point stands - who takes kids to a place where a massive firefight just took place (as in still dust in the ait and the helicopters still circling the area)?
When I watched the video what I saw was a bunch of guys in an area where a big firefight had taken place a day or two before, and there was a column of US vehicles (Bradleys, I think) moving into the area. If I'm a helicopter pilot whose job it is to protect that column, and I see dudes in the path of that column with assault rifles and RPGs, I'm going to take them out. Period end of story.
If you're brave enough (or stupid enough) to be a reporter and hanging around with guys with guns and RPGs who are in all likelihood getting ready to ambush a column or US armor, well, I'm sorry but it sucks to be you. Then before the dust has settled a van pulls up and starts pulling the wounded and their weapons into the van (a common tactic of the insurgents), and they brought children, well, again that is really sad, but I'd have to ask the parents WTF?
I think part of the problem here is that most people don't really understand these situations, or what they know if them was learned from TV and movies. The reality is that in a war zone, you eliminate the threat. That's how it works. If you understand how this is in reality, and you understand the context of the situation, this is really a non-story.
Short version: Guys with rifles and RPGs in an area known for insurgent activity hanging around with a column of military vehicles approaching and the guys in the helicopters took out the insurgents, then parents bring kids to a gun fight and the kids are severely injured. Lessons learned: don't hang around with insurgents and don't take your kids to a fire fight.
Space elevator on Earth will likely never be possible without some huge unforeseen leap in materials science, this is true. However a space elevator on the moon to get manufactured materials into lunar orbit for a trip down hill may be.
Radiation used in medicine is the largest source of man-made radiation to which people in the United States are exposed. Most of our exposure is from diagnostic x-rays. Physicians use x-rays in more than half of all medical diagnoses to determine the extent of disease or physical injury. Radiation is also used in cancer treatments, where precisely targeted radiation destroys diseased cells without killing nearby healthy cells. Radiopharmaceuticals, another medical treatment, are used to locate tumors in a patient's body and to treat cancer. One-third of all successful cancer treatments involve radiation.
The U.S. national annual background dose for humans is approximately 360 mrem. A mrem, or millirem, is a standard measure of radiation dose. Examples of radiation doses from common medical procedures are:
Honestly? Yes. I think he isn't capable of understanding even the simple definitions and explanations in the attached. I've talked to council members on various city councils over the years - there are some astoundingly stupid people in local government that lack knowledge of basic economics, let alone basic science.
The constitution is absolutely a living document. and the way to make edits is: Before an amendment can take effect, it must be proposed to the states by a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress or by a convention called by two-thirds of the states, and ratified by three-fourths of the states or by three-fourths of conventions thereof, the method of ratification being determined by Congress at the time of proposal.
Before calling people idiots and morons perhaps you should take a basic civics class to learn a little bit about what the fuck you're talking about. You're the one that sounds like an ignorant moron at this point.
It's quite simple and progressive moonbats seem to lose reading comprehension when reading the 2nd amendment. Now that the reciprocal insults are out of the way, lets parse:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State - this means that in order for a country to exist it needs an army to defend itself, yes?
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed - this means that the rights of the citizens to keep weapons shall not be interfered with by the government. so far, so good?
The context: The founders and the people of the colonies had just fought a war with Britain for freedom, and they clearly understood, better than any of us today apparently, that governments have a tendency to become self serving and oppressive. see the collected works of Thomas Jefferson, et.al for more details. If you read the other writings of the founders from that time period, you will understand that the point of the 2nd amendment is to ensure that the people retain at least some ability to defend themselves from the militia of the oppressive government.
And "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" is explanatory, not prescriptive; "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" is the part that has the force of law, and all they really needed to write. But there's been enough wiggle room in the phrasing for the enemies of liberty to exploit for the last 220+ years.
They didn't need to write it, but it does explain quite elegantly why the right exists. Penn and Teller do a good job of explaining this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GNu7ldL1LM
Well, theoretically, (unless the theory has changed) during the big bang matter could have been compressed past the Swartzschild radius due to pressure and black-holes formed that mass much less than is required for a black hole to form today from gravity alone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_black_hole Most of these will have evaporated by now (or maybe not depending on how you interpret the string theory), but if they can exist there should still be a great many of these in the universe. We know that a black hole can carry a charge, and the surface gravity can be calculated. It is possible that there may be some of these in the solar system, perhaps in many years we will discover a way to detect them, and increase their charge to the point where they could be manipulated electromagnetically.
Overall, while technically the number of "pixels" for the new iPhone doesn't match what's on the retina itself, PRACTICALLY SPEAKING they probably tested what people could actually discriminate and those are the numbers they got.
There are many reasons why the number of receptors on the retina does not equal actual resolution:
-Convergence: cells in the retina converge and inhibit one another. You lose resolution there.
-Center-surround properties: those retinal ganglion cells inhibit one another. This increases contrast but you lose info.
-The layer of cells that overlies the photoreceptors causes chromatic aberration, mostly for blue-violet light. Subsequently, there are little to no blue cones in the center of the eye because of this.
-The eye is constantly moving to prevent photoreceptor cells from bleaching. You lose visual acuity here, but don't notice because the brain fills it in.
-There is more convergence of cells as visual information proceeds to the back of the brain, and then back up again for higher level processing
In Arizona, and a bunch of other places it truly is a civil issue:
At a civil traffic hearing, the State’s witness(es), usually the officer who cited you, will attempt to prove that you committed the civil traffic violation on your citation. The State must prove a civil traffic violation by a preponderance of the evidence. The State may also present diagrams, photographs, or other evidence at the hearing.
No jail time or probation can be imposed for a civil traffic violation.
So, wait. The aggregated economies of all the countries in the EU is bigger? Really? Did you also know that the world economy is bigger than the EU economy?
US has a labor force of 155 Million and a GDP of $14.26 Trillion
EU has a labor force of 236 Million and a GDP of $16.45 Trillion
So that additional 81 million workers in the EU only adds about $2 Trillion to the GDP of the EU.
So, yes, the EU is a little bigger than the US in terms of GDP, but is much less efficient in terms of GDP per capita.
Slashdot Mirror
I watched the video twice and it doesn't really need any explanation. When watching the video it is important to to not analyze it with hindsight. We know NOW that there were kids in the van, and this is pointed out on the video. However watching the video without that knowledge and it is extremely unlikely that it would be known that children were in the van, given the context of the situation. We also know (now) that one of the guys had a camera with a big lens on it. It's also clear from the video that other guys had weapons (AK-47, and what looked like RPGs, or a really big tripod) Context is very important, such as what's going on on the surrounding areas (not on the video), what had been taking place in that area in the preceding days (not on the video). The guy in the video was a bit callous but his point stands - who takes kids to a place where a massive firefight just took place (as in still dust in the ait and the helicopters still circling the area)?
When I watched the video what I saw was a bunch of guys in an area where a big firefight had taken place a day or two before, and there was a column of US vehicles (Bradleys, I think) moving into the area. If I'm a helicopter pilot whose job it is to protect that column, and I see dudes in the path of that column with assault rifles and RPGs, I'm going to take them out. Period end of story.
If you're brave enough (or stupid enough) to be a reporter and hanging around with guys with guns and RPGs who are in all likelihood getting ready to ambush a column or US armor, well, I'm sorry but it sucks to be you. Then before the dust has settled a van pulls up and starts pulling the wounded and their weapons into the van (a common tactic of the insurgents), and they brought children, well, again that is really sad, but I'd have to ask the parents WTF?
I think part of the problem here is that most people don't really understand these situations, or what they know if them was learned from TV and movies. The reality is that in a war zone, you eliminate the threat. That's how it works. If you understand how this is in reality, and you understand the context of the situation, this is really a non-story.
Short version: Guys with rifles and RPGs in an area known for insurgent activity hanging around with a column of military vehicles approaching and the guys in the helicopters took out the insurgents, then parents bring kids to a gun fight and the kids are severely injured. Lessons learned: don't hang around with insurgents and don't take your kids to a fire fight.
I thought Mr 9mm was the shepherd?
Space elevator on Earth will likely never be possible without some huge unforeseen leap in materials science, this is true. However a space elevator on the moon to get manufactured materials into lunar orbit for a trip down hill may be.
A launch loop would be more feasible, according to this.
The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, after all.
Radiation used in medicine is the largest source of man-made radiation to which people in the United States are exposed. Most of our exposure is from diagnostic x-rays. Physicians use x-rays in more than half of all medical diagnoses to determine the extent of disease or physical injury. Radiation is also used in cancer treatments, where precisely targeted radiation destroys diseased cells without killing nearby healthy cells. Radiopharmaceuticals, another medical treatment, are used to locate tumors in a patient's body and to treat cancer. One-third of all successful cancer treatments involve radiation.
The U.S. national annual background dose for humans is approximately 360 mrem. A mrem, or millirem, is a standard measure of radiation dose. Examples of radiation doses from common medical procedures are:
http://www.doh.wa.gov/ehp/rp/factsheets/factsheets-htm/fs10bkvsman.htm
You think he doesn't know?
Honestly? Yes. I think he isn't capable of understanding even the simple definitions and explanations in the attached. I've talked to council members on various city councils over the years - there are some astoundingly stupid people in local government that lack knowledge of basic economics, let alone basic science.
Please educate yourself.
Bull shit
Well, the sound is suspiciously close to the brown note
I'm not your friend, buddy.
Code is hosted here if interested: http://code.google.com/p/konami-js/
So I finally looked it up. Interesting. http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/mars151.php
Do not take them with you if you're going to war. Weapons which can primarily be used to blind people are against the Geneva Convention.
It won't be my primary - It will be attached to my M60E4 so I can hit my target with 20+ armor-piercing 30-06 rounds because that's much more humane.
Written by Yoda?
Touche. However, I am not the government so I can ask you to STFU without infringing on your rights.
The constitution is absolutely a living document. and the way to make edits is: Before an amendment can take effect, it must be proposed to the states by a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress or by a convention called by two-thirds of the states, and ratified by three-fourths of the states or by three-fourths of conventions thereof, the method of ratification being determined by Congress at the time of proposal.
Before calling people idiots and morons perhaps you should take a basic civics class to learn a little bit about what the fuck you're talking about. You're the one that sounds like an ignorant moron at this point.
It's quite simple and progressive moonbats seem to lose reading comprehension when reading the 2nd amendment. Now that the reciprocal insults are out of the way, lets parse:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State - this means that in order for a country to exist it needs an army to defend itself, yes?
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed - this means that the rights of the citizens to keep weapons shall not be interfered with by the government. so far, so good?
The context: The founders and the people of the colonies had just fought a war with Britain for freedom, and they clearly understood, better than any of us today apparently, that governments have a tendency to become self serving and oppressive. see the collected works of Thomas Jefferson, et.al for more details. If you read the other writings of the founders from that time period, you will understand that the point of the 2nd amendment is to ensure that the people retain at least some ability to defend themselves from the militia of the oppressive government.
That's the context of it. Or perhaps you think those hack framers just fucked up the wording? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GNu7ldL1LM
And "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" is explanatory, not prescriptive; "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" is the part that has the force of law, and all they really needed to write. But there's been enough wiggle room in the phrasing for the enemies of liberty to exploit for the last 220+ years.
They didn't need to write it, but it does explain quite elegantly why the right exists. Penn and Teller do a good job of explaining this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GNu7ldL1LM
I would direct you to the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments which are part of the constitution and kindly ask that you STFU.
So, if we change the name to !white will that make you happy?
Well, theoretically, (unless the theory has changed) during the big bang matter could have been compressed past the Swartzschild radius due to pressure and black-holes formed that mass much less than is required for a black hole to form today from gravity alone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_black_hole Most of these will have evaporated by now (or maybe not depending on how you interpret the string theory), but if they can exist there should still be a great many of these in the universe. We know that a black hole can carry a charge, and the surface gravity can be calculated. It is possible that there may be some of these in the solar system, perhaps in many years we will discover a way to detect them, and increase their charge to the point where they could be manipulated electromagnetically.
Better shoot it in the head with a shotgun just to be sure.
Or maybe not
Overall, while technically the number of "pixels" for the new iPhone doesn't match what's on the retina itself, PRACTICALLY SPEAKING they probably tested what people could actually discriminate and those are the numbers they got.
There are many reasons why the number of receptors on the retina does not equal actual resolution:
-Convergence: cells in the retina converge and inhibit one another. You lose resolution there.
-Center-surround properties: those retinal ganglion cells inhibit one another. This increases contrast but you lose info.
-The layer of cells that overlies the photoreceptors causes chromatic aberration, mostly for blue-violet light. Subsequently, there are little to no blue cones in the center of the eye because of this.
-The eye is constantly moving to prevent photoreceptor cells from bleaching. You lose visual acuity here, but don't notice because the brain fills it in.
-There is more convergence of cells as visual information proceeds to the back of the brain, and then back up again for higher level processing
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/iphone-4-does-not-have-a-resolution-higher-than-the-retina-or-does-it/8586
Pabst Blue Ribbon?
In Arizona, and a bunch of other places it truly is a civil issue:
At a civil traffic hearing, the State’s witness(es), usually the officer who cited you, will attempt to prove that you committed the civil traffic violation on your citation. The State must prove a civil traffic violation by a preponderance of the evidence. The State may also present diagrams, photographs, or other evidence at the hearing.
No jail time or probation can be imposed for a civil traffic violation.
Civil matters by definition are not criminal
http://www.ci.gilbert.az.us/court/traffic.cfm
So, wait. The aggregated economies of all the countries in the EU is bigger? Really? Did you also know that the world economy is bigger than the EU economy?
US has a labor force of 155 Million and a GDP of $14.26 Trillion
EU has a labor force of 236 Million and a GDP of $16.45 Trillion
So that additional 81 million workers in the EU only adds about $2 Trillion to the GDP of the EU.
So, yes, the EU is a little bigger than the US in terms of GDP, but is much less efficient in terms of GDP per capita.