"I'm thinking we need a new Amendment that states that no Amendment can contradict or repeal an older Amendment, or contradict anything else in the Constitution, no matter what." the you are an ignorant fool. The constitution can change by design.
"We also need a new one which mandates preferential voting systems, because plurality voting simply doesn't work." I see now. People doing thing you don't like should be allowed to carry the same weight as your vote. And if YOU don't like it then clearly it's unconstitutional.
the 1850s telegraphed, they want their views back.
I've been married for decades, and my wife and I enjoy pornography.
Which is just another anecdote. Maybe you should learn what constitutes a good study,, and then read up ion the information. At least then you can have an actual discussion.
Don't, he is a troll. He complain about 'loudness', and when direct confronted he changes the subject slightly. I mean, think abiout this: the crux of his argument* is that loud equals bad music.
He clearly doesn't understand distortion, or compression artifacts, or any technical aspect. Of course in spite of the clear evidence of hios ignorance, he gfoes on as if he know what he is talking about.. SO he is a troll.
*I use that term very loosely regarding his stupid statements.
Everything about your post is provable wrong, or based on a stupid fallacy.
Just the point that you compare anyone who 'sing rock' to a professionally train opera singer show you're inability to think logically.
I can pull out the top best rock and roll singers, and that would have better voice control that some yahoo singing opera in the shower. Put together a logical argument...but I suspect you can't think clearly enough to put a logical argument together.
Just for the record. It's not possible for a Chernobyl accident to happen again. You couldn't even intentionally do it in a modern plant. i.e. 3.5 or 4th gen.
If you don't understand why that is, I would appreciate if you took a summer to study them during your free time. Even if your opinion doesn't change, at least we can have an intelligent conversation.
Actually the Government is well know for ti's high maintenance record, thanks for playing.
In fact, I would love to see the government roll out 4th gen Nuclear plants across the country. I wan the government to own, and operate them and sell the energy at cost.
Remove the monetary gain for putting of maintenance and storage and suddenly those problems are gone.
Shit, the half life of the material 'waste' of some new plants would be 200-500 year until background radiation levels, and in a quantity that they could store on site.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you actually have any evidences of it hurting a marriage?
It seems to me that any marriages hurt where due to someone keeping secrets.
Credit your source, asshole
No it isn't. It's the removal of regulation, and it's a group of people who seem to reject science when it suits them.
You statement shows the type of weak thinking that makes people believe they are an Island and nothing they do can effect someone else.
"I'm thinking we need a new Amendment that states that no Amendment can contradict or repeal an older Amendment, or contradict anything else in the Constitution, no matter what."
the you are an ignorant fool. The constitution can change by design.
"We also need a new one which mandates preferential voting systems, because plurality voting simply doesn't work."
I see now. People doing thing you don't like should be allowed to carry the same weight as your vote. And if YOU don't like it then clearly it's unconstitutional.
the 1850s telegraphed, they want their views back.
"Having been married for plenty of years,
which in no way lends any weight to your opinion.
I've been married for decades, and my wife and I enjoy pornography.
Which is just another anecdote. Maybe you should learn what constitutes a good study,, and then read up ion the information. At least then you can have an actual discussion.
Which is why modern reactors depends on gravity; which to the best of my knowledge has never been turned off.
Well as they base more and more opinion and uniformed ';gut feeling's we will continue to see more and more of these stupid statements.
how you have totally lost your ways.
Yes he did. He invented an amplifier to get a specific sound musicians.
He's a troll. Ignore him.
Don't, he is a troll. He complain about 'loudness', and when direct confronted he changes the subject slightly. I mean, think abiout this: the crux of his argument* is that loud equals bad music.
He clearly doesn't understand distortion, or compression artifacts, or any technical aspect. Of course in spite of the clear evidence of hios ignorance, he gfoes on as if he know what he is talking about..
SO he is a troll.
*I use that term very loosely regarding his stupid statements.
stop, he is a troll.
Everything about your post is provable wrong, or based on a stupid fallacy.
Just the point that you compare anyone who 'sing rock' to a professionally train opera singer show you're inability to think logically.
I can pull out the top best rock and roll singers, and that would have better voice control that some yahoo singing opera in the shower.
Put together a logical argument...but I suspect you can't think clearly enough to put a logical argument together.
-
Yeah, the Who, Stones, Clapton...their loudness just ruined music~
At least we have idiots like you to tell us what music is, and apparently you have defined art. Well done.
Moron.
"It's actually pretty simple if you know what you're doing."
No shit.
Is there anything that isn't easy for you know what your doing?
No, it isn't more difficult then building a rocket..assume you want the rocket to do somewhere and do something.
yet they still pout off 28-45db, and emit a frequency around 200hz.
Three are several reviews on pubmed.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=wind%20turbines
What a crappy video. It only prov3es that some things are louder then wind turbines. BIG FUCKING DEAL.
Since the effect would be... stopping to produce power and not 'kill a lot of people' It's actually better then a damn.
" For nuclear that's something like 100 miles from the plant"
based on..what? Even if true(it isn't) we can run wire for thousands of miles at a 7% loss, so A few hundred miles isn't really that big of a deal.
Airplane failures are always a cascade event. And every event makes the next planes safer.
Just for the record. It's not possible for a Chernobyl accident to happen again.
You couldn't even intentionally do it in a modern plant. i.e. 3.5 or 4th gen.
If you don't understand why that is, I would appreciate if you took a summer to study them during your free time. Even if your opinion doesn't change, at least we can have an intelligent conversation.
Big Rock Point
Fort St. Vrain
Haddam Neck
Main Yankee
Pathfinder
Rancho Seco
Saxton
Shoreham
Trojan
Yankee Rowe
And those are completed, there are several that are effectivly done, but not considered completed.
"1,000,000 are going to get cancer, we can't use the surrounding land for countless years to come...""
please state 1 example of that.
And you left out all the people who will die from coal emission.
Interesting factoid:
not turnnig three mile island back on has caused of 50 deaths since the event.
Number of people who got ill from thee mile island: 0
Actually the Government is well know for ti's high maintenance record, thanks for playing.
In fact, I would love to see the government roll out 4th gen Nuclear plants across the country. I wan the government to own, and operate them and sell the energy at cost.
Remove the monetary gain for putting of maintenance and storage and suddenly those problems are gone.
Shit, the half life of the material 'waste' of some new plants would be 200-500 year until background radiation levels, and in a quantity that they could store on site.
28 to 45 db.
You should probably use actual numbers isn't stead of a subjective 'feel'