Before deciding this is a great deal, consider the airplane industry. (I'm talking light planes, not airliners.)
Before WWII, there was a thriving business with dozens of light plane makers. You could buy good, cheap little planes. After WWII, there was some consolidation in the industry but you could still get a decent little plane for reasonable bucks.
Then the lawyers got involved. Liability lawsuits appeared everywhere. Since planes stick around for a while, a crash of a 20 year old model was still grounds to sue. Cessna quit making anything smaller than a corporate jet. Piper nearly went bankrupt. The entire GA industry entered a slump.
Finally, Congress acted and set strict liability limits on older light planes. (If it's been flying for 15 years, the maker probably isn't at fault.) Liability is still a problem though: a decent light plane that can carry a small family costs as much as a house now. This isn't a fancy plane: cloth seats and barely enough room to move your feet.
There are a few small makers out there (Cessna came back), but almost nothing cheap is left. You can build your own from a kit and slap an "Experimental" tag on it, but that leaves *you* fully liable for anything that happens. (Then again, as a pilot it was probably your fault anyway.) You could go for an ultralight, but that's for sightseeing, not for travel.
End result: a few companies sell a few, very expensive planes to rich people. Folks like me with a pilot's license but no trust fund rent aging C152s on weekends since we can't afford anything else. (Someday I'm going to build one, but I've got a 7-month old kid and a mortgage right now.)
Liability is almost certainly the wrong way to do this
More imporantly, you've not paid for open source software.
I didn't? What's this charge on my credit card for a copy of RedHat?
Sure, you can say that I bought the service contract and not the software, but I suspect you're going to have a really, really hard time convincing a judge of that when there's a box sitting on the store shelf that has "Red Hat Linux" printed on it. Specifically, that convincing is going to cost $ in lawyer's fees which RH can ill afford.
Seriously, this is a *terrible* idea. MS has lawyers out the wazoo and the cash to pay them to tie up any such suits forever. (See antitrust case) RH and other small companies don't, and they are going to get hammered the first time a major problem comes along
Doesn't work for the drug companies or any other company with significant regulation that delays introduction of the patented thing.
7 years is roughly what it takes for a drug to wind its way through the testing process, and it can be well over 10. It doesn't start making money for a few years after that. (Assuming it ever does: few drugs ever make back their development costs.)
There are plenty of reliable computers: the controls of the modern Airbus 340 are fully given over to a computer, and video-game consoles consistently work as advertised, as do Aegis missile cruisers, cellular telephones and digital watches
I'm afraid these are terrible examples.
Airbuses have been using digital flight controls for a while, and several crashes have been influenced by them. (See comp.risks back issues for details.)
Video game consoles crash often enough to be a problem: I've never seen all three consoles at the local software place working at the same time. (Interestingly, I've never seen the XBox down, but the GameCube and PS2 are often kaput.)
The Aegis software worked exactly as designed on the Vincennes, except that the UI was so bad the sailors couldn't tell that the target was climbing, not descending. I don't think shooting down civilian airliners counts as reliable.
Even the (Dish Network) receiver on my TV needs rebooting about once a month. (Can't speak for cellphones: I stay as far away from them as possible.)
And as the article point out, these are all dedicated purpose machines: nobody's loading Morpheus onto the Airbus flight control system. Getting true reliability for a general purpose machine is damn hard.
Another comment: RS6k users generally want serious support.
Back in my grad school days, one of my coworkers found a serious bug in our new RS6Ks. IBM had a *team* of engineers working on fixing that bug as soon as they verified it wasn't headspace+timing on our part. (We actually didn't have a 5 9's requirement for uptime or anything, but the bug could have affected people who did.)
Apple isn't set up to do support at that level- they sell to general consumers, not folks for whom 10 minutes of downtime is a deal-killer.
A couple of book suggestions. Movies just ain't gonna cut it here.
Most anything by Iain Banks in the Culture series. Big, honking ships that can waste star systems in milliseconds. (Ob Quote from memory "It looks like a dildo" "That's appropriate: armed, it can fuck star systems.) Excession has a good number of battle scenes.
Simmons' Hyperion series, if nothing else for the battle scene at the end between Kassad and the Shrike.
The Tides of God, for the target of the misson if for no other reason.
Ship of Fools. No real battle scenes, but the best aliens I've seen in a while.
OKay, it's rear projection or plasma... got it. My original point still stands
No, it doesn't. You don't block the projector: sure, you can stand in front of the board and block the view, but that's not any different than any other kind of black/whiteboard.
By the way, for about $200-$500, you can have an effective resolution on a white board of millions of dpi (think molecules).
Actually, it's nowhere close to that: whiteboard markers are fat and unwieldy for the most part.
I don't think you really see the benefits of one of these systems. Can you do any of the following on a whiteboard?
Save sketches as webpages for later use? (Students love this.)
Mark up an existing, detailed photo, diagram, or engineering drawing? (Or text: one of our professors diagrams ancient Greek dactylic hexameter on them, marking up existing Word documents.)
Have someone a thousand miles away see the same picture you do? (No, a camera system is vastly worse unless you broadcast HDTV.)
Highlight specific areas just like using a highlighter?
Turn markup off and on with a single button?
Hint: these aren't just for sketching on a wall. They've got capabilities far beyond that of a standard whiteboard. If you want to sketch on a wall, use a whiteboard. We've got them in the classrooms too, you know.
Smart Boards not all they are cracked up to be. They are inaccurate, very crude, and uncomfortable to work with. Aside from blocking the projector all the time...
Haven't used one recently, have you?
First, you don't have to block the board. The ones we use are rear projection so they just look like a big TV set. You can also get overlays for plasma TV screens- neither have this problem.
Now while that may not seem like such a big idea, how often have you found that you write in tiny little details or hash marks or some other marking on a diagram? Sometimes those are very useful.
If you're writing so small that a 1024x768 screen can't pick it up, nobody in your audience can either. These aren't designed to be used alone: they're for people to use in classrooms/teleconferences. Put a single black pixel up and step back 10 feet- you won't see it. You need an area of at least 6-10 pixels.
Eric
Re:What ever happened to
on
Hack in Space
·
· Score: 2
A NASA Ultraviolet Spectroscopic Satellite uses complex procedures for guidance
What I still don't understand is how they rotate it back out of the imaginary plane. I would think you'd try and stay away from it altogether since you might hit a stray pole.
Hey, my incredibly non-techie type wife will even watch Junkyard Wars with me sometimes. She vastly prefers the British version of the show just to listen to the language: she was a linguistics major in college.
If I want cross platform development, I'll use something I can commit to: Java, C if it's applicable, C# if it turns out that I have to.
I just spent the morning with a Spanish prof here who wants to take a bunch of old Hypercard stacks he wrote and update them. Given a choice of Flash, Java or C++ which do you think he'll be able to use?
Hint: it's not the last two:^) I can train him to use Flash to do what he needs to in about 2-3 hours. He can easily enter sounds, graphics and animations. He can have simple interactivity- students fill in boxes and then check translations.
How long do you think it would take him in Java? I like Java, but it's simply not the right answer here.
I like Futurama. I want to watch Futurama. I can't watch Futurama on my TV, since I don't get TV reception at my house (hills+trees), cable doesn't run there and I can't get network programming on my satellite dish. (Waiver pending, but I've already been denied once.) So if I want to see it I have to pirate it. Ditto Family Guy.
I can't be the only one in this boat. The one good thing is that I now realize how useless network programming is: other than the two shows listed, Monday Night Football and the Olympics there's nothing on that I care about.
Hypocrite. You didn't adopt because otherwise the kid would have ended up in an orphanage. You adopted because you wanted a kid. Otherwise why would you suffered the painful treatment?
Of course we wanted a kid- be pretty pitiful if we didn't. Of course, one action can have multiple consequences- his mother has a chance to go to college now and get a decent job in the future, which would have been a lot harder if she had to raise the kid herself. (Look up any stat for unwed teenage mothers vs. other teens in similar circumstances.) Remember, she asked for someone to raise her child: nobody held a gun to her head and demanded she give him to us.
As far as being a bad idea, you still are just handwaving. Evidence please- feel free to pull up stuff that indicates adoption is worse than long-term foster care (in the US) or orphanage care (in Russia, etc). Still waiting on your previous 404 link...
This is all too typical. First you insult me, then you assert some kind of right to have children, then you try to pummel me into submission with horror stories of your plight. Suffice to say I am not impressed.
This from someone who knows *nothing* about our situation and proceeds tar us with statements that simply don't apply. Who drags in state laws that a) don't apply in our case, b) we didn't pass and c) we don't support. But since you don't know anything about us, that's all you can do.
I personally love the bit about abuse: we aren't even allowed to *spank* our kid by the terms of our adoption. We had to undergo criminal background checks- perhaps a few more biological parents ought to have that happen, eh? I'd love to see the evidence, but your URL is 404.
I don't know what you have against adoption- I suppose you'd rather see the kids on welfare, aborted or sitting in orphanages? Or would you rather live in a fantasy world where these kids automatically are born with two loving parents who love them and can make sure they have enough to eat?
You may be happy with your kid, but for your indulgence to be satisfied, the natural mother is deprived of her rights
Ok, dipshit, I'll bite.
Did you ever think that there are women who might not *want* to raise a child? Our birthmother wants to go to college and decided that taking care of a kid at the same time wasn't the best way to do it.
As far as contact, get out of the 1950s. We've met the birthmother, we send her letters constantly. This is the norm in (domestic) adoption today- closed adoptions are basically dead. In fact, the person who's preventing more contact is *her*.
Luxury? I guess you have no problems breeding. Good for you. Or perhaps you haven't tried yet? In that case, I wish you the wonderful choice between expensive, painful and complex infertility treatments or a childless future. Wouldn't want to make the third choice, would we?
True, there are more children waiting to be adopted than people wanting to adopt. There are not a surplus of babies however. The surplus is in kids who are already past the infant stage therefore are less desireable to parents wanting to adopt.
Exactly. The "pro-life" folks don't seem to understand that those kids grow up! And of course a lot of them are less desireable anyway: they've got dark skin and thus many adoptive parents won't accept them. (NB: my wife and I have: our son is biracial, as his sister will be when we adopt her. Their loss- Adam is *beautiful*, far more attractive than my wife and I could have produced biologically.)
Adoption is a wonderful option: if there are any pregnant women out there who are thinking of abortion I urge you to give an agency a call first. But it simply cannot absorb the number of kids that would be born each year without abortion- it's too expensive, too time-consuming and frankly, too invasive for most people. (Our agency knows *everything* about us-details of our infertility, our medical histories, criminal backgrounds, net worth to the dime, etc.)
What's up over there in the States? Is it rendered illegal to adopt a poor child from your local community or even a poor foreign country? Or is it unpopular now, because that cute little kiddie might have terrorist genes because it came from Somalia?
Speaking as an (adoptive) parent, there are a bunch of reasons.
A pervasive opinion that adoption is a lesser option: people often ask about the "real" parents. (Hey moron, we change the diapers, we feed him at 2:00AM, he calls us mama and dada. We are the real parents.)
10k TV movies and breathless tabloid stories about adoptions gone bad.
Increasing health care coverage for infertility treatments coupled with agressive advertising by for-profit infertility clinics.
A culture where biological mothers can either abort or keep the kids with the help of welfare and be accepted, but placing a baby for adoption is regarded as despicable.
Some amount of racism. Lots and lots of people want perfect white infants: a lot fewer are willing to take darker kids. Fine by me: we got Adam since some other adoptive family couldn't handle the fact he was 1/2 black.
Adoption works. It's truly sad that so few people understand that.
The Canopy Theory is one of the best examples of how "scientific" creationism is intellectually bankrupt. It sounds wonderful until you actually spend five brain cells thinking about it. (Note: fast order of magnitude calcs follow.)
Assume we have enough water in the atmosphere in the form of vapor to cover the earth 30k feet deep. All that water weighs exactly what it weighs in liquid form and thus presses down with that same force: IOW, the Earth would have had an atmospheric pressure equal to about that of a deep sea trench. Given that humans have major problems dealing with more than a few atmospheres when scuba diving, not likely. (Oh, that's right. God took care of that.)
How can we see under all that water, or plants photosynthesize? The ocean is pitch black from 300 or so meters down in even the clearest water. (God again)
Next, work out how fast the water actually fell. 10k meters/40 days*24hours = 10.4 *meters* per hour. No chance of breathing under that kind of deluge. (God fixed it, check)
How about the kinetic energy of that water? (Again, real fast calc-I may be off by an order of magnitude or more. Feel free to check.) You have 10 km worth of water falling at least 10km. PE converted to KE: PE is mgh: g = 10 m/s^2, h = 10km, mass = 4/3*pi*(r2^3-r1^3) *h2o density, where r2 = r1+10km, r1= earth radius of 6378140m. Mass is roughly 5e18 tons = 5e21 kg, PE = mgh = 5e26 joules. A big H-bomb puts out 1e17, so this an energy output roughly the equal of 5e9 H-bombs exploding. Where did all that energy go- oh yeah, God fixed it.
Where is the water today? Oh, that's right, God miracled it away.
There's no science here at all, just a pathetic rationalization of a biblical story. Even one "God fixed it" takes it out of science altogether.
he lives in LA where rent is outrageous. living with your mommy is a good idea when you're 18 and in LA.
I've lived in LA- there's plenty of places that are really, really cheap to live.
Oh, they're also really, really dangerous. [1] I thought he was the big bad anarchist- wouldn't
want any police to take away his freedoms now, would he?
Welcome to anarchy: the guys with the biggest guns and meanest tempers rule
[1] While we were there a murder/arson occured 25 feet from where my wife and I slept.
Kind of makes you worry sometimes.
Why? He's old enough to hold a job, get married, buy a house, join the army and any of a hundred other things actual adults do rather than live in their parent's basement, eat their parents food and use their parent's electricity to write screeds about overthrowing the government because it oppresses the man.
Living at home makes it ok for those of us with real jobs and lives to laugh at his silly "1'm 50 3133t cause I'm a terrorist" ass.
The stupid idiot has lived his entire life sponging off the teat of mommy and daddy. His opinions are those of a child: he's never experienced anything else. Hopefully he'll learn a new form of sponging, bending over a few prison toilets.
Slashdot Mirror
Before WWII, there was a thriving business with dozens of light plane makers. You could buy good, cheap little planes. After WWII, there was some consolidation in the industry but you could still get a decent little plane for reasonable bucks.
Then the lawyers got involved. Liability lawsuits appeared everywhere. Since planes stick around for a while, a crash of a 20 year old model was still grounds to sue. Cessna quit making anything smaller than a corporate jet. Piper nearly went bankrupt. The entire GA industry entered a slump.
Finally, Congress acted and set strict liability limits on older light planes. (If it's been flying for 15 years, the maker probably isn't at fault.) Liability is still a problem though: a decent light plane that can carry a small family costs as much as a house now. This isn't a fancy plane: cloth seats and barely enough room to move your feet.
There are a few small makers out there (Cessna came back), but almost nothing cheap is left. You can build your own from a kit and slap an "Experimental" tag on it, but that leaves *you* fully liable for anything that happens. (Then again, as a pilot it was probably your fault anyway.) You could go for an ultralight, but that's for sightseeing, not for travel.
End result: a few companies sell a few, very expensive planes to rich people. Folks like me with a pilot's license but no trust fund rent aging C152s on weekends since we can't afford anything else. (Someday I'm going to build one, but I've got a 7-month old kid and a mortgage right now.)
Liability is almost certainly the wrong way to do this
Eric
More imporantly, you've not paid for open source software.
I didn't? What's this charge on my credit card for a copy of RedHat?
Sure, you can say that I bought the service contract and not the software, but I suspect you're going to have a really, really hard time convincing a judge of that when there's a box sitting on the store shelf that has "Red Hat Linux" printed on it. Specifically, that convincing is going to cost $ in lawyer's fees which RH can ill afford.
Seriously, this is a *terrible* idea. MS has lawyers out the wazoo and the cash to pay them to tie up any such suits forever. (See antitrust case) RH and other small companies don't, and they are going to get hammered the first time a major problem comes along
Eric.
Patents only good for 7 years, no extension.
Doesn't work for the drug companies or any other company with significant regulation that delays introduction of the patented thing.
7 years is roughly what it takes for a drug to wind its way through the testing process, and it can be well over 10. It doesn't start making money for a few years after that. (Assuming it ever does: few drugs ever make back their development costs.)
There are plenty of reliable computers: the controls of the modern Airbus 340 are fully given over to a computer, and video-game consoles consistently work as advertised, as do Aegis missile cruisers, cellular telephones and digital watches
I'm afraid these are terrible examples.
Airbuses have been using digital flight controls for a while, and several crashes have been influenced by them. (See comp.risks back issues for details.)
Video game consoles crash often enough to be a problem: I've never seen all three consoles at the local software place working at the same time. (Interestingly, I've never seen the XBox down, but the GameCube and PS2 are often kaput.)
The Aegis software worked exactly as designed on the Vincennes, except that the UI was so bad the sailors couldn't tell that the target was climbing, not descending. I don't think shooting down civilian airliners counts as reliable.
Even the (Dish Network) receiver on my TV needs rebooting about once a month. (Can't speak for cellphones: I stay as far away from them as possible.)
And as the article point out, these are all dedicated purpose machines: nobody's loading Morpheus onto the Airbus flight control system. Getting true reliability for a general purpose machine is damn hard.
Eric
Back in my grad school days, one of my coworkers found a serious bug in our new RS6Ks. IBM had a *team* of engineers working on fixing that bug as soon as they verified it wasn't headspace+timing on our part. (We actually didn't have a 5 9's requirement for uptime or anything, but the bug could have affected people who did.)
Apple isn't set up to do support at that level- they sell to general consumers, not folks for whom 10 minutes of downtime is a deal-killer.
One of the things that I consider a big advantage of Open Source is the fact that there is less need to re-invent the wheel all the time.
Ahh, that must explain KDE and Gnome then.
A couple of book suggestions. Movies just ain't gonna cut it here.
Eric
OKay, it's rear projection or plasma... got it. My original point still stands
No, it doesn't. You don't block the projector: sure, you can stand in front of the board and block the view, but that's not any different than any other kind of black/whiteboard.
By the way, for about $200-$500, you can have an effective resolution on a white board of millions of dpi (think molecules).
Actually, it's nowhere close to that: whiteboard markers are fat and unwieldy for the most part.
I don't think you really see the benefits of one of these systems. Can you do any of the following on a whiteboard?
Hint: these aren't just for sketching on a wall. They've got capabilities far beyond that of a standard whiteboard. If you want to sketch on a wall, use a whiteboard. We've got them in the classrooms too, you know.
Eric
Smart Boards not all they are cracked up to be. They are inaccurate, very crude, and uncomfortable to work with. Aside from blocking the projector all the time...
Haven't used one recently, have you?
First, you don't have to block the board. The ones we use are rear projection so they just look like a big TV set. You can also get overlays for plasma TV screens- neither have this problem.
Now while that may not seem like such a big idea, how often have you found that you write in tiny little details or hash marks or some other marking on a diagram? Sometimes those are very useful.
If you're writing so small that a 1024x768 screen can't pick it up, nobody in your audience can either. These aren't designed to be used alone: they're for people to use in classrooms/teleconferences. Put a single black pixel up and step back 10 feet- you won't see it. You need an area of at least 6-10 pixels.
Eric
A NASA Ultraviolet Spectroscopic Satellite uses complex procedures for guidance
What I still don't understand is how they rotate it back out of the imaginary plane. I would think you'd try and stay away from it altogether since you might hit a stray pole.
Hey, my incredibly non-techie type wife will even watch Junkyard Wars with me sometimes. She vastly prefers the British version of the show just to listen to the language: she was a linguistics major in college.
You just gotta find the hook :^)
If I want cross platform development, I'll use something I can commit to: Java, C if it's applicable, C# if it turns out that I have to.
I just spent the morning with a Spanish prof here who wants to take a bunch of old Hypercard stacks he wrote and update them. Given a choice of Flash, Java or C++ which do you think he'll be able to use?
Hint: it's not the last two :^) I can train him to use Flash to do what he needs to in about 2-3 hours. He can easily enter sounds, graphics and animations. He can have simple interactivity- students fill in boxes and then check translations.
How long do you think it would take him in Java? I like Java, but it's simply not the right answer here.
Eric
I can't be the only one in this boat. The one good thing is that I now realize how useless network programming is: other than the two shows listed, Monday Night Football and the Olympics there's nothing on that I care about.
"Get back into the palmtop market"??? They've never left: the iPaq and a dozen other PocketPC devices are already StrongARM based.
You can reply to HTML mail in plain text as well: just reply, Format->Plain Text.
Hypocrite. You didn't adopt because otherwise the kid would have ended up in an orphanage. You adopted because you wanted a kid. Otherwise why would you suffered the painful treatment?
Of course we wanted a kid- be pretty pitiful if we didn't. Of course, one action can have multiple consequences- his mother has a chance to go to college now and get a decent job in the future, which would have been a lot harder if she had to raise the kid herself. (Look up any stat for unwed teenage mothers vs. other teens in similar circumstances.) Remember, she asked for someone to raise her child: nobody held a gun to her head and demanded she give him to us.
As far as being a bad idea, you still are just handwaving. Evidence please- feel free to pull up stuff that indicates adoption is worse than long-term foster care (in the US) or orphanage care (in Russia, etc). Still waiting on your previous 404 link...
Of course she cried; if a woman doesn't cry, then you just didn't get it right. Besides, that is the best part for us - it shows she really loves you.
How about laughing? My wife thought I was joking.
She's never going to live it down. (At least she did say yes.)
Eric
This is all too typical. First you insult me, then you assert some kind of right to have children, then you try to pummel me into submission with horror stories of your plight. Suffice to say I am not impressed.
This from someone who knows *nothing* about our situation and proceeds tar us with statements that simply don't apply. Who drags in state laws that a) don't apply in our case, b) we didn't pass and c) we don't support. But since you don't know anything about us, that's all you can do.
I personally love the bit about abuse: we aren't even allowed to *spank* our kid by the terms of our adoption. We had to undergo criminal background checks- perhaps a few more biological parents ought to have that happen, eh? I'd love to see the evidence, but your URL is 404.
I don't know what you have against adoption- I suppose you'd rather see the kids on welfare, aborted or sitting in orphanages? Or would you rather live in a fantasy world where these kids automatically are born with two loving parents who love them and can make sure they have enough to eat?
You may be happy with your kid, but for your indulgence to be satisfied, the natural mother is deprived of her rights
Ok, dipshit, I'll bite.
Did you ever think that there are women who might not *want* to raise a child? Our birthmother wants to go to college and decided that taking care of a kid at the same time wasn't the best way to do it.
As far as contact, get out of the 1950s. We've met the birthmother, we send her letters constantly. This is the norm in (domestic) adoption today- closed adoptions are basically dead. In fact, the person who's preventing more contact is *her*.
Luxury? I guess you have no problems breeding. Good for you. Or perhaps you haven't tried yet? In that case, I wish you the wonderful choice between expensive, painful and complex infertility treatments or a childless future. Wouldn't want to make the third choice, would we?
True, there are more children waiting to be adopted than people wanting to adopt. There are not a surplus of babies however. The surplus is in kids who are already past the infant stage therefore are less desireable to parents wanting to adopt.
Exactly. The "pro-life" folks don't seem to understand that those kids grow up! And of course a lot of them are less desireable anyway: they've got dark skin and thus many adoptive parents won't accept them. (NB: my wife and I have: our son is biracial, as his sister will be when we adopt her. Their loss- Adam is *beautiful*, far more attractive than my wife and I could have produced biologically.)
Adoption is a wonderful option: if there are any pregnant women out there who are thinking of abortion I urge you to give an agency a call first. But it simply cannot absorb the number of kids that would be born each year without abortion- it's too expensive, too time-consuming and frankly, too invasive for most people. (Our agency knows *everything* about us-details of our infertility, our medical histories, criminal backgrounds, net worth to the dime, etc.)
Eric
What's up over there in the States? Is it rendered illegal to adopt a poor child from your local community or even a poor foreign country? Or is it unpopular now, because that cute little kiddie might have terrorist genes because it came from Somalia?
Speaking as an (adoptive) parent, there are a bunch of reasons.
Adoption works. It's truly sad that so few people understand that.
The Canopy Theory is one of the best examples of how "scientific" creationism is intellectually bankrupt. It sounds wonderful until you actually spend five brain cells thinking about it. (Note: fast order of magnitude calcs follow.)
Assume we have enough water in the atmosphere in the form of vapor to cover the earth 30k feet deep. All that water weighs exactly what it weighs in liquid form and thus presses down with that same force: IOW, the Earth would have had an atmospheric pressure equal to about that of a deep sea trench. Given that humans have major problems dealing with more than a few atmospheres when scuba diving, not likely. (Oh, that's right. God took care of that.)
How can we see under all that water, or plants photosynthesize? The ocean is pitch black from 300 or so meters down in even the clearest water. (God again)
Next, work out how fast the water actually fell. 10k meters/40 days*24hours = 10.4 *meters* per hour. No chance of breathing under that kind of deluge. (God fixed it, check)
How about the kinetic energy of that water? (Again, real fast calc-I may be off by an order of magnitude or more. Feel free to check.) You have 10 km worth of water falling at least 10km. PE converted to KE: PE is mgh: g = 10 m/s^2, h = 10km, mass = 4/3*pi*(r2^3-r1^3) *h2o density, where r2 = r1+10km, r1= earth radius of 6378140m. Mass is roughly 5e18 tons = 5e21 kg, PE = mgh = 5e26 joules. A big H-bomb puts out 1e17, so this an energy output roughly the equal of 5e9 H-bombs exploding. Where did all that energy go- oh yeah, God fixed it.
Where is the water today? Oh, that's right, God miracled it away.
There's no science here at all, just a pathetic rationalization of a biblical story. Even one "God fixed it" takes it out of science altogether.
Eric
he lives in LA where rent is outrageous. living with your mommy is a good idea when you're 18 and in LA.
I've lived in LA- there's plenty of places that are really, really cheap to live.
Oh, they're also really, really dangerous. [1] I thought he was the big bad anarchist- wouldn't
want any police to take away his freedoms now, would he?
Welcome to anarchy: the guys with the biggest guns and meanest tempers rule
[1] While we were there a murder/arson occured 25 feet from where my wife and I slept.
Kind of makes you worry sometimes.
Eric
I think it's okay to live at home if you're 18.
Why? He's old enough to hold a job, get married, buy a house, join the army and any of a hundred other things actual adults do rather than live in their parent's basement, eat their parents food and use their parent's electricity to write screeds about overthrowing the government because it oppresses the man.
Living at home makes it ok for those of us with real jobs and lives to laugh at his silly "1'm 50 3133t cause I'm a terrorist" ass.
The stupid idiot has lived his entire life sponging off the teat of mommy and daddy. His opinions are those of a child: he's never experienced anything else. Hopefully he'll learn a new form of sponging, bending over a few prison toilets.
If you honestly think that a silicone-inflated Carmen Electra-like bubblehead is sexier than Cathy Rogers, I feel sorry for you.