Fox didn't air the pilot movie which explained who everyone was and what was going on, but instead aired that horrendous episode about the train robbery, which was easily the *worst* episode of the season. I'd heard the pilot movie was supposed to have aired back in December around Christmas (which would have been another brilliant move by Fox...)
It aired in late december, I watched, it was good.
Officially, Fox says the show is on hiatus until they find a new timeslot for it, but I don't think anyone here would be surprised if Firefly never came back.
Fox is not buying any more episodes, and they aren't airing any of the ones they have in stock...
Go check out fireflysupport.com, they have details.
I don't watch it (mostly because the theme song is about as sweet to my ears as the sound of a cat sliding down a blackboard), but save Farscape, and then save Firefly , wich I do like : )
Jeeves USED to give interresting results, years ago, but back in (IIRC) the spring or summer of 2000, they turned evil. Now all the awsers it vomits are paid links with little relevance to the question I asked.
but some people can be confused by the way [google] just rattles off a bunch of sites
Yes, these people are called retards and should step away from the keyboard;- )
No, seriously, people are confused by a list of 10 sites listed in order or relevance to the query? Dang, don't these people ever feel lucky?
no politician or military leader has any desire to unleash chemical, or especially biological, weapons. They're just as likely to affect our own troops as well.
Unless you have the vaccine that immunises your troops against your biological agents. Then you can just send the disease, let the enemy get sick, and then waltz in unaffected. If you're telling me that your military scientists are not trying to do this, then either they, or you, are complete retards. That technology would give whoever controlls it an unbelievable upper hand. Not trying to get it would be very uncharacteristic of the country that got The Bomb first.
1993 - WTC bombed, no retaliation
Well, there were arrests, and an impressive bit of detective work with saliva on enveloppes...but it wasn't a country-to-country conflict, there wasn't anything to do in retaliation, no one to retaliate to (except the guys that actually did it, and I think they are still in jail).
* 1993 - "Black Hawk Down" in Somalia, US forces turn tail and run
Well, you invaded Somalia thinking it would be a piece of cake, the black hawk down was them retaliating. Getting out of there was the sane thing to do. (no point in loosing troops to invade somalia, the place was a mess)
* 1996 - Khobar towers bombed, no retaliation, abandoned more accessible bases in Saudi Arabia for more remote ones
Never heard of it
* 1998 - Bin Laden calls US a "paper tiger" in interview
Wow! Nuke him! Nuke him now! He calls the US a paper tiger! BURN ALL HIS LANDS TO ASHES! Come on, he called you names? How dare he!?! Sheesh...
* 1998 - Two embassies in Africa bombed, didn't retaliate until it conveniently delayed an impeachment vote
The wonderfull world of politics...
* 1999 - Terrorists intercepted planning to bomb New Year's Eve celebrations
That's what borders are for, good job that.
* 2000 - USS Cole bombed, no retaliation
The ship in Yemen? What, you were gonna retaliate againts Yemen?
* 2001 - Sept 11
Retaliated by bombing the shit out of Afganistan and then taking over. (BTW, american pilots on amphetamines bombed canadian troops on a training exercise...dunno what that was retaliating against, but now the canadiens got retaliated against! That'll learn 'em to...er...beat you at hockey!)
Because we didn't use effective or timely retaliation, they came to believe we were a bunch of spineless cowards. They kept escalating their attacks, culminating in 9/11.
No, because they keep wanting you to get out of islamic countries and you keep not leaving, they keep attacking you. And, the CIA trained them to do it. And who are those "they" we are talking about?
Anyway, just ignore me and go back to your normal train of thought: DESTROY! DESTROY! DESTROY!
As a history major this bit of misinformation has to be swiftly kicked out the door. The japanese would NEVER unconditionally surrender without the Nukes.
I never said they would, I clearly said that they were trying to surrender conditionally...ya know, with the russian diplomats.
[...] long explanation of why an unconditional surrender was what the US and allies were after [...]
Anyone who thinks that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki where simply vengeful acts has not a clue about the historical basis for the reasons for unconditional surrender - as you yourself proved.
I did NOT say the only reason for the nuking of civilian japanese were "simply vengeful acts", I said that it was done to gain the upper hand by scaring the rest of the world into submitting to the US foreign policies. I stand by that. The vengefullness was just an added bonus.
It was a horrible cold bloded murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians. You can come up with all the rationalisations in the world, it was still hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths!
why the fuck don't you blame the japanese leaders for not surrendering when they *knew* they where beat?
Oh, they had it coming huh? It was their own fault, you told 'em to bend over and take it up the ass, and they didn't listen, so it was quite allright to start dropping "A" bombs on 'em, really.
Yes, the japanese high command (or whatever they were called) should have realised that they were doomed, but I will not blame their willingness to try and save their way of life (embodied in the emperor) for the nukings. They were foolish, they were overconfident, and they got nuked by intelligent, overconfident jerks. It was overkill. they dropped a nuke on an industrial city, on morning rush hour, over the town bridge. That was a move to ensure that the most people would die. They could have made their point by dropping the nuke anywhere else, but they choose a high civilian mortality rate. Cold, calculated, evil.
It had EVERYTHING to do with preventing a World War III. And, guess what, it worked.
I have a rock here that keeps tigers away...I'll sell it to you, cheap!
The face of war changed. There was a cold war (wich took place all over the world), that some would argue counts as a third world war. It didn't follow the insane pattern of the first two world wars, but going ahead like that would have been suicide, and everyone involved knew that.
has not a clue about the historical basis for the reasons for unconditional surrender - as you yourself proved.
Considering that the only thing you seemed to have picked up from my post was "kick them while they were down", I reject your assumption.
And oh, you're a history major? So yeah, I would expect that you know more of the historical details...but guess what, you couldn't even understand my argument...Or worse, you understand my argument (nuking people is not nice), but you think that the ends justify the means.
I'm a pacifist, I think that killing someone to take his stuff is wrong. I think that killing someone's family so he'll do as you order is wrong. I'm all for vengeance, but you gotta know when to stop.
the only biological and chemical weapons we have left are used for training and research only, not research into new weapons mind you, but how to defend against them.
Bullshit. "How to defend against them" is a euphemism for "how to unleash them with minimal losses on our part". And you don't really need new wepons, you already have good weapons...people won't get any more dead with new weapons than with what's already available.
Yes, we are still the only country to use nuclear weapons in war. However, it probably saved the lives of 5 million American and Japanese soldiers who would've died in an invasion, and it ended the war.
Against civillians, mind you, and the war was already won. Japan had been trying to negociate a surrender with the help of russian diplomats for about a year when the US decided to nuke 'em (twice!). The point was not to end the war, it was to get an unconditionnal surrender...kick 'em while they're down. It also came in handy as a way to scare the rest of the world into submission to US foreign policy...the "we have the bomb" argument was a pretty good one for 10 or 15 years, until others could say the same.
Your utopia will never exist, and besides, I wouldn't want to live there.
How's your best friend Satan?
You also have a severe misunderstanding of the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists' mindset.
I don't know about him, but my understanding is like this: You hit them, they hit you back more, you ht THEM back more, they hit YOU back double more...
Round and round it goes...
So, yeah, keep on picking a fight with Irak, and when the extremists hit you back for them, you can say "see, they hit us, we were right to hit them first", again and agin and again.
1) It's not xenophobia. It's a joke. Your boredom stems from your overly-serious approach to internet posting. If I wasn't American, I'd rip on Americans all day. I'm not French, so I'll rip on the French as much as I please. I invite all French readers to reply with their worst, understanding that the interaction will all be in good fun.
Its a tired old joke...it bores me. And jokes that are funny because "the guy was from another country" all reek of xenophobia...but some are funny. : ) Yours bored me. If I had mod points today I would have modded you as overrated...
2) My list isn't in chronological order. I apologize profusely and pledge to keep all further postings involving multiple events in a timeline format.
I accept your apology and I look forward to enjoying your timelines.
3) You said the same thing I did, but you used more details because you google searched for "Raelians" and reported what you found.
Nope, did a book report on 'em in highschool...got an A. Actual knowledge...not something you see often on/., but it crops up once in a while.
4) We all agree here.:-)
Yup
5) Anything that involves group sex is at least worth a look.
That must be why they film so much of it...
Maybe Rael hit the wall a few too many times during his racing career: This would explain his status as a "former" race-car driver and as a lunatic.
Last I heard he still races...and he's really bad at it : )
After previewing this message I decided it was too agressive. I assure you the only reason for this is that I'm bored at work and I'm searching for any source of entertainment I can find. As I've mentioned, internet posting can only be taken seriously to a point.
Hey, glad I could give you something to waste your time on! : ) Happy holidays!
Oh joy, another "boo scince!" comment on cloning...sigh.
But, natural births are usually births that occur without massive intervention of medical or other science (2 cells merge, "nature" takes over, 9 months later, the results are usually favorable).
Ok, 2 points:
No, that's not true. Do you even know how humans are born? Without medical intervention we get really high infant mortality, the kind they get in underdevellopped countries.
In "cloning", 2 cells merge (the content of an adult non-reproductive cell are inserted in a reproductive cell that has been stripped of its DNA), nature takes over, 9 months later you get a new baby....same diff.
From my perspective, PETA is a group of flakes (that's my opinion only, let's not debate that here.)
I personally think that they are crazy extremists...flakes works too, but they make a good point about how cruel we are to animals (we are cruel to ourselves too, but they don't seem to care about that...).
If I have too[sic] choose between ending the life on a cloned animal that is "abnormal" and the life of a cloned human that is "abnormal", I can choose to end the animal's life with little or no moral regrets, not so with a cloned human.
Somebody likes to play god... Hell, if you're breeding animals to exploit them as food sources, there's no need to keep the defective ones; they would cost too much to maintain, and they would be worth less when grown up. So you kill them now rather than kill them later, no big deal. Humans are different, we aren't eating soylent green yet.
The natural way of creating life is working too well for most of us, and is a damned sight more fun then the petri dish method.
So what's your point here? That artificial insemination is both wrong and boring? "Working too well"? Is that a hint about overpopulation? Are you affraid we'll be overrun by an army of clones?
Yes, the science behind human cloning is not sound.
The science of cloning is sound if they documented everything, made lots of notes and mesurments...
But I notice you say "human cloning", not just "cloning". What about the science of sheep cloning? Is that sound?
I think this discussion has forced me to develop a view against human cloning, which I did not previously possess.
Dude, I don't believe that. I think you were clearly anti cloning, heck, vaguely anti science from the get-go.
That bit about "massive intervention of medical or other science" just reeks of anti-science views.
1) Their leader is French. 2) He calls himself "Rael," moved to Canada, and started a cult. 3) This cult believes that aliens created humans from DNA they brought to Earth. 4) The cult's headquarters is called "UFO Land." 5) They claim to have cloned a human.
Now, why the hell should I believe 5 if 1-4 serve to discredit any idea that intelligence and legitimacy may be present here?
Corrections:
He is French, but your xenophobic assumptions bore me...
He did change his name to Raël, and started a cult, but he did that before he moved to Canada.
He basically believes that the entity others refer to as "God" is in fact Yavhe, a 4' tall lil' gray alien with a mullet and a goatee, and that he and his race (the elohim(sp?)) "terraformed" the earth and created all life on it, and then proceeded to give us commandements and whatnot.
Yeah...UFO land...that IS corny...damn frenchmen;- )
Yeah, they've been talking about doing it for years...gotta love those raëlians...where other cults go for the cheap thrill of a mass murder, they go for group sex and cloning! : )
Many natural births done to date have resulted in abnormalities that manifested themselves later in the person's life. Well, an animal can be put down pretty quickly, and the ethics behind so are hotly contested by PETA. Not so with human life, a court needs to decide if a person will be executed or not. If there is a life threatning condition down the road, the naturally born person may have to endure a lot of pain and suffering that would have been avoided had they been aborted before birth. Bottom line, there is too much we don't know about natural reproduction to rush to create a new human for the purposes of going forth and multiplying only. This is not responsible or ethical human behaviour.
...winter clothing that use the much higher heat difference between the side next to the body and the side next to the winter cold while maintaining an usefull insulation...
and if they can give it some very general commands like walk this direction, or surprise that kid, that would be pretty amazing.
Yeah...I hope they have a vacuum cleaner built-in that thing, 'cause a walking dinosaur that surprises kids is likely to cause quite a few "accidents" from the terrified kid's part, if you know what I mean...
That's the magic," Sklar said. "When people see, hear and touch this character, it will be a real groundbreaking experience.
And possibly a real bone breaking experience...
Some of its potential antics are eating popcorn, "stealing" a guest's hat and sneezing.
"Here's your hat back sir...filled to the brim with soggy pop-corn! Have a nice day!"
The first Animatronic figures, called A-4s, could turn and open their mouths to be synchronized with music. The next phase, called A-100s, had more real-life movement and were used in Pirates of the Caribbean and "Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln" at Disneyland, where the figure stands and talks to the audience. But none have been able to directly interact with visitors.
The latest, free-roaming 4 legged animatronics will be called AT-ATs, and are covered in a thick armour that even ground-based blasters cannot penetrate. They also sing and dance!
Disney chose a dinosaur because children are so fascinated with them, Sklar said, plus "it's a large enough character to get their attention."
Other possible uses for the robotic dinosaur will be raiding p2p user's homes, Jack Valenti only has to say the word. Disney is currently cooperating with DARPA to create the next generation cuddly animatronics, wich will also serve as a mobile launcher for ground-to-air missiles. Children are expected to be delighted.
Maybe a script that detects the load a "victim" of the/. effect can take and that stops the clickthroughs once its reached its limit? Dunno how feasable that is technically, but it would be polite, and if people really want to follow the link they can allways copy and paste it to the adress bar.
Slashdot Mirror
this is a carefully orchestrated scare tactic to keep ps2 owners from buying XBoxes
No, the huge xbox controller is a scare tactic to keep people with hands from buying the xboxes...
It aired in late december, I watched, it was good.
Officially, Fox says the show is on hiatus until they find a new timeslot for it, but I don't think anyone here would be surprised if Firefly never came back.
Fox is not buying any more episodes, and they aren't airing any of the ones they have in stock...
Go check out fireflysupport.com, they have details.
I don't watch it (mostly because the theme song is about as sweet to my ears as the sound of a cat sliding down a blackboard), but save Farscape, and then save Firefly , wich I do like : )
pleaaaase!
Jeeves USED to give interresting results, years ago, but back in (IIRC) the spring or summer of 2000, they turned evil. Now all the awsers it vomits are paid links with little relevance to the question I asked.
but some people can be confused by the way [google] just rattles off a bunch of sites
Yes, these people are called retards and should step away from the keyboard
No, seriously, people are confused by a list of 10 sites listed in order or relevance to the query? Dang, don't these people ever feel lucky?
No you can't. People in prison still commit crimes.
Man, I gots to go to Finland!
: )
Unless you have the vaccine that immunises your troops against your biological agents. Then you can just send the disease, let the enemy get sick, and then waltz in unaffected. If you're telling me that your military scientists are not trying to do this, then either they, or you, are complete retards. That technology would give whoever controlls it an unbelievable upper hand. Not trying to get it would be very uncharacteristic of the country that got The Bomb first.
1993 - WTC bombed, no retaliation
Well, there were arrests, and an impressive bit of detective work with saliva on enveloppes...but it wasn't a country-to-country conflict, there wasn't anything to do in retaliation, no one to retaliate to (except the guys that actually did it, and I think they are still in jail).
* 1993 - "Black Hawk Down" in Somalia, US forces turn tail and run
Well, you invaded Somalia thinking it would be a piece of cake, the black hawk down was them retaliating. Getting out of there was the sane thing to do. (no point in loosing troops to invade somalia, the place was a mess)
* 1996 - Khobar towers bombed, no retaliation, abandoned more accessible bases in Saudi Arabia for more remote ones
Never heard of it
* 1998 - Bin Laden calls US a "paper tiger" in interview
Wow! Nuke him! Nuke him now! He calls the US a paper tiger! BURN ALL HIS LANDS TO ASHES!
Come on, he called you names? How dare he!?! Sheesh...
* 1998 - Two embassies in Africa bombed, didn't retaliate until it conveniently delayed an impeachment vote
The wonderfull world of politics...
* 1999 - Terrorists intercepted planning to bomb New Year's Eve celebrations
That's what borders are for, good job that.
* 2000 - USS Cole bombed, no retaliation
The ship in Yemen? What, you were gonna retaliate againts Yemen?
* 2001 - Sept 11
Retaliated by bombing the shit out of Afganistan and then taking over. (BTW, american pilots on amphetamines bombed canadian troops on a training exercise...dunno what that was retaliating against, but now the canadiens got retaliated against! That'll learn 'em to...er...beat you at hockey!)
Because we didn't use effective or timely retaliation, they came to believe we were a bunch of spineless cowards. They kept escalating their attacks, culminating in 9/11.
No, because they keep wanting you to get out of islamic countries and you keep not leaving, they keep attacking you.
And, the CIA trained them to do it.
And who are those "they" we are talking about?
Anyway, just ignore me and go back to your normal train of thought: DESTROY! DESTROY! DESTROY!
Paper tiger...sheesh...
Man that was awfull...the Roger Rabbit game was almost as bad...
I never said they would, I clearly said that they were trying to surrender conditionally...ya know, with the russian diplomats.
[...] long explanation of why an unconditional surrender was what the US and allies were after [...]
Anyone who thinks that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki where simply vengeful acts has not a clue about the historical basis for the reasons for unconditional surrender - as you yourself proved.
I did NOT say the only reason for the nuking of civilian japanese were "simply vengeful acts", I said that it was done to gain the upper hand by scaring the rest of the world into submitting to the US foreign policies. I stand by that. The vengefullness was just an added bonus.
It was a horrible cold bloded murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians. You can come up with all the rationalisations in the world, it was still hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths!
why the fuck don't you blame the japanese leaders for not surrendering when they *knew* they where beat?
Oh, they had it coming huh? It was their own fault, you told 'em to bend over and take it up the ass, and they didn't listen, so it was quite allright to start dropping "A" bombs on 'em, really.
Yes, the japanese high command (or whatever they were called) should have realised that they were doomed, but I will not blame their willingness to try and save their way of life (embodied in the emperor) for the nukings. They were foolish, they were overconfident, and they got nuked by intelligent, overconfident jerks. It was overkill. they dropped a nuke on an industrial city, on morning rush hour, over the town bridge. That was a move to ensure that the most people would die. They could have made their point by dropping the nuke anywhere else, but they choose a high civilian mortality rate. Cold, calculated, evil.
It had EVERYTHING to do with preventing a World War III. And, guess what, it worked.
I have a rock here that keeps tigers away...I'll sell it to you, cheap!
The face of war changed. There was a cold war (wich took place all over the world), that some would argue counts as a third world war. It didn't follow the insane pattern of the first two world wars, but going ahead like that would have been suicide, and everyone involved knew that.
has not a clue about the historical basis for the reasons for unconditional surrender - as you yourself proved.
Considering that the only thing you seemed to have picked up from my post was "kick them while they were down", I reject your assumption.
And oh, you're a history major? So yeah, I would expect that you know more of the historical details...but guess what, you couldn't even understand my argument...Or worse, you understand my argument (nuking people is not nice), but you think that the ends justify the means.
I'm a pacifist, I think that killing someone to take his stuff is wrong. I think that killing someone's family so he'll do as you order is wrong. I'm all for vengeance, but you gotta know when to stop.
Are you kidding, or just ignorant? Russia has more nukes than us
US: 7,982 deployed nuclear weapons
Russia: About 6000.
the only biological and chemical weapons we have left are used for training and research only, not research into new weapons mind you, but how to defend against them.
Bullshit. "How to defend against them" is a euphemism for "how to unleash them with minimal losses on our part". And you don't really need new wepons, you already have good weapons...people won't get any more dead with new weapons than with what's already available.
Yes, we are still the only country to use nuclear weapons in war. However, it probably saved the lives of 5 million American and Japanese soldiers who would've died in an invasion, and it ended the war.
Against civillians, mind you, and the war was already won. Japan had been trying to negociate a surrender with the help of russian diplomats for about a year when the US decided to nuke 'em (twice!). The point was not to end the war, it was to get an unconditionnal surrender...kick 'em while they're down.
It also came in handy as a way to scare the rest of the world into submission to US foreign policy...the "we have the bomb" argument was a pretty good one for 10 or 15 years, until others could say the same.
Your utopia will never exist, and besides, I wouldn't want to live there.
How's your best friend Satan?
You also have a severe misunderstanding of the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists' mindset.
I don't know about him, but my understanding is like this: You hit them, they hit you back more, you ht THEM back more, they hit YOU back double more...
Round and round it goes...
So, yeah, keep on picking a fight with Irak, and when the extremists hit you back for them, you can say "see, they hit us, we were right to hit them first", again and agin and again.
1) It's not xenophobia. It's a joke. Your boredom stems from your overly-serious approach to internet posting. If I wasn't American, I'd rip on Americans all day. I'm not French, so I'll rip on the French as much as I please. I invite all French readers to reply with their worst, understanding that the interaction will all be in good fun.
/., but it crops up once in a while.
:-)
Its a tired old joke...it bores me. And jokes that are funny because "the guy was from another country" all reek of xenophobia...but some are funny. : )
Yours bored me. If I had mod points today I would have modded you as overrated...
2) My list isn't in chronological order. I apologize profusely and pledge to keep all further postings involving multiple events in a timeline format.
I accept your apology and I look forward to enjoying your timelines.
3) You said the same thing I did, but you used more details because you google searched for "Raelians" and reported what you found.
Nope, did a book report on 'em in highschool...got an A.
Actual knowledge...not something you see often on
4) We all agree here.
Yup
5) Anything that involves group sex is at least worth a look.
That must be why they film so much of it...
Maybe Rael hit the wall a few too many times during his racing career: This would explain his status as a "former" race-car driver and as a lunatic.
Last I heard he still races...and he's really bad at it : )
After previewing this message I decided it was too agressive. I assure you the only reason for this is that I'm bored at work and I'm searching for any source of entertainment I can find. As I've mentioned, internet posting can only be taken seriously to a point.
Hey, glad I could give you something to waste your time on! : )
Happy holidays!
But, natural births are usually births that occur without massive intervention of medical or other science (2 cells merge, "nature" takes over, 9 months later, the results are usually favorable).
Ok, 2 points:
From my perspective, PETA is a group of flakes (that's my opinion only, let's not debate that here.)
I personally think that they are crazy extremists...flakes works too, but they make a good point about how cruel we are to animals (we are cruel to ourselves too, but they don't seem to care about that...).
If I have too[sic] choose between ending the life on a cloned animal that is "abnormal" and the life of a cloned human that is "abnormal", I can choose to end the animal's life with little or no moral regrets, not so with a cloned human.
Somebody likes to play god...
Hell, if you're breeding animals to exploit them as food sources, there's no need to keep the defective ones; they would cost too much to maintain, and they would be worth less when grown up. So you kill them now rather than kill them later, no big deal.
Humans are different, we aren't eating soylent green yet.
The natural way of creating life is working too well for most of us, and is a damned sight more fun then the petri dish method.
So what's your point here? That artificial insemination is both wrong and boring? "Working too well"? Is that a hint about overpopulation? Are you affraid we'll be overrun by an army of clones?
Yes, the science behind human cloning is not sound.
The science of cloning is sound if they documented everything, made lots of notes and mesurments...
But I notice you say "human cloning", not just "cloning". What about the science of sheep cloning? Is that sound?
I think this discussion has forced me to develop a view against human cloning, which I did not previously possess.
Dude, I don't believe that. I think you were clearly anti cloning, heck, vaguely anti science from the get-go.
That bit about "massive intervention of medical or other science" just reeks of anti-science views.
2) He calls himself "Rael," moved to Canada, and started a cult.
3) This cult believes that aliens created humans from DNA they brought to Earth.
4) The cult's headquarters is called "UFO Land."
5) They claim to have cloned a human.
Now, why the hell should I believe 5 if 1-4 serve to discredit any idea that intelligence and legitimacy may be present here?
Corrections:
Many natural births done to date have resulted in abnormalities that manifested themselves later in the person's life. Well, an animal can be put down pretty quickly, and the ethics behind so are hotly contested by PETA. Not so with human life, a court needs to decide if a person will be executed or not. If there is a life threatning condition down the road, the naturally born person may have to endure a lot of pain and suffering that would have been avoided had they been aborted before birth. Bottom line, there is too much we don't know about natural reproduction to rush to create a new human for the purposes of going forth and multiplying only. This is not responsible or ethical human behaviour.
...winter clothing that use the much higher heat difference between the side next to the body and the side next to the winter cold while maintaining an usefull insulation...
Man that's hard not to interpret as a euphemism for "orgasm!"
Well, so long as your phone plays the Python theme and doesn't vibr...er...it doen't vibrate, does it?
: )
I'm reeling from the thought that a watch can be worth more than my whole house.
Better not forget it in your pants come laundry day...
Hurrah for finland!
I'm writing from Canada, and I too think that "tv snow" looks nothing like real snow (except for the colour). But hey, it never snows in hollywood : )
PS I never cared to check what polar bears poo...
Yeah...I hope they have a vacuum cleaner built-in that thing, 'cause a walking dinosaur that surprises kids is likely to cause quite a few "accidents" from the terrified kid's part, if you know what I mean...
That's the magic," Sklar said. "When people see, hear and touch this character, it will be a real groundbreaking experience.
And possibly a real bone breaking experience...
Some of its potential antics are eating popcorn, "stealing" a guest's hat and sneezing.
"Here's your hat back sir...filled to the brim with soggy pop-corn! Have a nice day!"
The first Animatronic figures, called A-4s, could turn and open their mouths to be synchronized with music. The next phase, called A-100s, had more real-life movement and were used in Pirates of the Caribbean and "Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln" at Disneyland, where the figure stands and talks to the audience. But none have been able to directly interact with visitors.
The latest, free-roaming 4 legged animatronics will be called AT-ATs, and are covered in a thick armour that even ground-based blasters cannot penetrate. They also sing and dance!
Disney chose a dinosaur because children are so fascinated with them, Sklar said, plus "it's a large enough character to get their attention."
Other possible uses for the robotic dinosaur will be raiding p2p user's homes, Jack Valenti only has to say the word. Disney is currently cooperating with DARPA to create the next generation cuddly animatronics, wich will also serve as a mobile launcher for ground-to-air missiles. Children are expected to be delighted.
The Simpson's ep parodied the 2 at once...crafty lil' fellaws! : )
Dunno how feasable that is technically, but it would be polite, and if people really want to follow the link they can allways copy and paste it to the adress bar.
Science: Maps Used to Trace Lewis & Clark Route
But the most obvious one is the flux capacitor, its the same "triangle of lights" design.