Lisa: I think it's ironic that dad saved the day while a slimmer man would have fallen to his doom. Bart: And I think it's ironic that for once dad's butt prevented the release of toxic gas-
Neat idea, except for the fact that it will also plug up useful things like air filters, vents, and lungs. It seems like getting rid of all air on the spacecraft would be just as effective.
What do you mean no mainstream church insists that its followers take the Bible literally? Every church that teaches creationism insists on a literal interpretation, and sadly they aren't insignificant in number.
iapetus did a fine job dismantling your reasoning, I saw no point in repeating the points he made. And no, the GP didn't say it couldn't be a bomb because it had a breadboard circuit on it. He was only stating what is painfully obvious to everyone else--nothing in any of those pictures you linked to looked anything remotely like what the girl wore to the airport.
My point is that you should quite using misdirection and obfuscation to make it look like you have a valid argument.
Today, it was 75 degrees Fahrenheit at Logan airport. A little warm for a "hoodie", don't you think? The high for the day was 75 degrees. How often is the high temperature for the day reached before 9am? And even if she was overdressed that's pretty normal at airports since 1, airplanes are cooler than some people like, 2, people wear bulky clothing so they don't need to pack it, and 3, sometimes people fly to cooler climates.
So any device with a breadboard circuit can not be a bomb? What else can a bomb NOT contain. I'm sure our guys at TSA would like to know. I doubt the lady behind the counter knows that a breadboard circuit is. All she saw was a home made device (read: Improvised Device) attached to the chest of this girl with wires. Sorry, but that sounds like a bomb to me. Your painful attempt at logic has done more harm than Star's hoodie could ever have done.
Interesting. Do you have pictures of what it actually looks like? If you're right than it seems I underestimated the stupidity of their reaction, if that's even possible.
look at my comment HERE for some pictures of real live suicide vests that look very similar to what this girl had on her shirt, minus the blinking lights, of course. Yeah, minus the blinking lights... and plus the fucking explosives. That's a pretty big difference in my book.
Funny that you posted all those links but you forgot to post a link to show what she was actually wearing. I guess I can understand though, since then people would realize that her sweatshirt actually looked nothing like a bomb vest.
3 - Are you honestly telling me that if you saw somebody with wires sticking out of a briefcase at the airport who was ignoring the police you wouldn't be even the slightest bit nervous? And when the bomb did finally blow up you'd think the cops did the right thing, since no terrorist would be stupid enough to let the wires hang out? Where did you read that she was ignoring the police and where did you get the part about wires sticking out of a briefcase?
If you have already stated an argument previously in the thread then just say that. Telling other people to do research to back up your arguments is not helpful.
That's simply not true. There are specific articles in the constitution that apply to citizens of the United States. You can easily find them because they actually use the word "citizen". The other articles where the word "person" is used, and that includes every article dealing with civil rights, are clearly intended to cover people. If the authors intended the rights only to apply to citizens that is the word they would have used. It is clear that they knew enough to make the distinction when applicable.
Jebus dumass, on one hand you (correctly) say that the constitution applies to the government only, not individual people. Then you turn it around and say that the constitution only applies to citizens and not to foreigners. You see a difference there?
I personally reject the notion that I have to help my fellow man, and that being what seems to be a minority opinion on Slashdot It's actually a minority opinion in humans. Face it, that's the definition of an asshole. Don't act all surprised when you get a lot of shit because of it.
Slashdot Mirror
Fuck'em. It's Apples loss if Steve throws a tantrum and ditches ZFS for petty reasons.
I though fossil excrement was called scoprolite?
Ken Ham or Kent Hovind would be two obvious nominees.
obSimpsons:
Lisa: I think it's ironic that dad saved the day while a slimmer man would have fallen to his doom.
Bart: And I think it's ironic that for once dad's butt prevented the release of toxic gas-
Neat idea, except for the fact that it will also plug up useful things like air filters, vents, and lungs. It seems like getting rid of all air on the spacecraft would be just as effective.
What do you mean no mainstream church insists that its followers take the Bible literally? Every church that teaches creationism insists on a literal interpretation, and sadly they aren't insignificant in number.
True, but I doubt even they had though to involve the Supreme Court in the elections.
A fool and his money are soon parted. Sure Apple accepted their money, but who wouldn't?
He knows that, but since rectangle does not imply square they are not equivalent.
iapetus did a fine job dismantling your reasoning, I saw no point in repeating the points he made. And no, the GP didn't say it couldn't be a bomb because it had a breadboard circuit on it. He was only stating what is painfully obvious to everyone else--nothing in any of those pictures you linked to looked anything remotely like what the girl wore to the airport.
My point is that you should quite using misdirection and obfuscation to make it look like you have a valid argument.
Interesting. Do you have pictures of what it actually looks like? If you're right than it seems I underestimated the stupidity of their reaction, if that's even possible.
Funny that you posted all those links but you forgot to post a link to show what she was actually wearing. I guess I can understand though, since then people would realize that her sweatshirt actually looked nothing like a bomb vest.
And her change of clothes would have come from where?
If you have already stated an argument previously in the thread then just say that. Telling other people to do research to back up your arguments is not helpful.
That's simply not true. There are specific articles in the constitution that apply to citizens of the United States. You can easily find them because they actually use the word "citizen". The other articles where the word "person" is used, and that includes every article dealing with civil rights, are clearly intended to cover people. If the authors intended the rights only to apply to citizens that is the word they would have used. It is clear that they knew enough to make the distinction when applicable.
Jebus dumass, on one hand you (correctly) say that the constitution applies to the government only, not individual people. Then you turn it around and say that the constitution only applies to citizens and not to foreigners. You see a difference there?
How about you do some research and back up your statements instead of just telling everyone they are wrong?
It's actually a basic anti-competition thing. Competition only happens when the consumers are informed.
The problem with your objection is that in the quantum model causation does exist and most things are not truly random.
+1 Funny.
Wait, you are joking right? Please god tell me you're joking.