From the article: The idea, essentially, is that if two quasars on opposite sides of the sky are sufficiently distant from each other, they would have been out of causal contact since the Big Bang some 14 billion years ago, with no possible means of any third party communicating with both of them since the beginning of the universe — an ideal scenario for determining each particle detector’s settings.
Why would you assume that if they're 14 billion years apart that it would be any different than 14 seconds apart in time, at least in regard to entanglement? " with no possible means of any third party communicating" makes me think "we don't know of a means to communicate" Could the outcome of the experiment could show either action at a distance, or some faster-than-light communication without excluding either possibility? If it does happen that entanglement went away, it would be most interesting.
I read the articles, and what's missing is the actual times. The articles say they're slower than the other competitors, but what I'm curious about is this: are the USA skaters posting slower times in the suits than they did wearing other suits? If not, then it isn't the suits. I know I could spend some time researching this on the Internet, but I'm feeling as lazy as the reporters that wrote the original article.
No problems in this Wisconsin? Well, you're absolutely 100% right about f-wit drivers around Atlanta.
But as for Wisconsin... I look at the web cams at about 10:00AM (Wi time) Does no one live there, or is there some reason almost no one is on the roads? http://www.511wi.gov/web/traff...
The big problem is that some pharma manufacturers in India make crap. They know they're making crap and they're proud of it. Ripping people off is part of business culture everywhere, but they don't seem to make a distinction between cheating people out of their money and cheating them out of their lives.
The problem is that everyone knows they're making crap in India, but no one can come right out and say it because lawyers will be all over whoever says it. regardless of proven past practices.
Here's an example of what's being said and not being said. Read this first, a government statement: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm... Then read this to see what really happened: http://features.blogs.fortune.... (The HIV drug part of the story is about halfway down)
I don't know; I wasn't there. I think they were passionate about how their product turned out, but passionate about writing code?
I've known people that were passionate about their "product". They were great to work with when they had a good idea and they got their way, and hell to work with when they had a bad idea, whether or not they got their way. Match one of those up with a boss that has no bs filter, and, well, now you're not having fun anymore.
Another thing about that sort of question. I do believe that a well-run company would look at the psych profiles to see if applicants (and existing workers) are a best fit for their kind of job. But from what little I know about industrial psychology, it is generally worse than useless to just openly ask people that kind of question with one exception. That exception is if the job requires a bs artist or sociopath such as sales.
Anecdote: The best programmer I ever knew was highly productive - one of those people who would sit motionless for 10 minutes and then write nearly perfect and documented code for hours as fast as anyone could type. I mean like 10-20 times as productive as the next best programmer in the shop. This person would not work after five PM or Saturday except under greatest duress. (Why me? Make the slow people work late; maybe they can catch up.) This person was a perfectionist about everything but passionate about coding? Oh hell no.
Well, Clovis, don't keep us hanging - what did happen 11,000 years ago?
We just didn't want to wait around for Natalie Portman to pour hot grits down our pants
Maybe we all left in anticipation of Global Warming. Not that we cared; we just didn't want to talk about it. Or maybe we knew we could not keep our present healthcare policy, even if we wanted to.
I really wanted to put an ambush goatse link in here. I could have, but then I couldn't. Do you know what I mean?
For one thing, he/she did this all under the name "Naoki Hiroshima".
I don't know for sure, but I'll suppose that the part done through the Internet was from a laptop with a spoofed mac address from some open wireless access point. As for the part done over the phone, I kind of doubt that it was done from his home phone. Perhaps Google Talk or some other free Internet phone service.
That is all assuming that the attacker's story is true. I would not at all be surprised if it had been done by a PayPal or GoDaddy employee or associate, and all the hacking talk was a red herring.
If by "US media", you are talking only about television, then I have to agree. The only time I watch news on TV is when I'm on the treadmill at the gym. I assure you that CNN had noted the Jade Rabbit mission before the launch, during the launch, and after the landing. Nothing in-depth, but what can you say about the mission anyway?
Proper isolation? If by proper isolation you mean an air gap, then OK, I agree.
"Proper firewalling" is a pipe dream. If you have a firewall, then you have external access and a vulnerability right there. Whatever port you have open is an access point, and thus a vulnerability. Keep in mind that many of these systems have hidden backdoors or default admin accounts for maintenance. And the reply "it's OK if it's properly configured" would be true if every system had network admin that was 100% competent. Do you wish to make that claim?
"virus/malware"? I suppose you mean anti-virus/malware. There is no such thing a 100% effective anti-virus/malware software. They are not even close. Keep in mind that the anti-virus software in itself is a vulnerability.
There's something fundamentally wrong with an operation that provides incredibly expensive distraction (for the rich only) by polluting the atmosphere and failing to provide any socially redeeming value whatsoever.
Nope, there's nothing wrong with that. You describing almost every form of entertainment. (Television uses electricity which means burning more coal)
For another example, consider NASCAR: There's something fundamentally wrong with an operation that provides incredibly expensive distraction by polluting the atmosphere and failing to provide any socially redeeming value whatsoever.
Oh, wait I left off the "(for the rich only)". Is it OK to pollute the atmosphere for sport if it's enjoyed by the Everyman? Or are you saying that we can only pollute the atmosphere if it has a socially redeeming value, like book-burnings?
Nice link - it must have taken a lot of work to make that page, and it is good to see that someone has taken the trouble to gather actual evidence to support a position. Kudos.
The problem is that the wordpress page is a list of newspaper articles that talked about the "coming ice age", It takes a side and says "look at these". What we would want to see is a list of all climate-related articles from the 1970's and then determine if there was a preponderance of one kind of another, and what kind of magazines/journals published each.
Secondly, these are not links into scientific journals, so it can hardly be considered a consensus of scientific thought, but it does serve very well to show how public opinion may have been influenced. I have to agree that the press published be-scared articles, but as I recall (and I was an adult), there as a significant number of articles saying balderdash to popular press imminent ice age articles. The people that I knew at that time admitted to the possibility that we may be moving into an ice age eventually, or perhaps a period of cooling in the near future, and everyone was aware that ice ages come in cycles. I don't know anyone that thought the newspaper articles were compelling enough to be actionable. Confession: my degree and work is in a sci/tech field so the people I associated with tended to be a good bit more skeptical and knowledgeable than the general public.
Here's some counter-examples to the belief that there was a universal ice-age scare, see the links at the bottom/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling However, the wiki isn't looking at both sides either, but it gives you another point of view.
As for the wordpress blog. It could be improved somewhat, though. here are some suggestions.
Starting with the first one, the NCAR graph from Newsweek. It's NOT an article predicting an ice age. it's an article saying the minor cooling in the Northern hemisphere may severely impact agriculture output. Why did you not post the other graph in that article that showed warming in the Southern hemisphere? What about the quote in the article: "Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions"
National Academy of Sciences graph. The graph shows Northern hemisphere temperatures. I don't see any prediction of an ice age. The link returns two non-weather articles from 2005.
The Milwaukee Sentinel screen shot of a fraction of a George Will opinion piece from 1992. He is not saying that there is a coming ice age, he is saying the exact opposite. However, his stance is that some newspapers were using scare tactics, and he is using several newspaper articles quote fragments to show that the newspapers had got it wrong back in the 1970's. You really should not use a 1992 opinion column's article to support claims that 1970's were having an ice-age scare. BTW, two of the links in the Wordpress article point to the George Will article.
Sarasota Herald-Tribune article: Read the entire article on page 14A. This article is the exact opposite of an ice age scare - it says of the recent cooling trend "The first, which he said is held by the majority of weather and climate specialists, see trends originated in th
And if you think that you were taught in the 1960's that Thomas Malthus essay PROVED we would all starve to death by the year 2000, well, you need to go find that teacher and have your grade changed to "F". Thomas Malthus wrote that essay in 1798, and it had been debunked long before our great-grandparents were twinkles in our great-great grandparents eyes.
The rest of us can look at how far off IPCC predictions are here.
Umm, you just showed us a graph that shows the opposite of your claim. It shows that the IPCC predictions are sometimes less than the actual warming and sometimes more as you would expect when comparing a straight line to climate data, and that the newer IPCC model's upslope has gotten much better in matching the actual temperature upslope over time. Considering the year-to-year variability in surface global temperature, the 2007 IPCC predictions are not bad at all. Here's some surface temp graphs to compare: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
Lincoln's Gettysburg address George Washington's inaugural and farewell addresses Eisenhower's farewell address The Declaration of Independence. The whole thing; all of it. La Marseillaise (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Marseillaise) The Internationale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Internationale
It's not building out their grids to accept feed-in; it's rebuilding existing grids to handle sudden surges in power at the end-points of distribution.
The voltages at the endpoints of existing grids (i.e. your house) are dependent upon the amount of power generated centrally at the power generation plants. The power company must match the power generation to the load. If they don't generate enough, voltages drop (which burns out motors in air conditioners, refrigerators, etc) Industrial motors are usually set to shutdown before overheating, but that means your business is shutdown. Lawsuits result. If too much generation is added to the grid, voltages spike and can damage everything from electronics, lighting, to again, motors. The power company tunes their grid to take into account the voltage drops through the grid to distant points, the expected loads during the day as people wake up and goto work, weekends and holidays. and as things turn off during the night, and as days get hotter or colder. These are things that change relatively slowly and are fairly predictable.
Solar power is often not a stable generation. If a pop-up thunderstorm passes over a neighborhood, the solar generation plummets and then after the cloud passes the solar is back to full output again. the surge can take place over a period of a few minutes. This wreaks havoc with the voltages in the local area and presently there's little the local power company can do about it if the solar is a significant part of the local generation.
This is the problem they're having in Hawaii. Redesigning the grid and installing new equipment to manage voltages at remote points is not free. Who is going to pay for it? The solar users or the existing non-solar customers, or some combination of both?
There's a simpler explanation than bribery: What's the average age of a US Senator? 57 years old. Average. Google to them is like space aged rocket science. A lot of the government's actions can be explained by simple senility -- these people aren't just out of touch with society, in many cases they're in a phase of life marked by significant decline in cognitive reasoning, and studies have been done suggesting that the elderly are far more trusting than they should be due to biochemical changes in the brain. Put another way: They're easily suckered.
I've seen other posts of yours, and usually you're on target. This time your brain has failed you. You're looking at a group (average age 57) and extrapolating the deficiencies of a subset of that group ( those with severe cognitive decline) onto a different subset (US Senators).
For example, some people take the fact that some women have debilitating problems during menstruation and extrapolate to all women to state that women can't be trusted to do, well, almost anything they want to stop women from doing. Can you imagine how your paragraph could be written with simply substituting Blacks, or Irish for the ageist terms?
Consider "Google to them is like space aged rocket science". I suppose by "them" you mean the ones with PhD's in physics, chemistry, or microbiology? or the physicians? or the Attorneys? You might also consider that by and large, US Senators come from a group of people on the far side of the bell curve. Losing some points due to age leaves them still on the far side.
The water mentioned in the article is not fresh water - it is low salinity water and it still has to go through desalinization plant. However, it would, maybe, be cheaper to desalinize than ocean water.
The DNC just said that presidental appointments no longer need 60 votes, it only needs 50. There is nothing stopping them from doing the same with treaties.
We have gotten to the point where the two parties no longer prevent each other from doing stupid things, if the House is not involved the DNC can do whatever they want. Glad you all voted the way you did in order to make this possible!
Nope, that is incorrect on a number of levels.
There is not, nor ever has been, a requirement for 60 votes to confirm an appointment. Nor is there a requirement for 50 votes. The requirement is for a majority of present members assuming that a quorum is present. This is in the Constitution and cannot be changed without a constitutional amendent
Ratifying a treaty is also in the constitution, and requires a two thirds vote. This is in the Constitution and cannot be changed without a constitutional amendent
You may be thinking of the cloture rule to break filibusters. This is NOT in the Constitution. This is part of the Senate rules that the Senate can change at any time - it's their rules. The cloture rule to break filibusters was introduced in 1916, and it was set to two-thirds of the full senate. The vote was changed to require 60 in 1975. Now it's changed to 50 votes.
Slashdot Mirror
Turns out that if I had read the pdf to the end, I would have seen that they discussed the alternate expected outcome's implications in detail.
From the article:
The idea, essentially, is that if two quasars on opposite sides of the sky are sufficiently distant from each other, they would have been out of causal contact since the Big Bang some 14 billion years ago, with no possible means of any third party communicating with both of them since the beginning of the universe — an ideal scenario for determining each particle detector’s settings.
Why would you assume that if they're 14 billion years apart that it would be any different than 14 seconds apart in time, at least in regard to entanglement?
" with no possible means of any third party communicating" makes me think "we don't know of a means to communicate"
Could the outcome of the experiment could show either action at a distance, or some faster-than-light communication without excluding either possibility?
If it does happen that entanglement went away, it would be most interesting.
She rented "Monster in Law".
In her defense, she must have had traumatic amnesia that erased any memory associated with the movie.
I read the articles, and what's missing is the actual times.
The articles say they're slower than the other competitors, but what I'm curious about is this: are the USA skaters posting slower times in the suits than they did wearing other suits? If not, then it isn't the suits.
I know I could spend some time researching this on the Internet, but I'm feeling as lazy as the reporters that wrote the original article.
No problems in this Wisconsin?
Well, you're absolutely 100% right about f-wit drivers around Atlanta.
But as for Wisconsin ...
I look at the web cams at about 10:00AM (Wi time)
Does no one live there, or is there some reason almost no one is on the roads?
http://www.511wi.gov/web/traff...
70 car pile-up in the snow?
http://wjbq.com/70-car-pile-up...
Wi drivers have no problems driving in the snow?
http://www.navbug.com/article9...
The big problem is that some pharma manufacturers in India make crap.
They know they're making crap and they're proud of it.
Ripping people off is part of business culture everywhere, but they don't seem to make a distinction between cheating people out of their money and cheating them out of their lives.
The problem is that everyone knows they're making crap in India, but no one can come right out and say it because lawyers will be all over whoever says it. regardless of proven past practices.
Here's an example of what's being said and not being said.
Read this first, a government statement:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pm...
Then read this to see what really happened:
http://features.blogs.fortune.... (The HIV drug part of the story is about halfway down)
Are (were) these people "passionate" about programming?
http://www.fastcompany.com/281...
I don't know; I wasn't there. I think they were passionate about how their product turned out, but passionate about writing code?
I've known people that were passionate about their "product". They were great to work with when they had a good idea and they got their way, and hell to work with when they had a bad idea, whether or not they got their way. Match one of those up with a boss that has no bs filter, and, well, now you're not having fun anymore.
Another thing about that sort of question. I do believe that a well-run company would look at the psych profiles to see if applicants (and existing workers) are a best fit for their kind of job. But from what little I know about industrial psychology, it is generally worse than useless to just openly ask people that kind of question with one exception. That exception is if the job requires a bs artist or sociopath such as sales.
Anecdote: The best programmer I ever knew was highly productive - one of those people who would sit motionless for 10 minutes and then write nearly perfect and documented code for hours as fast as anyone could type. I mean like 10-20 times as productive as the next best programmer in the shop.
This person would not work after five PM or Saturday except under greatest duress. (Why me? Make the slow people work late; maybe they can catch up.)
This person was a perfectionist about everything but passionate about coding? Oh hell no.
Well, Clovis, don't keep us hanging - what did happen 11,000 years ago?
We just didn't want to wait around for Natalie Portman to pour hot grits down our pants
Maybe we all left in anticipation of Global Warming. Not that we cared; we just didn't want to talk about it.
Or maybe we knew we could not keep our present healthcare policy, even if we wanted to.
I really wanted to put an ambush goatse link in here.
I could have, but then I couldn't. Do you know what I mean?
lol, no. ...
But now that you've given me the idea
Beats me how the police would find them.
For one thing, he/she did this all under the name "Naoki Hiroshima".
I don't know for sure, but I'll suppose that the part done through the Internet was from a laptop with a spoofed mac address from some open wireless access point.
As for the part done over the phone, I kind of doubt that it was done from his home phone. Perhaps Google Talk or some other free Internet phone service.
That is all assuming that the attacker's story is true. I would not at all be surprised if it had been done by a PayPal or GoDaddy employee or associate, and all the hacking talk was a red herring.
Waiting for someone with a four digit UID to reply "you must be new here"
I'm on it!
You must be new here.
What newspaper do you read?
If by "US media", you are talking only about television, then I have to agree.
The only time I watch news on TV is when I'm on the treadmill at the gym. I assure you that CNN had noted the Jade Rabbit mission before the launch, during the launch, and after the landing. Nothing in-depth, but what can you say about the mission anyway?
Here's some links (below) from the Atlanta Journal. I think they did a decent job of reporting on it. It's similar to the coverage in most mainstream newspapers.
http://www.accessatlanta.com/v...
http://www.ajc.com/videos/news...
http://www.ajc.com/ap/ap/inter...
http://www.ajc.com/ap/ap/top-n...
http://www.ajc.com/ap/ap/top-n...
http://www.accessatlanta.com/v...
http://www.accessatlanta.com/v...
http://www.ajc.com/videos/news...
Proper isolation? If by proper isolation you mean an air gap, then OK, I agree.
"Proper firewalling" is a pipe dream. If you have a firewall, then you have external access and a vulnerability right there.
Whatever port you have open is an access point, and thus a vulnerability.
Keep in mind that many of these systems have hidden backdoors or default admin accounts for maintenance.
And the reply "it's OK if it's properly configured" would be true if every system had network admin that was 100% competent. Do you wish to make that claim?
"virus/malware"? I suppose you mean anti-virus/malware. There is no such thing a 100% effective anti-virus/malware software. They are not even close.
Keep in mind that the anti-virus software in itself is a vulnerability.
There's something fundamentally wrong with an operation that provides incredibly expensive distraction (for the rich only) by polluting the atmosphere and failing to provide any socially redeeming value whatsoever.
Nope, there's nothing wrong with that. You describing almost every form of entertainment. (Television uses electricity which means burning more coal)
For another example, consider NASCAR:
There's something fundamentally wrong with an operation that provides incredibly expensive distraction by polluting the atmosphere and failing to provide any socially redeeming value whatsoever.
Oh, wait I left off the "(for the rich only)". Is it OK to pollute the atmosphere for sport if it's enjoyed by the Everyman?
Or are you saying that we can only pollute the atmosphere if it has a socially redeeming value, like book-burnings?
RE: http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/the-1970s-ice-age-scare/
Nice link - it must have taken a lot of work to make that page, and it is good to see that someone has taken the trouble to gather actual evidence to support a position. Kudos.
The problem is that the wordpress page is a list of newspaper articles that talked about the "coming ice age",
It takes a side and says "look at these". What we would want to see is a list of all climate-related articles from the 1970's and then determine if there was a preponderance of one kind of another, and what kind of magazines/journals published each.
Secondly, these are not links into scientific journals, so it can hardly be considered a consensus of scientific thought, but it does serve very well to show how public opinion may have been influenced.
I have to agree that the press published be-scared articles, but as I recall (and I was an adult), there as a significant number of articles saying balderdash to popular press imminent ice age articles. The people that I knew at that time admitted to the possibility that we may be moving into an ice age eventually, or perhaps a period of cooling in the near future, and everyone was aware that ice ages come in cycles. I don't know anyone that thought the newspaper articles were compelling enough to be actionable.
Confession: my degree and work is in a sci/tech field so the people I associated with tended to be a good bit more skeptical and knowledgeable than the general public.
Here's some counter-examples to the belief that there was a universal ice-age scare, see the links at the bottom/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
However, the wiki isn't looking at both sides either, but it gives you another point of view.
As for the wordpress blog. It could be improved somewhat, though. here are some suggestions.
Starting with the first one, the NCAR graph from Newsweek.
It's NOT an article predicting an ice age. it's an article saying the minor cooling in the Northern hemisphere may severely impact agriculture output. Why did you not post the other graph in that article that showed warming in the Southern hemisphere?
What about the quote in the article: "Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions"
National Academy of Sciences graph. The graph shows Northern hemisphere temperatures. I don't see any prediction of an ice age. The link returns two non-weather articles from 2005.
The Milwaukee Sentinel screen shot of a fraction of a George Will opinion piece from 1992.
He is not saying that there is a coming ice age, he is saying the exact opposite. However, his stance is that some newspapers were using scare tactics, and he is using several newspaper articles quote fragments to show that the newspapers had got it wrong back in the 1970's.
You really should not use a 1992 opinion column's article to support claims that 1970's were having an ice-age scare.
BTW, two of the links in the Wordpress article point to the George Will article.
The Windsor Star article: Scientist Hubert Lamb, who also said "not for another 10,000 years"
Here's another contemporaneous article offering Professor Lamb views and some balance. That is, rejection of his position by other scientists
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1314&dat=19750908&id=jfJLAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ae0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=5280,2927204
Sarasota Herald-Tribune article:
Read the entire article on page 14A. This article is the exact opposite of an ice age scare - it says of the recent cooling trend "The first, which he said is held by the majority of weather and climate specialists, see trends originated in th
Planet Earth is just an endless WTF.
Endless ice breakers are getting stuck while some woman rides her tricycle to the South Pole?
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/450608/British-women-sets-new-world-record-for-cycling-to-the-South-Pole
I was in grade school in the sixties, and we were taught two indisputable scientific consensus facts:
That the great ice age was coming. In the early 70's, this was on the cover of Time Magazine.
Are you sure you remembered that correctly?
http://science.time.com/2013/06/06/sorry-a-time-magazine-cover-did-not-predict-a-coming-ice-age/
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2013/06/04/the-1970s-ice-age-myth-and-time-magazine-covers-by-david-kirtley/
And if you think that you were taught in the 1960's that Thomas Malthus essay PROVED we would all starve to death by the year 2000, well, you need to go find that teacher and have your grade changed to "F".
Thomas Malthus wrote that essay in 1798, and it had been debunked long before our great-grandparents were twinkles in our great-great grandparents eyes.
The rest of us can look at how far off IPCC predictions are here.
Umm, you just showed us a graph that shows the opposite of your claim. It shows that the IPCC predictions are sometimes less than the actual warming and sometimes more as you would expect when comparing a straight line to climate data, and that the newer IPCC model's upslope has gotten much better in matching the actual temperature upslope over time.
Considering the year-to-year variability in surface global temperature, the 2007 IPCC predictions are not bad at all.
Here's some surface temp graphs to compare: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/
Lincoln's Gettysburg address
George Washington's inaugural and farewell addresses
Eisenhower's farewell address
The Declaration of Independence. The whole thing; all of it.
La Marseillaise (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Marseillaise)
The Internationale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Internationale
Would they be interested in H-1B workers here in the US being sub-contracted to work at Fukushima?
It's not building out their grids to accept feed-in; it's rebuilding existing grids to handle sudden surges in power at the end-points of distribution.
The voltages at the endpoints of existing grids (i.e. your house) are dependent upon the amount of power generated centrally at the power generation plants. The power company must match the power generation to the load. If they don't generate enough, voltages drop (which burns out motors in air conditioners, refrigerators, etc) Industrial motors are usually set to shutdown before overheating, but that means your business is shutdown. Lawsuits result.
If too much generation is added to the grid, voltages spike and can damage everything from electronics, lighting, to again, motors.
The power company tunes their grid to take into account the voltage drops through the grid to distant points, the expected loads during the day as people wake up and goto work, weekends and holidays. and as things turn off during the night, and as days get hotter or colder. These are things that change relatively slowly and are fairly predictable.
Solar power is often not a stable generation. If a pop-up thunderstorm passes over a neighborhood, the solar generation plummets and then after the cloud passes the solar is back to full output again. the surge can take place over a period of a few minutes. This wreaks havoc with the voltages in the local area and presently there's little the local power company can do about it if the solar is a significant part of the local generation.
This is the problem they're having in Hawaii. Redesigning the grid and installing new equipment to manage voltages at remote points is not free.
Who is going to pay for it? The solar users or the existing non-solar customers, or some combination of both?
There's a simpler explanation than bribery: What's the average age of a US Senator? 57 years old. Average. Google to them is like space aged rocket science. A lot of the government's actions can be explained by simple senility -- these people aren't just out of touch with society, in many cases they're in a phase of life marked by significant decline in cognitive reasoning, and studies have been done suggesting that the elderly are far more trusting than they should be due to biochemical changes in the brain. Put another way: They're easily suckered.
I've seen other posts of yours, and usually you're on target. This time your brain has failed you.
You're looking at a group (average age 57) and extrapolating the deficiencies of a subset of that group ( those with severe cognitive decline) onto a different subset (US Senators).
For example, some people take the fact that some women have debilitating problems during menstruation and extrapolate to all women to state that women can't be trusted to do, well, almost anything they want to stop women from doing.
Can you imagine how your paragraph could be written with simply substituting Blacks, or Irish for the ageist terms?
Consider "Google to them is like space aged rocket science".
I suppose by "them" you mean the ones with PhD's in physics, chemistry, or microbiology? or the physicians? or the Attorneys?
You might also consider that by and large, US Senators come from a group of people on the far side of the bell curve. Losing some points due to age leaves them still on the far side.
This is how the terror attacks were stopped:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6nW7XvTYn0
The water mentioned in the article is not fresh water - it is low salinity water and it still has to go through desalinization plant.
However, it would, maybe, be cheaper to desalinize than ocean water.
The DNC just said that presidental appointments no longer need 60 votes, it only needs 50. There is nothing stopping them from doing the same with treaties.
We have gotten to the point where the two parties no longer prevent each other from doing stupid things, if the House is not involved the DNC can do whatever they want. Glad you all voted the way you did in order to make this possible!
Nope, that is incorrect on a number of levels.
There is not, nor ever has been, a requirement for 60 votes to confirm an appointment.
Nor is there a requirement for 50 votes. The requirement is for a majority of present members assuming that a quorum is present.
This is in the Constitution and cannot be changed without a constitutional amendent
Ratifying a treaty is also in the constitution, and requires a two thirds vote.
This is in the Constitution and cannot be changed without a constitutional amendent
You may be thinking of the cloture rule to break filibusters. This is NOT in the Constitution.
This is part of the Senate rules that the Senate can change at any time - it's their rules.
The cloture rule to break filibusters was introduced in 1916, and it was set to two-thirds of the full senate.
The vote was changed to require 60 in 1975.
Now it's changed to 50 votes.
Senate rules:
http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid=%26*2D4QLO9%0A
The House has its own rules (set in 1842) that prevent filibusters so they don't have this self-inflicted problem.