Who isn't to say we are the first intelligent and that now in parallel a lot is appearing ? Nothing. We can't draw conclusion either way right now. It is pure arrogance to go either way (we are alone (aka: we are the first)/ we are not alone). Both are as ludicrous as you put it.
I agree totally on the second part of your post. But on the first part, I disagree. Tall stone sculpture is not new. Heck if some historical report are to be believed the colossus was 30+ meter high. Tousand of year before the Jesus of Brasil. But even then with Modern engineering this is even easier. On the other hand 300 meter tall metallic structure is not that easy even with today's engineering, here we are speaking of 19th century. The carving of the stone is problematic because you ahve to do it in small aprt and you could do an error in the proportion. But afterward all you have to do is put the block one on each other for 40 meter, a big crane can do it and a lot of patience. As I said, many have been doing that for a long time since stone was the easiest material to make structure of. On the other hand try imaginating bringing multi ton steel with 19th century tech on top of a 200 or 250m building, making everything hold together , AND hold against the wind. The heighth alone make it a feat on another scale than the stone status.
walter haut, and I'll repeat what I said there : a confession discussed in 2000, made in 2002 for a death in 2005 is a way wee bit exagerated for the term "deathbed". Furthermore There is no way the guy would want to attract glory after his death. No, he was clearly impartial. wait wasn't it the guy with the ufo museum ? And wasn't it the guy which pretended that the US army would be stupid enough to ask casket (kid sized) from a local mortician ? I am surprised that some people give credence to this. Finally I'll deathbed confess that I know where a lot of gold is. Since it will be on my deathbed that will make it automatically true.
Come on, next you will tell me silvia browne conatct the dead, Steorn has got free energy, and geller really bend spoon with his will. What next ? Homeopathy, the way hahneman described it, works perfectly ?
Heck, 38 m is PATHETIC. Try with the eifel tower, 300m of structure end of 19th/start of 20th.
To give you an idea here below is J the Jesus status, and E the eifel tower, S the status of liberty (also built by french if I recall correctly) Each line is 15 meter.
The big J look suddenly really pathetic. But i can guess why it was wated on. This is Jesus with a big J. So naturally no matter how technologically and visually pathetic it is, it was over-voted on. Wanna take a bet on from which country came msot of the voter ?
But since a few year except another country (Liberia?) and the US EVERY country switched OFFICIALLY to the USI system, we can now safely say it is the american system.
First you are totally missing the point : the "10" truth are only true in average over population. It does not say there are NO suicide bomber, you have to read it as "why the extrem majority of suicide bomber are male muslim".
Furthermore the rare female suicide bomber case were studied. And you know what ? All of them were case of women whicvh had no hope or were forced to choose between killed by their own family for some sort of shame(adultery for example) *OR* become a martyr.
In the calculation below I often take the most near numbers, since there are many unknown it does not need to be precise.
One need to calculate the number of gallon sold in hot weather, and multiply by 1.2% of 3$ cents. Taking this fuel consumption in gallon US 2002 for passenger car motor vehicule there was 75000 million gallon and for all motor 167000 million gallon over 2002 (likely more now). Taking ALL motor, 167000 million gallon, and assuming a constant consumption over the year (not true but bear with me) that is 450 million gallons per day. Since most people buy their fuel during day time (at least here around...) I will asumme 100% was bought during the day to simplify. So for EVERY hot day we have roughly 450 million gallon per day bought. But in reality this is for the whole US but not all state will have a very hot temperature. Looking at the population of california, texas and a few other hot state, I come to a population estimate of roughly 70 million people (texas 29M+california 36M+ a few southern bordering 5M). Naturally this is likely to be a bit of an overestimate but I do not went to write a thesis, so unless somebody has better numbers... OK so the proportion is 70/299=~24%. So the fuel consumption for those people per hot day will be 24% of 457 =roughly 105 million gallon per day .
If there is a difference of 1.2% in volume, that means consummer paid 0.036$ too much at 3$ per gallon. This means for oil company a benefice per hot day, for ALL oil company taken together : 3,7 million dollars. Now I do not know the reparition per company, but assuming saomebody knows the % that could be done. repartition.
Still for each individual the loss of 0.036$ might not be that big, but the oil market per HOT day seems to get a few millions dollar, with maybe as much as 30 hot days per years, that would make roughly 100 million dollar. Multiply by 60 years. Sum mount rreaaaallly quick. This is not a BIG sum, but this ain't small chump either.
Supposedly magentic viscosity (which has been known for 100+ years) make the magnetic interraction non symetric (fast out/slow in approach of the magnet) and that this somehow break down noether theorem in some configuration, allowing them to gain potential energy when they had none =>OU. This is what they say on their forum.
I think this is a bunch of hooey , and they have not demonstrated any configuration into which magnetic viscosity is ANYTHING but an energy-loss option.
If they don't have a first machine, and only equation, they have NOTHING. On paper I can fly to the moon with only a big 7 foot stick , 77 inches of blue string (MUST be blue) and 3/4 gallon of milk. They HAVE to have a physical demonstration of PMM/OU or they are one of those thousands of other scam artist (Stan Meyer, Mark Golde, Dennis Klein...) which pretend to have something they don't really have : PMM/OU, or are quite near, SOOOO NEAR, we only need a bit of reengineering, to get a final solution to the free energy problem (yeah, right). Steorn pretend they worked 3 years (now 4) on this and they would never have a ready machine ? No generator ? Nothing ? (YEAH. RIGHT.).
A good emasure would be for example to see how much in % of the total world military expenditure the US spend (roughly 40% at 600+ billion dollar per year). Furthermore :
global issue on US military spending quoteLinking military spending to the GDP is an argument frequently made by supporters of higher military budgets. Comparing military spending (or any other spending for that matter) to the GDP tells you how large a burden such spending puts on the US economy, but it tells you nothing about the burden a $440 billion military budget puts on U.S. taxpayers. Our economy may be able to bear higher military spending, but the question today is whether current military spending levels are necessary and whether these funds are going towards the proper priorities. Further, such comparisons are only made when the economy is healthy. It is unlikely that those arguing that military spending should be a certain portion of GDP would continue to make this case if the economy suddenly weakened, thus requiring dramatic cuts in the military.
I do not know if it is a fair arguing against GDP, but knowing that the US military has got 40% of the total world gross expenditure is scarry, for a nation which was not attacked in its territory by other nation in the last 100 years (I give you Pearl Harbor but one can argue that the mainland USA was not attacked after the Mexico US war), but which attacked many other country outside (Vietnam, Korea, the often forgotten Panama, Irak etc...).
Not everybody can build tidal or hydroelectric. You have to have specific natural formation for that. Uranium ? Let me laugh. With the paranoia going around on nuclear weapon (justified paranoia or not), do you really think the US and most 1st world nation would let so much quantity of uranium being used all over the world by country either openly foe or at least to in friendly term ? Scratch uranium. That leaves you solar and hydrothermal. And even then there will be a need of progress (solar) before this would be used all over the world. Especially since solar AFAIK is intermitent. But this is even the BOTTOM of the worry. Energy is one primary resource but in itself it is useless without the other resource : ore (copper, iron, aluminium etc....etc...) and those are not only in limited quantity but you do not have alternative. The bottom line is that if those 6 billion people were living like the 0.7 first worlder, there is not enough of all resource for everybody. Metal, Crude, Energy, (maybe even drinking Water), etc...
Once you realize how much the first world consume, and how quick some part of the 3rd world are trying to catch, you realize what is scary in such a growth.
I lived 25 years in France, and not one time I had to go in the doctor for "normal" care I had to wait more than 1 hours. I also went twice in emergency (once without bleeding and another time leaking from my whole right leg and arm) and neither did I have to wait more than 30 minutes. I was never in a life threatening situation (except slowly bleeding but I was NOT near any danger zone) but i guess in such case you would not even have waiting time. For specialist (eye, ears, bones, tooth) I had to get an appointement but all were within a day or two, and none were emergency. As for a friend which had an emergency with her teeth, she was in the doctor room within less than 30 minutes. The same I lived for germany for the last 10 years. My parents got involved twice in emergency situation (not life threatening) and got their exams (radio, thomo, ecg) immediatly. My in-law got a exams+biopsy of growth in some galnd in his neck within days (results took a bit more to come though. Might have been a week between the exam and the results).
I have YET to see for anything a "waiting time for month" as I keep hearing social insurance country get. That is most probably not a "month" in average but probably the worst case scenario in a case of bad-luck situation.
On the other hand I keep hearing from the US horror story of people left dying or transported by taxi to downtown because they have no health insurance.
Not for food, but for fuel and water, *IF* the whole world would ahve a first world standard of living and particulary all sort of fuel consumption the US have. If you do not believe me compare per-head US consumption, with the whole world production, the multiply by 6 billion. Sorry. 6.7 Nillion now. And for some stuff (like crude) the production is growing slowlier (or even going down) quicker than human grwoth so it ain't going to be better.
Now if you take the average 3rd world consumption and make it stay constant per head, then I agree with you this is scare mongering. But such an hypothese seems to be completly belied by the fact that two of the most populated country on earth are making stride toward MROE consumption, not less. But feel free not to be concerned. I bet you live in a first world country.
A few more thousand Iraki dead due to water shortage and epidemy due to the sanction were only numbers for the US and UK. Collateral damage. This was a deliberate calculation involving a lot of dead people. Deliberate. You might try to justify it, but think on how it makes YOU, the US, looks like in the eye of the world when such deliberate calculation comes to the surface.
The only things stopping me to wish that the US would feel the same pain they inflict on other, is that on the contrary to your policy, I do not wish the death of innocent people.
I really wish to see a scientific study on that. Maybe common sense is wrong like in many case, but it certainly dictate to me that people being forced in a stresful situation like waiting 2 hours to be finger printed will be nervous in average, whereas a terrorist will KNOW ina dvance that it is made to detect his own nervousity and will simply fight it (chemically or by training) to be below the level. I predict that since the system is known, it will never catch any terrorist due to their nervousity. It might catch a lot of average citizen (false negative) and when your false negative overwhelm your positive... Then it is more than useless.
quote : "which over time may expand beyond fingerprints." What do they want in addition ? A retina scan ? a DNA sample ? WHAT FOR ?!?!? And why in the ninth hell, WE (the rest of the world) are not forcing the US to eat their own fudge at our frontier ? I find Brasil example to be a good one.
Bombing in the world is not new. What is new is that it is made a propaganda of it, and in addition that people pretend that a single organisation (S.P.E.C.T.R.E.^Z^Z^Z^Z^Z^Z I mean Al Quaeda) is handling the reign and direct all those bombing like a well ordered orchestra. and THAT is the ridiculous part. Long when Bush is gone there will be more bombing in other part of the world. (Heck even maybe in the US, done by one of those anti federal-nut).
You are making a great "step" to hide a flaw in your reasonement. The difference is that the body is not destroyed and rebuilt each instant. It only very small parts which die off and are replaced. But not identically else you would neither grow, nor would you forget, nor would your body differentiate during foetus growth. I repeat the MAIN mass of the body and brain is NOT replaced at each and very instant even if it is over time. This enorm step you take is assuming a Destruction of the whole body, then at a LATER time reconstruction would be identical to the small replacement which occurs constantly in the body. But it is not. It is NOT a philosophical question. At the moemtn you destroy the body for the teleportation, the life is OVER for this individual. Maybe an identical 1:1 individual is reconstructed with the same memory but it was not the original one. The perception for this individual would be final : death. Pretending otherwise introduce another entity which is the soul (or whetever you want to call the entity holding all info of the individual while his brain and body are non existent and destroyed), the only way to maintain that the individual survive the destruction to be reconstructed. But up to now there is no scientific proof of soul existing, and many evidence that the brain alone and its structure is responsible for our "self". Destroye the brain and everything is gone, even if you make a second one identical in any point. And if you really want to bring soul in the debate, then please feel free to bring evidence. But be warry that extraordinary claim, require extraordinary evidence.
even worst, if you can measure all atom, position, and quantum state and somehow reconstruct an individual at another place, then there is no obstacle to make multiple copy. If this is the case, then no one can pretend the original did not die and both copy are not the original.
Bottom line: if ever teleportation come to be in reality and is not science fiction, the only way to put me in a teleporter would be to shoot me dead and send my meat to the other side.
You forgot the war on "tities". Seeing the great scandal that a breast on TV can generate, I would not be surprised that there is a big need to have some vent to let out the frustration. Since you can't have sex, then you have got to have wars, lot of them.
Maybe we in the EU should organize a USA-thon ? I propose that we get big transport plane full of penthouse, playboy, maxim, german porn , a few fetish and silicon "realistic" sex doll, then we air drop the whole on washington. While everybody is occupyed, errrrrr, to clean up the mess, I am sure the world will feel more at peace:P.
Note : I have a really bad humour, so feel free to mod me funny or unfunny. Fair is fair:).
Mutliple choice is bad to test knowledge anyway
on
The Fallacy of Hard Tests
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I love the exams we had : a question was posed or a problem stated which required the knowledge we had learnt to solve it. Eventually there is more than one question asked to offer a lead. But no answer given. Those are real test. Applied Knowledge. Usually for multi choice with a very basic knowledge of the subject you can sort out formany response the one being the most probable. This is how I breathed through my english Multiple-Choice at the university, and hell, look at how bad (or how good;)) my english is. Face it multiple choice might be an easy way out for professor to correct exams, but they are the poorest choice to test the knowledge and habilitiy to reason of the student.
Point 1 up to 3 are OK, point 4 I will not judge I do not know if it is possible or not after all this is a form of veganism, and if the amino acid, carbonhydrate, fat is ok then why not. But point 5 and 6 are complet woo , nutty. NOBODY can live on water or light alone. I am even surprised you did not mention breatharian which are complete utter stupidity. Pure woo. In case you did not know all breatharian which were tested (by randi for example), either the medical team had to break off the test due to organ failure (read : starvation) or they were caught sneaking out for a nighty burger. NOBODY can live very long without protein and carbonhydrate input.
But then again you mention spirituality in conjunction with food intake, which is definitively not related. You can be very spiritual/philosophical and eat meat every day, and be a down the earth idiot vega.
First at all the hybrid 50/50 and 90/10 are STRAWMEN. There is not such a things existing. Inventing scenario like that does not help your argument AT ALL. Constructing strawmen always show that you have a weak basis and try to artificially increase it. This should not be modded insightful for this reason. Now if you had limited yourself to the lsit below this would have been insightful.
So now your list is : 1* Would you eat husbandery animals ? 2* Would you eat pet ? 3* Would you eat cousin-animal related to human 4* would you eat human ?
1,2,3 is for me a no brainer. Those are animals. I am omnivore. Conclusion : bring me the salt, this meat need a bit more taste. Now with a bit more honesty there is also a cultural and taste effect. Rabbit are pet to some people same for horse. I consider both being food. Same for dog. I would have far more difficulty to eat cat, but for the rest.... Please also realize that you thougth to be clever with the dog/cat mention, but you have to understand that even if in some culture those are called pet, in some other culture they might be called food. Same for chimpanzee , and other human cousin : they are in some culture food.
So in reality we can even ab-absurdo reduce your lsit to * animals which are human * human. But since I think you took it from the western cultural Point of view I kept it as above.
Now for the sheep-on-two-leg, or thinking meat. Yes if I am hungry enough (read : starving on the verge of death) then I would eat human meat. I would rather become cannibal than die. Cannibalism might be only for a short period up to the point where I am not in such dire situation anymore. DEATH is for ever. But your mileage may vary. But culturaly we do not eat two legged sheep meat for various reason. So this would be an answer no for various reason.
But as you read this is more a cultural reason than any other moral reason of violence against animal or what not. Food is food. Fine for you to have a high moral ground and decide not to eat what is mobile on its own and can walk/run/swim/crawl/fly. But the moment you start judging other because of their perfectly NORMAL food choice (read : we are omnivore for pity's sake) is the moment you make yourself "religious".
But practicing "targeted" assassination, which as the same time kill civilian and kids, is the best way to bring peace to the region, isn't it ? Collateral damage is acceptable , as long as YOU are not the collateral, he ? Think about this : maybe there is NO GOOD GUY in that story. Some of us think both side are as sick and bad than the other one.
From my point of view the only difference is that Israel due to historical reason has a stronger lobby in the US, and the US a veto in the security council. But that is it.
For a browser, to have "easily" testable major bug like remote execution, something which should have been caught a bit before. I disagree totally with the way this security "researcher" handled the bugs, but I also totally disagree taking off the slack because this is a beta. Bug found so quickly by testing a few known vulnerability in browser is something bad. With a big B. Smell of lack of security testing pre-beta.
Slashdot Mirror
Who isn't to say we are the first intelligent and that now in parallel a lot is appearing ? Nothing. We can't draw conclusion either way right now. It is pure arrogance to go either way (we are alone (aka: we are the first)/ we are not alone). Both are as ludicrous as you put it.
I agree totally on the second part of your post. But on the first part, I disagree. Tall stone sculpture is not new. Heck if some historical report are to be believed the colossus was 30+ meter high. Tousand of year before the Jesus of Brasil. But even then with Modern engineering this is even easier. On the other hand 300 meter tall metallic structure is not that easy even with today's engineering, here we are speaking of 19th century. The carving of the stone is problematic because you ahve to do it in small aprt and you could do an error in the proportion. But afterward all you have to do is put the block one on each other for 40 meter, a big crane can do it and a lot of patience. As I said, many have been doing that for a long time since stone was the easiest material to make structure of. On the other hand try imaginating bringing multi ton steel with 19th century tech on top of a 200 or 250m building, making everything hold together , AND hold against the wind. The heighth alone make it a feat on another scale than the stone status.
walter haut, and I'll repeat what I said there : a confession discussed in 2000, made in 2002 for a death in 2005 is a way wee bit exagerated for the term "deathbed". Furthermore There is no way the guy would want to attract glory after his death. No, he was clearly impartial. wait wasn't it the guy with the ufo museum ? And wasn't it the guy which pretended that the US army would be stupid enough to ask casket (kid sized) from a local mortician ? I am surprised that some people give credence to this. Finally I'll deathbed confess that I know where a lot of gold is. Since it will be on my deathbed that will make it automatically true.
Come on, next you will tell me silvia browne conatct the dead, Steorn has got free energy, and geller really bend spoon with his will. What next ? Homeopathy, the way hahneman described it, works perfectly ?
Heck, 38 m is PATHETIC. Try with the eifel tower, 300m of structure end of 19th/start of 20th. To give you an idea here below is J the Jesus status, and E the eifel tower, S the status of liberty (also built by french if I recall correctly) Each line is 15 meter.
____E_
____E_
____E_
____E_
____E_
____E_
___E_E_
___E_E_
___E_E_
___E_E_
___E_E_
___E_E_
__E___E
__E___E
__E___E
__E___E
__E___E_____S_
_E_____E_J__S_
_E_____E_J__S_
The big J look suddenly really pathetic. But i can guess why it was wated on. This is Jesus with a big J. So naturally no matter how technologically and visually pathetic it is, it was over-voted on. Wanna take a bet on from which country came msot of the voter ?
But since a few year except another country (Liberia?) and the US EVERY country switched OFFICIALLY to the USI system, we can now safely say it is the american system.
First you are totally missing the point : the "10" truth are only true in average over population. It does not say there are NO suicide bomber, you have to read it as "why the extrem majority of suicide bomber are male muslim".
Furthermore the rare female suicide bomber case were studied. And you know what ? All of them were case of women whicvh had no hope or were forced to choose between killed by their own family for some sort of shame(adultery for example) *OR* become a martyr.
In the calculation below I often take the most near numbers, since there are many unknown it does not need to be precise.
One need to calculate the number of gallon sold in hot weather, and multiply by 1.2% of 3$ cents.
Taking this fuel consumption in gallon US 2002 for passenger car motor vehicule there was 75000 million gallon and for all motor 167000 million gallon over 2002 (likely more now). Taking ALL motor, 167000 million gallon, and assuming a constant consumption over the year (not true but bear with me) that is 450 million gallons per day. Since most people buy their fuel during day time (at least here around...) I will asumme 100% was bought during the day to simplify. So for EVERY hot day we have roughly 450 million gallon per day bought. But in reality this is for the whole US but not all state will have a very hot temperature. Looking at the population of california, texas and a few other hot state, I come to a population estimate of roughly 70 million people (texas 29M+california 36M+ a few southern bordering 5M). Naturally this is likely to be a bit of an overestimate but I do not went to write a thesis, so unless somebody has better numbers... OK so the proportion is 70/299=~24%. So the fuel consumption for those people per hot day will be 24% of 457 =roughly 105 million gallon per day
. If there is a difference of 1.2% in volume, that means consummer paid 0.036$ too much at 3$ per gallon. This means for oil company a benefice per hot day, for ALL oil company taken together : 3,7 million dollars. Now I do not know the reparition per company, but assuming saomebody knows the % that could be done. repartition.
Still for each individual the loss of 0.036$ might not be that big, but the oil market per HOT day seems to get a few millions dollar, with maybe as much as 30 hot days per years, that would make roughly 100 million dollar. Multiply by 60 years. Sum mount rreaaaallly quick. This is not a BIG sum, but this ain't small chump either.
Supposedly magentic viscosity (which has been known for 100+ years) make the magnetic interraction non symetric (fast out/slow in approach of the magnet) and that this somehow break down noether theorem in some configuration, allowing them to gain potential energy when they had none =>OU. This is what they say on their forum.
I think this is a bunch of hooey , and they have not demonstrated any configuration into which magnetic viscosity is ANYTHING but an energy-loss option.
If they don't have a first machine, and only equation, they have NOTHING. On paper I can fly to the moon with only a big 7 foot stick , 77 inches of blue string (MUST be blue) and 3/4 gallon of milk. They HAVE to have a physical demonstration of PMM/OU or they are one of those thousands of other scam artist (Stan Meyer, Mark Golde, Dennis Klein...) which pretend to have something they don't really have : PMM/OU, or are quite near, SOOOO NEAR, we only need a bit of reengineering, to get a final solution to the free energy problem (yeah, right). Steorn pretend they worked 3 years (now 4) on this and they would never have a ready machine ? No generator ? Nothing ? (YEAH. RIGHT.).
A good emasure would be for example to see how much in % of the total world military expenditure the US spend (roughly 40% at 600+ billion dollar per year). Furthermore : global issue on US military spending
quote Linking military spending to the GDP is an argument frequently made by supporters of higher military budgets. Comparing military spending (or any other spending for that matter) to the GDP tells you how large a burden such spending puts on the US economy, but it tells you nothing about the burden a $440 billion military budget puts on U.S. taxpayers. Our economy may be able to bear higher military spending, but the question today is whether current military spending levels are necessary and whether these funds are going towards the proper priorities. Further, such comparisons are only made when the economy is healthy. It is unlikely that those arguing that military spending should be a certain portion of GDP would continue to make this case if the economy suddenly weakened, thus requiring dramatic cuts in the military.
I do not know if it is a fair arguing against GDP, but knowing that the US military has got 40% of the total world gross expenditure is scarry, for a nation which was not attacked in its territory by other nation in the last 100 years (I give you Pearl Harbor but one can argue that the mainland USA was not attacked after the Mexico US war), but which attacked many other country outside (Vietnam, Korea, the often forgotten Panama, Irak etc...).
Not everybody can build tidal or hydroelectric. You have to have specific natural formation for that. Uranium ? Let me laugh. With the paranoia going around on nuclear weapon (justified paranoia or not), do you really think the US and most 1st world nation would let so much quantity of uranium being used all over the world by country either openly foe or at least to in friendly term ? Scratch uranium. That leaves you solar and hydrothermal. And even then there will be a need of progress (solar) before this would be used all over the world. Especially since solar AFAIK is intermitent. But this is even the BOTTOM of the worry. Energy is one primary resource but in itself it is useless without the other resource : ore (copper, iron, aluminium etc....etc...) and those are not only in limited quantity but you do not have alternative. The bottom line is that if those 6 billion people were living like the 0.7 first worlder, there is not enough of all resource for everybody. Metal, Crude, Energy, (maybe even drinking Water), etc... Once you realize how much the first world consume, and how quick some part of the 3rd world are trying to catch, you realize what is scary in such a growth.
I lived 25 years in France, and not one time I had to go in the doctor for "normal" care I had to wait more than 1 hours. I also went twice in emergency (once without bleeding and another time leaking from my whole right leg and arm) and neither did I have to wait more than 30 minutes. I was never in a life threatening situation (except slowly bleeding but I was NOT near any danger zone) but i guess in such case you would not even have waiting time. For specialist (eye, ears, bones, tooth) I had to get an appointement but all were within a day or two, and none were emergency. As for a friend which had an emergency with her teeth, she was in the doctor room within less than 30 minutes. The same I lived for germany for the last 10 years. My parents got involved twice in emergency situation (not life threatening) and got their exams (radio, thomo, ecg) immediatly. My in-law got a exams+biopsy of growth in some galnd in his neck within days (results took a bit more to come though. Might have been a week between the exam and the results).
I have YET to see for anything a "waiting time for month" as I keep hearing social insurance country get. That is most probably not a "month" in average but probably the worst case scenario in a case of bad-luck situation.
On the other hand I keep hearing from the US horror story of people left dying or transported by taxi to downtown because they have no health insurance.
Not for food, but for fuel and water, *IF* the whole world would ahve a first world standard of living and particulary all sort of fuel consumption the US have. If you do not believe me compare per-head US consumption, with the whole world production, the multiply by 6 billion. Sorry. 6.7 Nillion now. And for some stuff (like crude) the production is growing slowlier (or even going down) quicker than human grwoth so it ain't going to be better.
Now if you take the average 3rd world consumption and make it stay constant per head, then I agree with you this is scare mongering. But such an hypothese seems to be completly belied by the fact that two of the most populated country on earth are making stride toward MROE consumption, not less. But feel free not to be concerned. I bet you live in a first world country.
A few more thousand Iraki dead due to water shortage and epidemy due to the sanction were only numbers for the US and UK. Collateral damage. This was a deliberate calculation involving a lot of dead people. Deliberate. You might try to justify it, but think on how it makes YOU, the US, looks like in the eye of the world when such deliberate calculation comes to the surface.
The only things stopping me to wish that the US would feel the same pain they inflict on other, is that on the contrary to your policy, I do not wish the death of innocent people.
Buy an european iPhone. as far as I know it is not legal to lock you to a network here.
I really wish to see a scientific study on that. Maybe common sense is wrong like in many case, but it certainly dictate to me that people being forced in a stresful situation like waiting 2 hours to be finger printed will be nervous in average, whereas a terrorist will KNOW ina dvance that it is made to detect his own nervousity and will simply fight it (chemically or by training) to be below the level. I predict that since the system is known, it will never catch any terrorist due to their nervousity. It might catch a lot of average citizen (false negative) and when your false negative overwhelm your positive... Then it is more than useless.
quote : "which over time may expand beyond fingerprints." What do they want in addition ? A retina scan ? a DNA sample ? WHAT FOR ?!?!? And why in the ninth hell, WE (the rest of the world) are not forcing the US to eat their own fudge at our frontier ? I find Brasil example to be a good one.
Bombing in the world is not new. What is new is that it is made a propaganda of it, and in addition that people pretend that a single organisation (S.P.E.C.T.R.E.^Z^Z^Z^Z^Z^Z I mean Al Quaeda) is handling the reign and direct all those bombing like a well ordered orchestra. and THAT is the ridiculous part. Long when Bush is gone there will be more bombing in other part of the world. (Heck even maybe in the US, done by one of those anti federal-nut).
You are making a great "step" to hide a flaw in your reasonement. The difference is that the body is not destroyed and rebuilt each instant. It only very small parts which die off and are replaced. But not identically else you would neither grow, nor would you forget, nor would your body differentiate during foetus growth. I repeat the MAIN mass of the body and brain is NOT replaced at each and very instant even if it is over time. This enorm step you take is assuming a Destruction of the whole body, then at a LATER time reconstruction would be identical to the small replacement which occurs constantly in the body. But it is not. It is NOT a philosophical question. At the moemtn you destroy the body for the teleportation, the life is OVER for this individual. Maybe an identical 1:1 individual is reconstructed with the same memory but it was not the original one. The perception for this individual would be final : death. Pretending otherwise introduce another entity which is the soul (or whetever you want to call the entity holding all info of the individual while his brain and body are non existent and destroyed), the only way to maintain that the individual survive the destruction to be reconstructed. But up to now there is no scientific proof of soul existing, and many evidence that the brain alone and its structure is responsible for our "self". Destroye the brain and everything is gone, even if you make a second one identical in any point. And if you really want to bring soul in the debate, then please feel free to bring evidence. But be warry that extraordinary claim, require extraordinary evidence.
even worst, if you can measure all atom, position, and quantum state and somehow reconstruct an individual at another place, then there is no obstacle to make multiple copy. If this is the case, then no one can pretend the original did not die and both copy are not the original.
Bottom line: if ever teleportation come to be in reality and is not science fiction, the only way to put me in a teleporter would be to shoot me dead and send my meat to the other side.
You forgot the war on "tities". Seeing the great scandal that a breast on TV can generate, I would not be surprised that there is a big need to have some vent to let out the frustration. Since you can't have sex, then you have got to have wars, lot of them.
:P.
:).
Maybe we in the EU should organize a USA-thon ? I propose that we get big transport plane full of penthouse, playboy, maxim, german porn , a few fetish and silicon "realistic" sex doll, then we air drop the whole on washington. While everybody is occupyed, errrrrr, to clean up the mess, I am sure the world will feel more at peace
Note : I have a really bad humour, so feel free to mod me funny or unfunny. Fair is fair
I love the exams we had : a question was posed or a problem stated which required the knowledge we had learnt to solve it. Eventually there is more than one question asked to offer a lead. But no answer given. Those are real test. Applied Knowledge. Usually for multi choice with a very basic knowledge of the subject you can sort out formany response the one being the most probable. This is how I breathed through my english Multiple-Choice at the university, and hell, look at how bad (or how good ;)) my english is. Face it multiple choice might be an easy way out for professor to correct exams, but they are the poorest choice to test the knowledge and habilitiy to reason of the student.
Point 1 up to 3 are OK, point 4 I will not judge I do not know if it is possible or not after all this is a form of veganism, and if the amino acid, carbonhydrate, fat is ok then why not. But point 5 and 6 are complet woo , nutty. NOBODY can live on water or light alone. I am even surprised you did not mention breatharian which are complete utter stupidity. Pure woo. In case you did not know all breatharian which were tested (by randi for example), either the medical team had to break off the test due to organ failure (read : starvation) or they were caught sneaking out for a nighty burger. NOBODY can live very long without protein and carbonhydrate input.
But then again you mention spirituality in conjunction with food intake, which is definitively not related. You can be very spiritual/philosophical and eat meat every day, and be a down the earth idiot vega.
First at all the hybrid 50/50 and 90/10 are STRAWMEN. There is not such a things existing. Inventing scenario like that does not help your argument AT ALL. Constructing strawmen always show that you have a weak basis and try to artificially increase it. This should not be modded insightful for this reason. Now if you had limited yourself to the lsit below this would have been insightful.
So now your list is :
1* Would you eat husbandery animals ?
2* Would you eat pet ?
3* Would you eat cousin-animal related to human
4* would you eat human ?
1,2,3 is for me a no brainer. Those are animals. I am omnivore. Conclusion : bring me the salt, this meat need a bit more taste. Now with a bit more honesty there is also a cultural and taste effect. Rabbit are pet to some people same for horse. I consider both being food. Same for dog. I would have far more difficulty to eat cat, but for the rest.... Please also realize that you thougth to be clever with the dog/cat mention, but you have to understand that even if in some culture those are called pet, in some other culture they might be called food. Same for chimpanzee , and other human cousin : they are in some culture food.
So in reality we can even ab-absurdo reduce your lsit to * animals which are human
* human.
But since I think you took it from the western cultural Point of view I kept it as above.
Now for the sheep-on-two-leg, or thinking meat. Yes if I am hungry enough (read : starving on the verge of death) then I would eat human meat. I would rather become cannibal than die. Cannibalism might be only for a short period up to the point where I am not in such dire situation anymore. DEATH is for ever. But your mileage may vary.
But culturaly we do not eat two legged sheep meat for various reason. So this would be an answer no for various reason.
But as you read this is more a cultural reason than any other moral reason of violence against animal or what not. Food is food. Fine for you to have a high moral ground and decide not to eat what is mobile on its own and can walk/run/swim/crawl/fly. But the moment you start judging other because of their perfectly NORMAL food choice (read : we are omnivore for pity's sake) is the moment you make yourself "religious".
But practicing "targeted" assassination, which as the same time kill civilian and kids, is the best way to bring peace to the region, isn't it ? Collateral damage is acceptable , as long as YOU are not the collateral, he ? Think about this : maybe there is NO GOOD GUY in that story. Some of us think both side are as sick and bad than the other one.
From my point of view the only difference is that Israel due to historical reason has a stronger lobby in the US, and the US a veto in the security council. But that is it.
For a browser, to have "easily" testable major bug like remote execution, something which should have been caught a bit before. I disagree totally with the way this security "researcher" handled the bugs, but I also totally disagree taking off the slack because this is a beta. Bug found so quickly by testing a few known vulnerability in browser is something bad. With a big B. Smell of lack of security testing pre-beta.