I am willing to kill a man by shooting a gun at him.
I have a gun and a person to shoot.
I am not willing to shoot the gun.
Therefore I do not have the capability to kill a man by shooting him.
So even taking into account pedantics, the US doesn't have the capability to put a man in space, because they are unwilling to use what they have...ergo, they can't put a person into space. And if you can't put someone into space, you can't say you have the capability to put a man into space. Face it, the US just can't and doesn't.
Sorry, but that action speaks more of a consumate scientist than a nutjob: he discerns an unexplained phenomenon (yeah, it could be phsychos who like gutting cows...Occam,s razor points that way too, but do you have proof? No.) and has the money and inclination to search for evidence in a scientific manner.
He's a rich curious guy, with interests in stuff which hasn't been explained satisfactorily yet. Not a nut job. A nut wouldn't install scientists or instrumentation on that farm.
True. Layering is exactly what you need. And not just for impact protection.
See, you not only need a kevlar-like layer and a sealant layer, but also a radiation-shielding layer, an isolating layer (gotta keep that oxegen in!) and an insulating layer (gotta keep the heat where it's needed!). Also you'd preferably have a 'spacing layer' (aerogel?) which separates the kevalr from the rest of the layers, so it has space to stretch in when hit. Plus you need a layer which keeps the different materials/fabrics from loosing it's shedded threads (they can play havok with machinery) and multiple layers of the aforementioned materials.
What really pisses me off is that I've been thinking about inflatable space stations for a couple of years now (prior art in my sketchbook/journal:( ) and have been doing some research for the last year. I was actually going to pitch the idea to ESTEC for a prelimenary research working study for the summer. Damnit, just goes to show you should never procastrinate!
Schrodinger would be proud, and Heisenberg would tell you something about the speed of a/.-ing happening and the therefore uncertainty in the location of aforementioned webserver:)
It's because of the way the japanese buy stuff as compared to the rest of the world. The japanese have no problem with a whole slew of models coming out within months of each other, each having slightly better specs/extra hardware. The rest of the world wants a huge leap in tech before they'd upgrade their equipment. The japanese buy evolutionary tech, the rest of the world only wants to buy something that's revolutionary better than their old stuff. Which means that in Japan, they get a higher turn over of products: more differentiated products get launched, because more will be bought.
Thing is, things aren't so simple as just the cost of power. One of the projects I had as a first year applied physics was 'sustainable energy'. When you actually look at the facts and figures, and are not just reacting to your gut reaction, nuclear is for the next 50 to 100 years the only way to go.
Wind power just doesn't cut it: reason being for one that it can't provide power all the time, and can't provide power when the wind is too slow or too hard. There's a number of nifty calculations you can make, but all you have to do is look at Finland, I believe it was: they invested heavily in wind power and are now regretting it heftily. Not only is power not being produced when it's needed, but it's being overproduced when it's not needed, and/it costs them bigtime to sell that power over the border!/ I know this sounds strange, but that's the way the world energy market works (well, call it a localised energy market, seeing as 'green energy' can be bought and sold like stock globally [but that's only on paper], but the actual electricity can't be transfered worldwide). And to boot, it's way more expensive than any other from of energy except solar.
Nice segue into that, eh? Solar energy is prohibitively expensive too. And appart from that, it's not very efficient. And (again), it can't provide power when needed. Which is not just important for cost reasons [so you don't have to buy from other countries] but more importantly it's important for getting the current to stay at a stable voltage so your equipment doesn't explode. Not only that, but solar cells are notoriously poluting in their manufacture.
Then there is tidal energy, which sounds nice...but there has been little to no research about it's environmental impacts (you know, the lack of which got us here in the first place?) like reducing tides, or maybe removing so much energy from the ocean tides that certain ocean streams will stop/reverse/whatever. BTW, none of this research has been done for solar and wind either: whilst there is research that says that localised heating up of the atmosphere might be enough to change tornado's from their path, we have no idea how we will affect the trade winds/whatever with these forms of energy. Oh, and again, to top it off, tidal energy is expensive.
I'll skip fossil fuels. Go look up the research yourself.
Now the two drawback to nuclear power in the form of fission (fussion won't happen for 50 to a hundred years, at least in a viable, mass-enough form) are the waste and risk of meltdown. Nuclear weapons are not a problem, unless we start enriching the radioactives just for powergenerating...and there's no reason to do that. As for terrorists? They don't have the resources to do that in secret. Hell, not only am I studying applied physics, but I used to study mechanical engineering: you need mayor funding and little bells will be going off in all the security agencies in the world when you start to try amasing the materials neccessary (which is one reason I started laughing when Powell went before the UN with his story about "tubes of such high tollerance" story...the tollerances he was talking about where a)used in many, many appliacations and b) in all probability not sufficient for cyclotrons. Anyway...). Back to the watse and meltdown. Let's have a look at the latter: meltdown will be pretty much a thing of the past when the new generation (IV) of reactors come online. These are (amongst others) those pebblebed reactors you might've heard of. Not only that, but if something does go wrong (and with the new designs, it's not very likely, but we must assume a worst case scenario) it will be contained. We are a long way away from the not-up-to-standards, bad-maintenance reactor of Chernobyl; current standards mean that if something does go catastrophically wrong, only a square mile or so of the earth is rendered uninhabitable. Which is much preferable to rendering the whole earth uninhabitable as we are with the current fossil fuels. And then there is t
You just happened to pick two of the most biased sources you could find? Go do a google search yourself. You are citing foxnews...the news corp which has stated so many things as fact, and when they where later proven to be wrong didn't even say so. They continually put a spin on tyhings it's not funny anymore. Go get yourself a real news source, preferably a less biased one, and prefferably one which hasn't been so controversial for putting spin on things.
Because he, unlike you, has taken an interest in the news the past decade. It's common knowledge. Please go do some research into the basics before you ask the equivalent of 'and how do you know that US prison guards did things like that to Iraqi prisoners?'.
Anyway; I do quite a bit of 3D work, and also do a bit of compositing to integrate my 3D work into real footage. I have an interest in special effects. You know what the first three things are which struck me about that video? 1) the guy seems too calm for someone who should know enough arabic to know what the guys behind him are going to do to him 2) what a convenient cock up of a zoom, just as they're grabbing for his head to behead him...in sfx land they'd call that a convenient cut so they can montage in the fake. It really is amazingly convenient 3) where's all the blood? They're cutting through his jugulars: the arteries which have the most blood running through them at the highest pressure...ever seen a cow get slaughtered? There should be more blood.
Now the video could be real...but I have to say that, even knowing nothing more about the guys who are supposed to be involved, there are some real convenient (there really is no other word for it) bits in that video. It's not tinfoilhat time, it's just knowing how such things are done fro moving images and some healthy scepticism. I for one would like it if an independant forensic scientist went over that video, together with a special effects artist.
But wasn't there also a lack of declaration of war, which would make it a bit hard to sign a truce? I thought that was one of the reason why Bush 'got away' with his whole 'enemy combatant' thing...afaik the closest Bush got was asking congress for funds to fight Iraq...but was there actually a declaration of war?
True...and part of the reason he did that was to work on the movie deal. Read 'The salmon of doubt'; mainly the intro, but also the bits describing hollywood agents:)
's Nearly all true...but it stops where you say "this war is going extremely well". That should read "the war went well but the occupation is going horribly wrong"...because the war is over.
Where the US went wrong is twofold (from a limited military analysis): the one point you' covered above about dissolving the army, which could have been used as a policeforce to prevent much of what is going wrong in Iraq. The second is also the reason why the war went so well: the whole 'shock and awe' thing. That was designed to absolutely ruin a country's infrastructure. Which it did...and that (among other things) is what is breaking the hearts and minds of Iraqi's right now.
They where working on this incarnation of the movie project before Adams died. And Adams, surprisingly, was involved too. 's Part of why he was in america when he had his heart attack.
One less worry, right?
Re:The Netherlands Connection is the key
on
More From Tanenbaum
·
· Score: 1
I would have mentioned a liberal government, decent schooling, and the like. But then I realised that was before the primary schooling system got reorganised according to some american system and now turns out morons who need a graphical calculator for the most basic task, and before 9-11 and Bush pushing his kind of 'democracy', 'law' and 'privacy' down europe's throat.
Do that, starting at lower concentrations of course, and rince repeat a couple of million years long, upping the concentration, and it does work that way. How impressive: you've just discovered the way evolution works, my friend!
If only that where true: global warming is accepted in scientific circles. How, when and how much is still being debated, but the effects are clear, period. Only crackpots are saying that global warming doesn't exist or doesn't show any effects. As for GM foods: many people don't have a problem with them per se: hell, we've been doing it (albeit slower) for thousands of years! What they have a problem with is the fact that there are minimal safeguards set up for this process which speeds up 'natural' evolution by a huge factor.
Your point still is a very valid one (I personally think your conclusion is near to the only possible one to make, for safeties sake), but the science of GM and global warming is valid.
Well, if you know what DNA sequence is changed, it's no so difficult at all. The problem of course is getting to know which parts have been changed, 'cos I don't think that kind of info is on file....
I've been thinking the same thing, and the only thing I came up with is 'education'. People need to hear this, but more importantly they need to hear it from unshakably reputable sources with clout. This kind of stuff also needs to be broadcast over a wide population, but as for how to get that done in a conservative ('news')media...?
Here's my idea: 'best plan for developing and maintaining cheap space tourism', the prize money to be invested in the application of aformentioned plan.
Slashdot Mirror
Logical phalacy alert!
I am willing to kill a man by shooting a gun at him.
I have a gun and a person to shoot.
I am not willing to shoot the gun.
Therefore I do not have the capability to kill a man by shooting him.
So even taking into account pedantics, the US doesn't have the capability to put a man in space, because they are unwilling to use what they have...ergo, they can't put a person into space. And if you can't put someone into space, you can't say you have the capability to put a man into space. Face it, the US just can't and doesn't.
Sorry, but that action speaks more of a consumate scientist than a nutjob: he discerns an unexplained phenomenon (yeah, it could be phsychos who like gutting cows...Occam,s razor points that way too, but do you have proof? No.) and has the money and inclination to search for evidence in a scientific manner.
He's a rich curious guy, with interests in stuff which hasn't been explained satisfactorily yet. Not a nut job. A nut wouldn't install scientists or instrumentation on that farm.
True. Layering is exactly what you need. And not just for impact protection.
:( ) and have been doing some research for the last year. I was actually going to pitch the idea to ESTEC for a prelimenary research working study for the summer. Damnit, just goes to show you should never procastrinate!
See, you not only need a kevlar-like layer and a sealant layer, but also a radiation-shielding layer, an isolating layer (gotta keep that oxegen in!) and an insulating layer (gotta keep the heat where it's needed!). Also you'd preferably have a 'spacing layer' (aerogel?) which separates the kevalr from the rest of the layers, so it has space to stretch in when hit. Plus you need a layer which keeps the different materials/fabrics from loosing it's shedded threads (they can play havok with machinery) and multiple layers of the aforementioned materials.
What really pisses me off is that I've been thinking about inflatable space stations for a couple of years now (prior art in my sketchbook/journal
Like, uhm, Bill? Or Steve?
Schrodinger would be proud, and Heisenberg would tell you something about the speed of a /.-ing happening and the therefore uncertainty in the location of aforementioned webserver :)
It's because of the way the japanese buy stuff as compared to the rest of the world. The japanese have no problem with a whole slew of models coming out within months of each other, each having slightly better specs/extra hardware. The rest of the world wants a huge leap in tech before they'd upgrade their equipment.
The japanese buy evolutionary tech, the rest of the world only wants to buy something that's revolutionary better than their old stuff. Which means that in Japan, they get a higher turn over of products: more differentiated products get launched, because more will be bought.
Thing is, things aren't so simple as just the cost of power. One of the projects I had as a first year applied physics was 'sustainable energy'. When you actually look at the facts and figures, and are not just reacting to your gut reaction, nuclear is for the next 50 to 100 years the only way to go.
/it costs them bigtime to sell that power over the border!/ I know this sounds strange, but that's the way the world energy market works (well, call it a localised energy market, seeing as 'green energy' can be bought and sold like stock globally [but that's only on paper], but the actual electricity can't be transfered worldwide).
Wind power just doesn't cut it: reason being for one that it can't provide power all the time, and can't provide power when the wind is too slow or too hard. There's a number of nifty calculations you can make, but all you have to do is look at Finland, I believe it was: they invested heavily in wind power and are now regretting it heftily. Not only is power not being produced when it's needed, but it's being overproduced when it's not needed, and
And to boot, it's way more expensive than any other from of energy except solar.
Nice segue into that, eh? Solar energy is prohibitively expensive too. And appart from that, it's not very efficient. And (again), it can't provide power when needed. Which is not just important for cost reasons [so you don't have to buy from other countries] but more importantly it's important for getting the current to stay at a stable voltage so your equipment doesn't explode.
Not only that, but solar cells are notoriously poluting in their manufacture.
Then there is tidal energy, which sounds nice...but there has been little to no research about it's environmental impacts (you know, the lack of which got us here in the first place?) like reducing tides, or maybe removing so much energy from the ocean tides that certain ocean streams will stop/reverse/whatever. BTW, none of this research has been done for solar and wind either: whilst there is research that says that localised heating up of the atmosphere might be enough to change tornado's from their path, we have no idea how we will affect the trade winds/whatever with these forms of energy. Oh, and again, to top it off, tidal energy is expensive.
I'll skip fossil fuels. Go look up the research yourself.
Now the two drawback to nuclear power in the form of fission (fussion won't happen for 50 to a hundred years, at least in a viable, mass-enough form) are the waste and risk of meltdown. Nuclear weapons are not a problem, unless we start enriching the radioactives just for powergenerating...and there's no reason to do that. As for terrorists? They don't have the resources to do that in secret. Hell, not only am I studying applied physics, but I used to study mechanical engineering: you need mayor funding and little bells will be going off in all the security agencies in the world when you start to try amasing the materials neccessary (which is one reason I started laughing when Powell went before the UN with his story about "tubes of such high tollerance" story...the tollerances he was talking about where a)used in many, many appliacations and b) in all probability not sufficient for cyclotrons. Anyway...).
Back to the watse and meltdown. Let's have a look at the latter: meltdown will be pretty much a thing of the past when the new generation (IV) of reactors come online. These are (amongst others) those pebblebed reactors you might've heard of. Not only that, but if something does go wrong (and with the new designs, it's not very likely, but we must assume a worst case scenario) it will be contained. We are a long way away from the not-up-to-standards, bad-maintenance reactor of Chernobyl; current standards mean that if something does go catastrophically wrong, only a square mile or so of the earth is rendered uninhabitable. Which is much preferable to rendering the whole earth uninhabitable as we are with the current fossil fuels.
And then there is t
You just happened to pick two of the most biased sources you could find? Go do a google search yourself. You are citing foxnews...the news corp which has stated so many things as fact, and when they where later proven to be wrong didn't even say so. They continually put a spin on tyhings it's not funny anymore. Go get yourself a real news source, preferably a less biased one, and prefferably one which hasn't been so controversial for putting spin on things.
Because he, unlike you, has taken an interest in the news the past decade. It's common knowledge. Please go do some research into the basics before you ask the equivalent of 'and how do you know that US prison guards did things like that to Iraqi prisoners?'.
Yeah...it originated at my uni.
Anyway; I do quite a bit of 3D work, and also do a bit of compositing to integrate my 3D work into real footage. I have an interest in special effects. You know what the first three things are which struck me about that video?
1) the guy seems too calm for someone who should know enough arabic to know what the guys behind him are going to do to him
2) what a convenient cock up of a zoom, just as they're grabbing for his head to behead him...in sfx land they'd call that a convenient cut so they can montage in the fake. It really is amazingly convenient
3) where's all the blood? They're cutting through his jugulars: the arteries which have the most blood running through them at the highest pressure...ever seen a cow get slaughtered? There should be more blood.
Now the video could be real...but I have to say that, even knowing nothing more about the guys who are supposed to be involved, there are some real convenient (there really is no other word for it) bits in that video. It's not tinfoilhat time, it's just knowing how such things are done fro moving images and some healthy scepticism. I for one would like it if an independant forensic scientist went over that video, together with a special effects artist.
But wasn't there also a lack of declaration of war, which would make it a bit hard to sign a truce? I thought that was one of the reason why Bush 'got away' with his whole 'enemy combatant' thing...afaik the closest Bush got was asking congress for funds to fight Iraq...but was there actually a declaration of war?
True...and part of the reason he did that was to work on the movie deal. :)
Read 'The salmon of doubt'; mainly the intro, but also the bits describing hollywood agents
's Nearly all true...but it stops where you say "this war is going extremely well". That should read "the war went well but the occupation is going horribly wrong"...because the war is over.
Where the US went wrong is twofold (from a limited military analysis): the one point you' covered above about dissolving the army, which could have been used as a policeforce to prevent much of what is going wrong in Iraq.
The second is also the reason why the war went so well: the whole 'shock and awe' thing. That was designed to absolutely ruin a country's infrastructure. Which it did...and that (among other things) is what is breaking the hearts and minds of Iraqi's right now.
They where working on this incarnation of the movie project before Adams died. And Adams, surprisingly, was involved too. 's Part of why he was in america when he had his heart attack.
One less worry, right?
I would have mentioned a liberal government, decent schooling, and the like. But then I realised that was before the primary schooling system got reorganised according to some american system and now turns out morons who need a graphical calculator for the most basic task, and before 9-11 and Bush pushing his kind of 'democracy', 'law' and 'privacy' down europe's throat.
Oh well....
"Try fucking with our food supply."
Oops! Looks like a certain corporation starting with an M is alrewady way ahead of you!
Then try to fuck a monkey and produce offspring :)
And how do you explain mules (the sterile offspring of a horse and a donkey)?
Do that, starting at lower concentrations of course, and rince repeat a couple of million years long, upping the concentration, and it does work that way.
How impressive: you've just discovered the way evolution works, my friend!
If only that where true: global warming is accepted in scientific circles. How, when and how much is still being debated, but the effects are clear, period. Only crackpots are saying that global warming doesn't exist or doesn't show any effects.
As for GM foods: many people don't have a problem with them per se: hell, we've been doing it (albeit slower) for thousands of years!
What they have a problem with is the fact that there are minimal safeguards set up for this process which speeds up 'natural' evolution by a huge factor.
Your point still is a very valid one (I personally think your conclusion is near to the only possible one to make, for safeties sake), but the science of GM and global warming is valid.
Well, if you know what DNA sequence is changed, it's no so difficult at all. The problem of course is getting to know which parts have been changed, 'cos I don't think that kind of info is on file....
...extradition for violating the DMCA.
Sounds like you're talking about that 'Special Intelligence Taskforce' (or something like that) which Cheney/Rumsfeld set up in the DoD.
I've been thinking the same thing, and the only thing I came up with is 'education'. People need to hear this, but more importantly they need to hear it from unshakably reputable sources with clout. ...?
This kind of stuff also needs to be broadcast over a wide population, but as for how to get that done in a conservative ('news')media
Here's my idea: 'best plan for developing and maintaining cheap space tourism', the prize money to be invested in the application of aformentioned plan.
Haven't you seen 'Monsters, Inc.'?