Thats not creative at all. its just plain old boring.
Now, THIS is original and creative. Id love to see the neighbors faces when this thing fires up on the front lawn! If some pinheads flashing lights annoy you, just pay them back with the wonderfully tuned sound of static discharge!
Enjoy!
I cant help but relate some personal experience here. I know its not production quality, or lots of information, but I recently pulled out my Apple IIe from storage. It included the original 5 1/4 floppy disks and drives.
There was also a cardboard box with ~150 floppy disks, some as old as 20+ years. NOT A SINGLE ONE WAS BAD. Yes, "Zork" still works!
Could it possibly be that the quality of media just isn't up to the demands of a longer life of storage anymore? We all know how Cadillac runs that racket, as in sell the crappy car, and make the money off replacement parts. Has media storage gone the same way? As in 'sell the media, but just good enough to work for x years' before being replaced. And with the demands to increase revenue year over year for public companies, perhaps that time-frame has become shorter and shorter over the years to keep the money flowing in.
Or am I just being too cynical? But you know, a world where such works as "Zork" can survive and "Legally Blonde" can not, on their respective media, might not be that bad.
What better way to avoid spending all the courts time issuing takedown notices than to SCARE those using this site, and OTHER sites to stop doing what they are doing?
Be very wary of those who go after the organizers of people, for their motives might not be something you can even imagine
Its not an 'argument'. Its a question of the scientific method. Of which the conditions have not been met in any way in which a valid conclusion can be drawn. It can be called a "theory' based on the available evidence, but it can not be called a proved conclusion. Its not my 'opinion' that the laws of physics work a certain way, its observable fact.
Is it incorrect to believe that the 3mm of hot fusion crust was being cooled by the cold interior _and_ by any surrounding water? Yes. It is known as 'specific heat of a material'. Go to your freezer, pull out an ice cube, and put a blow torch on it. Immediately after taking off the torch, drop the ice cube in your hand. Is it hot? Its the same principle, on a larger scale.
I do not think you are stupid, as you are obviously aware of at least some of the laws of physics, one being boyle's law which you quote as a possible explanation. I am also not puting forth an argument, and it can not therefore be termed 'dubious'. What I am doing is stating the simple fact that without any EVIDENCE, one cannot make a claim of anything being 'proven'.
Also, the witness accounts said nothing about the water 'boiling away' at the time of impact. They CLEARLY state the the water appeared to be boiling for 10 MINUTES after the locals came over to inspect the 'crater'.
Other details don't add up, they said - such as witness accounts of water in the muddy crater boiling for 10 minutes from the heat. Had the heat been a result of Boyle's Law, the heat dissapation would have occured fully at the moment of impact, and quickly returned to an equilibrium, as the specific heat of the surrounding muddy land is MUCH higher than the surrounding air it was exposed to. But not for a period of up to 10 minutes AFTER observers even arrived.
I will state again, in time it may be proven to be a meteorite. That time however, is not now. Basically, there is as much evidence to support this being a hyperdimensional wormhole, as there is for it to be a meteorite. So until ALL the evidence comes in, speculation on meteors, spaceships, satellites, wormholes, mud volcanoes, and sinkholes are all just as valid. They are also all theories, not proven by the evidence so far gathered. I would highly doubt you would be as accepting if the theory was a crashed alien spaceship, but there is just as much evidence to support that claim as there is to claim it was a meteorite.
Fair enough. My sources are as follows. However, not a single one of them is from this article. And since they obviously contradict it, it would seem that there is NOT a unanimous agreement as to what happened.
Mid sized meteorites are not hot. I'll say it again: Mid sized meteorites are not hot. First, meteoroids are naturally cold. They've been out in the frigid blackness of space for many billions of years -- these rocks are cold down to their very center. Second, because of its size there's a good chance that this meteorite was originally part of a larger meteor that broke up anywhere between 60 and 30km above the surface. If that is the case, the larger meteor's cold interior would become the smaller meteor's cold exterior. Since hardly any surface heating takes place lower than about 30km, this cold surface doesn't warm up by any appreciable amount. Some meteorites, located soon after landing, have actually been reported to have frost on the surface due to their still cold interior.
There 'preliminary' analysis quoted in this article is contradicted by the following; In addition, Woodman stated that astrophysicist José Ishitsuka of Peru's Geophysics Institute, had collected samples of the meteorite and had confirmed that it contained a high degree of iron. It was reported that Ishitsuka retrieved a 3-inch magnetic fragment of the meteorite and has based his conclusion after studying its properties.
What I am attempting to say, is that there is NOT any 'proof' as to what this was, at least not yet. And to simply accept the explination that it was a meteor without the evidence to support it, is not acceptable in any scientific attempt at explaining what happened here. In time, it may be 'proven' to be a meteorite. But that time is not now. It is merely 'speculation' that is a meteorite. Lots of things that fall from space can have a 'high degree of iron', some of them are manmade.
Wouldnt actually producing the meteorite be proof? Isnt it a little premature to jump the gun with the assumption that the meteorite that was steaming hot causing all this groundwater steam to be produced? When no actual meteorite has been produced. So far, all that has been produced it whats called a 3-inch metallic fragment that CONTAINS iron.
Aside from the fact that meteorites are actually cold when they hit the ground, it just doesnt seem to be a very valid conclusion without any actual evidence to support it. This would fail a 7-th grade science class project on the scientific method. At least it would when I was in 7th grade... is this what passes now?
So to simplify, these are the verifiable facts;
1) There is a big hole in the ground.
2) Something made a big hole in the ground.
2) There were reports of the water appearing to 'boil' in the hole shortly after it was formed.
3) There is arsenic contained in some nearby groundwater aquifers.
4) Water boils when an object that is immersed in it contains ENOUGH specific heat to cause the water to reach its boiling point
5) No meteorite has been shown to exist physically (a 3-inch fragment that simply contains the element iron is not proof)
6) No peer reveiw has been done on the results or fragment claimed by the ONE man from the peruvian govt.
In short, coming to a conclusion of "It was a meteorite" is simply not able to be substantiated by the available evidence. IF numbers 5, and 6 are shown to be non-negative over more time, then and only then could it even be POSSIBLE that this was a meteorite.
Can anyone provide more supporting evidence that fits with the meteorite theory?
Could you clarify that a little more please? Why does getting a static IP remove the option of TV service? I cant see any technical problems for that to be the case, so it must be some oddly written contract.
I would imagine with some deep digging, such a contract would be found to be anti-competitive.
On a side note, its pretty obvious why the state of broadband in the US is what it is. TeleVision is the sacred (cash) cow. Combine this with the strong opposition to any sort of NetNeutrality, and the game these TV/Internet/Phone companies are playing is becoming very clear. Not to mention VERY disturbing.
Obviously, youve not had much experience with the quality of the time function in a PC. Having an external, centralized location was the solution to deal with the already sup-par performace of local PC timekeeping.
Personally, Ive used a nice product called TrueTime WinSync on my windows PC's for quite some time now, and its always the first thing I install after the yearly HD wipes.
There are many, many applications that are adversely affected when 2 PC's on a network do not have an accurate time. Some have a space of days or weeks that are acceptable, but some have a much shorter amount of allowed error between the two hosts. An example you can try anytime is to set your PC clock ahead by about 4 years and then proceed to your favorite SSL enabled website.
No Worries. Ill keep on typing with my usual roller-coaster coherence of a discussion style. Sometimes its good, sometimes its not. Sometimes its modded correctly, sometimes its not. Sometimes all those conditions line up, sometimes they dont.
Im just suprised nobody started screaming at me because I typed "you're taxes" instead of "your taxes".
isn't it time to say enough is enough, and demand free access to the research we pay for through our taxes?
Wrong. Most of you're taxes pay for the interest on the national debt. Everything beyond that is 'paid for' through deficit financing. Mostly by selling US bonds to china as a result of the trade imbalance.
while I support the argument of open access to information, your methodologies leave much to be desired. Paying taxes doesnt give you a 'right' to anything. Anymore than paying a gas tax gives you a 'right' to go as fast as you want on public roads.
Well, if you dont see any difference, I expect to see you in the enlistment line first thing tomorrow morning. And dont make up some BS that youve 'already served' because it will be a lie. NO SINGLE PERSON who has been in war, will make the suggestion to simply to go to war over a PC break-in.
the fact, as you so like to call them, remains. Your post had nothing to do with the quoted article other than pointing out a misspelling. And in your response, you dont elaborate any further on the topic at hand. That topic was "Karl Rove resigning Aug 31st", in case you forgot.
And, the discussions here primarily dont focus on the 'worst thing in the world', simply because you say they do.. The discussion is mostly centered on the fact that things are going BADLY in the eyes of over 2/3 or the american population. That the things being done in our name as a country are not to our approval. I highly doubt you would apply that same logic to a serious injury to yourself. You wouldnt just brush off a 65% severed limb by saying; "I must be falling to that common fallacy that the most recent events are the worst ever in the history of mankind". You would deal with the situation because its BAD AT THE TIME. Or are you trying to argue that its not that bad because 'Hey, its not the end of the world so nothing needs to be done'.
As far as working for the DHS. Nowhere did I say you were a 'propaganda' mouthpiece. Although Im sure it helps your argument to put those words in my mouth. I DO think it reveals the decisions you have made in your life. And where you draw your own personal 'lines in the sand' when it comes to compromise.
But I do appreciate the irony of hearing the made up word 'recentism' from a guy who works in a branch of the govt that didnt exist not that long ago. So trust me, you arent pointing out what you think you are.
So an employee of the US Intelligence Service, and also the Dept. of Homeland Security was kind enough to post his thoughts on this matter. (really, check his homepage) Oh wait, you didnt post your thoughts at all, you just posted a few rambling paragraphs about nothing relevant at all within seconds of the article being posted.
And since you typed all that within 1 minute of the article posted, it is just dripping with authenticity.
This is the best part: instead recognizing that the internet can simply deluge us with an increasingly unprecedented level of information about any person or group which may pique our interest, allowing a wide range of ever more specific issues and minutia to be amplified to levels never witnessed in the past.
Is this 'unprecedented' level of information in contrast to being spoon-fed information by corporate news? Does is scare you when the unwashed masses have such unprecedented access to information?
Im sorry, but I have never seen a commercial with a mixed race couple having sex. And neither have you, and neither has ANYONE.
If, however, you are referring to the fact that there are people of mixed races in close proximity to each other as 'mixing', you are just as racist as the parent poster. deal with it.
Just because your 100% white population village doest have 'race-mixing', doesnt mean that the rest of the world operatets that way. Your ignorance is almost as astonishing as your ability to vocalize it.
You would be wise to actually research what you claim are 'facts'. You should probably start with a book about Pocahontas. You do know what a book is, yes?
informative? Ill go out on a limb and ask you if your white... just a guess since your surname has a roman numeral after it...
Maybe there are 'black' people in commercials because they actually are a TARGET DEMOGRAPHIC of the business? Or is it your belief that business doesnt serve black people?
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, racism is a belief or ideology that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially to distinguish it as being either superior or inferior to another race or races.
Your desire to not want to be a racist and trying to 'redefine' a WORD, is just this side of pure arrogance. Whether you attach a negative or positive emotion to the word 'racism' is something you need to face head on. Trying to redefine a word to satisfy your self-serving ego is plain silly.
Your 'understanding' is nothing but wordplay to make sure you always see yourself in a glowing halo of supremacy, instead of the BIGOT that you are!
Yes, all that construction around the ocean based measuring equipment has to skew the results. Also, all that urban sprawl in the 10's of thousands of ft range is really messing up the measurements of the weather balloons. Did you think that only one set of data is used in these models? Do you understand how modeling works?
Can someone explain to all the fish of the sea that we need them to stop building next to our ocean based equipment? And those damn avian cranes are starting to pop our balloons!
Here in Chicago, our 'official' temperature monitoring station WAS in the downtown area, and then was moved to the airport at a much later point, considerably outside of the urban heat island effect. This now results in the first frost of the year coming considerably earlier than it does in downtown. So, in this case, if its warmer NOW, then there are some serious problems with that theory you put forward that need to be explained.
There is also the slightly awkward fact that this 'argument' is actually PROVING what it claims to be dis-proving. That man-made effects are changing the environment and climate. Where exactly do you think that additional heat from the construction is going?
Actually, the parent of your post was correct. I am not 'ripping' on alberto, I am pointing out that it would be more interesting if google went to the same person to represent the other side of the same case. Do you honestly think it is normal behavior to go to the original mediator of the case to ask him to change his terms that were agreed to with a third-party?
There are those of us who dont take our direction from what we hear on the teevee, instead choosing to base our criticisms on the facts at hand. In this case, those facts are that the justice dept alone would be handling BOTH sides of the same case. And that a competent hearing would be the LAST thing anyone would expect out of such circumstances - NO MATTER WHO THE HEAD OF IT IS.
All I said is "you are aware of who the head of the dept of justice is, right?" No part of that is ripping on him, until you pre-define what I was talking about, except I never mentioned the things you are trying to paint this discussion as.
Your skills at driving a discussion INTO the very same place you were accusing me of taking it are to be admired. Not in any academic way, but admired none the less. Entertainment, perhaps.
Sidetracking a thread into an unrelated flamewar == flamebait.
Yes, thats pretty much what you tried to do there, isnt it?
This has a huge effect on the on-line map business.
Are you saying that you like mapquest better? Or that google offers a inferior product? Because when I go to 'google' to seach for 'maps' Im pretty well expecting to get google maps! If I wanted mapquest maps (and I cant ever imagine a situation where that would come up - to each their own) then I would go to mapquest. Are you trying to suggest that the government regulate which words I type into my browser?
Im afraid I just dont know what argument you are trying to make here.
What makes this political maneuver interesting is that Google went over the heads of the Department of Justice
You are aware of who the head of the department of justice is, right? It would be more interesting if they actually went to the head of the dept. of justice expecting a competent handling of their position.
Blah, blah, blah. Same tired garbage every century... "The horseless carriage will never succeed, the horse and buggy manufacturers control the market"
By IPTV, I mean the broad sense of video delivery by internet. Not the narrow view of IPTV being pushed by MS and the like. Think bigger, like youtube, or facebook, or myspace.
And from the sounds of it, you have already reached the 'old age' personality. And instead of throwing out nonsense facts such as 'all dozen of them' perhaps you should pay more attention to the trends already developing. Here is a link to get you started along those lines. Judging by your ID on this site(5 digits) my guess would put you in the 35 yr old range... +/- 3 years.
Frankly, whatever your view of the world happens to be right now, it matters little to those already dropping their cable TV for the alternatives. The world changes, you dont need to, nor are you required to. Among my circle of friends, I would say about 20% have rid themselves of a cable bill over the last 5 years. Myself included. Those numbers are running about the same at my place of work, where you will hear such things as 'I dont watch video unless its streamed'.
As far as stupidly optimistic, well Im not sure how being aware of something currently happening that you dont seem to be aware of is stupid, but whatever makes you feel comfortable in a world of change is not for me to dictate. Like I said, you dont have to change, nor are you required to... but to claim something thats actually happening is not happening, meets the definition of 'stupid' moreso than your own use of the word.
I have to say its rather disconcerting to see so many people actually bothered this much by something as trivial as moving pictures? And in all honesty, the same people who gravitated to mythTV are the ones who percieve themselves as somehow above 'regular' TV watchers.
In my opinion, MythTV is going to be looked back as the 'bridge' between the old model of what a TV station is today, and what IPTV will transform the market into in the next decade. Sure there will still be those who want and use MythTV or something of the like, just as there are old people today who still listen to music on AM radio. At some point in many of our lives we attach certain emotions on top of the technology that we use. Thus leading us to a point where the 'old' stuff is fine for our tastes. Because our tastes are based on more than hardware, they are based on the emotions and feelings garnered in the entire process. We all know the 'tubes sound more rich' audiophiles, its the same principle.
So, now that there are cadres of phosphor zombies worried about their 'listings' being taken away, you can all rest comfortably knowing the next step is to pull your pants up well above your waist-line
For some reason, every generation thinks 'they' wont get old. But as someone wiser than me once said; "Same shit...different day"
Slashdot Mirror
Thats not creative at all. its just plain old boring.
Now, THIS is original and creative. Id love to see the neighbors faces when this thing fires up on the front lawn! If some pinheads flashing lights annoy you, just pay them back with the wonderfully tuned sound of static discharge! Enjoy!
I cant help but relate some personal experience here. I know its not production quality, or lots of information, but I recently pulled out my Apple IIe from storage. It included the original 5 1/4 floppy disks and drives.
There was also a cardboard box with ~150 floppy disks, some as old as 20+ years. NOT A SINGLE ONE WAS BAD. Yes, "Zork" still works!
Could it possibly be that the quality of media just isn't up to the demands of a longer life of storage anymore? We all know how Cadillac runs that racket, as in sell the crappy car, and make the money off replacement parts. Has media storage gone the same way? As in 'sell the media, but just good enough to work for x years' before being replaced. And with the demands to increase revenue year over year for public companies, perhaps that time-frame has become shorter and shorter over the years to keep the money flowing in.
Or am I just being too cynical? But you know, a world where such works as "Zork" can survive and "Legally Blonde" can not, on their respective media, might not be that bad.
This is not about 'protecting' copyright.
This is about CONTROL.
What better way to avoid spending all the courts time issuing takedown notices than to SCARE those using this site, and OTHER sites to stop doing what they are doing?
Be very wary of those who go after the organizers of people, for their motives might not be something you can even imagine
Its not an 'argument'. Its a question of the scientific method. Of which the conditions have not been met in any way in which a valid conclusion can be drawn. It can be called a "theory' based on the available evidence, but it can not be called a proved conclusion. Its not my 'opinion' that the laws of physics work a certain way, its observable fact.
Is it incorrect to believe that the 3mm of hot fusion crust was being cooled by the cold interior _and_ by any surrounding water?
Yes. It is known as 'specific heat of a material'. Go to your freezer, pull out an ice cube, and put a blow torch on it. Immediately after taking off the torch, drop the ice cube in your hand. Is it hot? Its the same principle, on a larger scale.
I do not think you are stupid, as you are obviously aware of at least some of the laws of physics, one being boyle's law which you quote as a possible explanation. I am also not puting forth an argument, and it can not therefore be termed 'dubious'. What I am doing is stating the simple fact that without any EVIDENCE, one cannot make a claim of anything being 'proven'.
Also, the witness accounts said nothing about the water 'boiling away' at the time of impact. They CLEARLY state the the water appeared to be boiling for 10 MINUTES after the locals came over to inspect the 'crater'. Other details don't add up, they said - such as witness accounts of water in the muddy crater boiling for 10 minutes from the heat. Had the heat been a result of Boyle's Law, the heat dissapation would have occured fully at the moment of impact, and quickly returned to an equilibrium, as the specific heat of the surrounding muddy land is MUCH higher than the surrounding air it was exposed to. But not for a period of up to 10 minutes AFTER observers even arrived.
I will state again, in time it may be proven to be a meteorite. That time however, is not now. Basically, there is as much evidence to support this being a hyperdimensional wormhole, as there is for it to be a meteorite. So until ALL the evidence comes in, speculation on meteors, spaceships, satellites, wormholes, mud volcanoes, and sinkholes are all just as valid. They are also all theories, not proven by the evidence so far gathered. I would highly doubt you would be as accepting if the theory was a crashed alien spaceship, but there is just as much evidence to support that claim as there is to claim it was a meteorite.
Fair enough. My sources are as follows. However, not a single one of them is from this article. And since they obviously contradict it, it would seem that there is NOT a unanimous agreement as to what happened.
The object, Woodman said, was metallic in nature and created a crater 42 feet wide and 15 feet deep. The impact also registered a 1.5-magnitude tremor on the institute's seismic equipment.Ronald Woodman is the director of the Peruvian Geophysical Institute.
Mid sized meteorites are not hot. I'll say it again: Mid sized meteorites are not hot. First, meteoroids are naturally cold. They've been out in the frigid blackness of space for many billions of years -- these rocks are cold down to their very center. Second, because of its size there's a good chance that this meteorite was originally part of a larger meteor that broke up anywhere between 60 and 30km above the surface. If that is the case, the larger meteor's cold interior would become the smaller meteor's cold exterior. Since hardly any surface heating takes place lower than about 30km, this cold surface doesn't warm up by any appreciable amount. Some meteorites, located soon after landing, have actually been reported to have frost on the surface due to their still cold interior.
There 'preliminary' analysis quoted in this article is contradicted by the following; In addition, Woodman stated that astrophysicist José Ishitsuka of Peru's Geophysics Institute, had collected samples of the meteorite and had confirmed that it contained a high degree of iron. It was reported that Ishitsuka retrieved a 3-inch magnetic fragment of the meteorite and has based his conclusion after studying its properties.
What I am attempting to say, is that there is NOT any 'proof' as to what this was, at least not yet. And to simply accept the explination that it was a meteor without the evidence to support it, is not acceptable in any scientific attempt at explaining what happened here. In time, it may be 'proven' to be a meteorite. But that time is not now. It is merely 'speculation' that is a meteorite. Lots of things that fall from space can have a 'high degree of iron', some of them are manmade.
Wouldnt actually producing the meteorite be proof? Isnt it a little premature to jump the gun with the assumption that the meteorite that was steaming hot causing all this groundwater steam to be produced? When no actual meteorite has been produced. So far, all that has been produced it whats called a 3-inch metallic fragment that CONTAINS iron.
Aside from the fact that meteorites are actually cold when they hit the ground, it just doesnt seem to be a very valid conclusion without any actual evidence to support it. This would fail a 7-th grade science class project on the scientific method. At least it would when I was in 7th grade... is this what passes now?
So to simplify, these are the verifiable facts;
1) There is a big hole in the ground.
2) Something made a big hole in the ground.
2) There were reports of the water appearing to 'boil' in the hole shortly after it was formed.
3) There is arsenic contained in some nearby groundwater aquifers.
4) Water boils when an object that is immersed in it contains ENOUGH specific heat to cause the water to reach its boiling point
5) No meteorite has been shown to exist physically (a 3-inch fragment that simply contains the element iron is not proof)
6) No peer reveiw has been done on the results or fragment claimed by the ONE man from the peruvian govt.
In short, coming to a conclusion of "It was a meteorite" is simply not able to be substantiated by the available evidence. IF numbers 5, and 6 are shown to be non-negative over more time, then and only then could it even be POSSIBLE that this was a meteorite.
Can anyone provide more supporting evidence that fits with the meteorite theory?
If I had mod points, I would use them.
Whats worse, is that when it fails the first time around... something will be presented to MAKE people demand this 'filtering'.
The country is dead, and its a great fear of mine as to what is going to happen when that critical mass of people realize that reality.
will it be by conquest or consent? Well, we are where we are now, because WE consented to it.
Could you clarify that a little more please? Why does getting a static IP remove the option of TV service? I cant see any technical problems for that to be the case, so it must be some oddly written contract.
I would imagine with some deep digging, such a contract would be found to be anti-competitive.
On a side note, its pretty obvious why the state of broadband in the US is what it is. TeleVision is the sacred (cash) cow. Combine this with the strong opposition to any sort of NetNeutrality, and the game these TV/Internet/Phone companies are playing is becoming very clear. Not to mention VERY disturbing.
Obviously, youve not had much experience with the quality of the time function in a PC. Having an external, centralized location was the solution to deal with the already sup-par performace of local PC timekeeping.
Personally, Ive used a nice product called TrueTime WinSync on my windows PC's for quite some time now, and its always the first thing I install after the yearly HD wipes.
There are many, many applications that are adversely affected when 2 PC's on a network do not have an accurate time. Some have a space of days or weeks that are acceptable, but some have a much shorter amount of allowed error between the two hosts. An example you can try anytime is to set your PC clock ahead by about 4 years and then proceed to your favorite SSL enabled website.
No Worries. Ill keep on typing with my usual roller-coaster coherence of a discussion style. Sometimes its good, sometimes its not. Sometimes its modded correctly, sometimes its not. Sometimes all those conditions line up, sometimes they dont.
Im just suprised nobody started screaming at me because I typed "you're taxes" instead of "your taxes".
Peace
isn't it time to say enough is enough, and demand free access to the research we pay for through our taxes?
Wrong. Most of you're taxes pay for the interest on the national debt. Everything beyond that is 'paid for' through deficit financing. Mostly by selling US bonds to china as a result of the trade imbalance.
while I support the argument of open access to information, your methodologies leave much to be desired. Paying taxes doesnt give you a 'right' to anything. Anymore than paying a gas tax gives you a 'right' to go as fast as you want on public roads.
Well, if you dont see any difference, I expect to see you in the enlistment line first thing tomorrow morning. And dont make up some BS that youve 'already served' because it will be a lie. NO SINGLE PERSON who has been in war, will make the suggestion to simply to go to war over a PC break-in.
And if you STILL dont see any difference, try the following links; http://theheretik.typepad.com/the_heretik/images/c hild_of_war_life_in_death_053005.jpg
http://www.videos1.informationclearinghouse.info/i mages/seven.jpg
Those that modded this 'insightful' I would expect will be in the front of that enlistment line tomorrow, right ahead of you.
I dont quote sentences with made up words.
the fact, as you so like to call them, remains. Your post had nothing to do with the quoted article other than pointing out a misspelling. And in your response, you dont elaborate any further on the topic at hand. That topic was "Karl Rove resigning Aug 31st", in case you forgot.
And, the discussions here primarily dont focus on the 'worst thing in the world', simply because you say they do.. The discussion is mostly centered on the fact that things are going BADLY in the eyes of over 2/3 or the american population. That the things being done in our name as a country are not to our approval. I highly doubt you would apply that same logic to a serious injury to yourself. You wouldnt just brush off a 65% severed limb by saying; "I must be falling to that common fallacy that the most recent events are the worst ever in the history of mankind". You would deal with the situation because its BAD AT THE TIME. Or are you trying to argue that its not that bad because 'Hey, its not the end of the world so nothing needs to be done'.
As far as working for the DHS. Nowhere did I say you were a 'propaganda' mouthpiece. Although Im sure it helps your argument to put those words in my mouth. I DO think it reveals the decisions you have made in your life. And where you draw your own personal 'lines in the sand' when it comes to compromise.
But I do appreciate the irony of hearing the made up word 'recentism' from a guy who works in a branch of the govt that didnt exist not that long ago. So trust me, you arent pointing out what you think you are.
So an employee of the US Intelligence Service, and also the Dept. of Homeland Security was kind enough to post his thoughts on this matter. (really, check his homepage) Oh wait, you didnt post your thoughts at all, you just posted a few rambling paragraphs about nothing relevant at all within seconds of the article being posted.
And since you typed all that within 1 minute of the article posted, it is just dripping with authenticity.
This is the best part: instead recognizing that the internet can simply deluge us with an increasingly unprecedented level of information about any person or group which may pique our interest, allowing a wide range of ever more specific issues and minutia to be amplified to levels never witnessed in the past.
Is this 'unprecedented' level of information in contrast to being spoon-fed information by corporate news? Does is scare you when the unwashed masses have such unprecedented access to information?
Isnt that the problem?
Funny how all empires fall.
How did the US get to be such a disgrace?
Oh. Thats how
Im sorry, but I have never seen a commercial with a mixed race couple having sex. And neither have you, and neither has ANYONE.
If, however, you are referring to the fact that there are people of mixed races in close proximity to each other as 'mixing', you are just as racist as the parent poster. deal with it.
Just because your 100% white population village doest have 'race-mixing', doesnt mean that the rest of the world operatets that way. Your ignorance is almost as astonishing as your ability to vocalize it.
You would be wise to actually research what you claim are 'facts'. You should probably start with a book about Pocahontas. You do know what a book is, yes?
informative? Ill go out on a limb and ask you if your white... just a guess since your surname has a roman numeral after it...
Maybe there are 'black' people in commercials because they actually are a TARGET DEMOGRAPHIC of the business? Or is it your belief that business doesnt serve black people?
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, racism is a belief or ideology that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially to distinguish it as being either superior or inferior to another race or races.
Your desire to not want to be a racist and trying to 'redefine' a WORD, is just this side of pure arrogance. Whether you attach a negative or positive emotion to the word 'racism' is something you need to face head on. Trying to redefine a word to satisfy your self-serving ego is plain silly. Your 'understanding' is nothing but wordplay to make sure you always see yourself in a glowing halo of supremacy, instead of the BIGOT that you are!
Yes, all that construction around the ocean based measuring equipment has to skew the results. Also, all that urban sprawl in the 10's of thousands of ft range is really messing up the measurements of the weather balloons. Did you think that only one set of data is used in these models? Do you understand how modeling works?
Can someone explain to all the fish of the sea that we need them to stop building next to our ocean based equipment? And those damn avian cranes are starting to pop our balloons!
Here in Chicago, our 'official' temperature monitoring station WAS in the downtown area, and then was moved to the airport at a much later point, considerably outside of the urban heat island effect. This now results in the first frost of the year coming considerably earlier than it does in downtown. So, in this case, if its warmer NOW, then there are some serious problems with that theory you put forward that need to be explained.
There is also the slightly awkward fact that this 'argument' is actually PROVING what it claims to be dis-proving. That man-made effects are changing the environment and climate. Where exactly do you think that additional heat from the construction is going?
Actually, the parent of your post was correct. I am not 'ripping' on alberto, I am pointing out that it would be more interesting if google went to the same person to represent the other side of the same case. Do you honestly think it is normal behavior to go to the original mediator of the case to ask him to change his terms that were agreed to with a third-party?
There are those of us who dont take our direction from what we hear on the teevee, instead choosing to base our criticisms on the facts at hand. In this case, those facts are that the justice dept alone would be handling BOTH sides of the same case. And that a competent hearing would be the LAST thing anyone would expect out of such circumstances - NO MATTER WHO THE HEAD OF IT IS.
All I said is "you are aware of who the head of the dept of justice is, right?" No part of that is ripping on him, until you pre-define what I was talking about, except I never mentioned the things you are trying to paint this discussion as.
Your skills at driving a discussion INTO the very same place you were accusing me of taking it are to be admired. Not in any academic way, but admired none the less. Entertainment, perhaps.
Sidetracking a thread into an unrelated flamewar == flamebait.
Yes, thats pretty much what you tried to do there, isnt it?
This has a huge effect on the on-line map business.
Are you saying that you like mapquest better? Or that google offers a inferior product? Because when I go to 'google' to seach for 'maps' Im pretty well expecting to get google maps! If I wanted mapquest maps (and I cant ever imagine a situation where that would come up - to each their own) then I would go to mapquest. Are you trying to suggest that the government regulate which words I type into my browser?
Im afraid I just dont know what argument you are trying to make here.
What makes this political maneuver interesting is that Google went over the heads of the Department of Justice
You are aware of who the head of the department of justice is, right? It would be more interesting if they actually went to the head of the dept. of justice expecting a competent handling of their position.
Antiquing?
(damn, and I wanted to moderate too)
Blah, blah, blah. Same tired garbage every century... "The horseless carriage will never succeed, the horse and buggy manufacturers control the market"
By IPTV, I mean the broad sense of video delivery by internet. Not the narrow view of IPTV being pushed by MS and the like. Think bigger, like youtube, or facebook, or myspace.
And from the sounds of it, you have already reached the 'old age' personality. And instead of throwing out nonsense facts such as 'all dozen of them' perhaps you should pay more attention to the trends already developing. Here is a link to get you started along those lines. Judging by your ID on this site(5 digits) my guess would put you in the 35 yr old range... +/- 3 years.
Frankly, whatever your view of the world happens to be right now, it matters little to those already dropping their cable TV for the alternatives. The world changes, you dont need to, nor are you required to. Among my circle of friends, I would say about 20% have rid themselves of a cable bill over the last 5 years. Myself included. Those numbers are running about the same at my place of work, where you will hear such things as 'I dont watch video unless its streamed'.
As far as stupidly optimistic, well Im not sure how being aware of something currently happening that you dont seem to be aware of is stupid, but whatever makes you feel comfortable in a world of change is not for me to dictate. Like I said, you dont have to change, nor are you required to... but to claim something thats actually happening is not happening, meets the definition of 'stupid' moreso than your own use of the word.
Post or moderate?
I have to say its rather disconcerting to see so many people actually bothered this much by something as trivial as moving pictures? And in all honesty, the same people who gravitated to mythTV are the ones who percieve themselves as somehow above 'regular' TV watchers.
In my opinion, MythTV is going to be looked back as the 'bridge' between the old model of what a TV station is today, and what IPTV will transform the market into in the next decade. Sure there will still be those who want and use MythTV or something of the like, just as there are old people today who still listen to music on AM radio. At some point in many of our lives we attach certain emotions on top of the technology that we use. Thus leading us to a point where the 'old' stuff is fine for our tastes. Because our tastes are based on more than hardware, they are based on the emotions and feelings garnered in the entire process. We all know the 'tubes sound more rich' audiophiles, its the same principle.
So, now that there are cadres of phosphor zombies worried about their 'listings' being taken away, you can all rest comfortably knowing the next step is to pull your pants up well above your waist-line
For some reason, every generation thinks 'they' wont get old. But as someone wiser than me once said; "Same shit...different day"