50 years ago, some entrances to the Merritt Parkway (SW Connecticut) were less than 100 feet. They've been improved over the years, but some of them are still too short.
Merging onto a crowded high speed highway requires more skill than any other common automotive maneuver. Some people just aren't up to the job.
Before you argue about the existence of god, you must first define god.
All traditional non-trivial definitions of god lead to contradictions. Contradictions cannot exist, therefor god defined in a traditional non-trivial way cannot exist.
By traditional and non-trivial, I exclude saying "that rock is god". That rock obviously exists, but has no extraordinary properties that makes it worth consideration in this context. Similarly, pantheism must be rejected because if everything is god, god has no special properties and nothing special can be implied from its existence.
.
To talk about god and be understood by your audience, you have to be talking about something "supernatural": something outside of nature, something above, beyond, outside of, or superior to reality.
Reality is all that there is. The unreal does not exist, and neither does god.
A great deal of modern humanities teaching is deliberately obfuscated pretentious bullshit. A person with a logical mind, especially one trained to rigorously solve technical problems, has a difficult time with such convoluted garbage.
Widespread ignorance of and defiance of historical knowledge explains why so much of the world is messed up. If historians weren't just as frequently cranks as everyone else, the avoidance of modern-day disasters like Venezuela would be much more likely.
Living abroad, which city and state is your fate tightly bound with, that you know enough about to choose well and so that your vote affects your wellbeing? If there isn't such a location, you shouldn't be voting.
Some people speculate that the Viking colonies in the New World failed because the climate cooled too much. I've also read that hostile natives eventually drove them out. In either case, it wasn't for lack of trying that the Viking entry into the New World was a dead end.
Although heart disease may remain the number one killer, much heart disease can be either prevented or delayed. Except for heart defects present at birth (like malformed valves), most heart problems stem from bad nutrition and inadequate exercise. Fixing the "primary causes of aging" also prevents or delays most heart disease.
"Half life" thought of like radioactivity is not now, and probably never will be, a valid way of thinking about animals. Animals, in the absence of disease, predation, starvation, etc. tend to mostly live to more than half of a maximum life span, after which the death rate increases greatly until everyone is dead at the maximum life span. Experiments that increase a species' maximum life span (there are a few such experiments) still show the same sort of survival versus time curve, even if the point at which die-offs start to happen becomes a different portion of the maximum life span. Exponential decay in the portion of animals still alive does not occur.
Baseload refers to the power that is provided/used all day long, it's the minimum power in a system over a period of time, usually 24 hours. Baseload is provided by systems that are difficult or impossible to start or stop quickly and can be depended upon to operate without interruption for long periods of time. Baseload plants are the most economically efficient, otherwise there would be no reason to put up with their lack of agility.
Other sources of power are used to take care of requirements above the base, they can be started and stopped relatively quickly but cost more to operate.
Your view of history is quite limited. Abolitionists existed in 1700, and women were not entirely without rights - even compared to today in Muslim countries.
Someone 300 years old could have a substantial knowledge of trends of history, and be able to cogently point out bad ideas that keep reappearing.
And, of course, you assume that people never learn.
People need to die. It's the only way for change to happen. Imagine in people from 200 years ago were still alive and voting. We'd never progress as a society.
What a vile and disgusting statement, false in every regard. What makes you think that people don't get wiser as they get older? What makes you think change in society, which you call progress, will be an improvement? Judging from the proclamations of those young people making the most noise in politics today, progress is torturing all males to death and giving 3-year-olds the vote. There's no limit to human stupidity, and most of it comes from the immature.
The energy in wind is dissipated regardless of whether it's tapped by a windmill or entirely used up by friction against trees and the ground and buildings, etc.. By impeding the flow of air, windmills tend to reduce the mixing of cold and hot air, thereby making hot places hotter and cold places colder. Since blackbody radiation is a T^4 process, this means that total heat radiation from the Earth will increase. That's a net cooling for the planet -- assuming that there isn't some other phenomenon that pushes more strongly in the other direction. If windmills slow the wind over water, that means less evaporation, and evaporation is a cooling phenomenon, so windmills cause heating. But water vapor is a greenhouse gas, so less evaporation causes cooling.
It's complicated, and I doubt very much that they've modeled it adequately.
Bloomberg's credibility haws been in the unreliable-to-dishonest range for a decade or more. Bloomberg seems to be getting worse by the day, increasingly toeing a leftist destroy-America line. My question is: what's Bloomberg's angle in this case?
Slashdot Mirror
50 years ago, some entrances to the Merritt Parkway (SW Connecticut) were less than 100 feet. They've been improved over the years, but some of them are still too short.
Merging onto a crowded high speed highway requires more skill than any other common automotive maneuver. Some people just aren't up to the job.
There are already standards for breaking performance, they're known as crashworthiness.
If you mean "braking performance," then we also need education standards.
Metric ton is the most reasonable unit here.
Wolves will also kill and eat small humans.
Science is not needed to disprove the existence of god. Logic suffices for that task.
Tell me, having the categories "theist" and "not theist", what other possibility remains?
Before you argue about the existence of god, you must first define god.
All traditional non-trivial definitions of god lead to contradictions. Contradictions cannot exist, therefor god defined in a traditional non-trivial way cannot exist.
By traditional and non-trivial, I exclude saying "that rock is god". That rock obviously exists, but has no extraordinary properties that makes it worth consideration in this context. Similarly, pantheism must be rejected because if everything is god, god has no special properties and nothing special can be implied from its existence.
.
To talk about god and be understood by your audience, you have to be talking about something "supernatural": something outside of nature, something above, beyond, outside of, or superior to reality.
Reality is all that there is. The unreal does not exist, and neither does god.
The tech is also in the ink. Buy third party cartridges or ink and you'll find the colors don't match the OEM's ink colors and fading is worse.
A great deal of modern humanities teaching is deliberately obfuscated pretentious bullshit. A person with a logical mind, especially one trained to rigorously solve technical problems, has a difficult time with such convoluted garbage.
Widespread ignorance of and defiance of historical knowledge explains why so much of the world is messed up. If historians weren't just as frequently cranks as everyone else, the avoidance of modern-day disasters like Venezuela would be much more likely.
Living abroad, which city and state is your fate tightly bound with, that you know enough about to choose well and so that your vote affects your wellbeing? If there isn't such a location, you shouldn't be voting.
40 years ago there was no rap polluting every bit of popular culture it touches.
Propagation delays do make design more difficult. They can be modeled and compensated for.
Some people speculate that the Viking colonies in the New World failed because the climate cooled too much. I've also read that hostile natives eventually drove them out. In either case, it wasn't for lack of trying that the Viking entry into the New World was a dead end.
Change isn't always improvement. Look at the Russian and Chinese communist revolutions.
I agree that on balance the trend is improvement. It's just not always the case.
Have you listen to the news recently, where one shrill "feminist" declared that men should be killed, castrated, and their genitals fed to pigs?
Although heart disease may remain the number one killer, much heart disease can be either prevented or delayed. Except for heart defects present at birth (like malformed valves), most heart problems stem from bad nutrition and inadequate exercise. Fixing the "primary causes of aging" also prevents or delays most heart disease.
"Half life" thought of like radioactivity is not now, and probably never will be, a valid way of thinking about animals. Animals, in the absence of disease, predation, starvation, etc. tend to mostly live to more than half of a maximum life span, after which the death rate increases greatly until everyone is dead at the maximum life span. Experiments that increase a species' maximum life span (there are a few such experiments) still show the same sort of survival versus time curve, even if the point at which die-offs start to happen becomes a different portion of the maximum life span. Exponential decay in the portion of animals still alive does not occur.
Another sucker fell for the "robber-baron" lie. So common I can't be surprised, only disappointed.
Baseload refers to the power that is provided/used all day long, it's the minimum power in a system over a period of time, usually 24 hours. Baseload is provided by systems that are difficult or impossible to start or stop quickly and can be depended upon to operate without interruption for long periods of time. Baseload plants are the most economically efficient, otherwise there would be no reason to put up with their lack of agility.
Other sources of power are used to take care of requirements above the base, they can be started and stopped relatively quickly but cost more to operate.
The difficult problems we solve first. The impossible takes a little longer.
Your view of history is quite limited. Abolitionists existed in 1700, and women were not entirely without rights - even compared to today in Muslim countries.
Someone 300 years old could have a substantial knowledge of trends of history, and be able to cogently point out bad ideas that keep reappearing.
And, of course, you assume that people never learn.
What a vile and disgusting statement, false in every regard. What makes you think that people don't get wiser as they get older? What makes you think change in society, which you call progress, will be an improvement? Judging from the proclamations of those young people making the most noise in politics today, progress is torturing all males to death and giving 3-year-olds the vote. There's no limit to human stupidity, and most of it comes from the immature.
The energy in wind is dissipated regardless of whether it's tapped by a windmill or entirely used up by friction against trees and the ground and buildings, etc.. By impeding the flow of air, windmills tend to reduce the mixing of cold and hot air, thereby making hot places hotter and cold places colder. Since blackbody radiation is a T^4 process, this means that total heat radiation from the Earth will increase. That's a net cooling for the planet -- assuming that there isn't some other phenomenon that pushes more strongly in the other direction. If windmills slow the wind over water, that means less evaporation, and evaporation is a cooling phenomenon, so windmills cause heating. But water vapor is a greenhouse gas, so less evaporation causes cooling.
It's complicated, and I doubt very much that they've modeled it adequately.
Bloomberg's credibility haws been in the unreliable-to-dishonest range for a decade or more. Bloomberg seems to be getting worse by the day, increasingly toeing a leftist destroy-America line. My question is: what's Bloomberg's angle in this case?