Once again, the godless scientist will throw away millions and billions of tax payer dollars on the completely worthless pursuit of trying to prove that there is no God. The scripture tells us that God created the heavens and the earth. And upon earth and earth alone, He created man. But then you don;t believe that or even care about it, that is until you end up in hell wondering how stupid you had been.
And nowhere in scripture does it say that God didn't create other creatures on other planets, although it does have some passages which might be interpreted as referring to extraterrestrial life, but more likely to other life on other continents, or even just to other peoples in neighboring regions, or even just referring to Gentiles. IE. John 10:16
Yeah, bullshit. "It'd have been found already" is a useless answer as human beings don't have the means to transmit far and fast enough for that statement to have any iota of truth.
Human knowledge is not the bastion of truth and all there is in the universe.
Yup, once we get past that issue with the speed of light, we should really start making some progress.
It is not a simple YES or NO answer. It is BOTH. YES, there are UFOs, as in Unidentified Flying Objects and NO, these UFOs are not extraterrestrial life forms coming to visit us. They are merely airplanes, helicopters, atmospheric effects, shadows, and other natural and manmade phenomena that the observer at the time is unable to identify.
Why doesn't NASA try to find alien life? Finding alien life could lead to huge technological advances.
Because that is INS's job. NASA's job, if anything, would be to find native life on other planets. Which would be a waste of money because 1) There probably isn't any and 2) If there is, it will be too far away for us to do anything with.
If they charged the battery on the ground then they are also being dishonest about not using any fuels. Although of course there was a huge amount of indirect fuel used for various activities in the manufacture, transport, and whatnot, if they actually charged the batteries on the ground then they directly used fuel to do so, although like electric cars, the environmentalists tend to handwave the electric generation away.
I find the feat to be unremarkable, especially in light of the fact that it has been done before. Further, it is clear that they are not able to charge the batteries enough during daylight flight to be able to power the craft through the night.
46 days is not impressive at all for an airplane. Their is a man training now for a planned run across the United States in 45 days. This will beat this airplanes "record" (although that is not his goal).
It will be interesting to see how these seized items relate to the drug case. Or is this not seizure of evidence, but seizure of property just for the hell of it, because the guy may someday be found guilty of a crime?
Since the 1968 even presidents that "won by a landslide" won by far less than 50% of the eligible voters. The number of voters that voted for "neither of those bozos" has been higher than the number that voted for the winner every time. Unfortunately, the system requires that only one of the bozos on the ballot can get elected, so it is whomever out of those one the ballot that wins, even if most people didn't vote for anybody on the ballot.
Normally do not comment on or make fun of grammar mistakes but "Escape Goats"?? LOL. Thanks, you made my afternoon.
Laugh if you must, but the original "scapegoat" really did escape (although the word has no lineage to the word escape). There were two goats involved, and the scapegoat definitely got the better end of the deal.
From Leviticus 16:
7 Then he is to take the two goats and present them before the Lord at the entrance to the tent of meeting. 8 He is to cast lots for the two goats—one lot for the Lord and the other for the scapegoat.[b] 9 Aaron shall bring the goat whose lot falls to the Lord and sacrifice it for a sin offering. 10 But the goat chosen by lot as the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the Lord to be used for making atonement by sending it into the wilderness as a scapegoat. ...
21 He is to lay both hands on the head of the live goat and confess over it all the wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites—all their sins—and put them on the goat’s head. He shall send the goat away into the wilderness in the care of someone appointed for the task. 22 The goat will carry on itself all their sins to a remote place; and the man shall release it in the wilderness.
Don't worry about people who mod troll. In my experience, troll mod means one of two things.
1.) I disagree, but don't have any facts or evidence to make a good argument.
2.) I can't handle the truth.
I suppose you think all blacks are thugs unless proven otherwise.
What difference does it make whether someone is black or not? He was wearing a hoodie in summertime. How would you know it was someone black or just some punk ass white kid trying to be gangsta? Either way, he wasn't recognized as being someone who should belong in the neighborhood. This is a case where I wish Trayvon would have been white, we wouldn't even be having this trial. Another punk white kid jumps somebody and got killed for it. Moving along.
So, if someone is walking around in a place where they should not be, you are not allowed to get out of your car? Why don't we just lock up the law
MARTIN WAS NOT WALKING AROUND IN A PLACE WHERE HE SHOULD NOT BE.
No, clearly he was visiting his mother, his father, his father's fiance, a friend, etc, depending on which story you read.
If true, of course, he had every right to be there, and when asked by a security guard, he should have stated his business and thanked the security guard for keeping the neighborhood safe.
You can get out of your car, but if you shoot them, it'll be due to a confrontation you initiated through your actions, thereby destroying your claim to self-defense.
So, let me get this straight. If I get out of my car, and someone assaults me and I shoot them, then that is not self defense? Because my getting out of the car was "asking for it"?
Seriously, how big of a problem is this, that they need to be shutting down payment methods in an attempt to make you stop using them? I wasn't even aware that anybody did anything illegal with them. I didn't know until reading some of the comments that some people use them for getting around region encoding. Nevermind that region encoding ought to be illegal as it is. But still, if you sell a million hammers, and one guy uses a hammer to break a window, will Visa and MC stop processing payments for hammers?
With enough CPU power and malice, i could destroy Bitcoin in its current incarnation.
Which is why you are not given enough CPU power. It is distributed to prevent people from accumulating enough to destroy it. If you bought all of the world's top supercomputers, you would not have enough CPU power to "take over" bitcoin.
Also, you couldn't destroy bitcoin even if you did have over 50% of the horsepower, you could only invalidate your recent transactions, and prevent other transactions from being recorded. it would have to be out of sheer malice, because there is no way you could make it financially positive for you.
Couldn't agree more. The only thing they should be trying to decide is what sort of medal to give him for having the courage to defend himself against an assailant.
So, if someone is walking around in a place where they should not be, you are not allowed to get out of your car? Why don't we just lock up the law abiding and let the criminals roam free, if we are going to let them dictate our lives like this.
Instead he killed somebody.
Just like most cases of self defense, nobody sets out to kill anybody (well, except for the criminals sometimes), but if somebody jumps you and starts bashing your head against the ground, you have the right to defend yourself.
It seems clear to me that case by case, the government is trying to take away our rights to defend ourselves. They hand out harsher sentences against people who kill an armed assailant, than they do to assailants who kill an unarmed victim. It's pretty clear the message they are trying to get across: Just let the criminals do whatever they want with no dear of reprisal.
I didn't really consider it, but I guess wider is better for games, but wider and taller is even better than just wider. As for movies, I don't see a reason to watch movies on a monitor. if you are at work, you should be working, and if you are at home, then a monitor is overkill for a movie. But at home, some people don't have multiple display devices.
Still, even if you watch widescreen movies on your monitor, I don't see why anyone would buy a 2560X1080 instead of a 2560X1600. The movie will still be the same size, and you have extra space in case you want to browse the web or something while you are watching.
Is this ad...story.. a joke? I have two 1600x1200 20" (ie, 100dpi) monitors. How is this any better except perhaps eliminating the bezel? 72% of the resolution and at 95 dpi instead of 100. Try again.
I'm also confused. 20 years ago, 1600 X 1200 was top of the line, and now, we are supposed to get all excited about even LESS vertical resolution? Even my 2560X1600 30" monitor is now 5 year old technology (even if I just bought it last year).
MSL has risen 7.7 inches in 135 years in the rest of the world, but somehow has risen another 1.3 inches in the Keys in less time. I suspect that they are experiencing ocean water rise in conjunction with the natural eroding away of the islands themselves. You certainly wouldn't want to build any permanent (in terms of centuries) buildings on those islands.
Having employers provide insurance was the upside.
What if they don't have a job? What if I don't want to be tied to my employer because I am afraid of losing my health coverage? What we ought to do is make it ILLEGAL for employers to provider health insurance. We also ought to make it a law that you have to buy Health Insurance, and NOT health PLANS.
Basically, the things that Obamacare is trying to address are good, but the implementation is exactly the opposite of what it should be. It benefits companies and insurance companies and screws over employees.
Everyone working in tech in America is in the 1% - of the world. There's no moral harm when a job moves overseas to someone who objectively needs the money more.
When a 1% job in the U.S. goes to India, it goes to someone who becomes a.1%er. If they make even $20,000 they can live in the lap of luxury. Their goods cost less. We make more because our stuff costs more. If we ship our top jobs overseas, it increases the division of wealth in our country and in the overseas country.
It may surprise you to know that most technical people in India have people to cook and clean for them. Even on a tech salary, we can't afford that here.
In fact food is now cheaper than it has ever been
Perhaps this is true in the rest of the world, but where I live, in the U.S. food is more EXPENSIVE than it has ever been.
Sick days? What are those? We just went from having two weeks paid vacation and however many sick days you need, to two weeks of total Paid Time Off, including vacations AND sick days.
Benefits? Benefits are not a benefit, except to the employer. They get to tie you to a plan so that you are reluctant to leave and go elsewhere. And in many cases, who pays for the supposed "benefit"? You!. You could get the same "benefits" for cheaper individually.
Weekend? Ah, yes. Weekends are nice. It is great to be away from the company for a couple of days so I can get some work done without people constantly coming into my office. If it wasn't for weekends, I wouldn't be able to get done with all the work my company expects of me. After all, there is only so much you can get done working only 12 hour days during the week.
40 hour work weeks? Maybe the first three days of the week. But there are still 4 more days you have to work.
Fair Hiring practices? Nope. Nepotism reigns supreme, except when they are related to a worker bee.
Fair Promotion Practices? Nope. Only those who are related to the bigwigs get promoted. Or those whose skills are so poor that they won't be missed in their current position. If you are good at your job, then there you will stay, until your dying day. If a higher up position becomes available, they will hire someone external with no idea how the operation works.
But, I guess I have to concede that there is no more child labor (except for the scam magazine and newspaper subscription companies, and the fundraising industry). And you also don't have to live in a company house anymore, but that is just because they don't want to provide you with one or back your mortgage, because then they wouldn't get their money back when they fire you.
Slashdot Mirror
Once again, the godless scientist will throw away millions and billions of tax payer dollars on the completely worthless pursuit of trying to prove that there is no God. The scripture tells us that God created the heavens and the earth. And upon earth and earth alone, He created man. But then you don;t believe that or even care about it, that is until you end up in hell wondering how stupid you had been.
And nowhere in scripture does it say that God didn't create other creatures on other planets, although it does have some passages which might be interpreted as referring to extraterrestrial life, but more likely to other life on other continents, or even just to other peoples in neighboring regions, or even just referring to Gentiles. IE. John 10:16
Yeah, bullshit. "It'd have been found already" is a useless answer as human beings don't have the means to transmit far and fast enough for that statement to have any iota of truth.
Human knowledge is not the bastion of truth and all there is in the universe.
Yup, once we get past that issue with the speed of light, we should really start making some progress.
It is not a simple YES or NO answer. It is BOTH. YES, there are UFOs, as in Unidentified Flying Objects and NO, these UFOs are not extraterrestrial life forms coming to visit us. They are merely airplanes, helicopters, atmospheric effects, shadows, and other natural and manmade phenomena that the observer at the time is unable to identify.
Why doesn't NASA try to find alien life? Finding alien life could lead to huge technological advances.
Because that is INS's job. NASA's job, if anything, would be to find native life on other planets. Which would be a waste of money because 1) There probably isn't any and 2) If there is, it will be too far away for us to do anything with.
If they charged the battery on the ground then they are also being dishonest about not using any fuels. Although of course there was a huge amount of indirect fuel used for various activities in the manufacture, transport, and whatnot, if they actually charged the batteries on the ground then they directly used fuel to do so, although like electric cars, the environmentalists tend to handwave the electric generation away.
I find the feat to be unremarkable, especially in light of the fact that it has been done before. Further, it is clear that they are not able to charge the batteries enough during daylight flight to be able to power the craft through the night.
46 days is not impressive at all for an airplane. Their is a man training now for a planned run across the United States in 45 days. This will beat this airplanes "record" (although that is not his goal).
It will be interesting to see how these seized items relate to the drug case. Or is this not seizure of evidence, but seizure of property just for the hell of it, because the guy may someday be found guilty of a crime?
Since the 1968 even presidents that "won by a landslide" won by far less than 50% of the eligible voters. The number of voters that voted for "neither of those bozos" has been higher than the number that voted for the winner every time. Unfortunately, the system requires that only one of the bozos on the ballot can get elected, so it is whomever out of those one the ballot that wins, even if most people didn't vote for anybody on the ballot.
Normally do not comment on or make fun of grammar mistakes but "Escape Goats"?? LOL. Thanks, you made my afternoon.
Laugh if you must, but the original "scapegoat" really did escape (although the word has no lineage to the word escape). There were two goats involved, and the scapegoat definitely got the better end of the deal.
...
From Leviticus 16:
7 Then he is to take the two goats and present them before the Lord at the entrance to the tent of meeting. 8 He is to cast lots for the two goats—one lot for the Lord and the other for the scapegoat.[b] 9 Aaron shall bring the goat whose lot falls to the Lord and sacrifice it for a sin offering. 10 But the goat chosen by lot as the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the Lord to be used for making atonement by sending it into the wilderness as a scapegoat.
21 He is to lay both hands on the head of the live goat and confess over it all the wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites—all their sins—and put them on the goat’s head. He shall send the goat away into the wilderness in the care of someone appointed for the task. 22 The goat will carry on itself all their sins to a remote place; and the man shall release it in the wilderness.
Don't worry about people who mod troll. In my experience, troll mod means one of two things.
1.) I disagree, but don't have any facts or evidence to make a good argument.
2.) I can't handle the truth.
I suppose you think all blacks are thugs unless proven otherwise.
What difference does it make whether someone is black or not? He was wearing a hoodie in summertime. How would you know it was someone black or just some punk ass white kid trying to be gangsta? Either way, he wasn't recognized as being someone who should belong in the neighborhood. This is a case where I wish Trayvon would have been white, we wouldn't even be having this trial. Another punk white kid jumps somebody and got killed for it. Moving along.
So, if someone is walking around in a place where they should not be, you are not allowed to get out of your car? Why don't we just lock up the law
MARTIN WAS NOT WALKING AROUND IN A PLACE WHERE HE SHOULD NOT BE.
No, clearly he was visiting his mother, his father, his father's fiance, a friend, etc, depending on which story you read.
If true, of course, he had every right to be there, and when asked by a security guard, he should have stated his business and thanked the security guard for keeping the neighborhood safe.
You can get out of your car, but if you shoot them, it'll be due to a confrontation you initiated through your actions, thereby destroying your claim to self-defense.
So, let me get this straight. If I get out of my car, and someone assaults me and I shoot them, then that is not self defense? Because my getting out of the car was "asking for it"?
As a person who fancies myself a programmer, I have to ask: What is "the Clipboard"?
Someone who hasn't been around long enough to remember it. Lawn.. get off.. etc, etc.
I've been programming since 1981. Don't remember any clipboard.
Seriously, how big of a problem is this, that they need to be shutting down payment methods in an attempt to make you stop using them? I wasn't even aware that anybody did anything illegal with them. I didn't know until reading some of the comments that some people use them for getting around region encoding. Nevermind that region encoding ought to be illegal as it is. But still, if you sell a million hammers, and one guy uses a hammer to break a window, will Visa and MC stop processing payments for hammers?
With enough CPU power and malice, i could destroy Bitcoin in its current incarnation.
Which is why you are not given enough CPU power. It is distributed to prevent people from accumulating enough to destroy it. If you bought all of the world's top supercomputers, you would not have enough CPU power to "take over" bitcoin.
Also, you couldn't destroy bitcoin even if you did have over 50% of the horsepower, you could only invalidate your recent transactions, and prevent other transactions from being recorded. it would have to be out of sheer malice, because there is no way you could make it financially positive for you.
Couldn't agree more. The only thing they should be trying to decide is what sort of medal to give him for having the courage to defend himself against an assailant.
So, if someone is walking around in a place where they should not be, you are not allowed to get out of your car? Why don't we just lock up the law abiding and let the criminals roam free, if we are going to let them dictate our lives like this. Instead he killed somebody.
Just like most cases of self defense, nobody sets out to kill anybody (well, except for the criminals sometimes), but if somebody jumps you and starts bashing your head against the ground, you have the right to defend yourself.
It seems clear to me that case by case, the government is trying to take away our rights to defend ourselves. They hand out harsher sentences against people who kill an armed assailant, than they do to assailants who kill an unarmed victim. It's pretty clear the message they are trying to get across: Just let the criminals do whatever they want with no dear of reprisal.
I didn't really consider it, but I guess wider is better for games, but wider and taller is even better than just wider. As for movies, I don't see a reason to watch movies on a monitor. if you are at work, you should be working, and if you are at home, then a monitor is overkill for a movie. But at home, some people don't have multiple display devices. Still, even if you watch widescreen movies on your monitor, I don't see why anyone would buy a 2560X1080 instead of a 2560X1600. The movie will still be the same size, and you have extra space in case you want to browse the web or something while you are watching.
Is this ad...story.. a joke? I have two 1600x1200 20" (ie, 100dpi) monitors. How is this any better except perhaps eliminating the bezel? 72% of the resolution and at 95 dpi instead of 100. Try again.
I'm also confused. 20 years ago, 1600 X 1200 was top of the line, and now, we are supposed to get all excited about even LESS vertical resolution? Even my 2560X1600 30" monitor is now 5 year old technology (even if I just bought it last year).
As a person who fancies myself a programmer, I have to ask: What is "the Clipboard"?
MSL has risen 7.7 inches in 135 years in the rest of the world, but somehow has risen another 1.3 inches in the Keys in less time. I suspect that they are experiencing ocean water rise in conjunction with the natural eroding away of the islands themselves. You certainly wouldn't want to build any permanent (in terms of centuries) buildings on those islands.
Having employers provide insurance was the upside.
What if they don't have a job? What if I don't want to be tied to my employer because I am afraid of losing my health coverage? What we ought to do is make it ILLEGAL for employers to provider health insurance. We also ought to make it a law that you have to buy Health Insurance, and NOT health PLANS.
Basically, the things that Obamacare is trying to address are good, but the implementation is exactly the opposite of what it should be. It benefits companies and insurance companies and screws over employees.
Everyone working in tech in America is in the 1% - of the world. There's no moral harm when a job moves overseas to someone who objectively needs the money more. .1%er. If they make even $20,000 they can live in the lap of luxury. Their goods cost less. We make more because our stuff costs more. If we ship our top jobs overseas, it increases the division of wealth in our country and in the overseas country.
When a 1% job in the U.S. goes to India, it goes to someone who becomes a
It may surprise you to know that most technical people in India have people to cook and clean for them. Even on a tech salary, we can't afford that here.
In fact food is now cheaper than it has ever been
Perhaps this is true in the rest of the world, but where I live, in the U.S. food is more EXPENSIVE than it has ever been.
Sick days? What are those? We just went from having two weeks paid vacation and however many sick days you need, to two weeks of total Paid Time Off, including vacations AND sick days.
Benefits? Benefits are not a benefit, except to the employer. They get to tie you to a plan so that you are reluctant to leave and go elsewhere. And in many cases, who pays for the supposed "benefit"? You!. You could get the same "benefits" for cheaper individually.
Weekend? Ah, yes. Weekends are nice. It is great to be away from the company for a couple of days so I can get some work done without people constantly coming into my office. If it wasn't for weekends, I wouldn't be able to get done with all the work my company expects of me. After all, there is only so much you can get done working only 12 hour days during the week.
40 hour work weeks? Maybe the first three days of the week. But there are still 4 more days you have to work.
Fair Hiring practices? Nope. Nepotism reigns supreme, except when they are related to a worker bee.
Fair Promotion Practices? Nope. Only those who are related to the bigwigs get promoted. Or those whose skills are so poor that they won't be missed in their current position. If you are good at your job, then there you will stay, until your dying day. If a higher up position becomes available, they will hire someone external with no idea how the operation works.
But, I guess I have to concede that there is no more child labor (except for the scam magazine and newspaper subscription companies, and the fundraising industry). And you also don't have to live in a company house anymore, but that is just because they don't want to provide you with one or back your mortgage, because then they wouldn't get their money back when they fire you.