We seriously need this to work. What they do now with poultry waste is to turn it into a slurry and spray it onto the local pastures as "fertilizer". You can't imagine the god awful smell that produces.
The excess nitrogen from this mess runs off into the streams and lakes causing an algae bloom which kills fish. If this works at all, they are going to make some serious money doing a very good thing.
Right now we are experimenting on Earths ecosystem. I am for terraforming Mars as a survival tactic, in case the experiment on Earth fails. Yes, I would want to know everything I can about possible life on Mars. Mars life might be even more important to us than colonization.
Any research we do on changing a planets environment would most certainly teach us more about Earths environment.
As I understand it the median atmospheric pressure on Mars is very close to the triple point of water. In my opinion this is not a coincidence. The fact that Mars atmosphere is balanced at a point where liquid water will form indicates to me that water is a controlling factor in Mars' environment.
Since the median pressure on Mars is close to the triple point of water that means, at the lowest altitude areas on Mars, liquid water could exist on the surface at temperatures just above freezing. The water would quickly evaporate though because Mars' atmosphere is so dry.
If you are implying that non-monochrome monitors don't burn, that's what I thought too. Until I noticed that on our three year old workstations you can still read the main menu window after you turn the monitors off. We tell them it's an energy saving feature.
is a Quake level in the Valles Marinaris on Mars. Lots of gullys and rocks to hide behind. I would be constantly getting fragged though. I would be spending too much time looking at the scenery.
A little competition to get us back on track. We need to take NASA away from the politicians and give it back to the engineers.
Re:Imaginary Scientist-Creationist dialogue
on
Evolution in Action
·
· Score: 1
This, I believe is what the whole debate finally comes down to. It is a definition of what reality is. In this imaginary argument, the Creationist is saying that this 13 billion year history is built into the creation. This history is just as real as anything else in creation.
Evolution doesn't deal with creation of the universe nor with the creation of life.
Absolutly right! Evolution deals with a physical history. If there was a creation, it came complete with a full 15 billion year history. It is this physical history that Evolution explains. The universe is self consistant.
Creation and Evolution are not mutually exclusive.
I've never really understood this debate about "Creation verses Evolution". I see no reason why both ideas cannot be both correct. Both Creation and Evolution are explanations of why things in the world are the way they are today. However they are explaining completely different concepts. Evolution is merely an attempt to explain a physical chain of events which led to the world as we know it. Creationists do the Creator a great disservice by assuming that (s)he would create a universe that was not internally consistent That the universe would be created without a complete 15 billion year history, in full detail. In fact I believe he would use this history as a tool for the creation.
Evolution is not concerned with how this evidence came about. In fact it doesn't matter "when" or "how" creation happened. It's physical history and evidence still looks the same. It is this physical evidence that Evolution tries to explain, not the "truth" that the creationists are referring to.
This "Evolution Vs. Creation" is getting old anyway. The creationists need to drop their arguments against evolution and take on cosmology and physics. This is where we are truly getting close to a "truth".
Slashdot Mirror
Where are the Prius hacking sites?
Combine this with Honda's Asimo and one of these and I'm in.
This mission is the last of NASA's big budget planetary projects.
What is the deal with the phone number on their contact page:
1-888-GO-LINUX
We seriously need this to work. What they do now with poultry waste is to turn it into a slurry and spray it onto the local pastures as "fertilizer". You can't imagine the god awful smell that produces.
The excess nitrogen from this mess runs off into the streams and lakes causing an algae bloom which kills fish. If this works at all, they are going to make some serious money doing a very good thing.
Thank you, I would love to see that done more often. If it is worth listing in Slashdot, it should be worth helping the guy out with bandwidth.
When they add a camera we will finally have the elusive Dick Tracy wrist phone. These are great times indeed.
wouldn't they cheat and just lie?
Right now we are experimenting on Earths ecosystem. I am for terraforming Mars as a survival tactic, in case the experiment on Earth fails. Yes, I would want to know everything I can about possible life on Mars. Mars life might be even more important to us than colonization.
Any research we do on changing a planets environment would most certainly teach us more about Earths environment.
Yes, but it would be a very useful experiment. What we learned we could apply back to Earth.
As I understand it the median atmospheric pressure on Mars is very close to the triple point of water. In my opinion this is not a coincidence. The fact that Mars atmosphere is balanced at a point where liquid water will form indicates to me that water is a controlling factor in Mars' environment. Since the median pressure on Mars is close to the triple point of water that means, at the lowest altitude areas on Mars, liquid water could exist on the surface at temperatures just above freezing. The water would quickly evaporate though because Mars' atmosphere is so dry.
If you are implying that non-monochrome monitors don't burn, that's what I thought too. Until I noticed that on our three year old workstations you can still read the main menu window after you turn the monitors off. We tell them it's an energy saving feature.
is a Quake level in the Valles Marinaris on Mars. Lots of gullys and rocks to hide behind. I would be constantly getting fragged though. I would be spending too much time looking at the scenery.
A little competition to get us back on track. We need to take NASA away from the politicians and give it back to the engineers.
This, I believe is what the whole debate finally comes down to. It is a definition of what reality is. In this imaginary argument, the Creationist is saying that this 13 billion year history is built into the creation. This history is just as real as anything else in creation.
Both the scientist and the Creationist are right.
Evolution doesn't deal with creation of the universe nor with the creation of life.
Absolutly right! Evolution deals with a physical history. If there was a creation, it came complete with a full 15 billion year history. It is this physical history that Evolution explains. The universe is self consistant.
Creation and Evolution are not mutually exclusive.
End of Debate. (SIC)
I've never really understood this debate about "Creation verses Evolution". I see no reason why both ideas cannot be both correct. Both Creation and Evolution are explanations of why things in the world are the way they are today. However they are explaining completely different concepts. Evolution is merely an attempt to explain a physical chain of events which led to the world as we know it. Creationists do the Creator a great disservice by assuming that (s)he would create a universe that was not internally consistent That the universe would be created without a complete 15 billion year history, in full detail. In fact I believe he would use this history as a tool for the creation. Evolution is not concerned with how this evidence came about. In fact it doesn't matter "when" or "how" creation happened. It's physical history and evidence still looks the same. It is this physical evidence that Evolution tries to explain, not the "truth" that the creationists are referring to. This "Evolution Vs. Creation" is getting old anyway. The creationists need to drop their arguments against evolution and take on cosmology and physics. This is where we are truly getting close to a "truth".