Realistically there's no money for a major space project. We're running a trillion dollar deficit - the government has no way to pay the obligations it already has let alone new ones.
People don't tend to have an issue with the helicopters because they're big, noisy, expensive, and take a number of people to operate.
Drones aren't much cheaper. Sometimes they're even more expensive, depending on the sensors involved. Drones have more persistence, which is useful for surveilance, but so far there's not a big cost advantage.
Right, but the point is we didn't actually have to land people on the moon to show we could nuke the Russians. A missile test into the South Pacific works just as well.
You'd have to be sifting through some pretty darn small concentrations to make going to space worthwhile. We spent $100bn putting a glorified can into LEO, fer chrissake. You can do a lot of refining for that kind of money.
Yes, in fact they should be determined by political whims. The taxpayers are funding these missions, so the taxpayers should decide whether or not they go forward.
No, because it doesnt make sense. There is no way to cheaply get those "trillions of dollars" that an asteroid could contain into a low earth orbit, let alone down to the surface.
This. Recovering "trillions of dollars" worth of minerals at the cost of trillions of dollars makes much less sense than doing the same for far less money using conventional mining techniques. Also, you would never be able to recover trillions of dollars worth of minerals. The market for those minerals would crash.
$Phonemaker does nothing, tons of phones get stolen, $Phonemaker makes tons of replacement phones (i.e. tons of money).
Only if you assume the stolen phone never makes it back onto the market. Otherwise when a customer buys a stolen phone the phone maker loses a sale. It's a wash.
"A couple"? You mean 80? And it doesn't just involve the IRS, either. People are coming forward now that have had multiple government agencies (like IRS, OSHA, and EPA) sicced on them in a very short time period. It's hard to imaging how that doesn't involve coordination at a higher level.
These are going to be fun hearings. Obama's not dumb enough to put anything on paper, but at this point it's pretty clear the direction came from the top or very close to it.
Yeah, whatever. I would have said the same six months ago, but this guy has lost the last bit of trust I have in his integrity. This IRS scandal just gets worse and worse. He's making Nixon look honest.
This goes far beyond incompetence. Incompetence is when you try and fail because you weren't as good as you should have been. In this case they just rolled up the operation halfway through for no reason anyone can explain.
The president and his political allies were making a big deal about American guns reaching cartels at the time (dishonestly, of course). Would I put it past Obama to deliberately send guns to Mexico in order to generate political support for his gun control policies? No. No I wouldn't.
One of their primary jobs is to stop gun smugglers, they tried to do this job by letting through a few shipments so they could shut down the network, letting small fish go to catch the big fish, a very common investigative tactic. They failed badly.
Failed? No, not really. It wouldn't be a big scandal if they were trying something legitimate and failed. They forced retailers to break the law and then they closed the operation. They didn't even try to follow the guns, and nobody seems to know what the point of the operation was supposed to be or what the plan was. Nobody seems to know anything at all.
They told me if I voted for Romney the government would engage in unconstitutional wiretapping.
Nothing is more amusing to me that watching leftists trying to pretend this is all okay because it's Fox and not what they consider real news organizations. I hope you remember this moment when the next Republican president takes office.
It depends on what you mean by meat. While most primates are omnivores, the bulk of them only make that category by eating insects and grubs. While it's true insects and grubs are technically animals, that's not what most people think when they say "animal". The article the AC linked makes the point that a real "paleolithic diet" would be mostly vegetarian because our guts are derived from other primates which are mostly vegetarian.
In any event, my point was that he's wrong. Our ancestors were not vegetarians.
But the moment you throw that heavy spear you're going to realize there's no point. A throwing spear is quite a bit different in construction - you have to make it with throwing in mind.
No, they were not vegetarians. We have all sorts of archaeological evidence showing early man ate animals. The fact that most other primates don't is irrelevant.
Slashdot Mirror
Realistically there's no money for a major space project. We're running a trillion dollar deficit - the government has no way to pay the obligations it already has let alone new ones.
People don't tend to have an issue with the helicopters because they're big, noisy, expensive, and take a number of people to operate.
Drones aren't much cheaper. Sometimes they're even more expensive, depending on the sensors involved. Drones have more persistence, which is useful for surveilance, but so far there's not a big cost advantage.
Right, but the point is we didn't actually have to land people on the moon to show we could nuke the Russians. A missile test into the South Pacific works just as well.
You'd have to be sifting through some pretty darn small concentrations to make going to space worthwhile. We spent $100bn putting a glorified can into LEO, fer chrissake. You can do a lot of refining for that kind of money.
Yes, in fact they should be determined by political whims. The taxpayers are funding these missions, so the taxpayers should decide whether or not they go forward.
We had already demonstrated ICBM capability long before we went to the moon. The Russians never went to the moon... did we doubt they could nuke us?
We already need a new name. Rare earth elements aren't actually rare.
This. Recovering "trillions of dollars" worth of minerals at the cost of trillions of dollars makes much less sense than doing the same for far less money using conventional mining techniques. Also, you would never be able to recover trillions of dollars worth of minerals. The market for those minerals would crash.
But as Samantha Wright points out above, the very fact the camera was off casts doubt on the officer's testimony.
$Phonemaker does nothing, tons of phones get stolen, $Phonemaker makes tons of replacement phones (i.e. tons of money).
Only if you assume the stolen phone never makes it back onto the market. Otherwise when a customer buys a stolen phone the phone maker loses a sale. It's a wash.
And are just as reliable.
Yep. People forget the boomers went from hippie to yuppie, trading in their hand-painted VW camper buses and beads for BMWs and rolex watches.
"A couple"? You mean 80? And it doesn't just involve the IRS, either. People are coming forward now that have had multiple government agencies (like IRS, OSHA, and EPA) sicced on them in a very short time period. It's hard to imaging how that doesn't involve coordination at a higher level.
These are going to be fun hearings. Obama's not dumb enough to put anything on paper, but at this point it's pretty clear the direction came from the top or very close to it.
Yeah, whatever. I would have said the same six months ago, but this guy has lost the last bit of trust I have in his integrity. This IRS scandal just gets worse and worse. He's making Nixon look honest.
This goes far beyond incompetence. Incompetence is when you try and fail because you weren't as good as you should have been. In this case they just rolled up the operation halfway through for no reason anyone can explain.
The president and his political allies were making a big deal about American guns reaching cartels at the time (dishonestly, of course). Would I put it past Obama to deliberately send guns to Mexico in order to generate political support for his gun control policies? No. No I wouldn't.
One of their primary jobs is to stop gun smugglers, they tried to do this job by letting through a few shipments so they could shut down the network, letting small fish go to catch the big fish, a very common investigative tactic. They failed badly.
Failed? No, not really. It wouldn't be a big scandal if they were trying something legitimate and failed. They forced retailers to break the law and then they closed the operation. They didn't even try to follow the guns, and nobody seems to know what the point of the operation was supposed to be or what the plan was. Nobody seems to know anything at all.
Oh, yeah, I guess when you put it that way. It's only Mexicans.
Why all the stonewalling then?
Howcum it wasn't a major scandal when Bush was doing the same thing?
The Bush administration actually followed the guns and made arrests instead of letting them disappear like Obama's people did.
Fast & Furious is a major scandal. It's perfectly reasonable for Fox to treat it as such.
They told me if I voted for Romney the government would engage in unconstitutional wiretapping.
Nothing is more amusing to me that watching leftists trying to pretend this is all okay because it's Fox and not what they consider real news organizations. I hope you remember this moment when the next Republican president takes office.
It depends on what you mean by meat. While most primates are omnivores, the bulk of them only make that category by eating insects and grubs. While it's true insects and grubs are technically animals, that's not what most people think when they say "animal". The article the AC linked makes the point that a real "paleolithic diet" would be mostly vegetarian because our guts are derived from other primates which are mostly vegetarian.
In any event, my point was that he's wrong. Our ancestors were not vegetarians.
Yes, I know there are other primates that eat meat.
But the moment you throw that heavy spear you're going to realize there's no point. A throwing spear is quite a bit different in construction - you have to make it with throwing in mind.
No, they were not vegetarians. We have all sorts of archaeological evidence showing early man ate animals. The fact that most other primates don't is irrelevant.