There's a reason why skeet archery hasn't caught on.
I imagine it has more in common with not using normal bullets in skeet -- shotgun pellets don't carry as far. You really don't want arrows zipping on out of the skeet area.
Dipshit. You could have come up with all sorts of bigoted Asian jokes since sunlight is not white but yellow. Instead you spew about Jews and blacks. Heck, even a joke about uv light would have been more interesting.
This analogy is spot on, and whoever modded it off-topic obviously is incapable of understanding the topic and shouldn't have had the keys to the mod-car in the first place.
Even Jules Verne got it part right. The ISS would be at its fastest near Earth at its closest point to Earth, ditto for the moon, and at its slowest at the point in between where the gravities cancel each other out. In each direction of travel, it starts to accelerate as soon as one gravity is stronger than the other.
That's what evolution does. The mistake it doesn't make is propagate a bad design. Evolution's hangovers don't cause permanent changes. Heck, evolution doesn't have permanent changes.
Fool! The one true language wasn't Lisp. It was assembly language (especially IBM S/360 assembly language)!
Youngun, you'd best look behind you and realize the error of your ways. Machine code is where it's at. You take your assembler, with its labels and psuedo ops and formatting and passes of all things, and shuffle that card deck into oblivion before I come over the tubes at you and do it for your!
There are a zillion holes in TFA. I wonder if it actually summarizes the science accurately?
For instance, it assumes that if the ancestor could hear the same range as us, it could develop language, with the implication that if the ancestor couldn't hear the same range as us, it couldn't develop language.
Criminy, language doesn't depend on the frequency range! It may depend on bandwith to some extent, or beingable to differentiate the sounds from natural inanimate sounds.
And like you say, it would be pretty danged weird if the ears and voices worked with different frequencies. That's the kind of mistake an intelligent designer could make with a hangover after celebrating the design of a new version of, say, whale. But evolution wouldn't make that mistake.
The theory of gravity isn't proven either. As a matter of fact, evidence to prove evolution outweighs (pun intended) evidence to prove gravity. The gravitational constant is only known to a few digits while other physical constants are known to a dozen or more. No one has any more than paper theories on how gravity works, but there is a ton of work on evolution. Experiments have been designed, both in the lab and in the wild, to prove various aspects of evolution, have been carried out, and have worked as predicted.
You are the kind of idiot who insists everyone else has to provide proof equivalent to 2 + 2 = 4, but want everyone else to believe your bible because you say it is so, without the slightest pretense of provising anything even close to evidence.
Here's some reality for you: Obama had nothing to gain by caving in on this. NOTHING. Anyone who would be impressed by his caving in would think McCain too left wing to start with.
Here's some more reality for you: As I remarked in a different comment, I like having Congress and the President being in different parties because it slows down the damage they do. Especially this election, where the Dems stand a good chance of getting a veto-proof majority due to the Republican melt down on ethics and competency and peoples' general disgust with the way things are going. As long as Obama showed some respect for principles, I thought maybe it wouldn't be so bad, being the same party as Congress.
However, this retroactive immunity cavein has changed the calculus, and I now would rather have McCain, being from the opposite party, even tho he is even more craven than Bush.
All your remark shows is that you are not only intellectually challenged, but also narrow minded, wearing blinders, and suffering from cranio-rectal inversion.
Let's say you are the president and have been secretly, for years, illegally authorizing massive searches without warrants. This is blatantly unconstitutional.
So your supporters introduce a bill to retroactively legalize this and to pardon all those who helped you.
This stinks to high heaven, and there are lots of objections.
So you say "pretty please with sugar and cream on top".
Your opponents say "Oh, he compromised with us, let's pass this compromise."
I am not surprised either, but I had a small smidgeon of hope that simply because he was such a fresh face, he might actually give us a fresh start after all the years of the Reagan/Bush and Clinton dynasties. I want the president and Congress to be different parties just to keep Washington from doing too much damage, but a small part of me thought maybe Obama being such a fresh start would make up for that.
Now, no. I sure don't have much use for Bush Number 3, aka McCraven, but at least he would be the opposite party. With this spineless Congress, that's not much good, but it's better than nothing.
The problem is that Obama depicts himself as different from all other politicians, that he claimed he would support a filibuster over telecom immunity, and that he voted to cut off filibuster.
He flat out reneged on an important promise, apparently because he wanted to "move to the center", "accept the compromise (sic)", and "appear tough on terrorism".
All he really did was show that he is just another ethically challenged politician.
I was talking about California, not Texas. Before you rag on California for having too many regs, realize that freeways in empty west Texas have THREE simultaneous posted speed limits, whereas California only has TWO.
I will see if I can find the posted CA barber regs, but I was told the 2000 requirement by a barber many years ago. He was quite proud of it.
No, the rationale for barbering school is an excuse to keep the number of barbers low so your neighbor can't do it part time. It is much more recent than the middle age when barbers were surgeons.
Finding kiddie porn or terrorism plans while fixing a PC is an exact analogy to a barber finding skin diseases.
The rationale for requiring 2000 hours of schooling to be a licensed barber is they need training in recognizing skin diseases or some such rot. So an equally loose rationale that a PC fixer needs to recognize traces of kiddie porn or islamic terrorism could be their ticket to bureaucratic nirvana.
Come on, give some real reason why this won't pass muster.
I suggest auto mechanics, gardeners, garbage collectors, and home cleaning services are more likely to find evidence of a crime that computer repair shops.
Being a witness doesn't need a PI license... collecting EVIDENCE that can be used in court does.
The repairman doesn't need to collect evidence, he merely has to see it, like any other witness, and report it, so a proper police forensic specialist can collect it.
If an auto mechanic finds a kilo of drugs under a seat, he isn't collecting evidence, he is merely a witness and will call the police to investigate. Well, that's the theory anyway:-)
On what grounds? I suspect that the state can set pretty much any licensing requirements they want, up to some point, and I doubt this has hit that point. Whether people complain enough to get the legislature to reverse it, that's another story altogether. But once the courts admit that states can license professions, they usually get plenty of leeway. Look at the requirements to be a barber or beautician, something like 2000 hours of schooling. That's even more asinine. but pretty common.
Slashdot Mirror
Rubber chickens? Crowd control! RTFA!
Crowd control with a 155? That's six inches! What kind of a chicken are you launching?
There's a reason why skeet archery hasn't caught on.
I imagine it has more in common with not using normal bullets in skeet -- shotgun pellets don't carry as far. You really don't want arrows zipping on out of the skeet area.
Dipshit. You could have come up with all sorts of bigoted Asian jokes since sunlight is not white but yellow. Instead you spew about Jews and blacks. Heck, even a joke about uv light would have been more interesting.
You are pathetic and have no imagination.
In addition the no mercuary as already noted, they will have a longer life, be less fragile, and be smaller.
This analogy is spot on, and whoever modded it off-topic obviously is incapable of understanding the topic and shouldn't have had the keys to the mod-car in the first place.
Even Jules Verne got it part right. The ISS would be at its fastest near Earth at its closest point to Earth, ditto for the moon, and at its slowest at the point in between where the gravities cancel each other out. In each direction of travel, it starts to accelerate as soon as one gravity is stronger than the other.
Chips? Chips?!?
Punk, we didn't even have transistors.
If tubes were good enough for Mel, they were good enough for us.
That's what evolution does. The mistake it doesn't make is propagate a bad design. Evolution's hangovers don't cause permanent changes. Heck, evolution doesn't have permanent changes.
Fool! The one true language wasn't Lisp. It was assembly language (especially IBM S/360 assembly language)!
Youngun, you'd best look behind you and realize the error of your ways. Machine code is where it's at. You take your assembler, with its labels and psuedo ops and formatting and passes of all things, and shuffle that card deck into oblivion before I come over the tubes at you and do it for your!
There are a zillion holes in TFA. I wonder if it actually summarizes the science accurately?
For instance, it assumes that if the ancestor could hear the same range as us, it could develop language, with the implication that if the ancestor couldn't hear the same range as us, it couldn't develop language.
Criminy, language doesn't depend on the frequency range! It may depend on bandwith to some extent, or beingable to differentiate the sounds from natural inanimate sounds.
And like you say, it would be pretty danged weird if the ears and voices worked with different frequencies. That's the kind of mistake an intelligent designer could make with a hangover after celebrating the design of a new version of, say, whale. But evolution wouldn't make that mistake.
The theory of gravity isn't proven either. As a matter of fact, evidence to prove evolution outweighs (pun intended) evidence to prove gravity. The gravitational constant is only known to a few digits while other physical constants are known to a dozen or more. No one has any more than paper theories on how gravity works, but there is a ton of work on evolution. Experiments have been designed, both in the lab and in the wild, to prove various aspects of evolution, have been carried out, and have worked as predicted.
You are the kind of idiot who insists everyone else has to provide proof equivalent to 2 + 2 = 4, but want everyone else to believe your bible because you say it is so, without the slightest pretense of provising anything even close to evidence.
It's a simple disagreement. Show us where you get 20 years.
Here's some reality for you: Obama had nothing to gain by caving in on this. NOTHING. Anyone who would be impressed by his caving in would think McCain too left wing to start with.
Here's some more reality for you: As I remarked in a different comment, I like having Congress and the President being in different parties because it slows down the damage they do. Especially this election, where the Dems stand a good chance of getting a veto-proof majority due to the Republican melt down on ethics and competency and peoples' general disgust with the way things are going. As long as Obama showed some respect for principles, I thought maybe it wouldn't be so bad, being the same party as Congress.
However, this retroactive immunity cavein has changed the calculus, and I now would rather have McCain, being from the opposite party, even tho he is even more craven than Bush.
All your remark shows is that you are not only intellectually challenged, but also narrow minded, wearing blinders, and suffering from cranio-rectal inversion.
Let's say you are the president and have been secretly, for years, illegally authorizing massive searches without warrants. This is blatantly unconstitutional.
So your supporters introduce a bill to retroactively legalize this and to pardon all those who helped you.
This stinks to high heaven, and there are lots of objections.
So you say "pretty please with sugar and cream on top".
Your opponents say "Oh, he compromised with us, let's pass this compromise."
And everyone is sic (sic) at the thought.
Does that answer your question?
I am not surprised either, but I had a small smidgeon of hope that simply because he was such a fresh face, he might actually give us a fresh start after all the years of the Reagan/Bush and Clinton dynasties. I want the president and Congress to be different parties just to keep Washington from doing too much damage, but a small part of me thought maybe Obama being such a fresh start would make up for that.
Now, no. I sure don't have much use for Bush Number 3, aka McCraven, but at least he would be the opposite party. With this spineless Congress, that's not much good, but it's better than nothing.
The problem is that Obama depicts himself as different from all other politicians, that he claimed he would support a filibuster over telecom immunity, and that he voted to cut off filibuster.
He flat out reneged on an important promise, apparently because he wanted to "move to the center", "accept the compromise (sic)", and "appear tough on terrorism".
All he really did was show that he is just another ethically challenged politician.
Obama, agent of change?
Republicans believe in limited government?
Rule of law trumps rule of kings?
I think not. Same old, same old.
Thus we proceed to an animal farm world where words take on new meanings and some are more equal than others.
From the FAQ
# Completed a course in barbering from a school approved by the board (1,500 hours).
I was talking about California, not Texas. Before you rag on California for having too many regs, realize that freeways in empty west Texas have THREE simultaneous posted speed limits, whereas California only has TWO.
I will see if I can find the posted CA barber regs, but I was told the 2000 requirement by a barber many years ago. He was quite proud of it.
No, the rationale for barbering school is an excuse to keep the number of barbers low so your neighbor can't do it part time. It is much more recent than the middle age when barbers were surgeons.
Finding kiddie porn or terrorism plans while fixing a PC is an exact analogy to a barber finding skin diseases.
The rationale for requiring 2000 hours of schooling to be a licensed barber is they need training in recognizing skin diseases or some such rot. So an equally loose rationale that a PC fixer needs to recognize traces of kiddie porn or islamic terrorism could be their ticket to bureaucratic nirvana.
Come on, give some real reason why this won't pass muster.
He said it's cheap to force them to get PI Licenses, not that it's cheap to get PI licenses.
I suggest auto mechanics, gardeners, garbage collectors, and home cleaning services are more likely to find evidence of a crime that computer repair shops.
Being a witness doesn't need a PI license... collecting EVIDENCE that can be used in court does.
The repairman doesn't need to collect evidence, he merely has to see it, like any other witness, and report it, so a proper police forensic specialist can collect it.
If an auto mechanic finds a kilo of drugs under a seat, he isn't collecting evidence, he is merely a witness and will call the police to investigate. Well, that's the theory anyway :-)
Fortunately this will be shot down in court.
On what grounds? I suspect that the state can set pretty much any licensing requirements they want, up to some point, and I doubt this has hit that point. Whether people complain enough to get the legislature to reverse it, that's another story altogether. But once the courts admit that states can license professions, they usually get plenty of leeway. Look at the requirements to be a barber or beautician, something like 2000 hours of schooling. That's even more asinine. but pretty common.