that would be powered flight evolved 3 times...they forgot bats...this is also for only vertibrates...insects evolved flight also...who know how many times.
ok i agree with all the the obvious reever problems...but what really bothered me most in the movie was the final stand fight scene...it was terribly shot terribly coriagraphed and generally looked like a fight scene from one of those bad sci-fi channel shows like python vs anaconda and such.
First the scene should have been about 5 min shorter.
second should have been an over the shoulder shot of Jane when he fired the gatling gun...complete with reevers getting mowed down (yeah i know the pg-13 rateing...but there are ways)
third an over head shot...again showing the reevers getting mowed down.
forth a scene that follows one reever who starts from his ship gets in close enough hurts one of the crew and then gets killed.
After the gun fight when river satrts the hand to hand etc the fight works out fairly ok...bet there is like 10 min there that just suck ass.
"Book's background--not a discontinuity, simply not explained. I actually LIKED that it remained mysterious. We know quite a bit about Book from his actions, is that not enough? Vagueness happens in reality too."
book was an operative like Chiwetel Ejiofor was an operative....duh
"No there are property rights, but the best way to guard the property not being sold twice is using the property. There are even rules taht if you do not use the land you losse it after x years."
yeah that would be the exact opposite of private property rights. As i said no one has any intest in buying land they can neither own or preserve becouse of curupt socialized big government. have you ever thought why the price on the property is only $100,000?
it is becouse there is no legal enforcement of the deed.
stendec@gmail.com
"but an old growth forrest is ireplacable."
hmm that looks like a moral judgement to me...got any science to back it up???
look i don't like it when christians push thier life styles on me and on the government what makes you think you can push your life style on me and the government as well. The crazy thing that really pisses me off is cutting in national forests have for the most part stopped when you say irriplacable you mean someone elses privatly owned land.
got this from the bottomAlternative browsers may not offer perfection, but they offer plenty of features, though with less manageability.
Last I checked mozilla allows much greater manageability of cookies, images, popups, downloads...hell i can't think of anything EI does that is easier to manage.
And now we are fucked, with nothing to show for our dead sons and our tattered honor. And this folly will haunt us across the decades.
Last I checked the thing has been folly that has already haunted us across the decades. In fact your rant says as much....but in no way do explain how installing a democratic government in Iraq would continue this trend.
Your whole argument seems to be that we did shitty things in the past and made a mess...therefore we should do nothing and leave it a mess.
I for one think that cleaning up the messes left after the cold war is not only the smart thing to do to shore up our own national security as well as the world's but it is the moral thing to do as well.
I mean are you proposing that after all the things the US, the Soviet union and Western Europe did to Iraq and the Iraqi people we should in turn just leave it to Suddam and his sons and let it stew under thier tyrrany??
What does this "show for our dead sons and our tattered honor"?
We should not change the US constitution..i have a better way.
patition your state govenment to reform where you electorial votes go...most states have a system that the winner takes all, that is that when a candidate gets a majority even if it is only 51% all the electorial votes go to that one candidate. In some state (i don't know which all i know is i don't live in one) allow its electorial votes to be split...ie if your voting district for house representitive wins for the candidate that didn't win the states popular vote the candidate will still get the electorial vote....
the advantage here is three fold
first: this does not require a change in the constitution nor a vote on the federal level...you just have to get your local state government to change it.
second: this in no way risks a change to the checks and balances contained the electorial college which was intended to protect the rights of minority states with smaller populations.
third: it will give more power on the local level to individual voters and increase the chances of third parties to get electorial votes and therefor more national recognition...it will also increase the representative voice of minority republican and democratic voters in states which are predominatly the other party...ie democrates in democrat dominated districts in Texas could give electorial votes to a democrate candidate and republicans in eastern washington could give electorial votes to a republican candidate.
the best part of this is that it could actually be done...rather then pie in the sky run off elections that would require a constitutional amendment and perhaps have very bad unforseen unintended consiquiences inharent in any tempering with the constitution.
stendec@gmail.com
I don't mind slashdot posting articles on politics but it would be nice if it were more balanced....if slashdot is going to bash Kitty supporters then why don't they bash puppy supporters as well.
I should qualify this....i do appretiate slashdot's choice giving exposure to third party pets.
ok i can't go on any longer....i for one welcome out new fluffy faced overlords and in soviet russia our kittens own us.
Slashdot Mirror
that would be powered flight evolved 3 times...they forgot bats...this is also for only vertibrates...insects evolved flight also...who know how many times.
ok i agree with all the the obvious reever problems...but what really bothered me most in the movie was the final stand fight scene...it was terribly shot terribly coriagraphed and generally looked like a fight scene from one of those bad sci-fi channel shows like python vs anaconda and such. First the scene should have been about 5 min shorter. second should have been an over the shoulder shot of Jane when he fired the gatling gun...complete with reevers getting mowed down (yeah i know the pg-13 rateing...but there are ways) third an over head shot...again showing the reevers getting mowed down. forth a scene that follows one reever who starts from his ship gets in close enough hurts one of the crew and then gets killed. After the gun fight when river satrts the hand to hand etc the fight works out fairly ok...bet there is like 10 min there that just suck ass.
"Book's background--not a discontinuity, simply not explained. I actually LIKED that it remained mysterious. We know quite a bit about Book from his actions, is that not enough? Vagueness happens in reality too."
book was an operative like Chiwetel Ejiofor was an operative....duh
"No there are property rights, but the best way to guard the property not being sold twice is using the property. There are even rules taht if you do not use the land you losse it after x years." yeah that would be the exact opposite of private property rights. As i said no one has any intest in buying land they can neither own or preserve becouse of curupt socialized big government. have you ever thought why the price on the property is only $100,000? it is becouse there is no legal enforcement of the deed. stendec@gmail.com
"but an old growth forrest is ireplacable." hmm that looks like a moral judgement to me...got any science to back it up??? look i don't like it when christians push thier life styles on me and on the government what makes you think you can push your life style on me and the government as well. The crazy thing that really pisses me off is cutting in national forests have for the most part stopped when you say irriplacable you mean someone elses privatly owned land.
yes...i spoke to soon. Perhaps the moderators may wish to mod my ill informed post down.
got this from the bottomAlternative browsers may not offer perfection, but they offer plenty of features, though with less manageability. Last I checked mozilla allows much greater manageability of cookies, images, popups, downloads...hell i can't think of anything EI does that is easier to manage.
And now we are fucked, with nothing to show for our dead sons and our tattered honor. And this folly will haunt us across the decades.
Last I checked the thing has been folly that has already haunted us across the decades. In fact your rant says as much....but in no way do explain how installing a democratic government in Iraq would continue this trend.
Your whole argument seems to be that we did shitty things in the past and made a mess...therefore we should do nothing and leave it a mess.
I for one think that cleaning up the messes left after the cold war is not only the smart thing to do to shore up our own national security as well as the world's but it is the moral thing to do as well.
I mean are you proposing that after all the things the US, the Soviet union and Western Europe did to Iraq and the Iraqi people we should in turn just leave it to Suddam and his sons and let it stew under thier tyrrany??
What does this "show for our dead sons and our tattered honor"?
here is an article the disagrees with the paridime that modern co2 consentrations are abnormaly high
http://www.john-daly.com/zjiceco2.htm
We should not change the US constitution..i have a better way. patition your state govenment to reform where you electorial votes go...most states have a system that the winner takes all, that is that when a candidate gets a majority even if it is only 51% all the electorial votes go to that one candidate. In some state (i don't know which all i know is i don't live in one) allow its electorial votes to be split...ie if your voting district for house representitive wins for the candidate that didn't win the states popular vote the candidate will still get the electorial vote.... the advantage here is three fold first: this does not require a change in the constitution nor a vote on the federal level...you just have to get your local state government to change it. second: this in no way risks a change to the checks and balances contained the electorial college which was intended to protect the rights of minority states with smaller populations. third: it will give more power on the local level to individual voters and increase the chances of third parties to get electorial votes and therefor more national recognition...it will also increase the representative voice of minority republican and democratic voters in states which are predominatly the other party...ie democrates in democrat dominated districts in Texas could give electorial votes to a democrate candidate and republicans in eastern washington could give electorial votes to a republican candidate. the best part of this is that it could actually be done...rather then pie in the sky run off elections that would require a constitutional amendment and perhaps have very bad unforseen unintended consiquiences inharent in any tempering with the constitution. stendec@gmail.com
I don't mind slashdot posting articles on politics but it would be nice if it were more balanced....if slashdot is going to bash Kitty supporters then why don't they bash puppy supporters as well.
I should qualify this....i do appretiate slashdot's choice giving exposure to third party pets.
ok i can't go on any longer....i for one welcome out new fluffy faced overlords and in soviet russia our kittens own us.
stendec@gmail.com