Scientists who study climate are in agreement. Some non-experts who study unrelated fields disagree. I'll stand with the people who know what they're talking about, and whose arguments I find sensible.
Feel free to review the evidence yourself, and come to your own conclusions.
What about the part where he promised to help stabilize Iraq?
Maybe you aren't aware of the level of violence still taking place in Iraq. Let me enlighten you. Bush had not come close to stabilizing Iraq by the time he left office. In fact, he has reduced the violence only to about its 2004 level. That's not exactly helping, since he caused this lawlessness and anarchy in the first place.
What about where he promised we'd see no new terrorist attacks on American soil?
I'd argue that he deserves as much credit for preventing another attack as he deserves blame for allowing the first one. That is to say, none. There is zero evidence that any of his policies have helped make America safer, and while you may laud the fact that there hasn't been an attack on American soil, there have been many terrorist attacks against Americans and American allies over the past 7 years, which he failed to prevent.
If the government is willing to give your tax dollars to companies that cheat the US, then the only appropriate response is to refuse to pay your taxes, and get as many people as possible to do the same.
...but I support the right of people who do, provided they are responsible (as the father seemed to be, considering that the gun was stored in a lockbox)
From the article:
On the night of the shooting in October 2007, Petric used his father's key to open a lockbox and remove a 9mm handgun and the game, the court heard.
Giving his teenage son easy access to a 9mm doesn't sound very responsible to me.
And all this talk of him being able to kill with other murder weapons is bullshit. He shot his father in the head as well as killing his mother. It's only pure luck that he wasn't convicted of a double homicide. Name me one other household weapon besides a gun where you can fatally injure two people in 1 second. You sure as hell can't do that with a butcher knife.
Don't you know that drugs fund terrorism? That every puff of weed kills 5 innocent victims? And I'm talking about the white ones, not those scary looking foreign victims from the middle east.
I mean, just look at this government ad! How do argue with logic like "It's a fact because it's true"?
A recession is two consecutive negative growth quarters in terms of GDP.
Let me just quote wikipedia for you here.
A recession is a contraction phase of the business cycle, or "a period of reduced economic activity....Some business & investment glossaries add to the general definition a rule of thumb that recessions are often indicated by two consecutive quarters of negative growth (or contraction) of gross domestic product (GDP)
You know what a rule of thumb is right? It's not a law handed down by God, but a rough guide. This is economics, not science. Even if you were to abide strictly by the 2 quarters definition, I bet you couldn't give me a reason why it's 2 quarters and not 3 or 1.
Monopolies are created by governments. In a free market, the free flow of capital allows the emergence of new competition whenever an existing business is inefficient.
Previous adaptations include the misguided Will Smith feature I, Robot, the lame Bicentennial Man with Robin Williams, and two B-grade adaptations of Nightfall
So why should we be looking forward to the inevitably crappy Hollywood version of Foundation?
Bonus link: Maddox reviews the 'I, Robot' movie.
Of course, you can still watch south park without any commercials for free at South Park Zone and new episodes are put up the night the show airs (although I find they load much faster if you wait an extra day).
Eh, it's all part of the balancing game of geopolitics. China was a counterweight to the Soviet Union. Pretty soon we'll be looking for a counterweight to China. Japan and Russia would seem to be worthy candidates.
Skinner: Well, I was wrong. The lizards are a godsend.
Lisa: But isn't that a bit short-sighted? What happens when we're overrun by lizards?
Skinner: No problem. We simply release wave after wave of Chinese needle snakes. They'll wipe out the lizards.
Lisa: But aren't the snakes even worse?
Skinner: Yes, but we're prepared for that. We've lined up a fabulous type of gorilla that thrives on snake meat.
I don't think you understand what I'm saying.
The experiment we're talking about in THIS article produced 10^-16 g of anti-matter. That's far less than the amount of matter converted to energy in the first atomic bomb.
except that anti-matter/matter collisions have a FAR more efficient conversion to energy so you need much less of it.
I'm taking that into account. 64 kg of uranium was in the first atom bomb. 0.6 g of that was converted into energy. I'm assuming all of the antimatter produced here is converted into energy.
If true, this is the 1940s all over again -- only on a larger scale.
Calm down. The energy released by annihilating 100 billion positrons doesn't even come to 10 millijoules. Let me put it another way. According to Wikipedia, 0.6 g of matter was transformed into energy in the first uranium bomb explosion. This amount of anti-matter weighs 10^-16 g. That's 16 orders of magnitude less energy released. On top of that, there's no way to contain antimatter for long periods of time, so there's no way to gather enough anti-matter to make a bomb. But even if that technology were discovered tomorrow, and we could produce this much anti-matter every second, it would take a billion years to get enough anti-matter to make a bomb as powerful as only the first atom bomb.
Feel better?
My guess is they considered the science, not the Chicken Little hyperbole.
Environmentalists (as opposed to conservationists) depend on emotional appeal rather than science and rational analysis to further their agenda. Ergo, the court rightly dismissed their claims for the bullshit that it is.
Maybe you should have tried applying some of that rationality by reading the actual article instead of, I don't know, making shit up.
In its 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court said the navy needed to conduct realistic training exercises to respond to potential threats.
The court did not deal with the merits of the claims put forward by the environmental groups.
It said, rather, that federal courts abused their discretion by ordering the navy to limit sonar use in some cases and to turn it off altogether in others.
They know he'll be expelled, but that the Governor (
Palin) will appoint his successor to serve out the rest of the term....I don't believe that the Governor can appoint herself to the post, so at least the Democrats don't have to worry about hearing the words "Senator Palin".
Actually, it's a little more complicated than that, even if he is kicked out of the senate, which requires a 2/3 majority senate vote that is not guaranteed (Stevens wasn't even supposed to be elected, so I'm not making ANY assumptions here).
In Alaska, the governor doesn't have the power to appoint senators. If he is kicked out, Palin will have to call a special election. And I don't believe that there's any law forbidding her from running. So 'Senator Palin' is most certainly a possibility.
And regardless of their intent, over 106,000 Alaskans still put down a vote for a convicted criminal. The extreme partisanship required to do that is beyond comprehension.
The gripe I hear the most about government health care is that it won't work because the government can't handle that much responsibility. Well, we managed to make it work in most of the western world, didn't we? Why can't you just model your health care directly on the British system, or the Canadian system, or the French system, or the Cuban system, or any one of the dozens of government health care programs that have succeeded?
Of course Al-Quaeda didn't really endorse McCain. That is an endorsement from some anonymous guy on a message board used by Al-Quaeda. In fact, it says as much in your link:
Al-Qaida supporters suggested in a Web site message this week they would welcome a pre-election terror attack on the U.S. as a way to usher in a McCain presidency.
The message is credited to a frequent and apparently respected contributor named Muhammad Haafid. However, Haafid is not believed to have a direct affiliation with al-Qaida plans or knowledge of its operations, according to SITE.
I would celebrate, but I know in my heart he'll be replaced by someone just as bad. Our body politic is rotten to the core.
Mark Begich, mayor of Anchorage, is the man who will most likely replace him if Stevens loses on Nov. 4th. However, I have read that there is no rule in the Senate which forbids senators from being convicted felons. With the option of a Bush pardon still on the table, it is entirely possible that Stevens could hold his senate seat.
Initial conditions for the universe, by definition, can't be tested through observation. Any model worthy of examination that explain baryogenesis will produce other observables.
These machines are not "switching votes". They're just not.
If the machines were "switching votes", they'd do it internally and secretly, and not make it look like they're putting checkmarks next to the wrong boxes. Especially since the voter isn't able to view a paper receipt...
Since so many people want to believe that the electronic voting machines are rigged to make Republicans win elections[1], so I'm sure people will choose to believe that this is due to a GOP conspiracy instead of simple errors.
Maybe they're just as incompetent at rigging an election as they are at governing?
Any story about rigged machines needs to include this link.
Slashdot Mirror
Scientists who study climate are in agreement. Some non-experts who study unrelated fields disagree. I'll stand with the people who know what they're talking about, and whose arguments I find sensible.
Feel free to review the evidence yourself, and come to your own conclusions.
What about the part where he promised to help stabilize Iraq?
Maybe you aren't aware of the level of violence still taking place in Iraq. Let me enlighten you. Bush had not come close to stabilizing Iraq by the time he left office. In fact, he has reduced the violence only to about its 2004 level. That's not exactly helping, since he caused this lawlessness and anarchy in the first place.
What about where he promised we'd see no new terrorist attacks on American soil?
I'd argue that he deserves as much credit for preventing another attack as he deserves blame for allowing the first one. That is to say, none. There is zero evidence that any of his policies have helped make America safer, and while you may laud the fact that there hasn't been an attack on American soil, there have been many terrorist attacks against Americans and American allies over the past 7 years, which he failed to prevent.
If the government is willing to give your tax dollars to companies that cheat the US, then the only appropriate response is to refuse to pay your taxes, and get as many people as possible to do the same.
...but I support the right of people who do, provided they are responsible (as the father seemed to be, considering that the gun was stored in a lockbox)
From the article:
On the night of the shooting in October 2007, Petric used his father's key to open a lockbox and remove a 9mm handgun and the game, the court heard.
Giving his teenage son easy access to a 9mm doesn't sound very responsible to me.
And all this talk of him being able to kill with other murder weapons is bullshit. He shot his father in the head as well as killing his mother. It's only pure luck that he wasn't convicted of a double homicide. Name me one other household weapon besides a gun where you can fatally injure two people in 1 second. You sure as hell can't do that with a butcher knife.
Next we'll find a pro-weed verse in the Bible or something...
And the wise men started toking
And ye the bud was kind
It was salvation they were smoking
And its forgiveness blew their mind
No, wait, that was a Colbert Christmas. Oh well, close enough.
Don't you know that drugs fund terrorism? That every puff of weed kills 5 innocent victims? And I'm talking about the white ones, not those scary looking foreign victims from the middle east.
I mean, just look at this government ad! How do argue with logic like "It's a fact because it's true"?
Suck on that, dope fiends!
Look at all these hybrid animals!
Tigons and ligers and...bears? Oh my!
A recession is two consecutive negative growth quarters in terms of GDP.
Let me just quote wikipedia for you here.
A recession is a contraction phase of the business cycle, or "a period of reduced economic activity....Some business & investment glossaries add to the general definition a rule of thumb that recessions are often indicated by two consecutive quarters of negative growth (or contraction) of gross domestic product (GDP)
You know what a rule of thumb is right? It's not a law handed down by God, but a rough guide. This is economics, not science. Even if you were to abide strictly by the 2 quarters definition, I bet you couldn't give me a reason why it's 2 quarters and not 3 or 1.
Monopolies are created by governments. In a free market, the free flow of capital allows the emergence of new competition whenever an existing business is inefficient.
Which government created the Microsoft monopoly, again?
Previous adaptations include the misguided Will Smith feature I, Robot, the lame Bicentennial Man with Robin Williams, and two B-grade adaptations of Nightfall
So why should we be looking forward to the inevitably crappy Hollywood version of Foundation? Bonus link: Maddox reviews the 'I, Robot' movie.
Vegetables are what food eats.
And that kids, is why you should NEVER eat your vegetables.
Of course, you can still watch south park without any commercials for free at South Park Zone and new episodes are put up the night the show airs (although I find they load much faster if you wait an extra day).
Eh, it's all part of the balancing game of geopolitics. China was a counterweight to the Soviet Union. Pretty soon we'll be looking for a counterweight to China. Japan and Russia would seem to be worthy candidates.
Skinner: Well, I was wrong. The lizards are a godsend.
Lisa: But isn't that a bit short-sighted? What happens when we're overrun by lizards?
Skinner: No problem. We simply release wave after wave of Chinese needle snakes. They'll wipe out the lizards.
Lisa: But aren't the snakes even worse?
Skinner: Yes, but we're prepared for that. We've lined up a fabulous type of gorilla that thrives on snake meat.
I don't think you understand what I'm saying. The experiment we're talking about in THIS article produced 10^-16 g of anti-matter. That's far less than the amount of matter converted to energy in the first atomic bomb.
except that anti-matter/matter collisions have a FAR more efficient conversion to energy so you need much less of it.
I'm taking that into account. 64 kg of uranium was in the first atom bomb. 0.6 g of that was converted into energy. I'm assuming all of the antimatter produced here is converted into energy.
If true, this is the 1940s all over again -- only on a larger scale.
Calm down. The energy released by annihilating 100 billion positrons doesn't even come to 10 millijoules. Let me put it another way. According to Wikipedia, 0.6 g of matter was transformed into energy in the first uranium bomb explosion. This amount of anti-matter weighs 10^-16 g. That's 16 orders of magnitude less energy released. On top of that, there's no way to contain antimatter for long periods of time, so there's no way to gather enough anti-matter to make a bomb. But even if that technology were discovered tomorrow, and we could produce this much anti-matter every second, it would take a billion years to get enough anti-matter to make a bomb as powerful as only the first atom bomb. Feel better?
My guess is they considered the science, not the Chicken Little hyperbole.
Environmentalists (as opposed to conservationists) depend on emotional appeal rather than science and rational analysis to further their agenda. Ergo, the court rightly dismissed their claims for the bullshit that it is.
Maybe you should have tried applying some of that rationality by reading the actual article instead of, I don't know, making shit up.
In its 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court said the navy needed to conduct realistic training exercises to respond to potential threats. The court did not deal with the merits of the claims put forward by the environmental groups. It said, rather, that federal courts abused their discretion by ordering the navy to limit sonar use in some cases and to turn it off altogether in others.
They didn't consider the science at all.
They know he'll be expelled, but that the Governor ( Palin) will appoint his successor to serve out the rest of the term....I don't believe that the Governor can appoint herself to the post, so at least the Democrats don't have to worry about hearing the words "Senator Palin".
Actually, it's a little more complicated than that, even if he is kicked out of the senate, which requires a 2/3 majority senate vote that is not guaranteed (Stevens wasn't even supposed to be elected, so I'm not making ANY assumptions here).
In Alaska, the governor doesn't have the power to appoint senators. If he is kicked out, Palin will have to call a special election. And I don't believe that there's any law forbidding her from running. So 'Senator Palin' is most certainly a possibility.
And regardless of their intent, over 106,000 Alaskans still put down a vote for a convicted criminal. The extreme partisanship required to do that is beyond comprehension.
Obama's win was widely predicted, although most people underestimated his support (right now, it looks like he will take 364 electoral votes).
The biggest surprise of the night is in Alaska, where against all odds, they elected a convicted criminal to the US senate.
Amen, my commonwealth brother.
The gripe I hear the most about government health care is that it won't work because the government can't handle that much responsibility. Well, we managed to make it work in most of the western world, didn't we? Why can't you just model your health care directly on the British system, or the Canadian system, or the French system, or the Cuban system, or any one of the dozens of government health care programs that have succeeded?
Al-Qaida supporters suggested in a Web site message this week they would welcome a pre-election terror attack on the U.S. as a way to usher in a McCain presidency.
The message is credited to a frequent and apparently respected contributor named Muhammad Haafid. However, Haafid is not believed to have a direct affiliation with al-Qaida plans or knowledge of its operations, according to SITE.
So really, this is just media sensationalism.
What's a racist Marxist like me to do?
I would celebrate, but I know in my heart he'll be replaced by someone just as bad. Our body politic is rotten to the core.
Mark Begich, mayor of Anchorage, is the man who will most likely replace him if Stevens loses on Nov. 4th. However, I have read that there is no rule in the Senate which forbids senators from being convicted felons. With the option of a Bush pardon still on the table, it is entirely possible that Stevens could hold his senate seat.
Initial conditions for the universe, by definition, can't be tested through observation. Any model worthy of examination that explain baryogenesis will produce other observables.
These machines are not "switching votes". They're just not.
If the machines were "switching votes", they'd do it internally and secretly, and not make it look like they're putting checkmarks next to the wrong boxes. Especially since the voter isn't able to view a paper receipt...
Since so many people want to believe that the electronic voting machines are rigged to make Republicans win elections[1], so I'm sure people will choose to believe that this is due to a GOP conspiracy instead of simple errors.
Maybe they're just as incompetent at rigging an election as they are at governing?
Any story about rigged machines needs to include this link.