Dig out the statistics, and look at the death rates per 100,000 miles.
And that would prove what exactly ? Pretty much nothing. You will have to look at death rates per X actual accidents if you want to get any meaningful statement on which type of vehicle is safer _in a crash_.
Frankly, I find it amazing that you can take a 1 gallon jug of liquid and slowly burn it and propel yourself and 3000 pounds of vehicle 30 miles.
Uh huh. If we finally had a working, energy-producing fusion reactor, you could take a 1 gallon jug of liquid and power the whole world for quite a bit of time.
If the US decided to move to 1 compact New York style location and didn't require the massive amounts of fuel to move bodies from home to work to the mall to the grocery store to school to etc, how would that affect the economy?
I dunno. High population density has never been a hindrance to economic growth.
You were scared because you were in a nasty noisy machine?
So how many MRI scans have you had yet ? (MRI scans, _not_ CT scans. Albeit looking similar to the untrained eye, the two differ vastly in the amount of claustrophobia they will induce)
Inside the MRI scanner, the only thing you will see during the procedure is the inside of the tube, about 20 centimeters in front of your eyes. In comparison, the inside of a submarine is very spacious. And remember, you're not allowed to move.
Get your teeth filled with good old fashioned mercury amalgam. They'll not even find your head!
Nope. Amalgam fillings are clearly distinguishable on an MR image, but do not cause a distortion of the image of the surrounding tissue. Titanium plates in your skull, however, create really funny artifacts.
I consider myself an environmentalist, but, sorry, this article has several errors in it (the most obvious one is mentioning sulphur when talking about catalytic converters. Hello ? How the heck is a catalytic converter supposed to remove a certain type of atom from the exhaust, without nuclear reactions ?). And then it talks about doing catalytic conversion of the fuel itself. The whole thing is screaming out loud that whoever wrote it knows all the fancy words, but doesn't have a clue about chemistry.
The problem (mostly sulfur in fossil fuels) was reduced significantly, either by removing the stuff in the first place (for example from gasoline), or by using appropriate filters (in coal-fired power plants, for example).
Guess what: The same thing happened to other "scares", like the lead scare. These problems can be reduced or eliminated, after people stop ignoring them.
It could well be that HIV is an opportunistic infection that happens when some unknown virus causes AIDS.
If this were the case, shouldn't HIV be detectable in an individual at the same time as other symptoms of AIDS occur, not years before this point, when the individuals immune system is still effective ?
Or that HIV works in tandem with another virus to cause AIDS.
A mystery virus that has escaped detection so far ?
The only thing I don't understand is why no one has done studies with animals. Surely it would be beneficial to try and infect an animal in the lab with HIV.
And in any case, it is wrong to say kWh per year. Kilowatts per hour, per year?
No. kWh is NOT Kilowatts per hour, it's Kilowatts times hours, aka Kilowatt-hours.
On top of that, kWh/yr isn't wrong at all, it is merely an equivalent to Watts that makes it easier to calculate how much money (power companies usually charge by the kWh) is wasted by the device over the course of one year.
Assuming you can actually do that. Often enough, manufacturers are too cheap to put in a switch that completely separates the internal circuitry from the power outlet. The result is that the thing even draws power when it is "off" (not standby, but off). The only solution is an external switch.
What on earth could they be doing that needs to draw that much power?
Cheap circuitry. Of course you can get standby power down to below 1 W, but then you'd have to spend a few extra cents or bucks on the electronics. Since most consumers don't care (or know about) standby mode power consumption, the more profitable choice is to use the cheap design and let the consumer pay for it through higher electric bills.
Some electronic devices consume more than 10 W even in standby. Add that up for every device in your home, and you might even end up close to 100 $/year.
But it sounds like in Germany, in a University, you couldn't even write a paper about the benefits of Nazis or what Hitler did to unify and build up Germany. 'Cause if you did, you'd be breaking the law...
No, you would not. Not at all. You may also litter your paper with as many swastikas as you like, since it is all in scientific context. The only thing that's always breaking the law is denying that the holocaust happened.
Next time you're stationed in a foreign country, try to get out of the barracks more often (and not only to look at the local female population). You might find this a great remedy to ignorance. Thank you.
Consider the United States. The country went from colonial backwater to the worlds most powerful country in less than 200 years.
I would argue this was because the United States was a democracy, and just as importantly, a free society.
History is full of nations who went from almost zero to the worlds most powerful country of their time, and democracy isn't really the thing they have in common. Most of them do have in common that they aren't really big players anymore. Greece, Rome, Mongolia, England, and I'm sure the history books will yield more examples. Quite a few of them also lasted longer than 230 years (mostly those that were economically strong), while others crumbled within a few decades (those who were built only on military strength).
One can easily be converted into the other, but money is more convenient and has the added benefit of increasing exponentially over time.
If Congress was severely limited in power, infinite money in bribes would get the briber nothing.
So... who would prevent Congress from expanding its power ? No law is set in stone, neither is a constitution, if there are enough votes for the change. And even if one is, there are always ways to interpret it creatively or create additional laws to render is useless (in other circles, this process would be called hacking).
Slashdot Mirror
And that would prove what exactly ? Pretty much nothing. You will have to look at death rates per X actual accidents if you want to get any meaningful statement on which type of vehicle is safer _in a crash_.
Uh huh. If we finally had a working, energy-producing fusion reactor, you could take a 1 gallon jug of liquid and power the whole world for quite a bit of time. If the US decided to move to 1 compact New York style location and didn't require the massive amounts of fuel to move bodies from home to work to the mall to the grocery store to school to etc, how would that affect the economy?
I dunno. High population density has never been a hindrance to economic growth.
So how many MRI scans have you had yet ? (MRI scans, _not_ CT scans. Albeit looking similar to the untrained eye, the two differ vastly in the amount of claustrophobia they will induce)
Inside the MRI scanner, the only thing you will see during the procedure is the inside of the tube, about 20 centimeters in front of your eyes. In comparison, the inside of a submarine is very spacious. And remember, you're not allowed to move.
Nope. Amalgam fillings are clearly distinguishable on an MR image, but do not cause a distortion of the image of the surrounding tissue. Titanium plates in your skull, however, create really funny artifacts.
You'll also need to anticipate any questions you're likely to be asked, and their answers.
ha Ha HA
Yes, compared to the very beginnings of MRI, it is a quick and fairly uncomplicated procedure today.
I consider myself an environmentalist, but, sorry, this article has several errors in it (the most obvious one is mentioning sulphur when talking about catalytic converters. Hello ? How the heck is a catalytic converter supposed to remove a certain type of atom from the exhaust, without nuclear reactions ?). And then it talks about doing catalytic conversion of the fuel itself. The whole thing is screaming out loud that whoever wrote it knows all the fancy words, but doesn't have a clue about chemistry.
The problem (mostly sulfur in fossil fuels) was reduced significantly, either by removing the stuff in the first place (for example from gasoline), or by using appropriate filters (in coal-fired power plants, for example).
Guess what: The same thing happened to other "scares", like the lead scare. These problems can be reduced or eliminated, after people stop ignoring them.
It's more earthlike (small & rocky) than any other extrasolar planet (which are mostly gas giants).
Not even then. Cancer would eventually kill you, albeit more slowly than pathogens would.
If this were the case, shouldn't HIV be detectable in an individual at the same time as other symptoms of AIDS occur, not years before this point, when the individuals immune system is still effective ?
Or that HIV works in tandem with another virus to cause AIDS.
A mystery virus that has escaped detection so far ?
The H in HIV stands for "human".
[nitpick]
Immune deficiency caused by genetic factors would not be AIDS, since it is not Acquired, but innate.
[/nitpick]
No. kWh is NOT Kilowatts per hour, it's Kilowatts times hours, aka Kilowatt-hours.
On top of that, kWh/yr isn't wrong at all, it is merely an equivalent to Watts that makes it easier to calculate how much money (power companies usually charge by the kWh) is wasted by the device over the course of one year.
Assuming you can actually do that. Often enough, manufacturers are too cheap to put in a switch that completely separates the internal circuitry from the power outlet. The result is that the thing even draws power when it is "off" (not standby, but off). The only solution is an external switch.
You seriously think the entire population of the world has access to electricity ? Wake up please.
Cheap circuitry. Of course you can get standby power down to below 1 W, but then you'd have to spend a few extra cents or bucks on the electronics. Since most consumers don't care (or know about) standby mode power consumption, the more profitable choice is to use the cheap design and let the consumer pay for it through higher electric bills.
Some electronic devices consume more than 10 W even in standby. Add that up for every device in your home, and you might even end up close to 100 $/year.
Yeah right. If you have to follow Chines safety standards and can pay your workers Chinese wages, of course the thing will be a lot cheaper
No, you would not. Not at all. You may also litter your paper with as many swastikas as you like, since it is all in scientific context. The only thing that's always breaking the law is denying that the holocaust happened.
Hey ! Don't forget spreading Democracy all over the globe ! All that ammo costs a lot, y'know.
Next time you're stationed in a foreign country, try to get out of the barracks more often (and not only to look at the local female population). You might find this a great remedy to ignorance. Thank you.
It's theorized that the pills could eventually be handed out to victims of Katrina-like disasters as well as returning war veterans.
I bet it works wonders on torture victims, too.
I would argue this was because the United States was a democracy, and just as importantly, a free society.
History is full of nations who went from almost zero to the worlds most powerful country of their time, and democracy isn't really the thing they have in common. Most of them do have in common that they aren't really big players anymore. Greece, Rome, Mongolia, England, and I'm sure the history books will yield more examples. Quite a few of them also lasted longer than 230 years (mostly those that were economically strong), while others crumbled within a few decades (those who were built only on military strength).One can easily be converted into the other, but money is more convenient and has the added benefit of increasing exponentially over time.
If Congress was severely limited in power, infinite money in bribes would get the briber nothing.
So