You meant to say "extinctions linked to changes in Earth's orbit", which is not the same thing.
As for the global warming conclusions -- the article makes excellent points about how fairly minor changes in basic climatic conditions can have far-reaching consequences, including fatal impact on life. The fact that the current climate changes are 1) hard to diagnose, 2) hard to predict does not undercut the need to adjust emissions & pollution policy to prevent realistic bad consequences.
Very odd post above.
1) The article says the new number is 15.8B LY, not 14.3.
2) If anyone can explain the logic of why the width would be 24.6 "if they're not measuring from the point at which the big bang occured", I'd like to know what it is. But it's not correct, anyway..
3) The width would be expected to be http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?numb er=167
>> It is not a tax - it is a fee..
Excuse me? So if we make up new words for things, we can ignore what the Constitution sayas about them? -- that's the rationale?
I guess so, actually.. we have "police actions", not wars. We have quasi-federal agencies like the Federal Reserve -- who KNOWS what that is? We have family court and tax court that are really kangaroo courts, that violate due process and jury trial rights. We have the judicial system making new law all over the place.
Back after the Revolution, the govt dared not pull this kind of crap, because they knew that citizens knew how to handle rogue governments. We've lost that.
Jeezus crap. It pisses me off that I have no say in this. What do I do, unelect the FCC?
I think we should focus on building a nanotech device that will build nanotech devices that build nanotech devices.
My worry is that this has already happened. How would I know?
Yes. The other way to look at this answer is that by selecting 18 coins for the 2nd group, I have set it up so that the number of TAILS in the 2nd group = (the total number of heads - the number of heads in the 2nd group) = the number of HEADS in the 1st group. Flipping converts tails to heads, so then the numbers of heads in each group is equal. Works for any numbers, of course. Is there an extension of this process that would work for n-sided coins, or n groups of coins?
Slashdot Mirror
From the headline, I thought that Friendster was getting popular again...
You meant to say "extinctions linked to changes in Earth's orbit", which is not the same thing. As for the global warming conclusions -- the article makes excellent points about how fairly minor changes in basic climatic conditions can have far-reaching consequences, including fatal impact on life. The fact that the current climate changes are 1) hard to diagnose, 2) hard to predict does not undercut the need to adjust emissions & pollution policy to prevent realistic bad consequences.
Very odd post above. 1) The article says the new number is 15.8B LY, not 14.3. 2) If anyone can explain the logic of why the width would be 24.6 "if they're not measuring from the point at which the big bang occured", I'd like to know what it is. But it's not correct, anyway.. 3) The width would be expected to be http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?numb er=167
>> It is not a tax - it is a fee.. Excuse me? So if we make up new words for things, we can ignore what the Constitution sayas about them? -- that's the rationale? I guess so, actually.. we have "police actions", not wars. We have quasi-federal agencies like the Federal Reserve -- who KNOWS what that is? We have family court and tax court that are really kangaroo courts, that violate due process and jury trial rights. We have the judicial system making new law all over the place. Back after the Revolution, the govt dared not pull this kind of crap, because they knew that citizens knew how to handle rogue governments. We've lost that. Jeezus crap. It pisses me off that I have no say in this. What do I do, unelect the FCC?
I think we should focus on building a nanotech device that will build nanotech devices that build nanotech devices. My worry is that this has already happened. How would I know?
Yes. The other way to look at this answer is that by selecting 18 coins for the 2nd group, I have set it up so that the number of TAILS in the 2nd group = (the total number of heads - the number of heads in the 2nd group) = the number of HEADS in the 1st group. Flipping converts tails to heads, so then the numbers of heads in each group is equal. Works for any numbers, of course. Is there an extension of this process that would work for n-sided coins, or n groups of coins?