That is precisely WHY it's useless. There's no reason to own a nuke when your worst enemy only has a hand grenade.
"To conquer, we must destroy our enemies. We must not only die gallantly; we must kill devastatingly. The faster and more effectively you kill, the longer you will live to enjoy the priceless fame of conquerors." -- George S. Patton
It's all about killing theirs before they kill ours. Anything that gives our boys an advantage is, IMHO, priceless.
Drastic reductions - quickly - of CO2 will have a significant impact on our economy. Scaled over 20-40 years, I don't see a big problem. We did the same with many other "resources" in the past, we can do it again. I think most of who are characterized as "global warming deniers" really are bucking against the "OMGWTF WE'RE DOOMED IF WE DON'T STOP DRIVING TOMORROW!" crowd.
Climate change is inevitable - always has, always will. It's been hotter AND colder in the past, and we're coming out of an ice age. But somehow a few fringe folks have gotten the attention of the media with their "sky is falling" mentality and are pushing for drastic changes in our economy on the belief that:
1. Man is causing the global warming (when in fact we're adding precious little in terms of actual greenhouse gasses, compared to natural sources)
2. The current temperature and climate are "ideal" and should not be changed (maybe the Earth's natural balance is 4 degrees warmer than now?)
Kyoto would have had drastic impacts on our economy, yet even most Kyoto supporters agree it wouldn't DO anything, just be a symbolic gesture. Why seriously affect our own civilization - we are a part of Mother Earth, like the trees and monkeys - without really knowing why, and in fact knowing we won't change anything?
I'm rational all right, just a skeptic! If I'm being told to not take Sunday rides in my 63 Merc (yes, 8 MPG, but 400 HP on tap is fun!), or fly to China monthly, I'd like to know what the justification is, how positive is the position, and if those telling me to change practice what they preach...
And how are you different than the Christians that persecuted DaVinci and Copernicus for their helio-centric models? The vast majority of scientists agreed with the Church, after all... It was the few revolutionaries that brought about change...
So throw counter-arguments at me all you want. There's some evidence that previous fluctuations in carbon levels in the atmosphere had nothing to do with the lifestyles of the dominant species on the planet. There's plenty of evidence that the current increase is completely man-made, and there are very few, if any, models that don't predict global warming as atmospheric carbon levels increase.
See, this is where it all breaks down... "Don't give me facts, my mind is made up!" Rather than just go "OMG We're DOOMED!" I'd rather like to know really WHAT our contribution is, is what happening really man-made, and if so, what tradeoffs are we looking to make. It's not about DENYING there's climate change; it's about questioning what is CAUSING it! There's a LOT of data that's being overlooked - for obviously political reasons - that say the number one cause is the universe - you know, the sun, cosmic rays, and the like. We're doing actually darn little to the system...
Call me a Luddite, but I like a bit of reason and checking the data before decisions are made. At my job, when I spot a problem, I don't immediately start working on the first solution that pops to mind. Rather I spend a bit of time to figure out what the problem really IS, and then design a solution that will solve the problem in a way acceptable to me and my employers.
In terms of the climate, 20 years is nothing. And that's essentially what we're working with. 20 years of data fitting, research, and "what-ifs"... How about giving it a bit longer before we throw away our entire society? If not, then how about giving up your computer, car, house, and most modern conveniences and do your share?
Global Warming isn't a problem unto itself... its a symptom of our abuse of this planet. It's only a poster-boy issue. Both sides need to stop debating - it doesn't matter whether global warming is happening or not. It's OBVIOUS the damage we're doing... that should be enough to prompt us to fix it.
But you miss the BIG PICTURE - MAN is evil, and more importantly CAPITALISM is unnatural and the USS are the Great Satan! Never mind that our environmental quality is improving as compared to 100 years ago, we have to go back to the Stone Age so that we will be equal with all the dictatorships around the world, and we can have what is truly desired - Worldwide Equality! Never mind that we'll all be miserable...
I know, I know, it's counter to the popular Religion of Man-Created-Climate-Change, but maybe, just MAYBE there's something else at work? I mean, the magnetic field, solar cycles, and lots of other things should be factored in there, too...
And who knows? Maybe, just MAYBE the current climate is not the "right" climate? Maybe we're supposed to be a LOT warmer, like say 800 years ago? Why is today's climate determined to be "right"?
You asked... Hypocrite...:) And other civilizations experienced global warming - what was the Medieval warm period, or the little ice age? Right there are two within the last 1000 years!
Oh, and for the magnetic field stability, there's lots of data about how it's changing, and even the original NASA link I had provided information about how magnetic north is constantly changing...
Face it, the planet is ALWAYS CHANGING, and that - by definition - includes the climate. How much is our impact? No one knows, but we do know it's been warmer AND colder in the past, and will continue to change. CO2 has been higher AND lower in the past. Just running around saying "it's MAN'S fault!" isn't honest or helpful...
After all, 20,000 years ago my home outside of Seattle was buried under 600 meters of ice! Without Global Warming I'd still be stuck in the frozen white stuff...
Exactly! I mean, my conjecture of the magnetic field being unstable is based upon models and some local phenomena, and drifting magnetic north fields. But we know it's flipped and been unstable in the past, so it must be now, because the models say so and we have localized data...
Kind of like the "Man's driving climate change" argument, eh?
Your strawman doesn't apply... The issue is when the warrant's target IP cannot be isolated.
For your phone example, what if you and your neighbors are on a party line? The FBI has the warrant to listen to your phone, but because of the way you're still using your phones, they have no choice but to listen to the SAME LINE that carries the conversations of your neighbors. Perfectly legal, and completely reasonable.
The ISP is the party line; if the ISP - under a court-issued warrant - cannot break out your specific IP traffic for technical reasons, then the FBI gets to listen to all traffic to find your information.
Right: NASA asked for money, they didn't get it, so now the budget is decreasing.
I love that kind of thinking... You earn $100K per year, and ask your boss for a $15K/year raise. He says no, I'll give you a $10K/year raise instead. I'm sure you'll complain about the $5K/year "decrease" in compensation...
Igor, Joshua, Rich, and the whole crew at Kronos, over in Redmond. Good bunch of guys...
They've got some innovative takes on the ionic drive, including keeping ozone production WAY down. Also, with proper panel design, you can get some wicked airflow - we were playing with a 12" x 12" x 7" thick multi-stage panel that would move 700 CFM. Yes, that really blows!
One thing to remember is that the voltage required scales with distance. It's on the order of 5 kV/cm, so if you're down to a mm you "only need" 500V to make it work.
And no, you don't want a discharge! Sparking is BAD. Corona effect is to be avoided - you want to operate just below that point, were you get good ion flow from emitter to collector, but no corona to generate ozone, or sparks.
On the whole, if you ABSOLUTELY NEED zero moving parts, this is a good way to go. You can get high airflow AND dust filtration in a relatively compact form factor. But it's not cheap, and getting it UL certified isn't exactly the easiest (although it has been done for some products; I worked with them on a few new products and led their team in a couple of research projects).
My personal experience - just an engineer doing this in the consumer electronics field for 10 years - is that your argument is a strawman. The production lines - and the equipment used on them - are designed by us. They're usually set up by us, too... We design the gear, the testing systems, the production systems, the assembly lines, the control systems, then go and install them overseas. They in turn build the product, check the quality of incoming and outgoing equipment, and so on...
If you want to be paranoid, look at the availability of US manufactured magnets. Zero. Nada. No one in the US makes magnets here anymore. Why? It's too expensive - the US consumer simply will not pay for the magnets made in the US. General Magnetics closed down in 2001, they were the last of the US makers. And magnets are used in EVERYTHING electronic.
I'm not concerned about never being able to build product again; that simply won't happen. If you have the expertise to design the equipment, you have the expertise to build the equipment. The two pretty much go hand-in-hand. Would we need to ramp up to build again? Sure. But look at how this country ramped up airplane production in a very short time when needed. We've done it before, if we have to do it again, we will.
I'd say the problem is actually the exact opposite. Elementary kids are allowed to explore and question too much, and NOT told to sit down, listen up, and memorize the following...
Back in the day - when I was in school, in the early 70s - rote memorization of basic facts and concepts was de rigeur. The whole "learn as you best learn, explore, become a critical thinker" was ignored. And that's how it was all through US history, up until the feel-good late 70s... And that coincides with our brain drain.
Until a child is well into their teens - I'd say 15+ - they simply do not have the brain development to seriously critically think. Until this point, it SHOULD be STFU and OBEY and learn these facts and memorize your multiplication tables. Learn the fundamentals, so that when you start to critically think you'll do so with a firm background, and won't go traipsing down a path that solves the world's energy crisis but requires that 1+1 equals slightly more than 2.
Focus on teaching the "whole child" and making sure their feelings and emotions are "groomed" as well - if not more so - than their intellect is the main issue. School's about learning your basics - language, history, writing, mathematics - and learning discipline regarding how to study. Once you've mastered these basics, THEN you get the opportunity to go and explore in your last year or two of high school and in college.
Doing otherwise is like tossing someone the keys to a car and their driver's license before they've even really seen a car operated, let alone learned how to drive. Would you trust a 7 year old to drive you around all day? Do they have the ability - the mental capacity - to make enough good choices regarding driving? Nope. Likewise giving them the keys to their education as is so common today is bad for the kids, too...
I know it's popular to dismiss those who talk about "back in the day", but back in the day we didn't have a shortage of engineers and scientists, and schools were radically different. I proffer that the two are inextricably related, and if we're going to build our engineering ranks, we need to look at how school's ran when we had plenty of engineers, and go back to that method of education. It seemed to work quite well...
Re:We have a bigger problem...
on
Saving U.S. Science
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I'm one of those guys who helps companies offshore production. You know, makes introductions, sets them up with factory contacts overseas, shows them how it works, even check up on the overseas factory for them.
My opinion is that offshoring manufacturing concentrates the engineering HERE. Companies get VERY comfortable doing the engineering here, then throwing the design over to a manufacturing facility overseas, rather than the next building. It's simple to check if things are going well - how do your products measure on your tests implemented at another factory?
It is true that some try to offshore engineering as well, but I see that happening less and less, and many bringing back the engineering from overseas. Issues with tracking projects, project focus, making sure the engineering team has the goal of what's best for the company - not what's best for the manufacturer - in mind, sticking to design processes, etc. are greatly reduced when the engineering is kept local.
If anything, I'd say there's a net increase in US R&D and engineering over the last 10 years, more than offsetting the loss in manufacturing. Most companies already outsourced their manufacturing; moving that overseas isn't a big jump. Outsourcing engineering happens a lot in the US with the use of contractors, but outsourcing engineering of entire products overseas has been - at least in my experience - fraught with serious problems and is best avoided. Usually one or two projects run as such is enough to convince most companies not to do it...
When I bussed tables at Godfather's Pizza, I damn sure worked a LOT harder than Bill Gates does now. Of course, he runs a company that employs tens of thousands of well paid workers, and helped create an entire new industry employing all of us here. Microsoft makes more in 10 minutes than all the value I added to Godfather's over a 2 year period of time.
Perhaps menial labor is so devalued because pretty much anyone can do it, and in reality while it is important, it simply doesn't add value to the economy as a whole like the COB of a large tech firm...
Depends upon where you live... Grand Forks, ND you can get nice studio apartments for $250 per month, so that's about 6 full time days of work at the Federal minimum wage rate...
Your right to free speech does not demand that I listen or even pay attention. Your rights stop where mine begin, and if your march diverges from the approved, legally requested path (as all legal protest marches must file a plan), and interferes with my rights regarding free commerce, free speech (or the freedom to ignore your speech), then you lose.
DISCLOSURE: I am a contractor working at Microsoft part-time on several different projects, so take of that what you will...
In some things, MS is a serious innovator. For example, one project I'm working on is the RoundTable. It's a VERY unique video conferencing solution. Is the concept of video conferencing new? No. But this implementation is way beyond anything I've seen. It will change the way video conferencing is done.
MS is quite well served by Microsoft Research; there are a LOT of brilliant, innovative ideas coming out of that group and many will make it to public release. Will everything be earth-shakingly new and novel? No, but if you're looking to only qualify huge leaps as innovation then everyone short of IBM or 3M wouldn't be innovators.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. -- Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
Sure enough, we hold these truths to be self-evident... One being that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
The Declaration of Independence plainly states that our rights come from our Creator, and that the government exists at the consent of the governed for the purpose of securing these rights. It's pretty straight-forward.
Off the top of my head, I cannot think of another first world nation with such a statement in their founding documents. Like it or not, this country was founded on theistic principles - primarily Christian at that - and was integral to the reasoning for the founding. Our rights came from the Creator, not from a King, or from a government.
Slashdot Mirror
"To conquer, we must destroy our enemies. We must not only die gallantly; we must kill devastatingly. The faster and more effectively you kill, the longer you will live to enjoy the priceless fame of conquerors." -- George S. Patton
It's all about killing theirs before they kill ours. Anything that gives our boys an advantage is, IMHO, priceless.
Drastic reductions - quickly - of CO2 will have a significant impact on our economy. Scaled over 20-40 years, I don't see a big problem. We did the same with many other "resources" in the past, we can do it again. I think most of who are characterized as "global warming deniers" really are bucking against the "OMGWTF WE'RE DOOMED IF WE DON'T STOP DRIVING TOMORROW!" crowd. Climate change is inevitable - always has, always will. It's been hotter AND colder in the past, and we're coming out of an ice age. But somehow a few fringe folks have gotten the attention of the media with their "sky is falling" mentality and are pushing for drastic changes in our economy on the belief that: 1. Man is causing the global warming (when in fact we're adding precious little in terms of actual greenhouse gasses, compared to natural sources) 2. The current temperature and climate are "ideal" and should not be changed (maybe the Earth's natural balance is 4 degrees warmer than now?) Kyoto would have had drastic impacts on our economy, yet even most Kyoto supporters agree it wouldn't DO anything, just be a symbolic gesture. Why seriously affect our own civilization - we are a part of Mother Earth, like the trees and monkeys - without really knowing why, and in fact knowing we won't change anything? I'm rational all right, just a skeptic! If I'm being told to not take Sunday rides in my 63 Merc (yes, 8 MPG, but 400 HP on tap is fun!), or fly to China monthly, I'd like to know what the justification is, how positive is the position, and if those telling me to change practice what they preach...
And how are you different than the Christians that persecuted DaVinci and Copernicus for their helio-centric models? The vast majority of scientists agreed with the Church, after all... It was the few revolutionaries that brought about change...
Does it taste like chicken?
OK, no counter-arguments like man-made CO2 is only 0.117% of ALL global-warming contributions...
See, this is where it all breaks down... "Don't give me facts, my mind is made up!" Rather than just go "OMG We're DOOMED!" I'd rather like to know really WHAT our contribution is, is what happening really man-made, and if so, what tradeoffs are we looking to make. It's not about DENYING there's climate change; it's about questioning what is CAUSING it! There's a LOT of data that's being overlooked - for obviously political reasons - that say the number one cause is the universe - you know, the sun, cosmic rays, and the like. We're doing actually darn little to the system...
Call me a Luddite, but I like a bit of reason and checking the data before decisions are made. At my job, when I spot a problem, I don't immediately start working on the first solution that pops to mind. Rather I spend a bit of time to figure out what the problem really IS, and then design a solution that will solve the problem in a way acceptable to me and my employers.
In terms of the climate, 20 years is nothing. And that's essentially what we're working with. 20 years of data fitting, research, and "what-ifs"... How about giving it a bit longer before we throw away our entire society? If not, then how about giving up your computer, car, house, and most modern conveniences and do your share?
But you miss the BIG PICTURE - MAN is evil, and more importantly CAPITALISM is unnatural and the USS are the Great Satan! Never mind that our environmental quality is improving as compared to 100 years ago, we have to go back to the Stone Age so that we will be equal with all the dictatorships around the world, and we can have what is truly desired - Worldwide Equality! Never mind that we'll all be miserable...
I know, I know, it's counter to the popular Religion of Man-Created-Climate-Change, but maybe, just MAYBE there's something else at work? I mean, the magnetic field, solar cycles, and lots of other things should be factored in there, too...
And who knows? Maybe, just MAYBE the current climate is not the "right" climate? Maybe we're supposed to be a LOT warmer, like say 800 years ago? Why is today's climate determined to be "right"?
Oh, and for the magnetic field stability, there's lots of data about how it's changing, and even the original NASA link I had provided information about how magnetic north is constantly changing...
Face it, the planet is ALWAYS CHANGING, and that - by definition - includes the climate. How much is our impact? No one knows, but we do know it's been warmer AND colder in the past, and will continue to change. CO2 has been higher AND lower in the past. Just running around saying "it's MAN'S fault!" isn't honest or helpful...
After all, 20,000 years ago my home outside of Seattle was buried under 600 meters of ice! Without Global Warming I'd still be stuck in the frozen white stuff...
Kind of like the "Man's driving climate change" argument, eh?
This from the poster who states "95% of scientists who believe the evidence supporting global climate change"... I'll let consensus and 95% sink in...
Maybe the two are linked!
Your strawman doesn't apply... The issue is when the warrant's target IP cannot be isolated. For your phone example, what if you and your neighbors are on a party line? The FBI has the warrant to listen to your phone, but because of the way you're still using your phones, they have no choice but to listen to the SAME LINE that carries the conversations of your neighbors. Perfectly legal, and completely reasonable. The ISP is the party line; if the ISP - under a court-issued warrant - cannot break out your specific IP traffic for technical reasons, then the FBI gets to listen to all traffic to find your information.
I love that kind of thinking... You earn $100K per year, and ask your boss for a $15K/year raise. He says no, I'll give you a $10K/year raise instead. I'm sure you'll complain about the $5K/year "decrease" in compensation...
I love the way you spelled your subject... You obviously Coug'd it...
They've got some innovative takes on the ionic drive, including keeping ozone production WAY down. Also, with proper panel design, you can get some wicked airflow - we were playing with a 12" x 12" x 7" thick multi-stage panel that would move 700 CFM. Yes, that really blows!
One thing to remember is that the voltage required scales with distance. It's on the order of 5 kV/cm, so if you're down to a mm you "only need" 500V to make it work.
And no, you don't want a discharge! Sparking is BAD. Corona effect is to be avoided - you want to operate just below that point, were you get good ion flow from emitter to collector, but no corona to generate ozone, or sparks.
On the whole, if you ABSOLUTELY NEED zero moving parts, this is a good way to go. You can get high airflow AND dust filtration in a relatively compact form factor. But it's not cheap, and getting it UL certified isn't exactly the easiest (although it has been done for some products; I worked with them on a few new products and led their team in a couple of research projects).
Thank you! That is a wonderful suggestion, and I've already downloaded the install... Perfect!
If you want to be paranoid, look at the availability of US manufactured magnets. Zero. Nada. No one in the US makes magnets here anymore. Why? It's too expensive - the US consumer simply will not pay for the magnets made in the US. General Magnetics closed down in 2001, they were the last of the US makers. And magnets are used in EVERYTHING electronic.
I'm not concerned about never being able to build product again; that simply won't happen. If you have the expertise to design the equipment, you have the expertise to build the equipment. The two pretty much go hand-in-hand. Would we need to ramp up to build again? Sure. But look at how this country ramped up airplane production in a very short time when needed. We've done it before, if we have to do it again, we will.
Back in the day - when I was in school, in the early 70s - rote memorization of basic facts and concepts was de rigeur. The whole "learn as you best learn, explore, become a critical thinker" was ignored. And that's how it was all through US history, up until the feel-good late 70s... And that coincides with our brain drain.
Until a child is well into their teens - I'd say 15+ - they simply do not have the brain development to seriously critically think. Until this point, it SHOULD be STFU and OBEY and learn these facts and memorize your multiplication tables. Learn the fundamentals, so that when you start to critically think you'll do so with a firm background, and won't go traipsing down a path that solves the world's energy crisis but requires that 1+1 equals slightly more than 2.
Focus on teaching the "whole child" and making sure their feelings and emotions are "groomed" as well - if not more so - than their intellect is the main issue. School's about learning your basics - language, history, writing, mathematics - and learning discipline regarding how to study. Once you've mastered these basics, THEN you get the opportunity to go and explore in your last year or two of high school and in college.
Doing otherwise is like tossing someone the keys to a car and their driver's license before they've even really seen a car operated, let alone learned how to drive. Would you trust a 7 year old to drive you around all day? Do they have the ability - the mental capacity - to make enough good choices regarding driving? Nope. Likewise giving them the keys to their education as is so common today is bad for the kids, too...
I know it's popular to dismiss those who talk about "back in the day", but back in the day we didn't have a shortage of engineers and scientists, and schools were radically different. I proffer that the two are inextricably related, and if we're going to build our engineering ranks, we need to look at how school's ran when we had plenty of engineers, and go back to that method of education. It seemed to work quite well...
My opinion is that offshoring manufacturing concentrates the engineering HERE. Companies get VERY comfortable doing the engineering here, then throwing the design over to a manufacturing facility overseas, rather than the next building. It's simple to check if things are going well - how do your products measure on your tests implemented at another factory?
It is true that some try to offshore engineering as well, but I see that happening less and less, and many bringing back the engineering from overseas. Issues with tracking projects, project focus, making sure the engineering team has the goal of what's best for the company - not what's best for the manufacturer - in mind, sticking to design processes, etc. are greatly reduced when the engineering is kept local.
If anything, I'd say there's a net increase in US R&D and engineering over the last 10 years, more than offsetting the loss in manufacturing. Most companies already outsourced their manufacturing; moving that overseas isn't a big jump. Outsourcing engineering happens a lot in the US with the use of contractors, but outsourcing engineering of entire products overseas has been - at least in my experience - fraught with serious problems and is best avoided. Usually one or two projects run as such is enough to convince most companies not to do it...
Perhaps menial labor is so devalued because pretty much anyone can do it, and in reality while it is important, it simply doesn't add value to the economy as a whole like the COB of a large tech firm...
Depends upon where you live... Grand Forks, ND you can get nice studio apartments for $250 per month, so that's about 6 full time days of work at the Federal minimum wage rate...
Your right to free speech does not demand that I listen or even pay attention. Your rights stop where mine begin, and if your march diverges from the approved, legally requested path (as all legal protest marches must file a plan), and interferes with my rights regarding free commerce, free speech (or the freedom to ignore your speech), then you lose.
In some things, MS is a serious innovator. For example, one project I'm working on is the RoundTable. It's a VERY unique video conferencing solution. Is the concept of video conferencing new? No. But this implementation is way beyond anything I've seen. It will change the way video conferencing is done.
MS is quite well served by Microsoft Research; there are a LOT of brilliant, innovative ideas coming out of that group and many will make it to public release. Will everything be earth-shakingly new and novel? No, but if you're looking to only qualify huge leaps as innovation then everyone short of IBM or 3M wouldn't be innovators.
But, but, but... It's the WEB TWO POINT OH! Sure we lose a bit of money on each free answer, but we'll make it up in volume!
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. -- Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
Sure enough, we hold these truths to be self-evident... One being that we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
The Declaration of Independence plainly states that our rights come from our Creator, and that the government exists at the consent of the governed for the purpose of securing these rights. It's pretty straight-forward.
Off the top of my head, I cannot think of another first world nation with such a statement in their founding documents. Like it or not, this country was founded on theistic principles - primarily Christian at that - and was integral to the reasoning for the founding. Our rights came from the Creator, not from a King, or from a government.