If it is longerterm, then all the more reason to send supplies first, build up a depot so you know it is there and working before you send people. I would prefer to know the oxygen and water generator is working and built up a big store before i blast off from canaveral. This is not a moonshot race. It should also be a multi-nation joint effort. Let everyone put their hands into their pockets
You can weep all you want but this is a problem we need to solve. I wouldn't be giving up too soon. I see in you blog you saying you lost heart when the shuttle blew up. Well, this is a risky business and people die. The astronauts know it and accept it. We waste more fuel on silly pointless wars than we consume in space travel. You seem too ready to give up. Fine. Get out of the way.
Why does this topic come up every time and people are looking for loopholes to call Pluto a planet. Pluto is unique in being the first found but it clearly is in a completely different class to the eight planets. It is most likely smaller than Eris, and just as we found more moons for Pluto it is possible the others have more moons too.
Pluto wasn't a planet before 1930. Ceres was a planet in the past. It just seems like there was 9 planets for most of us. We will get over it.
"This money is making a difference - some Ugandan teachers report being instructed by US contractors not to discuss condoms in schools because the new policy is 'abstinence only'. Dozens of billboards around the country have sprung up promoting only abstinence to prevent HIV infection and sometimes discouraging condom use. Some leaders of small community-based organisations also report they are aware that they are more likely to receive money from PEPFAR (which is the largest HIV-related donor to the country) if they mention abstinence in their funding proposal.[16]"
As i said... abstinence teaching = religious nonsense.
and also from that article "Alternatively, the Roman Catholic organization Human Life International says that "condoms are adding to the problem, not solving it"
The sooner religion dies, the sooner the world gets better. Religion is hung up on sexuality. It is complete nonsense. Humans have sex. Religion wants to deny or control this.
Abstinence before marriage sounds like religious nonsense. Teach them sex education, give them access to what they need and let them make their own choices. AIDS is not the result of sex before marriage but is a much deeper issue. Instead of wasting money on religion, use that money to provide them free condoms and the problem will go away.
I have no objections to that. But why would you teach them that abstinence is the ONLY option? Especially knowing that not all would follow it. Why would you make it hard for them to get contraception, education on how the body works and access to abortion or other options if things go wrong. Because the people pushing abstinence as the ONLY option, walk away when inevitably it all fails. I remember seeing a stat that said that kids who take the pledge are just as likely to have sex as kids who don't. So lets not live in that dream world. There is nothing wrong with sex. It is a natural part of life.
Abstinence is an option if the person wants to abstain. No one is forcing them to have sex. But people are forcing them to NOT have sex. If they choose to do it, they need to have access to protection and education on their options and availability of abortion if something slips up. We should be in control of our own sexuality. It is not the business of any others.
Not really. Religious conservatives are still pushing abstinence. We end up with teenage mums who they don't want to let abort their unwanted fetuses. Resulting in children that they don't want to provide social services to. Doesn't sound like a sensible system to me.
The militia was formed into the National Guard. You are not a member of the National Guard or you would have mentioned it immediately.
" I AM a nutcase"
See, i can selectively quote others too.
I don't want crazies walking the streets armed to the teeth against their imaginary enemies. Add in the drug taking and you are not talking rational people. Letting them take a potshot whenever they get the DTs is not what i call sensible. School shootings and Work shootings is just one of the many examples of the craziness. If you want to have guns then store them in a gun club and leave them there when you are finished shooting your silly little paper targets. The fact you need to carry a gun makes you the coward here... and not a sensible one.
So when did you last turn up for militia duties? never, i am assuming as there is no militia. The gun ownership was put there to stop foreign invaders, not to arm the populace against each other. This part of the constitution has been misquoted again and again and statements like "Sure, I'll hand over my firearms to the government. I'll deliver the ammo first, however" shows exactly why nutters like you should be disarmed and deloused.
You do know that the right to bear arms is related to the forming of a militia to fight tyranny. Funny how when people talk about their constitutional rights they leave off that part.... So given there are no militias, then you don't need arms. America's fascination with guns always seems bizarre to me.
A house a few doors down from me always had the lights on late at night and the blinds down. The light behind the blinds seemed extra bright. It seems unusual but not THAT unusual. Then i heard they were busted for having a growhouse. The house was a McMansion in a very suburban area.
I understand that they do look at power consumption but in your case it is likely that your consumption is not high enough nor have you tripped any other warning signs.
Slashdot Mirror
If it is longerterm, then all the more reason to send supplies first, build up a depot so you know it is there and working before you send people. I would prefer to know the oxygen and water generator is working and built up a big store before i blast off from canaveral. This is not a moonshot race. It should also be a multi-nation joint effort. Let everyone put their hands into their pockets
You do realise that this was 50 years ago? and the objective was to define the border between india and china, which was only vaguely drawn up.
So it is ok for the U.S. to push their weight around but not ok for China to force agreement over which obscure mountain is owned by which neighbour.
So you are happy for the U.S. to return a big chunk of territory they stole from Mexico and give Alaska back to Russia?
Once they think that they have it, then they will attack (ask India about that).
Are you referring to this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_India_War
This was 1962. Next you will be quoting the dangers of Genghis Khan.
No need to join them up. Send the cargo on ahead and you know it will be there when you get there.
You can weep all you want but this is a problem we need to solve. I wouldn't be giving up too soon. I see in you blog you saying you lost heart when the shuttle blew up. Well, this is a risky business and people die. The astronauts know it and accept it. We waste more fuel on silly pointless wars than we consume in space travel. You seem too ready to give up. Fine. Get out of the way.
...that and you just told all of slashdot where it is. See... someone always talks.
The original article was talking about the status of Charon, not Pluto. The point was to elevate Charon to the same level as Pluto
Many TNOs have moons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Neptunian_object so there is no big deal there.
Why does this topic come up every time and people are looking for loopholes to call Pluto a planet. Pluto is unique in being the first found but it clearly is in a completely different class to the eight planets. It is most likely smaller than Eris, and just as we found more moons for Pluto it is possible the others have more moons too.
Pluto wasn't a planet before 1930. Ceres was a planet in the past. It just seems like there was 9 planets for most of us. We will get over it.
Well it didn't bother the popes in the past. Abstinence is a newer phenomenon in the church which came in the middle ages i believe.
And you have reached the Godwin point.... so bye.
Hardly obtuse.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV/AIDS_in_Uganda
"This money is making a difference - some Ugandan teachers report being instructed by US contractors not to discuss condoms in schools because the new policy is 'abstinence only'. Dozens of billboards around the country have sprung up promoting only abstinence to prevent HIV infection and sometimes discouraging condom use. Some leaders of small community-based organisations also report they are aware that they are more likely to receive money from PEPFAR (which is the largest HIV-related donor to the country) if they mention abstinence in their funding proposal.[16]"
As i said... abstinence teaching = religious nonsense.
and also from that article "Alternatively, the Roman Catholic organization Human Life International says that "condoms are adding to the problem, not solving it"
The sooner religion dies, the sooner the world gets better. Religion is hung up on sexuality. It is complete nonsense. Humans have sex. Religion wants to deny or control this.
Abstinence before marriage sounds like religious nonsense. Teach them sex education, give them access to what they need and let them make their own choices. AIDS is not the result of sex before marriage but is a much deeper issue. Instead of wasting money on religion, use that money to provide them free condoms and the problem will go away.
You are never ready but it is part of growing up. Just reduce the chance that the consequences are not negative.
I have no objections to that. But why would you teach them that abstinence is the ONLY option? Especially knowing that not all would follow it. Why would you make it hard for them to get contraception, education on how the body works and access to abortion or other options if things go wrong. Because the people pushing abstinence as the ONLY option, walk away when inevitably it all fails. I remember seeing a stat that said that kids who take the pledge are just as likely to have sex as kids who don't. So lets not live in that dream world. There is nothing wrong with sex. It is a natural part of life.
Abstinence is an option if the person wants to abstain. No one is forcing them to have sex. But people are forcing them to NOT have sex. If they choose to do it, they need to have access to protection and education on their options and availability of abortion if something slips up. We should be in control of our own sexuality. It is not the business of any others.
Not really. Religious conservatives are still pushing abstinence. We end up with teenage mums who they don't want to let abort their unwanted fetuses. Resulting in children that they don't want to provide social services to. Doesn't sound like a sensible system to me.
... breaking down the religious monopoly on this discussion? Abstinence has been shown to not work, yet it plays to the religious agenda
maybe they existed in both sides of the ocean at the only time but only appeared in North America when we observed them? I heard they had a cat
Militia Act of 1903 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903
Those nutters don't use science so they can't selective pick the data to support their theory. They either live or die by the sword.
The militia was formed into the National Guard. You are not a member of the National Guard or you would have mentioned it immediately.
" I AM a nutcase"
See, i can selectively quote others too.
I don't want crazies walking the streets armed to the teeth against their imaginary enemies. Add in the drug taking and you are not talking rational people. Letting them take a potshot whenever they get the DTs is not what i call sensible. School shootings and Work shootings is just one of the many examples of the craziness. If you want to have guns then store them in a gun club and leave them there when you are finished shooting your silly little paper targets. The fact you need to carry a gun makes you the coward here... and not a sensible one.
So it is being a coward to not want to carry a gun.... haha sure.
"Every US citizen is on militia duty every single day"
Where did you dream that up?
and it is interesting to see that gun ownership makes you less safe, not more safe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
spoken like a true gun-nut.
So when did you last turn up for militia duties? never, i am assuming as there is no militia. The gun ownership was put there to stop foreign invaders, not to arm the populace against each other. This part of the constitution has been misquoted again and again and statements like "Sure, I'll hand over my firearms to the government. I'll deliver the ammo first, however" shows exactly why nutters like you should be disarmed and deloused.
You do know that the right to bear arms is related to the forming of a militia to fight tyranny. Funny how when people talk about their constitutional rights they leave off that part.... So given there are no militias, then you don't need arms. America's fascination with guns always seems bizarre to me.
yes, i think most cops are like that. It is just in the movies and the minds of paranoids that they are the ninjas :)
... this whole discussion Funny? or perhaps Troll? There sure are a lot of paranoid people out there.
A house a few doors down from me always had the lights on late at night and the blinds down. The light behind the blinds seemed extra bright. It seems unusual but not THAT unusual. Then i heard they were busted for having a growhouse. The house was a McMansion in a very suburban area.
I understand that they do look at power consumption but in your case it is likely that your consumption is not high enough nor have you tripped any other warning signs.