From what has happened in Iraq, I think the well armed populace in this country would probably kick the army's ass, considering that we have about ten times their population and each of us makes about 15 times as much (GDP per capita, $3,600 vs. $45800). We can afford much more and better weapons and bomb-making materials.
Honestly, even if we recalled our entire military force, I doubt they would be able to deal with a nationwide insurgency, and the government would crumble within a year or two (especially given the relative ease with which one could take out various senators, judges, and lower people in the executive branch). Our military can't deal with military threats unless they come from a specific geological region (North Korea, Iran, etc). If the people are turned against them, there will be nothing they can do. Once the veneer is gone, they'll either have executions in the street or they'll flee for their lives.
Asbestos fibers are too large to be processed by the body via cellular methods (not to mention that they are resistant to oxidation--thus their use as fireproofing material). You might as well compare nanoparticles to shrapnel.
So it's bad to get rid of the biggest bully in the room because other, smaller bullies can still have their way?
I don't think so. It's also a lot easier to affect the policies of state governments (hell, it isn't all THAT hard to get elected to a state legislature). Businesses, once deprived of the cover of corporate welfare, will tend to fall into line, as they will be far more liable to be harmed by the actions of individual citizens. Hell, maybe they'll even be subject to the rule of law.
Think about how much easier it would be to deal with the RIAA if they didn't get sweetheart deals from Congress. Think how much healthier we would all be (not to mention how much cheaper food would be) if they dropped corn subsidies and removed the sugar tariff.
Our government pays lip service to the free market, while at the same time suppressing it by bailing out those companies which took foolish risks. Privatized gains, socialized losses.
First off, a mouse didn't evolve into an elephant, they both had common ancestors. Second, life evolves QUICKLY when exposed to environmental stress, contrary to Darwinian Evolutionary Theory (which has been modified to fit with current observations). If a mouse is well suited to its environment (it is), then you could go a trillion generations and see no change in phenotype (although the genetic structure would almost certainly have tons of random, but meaningless mutations).
More likely you would go very quickly from mouse-like to rat-like, and the larger rat-like mammals would speciate, perhaps by geographical isolation, into various other types of animals. Some would grow adept at climbing trees, other at burrowing, and others still at swimming. Some environments would encourage them to get larger (especially so since there are no big predators), and (rats being omnivores) some would specialize into meat eating or plant eating, etc, etc, until you have yourself something that looks like an elephant, or a giraffe, or a blue whale, or a human.
Of course, you can trace the common lineage of these creatures by looking at the genes that code for proteins, which generally can't change randomly (because it would kill the rat), but instead must remain functional until an advantageous change is made, at which point that lineage takes over that of the other rat-like creatures. We used to do it by looking at animal phenotypes (that means what they look like), but that is grossly inaccurate due to the phenomenon of convergent evolution, where animals from different sets of ancestors evolve the same adaptations and wind up looking very similar to each other. Other animals were classified as being further away from each other on the tree of life than they really were, for example, it turns out that bears are actually quite closely related to dolphins, even though they couldn't look more different from each other.
Examples of evolution in bacteria are common, but they are more difficult to see in large animals, but they do happen, and quickly. One example is related to a certain species of snakes in Australia (I forget which one), which was a high level predator. When Cane Toads were introduced more than 50 years ago, many of the snakes died trying to eat them, as they put out a potent poison. It has recently been found that the same species of snake has evolved a smaller head, so it can no longer eat the poisonous toads. This is an example of an environmental stress producing a rapid change in a species. Had the original snake survived elsewhere in geographical isolation, as time went on, they would accumulate enough changes to their DNA that they would no longer be able to breed, and thus would constitute a new species.
The fact is that the preponderance of evidence shows that evolution is happening RIGHT NOW, and genetic studies have shown that it happened in the past (unless the Almighty is an asshole and is just trying to trick us). The genetic code is like a book, and each time it is copied, small changes are made. If you compare different copies of the book, you can estimate how long it has been since the two copies diverged.
In addition, one can go further than that, and extrapolate back from a couple of different species sections of code and get a portion of a genome that produces FUNCTIONAL PROTEINS, from DNA that no longer exists in nature.
This means that the ToE makes predictions, and those predictions have proven accurate EVERY TIME that they have been tested (read--a lot). ID makes no predictions, it's just a pile of garbage dressed up as a scientific theory. Believing in that is like believing that underpants gnomes are responsible for electricity (it obviously couldn't be electrons, those are just WAY too tiny to do the stuff electricity does, right?).
Basically, you folks believe that there is no such thing as emergent complexity, but that very phenomenon is perfectly observable in nature. ID is a fairy tale, and has no place in the scientific classroom. Get over it.
Who's the puppet branch here? The one that stood up to the President, or the one that acts in the interests of the president and it's policies consistently, just to avoid conflict?
No, no , no. His rulings prove that he obviously hates America, and you are either with us or against us, so he's against us, and therefore he is an unlawful enemy combatant and so we're sending him to Gitmo.
Sounds farcical now, but I fear it will be truth (or at least truthy) soon enough.
Google should just say "ok" and deliver the information, conveniently printing out in ones and zeros (on dot matrix printouts, if possible), in 14,000,000 shipping containers in front of their corporate office.
There isn't a free market in the US, it's privatized gains with socialized losses, and lots and lots of corporate friendly laws that make the systemic gouging of the American consumer possible.
Let me tell you, if I got a single text message from some stranger that I had to pay for, I would drop their service the next month, and I would tell them why.
Luckily for them, they took my threats seriously and blocked my incoming text messages. I had Cingular, which is now AT&T. The block must have carried over, because I still don't get text messages.
*everything* should be encrypted by default, and no unencrypted connections should be offered. If you were to start using unlimited encrypted connections here within the UK, I guess the thought-police will immediately assume you to be a terrorist and bang you up for 42 days. In a federal pound-me-in-the-ass terrorist detention facility?
1. Solidify CO2 at night.
2. Cover with soil.
3. Continue to exist under the insulating layer of soil until it is removed by martian rover.
4. ???
5. Profit!
We would, if there was anything that was less than a mile away. Our entire national infrastructure is built around cars and cheap gas. Our residential neighborhoods are far away from commerial areas (our jobs and groceries, etc). We can't walk, and there is little to no public transportation.
You should remember that most of that extra money is going to your government and funding social programs and such. Those of us in the US have to pay extra taxes for those programs, or we don't get the benefits at all and have to pay for them ourselves.
The net effect is that we have to pay more to live, so we are hurting just as much, or more than you, so stop acting like a bunch of damned martyrs.
Slashdot Mirror
From what has happened in Iraq, I think the well armed populace in this country would probably kick the army's ass, considering that we have about ten times their population and each of us makes about 15 times as much (GDP per capita, $3,600 vs. $45800). We can afford much more and better weapons and bomb-making materials.
Honestly, even if we recalled our entire military force, I doubt they would be able to deal with a nationwide insurgency, and the government would crumble within a year or two (especially given the relative ease with which one could take out various senators, judges, and lower people in the executive branch). Our military can't deal with military threats unless they come from a specific geological region (North Korea, Iran, etc). If the people are turned against them, there will be nothing they can do. Once the veneer is gone, they'll either have executions in the street or they'll flee for their lives.
Asbestos fibers are too large to be processed by the body via cellular methods (not to mention that they are resistant to oxidation--thus their use as fireproofing material). You might as well compare nanoparticles to shrapnel.
So it's bad to get rid of the biggest bully in the room because other, smaller bullies can still have their way?
I don't think so. It's also a lot easier to affect the policies of state governments (hell, it isn't all THAT hard to get elected to a state legislature). Businesses, once deprived of the cover of corporate welfare, will tend to fall into line, as they will be far more liable to be harmed by the actions of individual citizens. Hell, maybe they'll even be subject to the rule of law.
Think about how much easier it would be to deal with the RIAA if they didn't get sweetheart deals from Congress. Think how much healthier we would all be (not to mention how much cheaper food would be) if they dropped corn subsidies and removed the sugar tariff.
Our government pays lip service to the free market, while at the same time suppressing it by bailing out those companies which took foolish risks. Privatized gains, socialized losses.
Oh you're gonna, when the Holy Spirit comes down and pokes holes in your condoms.
I must be getting my shellfish from the wrong place...
First off, a mouse didn't evolve into an elephant, they both had common ancestors. Second, life evolves QUICKLY when exposed to environmental stress, contrary to Darwinian Evolutionary Theory (which has been modified to fit with current observations). If a mouse is well suited to its environment (it is), then you could go a trillion generations and see no change in phenotype (although the genetic structure would almost certainly have tons of random, but meaningless mutations).
More likely you would go very quickly from mouse-like to rat-like, and the larger rat-like mammals would speciate, perhaps by geographical isolation, into various other types of animals. Some would grow adept at climbing trees, other at burrowing, and others still at swimming. Some environments would encourage them to get larger (especially so since there are no big predators), and (rats being omnivores) some would specialize into meat eating or plant eating, etc, etc, until you have yourself something that looks like an elephant, or a giraffe, or a blue whale, or a human.
Of course, you can trace the common lineage of these creatures by looking at the genes that code for proteins, which generally can't change randomly (because it would kill the rat), but instead must remain functional until an advantageous change is made, at which point that lineage takes over that of the other rat-like creatures. We used to do it by looking at animal phenotypes (that means what they look like), but that is grossly inaccurate due to the phenomenon of convergent evolution, where animals from different sets of ancestors evolve the same adaptations and wind up looking very similar to each other. Other animals were classified as being further away from each other on the tree of life than they really were, for example, it turns out that bears are actually quite closely related to dolphins, even though they couldn't look more different from each other.
Examples of evolution in bacteria are common, but they are more difficult to see in large animals, but they do happen, and quickly. One example is related to a certain species of snakes in Australia (I forget which one), which was a high level predator. When Cane Toads were introduced more than 50 years ago, many of the snakes died trying to eat them, as they put out a potent poison. It has recently been found that the same species of snake has evolved a smaller head, so it can no longer eat the poisonous toads. This is an example of an environmental stress producing a rapid change in a species. Had the original snake survived elsewhere in geographical isolation, as time went on, they would accumulate enough changes to their DNA that they would no longer be able to breed, and thus would constitute a new species.
He doesn't have to speak, he's the leader of the Democratic Party. Most Democrats probably would have gotten behind him had he taken that position.
You might have missed it due to the media blackout that was perpetrated on him, but Ron Paul seems to be what you wanted Obama to be.
Or he could filibuster. Just the threat of a filibuster from the Democratic nominee should have been enough to kill the bill in the first place.
He certainly won't be getting my vote. Neither will McCain, though. I refuse to pick between the lesser of two evils. That's why I'm voting Cthulu.
Yeah, I guess Gravity is an unproven theory too.
The fact is that the preponderance of evidence shows that evolution is happening RIGHT NOW, and genetic studies have shown that it happened in the past (unless the Almighty is an asshole and is just trying to trick us). The genetic code is like a book, and each time it is copied, small changes are made. If you compare different copies of the book, you can estimate how long it has been since the two copies diverged.
In addition, one can go further than that, and extrapolate back from a couple of different species sections of code and get a portion of a genome that produces FUNCTIONAL PROTEINS, from DNA that no longer exists in nature.
This means that the ToE makes predictions, and those predictions have proven accurate EVERY TIME that they have been tested (read--a lot). ID makes no predictions, it's just a pile of garbage dressed up as a scientific theory. Believing in that is like believing that underpants gnomes are responsible for electricity (it obviously couldn't be electrons, those are just WAY too tiny to do the stuff electricity does, right?).
Basically, you folks believe that there is no such thing as emergent complexity, but that very phenomenon is perfectly observable in nature. ID is a fairy tale, and has no place in the scientific classroom. Get over it.
Rather than being a lumberjack, I wish I'd been a girlie, just like my dear Mama.
Who's the puppet branch here? The one that stood up to the President, or the one that acts in the interests of the president and it's policies consistently, just to avoid conflict?
No, no , no. His rulings prove that he obviously hates America, and you are either with us or against us, so he's against us, and therefore he is an unlawful enemy combatant and so we're sending him to Gitmo.
Sounds farcical now, but I fear it will be truth (or at least truthy) soon enough.
So, judges can overrule the law just by saying they can? Who do they think they are, the President?
Google should just say "ok" and deliver the information, conveniently printing out in ones and zeros (on dot matrix printouts, if possible), in 14,000,000 shipping containers in front of their corporate office.
That'll learn em.
There isn't a free market in the US, it's privatized gains with socialized losses, and lots and lots of corporate friendly laws that make the systemic gouging of the American consumer possible.
Let me tell you, if I got a single text message from some stranger that I had to pay for, I would drop their service the next month, and I would tell them why.
Luckily for them, they took my threats seriously and blocked my incoming text messages. I had Cingular, which is now AT&T. The block must have carried over, because I still don't get text messages.
Yes, let's go down the path to total government power because it's natural and easy.
The world may not end, but I sure won't want to live there when the process is complete.
Remind me never to vote for you for any public office.
Luckily, they aren't able to decrypt sarcasm yet.
Just hope they don't die on the way there, and waste the n billions of dollars it took to get them there.
1. Solidify CO2 at night.
2. Cover with soil.
3. Continue to exist under the insulating layer of soil until it is removed by martian rover.
4. ???
5. Profit!
I firmly believe that the vast majority of politicians should leave office via trapdoor with a rope around their neck.
We would, if there was anything that was less than a mile away. Our entire national infrastructure is built around cars and cheap gas. Our residential neighborhoods are far away from commerial areas (our jobs and groceries, etc). We can't walk, and there is little to no public transportation.
Get off your high horse already.
You should remember that most of that extra money is going to your government and funding social programs and such. Those of us in the US have to pay extra taxes for those programs, or we don't get the benefits at all and have to pay for them ourselves.
The net effect is that we have to pay more to live, so we are hurting just as much, or more than you, so stop acting like a bunch of damned martyrs.