FuzzyOnDetails

I had to laugh when I got to this line. Thanks.

Again, your yardstick, your opinion.

They are not more complex genes, though PERHAPS the way they are inter-related makes it more complex overall. Is having eyes more advanced than the ability to feed from sunlight? It depends on what you value, and who draws up the yardstick for "advanced"

Wasn't it just such an unconstitutional economic means test that shut down our beloved Rhino party?

What yardstick gets used? For example, if the number of genes in the genome is used as a measure of complexity, rice is far more advanced than us. We have evolved in a symbiotic relationship with the world around us. It is foolish and short-sighted to think we are master.

Under your proposed system, I would not get to vote. I thought I might for a second, as I am a master glassblower, with over 16 years experience, but then you excluded me with the $50000 cutoff. Art is not lucrative enough, so not only can I not afford to own land, now you want to further marginalize me. My opinions are worthless, since my focus is not on getting rich. Perhaps it would be for the best though. As Douglas Adams once said, "Anyone intelligent enough to deal with politics is intelligent enough to stay the hell away.

I would have a hard time answering why I am doing it. I certainly can't speak to your motivation. Cheers!

So basically, you maintain the man has nothing of value to say, and refuse to refute him with reason, but will do so with insults. Nice.

Billy Bragg again:

I realized at work today I had typed IMF when I meant IDF. I must admit I was parroting something I had heard, and had not done my homework. I knew it couldn't have been the size of the standing army, but was assuming it was related to resources, but a quick Google search shows I am bound to be wrong on that account as well, based on spending. They are much further down the list than I thought. I do, however, stand by my assertion that the September 11th attacks were more likely an act of open warfare, and not an attempt to bully or coerce the US. I could be wrong, perhaps there were demands issued that got ignored, but if so we were never told about that, as then much blame would have been focused on those that refused to negotiate.

Not currently, but it can be the first of a two stage refrigeration setup, instead of needing a four stage cascade system.

Gogol Bordello:

The IMF is the second largest military on the planet. next only to the US, (who often use the IMF to do their dirty work). Terrorism is using fear for political ends. Plane hi-jacking has traditionally been terrorism. Give us money, or we kill all these people. Release these prisoners, or we will kill all these people. Whatever the demands. Did the attackers on September 11th issue demands? Were they trying to instill fear, or were they fighting what they saw as a holy war? Terrorism is an attempt at coercion, not just an attack. There are many warmongers in the US, and most are willfully blind to it. If taken as an act of war, the attacks on September 11th, 2001 were the second on US soil in over 100 years, yet the US has taken up arms on other nations soil with ONGOING campaigns over 50 times in the past 65 years. Somehow, it gets seen as a "Terrorist" attack, like someone is trying to bully them.

While the cops are trained to be pushy and get compliance, they are quite limited in the obligations they are allowed to place on you. As I said before, it is not a good idea to drag your heels, but you can if you want. Watch how this video plays out.

Another by Billy Bragg: Barry McGuire http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8SfiCnwF28 Tom Lehrer

The person walking down the street is not obligated to have I.D, but the officer is. While dragging your heels is never a good approach, "Why are you asking me for ID, when I am not obligated to have it, but you are?" is a perfectly legitimate response.

First, some trial bike action: The story with this second video has changed since I first saw it. The video denies it is people getting shot, but make up your own mind. The original story I saw posted with it was: These video shots are not made through the shooter's telescopic sight They are made looking through the spotter's scope. The spotter lies right next to the sniper and helps the sniper to find and home in on the target. The sniper is using a 50 caliber rifle. A 50 cal. round is about 7-8 inches long and the casing is about an inch in diameter. The bullet itself is one-half inch in diameter and roughly one and one-half inches long. Pay close attention to the beginning of the video. A Taliban is lying on top of the peak in front of you... when you hear the shot fired....watch what happens. The sniper is also about a half mile away... or more. A Canadian sniper in Afghanistan has been confirmed as hitting an enemy soldier at a range of 2,310 meters (7565 ft/1.43 miles), the longest recorded and confirmed sniper shot in history. The previous record of 2,250 meters (7369 ft/1.4 miles) was set by US Marine sniper Carlos Hathcock in Vietnam in 1967. The Canadian sniper was at an altitude of 8,500 feet and the target, across a valley, was at 9,000 feet. Canadian sniper units often operated in support of U S infantry units, which were grateful for their help. The record lasted only one day, until a second Canadian sniper hit an enemy soldier at 2,400 meters (7860 feet/1.48 miles). The Canadian snipers fire special 50-caliber McMillan tactical rifles, which are bolt-action weapons with five-round magazines. The Canadian snipers were the only Canadian troops operating without helmets or flak jackets as they had too much other equipment to carry. Each three-man team has one sniper rifle, three standard rifles Canadian (C7s), one of them with an M-203 grenade launcher. And the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=relat...p;v=tyHMUVA3sDA I found another, with the zooming out at the end intact:

I thought I would start a thread for peoples favourite political music. I will start with some Billy Bragg:

http://www.tpuc.org/node/533

I have been lampworking borosilicate glass for a living for over sixteen years. Every once in a while I have a piece of glass start "singing", sometimes quite loudly. Eventually, I learned this is an example of what are called Sondhauss oscillations. And so I was exposed to the topic. The most commercially viable application of this emerging technology is refrigeration. Regular vapour compression refrigeration is compressing a gas, letting it dissipate the heat, and then decompressing it, allowing it to absorb heat. A sound wave is just a fluctuating pressure wave, so it too has the ability to pump heat, with no moving parts other than the sound wave itself. Sounds cool? (forgive me) Praxair is doing it to liquify natural gas. Ben and Jerry's use it to make ice cream. Liquifying oxygen, nitrogen, and other cryogenic liquids. The list goes on. If you are looking to learn more, here is a good place to start: http://www.lanl.gov/thermoacoustics/ If you are looking for the world leaders in this technology, I would say it is these folks: http://www.qdrive.com/

The version of the bible we are expected to swear on in court starts by speaking of "Our Lord, JESUS CHRIST" The fact that it has been capitalized means "He" is a legal fiction.

"What happens when machines are smarter, and more capable then man?, Will humans even be needed?" Your second question begs the more important question, who gets to do the the "needing"? Therein lies the answer.

Where to begin. Perhaps with a joke, and then?... Atheists are all agnostics, because they believe in the uncertainty principal. God, on the other hand is an atheist. If he is all knowing, faith is impossible. Higher power? Who are you kidding! Our brain releases endorphins when it comes across information that confirms our belief structure, and supresses them when we come across information that conflicts with it. Words mean different things to different people. If a junkie could get their fix through a choice of interpretation, do you think they would? We are addicted to being right. The way I see things, the bible has many good teachings, but shouldn't be taken as gospel, if you will excuse the pun. I have long believed the planet is alive as a whole. We are all a tiny piece of "God", if you will. We are multi-celled organisms. Any single cell can be kept alive separate from the body, if provided with the right environment. Same as we are an overall awareness to a whole bunch of single cells, so are we part of the planet.

This schizophrenic is drawing a crowd. While I may be like the guy at the edge of the crowd asking passers-by if they have taken a moment to listen to this guy, you are just running around telling people not to listen to him because he is crazy. I find what he says to make a lot of sense. I ask you to convince me otherwise, and you ask me why approach the crazy guy. Admittedly, it is a huge can of worms, and many are seeing it with opportunistic eyes, as opening it gives them great wiggle room. I can understand how giving what he says any credibility might seem as the path to anarchy. If this is your fear, say so outright, or at least admit it to yourself.

You seem to be taking the time to repeatedly insult him though... I have yet to see you refute him. Is marginalizing the best you can do?