Cheetah

Are there really no-one who has anything to add to this at all?

fafalone said in post # :

Warp drives don't work with conventional propulsion; with conventional propulsion it's impossible; but the warp drive works by warping space-time; it is within the realm of possibility.

If I have understood it correctly, Warp Engines creates one or more "bubles" around the ship. Each of those bubles can move inside the buble outside of it with the speed of light or close to it, and with the ship in the innermost buble. Thus giving the ship an exponential faster-than-light speed.

I have no idea if we can make something like that, but I hope we get some kind of faster-than-light travel.

I want warpspeed or hyperspeed!

The NSA has no right to monitor all telecommunication. And who are they to say who are good and bad?

Yes, I read the article. And making the land mines "smart" makes it a lot easier for me to accept.

But they could still fail, and not be disarmed when the time comes. And if the USA should be able to send out some signals and disarm the land mines, couldn't another force also be able to do that after some time?

Besides, I'm not convinced of the tactical or strategical value of land mines.

Duke said in post # :

How exactly would you obtain this super dense matter?

It's fiction. Use some kind of special fusion or compression mechanism to create very heavy materials.

Wouldn't a brain transplant be succesful if you just managed to connect all the nerves in the spine to the brain? And the body didn't reject the new brain of course.

And one dimension gives a line. Two dimensions give an area.

Think this is interesting though. If one could fold space one wouldn't need to breal the speed of light.

When it all began? In the start I think surnames were familynames, or the name of ones father/mother. Or of the place one came from.

I have two surnames, one from my mom and one from my dad. The surname from my mom is not older than five generations, as my greatgreatgrandfather made up a surname for himself when he was 15, if I remember correctly. The surname from my dad comes from the area were my family comes from.

Why am I not surprised?

I am trying to make some world maps on how the world was in prehistoric times like Triassic and Jurassic, etc.

I have found a couple of maps which shows where the continents were at lots of different times, but none of them shows much about how the climate was in the different areas during those times.

Does anyone have any good links or information that tells how the climate was around the world (hundreds of) millions of years ago?

I'm currently reading "The Universe in a Nutshell", by Stephen Hawking. Great book about space, time, the universe, time travel and the future.

If this is civilian technology, have you any idea of the price (which I think must be quite high) or where one can get it?

Though won't it be easy to scan for it? It sends out its own radio-signals if I understood correctly. That should be easy to detect or shield against?

Btw, how does it get power if it carries no power by itself? By sucking power from its 'host'?

I remember seeing something similar, but this time it was that the windows would reflect a part of the sunlight further into the building to give more sunlight deep inside the building, and thus saving energy for lamps (at least during the day).

Anyway, both these and the windows you talk about have a small problem: With a lot of skyscrapers, would there be enough light hitting the windows to make much of a difference? Wouldn't the skyscrapers just create shadows for each other?

I really to much about Libyas politics or its near history, but as far as I know there is no reason for not letting them in.

wolfson said in post # :

Cheetah what a idiotic remark!

What remark by me was it that was idiotic, and why??

Sayonara³ said in post # :

Then prepare to be laughed at.

Would you care to explain why I will be laughed at?

Sayonara³ said in post # :

See my above post about diseases.

 

You're going to have to provide evidence that it's a disease if you want to continue this line of reasoning.

I looked through the thread, but I'm not sure which post you are refering to. You'll have to excuse me on that one.

I looked in the dictionary at Infoplease (lycos), and here is what I found:

Disease

1. a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavorable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment.

2. any abnormal condition in a plant that interferes with its vital physiological processes, caused by pathogenic microorganisms, parasites, unfavorable environmental, genetic, or nutritional factors, etc.

3. any harmful, depraved, or morbid condition, as of the mind or society: His fascination with executions is a disease.

4. decomposition of a material under special circumstances: tin disease.

A condition that makes an individual attracted to the same sex is what I would call a disorder or disease.

And I think my question about the lionesses is a valid question: Would you say that two lionesses having sex / trying to mate, is perfectly healthy?

Sayonara³ said in post # :

Perhaps you should consider that the fact you think homosexuality needs to be "cured" speaks volumes about where you stand.

I would certainly recommend that if a cure was availible, homosexuals should take that cure. Of course they can refuse, just as anyone can refuse medical treatment for diseases and injuries.

Homosexuals are normal people, but with a disease that makes them attracted to the same sex.

And if you don't think it is a disease, would you say that two lionesses having sex / trying to mate, is perfectly healthy?

Looks great YT

Sayonara³ said in post #7 :

And then maybe stone them to death if they don't "cure" themselves?

 

 

You might think you have "moderately liberal views", but I can tell you now that you don't.

No, I don't think we should stone them to death.

Perhaps I should be more carefull with my wording next time.

I would certainly wish and argue for homosexuals to take a cure if it is availible, but it's not like I would kill them if they don't. People have the choise to not take a cure if they don't want to, be it broken bones, malaria or homosexuality.

I have never tried to classify my own views, so I won't comment on what you can tell me about them.

fafalone said in post #11 :

If you define homosexuality as a disease since it inhibits reproduction, then I accuse you of the same for using any sexual technique that prevents reproduction. If you think the only acceptable sex is that which results in reproduction; good bye oral sex, condoms, and birth control. If reproduction is not the goal, then it ceases to be a valid argument against homosexuality.

I see homosexuality as a disease on the grounds that a homosexual person would not desire or want to make love to the other sex, and thus making it much more unlikely that that person would reproduce.

Of course I base this view in the belief that a homosexual person thinks the same way about sex with the opposite sex as I do in regards to sex with the same sex.

YT2095 said in post # :

but on a lighter note you said "Are there any animals that are SOLELY homosexual."

 

there Might have been, but they wouldn`t have lasted long for obvious reasons

Just what I was about to say.

As I see it homosexuality is a sickness. Heterosexuality is the only healthy option if the specie are to survive.

Having said that, I would like to make it clear that I don't view homosexuals as "lesser" humans or hate / fear them or anything. No one choose to become homosexual. They are human beings, they have a condition that is unhealthy in a manner of speaking, and there are no cure for it. Both heterosexual and homosexual people can function perfectly in our society.

Until a cure comes around, I think homosexuals should be treated no different than heterosexual people.

atinymonkey: George Snr didn't invade Iraq, he only threw them out of Kuwait. Still he would like to go into Iraq, but was afraid no one except the UK would support him in that.

Not that I don't think it is very suspicious that father and son can rule USA with only one president between them. And I still believe the Bush-clan fixed the election, though I'm not sure how much...

I'm with faf on this one. Let the religions decide if they allows gay marriage, and if so, we should respect that.

Correct. I for one would love more diversity among media players, which would probably lead to more intercompatibility among the different players and their formats.

I have partly watched a debate on BBC World today. They are debating War on Terrorism, WMD, democracy, the future of NATO, the middle east and/or something like that... (everything is mentioned at least)

Right now one of the Saud Princes just had a question. He mentioned that participation in elections in democratic nations like USA and other western countries, have declined in recent years. The question was wether that was an issue with the citisens or the democratic system.

As I see it democracy (or republic, for those who would like to mention that we don't have direct democracy) is one of the best government systems that has ever existed. But it requires active, politicaly involved citisens. If that doesn't exist the democratic system will in time crumble, and though it might still look like a democracy, it isn't anymore.

Do you think democracy as we know it might be in danger of disappearing, as people seems very little interested in politics, a least in many western democracies?

Whenever I hear "Pepsi" I think "Coca-Cola is best!"