MolotovCocktail

because thats what They want you to believe...

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

But in astronomical terms, a million years is a short time, so suppose someone says "sometime in the next million years"

in one sense that is really pinning it down!

in another sense it gives no idea

Yeah, good point. Its amazing that, on the one hand, 1 million years is so long for humans but on the cosmic timescale thats basically a blink of an eye!

I just read the article, and the one thing I found interesting was the involvement of antimatter and its creation. It seems to me that it was literally created right from the massive amount of energy from the blast. But such a phenomena can physically happen because energy and matter are interchangeable via E=mc^2, right?

I really don't get why some words are "bad", especially since we use them so often and very casually.

My guess is that they are attempting to pass off the game as some sort of game that is "for everyone", since most games like that are usually targeted for people below 16 in any case. But on US servers and games, I don't think they bleep out any obscenity, at least when I play games like battlefield.

Also, I'm not sure which country you live in, so you may want to look up laws regarding use of language.

<edit> we are so used to violence now, it seems, that the kind of violence you see on that game is probably seen as "not so bad" or "normal" nowadays.

well, to be serious about my favorite website, I like http://www.youtube.com

Also there is a star in our own galaxy, namely Eta Carinae, 7500 lightyears away, which is similarly near the upper mass limit and which has begun blowing away its outer layers by its own light pressure----and these astronomers say there is a chance that Eta Carinae could be headed for the same kind of explosion.

Do they have any idea when this will happen, and is as massive as the other star 240 million light-years away?

What about Saturn's moon Titan? That moon has a thick atmosphere and is filled with organic chemicals and ice.

Don't swamps also have a lot of bacteria that produce methane? I'm thinking that large scale production of methane could be done by creating large microbial mats and maybe left over animal waste and sewage.

Well, if they believe that it was a controlled demolition, how do they explain the fact that nobody saw any officials or people running around planting explosives, or the fact that debris went everywhere. Usually, in a controlled demolition, the explosives are planted in such a way so that it implodes to prevent debris from going all over the place. You need dynamite all over the building to make this work.

Another thing that doesn't make sense is why the government would want to blow up the Pentagon in the first place given the fact that it is the building that coordinates all US military forces and defenses around the world.

Hey, if it isn't our friend SOCRATES

link: http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=25459

I don't think there is any thing wrong with faith, and in fact I think we do need faith in something (such as faith in the scientific method).

perhaps because the moon doesn't have an atmosphere at all?

Yeah, but we can't breathe on Mars either.

That is something I have always wondered myself. For one, the moons of our solar system seem much more habitable than Mars, especially Jupiter's and Saturn's. And our own moon has a huge amount of titanium and other metal resources. Also, why not comets and astroids, they have organic material, water, and useful resources.

<edit> I think the reason for the popularity of Mars is probably because a lot of people believe that it was Earth-like in the past and the fact that it is the planet that popular science likes to talk about.

Its not only the drug companies pressuring psychiatrists to give drugs, but also sometimes parents of kids with some kind of mental condition such as ADD and ADHD. What would happen is that some parents (not all though) don't know how to handle their children if they end up different or if they end up not able to control them and so would go to a psychiatrist to put them on Ritalin or something.

Another tactic that drug companies use is to scare parents of children with mental conditions and disorders into thinking that what it is they have is far worse than it actually is, thereby making them think that drugging their children would make them better and of course giving the drug companies more money.

Not only that, they will sometimes support various myths about various mental diseases in order to sell their drugs. I know they do this with Autism, if you ever heard of the so-called Mercury Poisoning Myth

(link: http://www.autism-watch.org/ ).

Mental illnesses exist, but I think the statistics for the number of people who actually need treatment are constantly skewed by psychiatrists, so yes I do agree with you on that point.

Another difficulty with colonizing Mars is the amount of radiation that bombards the surface every day. Unlike Earth, Mars doesn't have an ozone layer to block out the UV radiation nor does it have a magnetic field to block out the cosmic rays.

I think its possible to colonize Mars, but its going to take a lot of resources and research before we can establish an actual colony. It would be more useful to put research stations first.

baltic sea != black sea.

 

baltic sea is open to the north sea which is open to the atlantic ocean. it would have a hard time evapourating.

yeah, but the water level can still drop.

- The Twin Towers were demolished by controlled demolition...

Well, I guess they are choosing to ignore the footage which clearly shows an airplane hitting the towers:

link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smKK8Tzhpso

and

link:

Well, pollution and destruction of the environment in general has been known for over a century. It hasn't been such a big issue until at least the 1970's.

1. geoguy

2. Klaynos

3. Don't know

4. Paranoia

5. the tree

6. Don't know

I like this one:

http://www.angelfire.com/super/badwebs/

you do need originality to play the opening, especially at my level . You also need it when the amateurs make opening mistakes or deviate from mainstream theory (as they often do). The only memorization you have to do is the basic opening lines and the strategies and ideas behind them. My advice is to only specialize in a couple of openings or so, and just know the basic ideas for the rest of them.

 

To (sort of) answer to the question, my openings are usually pretty boring and predictable (d4, nf6, bla bla).

You should try the Benko Gambit : 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 b5. This kind of game, while "strategic" does offer excitement in the fact that you boldly sacrifice a pawn in order attack on the queenside. Other fun openings include the Smith-Morra Gambit: 1.e4 c5 2.d4 cxd4 3.c3 dxc3 4.Nxc3. This opening, by white, sacrifices a pawn in order to get a huge lead in development. It can be quite dangerous if Black isn't careful.

Then again, openings in general are the "boring and predictable" part of chess, so I won't apologize.

Well, its clear you don't play chess a lot. Though openings do have some basic pattern, it does require a lot of diligence, study, practice, and originality to master this part of the game. And opening theory is constantly changing, and new variations are out very frequently.

This thread seems to be degenerating into attacks on other people....

I like the St.George Defense, in which black replies with 1...a6

But seriously, I tend to play the Indian systems (1.d4 Nf6), or the Sicilian (1.e4 c5)

The reason the Crab is crap is because you aren't occupying or influencing the center in any way, but you probably already knew that.

So, what is your take on this question? It just popped into my head just now and I'm not sure what to think.