Reaper

I don't really see why all this rationalization is taking place. May I remind everyone here that the Hoover Dam was built as part of the plan to give people jobs and help the economy. As well as providing electric power and access to clean water. I don't see why investment in sustainable energy can't also be used to help jump start the economy too. It would certainly create a great deal more jobs than the Hoover Dam did. I'm already smelling trouble here, it would seem that the whole "I will save the world" crap was really nothing more than political spin after all...

Does it really matter though? There are dates to when the posts were actually made, so anybody who can do simple arithmetic would know this already. And in this day and age you'd be hard pressed to find someone who can't do basic math, even in third world countries.

No, there is a limit to how deep they could go underwater, as the deeper you go the higher the pressure. They would certainly be crushed if they wander into deep enough waters. Most islands that are right off the coast (< 20 or so miles) would be quite safe.

Well, don't all stars mostly move in the same direction? And the stars and stellar material that would have given birth to the sun and other star systems would have had more or less the same period, so I don't know if the original stars would be that far off...

I like how the people arguing for Israel are ironic in so many ways. It's so easy to point at the other side for being savages (e.g. that the civilians somehow deserve to be brutalized for the actions of Hamas), while conveniently ignoring so many of Israeli atrocities at the same time. Like this one. About the fact that humanitarian aid is getting through, that's a lie and you know it.

As we all well know, the sun and it's system of planets are all products of some supernova that occurred long ago. But what I'm wondering is, does anyone know where this original star and it's subsequent supernova took place? Looking at a map of the nearest stars within 12 light years and 20 light years, respectively, there are no known pulsars or black holes located, which would indicate the "smoking gun". And, the Centauri system, the closest stars to our own solar system, are much older than the sun (about 6 billion years old or more...) So, does anyone have any idea on where or what type of supernova triggered the birth of our solar system?

Yes, that is their aim, but I don't think it is working too well; if anything it's making them more angry and more willing to use force (as is evident right now). And it seems to be fueling patriotism and religious fervor on the side of the Israelis. Terror tactics are usually employed in conjunction with guerrilla tactics (as in Afghanistan and Iraq) and/or for political gains. Not usually as their only means of attack; that only happens as a last resort (usually after their main forces have been decimated). Otherwise, it is far more effective to strike at their utilities or their ability to meet their basic needs, which is what the Israeli army is doing right now in Gaza Strip.

It has everything to do with it. The type of weapons you possess determine what you can possibly do to the enemy, and thus your strategic options. For example, if your nation happens to possess a large army, nukes, and the most sophisticated weapons in the world then there is quite a bit you can do to the enemy to incapacitate them. Such as strike military targets, large formations, important installations, utilities, etc. If, on the other hand, you only have rocks and home-made bombs, your options are quite limited; all you can really do is strike at civilian sectors and perhaps spread misinformation. You've given figures on the number of "rockets" that were fired, don't you find it strange that they haven't thought of concentrating their fire at strategic points/resources? Or military installations? Or how about at the Israeli army while they were standing outside? Clearly if their aim is to disrupt civilian life as much as possible they would have concentrated what small firepower they have towards powerplants, utilities, and so on. The fact that they haven't means that either they are idiots or are just simply not capable. Think about it. Otherwise the Palestinians are for the most part unarmed, all they can do is throw rocks. It's a lot more complicated then just Palestinians "attacking" and Israel "retaliating". This conflict has been ongoing ever since 1948, when the Israelis kicked the lot of them right off their homes and into large refugee camps, and since then they have been at a state of war. It is not going to be resolved just by sending more troops, more invasions, and more artillery fire. Besides which, when trying to subdue an enemy nation/organization, it is always a wise idea for the invading side to portray themselves as liberators, as people who will come to make everything better, rather than worse. You need the support of at least a significant fraction of the people in order to successfully subdue them. Israel, right from the very beginning, has done nothing to do that; they have constantly attacked the civilian sector, terrorized them, and deprived the lot of them of many rights. As well, many Jewish citizens have basically just went into their lands in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and settled right on top of them, all the while depriving the Palestinians of the same right and opportunity. Neither have they made much effort to control their media and portray themselves as the "good guys" (or if they did, they aren't doing a good job as Hamas is certainly getting to them). Only recently have they even bothered to make an alliance with one group (the Fatah). Yes, both sides are at fault, and yes Hamas is bad news, but clearly the military planners at Israel are not well versed in Sun Tzu. And whether anybody wants to admit it or not, it is Israel who has the resources and ability to better resolve the issue than does either West Bank or Gaza Strip, and to be the one who should start seriously put more effort into diplomacy then they have been over the decades.

I know, that's why I'm wondering why they don't just use counter-terrorist commandos, rather than using artillery strikes to bomb their neighborhoods away. Sure, the Israeli army is trying not to kill any innocents, but it doesn't really matter as they are still destroying everything they own and ruining lives for the most part....

I understand that, but seriously, what type of rockets are they using? I'm not saying that Israel should relax, but that there is no reason (either from a practical, strategic standpoint, or even a moral standpoint) to send a full scale invasion force to wipe Gaza Strip right off the map.... Regardless of what is there that is of strategic importance, as I noted before they don't appear to be capable of launching that kind of offensive despite so called "fears", otherwise they would have made numerous attempts already. I mean, seriously, even Al-Qaeda made sure to strike targets of strategic importance, so there is no reason to believe that Hamas wouldn't know this too. The fact that they didn't attack and/or damage their more important installations means that either their planners are idiots, or they just aren't capable of launching any kind of serious offensive into Israel.

Underestimate the enemy? Most of those explosives by Hamas are probably home made, and they clearly don't have any offensive capability. Hell, most of the Palestinians don't have assault rifles, or even guns. They are so weak compared to the Israeli army that they are forced to rely mostly on terrorist tactics. At this point they can't even fight a guerrilla war; for the most part all they do is throw rocks. Somalia is a much different case; the entire government collapsed and now there is a contest between various warlords vying for control over the nation. They are all heavily armed and some even have access to aircraft. They can be said to have a proper army (even though they are for the most part using guerrilla tactics). I think the problem is here most of you are grossly exaggerating their capabilities.

Railguns require a lot of power though, if you want to fire a round that can do significant damage. =========================== Honestly, I wouldn't use nukes due to the radiation they give out, which would kill both them AND us. However, a Fuel Air Explosive would be very good against the zombie hordes. They are much more powerful than conventional explosives and they don't have radiation.

One of the things I don't really get is why Israel is intent on bombing away the entire Gaza Strip region when they could just simply use some counter-terrorist squad or a SWAT team to go to their houses and get their leaders. It's not like they don't know where they live, and chances are they know where those rockets are being fired from (it's not that hard to trace rocket or cannon fire, that's why the MLRS is built with mobility in mind). I know Hamas is a legitimately bad organization, but sending in tens of thousands of soldiers with tanks right into Gaza Strip doesn't seem right at all. It's like trying to kill a fly with a shotgun; the Palestinians for the most part haven't been able to seriously stand up to Israel since the early 80's....

Well, I hate to rain down on all your parades, but there actually is a real life example of this happening. Although, I will note that this was done mostly out of political reasons, rather than scientific. Regardless, this is something that one does have to keep an eye out for, because it has happened in the past.

Living flesh. And, they have Infrared vision too. Hide out too long and they will find you

I don't know, the claims and observations are varied. What is known is that they don't need to breathe. If a body of water is shallow enough, they might be able to cross it. But what if the whole world has fallen to the zombie apocalypse???? Where will you run to then.... ========================================== Here is a comprehensive guide to surviving a zombie apocalypse: http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/04/how-to-battle-z.html and

They will fall given enough damage to the body. However, headshots are the quickest and most efficient way to kill them. You have to remember that they are already the walking dead, so just simply aiming at their vital organs won't be enough. You either have to do heavy damage to their bodies or blow their heads off (or both in some cases).

I know that, I was just imagining a scenario for which this crazy idea would actually work, without having to significantly modify our anatomy or doing brain transplants. And to show that this idea is, in principle, possible (ignoring the obvious engineering/anatomical difficulties involved, of course). In physics we don't consider those inconveniences, we prefer to leave all the details to the engineers .

Have you ever played Zombie Panic Source? The game deals with those issues right there.... I would prefer ranged weapons and guns. While blades and blunt objects are good for using as backup weapons, you have to get very close to them and you can only deal with one or two at a time. Not very useful for staving off hordes of zombies (there will be a lot of them and are observed to attack in groups). I think the best weapons out there against the zombies would be fragmentation/shrapnel weapons (such as mortars or shotguns) and grenades. Something that would produce lots of sharp, high velocity pieces in a wide area.

Grab a shotgun and aim for as many heads as possible. That, or nuke them.

Look at what I read over here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28404637/?GT1=43001 Looks like Israel is actually going through with this . They invaded Gaza Strip just less than 2 hours ago, and from this report they apparently massed "tens of thousands" of soldiers along the border. Now if THAT isn't a full scale invasion then I don't know what is . I guess we will see how this whole thing will play out huh? On the side note, what do you think the chances are of subduing Hamas with this kind of assault? Seems to me that no matter how many suicide runs or kidnappings they do, I think their days might be numbered. This is similar to what happened to the PLO over 20 years ago....

Well, I suppose the real problem is really one of physics, even more so than anatomy. Technically it is possible to fly anything, even a brick, given enough lift. It could work if you can also modify how fast humans can run at (say 150 km/h or so), otherwise it is not enough to merely graft wings on them for them to fly... A very large wingspan would also work (although probably not very practical for humans).

At least pennies are real money, take a look at this video when some guy tried to pay with things with Super Mario coins:

If you are going to try to reinvent the wheel, at least make sure that it is better than the previous ones. The same applies to scientific theories.

Nope! According to the Coinage Act of 1965, all coins and currency of the U.S. are regarded as legal tender. They cannot be refused in settlements of debts or public transactions. And certainly not by banks. For example, say you owe some credit card company some 1000 dollars or so. If you decide to pay all that in pennies, they cannot refuse it (or at the very least they cannot successfully sue you for that); pennies are legal tender, and if they don't accept that payment then they are committing a federal crime. Shopkeepers/retailers and public transport can refuse to accept that kind of payment, out of practical reasons of course. Vending machines can refuse large payments like that too. But of course the difference here is that you are not in any debt when you decide to buy something from the store; they can choose to refuse payment of pennies for the same reasons they may choose to refuse payment in credit. I don't know how it works in other countries though, but that's the law here in the U.S. And that's why the video is so funny to begin with, because in principle they can't refuse the payment, no matter how absurd or annoying it is . I personally have paid my parking tickets entirely in pennies before, and they are obliged to take it no matter their objections. That is entirely true, but not really the point. Read what I wrote above for how it is actually enforced.