|
Gaza
Jan 17, 2009 19:40:09 GMT -4
Post by smlbstcbr on Jan 17, 2009 19:40:09 GMT -4
Or Hamas made Palestinians lives miserable by using their territory as a base for terrorist attacks against Israel based on radical points of view and religion. Hamas is aprt of making the Palestinians lives miserable, but te major cause is Israel, as you can see. 1205 deaths which 46% are women are children is caused by Israel , other than the 5000 and somethign injuries with which Israel used banned weapons like white phosphorus,..all this is caused by Israel directly and by Hamas indirectly. Then none of them is the victim... only the common citizen that has nothing to do with politics, like Palestinians and Israelis.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Jan 17, 2009 9:43:28 GMT -4
The Presidential delegate when asked about the attacks of the president to the Catholic church: "No, we are not whining to the church, we are just complaining."
|
|
|
Gaza
Jan 17, 2009 9:32:39 GMT -4
Post by smlbstcbr on Jan 17, 2009 9:32:39 GMT -4
Jason Amnesty speaks to governments to apply human rights, including removing executon because it is a standard of human rights today.No, Israel and America are not the best defenders of human rights. You can speak about Switzerland and such countries of defending human rights, but never Israel or America who face reports from human rights activists for violating human rights. www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=35&x_article=1564take a look on how much miserable Israel has made the Palestinians life , giving Hamas justifications to launch rockets. If you want peace you wouldn't act this way. Or Hamas made Palestinians lives miserable by using their territory as a base for terrorist attacks against Israel based on radical points of view and religion.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Dec 12, 2008 13:01:47 GMT -4
I second that definition of socialist country for government jobs. But I believe that Constellation and Orion will go on. Obama remarked that US should be leading the outer space investigation when Chandrayaan 1 was launched.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Dec 5, 2008 14:00:18 GMT -4
I think that what Honda announced today about their F1 division should be taken on account:
Fukui, president of Honda, said this pullout is a message that Honda eyes new era of motor industry and copes with its demanding task. hinting that financial situation is not the main reason for pullout.
he went on to say, oil and material prices are going down at the moment, but it's only temporary, and motor companies are required to dump its traditional, obsolete way of building cars, and urgently adopt completely new philosophy/technology that doesnt rely on oil and takes high materials price/lack of availability of raw materials into serious consideration. hinting F1 is no longer viable and relevant for new era of motor and challenge towards it.
his perception is that now is the transition period for the history of the motor industry, from the past 100 years into the next 100 years.
Fukui explained that the biggest reason for withdrawal is to shift/concentrate/redistribute its resources fully to development of new technology/product. global recession/credit crunch is merely a trigger. he insisted that Honda aims, 3 years, 5 years from now, to be able to show the result and be praised for this (highly regrettable but brave) decision of withdrawal and creations of new value.
he apologized deeply, with a grave look, to fans, Brawn and all the great engineers/staffs, and Button and all the drivers.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Dec 4, 2008 22:36:31 GMT -4
Further, given how ignorant the HB crowd is repeatedly shown to be, why would anyone listen to them?Because, unfortunately, most people like to hear about affairs and intrigues, the way seen in Mexican and Venezuelan soap operas. (We, colloquially, name them culebrones. Loosely translated it means big snake in a pejorative manner ;D. The RAE dictionary defines culebrón as a extremely long and melodramatic soap opera).
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Dec 3, 2008 13:03:14 GMT -4
I've heard that because of that expensive trip, they made the journey to Washington in hybrids. Looks that they really need that loan after all.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Nov 25, 2008 16:12:47 GMT -4
I was thinking: a really big trebuchet... In which case a pair of ski goggles, a decent helmet, and an equally really big net would be in order, but a cape would be, IMHO, extravagant. Nah, a mattress and the Mythbusters' slingshot should do it.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Nov 23, 2008 23:31:18 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Nov 23, 2008 23:25:55 GMT -4
nomuse, The fact that one feels there might be “compelling reasons to explore other options” has very little to do with the fact that the “best-fit theory stands”. I fail to understand the logical inference here. The “best-fit theory” is nothing more than the best set of propositions aiming at explaining a phenomenon that has yet to be fully explained with the current knowledge. And what is the current knowledge that has yet to explain the "anomalies" in the moon missions? It is not what it feels, it is what is proven to work in real life. Physics remains the same in the Moon, the Sun, Jupiter... But you are forgetting that they were challenging the knowledge with FACTS and in order to prove them, they investigated a lot. Scientific Method was used to do it. Follow the Scientific Method, it's how investigation is done. First, your question should be: Did man walk on the Moon? Second, you investigate everything about it. Third, you form your hypothesis: Man did not walk on the moon because the evidence shown is not consistent with our (your) knowledge of Physics and Astronomy. Fourth, you perform your experiments and collect all data that comes from it (you go to a lab and recreate the moon). Fifth, analyze your results. Sixth, publish your conclusions. Seventh, challenge your results (this is very useful during an exam).
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Nov 21, 2008 12:15:56 GMT -4
A priceless moment came when the executives were questioned if they used a regular commercial flight to Washington DC and none of them raised their hands...
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Nov 20, 2008 13:54:28 GMT -4
A solution may be: to let them go bankrupt, then stimulate new factories with brand new technology. I think that if they go down, the results will be better in the long term. I've heard that auto industry there is not as good as it should be. (In Bolivia, the auto brand by default is Toyota, next is Volkswagen). And, 75 $ an hour? that's some expensive labor force...
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Nov 19, 2008 22:21:47 GMT -4
So, after watching almost every news channel, I decided to post a poll to know if you would agree/disagree with a rescue to the Big Three. Some sources indicate that GM is not going to last until 2009 and almost every analyst said that the awful decisions made by their executives is the reason for this begging.
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Nov 18, 2008 13:52:47 GMT -4
Still pending: - Detailed explanation on how the different layers of the visor assembly can generate 4 discernable clustered spherical “aberrations” from a single light source that is apparently the sun (as seen at 0:30)? - Is there any other object reflecting on the visor that is contributing to these 4 discernable clustered spherical “aberrations”? - Is there any other pictures or movies showing similar multiple reflections of the sun in an astronaut’s visor, on the moon? - Is the gold outer layer down in this video? To answer all of those: take a reflex camera with a decent objective lens to the most lit place you can find (a parking lot at midday would be ideal). Hold it with your extended arms at your eyes height and with the objective facing you. Move it, look at it from different perspectives, what do you see? I found with my Yashica that there are at least 4 reflections coming from the sun, when the objective is pointing up. SO, the objective lens is a set of optical mediums, the visor/helmet array is the same, curved and one after the other, it should act the same way, and in fact, it acts. The purpose of a decent objective lens is that it is composed of many lens (at least 3), they are carefully coated with reflective layers of some material (I'm a electronics engineer, not a optician, but I had to approve optics 101 and 105 to approve phys 200) and the helmet/visor is analogous. You can see, if you want, that the visor/helmet was very carefully designed. It had to act as a high quality lens to provide a clear vision of the environment and to protect the astronaut's eyes. Do what I told and you will see, if you want, that a point of light casts more than one reflection over an array of curved lenses. If you state that it is not true, then you have a very big problem with your physics knowledge and with your common sense. PS, Anyone who wears glasses finds that the "Detailed explanation..." is an everyday reality...
|
|
|
Post by smlbstcbr on Nov 18, 2008 12:33:01 GMT -4
Lunar Laser Ranging Instrument working, I wonder if it can accurately measure all the Apollo gear (at least give some hint) left on the surface.
|
|