riddler

Yes. For instance, George Bush Jr. was on route to an elementary school classroom when the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks started. His response was well-documented, of course: http://www.historycommons.org/essay.jsp?article=essayaninterestingday Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Whether he as innocent or guilty is irrelevant, with regard to what the Scottish government has done. 1. The government convicted him, and they have not changed their mind about his guilt. 2. The government released him on "humanitarian grounds", while still saying he was guilty. 3. The government, according to the above article, released a convicted terrorist and mass-murderer from prison in exchange for a lucrative oil contract. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Well, it is based on the end of their long calendar, so that's why people are saying 2012. But you're right, they never said that's the end of the world after that. They probably just expected people to go out and buy a new calendar. Maybe with pin-up girls that actually wear clothes. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Tobacco smoke contains over 4,000 different chemicals. At least 50 are known carcinogens and many are poisonous. The majority of this comes from the refined tobacco in cigarettes, and less comes from wrappings, filters, etc. One issue has been the hybridization of tobacco into it's current form, which has increased the harmful chemicals. But tobacco smoke IS particularly harmful when used over a long period. Incorrect. This is repetition of the musings of the RJ Reynolds PR department, and has no basis in fact. These are the same people that brainstormed the "smoking is healthier than breathing auto pollution" nonsense. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Not a bowling speech story, but a bowling ball story. Hookitt can tell it better than me I laugh every time I hear it. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I think you hit the nail on the head. AFF is a reasonable program, in my limited experience. But it's biggest failure is lack of good canopy (and landing) training. Yes, we're teaching a lot more in AFF than in S/L courses, and unfortunately it's mostly about freefall. But I don't think S/L teaching will fix that - just the fact that you have little or no freefall time and your pin is pulled for you doesn't help teach you canopy or landing skills. That part is still taught on the ground. The failure of AFF in this regard is that not much time is spent teaching canopy and ground skills during the ground portion. But consumers still don't want more than an 8-hour class prior to their first jump. Maybe the answer is an 8-hour class before the first two or three AFF jumps, and the latter ground-school classes shift to light freefall and heavy canopy and landing. I can see one advantage of the S/L with new students - teaching them to spot (a lost art today with GPS, even for experienced jumpers), and not having a lot of traffic during landing (since it's a hop-n-pop for the rest of us). But what we really need is a tunnel for canopies If someone could invent an effective canopy simulator, many of the canopy problems would solve themselves. I'm not sure if the computerized virtual ones are effective, but I'd love to try one. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Very nice, Drew! I didn't even know there were any pinball machines with skydiving. Any others that you know of? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Not saying the US is innocent at all. In fact, I believe the entire Iraq war (part 2) was probably for oil. But I haven't yet heard of the US releasing convicted terrorists for oil. Let me know if I'm wrong about that. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

You're not? Jesus! Baby! There were wars/invasions - killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people - started b/c of oil!! Welcome to reality.*** Ya know, I wish I could listen to the politicians (even the one like Obama, that I support), and think "yeah, I believe everything they're saying". I wish when the Scottish government said they were great humanitarians, I could say "wow, what a great society". I wish when Bush said "weapons of mass destruction", I could think "war is bad, but this is a just cause". I wish when Obama says "go to Afghanistan to find and kill OBL", I could think "I'm sure there will be no nation-building there". I wish I could think all those things. I think it would make me happier about our society. But I have yet to see a politician that didn't spin the money and power motives, and turn it into the Cause of the Day. I think I will vote for any politician that just stands up and says they will do anything, ANYTHING that brings more money and power into the country. It's going to be that way anyway, but at least I would vote for someone who wasn't lying about it. BTW - Obama condemned Scotland for this action, and I think Scottish citizens, as well as people from all 21 countries of the victims have a right to be angry about it. And I don't generally approve of the media, but I am damn proud of them for exposing this story. I hope the Scottish AND British PMs are handed their hats at the next election, since it's becoming clear that Downing Street approved of the whole thing. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Is anyone surprised by this? I'm not. From the Sunday Times: The British government decided it was “in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom” to make Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, eligible for return to Libya, leaked ministerial letters reveal. Gordon Brown’s government made the decision after discussions between Libya and BP over a multi-million-pound oil exploration deal had hit difficulties. These were resolved soon afterwards. The letters were sent two years ago by Jack Straw, the justice secretary, to Kenny MacAskill, his counterpart in Scotland, who has been widely criticised for taking the formal decision to permit Megrahi’s release. The correspondence makes it plain that the key decision to include Megrahi in a deal with Libya to allow prisoners to return home was, in fact, taken in London for British national interests. Edward Davey, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, said: “This is the strongest evidence yet that the British government has been involved for a long time in talks over al-Megrahi in which commercial considerations have been central to their thinking.” Two letters dated five months apart show that Straw initially intended to exclude Megrahi from a prisoner transfer agreement with Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, under which British and Libyan prisoners could serve out their sentences in their home country. In a letter dated July 26, 2007, Straw said he favoured an option to leave out Megrahi by stipulating that any prisoners convicted before a specified date would not be considered for transfer. Downing Street had also said Megrahi would not be included under the agreement. Straw then switched his position as Libya used its deal with BP as a bargaining chip to insist the Lockerbie bomber was included. The exploration deal for oil and gas, potentially worth up to £15 billion, was announced in May 2007. Six months later the agreement was still waiting to be ratified. On December 19, 2007, Straw wrote to MacAskill announcing that the UK government was abandoning its attempt to exclude Megrahi from the prisoner transfer agreement, citing the national interest. In a letter leaked by a Whitehall source, he wrote: “I had previously accepted the importance of the al-Megrahi issue to Scotland and said I would try to get an exclusion for him on the face of the agreement. I have not been able to secure an explicit exclusion. “The wider negotiations with the Libyans are reaching a critical stage and, in view of the overwhelming interests for the United Kingdom, I have agreed that in this instance the [prisoner transfer agreement] should be in the standard form and not mention any individual.” Within six weeks of the government climbdown, Libya had ratified the BP deal. The prisoner transfer agreement was finalised in May this year, leading to Libya formally applying for Megrahi to be transferred to its custody. Saif Gadaffi, the colonel’s son, has insisted that negotiation over the release of Megrahi was linked with the BP oil deal: “The fight to get the [transfer] agreement lasted a long time and was very political, but I want to make clear that we didn’t mention Mr Megrahi. “At all times we talked about the [prisoner transfer agreement]. It was obvious we were talking about him. We all knew that was what we were talking about. “People should not get angry because we were talking about commerce or oil. We signed an oil deal at the same time. The commerce and oil deals were all with the [prisoner transfer agreement].” His account is confirmed by other sources. Sir Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Libya and a board member of the Libyan British Business Council, said: “Nobody doubted Libya wanted BP and BP was confident its commitment would go through. But the timing of the final authority to spend real money was dependent on politics.” Bob Monetti of New Jersey, whose son Rick was among the victims of the 1988 bombing, said: “It’s always been about business.” BP denied that political factors were involved in the deal’s ratification or that it had stalled during negotiations over the prisoner transfer talks. A Ministry of Justice spokesman denied there had been a U-turn, but said trade considerations had been a factor in negotiating the prisoner exchange deal. He said Straw had unsuccessfully tried to accommodate the wish of the Scottish government to exclude Megrahi from agreement. The spokesman claimed the deal was ultimately “academic” because Megrahi had been released on compassionate grounds: “The negotiations on the [transfer agreement] were part of wider negotiations aimed at the normalisation of relations with Libya, which included a range of areas, including trade. “The exclusion or inclusion of Megrahi would not serve any practical purpose because the Scottish executive always had a veto on whether to transfer him.” A spokesman for Lord Mandelson said he had not changed his position that the release of Megrahi was not linked to trade deals. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

The post is real, but her account was hacked: http://www.theinternetpatrol.com/the-story-of-tracy-turkish-brooks-her-other-pussy-and-her-hacked-facebook-account/ After making these fake posts, the hackers also changed her marital status to "engaged", and her religion to "atheist". Lesson for the rest of us: security, security, security. Or risk public humiliation Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I'm off this thread now, before Dave shows us his boobs. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

People who smoke pot: how often do you smoke cigarettes? 1) All the time 2) Some of the time 3) My short-term memory is shot - what was the question, again? 4) Dude, I'm REALLY hungry Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Current cost, vs. projected cost. Frame it however you want, we're still going to have to pay for it. When all U.S. troops are out of Iraq, feel free to tell tally the cost then, and tell me I was wrong. We still have bases in Japan, 60 years after WW2. I doubt the Iraqis will be paying us $2 billion per year for the privilege. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Yep, you're right, of course. All atheists are by-definition, also communists. Except for Stalin, he was a closet believer: Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Man, from all the ranting from the right-wing here, I would've suspected there would be a LOT less cars on the road. But I still see all these cars with "I hate liberal/socialists" bumper-stickers. I would really prefer that they stick to their principles and stay off the roads - there's not enough room for the socialist-loving liberals, as it is. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

What about the fact that Obama and Hitler share 99.9% of DNA, so they must be like, identical twins or something? Certainly, they must have the same political views because of that. Of course, humans share only 96% of their DNA with chimpanzees, so there's no way that we could be evolutionary cousins. Apes are gross. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

I never voted for Bush (who funded a 3-trillion dollar war with my money for his own forced morality). Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Love him or hate him, he was instrumental in shaping American politics as it exists today: Personally, I agreed with most of his politics, but thought his personal life was suspect. Being a good liberal, I didn't care that much about his personal life. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

As an I.T. contractor, I spend a lot of time perusing job postings, looking for the next gig. Some of them are blatantly funny, others are funny in a subtle way. I thought I would start a thread dedicated to some of the ones I see. If you are in the job market, feel free to add your own. Here's one from Craigslist just posted today that I am giggling about: I guess they want a very experienced "rock star" that works on a part-time basis. And of course you need to be entrepreneurial with revenue sharing, but also work on a contract basis? That might be against the law. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

The people that are opposed need to watch television in New Zealand - their PSAs for drunk driving look like Rob Zombie movies. On a personal note, I was driving my two young daughters on the highway. Going around one bend, a huge pickup nearly careened directly into the passenger door of my mini-van, right where my 15-month old sits (it was only inches, and I swerved to avoid). I looked up and saw him blatantly texting, and he hadn't seen the curve in the road. He passed me, and I watched him nearly cause two more accidents within the next 100 yards. Anytime you see a minivan on the road, please just assume that young children are in it Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Hatfields and McCoys. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

http://www.wesh.com/video/20545065/index.html Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Thanks! That explains it. And I agree - collectors are worth more than the rebates. But part of their market it geared toward people that can't afford any new or used car, as well, and will pay for a short-term fix. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

Well, the "Clunkers" program is officially over, but my confusion continues. Maybe the secret to stimulating the economy is quick-hits like this one, that come and go before people start asking too many questions. My question is, why was there a limit on cars newer than 1984? Cars older than that often didn't even have catalytic converters, and are known to pollute a great deal more than newer vehicles. If part of the reason really was environmental responsibility, shouldn't we encourage the oldest cars to go first? I've heard a theory about collector cars, but I don't buy it. Not many older cars are in good enough shape to be restored economically, and those that are probably are worth more than the rebate. And other stipulations prevented real junkheaps from being traded - it must be running, it must be registered to you for at least a year, etc. You people are smarter than I am - does anyone know why the cars were required to be newer than 1984? Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD