wolfriverjoe

Ron - You do realize that 'freedom' and 'liberty' and 'patriotism' apply to people who think, look, and believe differently than you, right? And, given that you support Trump, I think you may have difficulty in understanding these concepts.

I've heard it said that "Fusion is the power of the future... And always will be." Small scale fusion reactors are largely impractical. A sustained and stable reaction (that generates more power than it requires) needs to be big. Really big. So for us to see "Fusion power plants" like we do fission plants is far more fantasy than reality. OTOH, we DO have a large scale fusion reaction readily available. With enough fuel onboard to last for a couple billion more years. It would be far more practical to develop ways to more efficiently and effectively capture that energy than to try to develop small scale fusion.

^This. The Wright Bros and Musk/Space X are often held up as 'poster children' for free market R&D (one article I found when making sure of my info was from the National Review). Unfortunately, that ignores the reality of how much R&D that is essential to reaching where we are now has been government funded. The Manhattan Project and nuclear energy, the CDC and all the medical research, NACA/NASA and all the aerodynamic research (Musk wouldn't get off the ground without all of that). And before anyone puts the Wrights up 'on a pedestal', they weren't in it for anything but the money. They wanted to get rich. They completely ignored the civilian market, thinking it wouldn't generate enough profit. They wanted all the government money. They also tried to develop a monopoly. Despite the 'dead end' of their control system (pelvic saddle & wing warping), they wrote their patent broad & vague enough that just about any other system fell within it, including Curtiss' control stick & ailerons. They then basically abandoned the idea of improving their plane and spend most of their time chasing patent infringement lawsuits.

Many of those landed on a steep slope with deep snow or trees to cushion the impact. The Serbian flight attendant had the above, plus a large section of the aircraft to slow her fall. They happen. They don't happen a lot more. It's along the lines of winning a big lottery.

I thought it was Langley who was funded by the government. The Wright Bros were self funded. Their bicycle business had done fairly well, and they had everything they needed to build their plane at the shop. Being self funded made them efficient. They found serious flaws in the aerodynamic 'formulas' that were accepted science at the time. They first did tests on airfoils attached to bikes (they had a good source for those ). And later built their own wind tunnel. Langley OTOH, had lots of money. So he just built stuff and then tried to figure out why it didn't work. The Wrights couldn't even get the Army interested in their plane after it flew. The first customers were the French. The Army didn't pay the Wrights anything until 1909.

Seeing as they don't seem to know exactly how many kids are in detention, or where they are, it's not terribly surprising that they don't know how many have died while in custody.

Is it safe to assume that higher latitudes have lower numbers because the angle of the sun is lower? So, regardless of the overall 'weather', Seattle & Burlington would have less than San Diego.

There was (and is) a lot more than just 'blind faith'. For engineering R&D, there has to be some sort of progress shown. Or at least strong potential for progress. For science, there has to be evidence. And any theory has to be defended against detractors and opponents (sometimes very vigorous ones). And if the evidence shows that a competing theory is more accurate, then it's usually adopted eventually. Evolution theory is a good example of this. It's grown and evolved (pun not intended) since Darwin first came up with it. As new research uncovers more information, the theory is changed. Yet, despite all of the efforts of the religious deniers, no evidence of any 'supernatural' influence has been able to stand up to scientific scrutiny. None. Zero. Those folks are the ones operating on 'Blind Faith.' Climate change denial is essentially the same. None of the denials have stood up to scientific scrutiny. Some of the claims haven't either, but that's the scientific process. You want a Nobel Prize? Show, in a manner that stands up to real scrutiny, that AGW is a scam. Or that evolution is.

Well, you can always put me on your 'ignore' list. That is one handy little doo-dad. Makes all the hassle of learning the new site functions worth it. Somebody has to be reasonable and sensible. Bill has been that 'voice' in the past, but lately he's just been bickering with the resident trolls. He's fallen into the 'I know you are but what am I?" trap. Many of the other 'reasonable' folks have left. I don't blame them. It's gotten pretty damned stupid in here of late.

Not really. He's making the valid argument that an unborn fetus is not considered a person and never has been. No rights, no privileges, not counted in the census, not insured, not eligible for USPA membership (although I know a bunch of kids who had multiple jumps before their birth). Historically, a fetus wasn't considered anything until the 'quickening'. When it started to move. In those times, an abortion could be performed prior, but not after. A woman could be executed prior, but not after. There were a variety of things that were distinguished by 'pre' and 'post' quickening. Interestingly, that milestone in a pregnancy is about where modern science has made the fetus viable outside the womb. I'm somewhat willing to debate the morality of aborting a viable (outside the womb) fetus. But I have no issue whatsoever with a woman deciding to terminate a pregnancy before that time. At that point, it should be her decision, in consultation with her doctor. We've had a bit of back and forth in the past about including the doctor in the decision, but I feel that trained and qualified medical personnel should always be consulted for a medical procedure. Slate story about the history of "quickening": https://slate.com/human-interest/2015/05/the-quickening-the-momentous-pregnancy-event-that-became-a-relic.html

There's a whole list. They're ALL disgusting. They're also all true. Snopes: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/personal-foul/

Give me a couple days to dig it out and get some pics.

SOS handles are still around. Not super common, but they're out there. Any idea what the S/L itself looks like? The ones I've seen (and packed) for sport student rigs have the metal 'locking' clip on one end and velcro on the other. I actually have both of the above (sport SOS handle & S/L) in my 'parts bin'.

From what I've read, yes. He was already sick when they were taken into custody. My understanding is that he went pretty much straight to the hospital. Pneumonia can be a real bugger. The symptoms aren't all that severe. You feel like crap, you have a bit of congestion and breathing is harder than normal (but not truly 'labored'). By the time the symptoms get 'bad'. it's late in the game, often too late. And once you reach a certain point, all the medical care in the world can't save you. Jim Henson (of Muppet fame) died that way. By the time he reached the hospital, it was too late. Personally, I had it back in 05. I had the flu and kept not getting better. After a about a week and a half, I started coughing up just a bit of blood and went to the doctor. He told me another day or two and I would have ended up hospitalized, another day or two after that and I would likely have not survived. He also mentioned how Henson died. Purely speculation, but I'll guess the kid got sick on the way north. Not much the parents could do. He likely would have died if they had turned back, stayed put or moved on. I also won't put a lot of blame on DHS/CBP. If the kid was already sick and they got medical care as soon as practical, they did as much as they could. There's a LOT of stuff I'll hold them accountable for (or would like to see them held accountable for), but this isn't one.

Given that it's been decades of accumulation, it's going to take a long time for it to go away. Even if we stopped using any plastic at all (or at least stopped throwing it away in a manner that it ends up in rivers and then the oceans) today, it would still be a long, long time before we could clean it up. Even if we tried. It's a bit on the depressing side that when Notre Dame in Paris burned, there was hundreds of millions of dollars donated within a few days. Half that money would go a long way towards cleaning up the plastic in the oceans.

Apparently, the American Airlines Pilot's Union had a meeting with a VP from Boeing a bit after the Lion Air crash. They seem a 'bit perturbed' that there was a control system on the plane that they had been told nothing about. A recording of that meeting has been released to the press. https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/05/15/boeing-737-max-audio-american-airlines-pilot-union-meeting/

Well, it's a lot more than ONE plastic straw causing problems. Its more like 500 million. Per DAY. And those straws (think about 500 million straws) are only a tiny fraction of the plastic garbage in the oceans. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2018/07/news-plastic-drinking-straw-history-ban/

There's also the 'Court of Law' thingy. While looking up Michael Mann for other reasons, I found that he has a libel suit in process. Apparently, he got sick and tired of the deniers falsely accusing him of making up his data. So he sued. As some may know, a libel suit is tough to win. The plaintiff has to prove that the libelous material is false, that the defendant knew it was false and that the false material was published with malicious intent (intent to harm). Not terribly surprisingly, the defendants have thrown everything they can at it to get it dismissed. So far, everything has failed. The suit is proceeding.

And who was it that cancelled the agreement? One that, by all reports, was working well and that the Iranians were holding to. Once somebody cancelled it, the Iranians were free to do as they wished.

Well, if they did it truthfully, then it would be fine. They won't, of course. They only want people with 'advanced education' to fill 'good jobs'. You know, people from "nice countries", like Norway. If they did it allowing people to come in and fill needed jobs, then they'd be allowing all sorts of people from 'shithole countries' to come in and fill jobs at the bottom of the ladder. Picking fruits and vegetables, working slaughterhouses, construction, hotel/resort/restaurant service, packing tandems, that sort of work. Those jobs are the ones going unfilled. Allowing immigrants to come in and fill those jobs (ya know? We have a lot of people trying to come in and get low level jobs) would be a great boost to the economy. Allowing them to be here legally, on the books, being paid a legal wage, subject to workers protections, all of that would be a really good idea. But they're 'brown people'. So it won't come to pass.

Yeah, those places don't have pesky 'environmental' rules. Or 'worker safety' rules (for both the miners and the power plant workers). Coal is cheap & easy power. The downsides, like mercury contamination downwind from the plants, take years to appear. Black Lung in the coal miners is the same. Of course, the miners have to survive long enough to develop black lung. Many won't live that long. Mining is dangerous.

The rules never applied to them. In the days before Roe vs Wade, abortion was reasonably accessible. It just took money to get it done safely. No matter what laws are enacted (and maybe upheld), abortion will always available. It just will be limited to those who have the means. And it's become readily apparent that this law isn't about "life" or "babies" or any of the romanticized garbage the anti-abortion crowd claims. It's about control. The new law in Alabama defines an 'embryo' as a human being. Unless it's in a lab. Then it doesn't count. Because it's not in a woman's body. It's only a 'human' if it's in a woman. Really.

And the really funny part about this is that the farmers were actually doing fairly well. Soybean exports to China were one of the few areas where the US was gaining in trade. Until the Mango Mussolini decided that "Trade wars are easy to win." So much winning.

One way to do it to make it easier for him is to do what I did - Take him out on a day you won't be jumping. That would give him the opportunity to 'take in' the atmosphere and attitudes of the DZ without any anxiety about you. Given the drive time, that may not be realistic. Observer rides are also cool. Depending on your dad's willingness and the plane they fly, it might be an option. Keep in mind that Otters and King Airs often descend as rapidly as possible. Near vertical dives are common. He may or may not be willing to endure that. My mom declined the offer of a ride for that reason. Skyvans & 182s descend much more gently.

No you didn't. I should have been more clear on that. However, you went with the idea of 'well regulated'. Which did not mean 'subject to rules and regulations'. Many of the 'not an individual right' arguments combine the 'well regulated' (wanting it to mean 'lots of rules') and the 'militia' (wanting it to mean 'government run organization') to try to establish that the 'people' in the 2nd A doesn't mean individuals. Neither of those ideas are anything close to what the 'original intent' was. Sometimes, establishing 'original intent' can be very much a grey area. However, there's enough supporting writings, to include early drafts of the 2nd A that make it pretty clear that it was intended as an individual right. Not that there aren't a LOT of people unsuited to the responsibility of owning/possessing a firearm. But, there are also a lot of folks incapable of operating a car safely. Or consuming alcohol in a responsible manner. Local to me, a mom with 3 kids in the car was well over the legal limit and crashed her car. She tried to drive off, telling a witness that 'they're going to take my kids away'. No shit. This was the 2nd time she's been caught driving under the influence with her kids in the car. Maybe she's not responsible enough to have those kids. https://www.wbay.com/content/news/Green-Bay-mom-booked-for-OWI-after-crashing-SUV-with-kids-inside--509846421.html