"But it refers to having liquid water available on the surface... and as far as i know life cannot exist without water..."
The Inuit don't seem to have a problem with it.
The inuits aren't 60% water like the rest of us? Wow, that IS huge. How come nobody noticed before?
That's a mighty big hole, considering the surface area of the entire Sun is only about twelve thousand times the Earth.
Atmosphere-vegetable-animal-atmosphere is a closed loop.
Citation needed. None of the referred articles or anything else I've ever seen even imply the existence of atmosphere->"vegetable" part of a "loop" for methane. Plants fix CO2 from atmosphere for growth, not methane. If something, be it microbial or animal, then turns some of the carbon in plants into methane there has to be positive contribution of methane (and negative contribution to CO2).
Unless someone flipped the magical "free energy" switch, there's no unless. Producing hydrogen and oxygen uses a shitload of energy that comes mostly from getting rid of those annoying fossil fuels. Not to mention that the vast majority of hydrogen is produced by steam reforming the aforementioned annoying fossil fuels, not electrolysis.
however considering that these beams are usually powered by 5/1000ths of a watt or so
Well, why don't we start by considering this to be a ridiculous assertion? There's absolutely no reason to assume that anyone trying to blind a pilot on purpose would be using puny off-the-shelf 5mW laser, when there are devices up to at least 1W trivially available.
Countries need to keep to themselves and stop trying to establish empires. It never turns out well; just look at the history of Rome.
Rome stood over a thousand years. Over two if you count the Byzantines as Romans. Which non-expansionist countries would you say "turned out well" in comparison, by, for example, lasting longer?
It also occurs to me to wonder... what would be so BAD about another "Medieval Warm Period", making *practical* arable and habitable places like the Greenland coast, central Canada, and parts of Siberia? Yeah, you might sacrifice a relatively smaller area elsewhere as desert, but wouldn't it be a net gain for human habitability?
It might be a net gain for human habitability, if only there was a way of moving humans without them slaughtering each other. Unfortunately, we're stuck with silly things like national borders, and if bajillions of Chinese and Indian coastal dwellers decide they want to move to newly habitable Siberia due to rising sea levels and Russia objects, shit will hit the fan and nukes start falling.
As to species preservation, all well and good, but species come and go all the time; that's the nature of a non-static biosphere.
So they do, but never before they have gone this fast, and it's not as if replacements just pop into being overnight even if punctuated equilibrium is given. And we still don't understand the biosphere fully, we may not know until it's too late which species were of vital importance to us.
Seems to my our job is to adapt as needed like any other viable species, not to attempt to freezeframe nature at some theoretically optimal point, lest the nonviable perish. What happens when your freezeframe inevitably collapses and you're stuck with a biosphere that's not *had* to adapt, and is now a large Fail?
There's no practical difference between "freezeframe collapsing" and a rate of change too fast for biosphere to adapt to, which is already happening.
Wait, what? You mean the one that is a more inconvenient version of the aeons old unix method of middle clicking in the browser window to open the url primary cutbuffer? The one that has been in Mozilla browsers as Middlemouse.contentLoadURL setting for at least five years, but probably forever. That one?
Opera innovation. Uhhuh.
And tabbed browsing, sorry, but no dice. Read the wikipedia article on tabs for example.
Apparently real guitars turn you into a duchebag.
Nah, but getting a real guitar won't turn a douchebag into a nice guy.
Most musicians enjoy the games, but this is slashdot, it's no surprise we have an abundance of bitter assholes who think they're great guitar players.
Because, getting a hellfire missile in the face is SO MUCH BETTER than getting strangled in a hotel room. Shame about everyone else in the vicinity, but hey, shit happens.
If you're eating meat, you should question how your bowels look and smell, how much meat is stuck inside there undigested and foul.
The epithelium covering the intestines is like the outer layer of skin - it's constantly being replaced, total turnover happens in less than a week. It's impossible for anything to get "stuck" for longer than that unless it's physically too large to pass (and we have teeth to deal with that, last time I checked). Even if you're eating superglue, the cells just die after a few days and anything attached to them goes along with them.
Whatever comes out when you're "cleansing" is just that - the dead cells of your own digestive tract and the bacteria living there, and there are probably a lot more of them dying than normal since you're torturing your body with starvation and external mechanical irritation in places that were never meant to be exposed to anything but half-digested food. It's no wonder it's foul, but if there is any difference based on diet, it's probably the bacteria - it makes some sense that the gut flora would be slightly different, since different bacteria help with digesting different foods.
People have been doing a LOT of dumb shit for thousands of years, and they've only recently stopped doing it not because all who practice sticking garden hoses up their ass have all been burned, but because we finally start to actually understand how our bodies work, and can throw the old misconceptions out. And you keep claiming it's "natural", but it's certainly not any kind of innate behavior a human let to grow without any outside influence would exhibit on his own, AND it requires a certain (even if small) amount of technology to do, so just how is it natural? It's something learned, like everything else we do.
Wikipedia would be dead within a month if they put up a paywall of any kind, even $0.01.
I don't know what's the going definition of "monster" these days, but I do think getting three years worth of salary in a month and a buttload of free advertising on top is a pretty big success.
No, it's not insta-ticket to the billionnaire club but nobody ever made it out to be either.
Freeware/homebrew games? Sure, Sony could do that, but then the actual console would cost up to twice what it does now to be able to make a profit. Then nobody would buy it, and it would flop badly.
You've got to be kidding me. If you seriously believe that enough people would buy a fucking PS3 just for homebrew games to actually make a noticeable dent in licensed game sales, I have a bridge to sell you. Quite a few bridges, really. All in mint condition!
The problem I see with 'what it is worth' is that I can't tell that until after I play, and I have to pay before that.
Nothing prevents you from paying again after you've played them if feel like they were worth more than what you initially gave.
"Protozoa are small, and bacteria are small, but viruses are smaller than the both put together."
