Can someone tell me how this isn't just unseemly science rather than bad science? Sure it might seem like you are "cheating", but if the data tells you something that you didn't expect going in and you change your hypothesis along the way, you still are presenting data and you simply just took a shortcut publishing your second paper and just tossed-out your initial attempt at writing a paper.

To me, bad science would be cherry-picking your data to fit your original hypothesis (or perhaps your ideology or world view).

So what you have is a car, parked legally with a cooking utensil inside. INSIDE the car. Now paint me stupid if I'm wrong, but if I was gonna plant a pressure cooker bomb somewhere, I'd be most likely to put it OUTSIDE of a car because the walls and windows of the car would be likely to absorb most of the sideways explosive force ... meaning that the only people likely to be killed by an exploding pressure cooker inside of the car would be somebody crazy enough to be walking on top of the car.

Consider that the Boston bombing pressure cookers were placed in backpack in the middle of a crowd. if those pressure cookers had been in a car you would have been looking at little more than a handful of glass shard injuries.

I'm pretty sure if India attempts to land this thing without warning anyone (e.g., designating a no-sail-zone) into Arabian sea just 200km outside of Karachi, I'm sure that people will be looking at this as an "unwarranted action" like North Korea.

For your viewing pleasure...

Speak for yourself, Bond girl Carey Lowell attended to my high school (not that I ever met her)...

Or as in the '80s the movie the "Breakfast Club" (of course not realistic). However, there are some actual real school districts that implement Saturday School.

Since it has unbalance parenthesis it's probably not traditional BASIC, but it could be a VPA (visibly pushdown automaton language, not to be confused with visual basic for applications or VBA)

Unless you think there was a pre-submission conspiracy (e.g, a manchurian candidate), AFAIK there were only 2 changes made to Rijndael during the AES competition:

1. Restrict the officially supported block size to 128 bits (rather than support any block size a multiple of 32-bits)
2. Restrict the officially standardized key sizes to 128, 192 and 256 bits and the number rounds associated with them.

No algorithmic modification were made to Rijndael during the AES competition (unlike the DES where the NSA tweaked the S-tables to strengthen IBM's submission against differential cryptanalysis.

I'm not sure how to argue that restricting the block size to 128-bits is an NSA conspiracy (that was a NIST requirement). Also as it turns out that it's more than likely that greater than 256 bit keys aren't going to be that great in Rijndael (even 256 bit keys are suspect to have fewer than 256-bits of security)

Of course it might be reasonable to argue that the NSA lobbied hard to pick Rijndael for AES because it was potentially easier to break (lowest security margin) than Serpent, but it wasn't because of imaginary *changes* made to Rijndael by the NSA...

Why do liberals tend hate comic books?

It's because it suggests to people that government is at best impotent and more often then not evil. However, some rich dude can be a hero (e.g., ironman, batman) can come in an save the day (generally against yet another rich evil dude, not an ideologue). This generally isn't the narrative they want to hear. Of course comic writers throw the liberals a bone once in a while (e.g., a gay character like iceman)...

However, most comic books are simply apolitically anti-establishment, not catering to any ideology other than angst and self-reliance of socially isolated individualism. This caters to the aspirations of their target reading audience, which is generally not aligned with liberal/conservative politics, but weakly aligned to a libertarian/progressive slant. The most common morality plays in comics appear to revolve around fate, fear, revenge, jealousy, penance, and sometime just spite which generally don't fall along political party lines (or maybe they do), but tend to move the plot along...

Some thing appear to have been lost in translation.

According to most other English language sources, apparently this A400 had a new software release that enabled it to control the fuel tank trim during some new types of maneuvers. It appears that some bug in this software triggered a situation where fuel was actually cut-off from the engines or perhaps the engines shut-off leading to a temporary engine stall (which proved to be unrecoverable). It's not clear exactly what happened yet, but I think they are close to ruling out a defect in the installed ECU (electronic control unit) itself, but not the software running on it.

So basically it has value because people expect it to (just like currency)... It's just the expectation holds for a broader number of eventualities...

Or just a standard yeast infection...

As any baker will tell you, it often only takes a little bit of bad yeast to stop the good yeast...

Your updated numbers are okay, but your conclusion is crap.

Of course Caltech looks at race, but unlike Harvard, it's a more of a STEM pool that it's drawing from, so it looks like the STEM pool of applicants. In fact when I attended, often admissions reviewers (who were mostly white-male faculty) would openly lament the multitude of applications from the asian-with-glasses-plays-piano-or-violin stereotype.

FWIW, the big push over the last 20 years at Caltech was to increase the number of women attending (not different races), so it is totally unsurprising (to me) that the asian population went up since the time I attended because it probably just mirrors the female-STEM high school population in California.

As for graduating on time, well, it's a tough school, but statistics don't bear out your assertion that rich asians are under-represented in the didn't-graduate-in-4-years-or-at-all pool. When I attended there, one of my school newspaper reporters looked at the statistics for an in-depth admission report and there is very little correlation with anything in the didn't-graduate-in-4-years rate (other than parents being a California resident).

Most potentially negative educational outcomes often were somewhat correlated with being a California resident (even though being private school, there is no tuition break for a California resident), because not being a well-known national institution (but more even with Harvard internationally in the STEM area, but behind MIT) the student pool is somewhat self-selecting having more qualified folks be out-of-state and international students. Also most other things being equal, California residents matriculate at a higher rate (east coasters accepted to multiple schools matriculate at Caltech at a much lower rate), and more likely to transfer to a UC school before they graduate if they are having trouble (rather than stick-it-out).

Of course the fact that California-resident Techers are also more Asian than the out-of-state/international pool, creates some Asian correlation in every statistic. However, with an entering class size of only about 200-250 people, the statistical significance of any trend is probably dubious as well. According to federal statistics, in 2006, 100% of underrepresented minorities graduated, but this fell to 80% in 2007, I think that was a result of 1 person less.

Although 80% average graduation rate means 40 folks don't graduate on-time, but in my class, I know of 10 folks that actually flamed out after 1 year. Also, if you look at the statistics of the student residence houses, the highest graduation rates are Lloyd and Fleming house and the lowest graduation rates are Dabney and Avery. Knowing the typical populations of these houses, I would say that a generalization that somehow accepting more Asians would help bring up the graduation rate is somewhat dubious (Avery and Lloyd house might be a poster-child for asian high-achievers, Fleming is much more representative of the population at large, and Dabney probably isn't representative of any population that is tracked by admission statistics). If manipulating statistics was the goal, Caltech should be simply accepting fewer Californians (which it's been trying to do for quite a while)...