it basically breaks physics, so theoretical physicists are desperate to figure out the solution.
This is exactly it.
Paraphrasing to make it fit, from Footfall...
"Everything exploded from nothing? Doesn't that violate the laws of physics?" / "I'm sure the universe is doing everything right. We just don't understand it yet."
Rumor has it the plane was running Windows ME
Even then, the crash itself was a rumor that lasted for so long purely because everyone refused to believe that anyone would still be running a copy of Windows ME.
Unless of course you're just an uncaring bastard.
Phew. Up until now I wasn't sure how I fit into all this.
Pfft, just wait until the Facebook page starts up.
Paganritual likes 'Abolishing Software Patents'.
A million random idiots clicking like to something they don't even understand will be enough to make things happen, surely.
(I also like 'bewbs')
As a christian, I can assure you that you have no idea what you're talking about.
Oh is that how it works? Once you're part of a group, you have complete knowledge of all facets of that group. Sweet.
As someone that uses commas, (^citation) I can assure you that you have no idea what you're talking about. Hey, that does work!
There are a lot of happy/unhappy people who are/aren't christian. Maybe it's not about that?
Maybe it is. This is a compelling argument we're having here. You're really good at making points requiring deep and involved refutation.
Is the world bad? Just ask the millions of non-upper-middle-class-white-western-civilization people for whom life most assuredly sucks on a daily basis. You don't need Christianity to prove the world is bad.
I would but they were all too busy chasing their next sexual encounter to answer the question.
And when was the last time that happened to you? Oh right, never.
I still claim that the cat jumping up on the bed in the middle of it can technically count in a pinch.
There are studies that show that christian couples have more and better sex than non-christian couples, even, gasp, those that waited until they were married.
You failed to read to the end of that study where they qualified it with the fact that the sex was with someone other than the person they were married with. You know, while we're merely claiming the existence of supporting evidence.
Let's see how much fun that threesome is after you get multiple diseases.
No danger here; I know exactly where your sister and mother have been. Dear diary, jackpot.
I'm not catholic. I don't take the pope seriously. Please stop lumping us all together.
You're Christian. A lot of us don't take you seriously. Also, we figured that lumping you altogether was the only way that threesome was ever going to happen.
I don't know, this could provide untold employment oppourtunities. Just have a bunch of people tasked with standing either side of this fatty walkway, with sticks, pushing them along like the human tyres that they are.
Remember: every time humanity comes up with an idiot-proof contraption, nature designs a better idiot.
Of course, what you meant to say was that every time humanity, moving forward, implements a new strategic initiative with a long term strategy focus towards the develeopment of an idiot-proof contraption
I got crumbs from my Hurtz Donut in my Hellahertz computer keyboard, this is
You can't own property, man.
My Dad stole ten bucks from my car one time utilising this exact same logic. Except the car was locked; he had a key for it as well. But he still told me that it was silly to leave money out where it was visible in the car because someone might steal it, so he took it to teach me a lesson. I'm sure that works in people's fantasy world where leaving something unlocked/exposed makes you even partly at fault for when it gets stolen.
Yeah the usage of wall was a mistake, and actually makes it much more incorrect than to say "the other car sitting still", and the exact double speed would only really make sense if the cars hit exactly head on. Obviously my example was in a perfect theoretical physics sense using simple vectors
Otherwise I'm pretty sure it's a reasonably close value.
They really had a hard time understanding that a compass wouldn't work on the moon or that the radio would be limited to line of sight.
Stuff like this concerns me about individuals, let alone the fact that this sort of logic could be forced upon a crowd. There is a real mentality of 'stuff I don't need to know', or stuff I wouldn't even think about. People just say "of course a compass would work on the moon, the moon has a north and a south", ignoring exactly how a compass actually works. Reminds me of the guy that posted here a while ago about how the real problem they need to address with the space shuttle on re-entry is that it has too much drag, that it isn't aerodynamic enough. Yeah, because the real challenge mission control has always struggled with is the shuttle stalling as it's coming into land, not that it's trying to avoid making a smoking crater as opposed to a proper landing. Or, more concerningly, that an accident at the speed I'm doing, with an oncoming car is like hitting a wall at that, speed, not the combined speeds of both cars because they are in opposite directions. Stuff that I presumed, maybe naively, that most people know just by default.
The professor asked me why I thought that was. The only thing I could come up with was that once you have an optimal solution bringing more people in only increases the chances that you will end up with a sub optimal solution.
Or, in layman's terms, 100 idiots that agree with each other will overrule one smart guy that knows what's going on, because all the idiots work with the logic that the more people that believe in something, the stronger it's case is. Also, that believing in something has any relevance to it's reality at all.
'2' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.
Bacon.
I kill people for a living.
My t-shirt of choice: "I'm an assassin (shhhhhhhh)!" http://www.splitreason.com/product/882
It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.
