It's whether or not you can hit all the notes in the right order... Sheesh.

The name of the guy who'll be in charge of decontaminating the TiME Capsule before launch, so if the Galactic Overlords show up and ask why we used a bioweapon to commit genocide on the peaceful bottom-dwelling protoplasmoids of Titan, I can point at *them* !

Is here

(Scientific) Research is to see what everybody else has seen, and to think what nobody else has thought. - Albert Szent-Györgi

Looks like the folks at National Semiconductor... (puts on sunglasses)... cashed in their chips.

YEEEEEEEAAAAHHHHH !

They do have somewhat of an "exchange program." Fellow from China was helping out at a dig in Alberta, Canada some years back when my father was up there on a working vacation. Apparently there are a number of sites in China that are absolutely lousy with dino bones.

The visitor also seemed a bit surprised at the methodology that was being used over here. We've all seen dino digs in films, and they're at least semi-accurate. Over in China, though, the preferred method back then (I am not kidding here) is to drill a hole and use a light explosive charge to shatter the fossil-bearing rock and then just glue all the bits back together. That method is *occasionally* used over here, but there, it was the standard.

"I'm sure that in 1985, you can buy plutonium at every corner drugstore... in 1955, it's a little hard to come by !"

Seriously, though, atomic weapons are kind of like supersonic jets. They require a fairly high engineering know-how just to make one that barely works at all. To make one that works really well, you need a tremendous amount of know-how (usually gained through repeated attempts), many hours of supercomputer modelling, and highly exotic materials.

Unfortunately, sometimes even a primitive, barely-functional atomic weapon is "good enough".

Who cares about putting out the fire... I just want the Lightning Cannon.

Evil Overlord Notice #1 : Discontinue Operation : Weaponize Shark immediately.
Evil Overlord Notice #2 : The Commissary of Evil will be serving fish sticks all week.

Yeah, there's one about a half-hour from where I live built on a nice big lake. Can't swim real near the plant because the warmer water is a haven for bacteria. That's the only environmental impact I've noticed from the place.

I just got a postcard from 2211, They said to go with solar when we can... all the wind farms permanently damaged the jetstream and now the equator is 180 farenheit and the poles are -200.

Until we get the solar thing figured out, they recommend nuclear power; just try not to use 40-year-old reactors that are built on the ocean and within 150 miles of a major faultline.

Hooking Clark Kent up to an EKG would be effective for *some* meteorites.

Am I reading this correctly? Lockheed-Martin is going ahead with the construction of the capsule even though the government isn't paying for it anymore?

Is this the moment where a private corporation risks a hundred million dollars betting on space exploration?

I voted "safer", because I would have guessed that a cataclysmic earthquake and tsunami would have turned any nuclear plant into a radioactive crater within minutes of the event.

So yeah, it *is* a lot safer than I thought it'd be... It's still holding, even if barely.

The article very clearly says that the defendant was *not* sued for libel. "The truth is an absolute defense" in cases of libel, so the ex-teacher had no ground to stand on for a libel case. He chose a civil tort instead, which allows you to sue for pretty much anything you like, so long as you can get a judge and/or jury to agree.

Also, i'm not sure what the police would have done. It seems from the article that the ex-teacher had been involved in some capacity in a bad mortgage scandal, the results of which did not cause him to face any legal sanctions. However, any university wishing to appear credible is *not* going to have someone studying mortgage failures that was implicated in even a tangential way with an actual mortgage fraud. "Avoid even the illusion of impropriety."

What I'd want to know as a jurist was whether the ex-teacher disclosed that past incident to the university before he was hired. If he had, I'd be far more likely to find in his favor, because an individual caused him to be terminated for reasons that the university initially did not find objectionable, but he was "Tried in the public courts" as they say. If he had *not* disclosed, I'd likely find against him, as it seems that he was merely caught being dishonest.