I doubt they exist.

You step on the accelerator. Chemical reactions occur within thousands of small cells, instantly releasing vast amounts of pent up energy as huge volumes of electrons are forced through the path of least resistance through the motors that propel the vehicle. The huge torque of electric motors causes sudden intense acceleration that pushes you back in your seat. The car gains speed. Faster. Faster.

Finally, it reaches MECO1 and the back half of the car falls away and gently glides back to earth to soft land vertically at the launch pad.

India was able to do a Mars satellite so cheaply by cutting lots of corners that NASA would have required.

For example, India failed to generate documents necessary to form a committee that would make plans to do a study on how to begin planning the mission. Definitely cutting corners.

SpaceX could still face a major setback if states make SpaceX sell launches only through dealer networks.

You might 'kan reed', but there's no evidence that you 'kan komprehend'.

Read the links the other poster provided, then toddle on off to your drum circle.

Just to clarify, I was referring to alimony rather than child support.

But yes, I've seen men carted off for jail when unemployment was at its peak a few years ago and they couldn't pay.

While my ex-wife has the responsibilities of a child, the payment I make to her is 'alimony', not 'child support'. Nice reading comprehension, SJW.

Debt slavery is perfectly legal in the US as long as you call it 'alimony'.

"Conservative" means different things in different countries. It even means different things in different US states.

In the USA, "conservative" might mean an advocate of small government and reduced government power, or it might mean a pro-life social conservative looking to restrict abortion or anything in between.

If privacy is a voter's primary concern in the US, it's probably best to vote based on the individual candidate's position than on the candidate's party.

UAH NSSTC lower tropical global mean is also Satellite data.
Can you give me any reason..... can you give yourself any reason... why you ignored one set of satellite data and embraced another set of satellite data? Note that this is a past-tense question. If you research the UAH NSSTC satellite data and the RSS MSU satellite data, you'll find that they are substantially comparable satellites, and that they face substantially equal equal difficulties measuring temperature, and substantially equal corrections trying to fix serious problems of long term skew in the data. But for my question here, doing a new look up on the satellites is irrelevant. I'm asking, at the time you picked that ONE dataset out of a long list of data sets, did you have any reason from picking that one, other than the fact that it most nearly fit your prior position?

I assume that was supposed to read "hasn't been corrected as much". Actually they are heavily corrected. Amongst other difficulties, the satellites are in decaying orbits which steadily skews their readings more and more each year. They also have a lot of difficulty separating the signal of lower troposphere warming from the cooling in the stratosphere (itself a central evidence of man-made global warming).

The satellite data is important, but like all methods of global measurements, there are challenges. That is why scientists don't cherry pick one data set, they take a comprehensive look at all data from MULTIPLE satellites and multiple means of ground measurements and from sea measurements and everything else they can get their hands on.

Why did you ignore one satellite over another. Why did you ignore all ground data. Why did you ignore the sea data I linked, especially after I pointed out that atmospheric temperatures only accounted for 2% of global heat being captured and sea temperatures accounted for 90% of the heat being captured.

Is it possible that you dismissed multiple lines of strong evidence because it doesn't fit your prior conclusions on the subject? Is it possible that you eagerly embraced the isolated RSS MSU satellite data set because that graph generated a negligible amount of warming on that exact 18 year time interval?

Question: If I select a different time interval than the last 18 years, and I show you that the RSS MSU satellite (the one you picked) graph shows warming or greater warming compared to the other (UAH NSSTC) satellite, would you ever arbitrarily abandon the RSS satellite data and arbitrarily embrace the UAH satellite, merely because it better fits the prior argument you wanted to make? Is that a reasonable, objective, unbiased evaluation of all available evidence?

-

Ping!

IMO our whole monetary system has evolved to promote convenience so much that we're losing basic security.

I just now cancelled a debit card because I'm tired of cleaning up after fraudulent transactions. The world is full of criminal organizations working full time to defraud anybody and everybody. I just can't see it as sustainable.

I'm guessing that this is the outbreak that will break out of sub-Saharan Africa. Rich countries probably have the infrastructure to control it when it reaches their shores, but the rest of the world may be stuck with a pandemic.