Lets not forget the copyright warning letters stuff that was also passed under the "emergency Christchurch" whatever it was. The guy is a crook. But not as stupid as he looks, for example copyright warning letters from ISPs is only for NZ copyright material *and* it has to go to a tribunal to disconnect the person. So none of this automated DCMA letter crap.

Also sky is shit and even charge extra for 1080.. Its a joke. The only reason people pay for sky in NZ is sport, mostly Rugby etc. Also bittorrent works fine in NZ.

The power rating of turbo pumps is in MW and even GW. Batteries are not going to cut it on anything that not a toy.

The earth is not exactly traveling in a straight line you know.

Why does it need to be manned? probes and stuff without meat bags that need metric tons of life support would give far better return.

Oh god.. not this kind of crap. You know this solves and explains exactly *nothing* that we have already observed right.

Which would be pretty fantastic!

Bad statistics is bad statistics. Suck it up or get the statistics right. I don't care what side is spinning what. I am always going to call deliberately misleading statistics out. Yea when its deliberate, is because their is an axe to grind. Regardless if that axe "drugs are awesome" or "beer is evil" or "all hurricanes are SUVs fault". It is done far too often in the scientific community by people that should know better.

Yea its old but i have been sick.

WTF are you ranting about? And did you even read my post? Little too much foam in the mouth there dude.

Total bullshit. Funding grants are totally dependent on findings and the track record of your previous findings. It is right there in the text (publicly available in many places) of the grants.

I personally know some people who contribute to the IPCC, I know many more that will never do that again. IPCC is a very very politicized report that is written and rewritten many times, by more senior people down the line. It has a lot less to do with science that it does with politics.

It wouldn't cover the salary of even one worker. Universities charge overheads. The can be anything from 15% to 60%. If you want more than 60k take home, they are going to need to provide far more than 120k per year.

Clearly you don't know many scientists. Scientists, and by association the science they do, has no more integrity than anything else done by people. There are many examples, of bad reviews to people they don;t like, to flat out make shit up. Then there is grant review pannels and well the list keeps on going. Oh and in the US about 1/4 of or salary is suppose to be made up in grants in many universities.

You do know that the gain function of all transistors is not linear. We use a bunch of feedback to make it mostly linear.

As someone with a masters in Astrophysics, we have very detailed understanding of the optics, detectors and their limitations. We often design our instruments or parts thereof.