You presume that most of the energy is not being directed into a single channel for there is nothing that dictates that the power would have to radiate evenly. Sure its far fecthed but so is this search. In any case wouldn't they be using the power to fuel thier space ships either opening worm holes or generating antimater :P which release power *elsewhere*.

Well those sorts of things are hard for many reasons such as the battery being dead, still in gear.. out of fuel etc...

My best friend in the first grade died because she wasn't wearing a helmet and was hit by a small truck in her neighborhood. It wasn't the drivers fault of course since she just went right out in front of them without looking. Helmets are good common sense... just wear it.

Its close... has alot of posix anyway in addition to the BeAPI.

Without 3G of course.... you have to have 1700 and 2100 on Tmobile for 3G to work at all.

Unsecured you could just fake your mac id if you were able to view the network traffic. Fairly trivial... sure it is a deterrent but hardly secure.

And not just that! "I'll get you, my pretty, and your little cdr too!" ... sigh making Lisp jokes on slashdot what have I done.

then just implement DVI-D over HDMI ... so you don't have to bother with the DRM. Check out the wikipedia article I imagine there are some kinks but HDMI is mostly backwards compatible with DVI-D And I have real world evidence as well.. Pandaboard does DVI-D for the very reasons you mentioned and it works just fine with a couple TV's I have tried that said it was picky one one monitor I tried though it seemed to be a kernel issue as one kernel would boot up on HDMI the other on DVI so had nothing to do with the hardware itself working correctly.

AMD/ATI makes game console graphics which are embedded. I believe they did sell off thier "mobile GPU" tech though probably because they saw it as becoming completely obsolete. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATI_Technologies#Console_graphics_products

Its got SATA-II SQUEEEEE!

USB on the panaboad is meh... and the SD slot is utter garbage :C I speak from experience that slot ate at least 3 cards two of them were brand new frist was probably because it has trouble with SHDC the other two were regular SD cards I'd RMA the board if it were mine however it was for a school project.

Actually I would expect them to bear strong resemblances as most of thier appearance would rely on genes that have nothing to do with thier survival at that critical point of change.... even after long periods of divergence there should still be lots of similarities. enough that they could be traced directly between one another. That I think is the greatest obstable to evolution as people try to portray it.... there are no "in betweens"

Or its an example of a common designer... nobody has observed any of these cases enough to know for a fact.

lungfish are pretty interesting too odd that they don't have wings :-) ... and that there would have to be separate evolution of components for flying fish... birds lungfish and mammals to all exist... which is highly improbable.

There is the developed eye which is inexplicable which I mentioned earlier. I take similarities to indicate a common designer as that is the simplest explanation it causes all that complexity to collapse into a single idea.

Fossil evidence of human ancestors has been falsified on many occasions mostly by combining fossils from different species or modification with tools there are also honest mistakes as well. An example of an honest mistake would be the brontosaur wasn't even a real dinosaur at all.

By fragile I meant unadaptable.... as in rather small changes in eco system can wipe out entire species rather quickly "ruining" an entire chain of evoltion as it were.

I said in my first post I didn't mind teaching about mutation and adaptation... however I do mind teaching evolution essentially as a religion. I don't believe species evolved from a common ancestor but I can conceive of the development of close relative species and later on those differentiating themselves further however I am still not an "Evolutionist"

There is a difference between "taking time to understand it" and having it shoved down my throat and ridiculed if I believe anything different which is what is experienced in universities and I would even expect in many high schools. I would argue that I know rather a bit more about evolution than most and probably on par with most /.ers ... I wasn't contending that students should brush it aside but as in my cause I shall take it with a grain of salt.

genetic smilarity isn't a good argument for either side from what I understand. You can argue that this species is related to that etc etc... however I can just as easily argue they merely had the same maker.

From what I read of that article there you see adaptation... which I even mentioned myself its still a fish and completely the same otherwise.

There are lots of documented mutations and adaptations. Look back at my original post... I said I didn't mind teachins such things as they do occur however I do mind and find it offensive when people imply that its the only possibility.

I do not believe in full evolution from from a common species.... that doesn't mean I can't understand the concepts of genetic mutation and adaptation.