The Marines deploy to austere environments, so their requirements are typically a little different. Large rooms like the one you linked might work for the General's briefing in the rear (though I can't imagine a single Marine facility that would pay for something like that), but battalions downrange need something a little smaller. IAAFM (former Marine).

So I'm a shill for China because I'm a shill for China? It's been really great having an intelligent conversation with you. Have a nice day.

Right. Because I disagree with you, I must be a paid dupe or a stupid no-nothing schmuck. I'm actually an intelligence analyst and do this for a living, but good for you for having a read a book about it. I'll make sure I defer to your expertise in the future.

Tibet is strategically important to China, and I don't foresee them just giving it up because some hippies are holding protests. Tibet holds a huge supply of freshwater that flows into China. It has nothing to do with religion or politics, just natural resources. Similar situation for South China Sea. The US and countries friendly to the US control most of the shipping lanes and ports near China. South Korea, Japan, Philippines, Taiwan are all right in China's way. They desperately need North Korea and as much control of other shipping lanes as they can muster. They're not being assholes about Tibet and Taiwan; they're trying to defend themselves and stay alive.

I found it funny too, then found out it's $1,000 per picture per copy. So one picture distributed 10 times would be far more costly than getting a permit.

Who's the "they" to whom you are referring? TFA makes no mention of F-4s.

Batteries. Just store up internet during the day for night-time use. Done. Alternatively, don't use as much internet while sleeping.

and into direct conflict with observations. I'm going to guess your math is wrong, not that black holes don't exist.

Then the Google Car, my harddrive, and the Space Shuttle are all robots too, though no one calls them that. The definition from Wikipedia also says it usually looks like a human or animal, so those things and my toaster wouldn't count (though Wikipedia also include nanobots). As I said, it's a broad term that's not well defined.

Tell them that, and they'll point out that they only reason we went was because the Soviet Union was way ahead in the space race for several years and it took many years for us to catch up.

Wikipedia defines a robot as a mechanical device resembling a human or animal. So yes, it can be considered a robot, considering the term is extremely broad and not well defined.

If all that's keeping your salary high is that people haven't gotten minimal training off a website, maybe your salary is too high.

I think the reviews are pretty fair. Apple deserves credit for inventing the large phone.

This isn't science's domain, as long as it has anything to do with origins. For that. we need ancient superstitions.

The only person with a botched understanding of science is the author. Science is the means by which we know what is true, and most definitely cover origins of things.