Besides, if you have one, why not just keep the other two mothballed for back up.

StartsWithABang is writing a summary. Where then are they plagiarizing? It's assumed they're paraphrasing the article(s).

I said "easier time" not that it'd necessarily work. Whether Lindbergh actually conducted credible scientific research on the matter is moot, eugenics was a very popular notion among scientists and intellectuals in general at the time. I mention Lindbergh because he was a American cultural icon and science promoter in that period of time. And in some ways a scientist himself, he created the first heart pump. His conversion, for lack of a better word, into the cult of eugenics started with his interaction with Dr. Alexis Carrel a surgeon who helped him on the heart surgery issue.

I'm not saying science caused the Holocaust. I'm just saying there's a more solid argument that "science" was more involved than Christianity was.

Wahabism, the Sunni sub-sect that started all this crud was put into power by the British in the early 20th century.

Are you brain dead, or are you just that biased and ignorant?

The Nazis, and German public by association, weren't doing it because Christianity said to do it. You'd have an easier time arguing that they did it due to science. It was an in thing to research racial science. Charles Lindberg himself, one of the most influential Americans of the time had supported the notion of racial purity (from a scientific stand point). You can find plenty of things in history to throw out for Christianity. No reason to Godwin the discussion and try to pin Nazism, or more specifically the Holocaust, on Christianity.

No.
Wikitionary:

So on that note, screw you. I was probably trying to a marginally nice thing for you.

I do it all the time, if someone is coming that is too far for me to wait and old, but close enough that hitting the Handicap button would keep the door open for them.

Ah I see, VA has some fairly loose open carry laws.

But those things aren't controversial simply from a "religious" perspective. You're implicating a general shift in morality here, religion itself has little to do with that when you consider the universal nature of those morals.

Albeit unlikely, the question is still valid. We're not talking a huge drop. But enough that the spending is outpacing the revenue, etc. The spending on this network would feasibly grow overtime, that means the revenues from the lottery need to grow as much as well over time. So even a drop in growth.

Except, it being a moon informs about the potential properties and behavior of the object. A moon has properties that decreases the likelihood of life forming on it.

I'm quickly losing hope with this Congress, day 2 and we're already doing the present a bill partisan BS.

Gas giants usually occur outside the "Goldilocks" zone. So those moons would be ice cold. Ignoring that. You have a object that is not always being hit by the sun, as the moon would be going through the planet's shadow. And then, you have that moons tend to be tidally locked to the planet.