I have started this page. Please like it, post it, and encourage people to sound off against the making of a Blade Runner sequel.
Thanks!
https://www.facebook.com/StopBladeRunnerSequel [facebook.com]

I have started this page. Please like it, post it, and encourage people to sound off against the making of a Blade Runner sequel.
Thanks!
https://www.facebook.com/StopBladeRunnerSequel [facebook.com]

I have started this page. Please like it, post it, and encourage people to sound off against the making of a Blade Runner sequel.
Thanks!
https://www.facebook.com/StopBladeRunnerSequel [facebook.com]

I have started this page. Please like it, post it, and encourage people to sound off against the making of a Blade Runner sequel.
Thanks!
https://www.facebook.com/StopBladeRunnerSequel

This should not be happening. With any luck, this abomination-train can be derailed. Hollywood has gone too far this time. Blade Runner is sacrosanct. There is NO room for a 'sequel', and I sure hope there is no market for one either. Blade Runner is. That is enough. No more is needed or wanted. Let's get together and send a message to Hollywood that enough is enough. Let's put a STOP to this abomination.

So it's NOT releasing unused monomethylhydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide into the upper atmosphere? .. My thoughts was that this glow could be caused by the combustion of the released fuel, being hypergolic and all.

This was not a nuke. The missle was unarmed. It was a flight and systems test. One thing the article fails to point out is the the fuel in the third stage is hypergolic. It is two parts, monomethylhydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide, which ignite upon contact. SO!! One can only assume that upon a fuel dump, there would be ignition which, it seems to me, would fully and totally explain this expanding cloud of glow.

Exactly. This scientist is simply seeking publicity. Making such statements based on current data is irresponsible.

agreed. what an utterly ridiculous question.
Is the era of ridiculous questions posed by dumb-asses over?
apparently not

re: "N-gons are needed to actually "create proper Geometry" in many cases," ... no ... just .. no
N-gons are a shortcut. They are BAD geometry. They are FAR to easy to make them non-planar, at whichpoint the rendering engine (regardless which one) has diffuculties shading it properly. They can be useful, but ONLY if you keep them 100% planar. If they are non-planar, you need to go in and re-topo for good edge flow and loops.

STFU!!!! Peole have beeen clamoring for N-gons for YEARS!!!! and now Blender finally has them ... and YOU want them disabled??!!! JERK!! Anyhow, in blender N-gons don't STAY n-gons. Everything is ultimately converted to tris for rendering. Besides which, no one is FORCING you to model with n-gons.

ABSOLUTELY!!!
Most people don't realize that the U.S. BORROWS paper money. Every piece of paper currency comes with IMMEDIATE debt. That is seriously messed up, and really really really needs to end.
It's a ridiculous situation, clearly designed to put money into the pockets of the rich.

... have known for decades.
obvious is obvious .. unless one's face is so buried in the obvious that one can't see the whole picture.

If cars can be charged wirelessly, why couldn't there be a system in place such that cars recieve needed power from infrastructure along highways. Batteries as backup and "off-grid" travel only. Seems this could be TOTALLY doable now.