Why not use silicon dioxide? IIUC that's what they used to use, and it's a cheap industrial chemical. AND it's heavier than water.

Money is not equivalent to free speech, no matter how you twist things. I do not accept your arguments.

It is worth noting that one of the arguments which I read to be against the "free press" is the statement "The power of the press belongs to the man who owns one.". I don't fee this is sufficient grounds to be against freedom of the press, but it certainly highlights the limitations on its desirability. It's a way that only empowers the wealthy, as opposed to free speech which is available to the eloquent, whether rich or poor. And that highlights a limitation on the desirability of free speech. But the constitution made the best of things, but requiring *both* free speech and the free press. It would be reasonable to equate money with the free press, but not with free speech.

Fail. There are no penguins at the North Pole.

Penguins don't live near the North Pole. Perhaps you should learn to use Wikipedia or Google.

You win. Imaginary would've worked as well. AC above also got it right.

Gee... I say your references are not good and I am a troll. All I asked for was proper citations.

I have an old LG Cosmo 3. Everything you asked for is all I do with it. I need to replace it though as the screen is now getting too scratched up. I think they still make them. Though I might upgrade to a Kramer.

A large impact in a shallow ocean area might well in every human dying within a decade. Most immediately. It would also first steam clean the planet, and then set an ice age in motion.

Now I'll grant that this is unlikely in any century, less likely by far, in fact, than that we'll do the same thing to ourselves via war or some other means. (War seems the most likely, but it's not the only contender. An escape from a biological warfare lab is a possibility. I'm not counting natural evolution as "doing it to ourselves", but it's happened to other species. In fact it is currently happening to a large number of amphibian species, some of which have already gone extinct.)

But I do consider asteroid impacts worth worrying about. Not worth obsessing about, however, as they are a bit down the ladder when it comes to humanity exterminators.

I also question his method of assigning proper degree of concern. And the reliability of his assertions. E.g. he claims that only one person has ever been hit by a meteor, but there's no evidence that that's true. He should have said only one person is known to have been hit by a meteor. But how many people in remote areas of the planet could have been hit and the reason for death, or even the fact of death, not officially acknowledged? And clearly nobody could cite an instance before around 1700, as even the existence of meteors was denied. So you need to ask what is the probability of someone being hit by a meteor and the fact being officially recognized. This is a quite different question. He performs the same type of factual manipulation (less obviously) in a few other places.

That said, it's not a major concern while other concerns rate higher. But a species ending event is worthy of particular concern over and above the concern over the individual lives lost, as you also need to consider the future lost, and not just a few personal futures, but all human futures.

Who decided? Who decided that corporations were legal persons? It sure wasn't the voters.

The site you link to has no peer reviewed papers, charts with out proper methodology cited, and links to essentially nowhere. Not acceptable.

Looking it up I see a dip due to the recession (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...). The question is if this trend will continue. The next question is if it is enough or too little.

Fail. Link points to a report which contains numerous links to actual reports and paper providing what was asked.

Because people don't spend a few hours to research their politicians before voting for them. Ignorance is not an excuse nor is laziness.

Then who keeps electing them? In a democracy you don't always get the government you want but you always get the government you deserve.

With a few exceptions such as assembly if your code is not readable you are doing it wrong. Code needs to be maintainable. The maintenance costs and lifespan of code often far exceed development cost and time span. If you are not writing clear code you are writing crappy code.