Well it is true, you can even read about its creation or question its creator directly.

Or was you trying to be faceatious and your knee jerked so hard it hit you in the head and lowered your IQ to the point you think one specific example is all possible examples as was stated?

Well, maybe you are a true believer or is it posdible you are just a manga fan with a fetish for tenacle monsters?

You are not envisioning a fact based result but a "your opinion" based result. Not really what is discussed here. Fox News for instance, gets more facts right then wrong even though they are selected to shill for the republicans. You have no facts stating that _ALL_religious_websites are wrong.

Not in science. A fact is an observation or evidence that has been repeatedly observed to be true. It doesn't mean always true or only true.

The problem is when existing theories compete. OR more precisely points within large theories compete. Take relativity for instance, gravitational waves help explain the big bang but not all observations support the big bang model. But gravitational waves are considered fact for the purpose of the theory even though it has never been directly observed because it can be explained in mathematical computations that explain observations.

So what happens when we actually detect them for real and they operate slightly different than we think? Does this new observation or fact get pushed to the front of the line or is it buried because the fact engine hasn't updated yet or the wikipedia article it is referencing is in a mod battle. How about if something else is found to explain the theory concerning gravitational waves but lives in the same limbo as gravitational waves in which it hasn't been directly observed but can explain observations with math also.

It reminds me in the 80's when (and I forget who) some doctor was claiming most stomach ulcers were the result of bacteria. Turns out that is a fact but he was originally ridiculed because the fact at the time was that no one believed that bacteria could survive in the stomach's acidic environment longer than it takes to pass through it. Now the fact is that it's cheaper to just giving a couple antibiotics and seeing if the ulcer disappears than to test if the ulcer is bacteria related or other. But it was indisputable at one time, then someone disputed it and now it is indisputable again. Facts change.

He did_not_say hell existed. He said might exist. Go ahead and go back and read it. His exact words was

there might be a hell

As I said, this is as much a religious argument as it is a scientific argument. All it is doing is asking if someone is concerned there might be consequences for actions.

If he said this guy was going to hell, or hell has a special place for him or similar, I can agree with you. But he did not say that and words impart thoughts which we can understand by the use of the words involved and might does not in any way signify there is, it only acknowledges that some think there is.

I doubt that, there are no sharks in space.

Oh, you are serious. Well, that was my first thought too. Either a laser weapon or a small particle of something (meteorite) smashed through it causing a catastrophic failure..

It's interesting that he declares something is good for a country without qualifying it. What he means is it is good for the idealized country he wants which is the same as putting your idealism above what is good for the country.

Even if it is interstate commerce, the constitution says congress has the power to regulate it not some extra legislative commit or department. It doesn't resolve the need for an act of congress to create the regulation or even pass the standards for the regulation to a department created for that reason. And there lays the problem, the FCC has openly and often admitted that congress never intended the FCC to regulate the internet in the ways it is trying to do. Congress has never given the FCC the power to create laws or rules for existing laws that would allow this to survive a constitutional challenge in court.

Nothing requires anyone to belive in any religion with what the op said. It only requires someone to know the religion exists as he said might be real not that it is real or that anyone has to have any belief in it.

It is no more a religious argument than a scientific argument based around what happens after death. It is a statement about societal norms and expectations that references an expectation of three largest religions in the world that has shaped the society in which he lives in. The reference to hell is ancillary in this context. Might exist and hell as used is little more than an impression of consequences for actions. Hell can be swapped with Karma or viciously enraged murderous women just as easily.

Not really.

Despite there being more than one set of principles in law in play here, usually a voluntary settlement includes some sort of admission of guilt which could prevent any appeals without showing some form of durress outside the penalties of law being faced. Its really difficult to win an appeal or even have an appeal heard when it involves a settlement.

He didn't make a religious argument. He asked if there was concern that there might be a hell. Of course as demonstrated by your answer, the answer is likely no.

But more importantly, even if the answer was yes, it doesn't preclude that kind of behavior. People sometimes ignore their beliefs in right or wrong or hell and do sick and evil things all the time.

I think this guy is just a moron eho doesn't understand the context or limits of principles involved here. He seems to have taken the principle of fair use to one extream knowing people would psy to avoid it. Then when he found out that there were limits, hes run to the opposite extreme.

With almost perpetual copyright, that type of analysis will likely happen before long. But i think the results will only become public when someone thinks they can get a royalty fee from the old ending up in the new.

You do understand that cheating at taxes is more of a democrat thing than a republican thing right?

http://taxprof.typepad.com/tax...

I know it's hard for the delusional to find their world isn't as they thought, but the fact of the matter is that it would seem that either someone is lieing to you or you are ignoring reality all together. So please, look up the suicide prevention number in your area, make sure you are near a phone, then read that link. You can also do searches for words groups together like "democrat tax cheats" and see lists of people that are near the top of the party.

But hey, stay hydrated and avoid cool aid if everyone is wearing Nike sneakers if at all possible.

The rules make sense enough for the most part. There seems to be a couple exceptions to the rules in science that nobody cares about. For instance, Mammals give live birth- except for the platypus and spiny anteater. Eggs need to be fertilized- except in some bee colonies where male bees or drones develop from unfertilized eggs.

There are plenty more and one more will not matter much at all.

Ice expands as it freezes. We also know water under pressure will super cool and not freeze but it will still expand. Take a pop bottle and fill it with water without putting the cap on and set it in the freezer. It will spill out the top. Put the cap on it and it will simple expand the plastic bottle (or break a glass bottle)

Now imagine a hole in the ground or a pocket of water just under the surface of the ground. It freezes, pushes up, and brings the ground with it a bit. It's under pressure so it doesn't all freeze but exerts force in pretty much a radius. The relief point is up until the weight of the column of water finds another relief point (a crack in the earth leading to sea or something.) If you look at the craters again, you will not find enough material around the edges to correct for the amount missing from the hole.

Now there is something called geothermal flux which is more or less changes in the heat within the ground. It is already being blamed for some of the permafrost melting. And we know there are perforations within the permafrost in the sea beds off the coast which are letting methane release. It's could have aided in the release and removal of material assuming water under pressure was in fact not frozen in these areas.

The pictures do not look like sink holes can be ruled out. What would likely rule sink holes out would be the depths of the permafrost as well as when it was originally established (the last ice age I believe).

You wouldn't need to get it pressed on a lot of disks but imagine if an ISO file of some movie was altered and when little johny downloads it and burns it in order to play on the large screen TV in the living room or perhaps a friends house, it's there.

Now what can this malware do. That depends, can it open a proxy and ping me so I can bounce my IP off yours? Can it sit idle until someone commands it to participate in a massive DDOS attack? Or can I use it to gain access to the blue ray player and have it stream video from the NAS in addition to playing blue rays?