The higher court has a tee time.

You do understand why these are not equivalent statements.

No, I don't. That would be proving a negative, which is a logical fallacy.

I'd cave in after a while.

"The drugs are right there, officer. In the cabinet underneath the video camera streaming this whole scene out to YouTube."

This could be the next thing. Forget vegan/vegetarianism.

And when the NSA needs help interpreting intercepted technical data, for example, it subcontracts with local 'domain experts'. In the aviation biz, that would be Boeing. So Airbus, good luck with those bids for aircraft sales.

If you think that a large part of what the NSA and CIA do isn't plain old economic espionage, I've got swamp land in Florida to sell you.

If quantum entanglement is a manifestation of 'communications' through a wormhole, then can we create an entangled particle pair, drag one far, far away and start poking it (with some signal). Then, we should be able to observe it's paired partner and extract that signal.

Even if this doesn't give us faster-than-light communications, it has uses. Imagine a submarine with one of a pair of particles in a transmitter. Wiggle (bounce, or whatever) that particle and watch its partner on land. You now have a comm link (possibly at a high speed) from or to an environment that isn't affected by the r.f. propagation problem. Also, untappable optical (or whatever) links. Because there is no physical medium between the endpoints for the NSA to tap.

Best analogy is Einstein's explaination of how radio works:

"You see, wire telegraph is a kind of a very, very long cat. You pull his tail in New York and his head is meowing in Los Angeles. Do you understand this? And radio operates exactly the same way: you send signals here, they receive them there. The only difference is that there is no cat."

... is just whistling Dixie* if they think we are going to submit to their wishes.

*Subject to copyright restrictions, of course.

Seems plausible. The Pacific DC Intertie operates at 1 MV line to line (500 kV line to ground). This is a greater field strength than cloud to ground lightning, but it doesn't flash over (nearly as often). So lightning must depend on some property or phenomena that occurs at higher altitudes, but not at or near ground level.

P.S. Extra points for that 'current theory' pun.

.... NASA nearly had to rename it 'Magoo'.

..., California, Chile, Mexico, Spain.

There's got to be a Mexican food angle in there somewhere.

... in a manner of speaking.

It keeps saying, "Braiiiins! Braiiiins!"

But if you listen to the FAA... drones *could* kill people and therefore we must fine their operators huge sums (Raphael Pirker for example) and we must enact new regulations that says they can't be used by terrorist organisations such as Amazon.com or DHL without expensive and difficult to get permissions. What do you mean that's a different type of drone? You mean the ones that kill can be used by the US government with impunity against the evil and the innocent alike -- while the ones that don't kill are increasingly restricted and constrained by regulation?

Good work America! (NOT).

Tweeted from a 787 in flight: "I have a paperclip."