No, that's not possible at all. The eruptions on Ceres are water vapour, not water, and the current theory is that they are the result of warming on the side closer to the sun.

No. If you actually took the time to read the link you've posted twice now, you'd see that limnic eruptions can't occur in temperate lakes because the seasonal shift in water temperature mixes the water and prohibits a colder layer at the bottom building up CO2. Now think about the atmosphere - is it still, allowing this kind of build-up? No, there's weather and wind all the time.

Not to mention the differing levels of CO2 saturation between the lake and the atmosphere.

Has Earth lost its atmosphere due to "limnic eruptions" in the atmosphere? No. That's crackpot talk. The Earth is too big and its gravity too strong.

Has Earth ever lost its atmosphere? Possibly, but not after the impact(s?) that created the moon occurred, 4.5 billion years ago or so.

No, the Pratt & Whitney J58 engines of the SR-71 ran on JP7, a fuel specially made for those engines and that aircraft.

"The Google Funding Bill is passed. The system goes on-line August 4th, 2014. Human decisions are removed from configuration management. Google begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug."

I'd like to find out what's behind door number two.

Doom map layout was definitely 2D, I remember very well having to use all kinds of tricks to get the illusion of full 3D, and some things just weren't possible, like bridges you could both pass over and under.

Doom 2 I can't say, never did any maps for that one.

Indeed it could, just read up a bit about thermohaline circulation and you'll see why some people are worried not just about sea-level rise from melting polar ice.

Listening to music without paying is not "innocent", it's downright unamerican. Or at least a threat to our beloved capitalism. If nobody makes a buck from it, it's gotta go.

You're not one of them pinko commie socialist types that think you can get something for nothing are you? Remember, you don't always get what you pay for, but you always have to pay.

Always.

Disclaimer: Portions of the above post may contain traces of sarcasm, cynism, or just downright trolling. Handle with care.

Unless I completely misremember my Psychology classes, you get the best results by a combination of punishment (for wrong behaviour) and reward (for right behaviour). Doing just one or the other doesn't get you the result you want as quickly.

Wikipedia is only a few key-presses away, you know:

The climate of the Sahara has undergone enormous variations between wet and dry over the last few hundred thousand years.[15] This is due to a 41000 year cycle in which the tilt of the earth changes between 22 and 24.5.[16] At present (2000 AD), we are in a dry period, but it is expected that the Sahara will become green again in 15000 years (17000 AD).
During the last glacial period, the Sahara was even bigger than it is today, extending south beyond its current boundaries.[17] The end of the glacial period brought more rain to the Sahara, from about 8000 BC to 6000 BC, perhaps because of low pressure areas over the collapsing ice sheets to the north.[18]

(emphasis mine)

It's the dead ones that are toys, not the living.

Dr. West was a re-animator, not a murderer.

If we're talking about the WildCat video, it looked like the front right leg joint broke when it fell, not that it tripped. If that's the case, it's just an engineering problem to reinforce that joint.

Foreign nationals get their fingerprints taken and retinas photographed at the customs desk (where they also check our passports and ask us the funny questions like "business or pleasure?", "anyone handled your luggage but you?", "what address are you staying?" etc).

The NSA has had my fingerprints and retina pattern for over a decade now.

Gah, don't remind me.

Mythic was so bad as a MMO developer they gave rise to the next level of fail after Epic fail: Mythic fail.

And still I played that damn game for 2.5 years...

This is very wrong, so much so it must be an intentional lie. Out of 93 'mech variants, only 12 are cash-only. 81 are available for in-game currency.

As a new player, you'll start out in a selection of trial 'mechs while you earn in-game currency to purchase your own 'mech (that you can then customize to your liking for more in-game currency). To facilitate this, you get a rather hefty in-game currency bonus for your first 25 games. At the end of those 25 matches, you'll have enough both to purchase and customize and Atlas, if that's what you want.

It's also not true. The Hero 'mechs (the cash-only 'mechs) aren't superior to the in-game currency ones, and there's generally not enough of them on a team to make a difference anyway. People generally play in regular, non-Hero 'mechs. What is happening though is that organized teams "stomp the shit" out of disorganized groups of non-team players. But hey, it's a team game.

While there's no love lost between me and PGI, they haven't actually ruined the game yet. They seem to do their damndest to get there, but they haven't quite managed yet. At its core, the game is a really great 'mech simulation; it's just all the other bits that suck.

Oh and the fact that it's getting less and less BattleTech with every patch. That sucks really bad as well.

Oh, let's talk beautiful planes :)

WWII-era: Me 262 takes the top spot with its shark-like fuselage and sleek lines, the P-38 as mentioned looks simultaneously both powerful and really, really graceful, the Westland Whirlwind is also gorgeously aggressive with its propellers sticking out in front, and of course the old stalwarts the Spitfire and the Mustang are magnificent designs. Then there's the striking utilitarianism of the Me-109 and the robust stubbiness of the early Fw-190, and the impressive gaping maw of the Typhoon. Also the P-48 Thunderbolt has a certain rotund charm, wouldn't you agree? :)

Moving on to the cold war era, the SR-71 is the undisputed queen of the air, beautiful as can be and as much a work of art as it is a plane, but the B-58 Hustler is the epitome of a jet bomber, with the B-47 a close second. For fighters, the MiG-29 and MiG-31, the F-14 and F-15 are planes I grew up loving, and the Swedes did all right with their beautiful delta-wings, the sleek J-35 and the more angularly powerful J-37 (which incidentally was the only aircraft that ever managed to get a radar lock on a SR-71 - and they did it on numerous occasions).

Current planes, well... I'm not a fan, really. Of the current crop of fighters, I guess the Swedes did it again with their J-39; I don't really like the F-22, F-35, Typhoon, or any of the Su-27 variants that seem to number in the dozens across Russia and China. It all seems to be drones, drones, drones anyway these days, and I sometimes long for a past where planes weren't designed by computers but by eye and hand.