Por supuesto!

... which cost as much as a mac book air. Do I have to spell it out?

I've been landing on the desert (you know, really hot places, where the day starts at 100F, and then it goes up) for the last 3 summers and I have never seen a plane "sink" like that.

I suspect the materials used on that particular airport are subpar.

That's what I'm interested in.

> the modern way to wipe out humanity is with bio-engineering of custom plagues.

That is so 1990. The modern way to wipe out humanity is debt. Why kill everyone, when you can make them all pay tribute instead? And if someone protests, you tell your media to blame the "crysis". And then keep on going until there are only some ritches, the army, and the poor. And then you have won.

'nuff said

http://www.google.com/search?q=o'brien+ds9&tbm=isch

Title says it all.

I call dibs on the dark cartoon Batman.

If you begin with "you are an idiot", you have already lost the argument.

Your post works both ways.

"I'm currently working on a large Java based application. It's just like every rich client I've ever done, except it enforces me to write a lot of redundant type information, and I have to compile every time I change something. Waiting for the VM to start is a pain in the ass. It's slower. I have to make it work in multiple operative systems. It's enterprisey and web 2.0ish and "secure", but I have to use this huge IDE I'm not familiar with and navigate through miriads of submenus to make the most simple tasks. I'm missing all the flexibility I'm used to in a console-friendly environment. As a developer, It just seems like a huge step backwards."

> no different then burning down all the library's because they have a copy of twilight.

Hmmmmmmmmmm...

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

I always choose stone. Stone wins everything.

> I wonder what "the dark ages 2.0" will be like

Watch "Idiocracy".

Thanks for the insight. I was raised in a very lenient family (religion-wise) and checking references is just something that you did.

I have met some of these people myself, and I still don't know what to tell them. I have tried to point out that they *do* make very reasonable logical checks in other environments (like, say, when someone is trying to sell them a car, they really think about whether the price is ok, what is the cut the seller is getting, etc). But on religious terms, they just accept assertions without going through the same process. That was my best attempt, and I still got no good results.

Right now my strategy consists on leaving them be, and hoping that they "find a way to start questioning" on their own, like you did when you were 9.

In your opinion, how can one "gently push" a religious person to "bother" checking citations?

For the lawyers.