Though in this case, we are the grandchildren of those who set up Hanford. The chickens are coming home to roost - on us.

I agree entirely with this. The huge numbers of people using cellphones, and continuing to do so over the years, mean that any effects caused by their radiation emissions must be either very small or very slow. We have had a large enough population using them that significant effects would be clearly visible.

That does not mean that there are no effects. But it does mean that they are small compared to the very visible effects of distraction and misuse. If you are not prepared to ban cellphones because of the number killed by texting while driving, it is disproportionate to get worried about the tiny number who may, possibly, suffer some unknown effect from the radiation.

I am not sure I would describe this as "Green". Using up all available resources in one massive burst, leaving nothing for future generations. Efficient, yea - in the way a nuclear bomb is efficient. But basically a cheap headline to draw attention to what is, yes, an interesting bit of astronomy.

Like many things that have evolved over time, the God concept has several uses, and it is not possible to say which is the one it was invented "for". As a vehicle for explaining morality (Why not kill? God says not), as a means of keeping people under control (do what the priest says, or God will punish you), explaining the unexplainable (God makes the sun rise), palliating the fear of death (God will take me to heaven, if...), providing a mechanism for attempting to solve the unsolvable, or at least doing something (prayer), providing a forum for happy singy dancy ceremonies (worship). It serves all these purposes separately, and which is the most important varies between people.

All the money goes to the military. Lights? Stuff them. Guns? Yeah!

Even if a goon with a heavy machine gun (China with nukes) was holding 50 people (Japan, the US) hostage?

While you are entirely correct NK can in no way win any war, it is not obvious that they know that. Evidence from people who have been there is that they believe their own propaganda. They might, in their insanity, start a war they /thought/ they could win. Though they would lose, the carnage would be appalling.

Because China, the third largest nuclear power on the planet, regards NK as deep in its "sphere of influence", and would regard any serious attack on NK as tantamount to a declaration of war. You have a rabid chihuahua owned by a heavyweight boxing champion. The dog is not problem, but the owner will flatten you.

No, by "levelling Seoul" is meant firing a barrage with the 14,000 well maintained, well dug in artillery pieces they have on their side of the border, aimed at Seoul. Conservative, old technology - but excellent for city busting.

It is not 60 year old ordnance, but it may be 60 year old designs - though I suspect it is newer. The one thing they have spend money on is conventional artillery. The have approx 14,000 guns (IIRC), believed to be well maintained and well emplaced in hardened bunkers, pointed at Seoul. It may well not be the latest precision targeted munitions. It doesn't need to be - Seoul is a large target. I saw a theoretical figure of half a million shells per hour. Obviously, that level would not be reached - but a tenth of that would be devastating.

Yes, NK could be flattened with conventional missiles. But they have enough artillery pieces lined up on the border (14,000, IIRC), with ammunition, to send up to half a million shells an hour into Seoul for a day or so. Before they were incapacitated, they could kill maybe ten million people is South Korea. Yes, it would be pointless slaughter, pure vindictiveness. But I am not prepared to say they wouldn't do it.

Source for distance, with position http://www.perseus.gr/Astro-Photometry-Kepler-KOI-0256-20110828.htm

Third hit on Google.

Why not? The energy was extracted from the environment and converted into a sound file playable on your computer. It may have been post-processed a bit, but it is a record of fluctuations created by the Bug Bang.

But, for example, the Alcubierre drive would allow us to travel to the stars in reasonable subjective time without FTL travel. If it could be built (manipulating multiple Jupiter-sized masses is currently a bit of a problem).

I think that Kepler is looking only at stars in our galaxy, a few hundred or thousand light years away/ago, so the time ago is not that great - within prehistory if not history, We can be pretty confident that laws of physics have not changed much since mammals evolved. This star is apparently 1,828 light years away,