"universe" = everything observable.
But that grammatical rule breaks down if you put the word at the start of a sentence.
If you have a favorite animal, I can rephrase to accommodate.
Probably wouldn't work with my dog, it would just eat the rubber band.
There are an infinite worlds, yet in none of those you're GWB
At least that explains why in this universe GWB doesn't punch himself in the face every now and then.
no need to read the stories
Indeed, there's a good reason the paper is known as the daily fail to people in the UK.
... Possibly I am a friend of this person, which is WHY I asked him to post the file.
... [Jane Q. Public]
Thanks for confirming that you asked Lonny Eachus to post the file, because you know him and are possibly his friend. Why are you so ambiguous and evasive about your friendship with Lonny Eachus? It almost sounds like you're ashamed to be his friend. As I've pointed out, you and Lonny Eachus have so much in common that you're clearly soulmates.
Strangely, Lonny Eachus seems to feel the same way about Jane. After I debunked Lonny's claim that dark energy is dead, Lonny went on an evasive rant that seems almost identical to Jane's comments above. Why would Lonny Eachus be ashamed of being friends with Jane, when they have so much in common?
Now that we're reasonably sure Mars is barren
Who is this "we" who are reasonably sure that Mars is barren? It sure doesn't include me. OK, I'm not a specialist biologist emphasising study of the 5 points which we've measured on Mars (and found lacking in life forms which we recognise, I'll grant), but I am a geologist with a better than normal understanding of the variability of rocks and the habitats that they represent to life forms. People I was at university with have worked on (and published) on some very peculiar terrestrial organisms from deep oil wells, and that represents just a few percent of the potentially habitable volume of this planet. And remember : so far we're only looking for life forms that have metabolisms and physiologies which function broadly similarly to ours.
If we had (say) 10 independent OOL (Origin Of Life) events (say, in different stellar systems), and in our couple of decades of experimentation Mars didn't have a trace of any of those systems, then I might agree that a few decades of searching would be sufficient. But since we still really have NO IDEA what the actual range of effective solutions to the questions of metabolism and physiology are, for this initial case I'd vote strongly in favour of waiting for a generation or ten. Say, until we've got a plan to decontaminate the planet which is as achievable (in the next ten human generations) as terraforming the planet.
(Though I'm a fan of SF, when I'm talking about terraforming Mars, I'm talking about a real plan, not a hand-wavey SF-quality plan. For example, it would be nice to know where you plan to get the 4*10^18kg (approx) of water that you'd need to put a 100m of water onto 30% of the surface (assuming you want some sort of vaguely terrestrial climate, and you're going to use a significant amount of water for things like agriculture). More to the point, how are you going to get to that level of space-faring expertise without concluding that living in asteroid belts is just plain easier than terraforming even quite terrestrial planets like Mars? Build the environment that you want, rather than having to tear down an existing environment and then build the environment that you want.)
That I actually have done
But yes, it's not exactly a very practical solution for Iceland. I'd really prefer something more designed for both roles, hanging and on the ground.
Are you talking about a Hennessy? I love mine. And I live in Iceland, where it's harder to use. I have no clue where you're getting that they're heavy. Unless you're comparing the regular nylon version to a silnylon tent, rather than nylon to nylon, silnylon to silnylon. The one-man silnylon versions are in the ballpark of 800 grams, including the fly. You kind of have to adapt them to use them as tents on the ground, though, they're not designed for that (but it is possible). Another criticism of them I have is that underside insulation seems to be an afterthought, and I'm not a big fan of their insulation kit (there's no reason it should be foam, I'd like a self-inflating mat). Their snakeskin packing system works well, but you can't pack up the hammock with the insulation on it; honestly, I'd love it if I could have my sleeping bag, hammock, and insulation all roll up as one element. And if had been designed to work both a tent and a hammock from the beginning, the insulation could double as a sleeping pad.
Not to mention that as a mountaineer, I'd think he'd care more about cooking efficiency than cook time. And while it's great to utilize the flame energy more efficiently, there's a far more significant optimization one can do - make insulated cozies that fit your pots. Bring to a boil, shut off the heat, put the pot it in the cozy and let it cook. For my pots, I made an underpiece and a lid that fits over each other, both out of aluminized foam; it works very well.
(Of course, he could be one of those people that doesn't eat any "cooked" meals, only the "just add boiling water" meals. In that case, then I guess it's all about the efficiency of using the energy from the flame
What I want to see in backpacking is a full integrated system. Where the tent is a hammock is a backpack is a ground cloth is a pack cover is a camp chair and so on down the line, where most components serve multiple uses. When I think about how much "fabric" and "rigid structures" I carry with me that if designed properly could be eliminated, it just seems like a waste.
No, I quoted that AC because, as I said, I hadn't heard your lectures on the hollow earth, birds evolving from insects, bismuth being a stable element, water shrinking when it freezes, and super conductivity being the result of electron tripletting.
I have seen you spray nonsense like a firehose on dozens of similarly absurd topics, so I wouldn't be surprised. I just wanted to see if those particular topics were part of Jane/Lonny Eachus's comedy act.
No, dozens of experimental data points where Jane might have been honestly overwhelmed by his Sauron-class Morton's demon. One control data point where Jane is definitely lying, because he's a pathological liar named Lonny Eachus who's dishonestly posing as a woman on the internet. Consider this AC:
"... Jane Q exists to intentionally miss the point in subtle ways and argue endlessly, never quite coming to grips with reality, while always retreating to some absurd evasion that seems to acknowledge the obvious while, in fact, concluding the exact opposite.
While this is an accurate description of Jane and I've also noticed Jane's dark matter claims, I'm curious to hear Jane's lectures about the hollow earth, birds evolving from insects, bismuth being a stable element, water shrinking when it freezes, and super conductivity being the result of electron tripletting.
Don't hit the keys so hard, it hurts.