Why would you used a complex system like this? Because you are not at your summer house and instead in Haiti right after the earth quake where they can bring a bunch of these things in easily and have a more sanitary situation then waiting a year for it to decompose properly. Now exchange Haiti with any other city and any other disaster and you won't have to worry about your kids picking berries and foraging for food from the bush your neighbor shits under.
Well, I guess it will make it easier to display the at the stores. You know, when a kid gets potty trained and you are at the hardware store looking for something to fix your leaky faucet and turn to find Junior is looking for the TP and asking you to help wipe. Now all they need to do is stick it outside for a couple hours.
My question is, how will this smell. I've had the misfortune of having to pour diesel fuel on a pile of shit and burning it before and it wasn't a good experience. And that outhouse was chemically treated to keep the smell down too. I cannot imagine many people wanting to purposely hang out around them.
How does the scientific method get destroyed by religion? I can see it being ignored periodically but not destroyed in the slightest. Very few parts of most religions cross the scientific method and even less conflict with anything produced by it.
You mean the bombing we had knowledge of and didn't prevent in order to allow our entry into WWII?
We could have relaxed our economic policy towards Japan and issued a stern warning instead of going to war with Germany I guess. Well, we did give Japan a stern warning but it didn't work because we demanded the complete withdrawal of all Japanese troops from French Indochina and China. Japan wasn't worried about us until we started clamping down on them economically for their actions in china and surrounding territories and demanding they cease. The US Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson, documented in his diary that he had discussions with Roosevelt about how to manipulate Japan "into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves".
Well, that is we could of until Germany attacked the US which we know they had plans for doing but do not know if those plans were simply provisional contingency plans like we keep on regular basis or an actual strategy they were going to implement at some point in time.
Anyways, the point still stands. The D and R mean nothing beside a president's name as shit happens and it gets dealt with. The GP was factually incorrect. Democrats get us into war too. Available evidence and history shows us that we could have avoided an attack on Perl Harbor by the Japanese but didn't really want to. To say Roosevelt was only responding is a little naive.
Besides, just as many people say "third of April" as "April the third".
I guess then both ways are just as valid and all this bickering is pedantic BS over personal preference rather than logic or anything of value.
Hence we are back to the real world.
Slight correction for you. Downloading is not defined as a copyright violation. Copyright does not protect who gets access to a protected work, just who can copy and distribute it. Downloading does neither unless you stretch the meaning of the word copying to include the machine you are downloading from making and transmitting a copy to you.
And the lost sale/money argument is incorrect. If you own a canoe rental business and I come in the middle of the night when you are closed and use your canoes without paying you, you are still entitled to the rental fees even though there is no noticeable degradation of the property or inability to rent the canoes. It is a process called conversion which is under the theft laws. Copyright restricts access except when the copyright owner allows and if they demand a fee, you accessing without paying that fee is a loss to them of the entire fee because the law has made it that way.
Now, I do not disagree with your overall premise though. Downloading by those who wouldn't normally go and see the movies or buy the CDs likely does help the studios and artists. The alternative would not be them making a purchase, it would be them ignoring the content altogether had an opportunity not risen that allowed them access. So I am confident that if they were not able to download, no sale would happen just as if you put locks on your canoes. But just as I converted your property for my benefit in the canoe scenario, I would be doing the same in downloading your movies and music without payment and you would legally be otherwise entitled to that payment.
Ecological disaster? So the goal posts are moved again I see. There will be no ecological disaster from running out of oil. Perhaps an economical disaster but it is highly unlikely.
The laws of supply and demand will move fast enough to ensure disaster is adverted. However, that is not to say some will not feel pain because of it. But that was not the point of my post. The point was to display the concept the GP was conveying to someone who clearly didn't understand it.
Could wouldn't become more expensive then diamonds. You are missing his entire point which isn't very novel but understood well.
So lets put this in another way. Suppose you are going to build a house out of these resources. Would you build it out of coal which would cost $10 a square foot of living space, or oil that would cost $11 per square foot of living space, or solar and wind that costs $15 per square foot of living space? Suppose you decided on Coal because it was the cheapest and you could get the most for your money. Suppose everyone did so driving the demand up therefore the price of coal goes up. Now suppose the cost of the coal house is $14 per square foot of living space. Your neighbor would likely build his out of oil because again, it is the most economical at the time.
Well, this drives oil up to $16 per square foot of living space and decreasing supplies with the same demand has already taken coal up some more to $17 per square foot of living space. Now I might chose solar and wind because it is cheaper at $15 per square foot of living space. As the resources deplete and cost more, demand will change because people will start switching to the more economical resources.
Did that illustrate it simple enough for you to understand? As demand goes up or stays the same and supply decreases, the prices increase. When the prices increase past the costs of other resources, people switch to the other resources halting or slowing the increasing of the pricing and the depletion of the resource. Eventually, if you run out of a resource, society will be off it long before that happens and it will not be because society is dependent on that resource unless it is some magical resource with some special property that cannot be found anywhere else and no one can ever engineer around it.
lol.. I see you took and passed the course on liberal debate and politics. Your little diatribe addressed nothing the poster said and did nothing but attempt to attack him. I guess you really do fear them tea partiers or something. I know their calm and straight forward approach backed by facts (or what appears to be facts) is scary when the most you got is emotional name calling and attempted insults. But I would challenge you to take this opportunity to search why your ideology leaves you so incapable of addressing his points and you have to resort to name calling and attempted insults. I suggest it has more to do with your beliefs then his.
I think he knows that. He just doesn't like the right wing and religious nutters being involved.
The oil we used today is as cheap as almost any other time in life. Efficiencies in process techniques and new processes have made this so.
This is what I don't understand from all the we are out of oil doom and gloom'ers. They say we need to adapt and change because we are running out of a resource but refuse to accept that the industry harvesting that resource has adapted and changed to cope with decline in the resources.
The US is poised to become the top oil producing nation in 2015.
If you consider all the other resources like Coal and Natural Gas, the doom and gloom will only be a slow transition to other resources over a period of several decades or more. And even the article I linked to is basing it's analysis on current tech. Any advancements or innovation can easily change it's predictions on the future output of oil.
I don't think the pilot would turn off the GPS transmitter in case of fire, he would turn off the electrical circuit powering it. Of course that could be dealt with by a battery and a circuit inside the unit that isolates it from the electrical system if it is ever disabled for any reason. I believe that's how the automatic electrical switches work for whole house generators, they isolate the internal circuits from the utility power until the utility power is restored.
Its not terribly more difficult for other then cars.
A few years back, a friend's daughter was headed to South America for some missionary work and would be in some what we consider to be dangerous countries (lots of kidnappings, armed rebels or drug cartels and so on). We found UN approved asset tracking devices a little larger then a credit card but about 5 times as thick. Probably about the size of a small smart phone but before those became popular.
A satellite can ping them, they ping back and a network of satellites coordinate its position. They have several methods of communications including cellular networks. Because it is normally passive, the battery life is on the order of 5 years unless it is transmitting a lot. It's designed to go onto heavy equipment, supply shipment containers and so on so they can be located around the world including in the cargo bay of cargo ships or the middle of a jungle or on a job site in the middle of a big city.
The thought was that if something happened to her, we could get close to finding her location by locating her belongings and perhaps her too. Of course we would have needed to rely on the authorities to trust us on the claim of location which is why we specifically chose a UN approved device. Thankfully, it was just an unnecessary item she had to lug around as she was quite a bit safer then he initially thought but it put her father at ease.
There are devices that could go years without power that could be used to locate just about anything. I guess the problem would be people knowing about it because if you know, you can disable or remove. So security by obscurity might be somewhat valid in a case or situation like this. But I would assume it can be done if the costs weren't prohibitive. I think the one my friend used set him back about 5 grand including the monitoring and all for the 9 months she was gone.
It also falls when you consider that the pilot can simply dump the fuel once he is out past a point of no return and force a crash when the remaining fuel runs out. He could even accelerate that crash by flying faster or slower then optimal speed and altitude.
777s have knowingly dumped their fuel in the past to make emergency landings and such.
People have suspected the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center of being turned into political entity ever since James Hanson started using it as credentials for his global warming activism. Its no wonder why congress continues to limit funding for NASA.