Beer?! That's nothing! They should have tested how much more awesomely creative you are after smoking marijuana. I remember one time, I smoked a joint, and someone asked a question about what to do about unemployment, and I came up with this fantastic idea, and it was just so perfect and then I.. and then.. and.. hey, got any Cheetos?

I not no how to uze internets, but me has gun and can drive the car to beer store.

Never mind. The fact you were able to type and submit it with your head nailed to the floor displays a certain "stick-to-it" attitude that will do you all right in the end.

I remember as a young lad, raised in Canada and speaking the Queen's English (not "that insufferable American argot", as one of my English masters had it), encountering the word "intrepid". Following the examples of metre (mee-tur) and centre (cen-tur), I pronounced it during an oral reading as "in-tur-pid", which brought the proceedings to an immediate halt.I tried to explain myself, repeating "in-tur-pid, it's right there in the book!" to increasing laughter from my class, but the master was sure I was having him on, and gave me a gating. Such, such were the joys..

Lasers are used underground to determine the location. If there are turns, mirrors are used.

Shark-mounted, no doubt.

Both Coors, and Miller, are now owned by canadian Molson.

Actually, not really true. The two companies merged, and control is shared between the Molson and Coors families. So, certain Canadians claim Molson's was taken over by Coors, and certain Americans claim the reverse. Later, they reached an agreement with Miller to do joint marketing, but it wasn't clear from the articles I read if this involved any change of ownership.

Except that an epidemic, using Wikipedia (since that's your reference) "occurs when new cases of a certain disease, in a given human population, and during a given period, substantially exceed what is "expected,". Now, given the predictions for H1NI, and given that this was the mildest flu season in years (in Canada, at any rate, and from what I've read in the US as well; not sure about other countries), how in the name of God does this definition hold? The number of new cases was substantially less than was predicted. So, if there's no epidemic, how can there be a pandemic? I call shenanigans on the media, hyping another non-existent "disaster".

Not disagreeing with you, but whenever someone points out the same BS in the climate debate, they are labeled a "denier", and subject to all kinds of calumny. The AGW crowd purposely hides the medieval warming period from their graphs, applies all kinds of (undisclosed) "adjustments" to raw temp readings (all of which apparently skew the temp upwards), close off sources of raw data (there used to be about 100 temp stations north of 60 in Canada; now there's ONE), place many weather stations in places that contravene their own regulations (close to A/C exhausts, tarmac, etc.), project doomsday scenarios about Pacific islands (none of which have disappeared).

I'm a freakin' engineer, and this complete contravention of anything that smacks of science drives me nuts. I'm not saying AGW doesn't exist; it may well be true. I'm saying on the basis of what's been shown, and more importantly, how it's been shown, the case is definitely "not proven".

This gets back to my much earlier complaint that java, html, etc. are cryptic because the friggin' guys who write them and use them DON'T WANT TO DO ANY TYPING.
I mean your html "Hello World" is unintelligble to anyone without programming background.
Write the same thing in VB:
Program HelloWorld
Begin
      Print "Hello World"
End
The html example uses 38 key strokes. The VB version uses 46. Yet I could show it to any reasonably intelligent kid, and he'd understand it pretty easily. Why should kids get wrapped up in cryptic syntax instead of programming in English? It's not like the logic in VB is inferior to the logic used by other languages. You still have to figure out all the steps in your program, get the logic correct, put in error checking/trapping if required, and then test it to make it sure does exactly what you want.
I still remember my very first CS class at the University of Toronto. The instructor went on and on about the importance of documentation, both for maintenance purposes, but more importantly, for debugging. He said if we would write out exactly what we wanted our programs to do, step by step, in English, it would make debugging faster and easier. And I've found that to be true. When I do documentation first, it speeds up the whole process; when I try to do it quick and dirty, it ends up taking me longer. I'd introduce a kid to any natural language type program first. I actually liked Turbo Pascal when I started using it after university (where I wrote in assembler, Fortran, and some exotics like Lisp and Spitbol) because I found it much easier to read over parts of the program when requirements changed, and understand what I had done, and what I needed to do.