"We?" How old *are* you?!
"No one has ever known we were among you. Until now..."
We're talking about Jews, here—there's a difference: One takes things out of your house but the other takes you out of your house.
while were at it
While I find your ideas intriguing, please don't write a newsletter. No one will subscribe to it.
India's views on homosexuality are amongst the most hostile on the planet
India's views on inter-racial marriage, hell even marriage within the same race (as it is socially defined) but outside of your own caste is the most hostile on the planet. For that matter, India's views on just about every social issue are extremely hostile. They make the US look like a bastion of liberal tolerance.
We need a new legal category, Asshole. Beyond Guilty or Not Guilty the Asshole standard would be added after guilt or innocence so we could find someone was Not Guilty but still an Asshole.
But then, all of Congress would be in prison. Somehow, I don't think they'll pass something like that.
With all of these politicians, I'm never sure if they actually are so ignorant to reject science out of hand, or if they are so self-serving that they simply lie about what they actually believe in order to win votes from people who really are ignorant. I tend to think it's the latter, and that that is more despicable.
When it comes to politicians and lawyers (of course, there is considerable overlap), you can always count on the more despicable option.
If a creationist says that the Oort Cloud is unscientific, people mock them. But the reality is, it doesn't follow a single tenet of the scientific method. It exists purely because without it, the presence of comets in the solar system would prove that the solar system is too young. So a theoretical "comet-holding" cloud is invented out of thin air because long ages require it, not because of any sort of observation or because the facts led anyone there.
Funny, I thought the Oort Cloud hypothesis had something to do with the existence of long-period comets, their period being easily calculable according to orbital mechanics (but then you probably don't believe in that, either). What's next? Denial of detected background radiation since it is evidence of the Big Bang?
It's also laughable how they believe there's even a remote possibility that they could swap spectrum with the DoD.
Indeed. The one agency that really could nuke them from orbit, just to be sure ^_^
And I think it's worth me stating this outright, lest someone claim I am a shill for LS - I think their plan was stupid, their product flawed and their approach totally wrong, and I think that all of those things were obvious from day one.
Which is also why I think the FCC shares some responsibility here.
So, you are saying that the FCC should be a stonewalling, Catch-22ing, dinosaur? Personally, I find it refreshingly modern that they actually let LS try. If LS fucked it up, they have only themselves to blame.
That's my point - they were given provisional approval to proceed, and when they failed the tests the FCC allowed them for months to submit proposed solutions. The provisional approval should never have been given, as it's a totally different use for the band than allocated for in the license - the FCC should have closed the door right then and there.
Then we'd be reading a story about how some spoiled rich brat was suing because the mean ol' FCC wouldn't approve his nifty idea.
1. Spoiled rich brats usually aren't doing anything technical enough and affecting the EM spectrum enough to require FCC approval.
2. If they are, they usually have Daddy (or themselves if they are old enough) to buy off a few politicians to get the law changed, after a prolonged media campaign about "modernizing" the laws.
all people at the institute rim goats and kiss underage boys. climate science is as false as my statement
Slanderous nonsense! Everyone knows they kiss goats and rim underage boys.
"methinks the lady doth protest too much"
if the documents were fake, they wouldn't elicit such a strong reaction. therefore, the documents are real
Not to be nit-picky, but when the queen said this in Hamlet, she meant "promise" too much, as the word was sometimes used then.
The most fascinating thing about this is the general hypocrisy involved. Whenever the whole "ClimateGate" matter occurred, Heartland was at the front of trumpeting the documents from that (which incidentally turned out to be utterly benign), with zero concern about the ethics of taking confidential documents from other people using hacking. Yet now, when the same thing happens to them, they use every bit of the legal system to go after not just the people who actually did do it but anyone who is then commenting or reproducing the documents. Really charming behavior.
You want to see even greater hypocrisy? Go to the Heartland Institute site and look up their articles on Tort Reform. Hypocrisy indeed!