Well that's quite a foolish (and probably racist) thing to say. According to wikipedia, Nigeria puts out less CO2 than 42 other countries, while China, the US, the EU, India, and Russia top the list in that order. I'm willing to bet that Nigerians also probably aren't particularly high-carbon emissions per capita compared to people in my country, the United States.
But this is all a bit much because you probably don't really want to control the population of the biggest CO2 emitters, do you? You're more likely interested in using any convenient and sloppy excuse to call for population control for nations whose citizens you don't particularly care for.
You wouldn't happen to be ethincally Chinese by any chance, would you, ShanghaiBill? Because if so, according to your own logic and wikipedia, you should hand out condoms to yourself.
I wonder how much resistance a theory like this gets just because feathered dinosaurs wouldn't look nearly as cool as the ones we see pictured today?
For me, the resistance comes when I look at the large reptiles of today which are descended from dinosaurs.They don't have feathers.
I'm confused here, can't you keep reading one particle and observing different spins based on when you observed it?
Short answer: NO.
Longer answer: measuring state collapses the waveform and every subsequent measurement will be the same.
Disclaimer: I am not a physicist nor do I pretend to be a physicist. These facts established, I am not your physicist, either. If you check back tomorrow, I still will not be a/your physicist.
"This is an easy one. Entangled particles operate using the same physics as wormholes. If one of the entangled pair is accelerated to relativistic velocities, say in a particle accelerator, they will not exist in the same relative timeframe. (SNIP)"
That's a misunderstanding of entanglement. There is not per see communication between the particle. When you have an entangled particle there is not one "communicating" the other that it is getting observed. What happens is that *both* particle form a single system with the specific property that when the spin of one particle is measured , the other particle has the anti spin state. Using all sort of relativistic trick on one particle will not do anything whatsoever because there is no communication to the other particle therefor frame of reference do nothing whatsoever.
I'm mostly an untutored observer in the domain of Quantum Mechanics, and even I could see the beginner's flaw in the thought experiment for the Many Worlds model.
My best guess is that the OP, understanding the concept of quantum entanglement does not involve communication between particles, is trolling everybody (or just having some fun).
My worst guess is that the OP has gotten so old the OP's mental faculties are slipping and so the OP has achieved subjective immortality but neglected to acquire eternal mental youth.
If by "right side" he means leaning towards totalitarianism and increasingly corporatist/fascist views towards online freedoms, then ok, I guess I can agree.
The right side? What a bunch of horseshit. The summary quotes Kerry as saying
And we believe these principles can positively help us to distinguish the legitimate practices of states governed by the rule of law from the legitimate practices of states that actually use surveillance to repress their people. And while I expect you to hold the United States to the standards that I've outlined, I also hope that you won't let the world forget the places where those who hold their government to standards go to jail rather than win prizes.
Which I'm might be a typo ("the legitimate practices of states that actually use surveillance to repress their people") but would be unsurprised to find out he actually said that, Freudian slip and all that.
What really infuriates me is the hypocrisy and the lies. Who is "win[ning] prizes" for holding the US government to standards? Snowden had to flee his country to seek asylum in RUSSIA for crying out loud.
The whole thing stinks and they (Kerry, Obama) have the gall to lie to our faces that they are going to do something about it.
I'm so angry I could spit.
It's over... apple is finished..
The summary has one detail wrong.
Yes, developers who do pay a yearly fee have been able to download betas of OS X. Additionally, users identified by various means were invited by Apple to be a beta testers and those invited testers paid nothing to be download, test, and evaluate OS X betas.
I know this because I have been one of those invited testers since 2008.
Russia sees this lucrative in advancing the plans to build a gas pipe and railroad through North to South Korea
Seriously? Lay critical crucial infrastructure through North Korea to South Korea?
There's no way Pyongyang would manipulate those rails and pipes in a fit of political pique that seems to happen, oh, once every eight months. Absolutely now way.
I get the same kind of car every time I rent (Toyota Prius because of low emissions), so the controls are pretty much where I expect them.
However, I know my case is somewhat unusual given there are dozens of Zipcar locations within a 1-mile radius of where I live. This means I can bike to my Zipcar rental, lower the back seats, and put my bike in. Because I have lots of places to find a Zipcar, I can almost always find one of a particular make.
They are not "nothing", but the psychological mechanism is what does the work. The trigger is in fact "nothing", in that it plays no part in the medical effect.
WTH. Mods on crack.
You said pretty much the same thing I said, except you made a mistake when you said "the trigger is in fact 'nothing'. " The "trigger" is often a sugar pill or some regimen believed not to have a therapeutic effect. Again, as you and I have both said, that is not nothing,
Nothing would be no exposure, either to a placebo or a substance/regimen suspected to have a therapeutic effect.
So the best argument in favor of your treatment is that it works as well as nothing, which is totally proven to work, sometimes?
You're equating "placebo" with "nothing". A "placebo" is not the same as "nothing". Placebos may activate psychological (or other) mechanisms to achieve their better-than-nothing results but, by definition, they are not nothing.
I think you're ignoring the obvious. Or maybe you're actually saying something of value and I can't parse. Maybe you're trolling.
So, telecoms charge to build and run infrastructure that transports packet traffic.
Internal distinctions a company makes about where to invest revenue and resources to build and run that infrastructure do not change the fact that building and maintaining that infrastructure is the same phenomenological process that moves data across the Internet's networks.
All the bureaucratic details of what a telecom must do to keep the infrastructure running doesn't change this fact.
The "academic" branch of feminism - like all academia - is safely removed from the real world and traffics mainly in the Andrea Dworkin "all heterosexual intercourse is rape" and Starhawk-style schools of radical feminism. This is a holdout from pre-'80s feminism and remains the intellectual vanguard of feminism but is a small niche among women.
As a former faculty of American Literature at at a research university, I can assure you that you have no idea what academic feminism is.
Critical theory, race studies, religious studies, psychoanalysis, film theory, subject spectator theory, semiotics, linguistics, cultural anthropology, and more are all well-understood by and -represented among the scholars and intellectuals who are recognized as feminists. Academic feminists analyze and consider the signs, systems of meaning, legal histories, social histories, cultural artifacts, popular culture, etc. etc, etc. insofar as they affect women and the people to whom women are connected, which would be every human being who has ever lived.
Feminism is multiple, not singular, and the best way to describe what drives feminists is the desire to see women—and the people and collectives to which those women are connected and by which they are constituted—to be empowered and autonomous rather than (as has historically been and, in many contexts, currently is the case) disenfranchised and subjugated.
Seriously, do yourself a favor and understand that movements that promote human welfare are good for everyone. People threatened by feminism don't understand feminism. Feminism is about making things better, flawed as some of its approaches may be.
Here's something old-school style that demonstrates some "academic" feminism from 1991: Donna Haraway's "A Cyborg Manfiesto". That's some old-school cultural anthropological feminism for you that is super awesome, fun, literate, and though-provoking.
Try it and see. Some of these people are smart and amazing. You might be surprised.
(As a straight male professor, it agonized me when young intelligent women would come to my survey on critical theory and proudly announce during our feminist section that "I am not a feminist." I am grateful to have had the opportunity to change some of these young persons' minds.)
Let me take a shot at incorporating this detail: The buyer is paying the post office's parent company for construction and maintenance of post roads.
Come on. Are you even trying to make a coherent argument?
In the case of the Internet, paying for the "construction and maintenance" of infrastructure is the same thing as paying to have the bits go back and forth across the networks that make up the Internet.
Or are you seriously saying telecomms are charging to "move" ones and zeroes separately from the infrastructure and energy through which those ones and zeroes "move"?