Anecdotal example: I drive a pickup truck, and I have owned it for 11 years. It is on its way out soon, and I can't wait to get a small car as I am tired of having something that costs so much to fill up, has bad traction on snow/ice, and is hard to navigate in tight parking lots. But then maybe after xx years in a compact, I'll buy another truck...
MY first car was a 1980 Bronco (that I got in the early 2000s). I loved that thing. Went from that to an Infiniti I30, from that to a 2006 Tundra, and now I'm back to a 2014 Focus. I'm hoping my next one (in about 7-10 years) will be a Jeep. It really is kind of cyclical.
I don't understand why so many people want to drive pickups either. In a pickup you can only haul stuff you care about in decent weather. I get it if you're a farmer or ranch hand and need to haul messy stuff year round, but why would anyone else want to drive a truck? And why is it that the bigger the pickup, the greater the odds that they will back into parking spaces?
I used to drive a pickup with a foldable/removeable bed cover. It allowed me to carry more than I could in a SUV and allowed me to transport stuff in bad weather. It was very handy while I was in college (about 400 miles from where I lived) and whenI was moving around in grad school. My friends in grad school also solicited my help for moves several times as well.
Lucas claims this is not a revenge plot.
Lucas's representatives said this is not revenge for the blocked film studio, reports The Daily Mail.
Did the representatives wave their hands as they made that statement?
Considering Interpol never gets involved in small crime, let alone one where one law agency hasn't even issued a warrant, merely requesting he presents himself to answer some sex without condom charges, shouldn't we also be asking why this case is so special and why don't they do this for ever other incident that crosses borders?
Interpol doesn't choose what crimes to get involved in. If a state makes a request to Interpol for a red notice then Interpol sends it out. It's not like the movie Hitman with a squad of armed agents roaming all over a country looking for 1 person; they simply facilitate requests and notices between agencies of different states.
Replace "science" with "football" in your assertion of what people should do, and explain why your rendering of what's important is objectively better, beyond being better for massaging your own ego.
Sure. I played football from elementary school all the way through college. My wife knows nothing about the sport but I want her to watch it with me. I don't start talking about different offensive formations like pistol, shotgun, spread, or when to use a 4-3 instead of a 3-4 defense. I start with basics, give her a rough idea of who everyone is and what they do so she can follow along while I can pay more attention to the "tactics" of the game. I fail to see how this is a bad thing (or "massaging my ego"-nice ad hominen by the way), and is precisely how you go about bringing in people that are completely unfamiliar with a topic. If you tailor a tv show about science to the people with a Master's degree or higher level of understanding then you miss out on a lot of people.
Is it true the public facing entertainment network is connected to the aircraft's avionics? That seems fucking insane!
They aren't. This is an idiot trying to make a joke after the report from the FAA came out the other day.
I have a big interest in physics and cosmology, etc, and generally fall asleep listening to some lecture or talk of some sort, be it Feynman or Susskind or what have you.
Quit mixing pop culture and science, it dumbs it down and makes people I respected once look like
These kinds of shows aren't for people who fall asleep every night listening to lectures. These kinds of shows are for the people who think Taylor Swift is the greatest singer/songwriter of all time, or can name everyone in the newest season of Dancing with the Stars but can't name the top people in government. The idea is to get people who aren't normally interested in science to at least think about it, to develop a rudimentary understanding of how science works (scientific theory, how scientists think, etc) and why the world around them is the way it is. Even a simplistic understadning is better than no understanding at all.
...and trying to put aside years of bad blood and bruised egos.
Wow, who would have thought there was so much glory in being the 'origins of dog' guy.
Must be a bunch of glory hounds
And a religion that says "I believe X, Y and Z, I exploit people where I can, and I do what I can to hurt my perceived enemies" has no chance.
Sounds like they would have better luck going for corporate tax breaks.
Ahemm.. extermination of the American BIson... anybody? By the 1860s numerous US military figures advocated the extermination of the bison as a method to subjugate the American Aboriginals. General Philip Sheridan even stepped before Congress to plead for permissions to slaughter the bison herds to starve Native Americans into submission.
Was the blockade of the South during the Civil War an attempt at Genocide? How about blockading Germany during WWI/WWII? That's not an example of genocide, that's trying to defeat an enemy by targeting their ability to wage war (can't fight without food). As I said, it was more a low intensity guerrilla war than it was a genocide.
The crusades were a response to 400 years of enslavement and wholesale slaughter by Muslims.
The Crusades were an attempt by a European noble class that was declining in wealth and power to find a way for their population to target their frustrations on an outside threat rather than enslavers/rulers and claim more land for themselves. When Christians would sack a town they would usually slaughter all inhabitants-man, woman, child, Christian, Muslim, or Jew (easier to loot from the dead). Muslims usually let Christians and Jews live-they might pressure them to convert or force them to pay a tax, but they still got to live.
We cannot command nature except by obeying her. -- Sir Francis Bacon