You do nothing that a small shell script can't except post silly comments and waste our time. :p

They weren't. They were pointing out that the Mongolia being referred to in the story is the independent country that's not a part of China, and making the distinction between the two Mongolias without getting bogged down in a discussion of internal Chinese politics that would be utterly irrelevant to the point being made.

Yes, this gets predicted every day going back to the invention of language. Alas, it never happens. We continue to lurch and stumble forward into the future like the large group of incompetent boobs that we are...

Of course it does. One does not accidentally create a headline so well fine tuned to misrepresent the contents of a story or contradict its conclusions. It requires careful editing...

In the absence of burning children, the idiot who throws her bag into the fire without knowing whether it contains commonly found, easy to obtain insulin or something rare and possibly irreplaceable on short notice ought to be thrown into the fire before he actually kills someone with his rage instead of causing a minor inconvenience for this guy's wife. This guy's wife is probably being slightly unwise in an emergency. The guy who throws her bag in the fire is a dangerous psychopath, or at least has both extremely serious anger-management issues and poor judgement -- not a good combination.

Or if you do see them walking away, you have bigger problems to deal with than an airplane crash...

The words following the comma in the above sentence demonstrate that the words before the comma are false.

Oh, no, there's no problem with you. But that, in an of itself, would make you far from ordinary... and is probably untrue. What I should have more accurately said was, "the problem [referring specifically to this one] isn't with you". Doubtless you're as screwed up as the rest of us, just in ways that aren't relevant to the topic at hand.

I do hope the widow/children/survivors of the guy whose life-saving medicine you threw in the fire manage to get a substantial reward from the court. I'd hope for at least a criminal manslaughter charge, too, but that might be more difficult to get. With any luck, you'll die before this situation comes up and no one will have to be harmed by how obviously huge an asshole you are...

Nor bound to any other specific definition. Hence, confusion...

The mistake some people make is in assuming the latter is even possible without doing the former. Optical illusions are possible because even the most immediate mental image of what's before you eyes at the very moment is an interpretation in your mind of what you think your eyes are telling you. Perception necessarily involves interpretation.

First, you ask them which axis it rotated around while avoiding the terms they're unfamiliar with, like "roll" (in the technical sense), "pitch" and "yaw". When they respond with obvious confusion, you go on to explain what an "axis" is and what "axis of rotation" means. If they haven't wandered away by that point but are still standing in front of you making apparent eye-contact, wave your hands to verify that they are in fact too dazed to wander off on their own and call over a paramedic.

That works for this site. Your average CNN viewer isn't enough of a geek to know what "yaw" means. Heck, the majority of them will get "axis" wrong if you ask them to define it in their own words...

Aerospace engineers and aviation geeks are apparently resented by computer geeks because they were never as uncool... :p