Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.

1st world: United States and allies during the cold war.
2nd world: Soviet Union, China, and allies during the cold war.
3rd world: Any nation not listed in the above two categories.

Look it up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3rd_world

I believe the current consensus is that Jupiter and Saturn (and I'm not sure about the other Gas Giants) has a compressed "liquid metal Hydrogen" core, (where Hydrogen at sufficient pressure acts as a metal): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallic_hydrogen#Astrophysics. IANA Physicist, so take that wiki article at face value. I'm still with you on not knowing what would happen, but I suspect that pressures significant to turn Hydrogen into a metal, I'd lean towards something akin to your diamond explanation, depending on the composition of the impacting body.

Here's three:

Rockets first:

• Titan
• Atlas
• Delta

Next, Launch Capabilities:

• United Launch Alliance

I don't know if LM or Boeing still provide launch services outside of the scope of ULA.

Which country do you live in?

To be fair, we used to think of atoms in the same way (that's why we called them 'atomic'). We learned more, and revised our thinking, but the name stuck.

As much as it troubles me, I must agree. I loved learning Java, and I still love writing and using it, but it hasn't had the force behind it that it once did. Initially, it had a similar dictatorship running the show (albeit not a single person, but Sun wouldn't let anyone else influence its path), until the JCP came around. Since then, I haven't seen many improvements. I so desperately want Java to succeed, so much of it just makes sense to me. When used correctly, it can be a beautiful language.

And make it a true 3d sandbox game! That, and Military Madness for the old TurboGrafx 16.

I thought it had Teh berculosis!

Which one?

I read an article a while back on Pebble Bed reactors (though, for the life of me I can't remember where, so I'll link the wiki article instead). They seem to be a lot more stable and less prone to the dangers cited by the anti-nuclear crowd (like meltdowns, etc), and the fuel is not as concentrated. I'm not a nuclear physicist, so I can't speak to their efficiency, but IMHO would be a viable avenue to pursue as well.

Yep, I'm that guy. A bike does have an even better feeling. And, yes, utterly annihilates in real world performance. Insensitive clod. But because I love a bike doesn't mean I don't have use for a car. Most of your arguments against a bike are bad. Try cargo space (strapping 2x4s to my back doesn't work real well), passenger space, and long road trip comfort.

As for windshields? Put a helmet on. Weather? Put on a set of leathers. Heater? I have heated hand grips. Cooler? Ride faster :P Potholes? Just maneuver around them (and I have hit some pretty big ones, it's jarring, but I'm not dead). Sheesh.

So, wait... let me get this straight. We're moving from show segments with commercials between them to commercials with show segments between them? Something feels wrong here.