Re: 1400 light years
Someone got there first? :)
196 posts • joined 23 Aug 2007
Someone got there first? :)
Are you seriously trying to compare science to religion by using moon-landing deniers as examples of followers of science?
And really claiming that without religion we would all be killing each other to get what we want? (weren't the conquistadors pretty religious? and the crusaders? and the vikings? the Romans?) would you actually murder your neighbour for some Ben and Jerry's if Jesus wasn't stopping you?
As for your claim that religion makes people think, isn't faith an unquestioning belief, in the absence of evidence?
Uhm, and do you think that North America is just the US?
The universe is c, 13 billion years old. This galaxy was formed relatively close to the beginning of the universe. The light we are seeing now when we look at this galaxy has taken 13 billion years to reach us, which makes it 13 billion light years away...
The main thing you need to get your head around is that spacetime itself has been expanding for all of those 13 billion years.
"the light we see from something 2 million light years away left there 2 million years ago"
not quite! That would only be true if the universe was static. It isn't. Your something is 2 million light years away. The light leaves on its way to us but will take more than 2 million years to reach us as the fabric of the universe itself is expanding as the light is travelling...headfuck, right?
I imagine it's easier this way than taking samples for testing in the lab. Tampons don't cost much.
I can only assume they use tampons instead of cotton balls because they have a handy string for tying them to things.
Plus if they used cotton balls it wouldn't be in all the national newspapers. This has been done for ages by cavers wanting to find out if point A and point B are connected underwater: place some cotton balls at point B, tip some laundry detergent in at point A and go back with a UV light a few days later....
"However, the similarities between Scottish gallic and irish gaelic being what they are I find it difficult to believe there was not significant population movement between the two over a much longer period."
Gaelic and Gaelic are almost identical in their written forms, but one of the things this study shows is that geographical regions can be similar or identical culturally, but still be genetically distinct, so I'm not sure what your point is?
"It is interesting to see how the genetic groups are so closely aligned with inter-area rivalries which still exist today."
The genetic groups have persisted partly because of the inter-area rivalries.
Dinosaurs did not have a second brain in their bums, it is a 19th Century myth, long since debunked.
ie any Belorussian woman over the age of 32.
Would you like a sausage?
It's also safer/better for cyclists (and horse riders)- most will naturally mount up by throwing their right leg over (i.e. from the pavement in the direction of traffic in a sensible country). Also the reason why bicycle drive chains are on the right hand side.
"And of course when we think about students we think of young teenagers with their raging hormones and humping each other any chance they get."
What do you reckon the infant mortality rate was 100,000 years ago?
You do know that "sealing in the juices" is a load of bollocks, right?
Yes Brian, please do...
We are all the same species however I am sure you will agree that there are differences between populations- if I introduced you to a Maasai and an Inuit you would be able to tell which is which, right?
The studies on IQ and race that Watson is presumably referring to should really raise questions about what the IQ test is actually measuring and whether or not the differences are due to nature or nurture (does socio-economic background or other factors such as exposure to lead in the womb/ infancy have an effect on IQ?) however from his other stated views it seems that Watson has already come to the conclusion that black people are genetically inferior.
He's a bit of a twunt really, which is a shame as he has contributed so much to the study of biology- I'm pretty sure my first lecture at university was on the double helix.
you may find this interesting:
Could be easier than you think, with "Nasa having commissioned SpaceX to build a transporter."
"the leg pulley was doing most of the work."
what are you dribbling about? For a start there isn't a leg pulley- the climber is moving a sticky pad up with a foot platform rigidly attached, then straightening his leg to gain height. His legs are doing most of (ideally all) the work. The pads are the only thing attaching him to the wall. If you're suggesting that the climber should be climbing up using arm-power alone then you have clearly never climbed (or prussicked up a rope...).
It's attached by 3 ice screws on its feet.
Uhm, no....If it is not for profit, why can you buy imported whale meat in Japan?
What is silly is that the Japanese pretend that their purely commercial fishery is simply a byproduct of their scientific research. It isn't. That being said I don't really have a problem with small scale commercial whaling of the like carried out by Norway, Iceland etc, it is certainly a more sustainable fishery than cod, for example, and the animal has had a happier life than my bacon sarnie's previous incarnation. It can also be delicious ;)
Wasn't that the problem with Beagle 2 as well?
"Today judo is mainly (in fact, virtually only) a sport."
Putin, Vladimir, Judo: History, Theory, Practice,
Chicken eggs are dinosaur eggs so wonder no more.
Mobius action cam, £40.95 incl. P&P on ebay.
Excellent review here:
Lots of pubs and bars in Tokyo to be reached by elevator.
Hundens balla in Norwegian.
Are they brown, by any chance?
I'll join in with the pedantry.
Plants can be venomous, if they transmit or inject their toxins through a specialised apparatus, e.g. nettles.
The frogs you mention are poisonous, not venomous, as the toxin is delivered passively. Poisonous can refer to a substance or a plant which causes illness, death etc when taken into the body, or to an animal which produces a poison.
Aye, say what you like about Hitler but at least he gave away Mein Kampf for nothing.
That is jaw-droppingly cool. In my (not so distant) youth it seemed almost inconceivable that we would be able to really know anything about extra-solar planets, or even be able to prove their existence....now all we need to do is figure out a way to visit them.
"Which leaves the only real driver of aliens coming here being for the sake of it."
Iain M Banks touched upon this in Transition- if tourism is the only reason for an alien race to visit other planets, and the only thing unusual about Ole Earth is the fact that our moon and star appear almost exactly the same size in the sky, then the best place to look for aliens on Earth would be to watch out for space hippies around the time of a solar eclipse....
You do realise you're missing out, don't you?
Would be ideal for ultralightweight backpacking....
Bruce Wayne of course
A pint, or possibly 2 pints, of beer is already an excellent post-sports drink. Better than water alone anyway (after 1 or 2 in an hour post exercise the body has absorbed as much carbohydrates as it can use and the diuretic effects of the alcohol will start to have a bigger effect). It contains nutrients and electrolytes as it is.
Maybe what these Aussies have actually discovered is what the rest of the civilised world just calls "beer" already, as opposed to that koala urine Fosters
I'd rather not take a centrum thanks;
If you'd bothered to read the article;
"Following testing, the ESA gave the precooling system the thumbs-up in November last year, prompting the British government to stump £60m towards the construction of a full SABRE prototype."
And some beer sacrificed on the stones for lovely malty steam
"Brian Cox is a lecturer in Astrophysics"
No he's not. He's a particle physicist.
""If you have reasonable doubt about their guilt, you MUST find them not guilty." Whether the penalty is death or imprisonment *shouldn't* make a difference in deciding guilty or not guilty"
It shouldn't make a difference in deciding their guilt, however it should make a difference in deciding the punishment if capital punishment is an option. If there is *any* doubt about their guilt, reasonable or otherwise, then they should not be put to death.
For premeditated murder, with zero doubt as to guilt, then they should be fired out of a cannon as soon as sentenced.
Balls to your sweeping statement Jake.
Drugs have always been an option, throughout human history, and across human cultures. From a champagne reception to a shaman's hut in the rainforest, people have always, and will always, like to get off their tits. . It's the prohibition of drugs that is new and is the problem, not the drugs.
Drugs are never going to go away, no matter what kind of social utopia you imagine you want to live. Me, my utopia would be one in which individuals are allowed to make their own life choices, to the extent that they don't harm others with those choices.
Does the thing have portholes to look out of, or does the pilot just watch everything on viewscreens?
Has certain redeeming features