Man, ordinary bras are fiddly enough, a double-sider is going to be a nightmare.
15 posts • joined 12 Sep 2008
Sounds good, but maybe a little extreme
I don't see why using the phone when stationery with the handbrake on should be a problem, but perhaps it will generally discourage phone use while in the car. Hands-free kits are cheap and easy to use, and newer cars often have Bluetooth built in. There's not really any excuse for yakking into the handset while you're supposed to be watching the road.
On a daily basis I see idiots going one-handed around roundabouts with their phone clamped to their ear. If you have to take the call, pull over for a minute instead of risking other people's lives.
If only IOS had parental controls to prevent this sort of thing from happening. Oh wait, it does.
Position triangulation data
The positions logged clearly aren't GPS accurate, and they're also not mobile phone base station (towers) positions. It looks more like a log of positions triangulated from the base stations the phone is within range of, like when you ask the phone to show your position without using GPS. It can be tens of miles off, depending on the quality of signal it's getting at the time. The log on my phone showed points up mountains and in the sea, as well as within cities that I've only ever driven past. It's more like throwing darts at a map than actually "tracking" you in any useful way.
Don't be wet. (wet wet)
I feel it in my fingers
I feel it in my toes
Love is all around me
And so the feeling grows
Its written on the wind
Its everywhere I go, oh yes it is
So if you really love me
Come on and let it show
@Jamie re. "theory"
> It is called the Theory of Evolution, not the Evolution or the Fact of Evolution.
Yes, it is a theory, just like
Plate Tectonic theory
So, I guess you don't accept the existence of cells, atoms, continents or electricity either?
In science, "theory" does not mean "wild, unsupported guess dreamed up for laughs at a drunken party" like so many people seem to think.
If only there was some sort of easily-available source of information you could use to find this out for yourself in two minutes...
@Lee - Abiogenesis
> A very big mistake made by many people, not just yourself, is the failure to separate evolution from abiogenesis.
You are correct, of course - I was oversimplifying as the details are a bit much for a forum like this. Evolution is not about how life *began*, but how it has worked since then.
But, of course, there is still no need to invoke the supernatural as an explanation of how it actually started up.
God of the Gaps
AC - "the questions that evolution can't answer can still be atributed to a god."
Only if you subscribe to the "God Of The Gaps" notion. If science cannot currently answer a question, then immediately saying "Aha! God did it!" is about as intellectually weak as it is possible to be.
Wouldn't it be better to try to find out, than to invoke the supernatural as an explanation for anything you don't know the answer to?
Evolution does not preclude the existence of a God, but it does show that there is absolutely no need to require a God to explain the entire history of life on the planet.
You might as well say, "Well, I don't really understand every detail of how my Plasma TV works, so I guess God must be working in there somewhere".
So they're catching up with 19th century science? Excellent.
So now we are going to have to put up with kids all day shouting things like
"NEW TEXT RECIPIENTS SHAZZA BAZZA AND TEZZA". OH EMM GEE ELL OH ELL EXCLAMATION MARK SEE YOU LATER SEND TEXT"
Clever technology yes, I just feel it's going to be very, very annoying.
Just to be fair
What would be a suitable place on the body for certain clergymen to have "HUGE IDIOT" tattooed as a warning?
Hollywood take note
Sounds like this could spawn a sequel to 'Sunshine'.
Will Smith and a crew of plucky astronauts take a container of artificial solar particles beyond the orbit of Pluto, and release them to save the Earth! Along the way there is love, death, sex, horror and a diversion to land on Io to refuel with hydrocarbons (leaving one brave soul behind because there was an oxygen leak and there's not enough air left for everybody).
"I am staying neutral on the subject, but from what I have seen the evolutionists are too scared to discuss the theory and instead try to shout down and insult those who have opposing views."
Are you also neutral on the theory of gravitation? Or the germ theory of disease? Or atomic theory? These are all "just theories", like the theory of evolution. There are lots more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory#List_of_notable_theories
There is incontrovertible evidence that life has evolved over billions of years, and the theory of evolution is the best (if not only) explanation of the available facts.
What exactly do you think needs to be discussed, and why does it apply only to this one theory and not to all the other scientific theories?
Anonymous Coward - "and if evolution is the way it happened - why has it stopped at Humans?"
It hasn't. It is an ongoing process.
Your comment is typical of those who object to evolution - you clearly have a poor understanding of what it is and is not. In my experience, those who object to evolution invariably have a very poor grasp of the subject, or have been deeply misinformed by creationist websites.
These are the same people who trot out things like "If we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?", "It's only a theory." and "Half an eyeball is no use therefore evolution is wrong!"
The net is full of resources which will correct your misunderstanding of these matters.
Paris, because she can have a sample of my genetic code any time...
The legitimate scientific theory that:
A Mysterious Being created all things, using a Mysterious Process, for Mysterious Reasons.
Why should Christian creationism be given the privilege of being discussed in science classes? There are literally thousands of other creation myths of equal merit (i.e. none) out there. The Biblical creation story is not special.
Another problem with this nonsense is that there will be pupils who really believe this crap, and will argue with the teacher or even go so far as claiming discrimination if the teachers explain why it is "not science", taking away time which would be better spent teaching the actual subject.
We need Critical Thinking classes in schools so kids can learn for themselves why Creationism and similar drivel is a load of bunk.