bascule

You should hook up with Ann Coulter. You two are perfect for each other.

You're lumping Al Franken with Rush "Never worn a uniform but I'll call military opponents of Iraq 'Phony Soldiers'" "I was addicted to Hillbilly Heroin but I support the war on drugs" Limbaugh?

They certainly seem to understand it better than the don't tax then spend neocons Sounds like you're arguing for the Laffer curve... lower taxes and revenues will go up... right?

Well, that's a blanket assertion. I think fascism starts out liberal and ends up conservative. Fascists attempt to connect to (liberal) labor movements, institute bleeding heart social programs, etc. etc. to win the hearts of the people. Then, once they have power, it turns into a marriage of business and government, where the business and government leaders become members of a totalitarian oligarchy.

What's the context for bringing that up in a history classroom? So I don't see you disputing the fact that Darwin and his theories (which demonstrate a literal interpretation of Genesis is scientifically untenable) are integral parts of 19th century western history. Should Copernicus, Galileo, and the discovery of heliocentrism be omitted from the history classroom so as not to step on the toes of any Bible literalists who may still believe that the Sun orbits the earth? Or should we, to use your metaphor, strap them to a chair Clockwork Orange style and blast into their eyes the message THE EARTH GOES ROUND THE SUN

Unipolar signaling using a continuous wave is probably the best approach. Iruka, to start with, you should try building a radio transmitter and receiver. After that you can build an oscillator to hook to the transmitter in order to transmit a continuous wave.

No, they didn't. The quoted citation comes directly from their page. Here it is in context: Citation [9] is: Here they're lumping three different sources together. I can see how it might be confusing. Not so obvious as it might seem. Even if the Census Bureau's 2005 American Housing Survey Data Charts were the source for the air conditioner data: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/ahs/05dtchrt/05dtchrt/source.html And even so, there's no appliance data here: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/ahs/05dtchrt/05dtchrt/ahs05.html If you think they are correct can you find the data that corroborates their claim that 80% of poor households have air conditioners?

Let's try this one: They cite: Well, here's their first f*ck up, the actual report is called Household Characteristics. Here's Appliances broken down by income: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs2001/hc_pdf/appl/hc5-3a_hhincome2001.pdf The report claims there are 15 million US households below the poverty line. Jumping to page 3 of the report, I see the section of interest: Households With Electric Air-Conditioning Equipment. According to the report only 9.6 million households belonging to people below the poverty line have air conditioning. That's not 80%. That's 64%. The Heritage Foundation's statistic is off by approximately 2,400,000 households. I'd really like to know if I made a mistake here, but it seems pretty clear and straightforward... Something tells me the totality of money you've paid to the federal goverment comes nowhere close to a hundredth of a percent of $12 billion. It's hardly your money.

http://www.nerc-essc.ac.uk/~olb/PAPERS/len19.pdf

Well, rather than total number you could do a periodic metric of percentage growth/loss over time

I'd recommend iVinyl: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n33ACfZ45ys If that's too big consider the iPod Flea: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6979065094299371478

That would be a slippery slope fallacy.

Personally I'd love to see citations in LQG compared to string theory

Just to name a few: France, Denmark, Finland, Austria, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, who top the world in healthcare satisfaction. Now that's not very libertarian of you. Why not defend ourselves with privately funded militias?

At least not any more than taking pot shots at string theory

In more civilized countries, healthcare is considered a right, not a privilege. On an unrelated note, how do you feel about the $459 billion Congress just approved for the DoD, which doesn't include the $190 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. $650 billion for war vs $12 billion for children's healthcare... guess the latter is too much though. I'm afraid I wasn't privy to those conversations. Can you source that for me?

Yes, mistakes were made on both sides. Now why is this going to trial?

After 6 years of his budget increasing at twice the rate of his predecessor... after $2 trillion in tax cuts resulting in the largest budget deficits in history, year after year, with the national debt poised to break $9 trillion dollars, Bush has finally vetoed his first spending bill. Is the latter supposed to make up for the former? This is the first time that Bush has ever expressed concern about a budget item in the form of a veto. Pork is constantly passing through the White House and Bush has never cared. How about $2.4 billion for airplanes the Air Force doesn't even want? (but provide awfully good pork for Texas) My concern isn't so much Bush trying to exercise fiscal responsibility but both his timing (6 years too late) and the subject of the funding bill. Concerns about overspending on healthcare seem somewhat ridiculous when Bush and his fellow Republicans passed one of the largest Medicare expansions in history, authored in such a way as to maximize profit for the pharmeceuticals by preventing Medicare from purchasing drugs directly and thus obtaining bulk discounts in the same way Health Canada does (ever wonder why Canadian drugs are so cheap comparatively?) Why this? Why is this the first spending bill Bush has ever vetoed? (besides the Iraq War spending bill which was clearly not about money but about timetables)

Hi Chris C, nice to have you around. Given the sheer abundance of confusion that surrounds climate change (even around here), it's always great to see someone who's well-informed. A couple other points of note: Early 20th century warming can be partially attributed to a decrease in volcanic activity (due to reasons Chris C outlined above) Anthropogenic CO2 emissions are over two orders of magnitude greater than natural ones, including volcanoes

Amazing. Thanks. So, to put this in perspective: it's Bush's 4th veto. This includes two stem cell research bills and the Iraq funding bill with a withdrawal timetable...

And there's the point: the law is unduly discriminatory against potential false positives.

How exactly is it an ad hominem? Is it? So far I've seen no substantiation of this claim short of stereotypes.

Are you interested in transmitting digital data, or just video? If your interests are video, there are much simpler analog schemes like NTSC. Your best bet might be to get involved with a local ham radio club and express interest in transmitting video. Would you be more interested in something like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amateur_television

Bush never mentioned the purported regressive nature of the tax (still completely unsubstantiated) in his reasoning for rejecting the bill. How is that any better of an argument than saying Bush rejected the bill to satisfy the tobacco lobby?

There's several ways to encode digital data into analog media. One of the most common is quadrature amplitude modulation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrature_amplitude_modulation The data rate is controlled by three variables: 1) Bits per quadrature, which represents how much data is encoded into each "symbol" 2) Quadratures per second, otherwise known as the baud rate 3) Total multiplexed channels. To boost throughput, you can transmit data on multiple frequencies simultaneously Multiply these three values together to calculate total throughput