bascule

So the situation is basically this: most Democrats and a small number of Republicans want out of Iraq. Senator Dick Lugar ® wants out now but doesn't want to force Bush to do it. Harry Reid wants out now and wants to force Bush to do it. What just happened in the Senate is just a continuation of the extremely polarized political climate in this country. I said Reid and Lugar should cosponsor a bill, but it'd have to be one everyone can agree on. So how about this: The bill would sponsor an international summit between the U.S., Iraq, and the surrounding nations (Iran, Kuwait, Turkey, Jordan, Syria, and Saudi Arabia). At this international summit America would put a phased withdrawal on the table and ask delegates from these nations to come up with a plan for how it will be carried out. The American delegates would be responsible for coming up with a plan they actually think could fly in Congress. After that, they come back with a plan, submit it to Congress, and let them vote on it. How about that? (... *awaits the first "But, but, those people are terrorists!"* ...)

It's really just stupid. Here we have Harry Reid and Dick Lugar arguing basically the same thing. Why don't they get together and coauthor a withdrawal bill already? A bipartisan withdrawal bill. Instead when Lugar tried to introduce a non-binding resolution Reid panned it and introduced his own binding one, which failed to even get sufficient votes to end debate. I guess he's waiting for cloture or something, and rabble rousing in the meantime.

You might see my previous post on this matter, but here's a basic description: However, I've been quite curious about using a Bell test setup to produce a shared, streaming random pad. Once you have that you can use whatever OTP-based encryption methodology you like, and thus have provably unbreakable encryption.

It's my belief that abiogenesis resulting in something as complex as a prokaryote is an extraordinarily unlikely event. My guess is that most autocatalytic reactions which could eventually give way to self-sustaining and self-replicating life systems fizzle out of the necessary chemical components before they're able to reach that stage.

I really hate that statement. Here's my corollary: If there's no reason to believe in something, then it's unreasonable to believe it's true. Anecdotes aren't evidence. Using anecdotes as the basis of an argument is not only unscientific, but typically a logical fallacy (often a hasty generalization) No, I don't have evidence falsifying teapots orbiting the sun either. Or unicorns. Or vampires. Or Zeus. The appropriate answer is no. If you claim something exists, the onus is on you to demonstrate a supporting line of reasoning for your claim. It's not unreasonable to assume that baseless arguments are false until proven otherwise. All that said: No, ghosts are not real. Unicorns aren't real. Vampires aren't real. Leprechauns aren't real. Zeus isn't real.

So yeah, my bad... I definitely messed up this thread. Okay first, it's filibuster, not philibuster And second, Reid wasn't filibustering, Republicans were, and Reid was keeping the Senate in session to force a vote. And yeah Pangloss, the candlelight vigil was touching. They didn't sing We Shall Overcome, just shouted WAKE UP And it ends with a 52-47 vote, short of the 60 needed to end debate: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/18/us.iraq.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories UPDATE: Now I'm confused. I can't find the names of which Republican(s) were filibustering

For those who care (and don't have TV) that bastion of impartiality ThinkProgress is liveblogging the event. Video of Reid, Pelosi, and others speaking during candlelight vigil in DC

I'm sorry, I didn't read your post past here. I'm not sure why you juxtaposed these statements the way you did, but as far as I can tell: 1) The Wikipedia article does not state what you claim it does 2) My personal inference, given the juxtaposition of these statements, is that the quote is from the Wikipedia article. It's not. For all appearances you're citing a source which at least attempts to maintain a neutral point of view, but in actuality you've gone back to conspiracy theorist crap. Please examine the side of science before repeating lies, thank you.

I love soybeans. Edamame (steamed, salted soybeans in the pod) are one of my favorite foods. The claims about isoflavones, particularly as a "poisonous" phytoestrogen, are unfounded. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isoflavone Modern medical science regards isoflavones as an antioxidant with a potential but as yet unsubstantiated ability to prevent certain types of cancers. Modern medical science also regards the majority of animal fats, particularly consumed in large quantities, to have a negative health impact. This site seems to be criticizing science while pushing a particular agenda. It's using the tactic of "FUD" (fear, uncertainty, doubt) in order to do so.

The bit people seem to omit was that while Clinton was impeached, he was also acquitted. As far as the law is concerned he never committed perjury.

Einstein proposed the same thing. That very idea is the basis of the EPR paradox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox Measuring any aspect of one particle collapses the waveforms of both. In this sense there is non-local "spooky action" at a distance, instantaneously between the two particles. In observing A, you alter the behavior of B, and vice versa. Thus this apparent loophole doesn't work.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/16/reid-filibuster/ Will this technique work, or is it just another vain attempt by the Democrats to force a vote on Iraq withdrawal? It comes at a time when two Republicans are also pushing Iraq withdrawal, much to the chagrin of the White House: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1034793420070715

DVDs are typically 480p. This means that the picture scans progressively (from the top of the screen to the bottom) with a square pixel resolution of approximately 720x480 (the 480 bit is the vertical component with an implicit 16:9 aspect ratio). DVDs can also be interlaced (alternating the scanning of even and odd rows) HDTV is typically 720p or 1080i. 1080i provides a larger frame size with a lower scan rate, and vice versa for 720p. A third standard, 1080p, which provides high quality progressive content, is starting to become available thanks to media like Blu-Ray and HD-DVD.

If 30% of blood polonium... Well, to begin with, your results contradict peer reviewed scientific research. I've cited two papers here... Martell's experimental measurment of radiation dosage and the paper measuring 210Po. You're contradicting them both. You're demonstration of ambient radiation being "thousands of times" worse than cigarettes is based on a pyramid of assumptions, everything from how much air you breathe to the specific radiation dosage and method of administration. If you're trying to compare radiation dosage, shouldn't your results be in rads? And furthermore, the dosage is going to vary based on a multitude of factors which can't simply be calculated but instead need to be experimentally measured. The real problem is there are scientists writing peer reviewed papers on these issues all the time. They're confirming their findings experimentally. You're doing some off-the-cuff calculations which contradict experimental, peer reviewed research. Strawman? You're contradicting two papers I linked. You could at least do me the courtesy of finding at least one paper which confirms your position, specifically in regard to radiation dosage.

Here in the Real World, I have to deal with things like schedules, time estimates, deadlines, and taking the heat for when I miss them. It would be unacceptable for me to give some excuse like "I don't know how long it will take, I just need more time" Condi did just that yesterday, asking for more time before the House takes any action, in response to them passing a withdrawal schedule: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/13/us.iraq.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories Is the Administration's inability to set deadlines and stick to them indicative of incompetence? Is their inability to even give a time estimate indicative of their complete inability to estimate the scope of the tasks they undertake, or are they just afraid of giving a realistic answer?

Anthropogenic Greenhouse Gases, most notably CO2

I've seen this problem addressed on RealClimate. At present the models are not accurately predicting tropospheric heating (although it's within a reasonable margin) However, the models are predicting hundreds of other factors successfully across a century of instrumental record. Regardless of what the reality is, I've only seen this idea used as part of an argument from incredulity.

The sun has been one of the primary drivers of climate change for quite some time. Not anymore. Man is the primary driver of climate change now.

We don't know what happened in a pre-big bang context. That would require a theory which unites relativity with quantum mechanics. Right now we reach a classical singularity. There are various theories of quantum gravity. Some of them do propose parallel universes, for example Lee Smolin's fecund universes theory. However these theories are mathematical constructs. They are not yet testable.

I've been meaning to take apart a Guitar Hero controller, replacing the switchy doodad with a piezo and remounting everything into a crappy (but full size) guitar body

Can you find a paper to back that up? You're comparing something which is cleared by natural processes and passes through the alimentary canal to something that lingers and accumulates inside of the lungs. Again, the consumption is entirely different. Your average smoker is coating their lungs with cigarette smoke at least 20 times a day. Rather than being naturally cleared, insoluble polonium compounds accumulate and increase in concentration. Lung tissue is also far more sensitive and less protected than the tissues of the digestive system. Since I don't want to delve into your off the cuff calculations, I'll just link a paper which disproves your assertion that environmental exposure to polonium 210 is more than in cigarettes: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10670918&dopt=Abstract Clearly smokers are being exposed to more 210Po than non-smokers. I'd really help if you could find papers to support your position, rather than trying to do your own calculations. If blood polonium has been experimentally demonstrated to be 30% higher in smokers than non-smokers, then clearly something is wrong with your calculations. You omitted the rest of the sentence: Furthermore the Martell paper I cite is more recent than that document.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.stm Can we put aside arguments about the effects of solar forcings yet?

We were hearing quote a different tune some 8 years ago... perhaps the greater concern is the hypocrisy of the individuals involved... many of whom 10 years ago were lambasting Clinton for his infidelity. It's just a further indicator of massive, systemic corruption and hypocrisy. Personally I'm all for it... what we're experiencing lately has people motivated to vote for change. The other day I was in the local hippie nexus, the super eco-friendly vegan burger joint, and I saw a "Ron Paul for President" sticker on their soda machine. Here's a man who is quite conservative, but yet has appeal to extreme hippie liberals. I'm all for the media making us hate the status quo. It's kind of a bad situation.

Sure hope you're not using a computer then (OH WAIT!). Alan Turing built the Bombe in order to crack the encryption on messages sent from Nazi command in order to help the Allies win the war. And sure hope you're not using a microwave, with its magnetron originally designed to spot incoming aircraft from great distances

Indeed, and the process of pan frying, particularly of bacon, will also produce nitrosamine. All the more reason to avoid meats which contain nitrosamine, as well as pan frying. That's in addition to the cholesterol, fats, and moral issues associated with these meats. However, keep in mind that nitrosamine as a carcinogen comes nowhere close to an insoluble alpha emitter that gets glued to your internal tissue by sticky chemicals.