doG

See http://exploration.grc.nasa.gov/education/rocket/rktcp.html for some rough CP calculation. Try different fin sizes. You can always add weight to the nose to move the CG forward to adjust the CG to CP relationship. Side note: For safety I'd not use the needle on the nose cone. Parachute ordinance can and does fail and the rocket will come down like a ballistic missile when that happens. There's no need for it to be an arrow as well.

Write your own programming language and don't share it with anyone.....

What reason is there to think it is true? It is a collection of books written by storytellers through the ages. All of the books are of the form, he said he said, i.e. hearsay. There is zero supporting evidence in favor of the bible's accuracy as any kind of historical record of events. No good skeptic would ever accept it as true without supporting evidence from those that assert it is true. It is not up to skeptics to disprove those that assert its truth, it is up to those that assert its truth to support their claim of truth. Until then their claims are just a bunch of hot air.

Knowing or not knowing the truth is not what makes one agnostic, believing the truth is unknowable is what makes one agnostic. Rubbish. Real investigative science and skepticism are the reason I believe questions like, "could there be a god?" are pointless.

Only to the gnostic. Since agnostics believe we could never really know the truth it is a pointless question to them. Since I am agnostic I believe it is pointless.

IMO it's a pointless question. Unless someone can prove that there could not be a god then the default answer is, "sure, a god is possible". We could of course follow this with an infinite number of other pointless questions, i.e., Could there be unicorns?, Could there be leprechuans?, Could there be wormholes?, Could there be Raleians?, etc. and so on forever. Sure, anything is possible. Why bother?

Maybe aqua regia or hot nitric acid...

Sorry but that's incorrect. I will also mention that the relationship of CG to CP is on the Level 2 High Power Rocketry Certification test...

Wow, a relevant link I found posted elsewhere:

An example to think about. I've a small rocket I've made that stands about 4.5 feet tall with an airframe of about 1.5" diameter. It's made of a carbon fiber tube to withstand launch forces since the entirety of it is filled with a fast burning composite of ammonium perchlorate, so fast in fact that it burns all of its fuel in under 2 seconds. This rocket leaves the launch rod at mach 2.2 and coasts to an average altitude of 16,000 feet in seconds. Which force do you think has a fast enough reaction time to keep the rocket stable instantaneously, the force of the air resistance on the fins or the force of gravity on the body? For very slow rockets gravity might assist you in stabilization but not enough for fast moving rockets.

Taxing the churches revenues would violate nothing. There is no Constitutional separation of church and state. The 1st amendment says explicitly, Congress cannot establish any religion or pass any laws that favor any religion over any other. It also cannot pass any laws that prohibit or coerce anyone of holding a particular religious belief. The 16th Amendment says explicitly, IMO, as long as Congress taxes all churches the same then I don't see any conflict with the 1st Amendment or the separation of church and state implied by Jefferson's letter to the Dansbury Baptists.

I just tried it with mine and it worked just fine. I did have to play around moving the glass to and fro to get it focused but once focused it took a magnified image.

That's a pretty slippery slope though isn't it? Non-profit? Does that mean I can buy marble floors with my revenue like the church does? Gold candlesticks? Handmade stained glass windows? Can I earn a living at a job and give all my earnings to my church so that my church can take care of my family and me? If I do that is my church non-profit?

Conversely, if we're going to allow such exemptions then shouldn't it be fair for every man to declare his own house his church and enjoy the same exemptions? This would end all personal property taxes

Do you? Are you skeptical of what you are told when there is no proof? Do you realize the bible is nothing but a collection of books written by storytellers? Do you seriously question any part of those books for a lack of supporting evidence? Using reason and rational thought is using one's brains, using blind faith is using nothing but emotion.

Really now? The Christians around these parts tell me I'm going to hell because I haven't accepted Jesus as my savior. They claim everyone that's not Christian is destined for hell.

Let's not forget the Christian take...

OK, we get it, in your opinion evolution favors murder. Again, have you got any support for your assertion other than your opinion?

Your theory is flawed. If it was true then evolution would not have produced social species like ants, flocking birds, schooling fish, etc. There would be no buffalo herds or packs of wolves. I challenge you to provide something other than your opinion to support that assertion.

Strawman!!! Letting adult gay couples marry is victimless. Child molestation is not. Can you really not see the difference? Some of us oppose discrimination, me for example, some of us condone it, you for example.

That shouldn't matter. It is not ok even for 99.9999999999999...% of the population to say it's ok for us to use the word marriage but not you. Discrimination is never ok no matter what percentage of the population thinks it is. The ONLY victims in this case are the ones being discriminated against, not those that are doing the discriminating.

I would like to use this thread as an example of the need for another forum, something like Crackpot Theories. This topic is not even a reasonable scientific speculation.

I personally started with machine code on a Z80 processor, first on my Heathkit H89 and then my Sinclair ZX80. Later on I moved to assembly on the Commodore series of computers. I can say it has helped me to understand higher level languages better than I might have.

http://www.bloodshed.net/dev/doc/index.html

Your repeated point is prevarication. Your assertion the church has had a monopoly on marriage for a couple of thousand years or so is untrue and unsupported. There's no point in having any debate at all on a science site with those that make quack, untrue assertions and refuse to offer any support for them. If you can not or will not support your assertions then there's no point in giving any consideration to your point of view at all. Those that are worthy of debate are those that can support what they claim with references. You've repeatedly shown that you are not one of those.