Sayonara

Personally I couldn't care less if creationists want to waste their time attacking Darwinism, seeing as virtually every detail of it has been superseded anyway (apart from the central "things change" premise, which even creationists don't deny).

http://www.virgingalactic.com Welcome to Space

No, what's a never-ending cycle is people posting to this thread with arguments that have already been destroyed in it, because they can't be bothered to read back.

The disadvantage people are at when they reply to a thread this old is that most of them were not here to see it was deliberately posted in the pseudoscience section, and not one that was moved here

Wow, this is just like those other threads that are just like this one.

What he said. Read this: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/oped-02e.html

What? That's the law as it stands in the USA, which Refsmmat is erroneously using as a yardstick by which to judge other cultures. May I refer you to the television watershed, which protects your society's children from phrases such as c**ty ball-lick f**ksock shitters. You're proposing that this kind of control is counter-productive. Considering the extremely obvious trends in the media and in general public life I'd have to disagree. Words that were considered vulgar only ten years ago are now mainstream. Russian people in "Shadow of Communism" shocker. That's due to people being easily corruptible, not random law X that we don't agree is "right".

As excuses go, that one is pretty retarded.

The grandfather paradox can't happen, as I have discussed at great length in previous threads on this subject.

That's more along the lines of what I'm looking for, thanks (although it would be nice if you could leave Kerry and Bush out of it).

Were you talking to me, or Refsmmat?

If you can add one to it in an operational sense, doesn't that make R "not infinite"?

You're stumbling over old ground here. What does that have to do with anything?

I would just like to make the observation that in many of these "I am having problems" threads, Norton is a common factor. Makes you think.

He doesn't need to defend himself against that comment because you were straw manning him. Highlighting this is actually part of my mandate as a member of staff. I think you'd be surprised at how many people here share that sentiment (and probably at which people too). Perhaps if you are always expecting to find a thing wherever you look, you always will.

Notice how I said "policy", and not "article"? Apparently not. No?

And there was me thinking that freedom of speech was intended to protect what people have a right to say, not the way in which they choose to say it.

Yes?

I'm too busy to sit here telling you things you can find out yourself by installing the software. Summary: if you only use outlook for email, and not for personal organisation, switch to Thunderbird.

You are still missing the point. This policy does not aim to "put new weapons in space". It is to do with the USAF giving itself permission to use existing and future space arms to disable or destroy the space-based efforts of other nations and enterprises whether they are enemies of the USA or not. That's irrelevant to this thread. That's irrelevant to this thread. That may well be your opinion, but it doesn't answer the very simple question I asked in a particularly useful or relevant way. My interest here is in how this will impact other nations individually, and international politics and space exploitation as a whole, not in how it will be a good thing for America. Try not to be so insular. Thank-you for that world-class contribution to the discussion, Douglas. This thread is about territoriality, resource partitioning and space superiority. Anyone who isn't interested in discussing those topics should reconsider before they post comments.

Spam filter is great, it can also learn what makes junk mail junk as you mark things "spam" and "not spam". It is not buggy in the least. Outlook is poor by comparison because it is crammed with features that a mail client doesn't need, but lacking features that you'd expect to be associated with an application that is primarily for organising mail. However if you do need the integrated calendar-contacts-to do list etc, Thunderbird isn't the best way to go because it is only for mail.

That was more than implied in what Bloodhound actually said.

Well, apart from the flexible ones.

Are you sure it's not just because the USA likes to be the country that stands alone, and going with the flow in an organisation called the "United Nations" detracts from that image?

No, you don't get it. It's not the technology that is the problem - it's the plans for the policy change.