zapatos

I've been drinking about six cups of coffee a day for 30 years and still get a great buzz! Definitely my drug of choice!!

I don't know if it benefited them in any way, but during the BP oil spill in the gulf, BP's High Interest Technology Team took proposals regarding oil cleanup and methods to stop the leak, from outsiders. Obviously the gulf spill was a slow moving disaster and didn't have much chance of causing thousands of deaths, so I don't know if the solicitation of ideas from outsiders applies in this situation. However, you never know when someone might have a useful technique that has just not become common knowledge yet. If tepco believes there is no chance that an outsider has an idea that has not occurred to them, I think it is they who are being naive. http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20011323-54.html

Poetic Facepalm: "That argument is as thin as the soup you would get by boiling the shadow of a pigeon that had starved to death." --Author Unknown

No.

Orbitals of a carbon atom, as seen by a field-emission microscope. Image: From "Imaging the atomic orbitals of carbon atomic chains with field-emission electron microscopy," by I. M. Mikhailovskij, E. V. Sadanov, T. I. Mazilova, V. A. Ksenofontov and O. A. Velicodnaja, in PHYSICAL REVIEW B, Vol. 80, NO. 16; October 2009 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-shape-of-atoms

If my wife and I could not have children due to a problem with me, and my options for children would be to fertilize my wife's egg with someone else's sprerm, or to have a clone, I would choose clone. I also don't see the need to perfect it in animals first. Doing so would not mean we would have no problems in cloning humans. However, standard rules should be put in place for the conditions under which cloning may be attempted, just as was done with transplants or any other cutting edge procedures. I do expect much moaning and gnashing of teeth from the devoutly religious just as with many new procedures, such as the response to 'test tube' babies and the first surgical procedures.

Right Slider. The article says the thickness of paper is about 9 mil, not 9 millimeters. Nine mil is correct.

Manners work both ways. While a guest should always try to comply with the rules of a home, a host should take whatever steps they can to make the guests welcome. If a host treats their guests to demands (It's my home, I make the rules!), they may find that the guests avoid the problem in the future by staying away altogether.

I agree CP. People like being part of a group, but only when there is an opposing group (Cardinals fan vs. Cubs fan, Christian vs. Jew, Prius owner vs. Humvee owner, etc.). I believe we won't really feel so much a part of a global group until we find intelligent life elsewhere. At that point we will very much feel we have something in common.

You don't trust Google or you don't trust the Google search results? You don't trust Google but you trust the people on this site? I imagine a lot of answers given on this site come from a Google search.

Lots of people know approximately what it is. You can Google something like "total human population of Europe" to quickly find out yourself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture

Using your definition, the only thing I can think of that is productive is starving to death.

One of the reasons you attack command and control centers is to deprive your enemy of the ability to command and control their air defences. If you want to establish and maintain a no fly zone you have to keep your own aircraft safe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-aircraft_warfare

I know some conservatives, but they don't tend to be in your face about it. More like they are tolerant of my misguided ways. Yeah, that was a bit over the top. It is more like some people on this site tend to be outspoken about why Christians are intellectually deficient (or whatever), and the Christians that I deal with on a regular basis (not talk show blowhards) don't really talk about non-Christians at all. That is, people don't talk about non-Christians just because they are non-Christians. I don't see any distinction being made based on religion. With the people I know, religion is more in the background, sort of the basis for why you do and think the things you do, but not something out front and obvious. Most Catholics I know you would never know they were Catholic unless you asked.

My background is Catholic. Twelve years Catholic school for me, same for my kids, several priests and nuns in my extended family, and eight years of Catholic school for my wife. My point being, I've been around a lot of Catholics and other Christians over the years. When I hear people criticize Catholics and/or Christians it usually has to do with birth control, one true religion, sex outside of marriage, infallibility, and the other usual topics. But more specifically, the way Catholics/Christians impose their beliefs on others. What I find interesting is that while the Church has very specific views on these topics, I very rarely find any individuals who feel the same way. The last person I knew who followed the rhythm method of birth control was my grandmother. I don't know anyone who abstained from sex before marriage, and I don't know anyone who feels (or at least acts) superior to anyone of a different religion. What I do find is a very diverse, inclusive group, pushing the idea of service to others, forever raising funds to help people in need, with a propensity for drinking beer (sold at nearly every church sponsored event I've ever been to). So it makes me wonder why it is that so many others such as yourself are always running into Catholics/Christians who are "offended" by non-Christians, who have a problem with non-Christian holidays, who feel non-Christians are heretics, who don't want to admit others are non-Christian, who don't want non-Christians to have a good holiday, who feel non-Christians are hell-bound, who are intolerant, and above all, who are apparently expressing these beliefs to anyone within earshot, else how could you and others know that they feel this way. In fact, I see more intolerance on this site toward Christians, than I've ever seen anywhere exhibited by Christians.

That's a relief to know you think so. Rather than viewing this in context you seem to want to use this as an opportunity to criticize democrats in general and Obama in particular (although no one seems particularly anxious to join you). Perhaps a little more debate and a little less rhetoric may garner additional support for your views.

Obviously tough to predict the future, but the price of oil dropped immediately after the UN resolution authorizing force to stop Gadhafi's attacks. And the sooner the crisis is resolved, the sooner the oil will be flowing again.

I am. It's just not that often that I see someone imply that the president is taking action because it is what is in the best interest of the US (steady supply and price of oil), and then say that they find that ironic.To me it would have been ironic if, for instance, the president did things that interrupted the supply of oil and increased price volatility.

So you find it ironic that the leader of the United States does what is in the best interest of the United States?

And to swansont's point, you can walk away from the light bulb you are sitting under, and you will no longer be exposed to its radiation. Since you cannot walk away from the light bulb you swallowed you continue to be exposed to its radiation.

Of course you may die long before the tsunami on you first long road trip... So when the water comes in, while everyone is running for high ground, you propose to go underground where the water is going to flow? And if you don't drown because your underground shelter is flooded, but is instead airtight (even after the earthquake), then you suffocate? I'm holding out for another solution.

It helps people retain moisture , protect organs and prevent infection. Some people use it as a canvas for living art. It has also been used in book binding.

Oh, good. Another feces thread. You are now up to five. Were the others listed below answered to your satisfaction? I think your name is quite appropriate. Mystery_of_GodST, on 13 January 2011 - 07:44 PM, said: Say you had a substance, let's say feces and it took up most of a big country of the globe but if you took a small peice of every feces you had and put it on each road on the planet and it covered it seems like it could happen but i dont know why because if the substance is smaller than the country, how could it expand to every road on the planet? Quote The total land area of all continents is 148,647,000 square kilometres (57,393,000 sq mi) Approximatley, how much would it take for one average human feces spread out on the ground would it take to cover the entire land area of all continents? Quote How much area does one average human stool amount to? And The total land area of all continents is 148,647,000 square kilometres (57,393,000 sq mi), or 29.1% of earth's surface (510,065,600 square kilometres / 196,937,400 square miles). How much of those one average human stools would it take to cover the entire earth's land area? Thanks. Quote Akward questions: 1. Approximatley how big does one average human stool expand too in measurement? 2. Approximatley how much of those one human stools would it take so that every little spec of the entire planets land (each continent) is covered with it? Hope to get benificial answers from the knowledgable users on ScienceForum.Net

A frog in a blender.