John Cuthber

How do you know? Perhaps they are all unicorns and you just have the mistaken view that they are people? That's the trouble with that line of "reasoning" it gets you everywhere so it gets you nowhere.

It is not a theory. (I won't argue with the rest of the description.) Maybe you should ask the moderators to move this to the right place (Speculations or Trash). I will argue with the rest of the description, on the basis that I didn't read it and it's not scientific.

Yes I did read it. The word "surely" is a rhetorical device. It could be, but how did they get into a senior position in NASA? At best, you have to say the odds are poor.

Nor does anyone else here. Which means that NASA is innocent until proven guilty. But seriously, if they were going to e racist about it, surely they would have chosen a white man as the replacement.?

If reality isn't here, why are you writing to it?

I didn't say anything of the kind, did I. So that's a straw man. It's more nearly true to say that I said "they didn't vote against Trump because they were not actively anti racist" No. You made that bit up for yourself.

All supporters of racism are racists. You are plainly unqualified to tell me what I think and why. Please don't do it again; you will just look silly. What makes me think that they are racists is that I recognise that, if they are not part of the solution, then they are part of the problem. If you value all people equally then you don't support people whose actions oppress some people on the basis of their colour. If you really can't find a non racists Right wing politician to support then; (1) perhaps you should stand for election as one, and (2) wouldn't that tell you a lot about the morality of the political Right?

OK, what's the difference between being racist and being an apologist for a racist and supporting them while decrying anyone who points out that trait? To paraphrase Forrest Gump (and that seems a reasonable approach) Racist is as Racist does. So, if we have people here supporting an unquestionably racist man, are they not, themselves, also racist? And if it's true that they display racist behaviour then is describing them as such "name calling" or just description?

There may be a reason for that... "Here Are 13 Examples Of Donald Trump Being Racist" From http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/donald-trump-racist-examples_us_56d47177e4b03260bf777e83 "Yet more proof: Donald Trump is a fascist sympathiser" From https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/29/donald-trump-britain-first-fascist-sympathiser "Either Trump is himself a white supremacist or he is a fan and defender of white supremacists, and I quite honestly am unable to separate the two designations." from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/opinion/trump-white-supremacist.html and I guess you just have to write of Nazi as legitimate hype since there's not really a Nazi party for him to join. And, I can't help wondering if the problem is not so much as that nobody in authority should be able to work with someone like that. It's there right to vote for him. It's not his right to lie incessantly to get that vote. It's the equivalent of lying on your CV/resume. You should expect to get sacked.

When your country spends more of "defence" than the total of the next half a dozen or so highest spending countries added together, it's pretty clear you are not actually spending on "defence" as such. It's a pork barrel. It's a bit like social security spending, it keeps a lot of people off the dole queues. That's fine in a way, but most of the people it "employs" could get useful jobs, rather than working out clever ways to kill people. Many countries have similar schemes where people who lack the basic intelligence or life skills are looked after and provided with an opportunity to do work that suits what capabilities they have- such as making simple furniture or street cleaning. They work, and their salaries are subsidised by the government, but at least there is some sort of service provision in exchange. It does a good job of raising the morale of the workers too, as they feel they are contributing to society. Since a civilised government would be paying for their upkeep anyway, it's quite a reasonable system. In the US, it seems that the state has decided to run "sheltered employment" for people via the military. Historically, that made sense. Squadies didn't need to be bright. (That's not to say that some were not intelligent; those who were tended to be spotted + promoted). However we now have a system where the government pays a lot of money to bright well qualified people to get them to do something that's fundamentally undesirable. In doing so, it robs other sections of industry of that talent, and I can't see how that benefits the economy. And the fate of those who would be in sheltered employment in other countries, isn't pretty in the US.

It's a long standing problem. Does the Chat moss crossing count as a bridge? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liverpool_and_Manchester_Railway#Construction

Fascinating, but are you sure it is floating? How does it cope with seasonal changes in river level

Technically, it's a conductor.

Not where I live now, but where I grew up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Jubilee_Bridge and it has been joined by another https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mersey_Gateway

In the interest of balance, please post some.

Trump is narcissistic enough to think that anything that threatens his God given presidency would "relate to ... the maintenance of good order in the armed forces."

mainly wrong.

As I said; it doesn't, so the question makes no sense.

You have shown in the video that it gets reset because you push it.

One possibility is the so called "basic copper sulphate" A sort of mixed sulphate/ oxide. Did you wash the copper carbonate with plain water, or with solution of bicarbonate? You may find that leaching the powder with a solution of bicarbonate, then water and then heating it again gets you a better sample of copper oxide.

If you have to keep pushing it, it's not "over unity".

You can't. However, you can have conduction in a much lower pressure than the air around us.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermochromism might help

"why do two objects fall same rate in a vacuum?" What else could they do? The "obvious" answer is that a heavy thing would fall faster. Well, let's think about that; what would happen...? Lets get two different rocks (say 1Kg and 2Kg) and tie them together with a string, then drop them. The heavy rock falls faster- and so it pulls on the string and that makes the light rock also fall at the same speed as the big rock. But, considered together the thing is now a 3Kg "thing made from 2 rocks + some string" so it should fall even daster than the 2Kg rock. How can that work? The little rock is being dragged down and, consequently, it's pulling back on the string. Yet somehow, by pulling back (up) on the 2 kg rock it makes it fall down faster (so that the whole 3kg collection falls faster than a 2kg rock). That makes no sense at all. It also didn't make sense to Galileo, and that's what he pointed out to people at the time. They didn't believe him, and that's why he did his famous experiment; not because he wanted to know the answer (which he had already worked out) but to convince the other "philosophers" of the day who accepted everything that Aristotle told them. It also doesn't work if you assume that lighter things fall faster; the only way that it makes sense is if everything falls at the same rate.

Most puzzles make lots of assumptions that are less reliable than that.