Cap'n Refsmmat

If you are going the speed of light, and shine a flashlight, the light will not move (relative to you!) because it is going the speed of light, and so are you, so it is going the same speed as you, and relative to you, is not moving.

Electrons can go close, but not entirely, the speed of light.

Whoops, it doesn't remove ALL the blueish, it depends on the dust. It may remove some, all, or none of the mixed blue colors may be removed. I don't have a source, but if you look at a color wheel, you see that without blue, the middle of the rest is orange. The eye may be sensitive to different things, but I'm not sure. You could search for it.

No, the remaining primary colors (red and yellow) equal ORANGE! Also, he says that if you also remove cyan blah blah, but removing blue also removes all colors with blue in them!

Couldn't that dust he talks about be red dust? Oh, and he seems to be assuming our atmosphere is the same as Mars', which it isn't. Mars is 90 some percent carbon dioxide, with little nitrogen and even less oxygen. So the light is scattered differently. Also, he seems to assume that blue light is removed from Earth's atmosphere by Raleigh Scattering, but if it was, I couldn't see any blue! No blue light! And, of course, he seems to think that they know what Martian dust is made of, when they don't. The easiest way to prove Mars has a red atmosphere is get a telescope. Earth looks blue because of our atmosphere (somewhat) and when you look from space, to just above the horizon, you see blue. I believe the same for Mars.

And.. does it have uses? No!

Nice. What's funny is, Columbia was the strongest of the orbiters. It was the first, and they didn't know what it would face. So, if it was Atlantis or something, it would have just broken apart a lot easier.

And in bacteria. But let's leave this to the 40000000 other threads about it.

I doubt you could make that big of a response.

I want a parrot like that! (as long as he understands "SHUT UP! CAN'T YOU SEE I'M ON THE PHONE?")

DEFINITELY! I hate real player... and Macs.... and lots of other comuter related items.

I doubt it would be allowed, unless I could use itty-bitty font.

Yes, it is not observable, it takes too long! It is testable by fossils. It is not repeatable because I really doubt nature would do the same thing twice. Now, don't let this devolve (ha!) into a discussion of evolution, theres about 400000000 threads about it.

Well, women certainly have good memory Other than that, there is nothing much different, I suppose.

As you can tell, most of us are thinking, WHAT?!!

No, they store less energy, meaning they don't have to feed that fat, and they are healthy. Or, with less food, they adapt to be able to use their energy more efficiently, making them healthy. I made that up in about 2 seconds. I'm good at doing that.

The quote is from the book. I think both sources were too vague. If I ever see Kranz or Pavelka, I'll ask.

Living below room temp forces your body to heat itself up, using up all those nasty calories.

I hope not!

In those color images, the camera was not calibrated! They then calibrated it to fix it. (one wonders why they didn't do it earlier)

Forbidden Donut? Can I have one?

But I like it! So it's better! :-p

Depends on their education! (duh!)

If they have it on their server without "© 2004 ESA" then they aren't copyrighting it.

Do you have proof of this? I did read that NASA archive. Did you read my suggestion?