ydoaPs

No, it doesn't. He was born in Hawaii; they don't do "Birth Certificate"s. It's been done. I even hotlinked the official scan in the OP.

Sure they can; all they have to do is make it an amendment.

Experiment says you're wrong; we are not in motion with respect to any luminiferous aether. However, experiment also shows that we're also not stationary with respect to any luminiferous aether. That's what swansont meant when he said your ideas came pre-falsified.

Rather than shove us to your personal site(which is against the rules), how about you answer swansont:

No, they're not. At least in Hawaii. If they're not, then NO ONE born in Hawaii has a "Birth Certificate." State law, dude.

In this video from MARCH 25, 2011, Hannity repeatedly claims that the birth certificate has never been shown. And here I thought this was settled years ago. Sure enough, it was settled way back in 2008. You can even see the official scanned copy here: So, why do people keep claiming that the birth certificate has never been shown? Why do so many people actually believe it and/or that he was born in another country? In an age where fact checks are so easy, it's amazing to me that this absurdity isn't immediately exposed and those purporting it ridiculed.

I've also linked to this page quite a few times as well as the TalkOrigins trio. A great tool for exposing e-mail forwards for the bunk they are(a large percentage are pure bull excrement) is Snopes. And you have the politics equivalent: FactCheck.Org and Politifact.

Are you saying it's reasonable to worship fictional hobbits, or are you missing the point?

Pretty much anything from Information Is Beautiful is bound to be amazing. That's where I got the Myan Calendar infographic which I've hotlinked here several times.

It would be best to look at a graph. If it is periodical over a period, that means it repeats itself. Like a sine wave goes all the way around and back to its starting point in a period of 2π.

Yes, modern reactors are much more advanced, but you can still have significant problems should safety features be disabled. Consider the situation in Japan: even with a negative coefficient of reactivity due to temperature(which means a rise in temperature means a decrease in power) you can still have a meltdown if you don't get rid of the decay heat. Now, even with a meltdown, it's not too terrible so long as the reactor vessel isn't breached by a steam/hydrogen explosion or by the melted fuel itself. With nuclear incidents, containment and decay heat removal are pretty much everything. Contamination(spread of material that emits radiation) is a huge deal. [math]D_2=D_1\frac{x_1}{x_2}[/math] Where D2 is the dose(amount of radiation you'd receive) you're trying to find at location x2 and D1 is the dose you know at location x1. To see how dramatically the radiation decreases, let's use some easy numbers. Let's assume that we know the dose D1 at 1 foot away from the radiation source. We need to find the dose at 2 feet away from the radiation source. [math]D_2=D_1\frac{x_1}{x_2}=D_1\frac{1}{2}[/math] The radiation level already decreased by half! And that's ignoring the shielding effects of the atmosphere between the points. If there is a meltdown and contamination is breached, it could send a lot of radioactive material airborne. Alpha particles and beta particles don't really do a whole lot of damage when they're on the outside of your body; they are both stopped by the layer of dead skin. However, if you inhale radioactive alpha and beta sources, then it's a bad day indeed.

The Chernobyl incident wasn't as much about reactor design as much as it was improper operation. Many of the safety protocols were disabled.

I'm thinking most of it would be pretty wet still. However, if you managed to make shelter from the non-conbustables and find some dry wood, you could dry out wet wood before you burn it.

Given the premises of the OP, it is special pleading to remove God from consideration with the same line of reasoning unless a specific mechanism for doing so is given. No such mechanism has been provided. Otherwise, we could just say: A question sometimes is not only a question but makes a claim. The question, "Who created hydrogen bonding and dipole dipole interactions?" is equivalent to "Someone created hydrogen bonding and dipole dipole interactions. Name that person." The premise of that question is considered false by all the scientists I know. The question itself is invalid/misleading. However, the general sub-thread you jumped into was attempting to show the error of the reasoning in a different manner. You can't just change the rules mid game.

Jesus. Checkmate, atheists!

It reminds me of Bill O'Reilley and his thing about the tides. "Oh yeah, how'd the moon get there?". He never stops to realize that the end of that line of reasoning is "Oh yeah, how'd God get there?".

Water molecules are non-wet material; how do they join together to make up a pool of wet water? Your composition fallacy ignores the concept of emergent properties.

AFAIK, the state owned banks in ND don't do mortgages; they provide capital loans for local business ventures. It should also be noted that I'm not advocating government takeover of banks. I think what is discussed in the video is quite reasonable, however.

What do you guys think? Apparently the state owned banks in ND give loans to local businesses at a reasonable rate and funnel the interest into the state as revenue instead of into the pockets of a CEO as profit. Should more states do this?

That would make it unsound; not invalid.

The only popular mathematics I've read recently is the site advocating Tau vice Pi, and I think it was done fairly well and made the subject matter rather accessible.

I wish the media would use their fact checkers. Sure the situation in Japan is breathtakingly horrific, but saying ridiculous things about radiation makes it seem orders of magnitude worse. For example, it was reported that the Navy was moving their ships due to radiation concerns. That's much more terrifying than it sounds at face value if you know anything about radiation. Even without shielding, radiation drops incredibly quickly with distance. [math]D_2=D_1\frac{x_1}{x_2}[/math] Where D2 is the dose(amount of radiation you'd receive) you're trying to find at location x2 and D1 is the dose you know at location x1. To see how dramatically the radiation decreases, let's use some easy numbers. Let's assume that we know the dose D1 at 1 foot away from the radiation source. We need to find the dose at 2 feet away from the radiation source. [math]D_2=D_1\frac{x_1}{x_2}=D_1\frac{1}{2}[/math] The radiation level already decreased by half! If they were moving the ships due to radiation concerns, there would be a burn radius around the plants where everything was melted or on fire. What's infinitely more likely is that they're moving the ships due to contamination concerns. If there is a meltdown and contamination is breached, it could send a lot of radioactive material airborne. Alpha particles and beta particles don't really do a whole lot of damage when they're on the outside of your body; they are both stopped by the layer of dead skin. However, if you inhale radioactive alpha and beta sources, then it's a bad day indeed.

I don't think that it would. This page does a pretty good job of explaining why. It's more natural than pi. It's similar to unit choice for physics. By picking natural units in physics, we can make the equations cleaner and more elegant(dropping off c everywhere since our units make c=1). Think of all the equations that call for 2pi times whatever. It seems that the way the world works is more into tau than pi. Distance fallen: [imath]\frac{1}{2}gt^2[/imath] Spring energy: [imath]\frac{1}{2}kx^2[/imath] Kinetic energy: [imath]\frac{1}{2}mv^2[/imath] Circular area: [imath]\frac{1}{2}\tau{r^2}[/imath] Not only does the equation not suck, it seems to fit into a pattern some would say adds to tau's elegance.

They're obviously good enough. That's why the GOP wants to cut their funding.