matty

Like to eventually make my way back to this one...

Here's a doosey on that email scandal... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246661/New-scandal-Climate-Gate-scientists-accused-hiding-data-global-warming-sceptics.html Yeah, see what you mean on that narrow escape, lol.

Heh, as opposed to yours? A copout Your Search unearthed scarcely four mind-numbing remarks ever on the Kyoto Protocol, as I'd have imagined, the reason I don't rely on looking back to what copouts can be counted on to favor a lean against, a supposed arsenal in the database that exists in outdated posts.--Telltale enough on relevant science behind your Factplay but thanks just the same... Least Greg there is kept current enough to have caught on to the latest popularized terminology in Climate Change, since warming alarmists were outed for Hyping and had to get a facelift, like every other scandalous thing suddenly found morphing under new identity~classic. Not unlike the 'ol bait n' switcheroo..*hee*

Pff, I believe Cuthbert is the only one who actually addrEssed my post but I'll come back later on how far outta context you jacked up that remark. So as far as Cuthbert is concerned, I'm not sure the significance was entirely spent on the obvious nature of those numbers as it illustrated how easily you can sway this issue in the setting of an honest, patient discussion; i.e. the marked upsurge in numbers for it's not being the big crisis it'd been purported to have been may have been rather some smidgeon of the issue at hand.~You keeping up? Good. For clarity, I didn't say warming hadn't gone on; http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100131145840.htm; One, I categorically questioned how much of the press discussion thus far on GW has been rooted in genuine Crisis vs how much is bloated by profitable-popular hysteria, both in light of the previous link and taking into account how ridiculous it is to rely on these aforementioned 'climate models' held now in such high esteem:) and, TWO, I as much as disregarded AGW either trumping or competing with any of it because--and I'm sure we can agree on this much--we've already arrived at thin territory in the way of the Known vs Unknowable discussion by this juncture asis, esp since water vapor is a pretty major player on the scene by comparison, juxtaposed against the backdrop of man's collective footprint but I never said we shouldn't prepare to do better by the planet, of course we should do what we're able. But water vapor having gone so quiet on the greenhouse gases-front and from the outset should have rang out like Barry Sanders, the household Brand, falling on deafears in a Peak season, lol. Most very suspect with the near omission:) Lessee, here, don't bother throwing me a bone on the IPCC email scandal, which'd be fun; we'll call it a 'gimme' and go for arithmetic instead, a simple logic problem?--If ten turds a-stinking swell up from underneath the seats of their ranks and another five in Maggots goes askitter trying to ditch the sinking ship, well, what Is the official count, should it take One thing coming to light to wash it all clean for the whole? lol Hey, I guess we all have our standards but I'm kinda big on that whole ratio and proportion thing. Uhh, Science may not Entirely depend on popular vote but Legislation is King regardless, having trumped your science way back now in a warm, bacteria-friendly climate such as this.--And legislation today, *Zombie*, in fact Lives and Diies by just that, popular vote & propaganda. Guess you don't catch even the average paper any too frequently or you're an awfully surface-reader, *snicker*~maybe you oughta yank your head outta the sand, have a peek around the lay of the land just every now and again. Why, the grand web itself--a major mechanism to that end in the scheme of things--revOlves around a yawner of a predictable struggle between Interested-Parties-propagandizement; whoever's determined to fight the hardest to maintain their shit at the top of the heap *wins*! A literal continual deathbattle ensues there around the clock, every time you google Today anything even remOtely related to what's even thinly projected to be on the legislative docket Tomorrow. It is precisely this kind of Hillrod, relax yourself into a Stupor-mindset that plagues the US today, one brewski at a time. But you go ahead and enjoy, it was probably Millertime anyway. And, btw, boys, speaking of obvious evidence having your beliefs challenged itches like a rash, I noticed the first two of you, Mods, yes?, rushed right in to greet me. And on a forum so bent on providing backup for your bullshit that it approaches adnauseum--not a link between the three.*lol*

Did we arrive at a consensus, was Tony the winner and were you cheating on something from another forum, ajb?--I don't think molecules should count...

Cool. Did you remove material creating the semicircle profile in order to accommodate or house something later; some rerod for a makeshift tent or something?lol Or would it be better to have left it whole, I do see advice that without the sand you get collapse but, anyway, checkout this fixture looking badboy... http://compare.ebay.com/like/160652823790 And the PVC 'Bendit' gadget is neato, checkout the gallery They brag, whoa. http://pvcbendit.cgom/gallery I had no idea you could bend like this, you always see so many pvc elbows--but then same with a standard pipe, but when I think bend, I'm thinking strictly metals...cool thread. Craigslist, eBay are good places to keep in mind and there's some kinda heat gun fresh on the market you might wanna take a look at, since the bendit was for applications where you'll be needing it a lot. There was an affordable version though, not all instances were upwards of $300. P.S. I think the idea behind the end product you're trying to achieve is everything; for instance, if you put too heavy pressure too fast in the way of that spherical object you'd like to rest in it while two posts support it at either end, you may thin area toward center of the arc you're trying to create and compromise strength or Function; whatchya' tryin' to fashion???

I love a flaccid argument heavy on the Effortless, light on substance I can return to at the end of the day in my downtime.~

Look here... http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record_of_the_past_1000_years It's a pretty famed study of the last 1000yrs and does Not support anthropogenic warming. And then maybe Google "IPCC scandle" before you go digging around looking to them, your search will be rife with materials for a couple of healthy night's reading...

http://www.npr.org/templates/text/s.php?sId=9082151&m=1 Reported here by NPR and watching the debate unfold was no less compelling. "In this debate, the proposition was: "Global Warming Is Not a Crisis." In a vote before the debate, about 30 percent of the audience agreed with the motion, while 57 percent were against and 13 percent undecided. The debate seemed to affect a number of people: Afterward, about 46 percent agreed with the motion, roughly 42 percent were opposed and about 12 percent were undecided. "~from the link above... http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=2938762 Also seconded here by ABC, who reminds us of fashionable alarmist rhetoric of the seventies on a coming ice age; popular and profitable hysterics and nothing more than the groundwork of exploitive fearmongerers. http://intelligencesquaredus.org/index.php/past-debates/global-warming-is-not-a-crisis/ --view full debate video here, it's surprisingly entertaining... If you google The Great Global Warming Swindle you'll find another powerful presentation not to be missed arguing against an already established consensus on anthropogenic--man caused--warming. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/21/AR2009112102186.html. -- the Washington Post on the IPCC organized climate science email scandle http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/13830/ Last but hardly the least, I'll leave you with this for tonight, the piece de resistance; Michael Mann's hockey stick, right to the kisser. ~Nite Ok, this's really the last one, clarifying "The Hockey Stick Controversy"--and to the researcher here looking for climate stats, you can't beat this... http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy

Yeah, I wouldn't advise rooting a dissertation in it but Wikipedia's fairly reliable on generalities, otherwise I'd look to more highly regarded sources; common medical journals, the AMA...

I believe these guys can point you to accredited sources... http://www.detc.org/

Appolinaria's right, you'll find it under the subheading of attachment disorders in Post Traumatic Stress literature. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_post-traumatic_stress_disorder

Yep, brakes employ centrifugal (rotational) force and center of Gravity is central to that equation. A couple of helpful links... http://books.google.com/books?id=NxUHAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA215&lpg=PA215&dq=centrifugal+force,+gravity+and+brakes&source=bl&ots=V6I2ym8Ty3&sig=XYcbQEP4RYeKQNOh86GPx6lbzwM&hl=en http://www.webtrafficschool.com/wts/content/Texas/Forces_that_Influence_Driver_Control.html http://library.thinkquest.org/11902/physics/newton4.html (In the link above, a few paragraphs in you come to the subjects of velocity and acceleration and, I'd think, momentum, all of which amount to the entirety of the braking equation when coupled with gravitational forces.) ~Of course, if we're talking Toyota, we have to add other, runaway, less predictable elements to the discussion.

Vehemently, yEs, I think. We could liken the question to feigning on whether or not Hitler was 'bad.' Consider its origins, a tidbit from PBS, here, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/darwin/nameof/. I think this thread's gone askew from whence it came, considering eugenics was based on a twisted elitist perception of inequality, from a vantage point even presuming to sneer down its highbrowed nose at likes of such things as pauperism, race.--(See Margaret Sanger) All of this only being further ironic evidence of the fact smart people are just as menacing to the whole, do as much damage to the gene pool--a questionable term on its own--as the sum total in all the rest.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/01/0117_020117TVspidermammals.html There are still more current links surfacing on this from the likes of ABC but I've not gotten to them & I'm partial enough to NatGeo.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/world/iraq/2003-04-15-kevlar_x.htm-- I was always fascinated by this encouraging factoid, neat it was still cropping up in newsbit even as recent as here...

Speaking of supercomputers, I wonder if the subject of this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/5287254.stm has ever come up in here, stumbled on it, though it's old, while trying to reference a recent article from mos ago on protein folding, sparked by a thread floating around in here somewhere.--But kinda cool, don't remember if that thread mentioned gaming-for-a-cure, since I can't relocate it as yet...

Well, I do give a lot of credence to the idea engineering is very much a mathematical, mechanical beast, and therefore the same credence men are more privvied to it by nature, if we're to believe all the data; supposedly men are more mathematical creatures, prone, if drawn naturally to it, where, generally speaking, it's said we have to rise to the occasion of it, hard to dismiss an awful lot of good research has gone that direction.

Hey, Marc, The hollow panels make total sense, sure, I just wondered if the fact your 'corrugations', as it were, would present G-load issues, considering they don't run parallel to the axis, but comparatively horizontal on that semi-45 degree angle?--But I suppose being as they're housed between skins eliminates that being an issue altogether, I just wondered the likelihood? I guess I'm having trouble visualizing where exactly the nonuniformity in regards to the thickness comes in?~The trouble in trying to impart some things across the 'net via diagram, but curious, you must goof with an at-home CAD program, what version? I wonder what you mean by airframes but folded sheet conjures a sense of shear strength...and your isogrid panels look crazy-strong, eh.--I have to go look at the sandwich panel in fig. 3 again, but I certainly gotchya' on the reliability of more material bonded across a greater surface area and twice so on the idea of any glueing being a preferred process here, eeshk, and certainly that cold wouldn't seem desirable. I thought the honeycomb looked cool, though, heh. Yeah, the new face of CNC is crazy and I bet your giant milling machine cost a shiny penny, alright.--Vaguely remember woodruff keys, all this goes a ways back for me but it was intriguing.--But, so what is current rocketpanel-theory today on the whole, I wonder, don't they have a standard configure?--I did cringe at the idea, say, 80 panels welded lengthwise together to make up the height, that didn't seem right, without some sort of additional inner rib running the length of those panel joints or something but it's all greek to me, hard to wrap my brain around. ~I suppose nearly everything can be improved upon and keeping the gears churning is good, it's what brought excel into the realm of CAD, which is still crazy morphing to me. Thanks for humoring me.

Stand back, you'll be calling a diesetter. *I'm not reopening the thread, so don't talk to me.

Traditionally, we're hardly known for being groomed in the direction; it's the reason today a girl can still apply to colleges with more guaranteed success on a 'nontraditional' grant, which makes it more social than psychological at first glimpse but the social implication certainly has potential, then, to selfpropel, if entrench, what already culturally exists as the norm.--The reason it is difficult, I think, ever to make progress... We tend, I mean, to accept the positions we'd been pigeonholed into, by whatever the means, even laying plenty 'blame', then, in the direction of ourselves. I do think men have an innate curiosity not generally akin to women, however, in regards to what makes things tick but most definitely nurtured from early on in a way that isn't usually seen in females, who're gently nudged in other directions more natural to our thinking in the past. Lol, I've thoughtso myself, there'r almost none--males, that is.

Alright, Cap'n, devil's advocate, fair enough... The list of potential societal ills is long and arduous, making its way to the most far-reaching corners so that if we're to obide by this thinking, if we were to actually adhere to it through to legislation, we would see it bleed out to such ridiculous ends as the Internet, Religion, Music, Art, Theatre, Literature, T.v., Radio & all forms of entertainment, including recreation and sports; look at the pink-faced embarrassment at the wide spread corruption recently surfacing across the college football scene, so much that, for the first time in decades, it threatened to call the 'Death Penalty'... Further, you'd have to extend it to such ridiculous but obvious things as eating/health related habits--and we did recently see a sugar tax, a soda pop tax surface in Denver, being tossed around elsewhere not so long ago. Freedom of Speech has only recently been argued to be on that 'slipperyslope' of a list and by four NY Senators http://www.thetechhe...ege-not-a-right, using a 'digital' era as a platform. --So how thinly was it we ever setout/wished not only to spread our resources, in an era seeing such a downturn as this it harkens fairly enough, IMO, to a brush with the Great Depression, but also to end up so far from our original libertarian identity, Land of the Free, anyway?.. At some point, I think we have to pick our battles and not just that, hopefully, but constrain them to what's within sOme semblance of reasoned Sanity still allowing for breathing room of a Free Will. ~That is to suggest--and hardly only from the vantage point of a healthy retrospect--the Least of these potential ills certainly isn't Big Government. Pretending not to see the elephant in the room is but to dare indulge toying with a devil's advocate of another, far more troubling terrain~sounds the mother of all potential societal woes by the end of the equation here, talk about your cumulative err...

Hey, I'm just bringin' the Balance.