News Stories

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

i thought frenchies were either Gaelic or Franks?

I'm just saying - tacking "ian" to every country name instead of having a boatload of variations would simplify things. "US of Americanian", "United Kingdomian", "Chinaian"... and yes, "Israelian". No more questions!

On second thought, maybe countries in "-a" should just become "-an". "American", "Indian"... "Chinan".

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness

both of which would at least be accurate and grammaticality correct descriptions

Albeit mean as it is used often in a negative connotation by the media against the Israelis. Of course, the term Jew has been a negative connotation throughout the centuries (even by Charles Dickens) as a selfish, thieving miser and slave-driver.

And the extreme-right in the Knesset aren't helping.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

I'm just saying - tacking "ian" to every country name instead of having a boatload of variations would simplify things. "US of Americanian"

Wouldn't that be "US of Americaian"?

[Ascaloth]

I've heard "USian" used before.

[Xellos-_^]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ap-newsbreak-obama-administration-plan-would-kill-rival-bird-to-save-spotted-owl/2012/02/28/gIQAvxAUgR_story.html

The government set aside millions of acres of forest to protect the owl, but the bird’s population continues to decline — a 40 percent slide in 25 years.
A plan announced Tuesday would designate habitat considered critical for the bird’s survival, while allowing logging to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire and to create jobs. Habitat loss and competition from barred owls are the biggest threats to the spotted owl.

anyone else think the government should just let nature take it course and let the Spotted owl go extinct? Even with huge tracts of forest being set aside, is numbers are still dropping. It just can't compete with other owls.

[Ithekro]

Considering the spotted owl can actually survive nesting in cities.....

[Mr Hat and Clogs]

We humans love to fight against nature. One day it'll bite us in the ass in an epic fashion (my money is on an asteroid).

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Mr Hat and Clogs

We humans love to fight against nature. One day it'll bite us in the ass in an epic fashion (my money is on an asteroid).

funny you mention Asteroid...

There is an asteroid called 2011 AG5, and if it follows the orbit scientists have plotted for it so far, there is a small, small chance that it could hit Earth in February 2040.
Don't quit your job and sell your house just yet. Astronomers, who have been tracking the asteroid since January 2011, say it is in an elliptical orbit that could bring it somewhere near Earth in 2040. Earth is about 8,000 miles in diameter; the asteroid appears to be about 450 feet across.
The problem is that having watched it for only about half an orbit around the Sun, the scientists cannot say for certain where it will be 28 years from now. So, for the moment, NASA's Near Earth Object Program says the odds are about one in 625 that it could hit us in that still-distant future.



http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/ast...6#.T02MlvU4ba4

[Mr Hat and Clogs]

Sweet, I'm on line for winning the bet in 28 years! 450 ft isn't that big though, I was expecting more from you nature. For shame. Prove the shiva hypothesis correct, you can do it.

[Ithekro]

So a very high speed rock the size of a destroyer. Hmmmm.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

So a very high speed rock the size of a destroyer. Hmmmm.

And its a destroyer moving at multiple times the speed of sound.... there's be no "rolling across the sky - boom", just<<connection loss>>

[Ithekro]

2040?....well that is about when the Gamilons are suppose to find us...but the Planet Bombing...that was much later...after we annoy them by not surrendering....

[Rahan]

I doubt it's a threat to Mankind, even if it was really on a collision course with Earth.
The only dangerous asteroids are the ones that would remain unidentified until a few months before impact. With today's technology, we might fail at dispatching it in time.
But an asteroid we see coming 30 years in advance ? Easily nukable (well, unless our petty governments insist on remaining petty till it's too late)

I still think we don't need any help from nature to wipe ourselves out.

[Mr Hat and Clogs]

You know the whole nuke-an-asteroid tactic won't actually work on anything that would be a threat. Assuming an asteroid is even made of rock, and not solid iron ore (which may just shrug off a nuclear blast), it will probably just reform itself under its own gravity in a few hours anyway, rendering Mr Nuke a complete waste of time. Besides if it didn't reform and big-ol-chunks of rock came raining down all over the planet rather than just hitting the one spot and possibly causing even more damage, well whoever fired the thing would have a few questions to answer.

There are better ways to deal with them other then nukes, they're kind of a last ditch 'may as well toss everything including the kitchen sink' kind of defence.

[Ithekro]

Nuke does not always mean "blow it the hell up". It can also mean "divert its course via massive release of energy and/or kinetic impact".

[andyjay729]

A trade union is planning a strike for the London Olympics.

Hopefully the chavs and yobs won't also "celebrate" the anniversary of last summer's riots too.

[Ithekro]

Fears grow of Israel-Iran missile shootout

http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...ssile-shootout

Now they are talking, in detail, about what Israel and Iran might do to each other and with what.

"I have a bad feeling about this"

I just wonder if we aren't being distracted by this from something else that is actually worse.

[andyjay729]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

funny you mention Asteroid...

450 feet is a bit bigger than normal, but it doesn't sound like a potential extinction event. I've heard the one that killed the dinosaurs was about the size of Mt. Everest, for some perspective.

So...let's just hope that if we can't deflect it, it'll be a dear and come down in some remote area like the Tunguska event.

[aohige]

Originally Posted by Mr Hat and Clogs

You know the whole nuke-an-asteroid tactic won't actually work on anything that would be a threat. Assuming an asteroid is even made of rock, and not solid iron ore (which may just shrug off a nuclear blast), it will probably just reform itself under its own gravity in a few hours anyway, rendering Mr Nuke a complete waste of time. Besides if it didn't reform and big-ol-chunks of rock came raining down all over the planet rather than just hitting the one spot and possibly causing even more damage, well whoever fired the thing would have a few questions to answer.

There are better ways to deal with them other then nukes, they're kind of a last ditch 'may as well toss everything including the kitchen sink' kind of defence.

Uh, what you're saying doesn't apply to an object mere 450 FEET in size.
And yes, bunch of small debri causes less harm to the sphere (note: I did not say human civilization and settlements) than one massive chunk.

The latter can cause a ripple effect from crust penetration, causing massive secondary damages.

[Mr Hat and Clogs]

I wasn't talking about the 450ft sized one (much of which would burn up on entry, probably about half it's mass, depending what it's made of) I was talking about the threatening ones (ie 1KM in length or greater). Anyway I'm not going to get drawn into an argument about it (since I don't care that much), you can go read up on it the theories for the best ways to stop asteroids from credible sources all over the internets.