dorbie

It takes a force to slow any mass, for the PC in a canopy transfer what force overcomes the momentum from the spring and the sustaining force from the prevailing airspeed (below that speed) + gravity after 5 feet of bridle? Even a small amount of momentum on the PC could produce a significant impulse force provided the system isn't too elastic and doesn't flex too much/quickly. I think this deserves to be tested in the air, not a bench.

This is also worth watching if you are interested in understanding the show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIDeVseZ8Fs The intent is a skeptical show countering all the bullshit that permeates popular culture. If you have an issue with that you probably believe way too much bullshit.

Penn & Teller's "Bullshit" is one of the most intellectually dishonest shows I've ever seen. In my opinion you are VERY wrong. The 12 step program did offer alternatives for example. Many other shows do, on the other hand you don't really need an alternative for stuff that just shouldn't be done. Bullshit is very honest, it is driven by Penn's radically libertarian views, they occasionally make mistakes and have been known to admit it when they do. Here is an example of them admitting a mistake: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrub3dt7R5U I think anyone who watches bullshit and leaves with the impression that it is intellectually dishonest needs to engage in some serious introspection.

The Boston Tea party covers the taxation without representation. I think I was told about this i.e. the stamp duty on the crates of tea. Not the details of all taxes imposed then lifted except that one etc.

You mean the ACLU??? Are you claiming Christianity is incompatible with civil liberties?

Hmmmm.... She's showing us what she means by "foaming at the mouth". Hillarious given the context.

I have met people like this too, compounding this was their belief that they were better than others for the most superficial of reasons.

Correct and in fact there is statistical evidence that establishes a correlation between religion and immoral behavior.

Morals are not derived from religion. There are far fewer atheists in prison that their proportions in the general population suggest there should be. Clearly they are less religious and more law abiding than Christians and any other religion you can imagine. Atheists are even more law abiding than Bhuddists so in fact the opposite of what you are saying is true.

Thats what has kept my mough shut so far, But it is on my mind daily. The assumption here is that 12 steps works. There are other options that demonstrably work better. Do the research before you say anything and if you do decide to show him other options have your ducks in a row.

Unbelievable. Do they teach you about the Marshall plan in Germany these days or are the Aryan morons too busy getting ready to slaughter the undermenchen again? Are you even aware of how the Germans started squealing like stuck pigs when it was hinted that the U.S. bases there were no longer essential with the collapse of the Soviet Union? That's right America wanted to leave but the Germans got their begging bowl out and asked America to stay. Get a clue.

None! I don't have problem with science at all. My biggest problem is I'm not communicatimng my point, or more likely people are misreadiung my statements based on their own personal biasis. I think science is good. I was simply stating that we use the misuse and abuse of religion as a reason it is bad. I think it is unfair to do that, just as it would be unfair to label science as bad because of its misuse and abuse. Which religion? Almost all of them are certainly wrong. Should mystical incorrect belief systems be placed on a pedestal. Science is correct, it towers on its own merit. Religion takes credit for a lot of stuff it doesn't necessarily induce, morals is a good example. Did you know that Atheists are massively underrepresented in prison populations?

P.S. when I was in London recently, near the US embassy, there was a plaque next to a door, it said something like (and I'm paraphrasing severely). "Benedict Arnold, Patriot and Hero Lived Here." with some dates. Great stuff.

Guys, he's referring to the treasonous collonial rebellion of 1775, this will help you remember. In Scotland I was taught about the Boston Tea Party that sparked the whole thing off and not much else. I also remember the "I cannot tell a lie" George Washington tree chopping story and was told about Johnny Appleseed planting apples all over America but this was all probably in "primary school" I think, so it was for 12 and under. It was probably a very brief curriculum on America, it's funny with hindsight the random stuff they pick to teach you (or maybe that's just my memory selectively recalling a few things). It was probably a brief lesson.

I agree with you, This is like saying having a brain has positive and negative effects. No, the implication is there are good things that come from religion (charities that feed & clothe, hospitals, orphanages, and even the peace and comfort it brings to some during trials of life) and their abuses of religion such as crusades, inquisition, etc. Yes it most definitely is. I made no comment about religion in the post you responded to. Quit comparing a simple methodology of reason to religion. Science is not the sum total of it's discoveries, it is a way of thinking correctly/accurately about the world we observe. If you want to think less objectively and accurately then by all means undermine science. You should try to understand what science is first though.

Science is a methodology of discovery. It is a process of reason and thought, that is all. What we do with the discovery is a different issue. Some of your cases were downright manipulative, for example citing overpopulation instead or medical treatments, hygene, disease theory, drug research, knowledge of DNA, advances is agriculture and of course scientific tracking of populations. Or lobotomies, a very unscientific treatment in a world where science has eliminated trapenation and unscientific other horrors. Science is not a religion, it is a methodology that helps humans think rationally and objectively about the world. If I said "Human language is a bad thing, look at what Hitler did with it." it would make about as much sense as your critique of science.

I agree with you, This is like saying having a brain has positive and negative effects.

What do you desire when you point the finger at science and the enlightenment? It took a few centuries to recover from the damage Christians did when they collectively turned against reason and the damage has never been undone. Now because you feel your cult is under threat you blame science for all the problems you can cram in a post. That's like blaming your brain for your hair color. Science gives us the methods and intellectual tools of exploration and reason. You may not understand it but it is not some mystical belief system like a religion that it makes any sense to 'blame' for anything. You wouldn't excise your cerebellum for some imagined problems, nor should you consider doing that with the tools of reason. Your attack on reason would be obscene if the Christian progroms of the past were more recent.

You have no factual basis for that claim. Moreover the program requires dis-empowerment and intense attendance of religeous oriented rituals that would put a priest to shame.

The AA's 12 steps has gained a lot of momentum, but it's not for everyone. There are other statistically more successful and less religious less dis-empowering programs. One of the issues with 12 steps it the lack of hard evidence that it actually works better than other approaches to any significant degree (quite the contrary in fact), evidence given is mostly anecdotal but the few who manage to abstain while on it become ardent "true believers". There are alternatives, depending on what your friend's problem is. In summary 12 steps is closer to a cult that a treatment program, stay away and find a real solution. ad-populi is no way to evaluate any treatment. From Google: http://unhooked.com/sep/beyondaa.htm http://www.uic.edu/orgs/convening/AA.htm http://www.smartrecovery.org/ http://www.deanesmay.com/archives/006854.html http://www.deanesmay.com/archives/006527.html http://www.addictioninfo.org/articles/27/1/Addiction-Alternatives-or-Alcoholics-Anonymous/Page1.html

Hmm... I read your post and all I see is a devoutly religious person ironically and inadvertently highlighting yet another danger of the muddled thought processes of the deeply religious. Christianity has already heralded one dark age, let's not go for two.

He's not buying into it, it's just the usual bullshit posturing of American politics. Everyone knows there's no line-item veto. Everyone knows that congress has attached a major rider to the budget setting a deadline for troop withdrawal. Bush has no obligation to accept this and congress cannot force the issue without a greater majority. So despite everyone knowing exactly what's going on you get these vapid arguments and phoney posturing over absolute bullshit. There's no acceptabe budget on the table, it's been politically hamstrung by the withdrawal rider. Now we get to watch the pantomime play out. The only question most of these D.C. assholes care about is who will come out of the shitstorm smelling the sweetest.

This is topical considering the article and is barely about Clinton, Berger stole documents years after Clinton had left office, it's not dredging anything up you kneejerk leftist harridan. I'm no more a Limbaugh fan than you are. I'd wager I've heard less of him than you. Now back to the subject which you ignored. You don't have to be a part of the vast right wing conspiracy(and no I'm not a Hillary Clinton fan either) to understand that Sandy was caught stealing documents from the national archives and got a slap on the wrist for it. Of course he didn't sell them on ebay like the guy in the article I posted. The trouble with you Americans is you treat disparate political issues like a package deal and it forces you to constantly compromise your principals. Like excusing Berger's theft while scurrying behind feeble accusations of dredging up an attack on Clinton. Jost make sure you don't break lockstep with the party there, I wouldn't want you to strain anything.

I got the impression Bill was merely a narcissistic weather-vane (trapped by circumstances when he lied). Hillary on the other hand gives me a different impression, she seems insincere but no more so than many other U.S. politicians, maybe it's just that she's less of a natural. She's had a few moments where I think she's earned some respect. Her oratory skills are terrible, very strained and unnatural sounding to me, like she's straining to maintain a impassioned-yell. There's just no need for that intonation, but Bush talks like a baboon by comparison. She's just shrill, she'll annoy the heck out of the Republicans if she gets in, but at least Whitewater etc. is out of the way, what else can they throw at her? I'm just gonna sit back and enjoy the show this election season, it should be very entertaining watching it all pan out. Romney has raised a load of cash, it'll be interesting to see him emerge as candidate and see McCain struggle to overcome his recent legacy with the party faithful. Republicans seem to hold their grudges very dear and Limbaugh hates the guy which is not an insignificant burden. Oh man, hearing Limbaugh struggle with a McCain candidacy or even Presidency would be priceless.

The Reuters article sure tries hard to spin this as a freedom of speech issue at the end and deftly avoids the facts you highlight. That's either incompetent or dishonest reporting. Sadsacks. Maybe they just got lost and found themselves studying in the wrong country. It seems like a piss-poor way to act when you're a guest (two guests, one is an immigrant from Pakistan). I for one will laugh if the judge sends them to jail as a prequell to a one way ticket home. The description of citizen Akbar's book has some interesting info... http://www.amazon.com/Come-Back-Afghanistan-California-Teenagers/dp/1582345201