“You are absolutely right. It is easy to get a gut feeling from reading an article or looking at a picture, but those cannot be used to convict someone for murder. There has to be evidence, which the appeal CLEARLY showed was non-existent.”
karpmed on Mar 28, 2013 at 13:53:47
“"It is easy to get a gut feeling from reading an article or looking at a picture, but those cannot be used to convict someone for murder."
“I just saw the pilot episode on Hulu and I really enjoyed it! I like the "investigative horror" aspect to it. Unfortunately I think the fact that it's a serialized drama and not a "procedural" show will result in its cancellation after 1 season. Other fantastic serialized dramas (V, The Event, etc.) all end up getting cancelled far too soon because the majority of TV audiences can't follow a deep storyline.”
Lechiffre on Oct 6, 2012 at 10:08:05
“In 666 they've worked out a home decoration angle to keep women interested . That's the only aspect of it that I thought was dull . Other then that its fairly well executed .
The vent was weak though .started well and was too soapy and there wasn't enough killing and fights.”
Magdalena Vance on Oct 6, 2012 at 02:05:40
“totally agree with you!!! and i stil hope the 666 PARK AVENUE keeps coming back!”
“Think what you want about Amanda, but you can't say the prosecutor isn't a psycho. Try googling him once: Giuliano Mignini.”
Lleah on Jul 20, 2012 at 00:39:45
“Yes, the Italian justice system is an ineffective, antiquated, mess and so is Giuliano Mignini. Fortunately for Amanda....Perugia, Italy had never seen anyone as nefarious as Amanda Knox...and surely are praying they never do again....they never knew what hit them. And neither did poor Meredith Kercher. Amanda gives me chills.”
“I understand your point, but its assuming first that asteroids are the primary risk to Earth's longevity, and that the quality of life on Mars must forever be as it would be under today's technology. The true threats to life on Earth are disruptions in its biogeochemical cycles due to one of the countless effects of overpopulation. Also, certainly radiation is a factor in long term spaceflight, but the primary source of radiation on interplanetary trips would be GCRs, which are very low flux. The radiation from solar particle events takes time to reach the Earth/Mars region, and our present day radiation protection capabilities are more than enough to keep a human out of the "serious/fatal" exposure range.
Also, the very purpose of investing money into this research is to improve the technologies. Yes, if we flew to Mars today, life would be extremely difficult. However, by solving the stability issues of closed ecological systems, we could provide the inhabitants with fresh, naturally purified air and water supplies, along with fresh food. In addition to spreading our biospheric capabilities to other planets, it will also help us unlock the EXTREMELY complex mechanisms and models by which our very own planet regulates itself and keeps us alive!
This research is the polar opposite of a waste of time--instead it is absolutely vital for continued the existence of humans in the future.”
“I think robots would definitely be a good short term solution, but they are decisively not good enough for long term. There are so many factors, not the least of which is explosive and uncontrollable population growth, that are going to require human habitation of nearby planets. It's not a question of "if" the need will arise, only "when."
Yes, it is going to be a financial investment, but we can only make excuses for so long. It is a simple fact that human beings are 100% unprepared for preserving their species if ANY large-scale biospheric abnormality or disaster were to take place. And these things certainly have happened multiple times in Earth's history, and will happen many more times in the future.
Sadly, humans also have an inflated sense of invincibility on Earth..
So until extinction is imminent, the masses will not recognize the critical, life-saving importance of this research.”
taoistpunk on Jun 10, 2012 at 13:55:42
“population growth can not be solved by off-worlding the problem. even if you could ship people out as quickly as they are being born, the problem merely moves to mars, a much smaller and more hostile environment. add to that their own population growth and they'll be shipping people back here.. add as many planets as you like into the loop and eventually you still return to the same problem.
we either solve it here, or it destroys us.
asteroids and atmospheres are all manageable with the exception of sudden and unexpected events, but that would also include nearby supernova and rogue black holes and any number of other unlikely events that we would have no control over anyway and which could just as easily take out any colonies.
until then, robotic missions and research into terra-forming, high speed space travel, ships that allow people to travel in the hostile environment of space, etc, that all makes sense. and colonization will be a part of it, but colonies should follow the same logic they always have: human expansion into greater opportunities.
very small colonies supporting mining operations or vacation travel that are financially viable makes sense, even scientific research colonies if it pays dividends. but the kind that guarantee the species - permanent ones, thousands strong, independent and far enough from earth to prevent falling into it’s same fate, are still a long, long way away.”
ThinkCreeps on Jun 9, 2012 at 07:43:03
“It remains a total waste of time. The cost of deflecting even a 10-km sized asteroid would be nothing compared to sending a substantial number of people to Mars. A handful of tourists may be willing to pay a few $100m to go, and that might cover the cost; however, it will mean an inevitable reduction in life expectancy, even before worrying about them getting sick, due to the radiation damage on the long flights, which would be either serious or fatal depending on the mood of the Sun at the time.”
“I agree that we can and MUST colonize Mars as quickly as possible, but I think we owe it to the first colonists to do everything possible to ensure their long-term well being. The life support systems used in modern space vehicles are almost totally open-loop, and require constant resupply from Earth. For space systems in low-Earth orbit, it is still expensive, but much easier to resupply life support consumables because of the relatively short distance.
A Mars mission would take years to complete.. and this venture is aiming for a life-long duration. Humans use approximately 22 kg of life support materials per person, per day. If we tried to launch even one year's worth of material, the total volume, weight, and cost would be unreasonable. Modern regeneration technologies are mechanical, and those have a tendency to break down over time. Additionally, they can really only revitalize the air and water supply.
It is time for investment in closed ecological system research. If we could implement functioning "mini-biospheres" within space vehicles and habitats, we could have a potentially more reliable means of not only renewing the water and air, but also growing plant food for consumption. There have been experiments done before on Earth, but there are ongoing problems preserving the stability of these closed ecological systems. Like machine-based technology, closed ecological systems tend to break down over time because they are too small and don't contain enough material to continuously support themselves.”
French Toast on Jun 8, 2012 at 13:47:49
“I like your sensible approach. You look past the super sexy launch and land to the lesser sexy aspects that most people don't think are inspirational enough.”
Reno Fickler on Jun 8, 2012 at 13:36:05
“There were a couple of really good programs on H2 on this very subject. One even dealt with what the astronauts would do if things didn't go 'according to plan'. The resourcefullness of the human physche comes into play. Sooner or later we either prepare for the move to some other world or simply let the human race go extinct, the choices are pretty limited regarding our distant future. One certainty is we have to improve our 'transportation' methods.
Like you say, we either alter its atmosphere or create a type of flora that can exist there for the sustinence of our earliest dwellers. I think the creation of some form of 'greenhouse gas' would be one of the 1st steps to alter Martian atmosphere.”
ThinkCreeps on Jun 8, 2012 at 08:37:28
“That's all an expensive and rather wasteful possibility..... or we could just continue to send robots that work great, and don't have to pass any psychiatric tests.”
“Seriously! I hope there's an internal investigation in that police department, because that city has a population of less than 8,000 but its own police force. If I was a resident there, I'd feel a little cheated and not very safe.”
Doug Dougie Jaeger on Jan 5, 2012 at 07:57:45
“I'm sure you have heard of rural America. Take a look at the size of the police force in that county, then look at the # of square miles in the county. 8,000 people in NYC are much closer than 8,000 people in rural OK.”
“If it would reduce airfares at all, I'm all for it. I'm a frequent flyer and never eat or drink anything from a plane unless it's an overseas flight, just for hygiene reasons. You can buy anything you like at the gate, anyway.”
“I hate to be cynical because I really respect people who have big aspirations for space exploration. But I can almost guarantee this will not happen in 2023. No one ever mentions one of the most critical aspects of a Mars mission, and that is the environmental control and life support system in the space vehicle. The "existing technology" that Lansdorp claims they will use is not prepared to sustain even one person for the length of even just the travel to Mars.
The ISS and other space missions rely completely on physical/chemical technology with limited or no regenerative capabilities (atmosphere to an extent, but nothing remotely adequate for food and water sources). The reason people can live so long on ISS and LEO missions is that we are close enough to constantly resupply the spacecraft with resources from Earth. No need for regeneration. However, when we are on the way to Mars, it is going to be impractical/impossible to resupply from the Earth.
Before I *ever* believe one of these "Humans going to Mars" stories, I'll need to see their plans for sustaining the crew from a life support perspective first. The research has not been done in enough detail yet, and the funding is barely existent. But I hope and pray that someday it will be possible!”
“I was so blind before. I thought it was the past several years of failed economic policy that were driving this country into ruin. Now I realize my worries were for nothing--it is actually 2 men living together that caused all this! Thank you for the clarification.”