TV's assault on science - so sick of it
tobymax43
SciFi Science, Mythbusters there
are far more on the near fake sciences like Ghost Hunters, Ancient
Aliens, the zillion it seems
paranormal shows including the one with the college students on A&E
where they investigate ghost
hauntings. Tell me tax payer money is not going to that research those
students are doing.
Who views all these paranormal shows (really ghost stories shows but
paranormal seems hip I guess).
Is it the fundamentalists that are the avid viewers?
I am on the fence about Curiousity. I liked the parallel universe
episode but I couldn't help but think why
not on a less theoretical subject?
I am just fearing that with all these good science shows with the
really bad there may be for many
people a sense of equality ie Ancient Aliens as just as legit as
Universe. The college student
paranormal show to be just as valid as Mythbusters.
I would love to see a poll asking who you believe in more and include
Darwin, Einstein and Von Daniken. I would not be to surprised if
Daniken came ahead of
Darwin. I further would love to know the numbers of "religious"
getting polled and how they split.
I still belieive Ancient Aliens is the most insidious show on TV with
no show really debunking
the claims.
Butch Malahide
> For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming back),
> SciFi Science, Mythbusters there
> are far more on the near fake sciences like Ghost Hunters, Ancient
> Aliens, the zillion it seems
> paranormal shows including the one with the college students on A&E
> where they investigate ghost
> hauntings. Tell me tax payer money is not going to that research those
> students are doing.
>
> Who views all these paranormal shows (really ghost stories shows but
> paranormal seems hip I guess).
shows you mention--what are they, TV shows?--but I watched Arthur C.
Clarke's World of Strange Powers.
RichA
Most people are white trash. They believe in whatever is
sensationalist in nature. They are too stupid to appreciate the fact
that much of science is really fascinating.
Dorothy J Heydt
My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka, set in
a small town in Oregon where EVERYbody is a brilliant scientist
-- except for the town sherrif, whom they hired in because he has
skills they never trained for. Sounds better than the mill's run.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the gmail edress.
Kithrup's all spammy and hotmail's been hacked.
Dorothy J Heydt
Excuse me, there are white, black, pink, tan, and for all I know
polka-dot trash. Stupidity is one of those things that God
distributed with an even hand, and so is tackiness. Moderate,
please, your language.
They believe in whatever is
>sensationalist in nature. They are too stupid to appreciate the fact
>that much of science is really fascinating.
Get out the C4....
Wayne Throop
: My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka, set in a
: except for the town sherrif, whom they hired in because he has skills
: they never trained for. Sounds better than the mill's run.
The second season lost me, I'm not totally sure why; I just found myself
fast-forwarding just to see how the plot-du-jour came out. Which means,
I suppose, eight deadly words problems in some form.
I still think the first season opening sequence was brilliant, with
all the seeming soccer-mom-suburbia normalcy and andy-griffenesque
ersatz-whistled tune, which when you get a bit closer or see from
a different angle turns out the kid delivering papers has a robotic
throwing device attached to his bike, the guy mowing his lawn is using
a hovering laser cutter of some sort etc etc etc.
I think that intro got truncated in later seasons...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNflQa-mOEg
Well, at least they are still mostly positing superscience instead
of mystic mumbo-jumbo like Warehouse 13 (though of course there were
crossovers on some episodes iiuc). Hm, come to think, Warehouse 13 is
another one that lost me somewhere in season 2.
"I could construct a robotic throwing device which will
provide the stone with transit to the river's edge!"
"What an... odd thing to say."
--- Katerina Donlan and Antimony Carver
trotsky
Even if they're not white? WTF?
Raymond Daley
> SciFi Science, Mythbusters there
> are far more on the near fake sciences like Ghost Hunters
favourites they insist is paranormal but is caused by nothing more than good
old scientificly explainable arcing.
> paranormal shows including the one with the college students on A&E
they use their show to push the Christian religion onto Atheists.
They did a show where they went to a house and the owner said he didn't
believe in God, they looked at him as though he'd just admitted to being a
mass murderer. However unlike Ghost Hunters they don't JUST investigate,
they also try to cleanse or remove spirits if they find them. Ghost Hunters
just explain stuff, PRS take actual action.
> Who views all these paranormal shows
But I do believe in ghosts because I happen to have had personal experience
several times.
I'm an extremely logical person and I general watch the shows to try and
debunk them, I've reviewed a ton of the shows in the genre on my blog and I
tear into them like nobodies business. I'm actually the person who debunked
Ghost Labs Tombstone Shadow Man as a metal fence post using nothing more
than a £200 PC against their hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment.
Howard Brazee
But I will have to admit to reading fantasy. I don't find new psi
novels to be attractive anymore. Is that really different from TV
shows with ghosts (Topper), or psychic cops?
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
Howard Brazee
>> Most people are white trash.
>
>
>Even if they're not white? WTF?
applies to people of all races and colors.
"Rednecks" may have worked just as well here.
(Although I have read that that term got started when hat-wearing
ranchers described cap-wearing farmers).
Quadibloc
> My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka, set in
> a small town in Oregon where EVERYbody is a brilliant scientist
> -- except for the town sherrif, whom they hired in because he has
> skills they never trained for.
in a future where the Constitution was amended to allow Arnold
Schwarzenegger to become President.
John Savard
David Johnston
> For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming back),
> SciFi Science, Mythbusters there
> are far more on the near fake sciences like Ghost Hunters, Ancient
> Aliens, the zillion it seems
> paranormal shows including the one with the college students on A&E
> where they investigate ghost
> hauntings. Tell me tax payer money is not going to that research those
> students are doing.
Dorothy J Heydt
I haven't seen the show (I watch almost zero television these
days), only had it described to me.
Dano
science". Waayyy more worrisome!
Ubiquitous
>You should be as worried about the Tea Party and Republicans "assault
>on science". Waayyy more worrisome!
TROLL-O-METER
5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity
======================================================================
ISLAM: Winning the hearts and minds of the world, one bomb at a time.
me
out what the attraction to those shows are.
art...@yahoo.com
> I still belieive Ancient Aliens is the most insidious show on TV with
> no show really debunking
> the claims.
some Von Danikenish "documentary". Hopefully they don't show that
stuff to school kids anymore.
I haven't seen "Ancient Aliens". Does it pretend to be a documentary?
David Johnston
It is a documentary. It's just documenting the babbling of fantasists.
Jerry Brown
Heydt) wrote:
>In article <4bf11fbe-6dec-4ded...@i21g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
>Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>On Sep 11, 12:08�am, djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
>>
>>> My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka, set in
>>> a small town in Oregon where EVERYbody is a brilliant scientist
>>> -- except for the town sherrif, whom they hired in because he has
>>> skills they never trained for.
>>
>>Sounds like they stole the idea from a Sylvester Stallone movie. Set
>>in a future where the Constitution was amended to allow Arnold
>>Schwarzenegger to become President.
>
>Was there such a Stallone movie?
Demolition Man.
Schwarzenegger as a former president (enabled by the "61st Amendment")
was a throwaway gag among many.
It's better than it sounds despite its star, and has periodic winks
from the screenwriters suggesting that they were real SF fans to a
degree not seen again until Futurama: e.g. Sandra Bullock (popular
actress of the last couple of decades) plays Officer "Lenina Huxley"
in a clear Brave New World reference.
Further links if you (or anyone else) are interested:
<http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106697/>
<http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DemolitionMan>
--
Jerry Brown
A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)
Sean O'Hara
declared:
> >
> My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka, set in
> a small town in Oregon where EVERYbody is a brilliant scientist
> -- except for the town sherrif, whom they hired in because he has
> skills they never trained for. Sounds better than the mill's run.
It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
--
Sean O'Hara <http://diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com>
Testament of Lady Silvie <http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/44152>
False Colored Eyes <http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/43538>
The House Divided <http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004DZNUBE>
Michael Grosberg
> For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming back),
> SciFi Science, Mythbusters there
> are far more on the near fake sciences like Ghost Hunters, Ancient
> Aliens,
and the "Fy" stands for "Fyction" (he said with tongue firmly in
cheek).
Ancient Aliens, though... that's a travesty. The history channel has
become a home for conspiracy theories, cryptozoology, UFO's and
religion. I do hope no sane person watches it and believes what they
see. But then again I'm completely fed up with the non-crackpot
History channel shows as well. Season after season of "World after
humanity"... watching paint dry has never been so interesting in
comparison. And Ice Truckers, how is this related to history in any
way? There's no history on the History channel anymore.
> Who views all these paranormal shows (really ghost stories shows but
> paranormal seems hip I guess).
> Is it the fundamentalists that are the avid viewers?
Robert Carnegie
President Scharzenegger appears only as the customary Library.
They do have high-speed electronic education, applied to inmates of
the cryogenic prison, including Stallone, who becomes an enthusiastic
knitter: I think he expresses developing feelings for Bullock by
presenting her with a sweater. Come to think of it, some of the
audience should thank him plenty, if that's right.
Jim G.
> My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka, set in
> a small town in Oregon where EVERYbody is a brilliant scientist
> -- except for the town sherrif, whom they hired in because he has
> skills they never trained for. Sounds better than the mill's run.
respectful approach to "science." CAPRICA or BSG it's not. :)
--
Jim G.
Waukesha, WI
Scott Lurndal
>In the Year of the Rabbit, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
>declared:
>
>> >
>> My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka, set in
>> a small town in Oregon where EVERYbody is a brilliant scientist
>> -- except for the town sherrif, whom they hired in because he has
>> skills they never trained for. Sounds better than the mill's run.
>
>
>It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
>don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
last good forensics drama was quincy, the cop shows have been done to
death since hill street blues/miami vice, and reality TV sucks rocks.
scott
djinn
<je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:27:01 GMT, djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>
> Heydt) wrote:
> >In article <4bf11fbe-6dec-4ded-8a73-9a82aeb0c...@i21g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
> >>On Sep 11, 12:08 am, djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
>
> >>> My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka, set in
> >>> a small town in Oregon where EVERYbody is a brilliant scientist
> >>> -- except for the town sherrif, whom they hired in because he has
> >>> skills they never trained for.
>
> >>Sounds like they stole the idea from a Sylvester Stallone movie. Set
> >>in a future where the Constitution was amended to allow Arnold
> >>Schwarzenegger to become President.
>
> >Was there such a Stallone movie?
>
> Demolition Man.
>
> Schwarzenegger as a former president (enabled by the "61st Amendment")
> was a throwaway gag among many.
>
> It's better than it sounds despite its star, and has periodic winks
> from the screenwriters suggesting that they were real SF fans to a
> degree not seen again until Futurama: e.g. Sandra Bullock (popular
> actress of the last couple of decades) plays Officer "Lenina Huxley"
> in a clear Brave New World reference.
>
> Further links if you (or anyone else) are interested:
> <http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106697/>
> <http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DemolitionMan>
>
too much spoofing of 20th century society for the movie to be
generally popular. People looking for a 'Stallone flick' were gravely
disappointed.
The more recent ( and less funny ) The Expendables has a scene
where Stallone and Schwarzengger
have an un-amicable meeting, and Stallone's parting remark was " He
wants to be President" .
Sean O'Hara
declared:
Re: Eureka
> >It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
> >don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
>
> Because there is very little that's actually better to watch? The
> last good forensics drama was quincy, the cop shows have been done to
> death since hill street blues/miami vice, and reality TV sucks rocks.
>
or Korean historical dramas from Crunchyroll.
Every time
shows that require good writing and good actors, which is why they are
taking over the airwaves.
I do wonder - and I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theoriest -
if all this crap - the shows, and the moronic commercials in between
them, aren't really aimed at dumbing down America more than it already
is.
BP
The Coldest Equations
http://volcanoseven.com/TheColdestEquations/
Derek Lyons
>For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming back),
>SciFi Science, Mythbusters there are far more on the near fake
>paranormal shows including the one with the college students on A&E
>where they investigate ghost hauntings.
have a bridge to sell you.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
alie...@gmail.com
> In the Year of the Rabbit, the Great and Powerful Scott Lurndal
> declared:
>
>>
>> Sean O'Hara<sean...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>
> Re: Eureka
>
>>> It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
>>> don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
>>
>> Because there is very little that's actually better to watch? The
>> last good forensics drama was quincy, the cop shows have been done to
>> death since hill street blues/miami vice, and reality TV sucks rocks.
>>
>
> Which is why I don't watch TV, and when I do I'm usually streaming anime
> or Korean historical dramas from Crunchyroll.
Mark L. Fergerson
Greg Goss
>>in a future where the Constitution was amended to allow Arnold
>>Schwarzenegger to become President.
>
>Was there such a Stallone movie?
action movies that year. In the Stallone one Schwarzenegger becomes
president. In the Schwarzenegger one we see a life-size cardboard
cut-out of Stallone as the Terminator.
A side plot of the Stallone one is teaching the inmates useful life
and job skills. In Stallone's case, he learns knitting.
--
"If the Gods Had Meant Us to Vote They Would Have Given Us Candidates" (Jim Hightower)
Derek Lyons
>Sean O'Hara <sean...@gmail.com> writes:
>>In the Year of the Rabbit, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
>>declared:
>>
>>> >
>>> My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka
>>
>>It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
>>don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
>
>Because there is very little that's actually better to watch? The
>last good forensics drama was quincy, the cop shows have been done to
>death since hill street blues/miami vice, and reality TV sucks rocks.
I see you live in a universe where your TV selection is limited to
forensics drama, cop shows, and reality TV. How thankful I am that I
do not live in such a universe.
Kay Shapero
>
> My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka, set in
> a small town in Oregon where EVERYbody is a brilliant scientist
> -- except for the town sherrif, whom they hired in because he has
of itself OR take itself too seriously.
--
Kay Shapero
http://www.kayshapero.net
Address munged, to email use kay at the above domain (everything after
the www.)
Ken Wesson
> Sean O'Hara <sean...@gmail.com> writes:
>>In the Year of the Rabbit, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
>>declared:
>>
>>> My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka, set in a
>>> small town in Oregon where EVERYbody is a brilliant scientist --
>>> except for the town sherrif, whom they hired in because he has skills
>>> they never trained for. Sounds better than the mill's run.
>>
>>It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
>>don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
>
> Because there is very little that's actually better to watch? The last
> good forensics drama was quincy
Ken Wesson
> On Sep 11, 6:05 am, tobymax43 <toby...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming back), SciFi
>> Science, Mythbusters there
>> are far more on the near fake sciences like Ghost Hunters, Ancient
>> Aliens,
>
> Personally I'm OK with Ghost Hunters since it's on the SYFY network and
> the "Fy" stands for "Fyction" (he said with tongue firmly in cheek).
> Ancient Aliens, though... that's a travesty. The history channel has
> become a home for conspiracy theories, cryptozoology, UFO's and
> religion. I do hope no sane person watches it and believes what they
> see. But then again I'm completely fed up with the non-crackpot History
> channel shows as well. Season after season of "World after humanity"...
> watching paint dry has never been so interesting in comparison. And Ice
> Truckers, how is this related to history in any way? There's no history
> on the History channel anymore.
Remember when it used to be the Hitler Channel?
erilar
> In the Year of the Rabbit, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
> declared:
>
> > >
> > My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka, set in
> > a small town in Oregon where EVERYbody is a brilliant scientist
> > -- except for the town sherrif, whom they hired in because he has
> > skills they never trained for. Sounds better than the mill's run.
>
>
> It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
> don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist
Raymond Daley
"Derek Lyons" <fair...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e6d8d0d....@news.supernews.com...
>
>>For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming back),
>>SciFi Science, Mythbusters there are far more on the near fake
>>sciences like Ghost Hunters, Ancient Aliens, the zillion it seems
>>paranormal shows including the one with the college students on A&E
>>where they investigate ghost hauntings.
>
> If you believe that Mythbusters is a "good show on science", then I
> have a bridge to sell you.
Admittedly they don't always get it right and do sometimes even start from
completely the wrong perspective but its one of the best science related
shows in existance.
Wayne Throop
: Whaaaa? Ever heard of a show called "CSI"?
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
They're not science, for the most part. It's off-the-cuff engineering
with minimal rigor.
It's a hell of a lot of FUN to watch but scientifically it's just
winceworthy.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com
James Silverton
I have seen several of my preconceived notions exploded :-)
--
James Silverton, Potomac
I'm *not* not.jim....@verizon.net
Quadibloc
> I enjoyed it, but I don't remember an "everyone's a genius" angle.
I wasn't claiming that detail, merely that there was a future so
advanced that there was no crime... until they finally had this one
criminal. And the people then were, if not geniuses, at least so non-
violent and over-civilized that they had to thaw Stallone out so as to
have someone who could fight the criminal.
But then, I guess no one would say that Eureka stole its idea from
"The Magnificent Seven" - and maybe Demolition Man has more in common
with that than with Eureka, in which law enforcement plays a minor
role, I presume.
John Savard
Quadibloc
> "If the Gods Had Meant Us to Vote They Would Have Given Us Candidates" (Jim Hightower)
John Savard
Hunter
tob...@comcast.net says...
> For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming back)
GOOD!:-)
> SciFi Science, Mythbusters there
> are far more on the near fake sciences like Ghost Hunters, Ancient
> Aliens, the zillion it seems
> paranormal shows including the one with the college students on A&E
> where they investigate ghost
> students are doing.
> Who views all these paranormal shows (really ghost stories shows but
> paranormal seems hip I guess).
Well to be fair they don't just cover ghost stories but also things like
"remote viewing" and the like. Things that MAY have some scientific truth to
them. Like an episode of Through the Wormhole" said that a "sixth sense" may
not be so ludicrous after all. I am prepared to believe it if actual evidence
is put forth. A lot of things that seemed ridiculous to science in the past
have proven true. Like Albert Einstein rejected the possibility of Black Holes
existing even if his own math said they could exist LOL!
>
> I am on the fence about Curiousity. I liked the parallel universe
> episode but I couldn't help but think why
> not on a less theoretical subject?
---
Well, I think the possibility in parallel Universes is a hot subject that could
be the next great break through so why not? The same for time travel. All these
once scientifically "impossible" things aren't nearly as "impossible" after
all.
I don't mind the episode on alien invasion as well. It is nice to speculate
about these things and it is theoretically possible that a malevolent race
could come to this world. It is likely to be a rough galaxy out there. :-)
They did more "down to earth" episodes about how and why thee Titanic sank and
how sexual arousal works as well.
>
> I am just fearing that with all these good science shows with the
> really bad there may be for many
> people a sense of equality ie Ancient Aliens as just as legit as
> Universe. The college student
> paranormal show to be just as valid as Mythbusters.
---
I'm afraid of that too but the saving grace is that the real science shows like
Curiosity, Through the Wormhole, Mythbusters, Explorer are on real science
channels like Discover, Science Channel, and Nat Geo.
The Paranormal/Ancient Aliens shows are on the History Channel (unfortunately,
although "History" does redeem itself by having the great shows "The Universe"
and "How the Earth was Made") and on the perhaps more appropriate Syfy (Don't
get me wrong. I do think there are alien civilizations in the Universe, that is
legit scientific stance like SETI, but I don't believe they built the Pyramids
for us. I find the alien invasion shows far more scientifically believable).
I am disappointed that the History Channel run these Ancient Alien shows
outside of the context of legitimate history (that is having a subject on the
history of UFO sightings are legit, but to treat them as a possibility that
they gave us some scientific foundation is silly).
>
> I would love to see a poll asking who you believe in more and include
> Darwin, Einstein and Von Daniken. I would not be to surprised if
> Daniken came ahead of
> Darwin. I further would love to know the numbers of "religious"
> getting polled and how they split.
----
Regarding the religious history and any possible scientific explanations over
miracles I do think that is perfectly legit history and science subjects. Like
the life of Jesus from a archaeological perspective.
> I still belieive Ancient Aliens is the most insidious show on TV with
> no show really debunking
> the claims.
True. If there were actual scientific evidence it would be fine by me but so
far there isn't nothing I have read so far (although I do find some ancient
jewelry that look exactly like airplanes interesting. What's more when large
scale models are made they actually fly!).
--
----->Hunter
"No man in the wrong can stand up against
a fellow that's in the right and keeps on acomin'."
-----William J. McDonald
Captain, Texas Rangers from 1891 to 1907
Mason Barge
>tobymax43 <tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming back),
>>SciFi Science, Mythbusters there are far more on the near fake
>>sciences like Ghost Hunters, Ancient Aliens, the zillion it seems
>>paranormal shows including the one with the college students on A&E
>>where they investigate ghost hauntings.
>
>If you believe that Mythbusters is a "good show on science", then I
>have a bridge to sell you.
would have been rich. Half the discovereis/inventions in history have
come about by guys who put some weird stuff together or did something fun
to something and, bingo.
It's a good show. And it's science-related. Maybe "practical science"?
Scott Lurndal
>sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>
>>Sean O'Hara <sean...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>In the Year of the Rabbit, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
>>>declared:
>>>
>>>> >
>>>> My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka
>>>
>>>It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
>>>don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
>>
>>Because there is very little that's actually better to watch? The
>>last good forensics drama was quincy, the cop shows have been done to
>>death since hill street blues/miami vice, and reality TV sucks rocks.
>
>I see you live in a universe where your TV selection is limited to
>forensics drama, cop shows, and reality TV. How thankful I am that I
>do not live in such a universe.
>
scott
Jim G.
>
>> Sean O'Hara<sean...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>> It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
>>> don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
>>
>> Because there is very little that's actually better to watch? The
>> last good forensics drama was quincy, the cop shows have been done to
>> death since hill street blues/miami vice, and reality TV sucks rocks.
>
> I see you live in a universe where your TV selection is limited to
> forensics drama, cop shows, and reality TV. How thankful I am that I
> do not live in such a universe.
doctor- or lawyer-type procedural. And I've never voluntarily watched a
"reality show" in my life. Unless sports and documentaries count as such. :)
Rich
news:zs6dnWuvx4TiCPHT...@mchsi.com:
> On 9/10/11 11:28 PM, RichA wrote:
>>> For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming back),
>>> SciFi Science, Mythbusters there
>>> are far more on the near fake sciences like Ghost Hunters, Ancient
>>> Aliens, the zillion it seems
>>> paranormal shows including the one with the college students on A&E
>>> where they investigate ghost
those
>>> students are doing.
>>>
>>> Who views all these paranormal shows (really ghost stories shows but
>>> paranormal seems hip I guess).
>>> Is it the fundamentalists that are the avid viewers?
>>>
>>> episode but I couldn't help but think why
>>> not on a less theoretical subject?
>>>
>>> really bad there may be for many
>>> people a sense of equality ie Ancient Aliens as just as legit as
>>> Universe. The college student
>>> paranormal show to be just as valid as Mythbusters.
>>>
>>> Darwin, Einstein and Von Daniken. I would not be to surprised if
>>> Daniken came ahead of
>>> Darwin. I further would love to know the numbers of "religious"
>>> getting polled and how they split.
>>>
>>> no show really debunking
>>> the claims.
>>
>
>
> Even if they're not white? WTF?
>
Same thing. Just look at some of the popular things on TV. How could
anyone come to a different conclusion?
Rich
news:j4lan8$lgs$1...@dont-email.me:
unwashed. The bad part is that it's hit or miss, but it can't be
anything else, given its limited timescale. Unless someone wants (for
example) a year's worth of testing on one theory in order to shake out
all the variables. That's science.
Thanatos
> They did more "down to earth" episodes about how and why thee Titanic sank
The reason the Titanic is pretty frickin' obvious. It was a massive hunk
of metal and it had a huge hole ripped in the side.
Barry Margolin
It was supposed to be strong enough to prevent such an accident.
It's similar to the surprise that architects had over the WTC falling
down. No steel building was supposed to be able to be destroyed by
fire, but no one counted on the extreme temperature of a tank full of
jet fuel.
--
Barry Margolin
Arlington, MA
Bill Snyder
<bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>In article <atropos-EDAFA0...@news.giganews.com>,
> Thanatos <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <MPG.28d81528...@news.optonline.net>,
>> Hunter <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>
>> > They did more "down to earth" episodes about how and why thee Titanic sank
>>
>> Really?
>>
>> The reason the Titanic is pretty frickin' obvious. It was a massive hunk
>> of metal and it had a huge hole ripped in the side.
>
>But why did hitting an iceberg result in ripping such a huge hole in it?
>It was supposed to be strong enough to prevent such an accident.
battleship; and even a battleship's hull wasn't designed or
expected to stand up to a high-speed collision.
What it was definitely supposed to be, was compartmented well
enough to prevent a hole in the side from sinking it. There are
lots of theories about the sinking that try to assign a single
main cause (brittle steel at low temperature, bad rivets,
excessive speed), but two large factors were first, that they
didn't plan for a sideswipe that would open up several
compartments at once; and second, that the supposedly water-tight
compartments could slop over into one another once one of them
filled up -- they weren't sealed-off all the way to the top.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank]
Thanatos
> In article <atropos-EDAFA0...@news.giganews.com>,
> Thanatos <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <MPG.28d81528...@news.optonline.net>,
> > Hunter <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > > They did more "down to earth" episodes about how and why thee Titanic
> > > sank
> >
> > Really?
> >
> > The reason the Titanic is pretty frickin' obvious. It was a massive hunk
> > of metal and it had a huge hole ripped in the side.
>
> But why did hitting an iceberg result in ripping such a huge hole in it?
> It was supposed to be strong enough to prevent such an accident.
Line's PR department.
alie...@gmail.com
> Derek Lyons sent the following on 9/12/2011 1:05 AM:
>
> > sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>
> >>> It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
> >>> don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
>
> >> Because there is very little that's actually better to watch? The
> >> last good forensics drama was quincy, the cop shows have been done to
> >> death since hill street blues/miami vice, and reality TV sucks rocks.
>
> > I see you live in a universe where your TV selection is limited to
> > forensics drama, cop shows, and reality TV. How thankful I am that I
> > do not live in such a universe.
>
> Indeed. In fact, NCIS is pretty much the closest I get to a police- or
> doctor- or lawyer-type procedural. And I've never voluntarily watched a
> "reality show" in my life. Unless sports and documentaries count as such. :)
out of the box weirdo Abby Sciuto) actually studied and intended to
work in forensics before taking up acting. The rest of the characters
are IMO nicely drawn and interact well. It's also very nice to see
David McCallum again...
Mark L. Fergerson
Derek Lyons
>The good part about it is that it questions idiotic, beliefs of the
>unwashed.
coolness, it invariably chooses coolness but claims that it is
science.
Ken Wesson
remake in the works that I'm unaware of...
Stephen Harker
The other problem I have seen mentioned was that Titanic had
transverse compartmentation. This meant that the Titanic was
vulnerable to something like an iceberg that opened up many
compartments by a slash along the sides. In comparison the Lusitania
had longitudinal compartentation and limited transverse. There have
been some claims that Lusitania would (possibly) have survived the
iceberg, while Titanic would (possibly) have survived the torpedo that
sank the Lusitania. Admittedly I have no idea how much credence these
claims have.
See, for example <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Lusitania> whic
says somewhere
=====================================================================
The vessels of the Olympic class also differed from Cunard's Lusitania
and Mauretania in the way in which they were compartmented below the
waterline. The White Star vessels were divided by transverse
watertight bulkheads. While Cunard's Lusitania also had transverse
bulkheads, she additionally had longitudinal bulkheads running along
the ship on each side, between the boiler and engine rooms and the
coal bunkers on the outside of the vessel. The British commission that
had investigated the Titanic disaster in 1912 heard testimony on the
flooding of coal bunkers lying outside longitudinal bulkheads. Being
of considerable length, when flooded, these could increase the ship's
list and "make the lowering of the boats on the other side
impracticable".[29] and this was precisely what later happened with
Lusitania. Furthermore the ship's stability was insufficient for the
bulkhead arrangement used: Flooding of only three coal bunkers on one
side could result in negative metacentric height.[30] On the other
hand Titanic was given ample stability and sank with only a few
degrees list, the design being such that there was very little risk of
unequal flooding and possible capsize.[31]
=================================================================
--
Stephen Harker s.ha...@adfa.edu.au
PEMS http://sjharker.customer.netspace.net.au/
UNSW@ADFA
trotsky
> In article<MPG.28d81528...@news.optonline.net>,
> Hunter<buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>> They did more "down to earth" episodes about how and why thee Titanic sank
>
> Really?
>
> The reason the Titanic is pretty frickin' obvious.
sentences again?
trotsky
judgmental about others only makes you look like a Canadian version of
Archie Bunker.
trotsky
I don't even believe the concept of a "PR department" existed in those
days.
Default User
"Michael Grosberg" <grosberg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:47b1e1c6-2e5a-44ed...@br5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
> There's no history on the History channel anymore.
"History is made every day". While they deviate from the channel's purported
theme to one degree or another, I happen to like shows such as Ice Road
Truckers, Pawn Stars, and American Pickers. And the latter two do discuss a
little bit of history with regards to the objects show on the program.
Brian
--
Day 950 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project
Current music playing: None.
Walter Bushell
Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
it was a Port Authority project and hence immune to NYC construction
laws.
--
Ignorance is no protection against reality. -- Paul J Gans
Thanatos
federal, state, and local. The NY building inspectors who have been
inside the high-rise office building on the UN complex were horrified at
the cracks running through the main load-bearing columns and the general
disrepair of the entire building. They predict it could suffer
catastrophic structural failure within the next decade, but are
powerless to do anything about it. The UN itself keeps talking about
renovating and repairing it, but just like with everything else the UN
does, the gulf between talking about it and actually doing it appears to
be vast.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
news:49be5929-264f-41db...@a12g2000yqi.googlegroups.
com:
>
> They do have high-speed electronic education, applied to inmates
> of the cryogenic prison, including Stallone, who becomes an
> enthusiastic knitter: I think he expresses developing feelings
> for Bullock by presenting her with a sweater. Come to think of
> it, some of the audience should thank him plenty, if that's
> right.
Her pants were far more interesting.
--
Terry Austin
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
news:cdc81a0b-1e8d-4c4d...@a12g2000yqi.googlegroups.
com:
> On Sep 10, 11:05 pm, tobymax43 <toby...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> I still belieive Ancient Aliens is the most insidious show on
>> TV with no show really debunking
>> the claims.
>
> I remember in Junior High School (in the early 70's) they showed
> us some Von Danikenish "documentary". Hopefully they don't
> show that stuff to school kids anymore.
> I haven't seen "Ancient Aliens". Does it pretend to be a
> documentary?
>
History Channel shows are easy to classify. Unless somebody has the
budget for a celebrity narrator, they use one of two voice-over
guys. One of them is very consistently used on the serious
documentary/history work, the other is very consistently used on
the woo-woo crap. I can generally tell from the commercial which it
is, but ten seconds of the actual episode is generally enough to
figure out which voice-over guy, and that's pretty definitive.
(In this case, doesn't the _title_ tell you everything you need to
know? I mean, seriously, dude.)
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
com:
> There's no history on the History
> channel anymore.
>
You preferred "All Hitler All The Time"?
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
@news.supernews.com:
> tobymax43 <tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming back),
>>SciFi Science, Mythbusters there are far more on the near fake
>>sciences like Ghost Hunters, Ancient Aliens, the zillion it seems
>>paranormal shows including the one with the college students on A&E
>>where they investigate ghost hauntings.
>
> have a bridge to sell you.
>
a hot readhead involved half the time). But science? Yeah.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
news:j4lan8$lgs$1...@dont-email.me:
> On 9/12/11 11:24 AM, Raymond Daley wrote:
>> "Derek Lyons"<fair...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:4e6d8d0d....@news.supernews.com...
>>>
>>>> For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming
>>>> back), SciFi Science, Mythbusters there are far more on the
>>>> near fake sciences like Ghost Hunters, Ancient Aliens, the
>>>> zillion it seems paranormal shows including the one with the
>>>> college students on A&E where they investigate ghost
>>>> hauntings.
>>>
>>> If you believe that Mythbusters is a "good show on science",
>>> then I have a bridge to sell you.
>>
>>
>> Admittedly they don't always get it right and do sometimes even
>> start from completely the wrong perspective but its one of the
>> best science related shows in existance.
>>
>>
>
> They're not science, for the most part. It's off-the-cuff
> engineering
> with minimal rigor.
>
> It's a hell of a lot of FUN to watch but scientifically
> it's just
> winceworthy.
>
It's cited as one of the reasons kids pursue science and
engineering careers. And that's worth something.
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
news:MPG.28d81528...@news.optonline.net:
> In article
> <b91265f2-05a5-4c6d...@d2g2000vby.googlegroups.com
> >, tob...@comcast.net says...
>>
>> For every good show on science like Universe (is it coming
>> back)
> -----
> GOOD!:-)
>>,
>> SciFi Science, Mythbusters there
>> are far more on the near fake sciences like Ghost Hunters,
>> Ancient Aliens, the zillion it seems
>> paranormal shows including the one with the college students on
>> A&E where they investigate ghost
>> hauntings. Tell me tax payer money is not going to that
>> research those students are doing.
>>
>> Who views all these paranormal shows (really ghost stories
>> shows but paranormal seems hip I guess).
>> Is it the fundamentalists that are the avid viewers?
> ----
> Well to be fair they don't just cover ghost stories but also
> things like "remote viewing" and the like. Things that MAY have
> some scientific truth to them.
such subjects, and not _one_ credible, reproducible positive
result, only an idiot would consider the question still open.
David Johnston
>> It's similar to the surprise that architects had over the WTC falling
>> down. No steel building was supposed to be able to be destroyed by
>> fire, but no one counted on the extreme temperature of a tank full of
>> jet fuel.
>
> If the buildings had been built to NYC code they would have stood,
Robert Carnegie
But I suppose he'd have thought of somewhere else...
Anim8rFSK
> In article <barmar-69BF35....@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > In article <atropos-EDAFA0...@news.giganews.com>,
> > Thanatos <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <MPG.28d81528...@news.optonline.net>,
> > > Hunter <buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > They did more "down to earth" episodes about how and why thee Titanic
> > > > sank
> > >
> > > Really?
> > >
> > > The reason the Titanic is pretty frickin' obvious. It was a massive hunk
> > > of metal and it had a huge hole ripped in the side.
> >
> > But why did hitting an iceberg result in ripping such a huge hole in it?
> > It was supposed to be strong enough to prevent such an accident.
>
> Not really. Most of that was just uninformed braggadoccio by the Cunard
> Line's PR department.
guarantee of passenger safety. :)
IIRC it didn't even get a hole ripped in the side, but the collision was
sufficient to spring open the plates, in just the right number of
compartments, in just the right place, in compartments that had
bulkheads that didn't go to the top, so that as they filled the water
sloshed into the NEXT compartment, whether it was open to the sea or
not. The iceberg managed to do everything exactly right.
I've never had a clear answer on if they addressed any of this on her
two sister ships, but I assume not, since they probably had no idea what
the Hell really happened. It would be interesting if the Brittanic and
Olympic did NOT have the same vulnerabilities though; it might tell us
that Titantic had some shortcuts taken above and beyond not bothering to
put on remotely enough lifeboats.
--
"Please, I can't die, I've never kissed an Asian woman!"
Shego on "Shat My Dad Says"
James Silverton
so water could flow into them as the ship sank. It's hard to see the
reasoning for the design but there it is. The non-provision of
sufficient life boats was criminal even if law allowed it.
Still, well placed generals like Haig could stupidly order millions to
die in the next few years and were honored by their country afterwards.
Even ex-serviceman's organizations respected Lord Haig after the war
when hanging him would have been more appropriate.
--
James Silverton, Potomac
I'm *not* not.jim....@verizon.net
James Silverton
Quadibloc
<tausti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> History Channel shows are easy to classify. Unless somebody has the
> budget for a celebrity narrator, they use one of two voice-over
> guys. One of them is very consistently used on the serious
> documentary/history work, the other is very consistently used on
> the woo-woo crap.
I wonder if the second guy is paid more...
John Savard
Robert Bannister
> sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>
>>> In the Year of the Rabbit, the Great and Powerful Dorothy J Heydt
>>> declared:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>> My daughter and son-in-law watch something called Eureka
>>>
>>> It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
>>> don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
>>
>> last good forensics drama was quincy, the cop shows have been done to
>> death since hill street blues/miami vice, and reality TV sucks rocks.
>
> I see you live in a universe where your TV selection is limited to
> forensics drama, cop shows, and reality TV. How thankful I am that I
> do not live in such a universe.
You mean in your universe there are TV channels that show something else
apart from the above and cooking shows?
--
Robert Bannister
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
everything imaginable. And some things that aren't imaginable until you
see them.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com
suzeeq
Not a 'PR department' as such, but the company still issued press
releases or gave interviews which bragged pretty heavily about it being
'unsinkable'.
RichA
Archie Bunker suggested they arm all passengers on airliners as a way
to thwart hijackings. The liberal laugh track laughed self-
indulgently. Imagine if they had taken his advise just before 9/11?
Derek Lyons
access to cable or satellite TV.
Derek Lyons
>Not a 'PR department' as such, but the company still issued press
>releases or gave interviews which bragged pretty heavily about it being
>'unsinkable'.
Cite? Everything I've ever seen describes that as a journalistic
creation.
Robert Bannister
You've got a better television than I have. Since we went digital and
the number of channels/stations doubled or trebled, I have been watching
more and more DVDs.
--
Robert Bannister
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
of mine watch and recommend. And there is a very wide variety.
suzeeq
> suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> Not a 'PR department' as such, but the company still issued press
>> releases or gave interviews which bragged pretty heavily about it being
>> 'unsinkable'.
>
> Cite? Everything I've ever seen describes that as a journalistic
> creation.
owned by Cunard or the ship building company.
trotsky
"uninformed" part. The technology didn't exist to do stress analyses of
the hull to determine if it was "unsinkable" or not. What Thanny said,
as ever, was a bunch of bullshit he pulled out his wazoo.
trotsky
Robert Carnegie
firearms would have won the gunfight.
By the way, are you also serving alcohol on every flight?
And, when did we ban smoking?
It seems likely to me that Muslim terrorists would stay sober, and
again would be the better shots in the battle...
...and if you /don't/ have Muslim terrorists on your all-armed flight,
watch out for the five-year-old kid who wants their dessert without
eating all their vegetables first. Whom you armed.
Howard Brazee
wrote:
>>The good part about it is that it questions idiotic, beliefs of the
>>unwashed.
>
>The bad part is that when the choice exists between science and
>coolness, it invariably chooses coolness
So far, I agree.
>but claims that it is science.
Any examples? Names?
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
news:6e408005-aadc-43c6...@h6g2000vbc.googlegroups.c
om:
And based on that, I suspect he is.
Lynn McGuire
I've had DirecTV satellite for almost 20 years. About
5,000,000 channels and not much good on except old Buffy
reruns. Watched "Band Candy" last weekend.
Lynn
Wayne Throop
:: coolness, it invariably chooses coolness but claims that it is science.
: Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net>
: Any examples?
Seconded. My impression is that they rather gleefully say that they're
going for cool, especially if the cool is an explosion of some sort.
But also when they, say, build aboat or a a 40 meter or so bridge,
entirely out of duct tape. They don't do any of that as a scientific
experiment, nor present it as such.
On the other hand, checking whether a fired bullet and a dropped
bullet hit the ground at the same time... fairly science-like.
Even if they are only verifying what a well understood model already said.
Actually, their canon-entirely-out-of-duct-tape was on my mind when
reading Gould's 7th sigma; just how would one design firearms entirely
without metals? The two methods noted in the book, ie, disposable
barrels, or rocket propelled ceramic amunition to reduce strain on barrels,
both seem feasible... but I wondered if a ceramic barrel reinforced with
tensioned plastic (eg, duct tape) might work; the ceramic for the wear,
the plastic for the resiliency. I suspect it wouldn't work...
but it'd be an interesting engineering challenge to come up with
a non-disposable barrel for use with simple slugs, sans metal.
What good is a glass gun-barrel?
"Bring on the lightning, we'll build a monster for fun
Bring on the lightning, we'll turn him lose when we're done..."
--- staff at Mama Gkika's
David DeLaney
>Actually, their canon-entirely-out-of-duct-tape was on my mind when
>reading Gould's 7th sigma; just how would one design firearms entirely
>without metals? The two methods noted in the book, ie, disposable
>barrels, or rocket propelled ceramic amunition to reduce strain on barrels,
>both seem feasible... but I wondered if a ceramic barrel reinforced with
>tensioned plastic (eg, duct tape) might work; the ceramic for the wear,
>the plastic for the resiliency. I suspect it wouldn't work...
>but it'd be an interesting engineering challenge to come up with
>a non-disposable barrel for use with simple slugs, sans metal.
>
>What good is a glass gun-barrel?
Dave "makes posting slowed-down-by-a-million videos of the process to YouTube
much easier" DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Jim G.
> On Sep 12, 1:03 pm, "Jim G."<jimgy...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> Derek Lyons sent the following on 9/12/2011 1:05 AM:
>>
>>> sc...@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>>
>>>> Sean O'Hara<seanoh...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>>> It's a cute show that's fun to watch if you have time to kill, but I
>>>>> don't understand people who watch it on a regular basis.
>>
>>>> Because there is very little that's actually better to watch? The
>>>> last good forensics drama was quincy, the cop shows have been done to
>>>> death since hill street blues/miami vice, and reality TV sucks rocks.
>>
>>> I see you live in a universe where your TV selection is limited to
>>> forensics drama, cop shows, and reality TV. How thankful I am that I
>>> do not live in such a universe.
>>
>> doctor- or lawyer-type procedural. And I've never voluntarily watched a
>> "reality show" in my life. Unless sports and documentaries count as such. :)
>
> NCIS has the advantage that Pauley Perrette (plays the cheerfully
> out of the box weirdo Abby Sciuto) actually studied and intended to
> work in forensics before taking up acting. The rest of the characters
> are IMO nicely drawn and interact well. It's also very nice to see
> David McCallum again...
It's a good show that bucks (IMO) the usual procedural and formula
trends, even though it clearly has leanings towards both. At the same
time, I much prefer the arcs that involve international intrigue and
espionage, as opposed to the generic Dead Petty Officer of the Week
standalones.
--
Jim G.
Waukesha, WI
Michael Stemper
>Actually, their canon-entirely-out-of-duct-tape was on my mind when
>reading Gould's 7th sigma; just how would one design firearms entirely
>without metals? The two methods noted in the book, ie, disposable
>barrels, or rocket propelled ceramic amunition to reduce strain on barrels,
>both seem feasible... but I wondered if a ceramic barrel reinforced with
>tensioned plastic (eg, duct tape) might work; the ceramic for the wear,
>the plastic for the resiliency.
If I recall correctly, an all-ceramic gun was described in Kornbluth's
"That Share of Glory". The Trader had to use one because his own gun
from off-planet was made from metal, and thus interdicted.
I don't seem to recall him being thrilled with its ease-of-use features.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.
Wayne Throop
: It's a good show that bucks (IMO) the usual procedural and formula
: trends, even though it clearly has leanings towards both. At the same
: time, I much prefer the arcs that involve international intrigue and
: espionage, as opposed to the generic Dead Petty Officer of the Week
: standalones.
It has always seemed a bit dubious to me that NCIS should be considered
a peer of the CIA and/or the FBI in terms of counterespionage, and/or
intelligence gathering. But so it would seem, in the gibbs-verse.
I also wonder at the rate of fatalities among NCIS agents. Wow.
And finally, selective prosecution, and/or outright judge/jury/executionorism,
seem... um... remarkably common.
But *other* *than* *that*, it's a marvelous show, sure.
"Leon... you didn't just upload that from our IP did you?"
"Are you asking if I routed it through the traffic light system and
bounced it off a dozen satellites? Would you like me to enhance the
surveillance footage until we can see fingerprints? Quick someone
open a port before CTU is hacked from within!"
"Jesus Christ, calm down, I was just asking."
--- http://www.grrlpowercomic.com/
"Not the boots!"
"Hwarf!"
"Adrenaline crash is a hell of a thing."
"Sorry about your boot."
--- Maxima and Sydney
http://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/262
http://www.grrlpowercomic.com/archives/267
Wayne Throop
: If I recall correctly, an all-ceramic gun was described in Kornbluth's
: from off-planet was made from metal, and thus interdicted.
I expect that if you made the block of ceramic large enough, and the
propellant charge small enough, you could have a ceramic with a reusable
barrel which would create fatal wounds. But I kinda doubt it'd be
practical enough to compete with disposable barrels and/or gyrojet ammo.
And probably not nearly so compact and deadly as Malkovitch's character's
in "Line of Fire".
Wayne Throop
: And finally, selective prosecution, and/or outright
Brenda Lee Johnson is actually getting into *serious* trouble
for her... somewhat creative law enforcement style.
The season cliffhanger was... interesting.
Not that she works for NCIS or anything, but still.
On the other hand, when she worked as a spy for one episode,
at least they had the grace to semi-formally lend her to another
agency, rather than pretending the LAPD would do it.
John Fairhurst
I don't have a TV - largely because if I did, I'd just be sat in front
of it doing nothing else. So I'm sat in front of my computer watching
the catchup services instead though I suppose that's my fault :-)
--
John Fairhurst
e: Jo...@johnsbooks.co.uk
w: http://www.johnsbooks.co.uk
Anim8rFSK
James Silverton <not.jim....@verizon.net> wrote:
> On 9/13/2011 5:50 PM, Anim8rFSK wrote:
> > In article<atropos-4116B6...@news.giganews.com>,
> > Thanatos<atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In article<barmar-69BF35....@news.eternal-september.org>,
> >> Barry Margolin<bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >>> In article<atropos-EDAFA0...@news.giganews.com>,
> >>> Thanatos<atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> In article<MPG.28d81528...@news.optonline.net>,
> >>>> Hunter<buffh...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> They did more "down to earth" episodes about how and why thee Titanic
> >>>>> sank
> >>>>
> >>>> Really?
> >>>>
> >>>> The reason the Titanic is pretty frickin' obvious. It was a massive hunk
> >>>> of metal and it had a huge hole ripped in the side.
> >>>
> >>> But why did hitting an iceberg result in ripping such a huge hole in it?
> >>> It was supposed to be strong enough to prevent such an accident.
> >>
> >> Not really. Most of that was just uninformed braggadoccio by the Cunard
> >> Line's PR department.
> >
> > Yeah, "The Ship God Himself Can't Sink" is more PR line than actual
> > guarantee of passenger safety. :)
> >
> > IIRC it didn't even get a hole ripped in the side, but the collision was
> > sufficient to spring open the plates, in just the right number of
> > compartments, in just the right place, in compartments that had
> > bulkheads that didn't go to the top, so that as they filled the water
> > sloshed into the NEXT compartment, whether it was open to the sea or
> > not. The iceberg managed to do everything exactly right.
> >
> > I've never had a clear answer on if they addressed any of this on her
> > two sister ships, but I assume not, since they probably had no idea what
> > the Hell really happened. It would be interesting if the Brittanic and
> > Olympic did NOT have the same vulnerabilities though; it might tell us
> > that Titantic had some shortcuts taken above and beyond not bothering to
> > put on remotely enough lifeboats.
> >
> The Titanic's "watertight" compartments were not closed at the top and
> so water could flow into them as the ship sank. It's hard to see the
> reasoning for the design but there it is.
Right, but was that the initial design, or a short cut implemented in
construction?
--
"Please, I can't die, I've never kissed an Asian woman!"
Shego on "Shat My Dad Says"
Anim8rFSK
Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Sep 2011 05:23:39 GMT, fair...@gmail.com (Derek Lyons)
> wrote:
>
> >>The good part about it is that it questions idiotic, beliefs of the
> >>unwashed.
> >
> >The bad part is that when the choice exists between science and
> >coolness, it invariably chooses coolness
>
> So far, I agree.
>
> >but claims that it is science.
>
> Any examples? Names?
Roberto Orci. Brannon Braga.
Lynn McGuire
the streets is that she is gone and that there will be a
spinoff of the internal affairs lady taking charge of
major crimes. Wont be near as good.
BTW, I can file a lawsuit on you for breathing. So could
that sour piece of work lawyer (good actor though !).
That does not mean that he will win.
Lynn