ImaginaryN

Registered bored user

ImaginaryN wrote:
Thing is, at some point Iran, and everywhere else in the world, IS going to need to have nuclear reactors, for the simple reason that they will need power and we cannot have developing nations using fossil fuels the way we did in the industrial revolution, because then, well, we're all dead.

So what needs to be fixed is the global problem of why people want to throw nuclear bombs at each other in the first bloody place, not condescendingly and patronisingly tell all these other countries that 'you know, you just can't be trusted with these, so we're going to just keep them locked away in the cupboard until you're old enough', while simultaneously waving our own nuclear reactors in their faces singing 'na na na naaa naaaaaa'.
ImaginaryN wrote:
More guns = less homicides?

The US has a homicide rate which is more than 5 times higher than the UK. The US public own about a quarter of a billion guns (112 guns per 100 people), the UK public own next to none (6 per 100 people).

So, can you please explain how on earth you can arrive at the above conclusion?


ImaginaryN wrote:
5cats I've seen this argument do many times and it makes NO sense.

If Chicago banned the sale of toasters, but the rest of the country continued selling them, do you think that everyone's home would suddenly be toasterless? No, because the rest of country hasa billion toasters and they can just get one elsewhere. 

Until there is a nationwide ban and an amnesty for everyone, there will be no difference. A regional ban will not reduce gun crime because guns are ubiquitous throughout the rest of the country
ImaginaryN wrote:
I can't speak for other countries, but after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987, the UK government passed the the Firearms (amendment) Act 1988, which BANS the ownership of semi-automatic rifles and restricts the use of shotguns with a capacity of more than three cartridges (in magazine plus the breech).

After the Dunblane shootings of 1996, the goverment passed the Firearms (amendment) Act 1997 which BANS all handguns from private ownership.

People in the UK can still own shotguns for hunting, but the guns have to be fully licenced, and if stored at home, must be kept in a locked gun case, and the ammunition has to be kept in a totally separate locked cabinet.

Guess what, we don't have mass shootings.

In the US, statistically you guys have a mass shooting every single day of the week, with something like 11,500 people killed by guns this year already.

You guys see it as just 'one of those things', blasé in the same way as people become blasé about road deaths. But year on year there are safety improvements in vehicles and pedestrian safety. We are moving into an age of driverless vehicles which will slash road deaths. People are CONSTANTLY looking to improve road safety.

What the FUCK are America doing to improve 'gun safety'? Literally nothing, because too many people love the 'freedom' to own a gun. Its perverse, the obsessions with 'freedom'.

I don't call living in fear of being shot every day or your life, worrying about sending your kids to school in case they get massacred, I don't that freedom, I would call it quite the opposite.

This subject comes up quite a lot on pan-atlantic forums and descends into choas each time, because literally, we Europeans cannot even begin to understand why you are all so precious about keeping a bloody gun, when literally tens of thousands of men woman and children are dying each year as a direct result. it's sheer lunacy, and the ferocity with which you defend the 'right to bear arms' cannot help but make us look at you in pity in many ways. Sorry, but it's true.
ImaginaryN wrote:
5cats I can't speak for other countries, but after the Hungerford mass shooting in 1987, the UK government passed the the Firearms (amendment) Act 1988, which BANS the ownership of semi-automatic rifles and restricts the use of shotguns with a capacity of more than three cartridges (in magazine plus the breech).

After the Dunblane shootings of 1996, the goverment passed the Firearms (amendment) Act 1997 which BANS all handguns from private ownership.

People in the UK can still own shotguns for hunting, but the guns have to be fully licenced, and if stored at home, must be kept in a locked gun case, and the ammunition has to be kept in a totally separate locked cabinet.

Guess what, we don't have mass shootings.

In the US, statistically you guys have a mass shooting every single day of the week, with something like 11,500 people killed by guns this year already.

You guys see it as just 'one of those things', blasé in the same way as people become blasé about road deaths. But year on year there are safety improvements in vehicles and pedestrian safety. We are moving into an age of driverless vehicles which will slash road deaths. People are CONSTANTLY looking to improve road safety.

What the FUCK are America doing to improve 'gun safety'? Literally nothing, because too many people love the 'freedom' to own a gun. Its perverse, the obsessions with 'freedom'.

I don't call living in fear of being shot every day or your life, worrying about sending your kids to school in case they get massacred, I don't that freedom, I would call it quite the opposite.

This subject comes up quite a lot on pan-atlantic forums and descends into choas each time, because literally, we Europeans cannot even begin to understand why you are all so precious about keeping a bloody gun, when literally tens of thousands of men woman and children are dying each year as a direct result. it's sheer lunacy, and the ferocity with which you defend the 'right to bear arms' cannot help but make us look at you in pity in many ways. Sorry, but it's true.
ImaginaryN wrote:

It was interesting how a debate about something purely physical, the shape of an object,  descended into a religious argument! 

I personally believe there is an abundance of direct and indirect evidence regarding the moon landings. I think it's poor science to say we don't have the technology to land on the moon and interpret that as a reduction in technological or scientific advancement. People are going into space routinely. The ISS is evidence that we can routinely fly humans into space, dock with an arbitrary object, and then come home again. That technology is built upon the apollo missions, which remember although they achieved their goal *sometimes*, we're extraordinarily unreliable, whereas space travel now is not. We have built upon the technology developed in the 50s and it's very shortsighted to think that this current reliable technology of building inhabitable satellites in space etc sprang out of nowhere! And if you accept that it didn't spring out of nowhere, then you must accept the technology was there decades ago, and coupled with the contemporaneous evidence and subsequent photographic evidence from varying sources, I find it hard to imagine anyone of any intelligence maintains that it didn't happen.

As for evidence of God and jesus. There is no documented evidence of God or of Jesus' spiritual and omnipresent existence. None.

The only evidence you have are beliefs of others and your own non tangible belief.

If that is the kind of evidence that you consider has credence above all others, then your mind will by definition never be changed.

But that is not the mind of a scientist, that is not how scientists or rational objective people think. 

I would be genuinely interested to hear the evidence you have regarding the existence of God,  I really would. But is it something as plain as as photograph or something that can be measured in any way, is it something observable or something which can be put to a test in a scientific way? Can you show it to me?

Or is it vague, or is it wrapped up in am enigma that somehow makes it unaccessible for a 'non believer'?r
ImaginaryN wrote:
Just sort yourselves out a decent national health service like most civilised countries and be done with it!
ImaginaryN wrote: So I take it you consider the death sentence should be the appropriate sentence for anyone convicted of robbery? Because that's what you're saying.....I think that even the ancient Muslims in the middle east would consider that a bit harsh....they only used to chop robber's hands off. I love how America makes out to be so civilised and advanced, when the reality is, you scratch the surface and there's immature barbarism running right down to the core. If only you cared enough about anything outside of your own borders to realise what the entire rest of the world thinks of you.
ImaginaryN wrote: I watched that with an entirely straight face. I literally can only assume that the title of the post was supposed to be some form of a sarcastic put down??
ImaginaryN wrote: I know this because I live in a country outside of America (yes, hard to believe I know but such a place does exist).....all the stubborn people who want to defend their gun 'freedoms' with their ridiculous rhetoric are making America on the whole look like a bunch of backwards irresponsible ignorant idiots. Sorry, but it's true. And Obama knows it! He's such an apologist now, but that's because he's EMBARRASSED! Embarrassed that there is such a massive and disgusting problem with guns in your country but the people are so unwilling to do the smallest thing to tackle it. Seriously, time to emerge from of the dark ages. This British are no longer coming. I'll leave the link at the end, but after the Oregon shooting, a statistic appeared that there had been 994 mass shootings in 1,004 days up to that point across America. (A mass shooting is defined as more than 4 people being shot). Nearly one every single day for nearly 3 years. So that's 4000 people killed in 3 years by gun violence. Anyone care to tell me how many Americans terrorists (or Muslims as many of you like to call them) have killed in recent years? And how much is the budget and how much work is being carried out to combat terrorism? Answers; next to none, fucking trillions, and shit loads. What's being done to tackle gun violence? Absolutely fuck all. Seriously, America, sort it out because you're fast becoming an utter joke. http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/oct/02/mass-shootings-america-gun-violence
ImaginaryN wrote: Riiiiggghhht....she said he was wearing dark clothes, which showed up light due to the infrared camera....so why is the Tacoma police car (Which is white) showing as white in the footage?

She is a total and utter liar!!! So is the stupid policeman who obviously intentionally ran someone over.

How drating drated up can you get?!
ImaginaryN wrote: And by mean person, I mean a terrifically offensive word for female genitalia.
ImaginaryN wrote: Only in America would people come up with the drating ABSURD solution that you should arm primary/elementary school teachers with concealed weapons. drating joke.

The whole country is INFESTED with easy to obtain guns due to your DIABOLICAL constitutional right for any person to own a gun. Its pathetic.

This has not happened in the UK and it won`t, because 19 year old boys can`t walk into drating Walmart and guy a deadly automatic weapon.

Wake up!!! drating WAKE UP!!! To all those in favour of keeping your gun laws as they are in light of this latest disgusting, blood curdling, easily avoidable tragedy - you are mean personS!! No offence.
ImaginaryN wrote: Re-read the wiki article....It says you can freeze PURE water to about -41 degrees C without it crystalizing, but to go any lower than that without it crystalizing you need to cool it at 10^6 K/s...so no specialist equipment needed.

Everyone here has a bloody freezer, get off your arses, buy some distilled water and try it instead of debating it ffs!!

ImaginaryN wrote: Doesnt mention anywhere how much fuel the radiowave generator uses!! If it uses a ton of electricity to enable you to burn water, then its pointless! and how would you run the radiowave generator in your car?
ImaginaryN wrote: CAPTION `Phew, thanks!....I needed SOMETHING to get the blood flowing down there!`
ImaginaryN wrote: In 1959, the US space budget was only 5billion dollars, within 6 years it peaked at well over 30billion(equivalent). Thats way more than it ever has been since then! Maybe they faked the landings so they could spend all that money secretly making and pointing missiles at the russians and who knows whoelse, or generally using it under false pretenses?
ImaginaryN wrote: most of you guys are stupid drating mean persons. It hinted at the length of the video, by saying skip 3 minutes, and it also described precisely what happened. DONT dratING WATCH IT THEN, mean personS! Youre wasting my drating time moaning about something that was plainly obvious from the start. RETARDS!!! dratING RETARDS
ImaginaryN wrote: well, speaking of incest, he certainly is one lucky mother-farcker! Look how far to the left of him the bullet bounces, and then changes direction again to hit him in the side of the head! nuts. Ive always wondered whether bullets could actually ricochet straight back at you and hit you, and now i know! yay.
ImaginaryN wrote: , (a reverse of what happened to the first coil), in to a wire, so you can use it.

I just dont see how they can make it anywhere near 90% efficient! im suprised that they say it can be 45% efficient! How does it not waste electricity alllllllllllllllllllllllll the time its in use?

ImaginaryN wrote: For all the people who doubt the concept that this works on, (conductivity quotient, wtf!), look up `inductance` on howstuffworks. We`re not talking about zapping pure electricity through the air, we`re talking about magnetic fields, which pass thru everything, including people, more or less, without hindrance and without any affect to non-metalic objects.

A coil which is fed with elctricity, from a wire, spews out an electromagnetic field,like this. . This field, if stable, exists quite comfortably (in this case filling a whole room), not interracting with anything, for as long as you feed the coil with electricity.

But if the magnetic field interacts with another metal coil u bring in to the room, this new coil will draw some of the energy from the field--- If u feed a coil with a magnetic field, it spews electricity back out, (a reverse of what happened to the fi

ImaginaryN wrote: ^^^ lol

no one is saying, `omg there is definately life on this planet, we must invest the entire planets finances on going there.` It simply shows that earth is in no way unique. And therefore, probably, life is in no way unique either. Dont forget there have only been 200 planets discovered outside of our solar system, and ALREADY we have found one that bears a striking resemblance to earth, that might, MIGHT, be suitable for life. So, if there are 100BILLION stars in this galaxy alone, and hundreds of billions of galaxies, thats 10 with 100 zeros after it stars. if one in every BILLION stars had a planet orbiting, that would make 10 with 90 zeros after it planets. If we find one in every 1000 planets (rather than 1 in every 200, which we could feasibly say), that is earthlike, thats 2 with 88 zeros after it planets that could be earthlike. So its a big discovery even if this place isnt quite suitable for life as we know it.

ImaginaryN wrote: `Is it` isnt a line from the comedy, its a line she used to make an example of the common-allgarden english chav!

The phoenix bit was very random, loved it!!

And since when have the Cure been JUST a band???! hhhmmff

ImaginaryN wrote: Lol, `there probably isnt anything special`. If there was anything AT ALL, then say goodbye to most of our so-called religions on this planet. I cant imagine the turmoil it would cause in this world! All the most veciferous relious groups all finding out at once that what they believed in was bullpoo......head for the hills!

I honestly dont think that this planet could survive finding life outside of earth because of the reaction by the people on it. and that saddens me.

ImaginaryN wrote: people dont post their logic. Posting the answer is pointless, as you can pretty much take as many shot in the dark attempts as you like, providing you have patience. So all the smart alecs who have apparently beaten it, how about some actual hints to the working out of some of the harder ones? rather than just boasting a load of, probably, ill gotten answers!