Truthers think that because the transponder was turned off that the planes would've "disappeared" off the radar. But everyone knows that the FAA still uses conventional radar.

Example:
Truthers truely are stupid & lazy to look up the facts themselves. Quite pitiful!

Do your current political beliefs closely mirror the political beliefs of those who raised you, or differ completely? Does it resemble the general political beliefs of your area or stand out as an oddity? If the former for both questions, do you acknowledge that your political beliefs may have been influenced by those who raised you and/or your area? How does that make you feel about the authenticity of your politics?

Okay Sibwol, you've got the floor.

http://www.youtube.com/user/SiberianWolfProSCO

Hello,

one of my cats (the male one, you can see him in my avatar) got earmites in one ear. Is there anything that i can do myself, without taking him to the vet? I'm already cleaning that ear as much as i can (without poking things deep into it), but that doesn't really help.

He's a stray who decided about 1 year ago to live with me (damn package from the cat-door omitted the "Now comes with free extra cats" sticker :D). While he is all cuddly and sweet, there is no way that i can put him into a box to transport him to a vet. He _really_ don't like that. I did that once when i moved, took me about 2 hours, lot's of my blood, and afterwards he decided to pee anywhere except one of the litter-boxes for two weeks. Of course i really like to avoid having all that trouble again.

All the stuff that is available against earmites is prescription only over here, and none of the vet's around my place would give me one without showing up with the cat first. However, it is confirmed to be earmites by a vet, i took some of the dirt there and he analyzed it. A few vets here do home visits, but for a hugely overpriced extra fee. Since i'm really low on money currently, this is just a no-opt at the moment.

So, any ideas what i could do to get rid of them?

Thanks,

Chris

Museum finds astronomer Galileo's lost body parts!

The parts were taken from Galileo when he was reburied in 1737

Two fingers and a tooth belonging to famed astronomer Galileo Galilei have been found more than 100 years after going missing, a museum in Italy says.

A collector bought the items, lost since 1905, at auction and gave them to Florence's History of Science Museum.

The museum said it had no doubt about the authenticity of the items.

Scientists cut the parts - plus another finger and a vertebrae - from Galileo's body in 1737, almost 100 years after he died.

MORE GRISLY DETAILS:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8371521.stm

:eek: :eye-poppi :cool: :jaw-dropp :D

This article's really so misses the point - :rolleyes:



More here:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle6925781.ece

That icon of Christmas and staple of Thanksgiving, the pumpkin pie, may be in peril thanks to some oddball weather according to Nestle.

First it was tomatoes and potatoes...now it's pumpkins. Um...should I begin to...:eek: yet?

Researcher says text proves Shroud of Turin real

ROME – A Vatican researcher claims a nearly invisible text on the Shroud of Turin proves the authenticity of the artifact revered as Jesus' burial cloth.

The claim made in a new book by historian Barbara Frale drew immediate skepticism from some scientists, who maintain the shroud is a medieval forgery.

Frale, a researcher at the Vatican archives, said Friday that she used computers to enhance images of faintly written words in Greek, Latin and Aramaic scattered across the shroud.

She asserts the words include the name "Jesus Nazarene" in Greek, proving the text could not be of medieval origin because no Christian at the time, even a forger, would have labeled Jesus a Nazarene without referring to his divinity.

More to be found at the article here.

No photos included of the mystery writing (I'm sure they'll pop up sooner or later), but though I'm certain the shroud is a forgery based on evidence to date, I'm curious to see what she's seeing.

This is the kind of statement that will drive any critical thinker up the wall.


The square root of 4 is rainbows.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8369674.stm

We should ban obesity. Obesity carries with it a number of health problems that include Heart disease and stroke. High blood pressure. Diabetes. Cancer. Breathing problems, such as sleep apnea (when a person stops breathing for a short time during sleep) and asthma.

Smoking is banned because of health risks. From smoking we get several health risks, including cancer and cardiovascular disease.

So if we can ban smoking, why can we not ban obesity?

It might infringe on people's rights? What right is there to be fat? There is no such thing as a right to be fat.

So I am in full support that obesity must be made illegal. It will only save lives in the long run and a healthy America means a more productive America.

Among other things, the right to privacy between doctor and patient that justifies abortion, can be applied to general medical decisions.

Unlawful health reform?


Other choice chunks...



Supporters...must...rationalize...these...things.. .away...without...affecting...other...decisions... we...like...

A small compilation of Glenn Beck and co's obsession with rape:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Is this just a symptom of social conservatives' larger obsession with sex? Or are they trying to systematically convince their audiences that a democrat being in power is the worst thing in the world, and even threatens people in the most personal way possible?

Hi,

I'm trying to talk some family members into getting the shot. I've even tracked down the place and time to get it. The problem? Everyone's afraid of some vax mythology. I was hoping someone might be able to help me find some really convincing sites to help debunk some of these chestnuts:

1) "If I get the flu shot, I'll be more likely to get the flu this year, and the next, and the next, and the next..." :rolleyes:

2) "Haven't people died from the new vaccine? Wouldn't it be safer just to get the flu?" :mad:

3) "Flu shots give you the flu, but a milder form, so you'll still be sick after you take it. I don't want to be sick so I'm not taking the shot." :jaw-dropp

Quoting The Examiner:

http://www.examiner.com/x-28973-Essex-County-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m11d19-Hadley-CRU-hacked-with-release-of-hundreds-of-docs-and-emails

The University of East Anglia's Hadley Climatic Research Centre appears to have suffered a security breach earlier today, when an unknown hacker apparently downloaded 1079 e-mails and 72 documents of various types and published them to an anonymous FTP server. These files appear to contain highly sensitive information that, if genuine, could prove extremely embarrassing to the authors of the e-mails involved. Those authors include some of the most celebrated names among proponents of the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

For some reason, the files leaked are described as "Leaked FOIA files". (File name: FOI2009.zip)

Not sure whether that means they were files previously requested or in process of being released under FOIA or what.

But are they real files or fake?

One of many discussions, this one by Motl:

http://motls.blogspot.com/

I have no idea how viral that slogan/bumper-sticker is, but you Christians should be ashamed of yourself. :D:p

Under what circumstances would law enforcement choose expanding bullets over full metal jacketed ones? You would think if you are going to require lethal force to bring down an assailant, then the former would be the obvious choice.

This question springs to mind after watching the latest episode of the BBC drama
Spooks in which

We have noticed that our cat's left pupil seems a lot narrower than his right. Sorry for the blurry picture, crappy camera and moving cat, but I think it gives the general idea.

Any idea what may have caused it and should we take him to the vet? His behaviour has been no different to normal.

So, these new mammogram guidelines came out and apparantly they are very controversial. On my way to work I was listening a radio program about it, and the doctor who was speaking for the people who wrote the new guidelines was viciously attacked, with all kinds of nasty aspersions thrown at her. It was a clear-cut case of shooting the messenger. All they did is look at the evidence from population studies to see if the benefits of yearly mammograms were outweighing the risks, and the data showed that it's arguable that the benefits outweigh the risks for women in their 40s and that every two years rather than every year might be better for older women. They didn't say not to get mammograms, but to discuss it with your doctor. For reporting what the evidence is, they have subjected to a lot of abuse. It's a real shame. One one side is the cold hard data, and on the other are personal experiences.

I know that Obama has suggested that America could save a lot of money on healthcare by studying what works and what doesn't, but this episode suggests that people aren't going to care what the data says if you have some actual real people come out and say "treatment X saved my life, so you know where you stuff that data of yours."

Here's the report:

http://www.nyenvirolaw.org/WTC/130%2...logy.Final.pdf

Nothing in that report suggest any explosive residues in the dust.