It's been animated. nice.
I wonder if that law firm would make such a big deal if a law they agreed with was enacted in such a manner?N.Y. gay marriage law faces first legal challenge
The day after New York became the sixth U.S. state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, a traditional-values law firm filed a lawsuit to overturn the law, saying that politicians used a “corrupt legislative process” to enact it.
The lawsuit claims violations of New York State Open Meetings laws, irregularities in the state Senate voting procedures and “unprecedented Senate lock-outs” in which lobbyists and the public were denied access to lawmakers.
The gay marriage law was enacted soon after the Senate voted, 33-29, in favor of it on June 24. The law went into effect July 24.
“New York law requires that the government be open and transparent to keep political officials responsible,” said Mathew D. Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, a Florida legal organization that has argued against same-sex marriage.
“When government operates in secret and freezes out the very people it is supposed to represent, the entire system fails,” he said. “The backroom tactics were rampant in the passages of this law. The law should be set aside and the process should begin again to allow the people a voice in the process.”
more on above link
lol, of course notunnamednewbie13 wrote:
I wonder if that law firm would make such a big deal if a law they agreed with was enacted in such a manner?N.Y. gay marriage law faces first legal challenge
The day after New York became the sixth U.S. state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, a traditional-values law firm filed a lawsuit to overturn the law, saying that politicians used a “corrupt legislative process” to enact it.
The lawsuit claims violations of New York State Open Meetings laws, irregularities in the state Senate voting procedures and “unprecedented Senate lock-outs” in which lobbyists and the public were denied access to lawmakers.
The gay marriage law was enacted soon after the Senate voted, 33-29, in favor of it on June 24. The law went into effect July 24.
“New York law requires that the government be open and transparent to keep political officials responsible,” said Mathew D. Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, a Florida legal organization that has argued against same-sex marriage.
“When government operates in secret and freezes out the very people it is supposed to represent, the entire system fails,” he said. “The backroom tactics were rampant in the passages of this law. The law should be set aside and the process should begin again to allow the people a voice in the process.”
more on above link
US isn't the only country who may lose their credit rating, UK release GDP figures in less than an hour. According to The Telegraph, "Weak growth is putting Britain's precious AAA sovereign credit rating at risk, experts have warned ahead of Tuesday's lacklustre GDP figures."
Last edited by Jenspm (2011-07-26 00:55:39)
The UK's debt is something like 400% of GDP, where the US's is just now approaching 100% of GDP...Jenspm wrote:
US isn't the only country who may lose their credit rating, UK release GDP figures in less than an hour. According to The Telegraph, "Weak growth is putting Britain's precious AAA sovereign credit rating at risk, experts have warned ahead of Tuesday's lacklustre GDP figures."
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
The UK is proper screwed, thank you Blair and Brown.
Fuck Israel
"Saggy pants law!"Jaekus wrote:
lol, of course notunnamednewbie13 wrote:
I wonder if that law firm would make such a big deal if a law they agreed with was enacted in such a manner?
(silence from firm)
lolunnamednewbie13 wrote:
"Saggy pants law!"Jaekus wrote:
lol, of course notunnamednewbie13 wrote:
I wonder if that law firm would make such a big deal if a law they agreed with was enacted in such a manner?
(silence from firm)
Naturally they're playing to their own agenda.
Do you think it would honestly be overturned though? I see it at best as stalling the inevitable - and that's assuming they're actually successful.
Make X-meds a full member, for the sake of 15 year old anal gangbang porn watchers everywhere!
FEOS wrote:
The UK's debt is something like 400% of GDP, where the US's is just now approaching 100% of GDP...Jenspm wrote:
US isn't the only country who may lose their credit rating, UK release GDP figures in less than an hour. According to The Telegraph, "Weak growth is putting Britain's precious AAA sovereign credit rating at risk, experts have warned ahead of Tuesday's lacklustre GDP figures."
http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/downc … amp;title=
Im not sure where 400 comes from but thats higher than our debt has ever been, it peaked at 200% around the early 1900s
Ah I see external debt...not sure how that ranks vs national debt :s ill leave now..
Last edited by Cheeky_Ninja06 (2011-07-28 06:32:01)
More data debunking GW...
http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-ga … 34971.html
http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-ga … 34971.html
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
The 'warming' part simply cannot be debunked. The cause and effect however...
The simple truth of the matter is that nobody really knows what's going on. You read a few papers on global warming concerning the same subjects, and even if they agree with eachother, the outcomes and data of their research are very different... happens quite often. It's confusing. There are so many variables to take into account and so much data that has to be gathered that it becomes an enormous clusterfuck if you try to link it all togheter.
The simple truth of the matter is that nobody really knows what's going on. You read a few papers on global warming concerning the same subjects, and even if they agree with eachother, the outcomes and data of their research are very different... happens quite often. It's confusing. There are so many variables to take into account and so much data that has to be gathered that it becomes an enormous clusterfuck if you try to link it all togheter.
inane little opines
I stopped reading (and went straight to the paper link) as soon as they said "alarmist". At least pretend to not be pursuing an overt agenda, would you?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14322957
UK to start enforcing website censorship.
I keep meaning to start a thread on copyright actually. Not just for pirate stuff, Apple and HTC seem to spend half their time in the court rooms and I caught a presentation given at CERN on the topic where scientists have the same problem. Research, development and creativity are being limited by the current approach to copyright.
UK to start enforcing website censorship.
I keep meaning to start a thread on copyright actually. Not just for pirate stuff, Apple and HTC seem to spend half their time in the court rooms and I caught a presentation given at CERN on the topic where scientists have the same problem. Research, development and creativity are being limited by the current approach to copyright.
Paper itself interesting though, even if the model they use seems almost absurdly simplified at first. Results look interesting, and worthy of attention. Assuming they did make mistakes of course, which can and does happen (a lot) - we'll wait and see, I didn't read through it in enough detail to have spotted any that may have been there.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Oh, but NASA was the goto if they championed GW... Okay..
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
South Korea claims that China hit the motherload
35 million users are affected by a South Korea hack
35 million users are affected by a South Korea hack
SOUTH KOREA has claimed that hackers from China could have stolen the personal information belonging to up to 35 million users of an SK Communications website portal.
South Korea's communications regulator said that SK Communication's internet portal Nate and blogging web site Cyworld was exploited by hackers from China. Those websites are two of the most popular in South Korea and the regulator claims the hackers might have got the phone numbers, email addresses, names and unspecified "coded data" of up to 35 million users.
Reuters is reporting that South Korean police are on the case but have yet to request the assistance of Chinese authorities. South Korea has recently set out a cyber security plan after a number of South Korean financial firms were hit by cyber attacks. However the attack on SK Communications will be the largest data breach in the country's history if 35 million users' data has been lifted.
Hackers based in or working on behalf of the Chinese government have been accused of carrying out a number of widely publicised attacks throughout the world. Earlier this year it was claimed that US defence contractor Lockheed Martin's network was breached by Chinese hackers following information acquired through an attack on RSA Security.
Apart from the deeply worrying possibility that up to 35 million users might have had their private data stolen, the big surprise is that this was a security breach that Anonymous or Lulzsec did not take part in. It seems that those loosely connected western hacker groups might work in the same 'information liberation' industry, but they have some morals about the information that they choose to acquire and expose
Read more: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/new … z1TTqYGFsK
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I should have said "didn't". Sorry.Spark wrote:
Paper itself interesting though, even if the model they use seems almost absurdly simplified at first. Results look interesting, and worthy of attention. Assuming they did make mistakes of course, which can and does happen (a lot) - we'll wait and see, I didn't read through it in enough detail to have spotted any that may have been there.
Adding to this, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 … witterfeed
Looks interesting, worth following. Gonna get very bored by the idiots who claim that this proves the theory is bunk, though.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Different computer models. Different satellite(s) and data. It's no wonder when you put different variable in the results fluctuate.Shocking wrote:
The 'warming' part simply cannot be debunked. The cause and effect however...
The simple truth of the matter is that nobody really knows what's going on. You read a few papers on global warming concerning the same subjects, and even if they agree with eachother, the outcomes and data of their research are very different... happens quite often. It's confusing. There are so many variables to take into account and so much data that has to be gathered that it becomes an enormous clusterfuck if you try to link it all togheter.
I don't see any evidence that "debunks" gw, but rather a seemingly lack of consistency in 13rin's link. Which I guess is an argument against credibility.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I didn't read the link, read one paragraph and it was clearly tiresome agenda-filled tripe. Read the actual paper or read the sciencedaily article if you actually want to get a reasonable picture of what the paper says.
The most significant thing is the inability to distinguish forcing and feedback effects, obviously. Not sure myself how to get around that but I'm not deep into modelling.
The most significant thing is the inability to distinguish forcing and feedback effects, obviously. Not sure myself how to get around that but I'm not deep into modelling.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
eekCheeky_Ninja06 wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14322957
UK to start enforcing website censorship.
I keep meaning to start a thread on copyright actually. Not just for pirate stuff, Apple and HTC seem to spend half their time in the court rooms and I caught a presentation given at CERN on the topic where scientists have the same problem. Research, development and creativity are being limited by the current approach to copyright.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
http://www.space.com/12469-climate-chan … -fast.htmlSpark wrote:
I didn't read the link, read one paragraph and it was clearly tiresome agenda-filled tripe. Read the actual paper or read the sciencedaily article if you actually want to get a reasonable picture of what the paper says.
The most significant thing is the inability to distinguish forcing and feedback effects, obviously. Not sure myself how to get around that but I'm not deep into modelling.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Yawn. One paper is the be-all-and-end-all because I agree with it. Yeah alright.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
So true.Shocking wrote:
The 'warming' part simply cannot be debunked. The cause and effect however...
The simple truth of the matter is that nobody really knows what's going on. You read a few papers on global warming concerning the same subjects, and even if they agree with eachother, the outcomes and data of their research are very different... happens quite often. It's confusing. There are so many variables to take into account and so much data that has to be gathered that it becomes an enormous clusterfuck if you try to link it all togheter.
"You could plan a pretty picnic. But you can't predict the weather."
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman