search results matching tag: carrier
» channel: learn
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
Videos (186) | Sift Talk (7) | Blogs (17) | Comments (406) |
Videos (186) | Sift Talk (7) | Blogs (17) | Comments (406) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
Rig anchor chain breaks under tension
>> ^AeroMechanical:
Wow, that's a lot of energy. I had a friend who worked deck crew on an aircraft carrier, and he told me about how occasionally the wires used to catch the jets when they land would snap. He says he saw a guy have to jump over the same wire three times as it snaked around (it's the sort of thing that would cut you in half if it hit you).
scientific evidence:
http://videosift.com/video/Ghost-Ship-Awesome-Scene-from-a-Shitty-Movie
Rig anchor chain breaks under tension
like this? http://videosift.com/video/PHY-NYA-Aircraft-carrier-mishap
>> ^AeroMechanical:
Wow, that's a lot of energy. I had a friend who worked deck crew on an aircraft carrier, and he told me about how occasionally the wires used to catch the jets when they land would snap. He says he saw a guy have to jump over the same wire three times as it snaked around (it's the sort of thing that would cut you in half if it hit you).
Rig anchor chain breaks under tension
Wow, that's a lot of energy. I had a friend who worked deck crew on an aircraft carrier, and he told me about how occasionally the wires used to catch the jets when they land would snap. He says he saw a guy have to jump over the same wire three times as it snaked around (it's the sort of thing that would cut you in half if it hit you).
Usain Bolt vs. 116 Years of Olympic Sprinters
Nobody has brought up doping yet. I have absolutely no idea how vast it's influence is or how little it may be sought after due to the literal pride of the athletes themselves may be influencing these decisions among their own community (and I do think that the athletes and how they handle those that have done it, might do it, and haven't yet but are just hearing about the possibilities of doping; how they talk and act to stop it when they can amongst themselves and their community is what fights it the best).
I know some of the athletes have been suspended up to four years, but are still allowed to play again. I don't know if it matters what they were doing (as anabolic steroids and its effects will be lifelong if you keep up your routine) as some doping schemes are quick fixes like someone trying to use adrenaline. I mean do they check for that type of thing, a neurotransmitter carrier drug stuck in something like a false tooth; you bite down and in 5-10 seconds your adrenaline shoots forward for 30 seconds... I guess I should look and see how far they've taken this process; I know they are very vigilant, as much as possible. But, I really don't know were the holes are and how big they possibly are.
Training has most defiantly given athletes a superb edge. Not only do they run and work out, but they WATCH themselves run and can see what they are doing run. They just compare it to the best and modify themselves in that fashion gaining seconds, upon seconds. Eventually they learn to add a new twist and soon people are watching HIM or HER for inspiration to win a medal.
I know many athletes get their medals the old-fashioned hard way, proudly and resolute, for their country. It just makes me wonder how far doping has truly influenced the athletes and what areas of their training and structure actually test them correctly with the possibility that there may always be an area, with many athletes all doping (they are tested at the Pre-Olympic qualifiers, The Olympics, but then a shady organization "passes" them all at their home training camp). I hope that it never reaches that scale, but I always have problems when there are some Olympic coaches that have had about six athletes under them, three of them have been caught doping and three are OK--kind of disconcerting...
-edit
I forgot one point I was going to make. You can obviously see from the info-graphic that even training and in absolutely NO WAY can doping account for the 8 year old to the rest of the teenage field of sprinters. It shows to me that perhaps a very long change in diet stopping any malnutrition, FAR better medical care (also limiting disease to a LARGE extent) has lead to a BETTER populace, even genetically which just due to this little clip you could make the case, to some degree. Then you have some of the intangibles like better shoes, better surfaces to run on, and other like changes in our lives that were mentioned and the ones you can think about that weren't. Then you find the cream of the crop athletes, give them superb training, and I truly do think you can see why we have increased those three seconds.
I just merely hope doping isn't behind many victories. I actually wouldn't care if it was someone genetically modified--not grotesquely (to go out of your way to destroy the human form is up to you, but as scientists I don't think we should aim for that--we should aim within that, I also have a feeling that someone grotesque may not be exactly happily received at The Olympics...), just suited to run faster with muscles that are far more dense than usual. As long as genetic changes like this eventually come to almost all of us, changes that enrich and make our lives better (not The Hulk™).
Hilarious Siri Vs Google Voice Face off!
>> ^deathcow:
my Android 4 phone voice recognition is pretty amazing
Yeah, I have Ice Cream Sandwich on a Galaxy Nexus, and I'm pretty amazed by how well it gets addresses I ask it to navigate to. I keep thinking 'No way will it get this', and then it does. 'huntington drive', 'warrnambool', 'craigieburn'.
I'm looking forward to the natural language search like this in JB. I'm waiting a bit to see if my local carrier releases it for use. If they take too long I'll root my phone and flash it to stock Google.
Scientists 99.999% sure Higgs boson has been found
>> ^VoodooV:
so did they or didn't they?
every article I've read announces they've found it! but in the article itself they backpedal and say that they're pretty sure they found it.
I loves me my science but they are notorious for hyping up stuff like this only for the hype to not measure up.
They found a blip which is a particle that resembles the Higgs, they have yet to determine if it is a boson. Bosons are usually the force carriers, so this is important if it is the fit into the understanding of what the Higgs is in the standard model (a force carrier for mass). If it turns out to be a fermion, or crazy worse, a lepton (very improbable), then we will have to go back to the drawing board for the standard model. Also, the Higgs is seemingly lighter than predicted, this causes some math issues with zero-point energy. With as much as a full gigaelectron volt difference between the 2 detectors for the Higgs, there is still a lot of work to do. That isn't to understate the importance of this, there is something going on.
StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm - Battle Report (PvZ)
As an old school protoss it makes me very sad that they are removing the iconic carrier and replacing it with such a functionally similar unit.
As a Zerg player it does make me happy to see Hydras actually being useful
I totally understand wanting to go apesh*t in T-Mobile shop
Many mobile phone service providers are generally corrupt and greedy. This came out of Canada this week:
"Canadians have been misled by the carriers into thinking the access fee — typically between $6.95 and $8.95 a month — was a tax by the government or the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, when in fact it was simply extra revenue for cellphone companies.
The suit was filed on behalf of more than 14 million monthly cellphone subscribers, or nearly half the country's population."
This is a $19-billion class-action lawsuit.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/06/28/cellphone-class-action-lawsuit.html
Where the Hell is Matt? Dancing All Over the World AGAIN!
The aircraft carrier bit was a bit out of place ...
Congressman Gowdy Grills Secretary Sebelius on HHS Mandate
I think you may be missing the point of what the Congressman was getting at, and especially what rights we have under the constitution. Are you aware of what the free exercise clause is about?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Every person is guaranteed the right to practice their religion free from government interference. This is a fundamental right for every citizen, and religious liberty is one of the principles this country was founded on, if you know your history.
Here is a basic description:
"The Free Exercise Clause . . . withdraws from legislative power, state and federal, the exertion of any restraint on the free exercise of religion. Its purpose is to secure religious liberty in the individual by prohibiting any invasions there by civil authority.”227 It bars “governmental regulation of religious beliefs as such,”228 prohibiting misuse of secular governmental programs “to impede the observance of one or all religions or . . . to discriminate invidiously between religions . . . even though the burden may be characterized as being only indirect.”229 Freedom of conscience is the basis of the free exercise clause, and government may not penalize or discriminate against an individual or a group of individuals because of their religious views nor may it compel persons to affirm any particular beliefs.230 Interpretation is complicated, however, by the fact that exercise of religion usually entails ritual or other practices that constitute “conduct” rather than pure “belief.” When it comes to protecting conduct as free exercise, the Court has been inconsistent.231 It has long been held that the Free Exercise Clause does not necessarily prevent government from requiring the doing of some act or forbidding the doing of some act merely because religious beliefs underlie the conduct in question.232 What has changed over the years is the Court’s willingness to hold that some religiously motivated conduct is protected from generally applicable prohibitions"
Now, when you say Government should do what's best for "all citizens", what you're really saying is that Government should do what's best for "some citizens", because most citizens of this country are religious. Over 80 percent of us profess to be Christians, and that doesn't include all of the jews, muslims, hindus etc. Clearly, what's best for most citizens is the guarantee of religious liberties, a constitutional principle which, again, is at the heart of why we even have a United States of America.
As far as human sacrifice goes, that is what the Congressman meant when he spoke of the balancing test in regards to constitutional law. The Supreme Court decided for instance, on balance, that the fact of polygamy would harm the interests of the United States more than it would be compromising the the religious liberties of mormons. Allowing people to murder one another for a religious ritual would be in that category. This is not something the Supreme Court does lightly; on the main, they rule in favor of religious liberty.
So, while you may prefer a secular country with secular values, that isn't where you were born. This country was founded on freedom, not secularism. If you want to tamper with that, you are on a slippery slope to totalitarianism.
As far as contraceptives are concerned, the government is treading on the religious liberties of catholics by forcing them to carry contraceptives in their health plans. Changing the rule so that they are distributed for free changes nothing, because the catholics will have to pay higher premiums, and also because some catholic institutions have their own private carriers, which means they will have to pick up the tab. They shouldn't be forced to violate their conscience and pay for contraceptive use, and the Supreme Court will agree with that when they hear the case.
>> ^Sepacore:
Gowdy Grills "When a state banned a practice of animal sacrifice and a religious group objected, it went to the supreme court. Do you know who won that?"
Kathleen Sebelius "I do not sir"
Gowdy Grills "The religious group won"
Gowdy Grills "I think the state has an important interest in having license tags on automobiles so law enforcement can know who they're dealing with. When a religious group objected to having a certain license tag on their cars, it went to the supreme court. Do you know who won?"
Kathleen Sebelius "I do not
Gowdy Grills "The religious group won"
Groups given exceptions to compassionate/reasonable behaviors/expectations because they say they're religious.. this type of occurrence is wrong for Governments to allow/support when they are supposed to be doing what's best for all citizens, not letting some groups who have a personal preference get away with things that would put anyone else in jail. When it comes to physical well-being/suffering or reasonable safety/accountability, those who have their personal preferences that oppose such rational positions need to pull their heads in.
I'd like/hate to see what would happen in a supreme court case where a religion stated "it's my religious right to kill that person/human because of my holy doctrine".
Where the same situation occurred but with animals, and the group were authorized to carry out their murders.
More relevant to the HHS mandate, if someone doesn't want to use contraceptive, they don't have to just because it's covered in their universities/schools health plans by government policy. The government is trying to give people the option. Catholics could exercise their abilities to be devout to their subscribed belief system and simply not use the contraceptives.
The Colbert Report - Don McLeroy on Texas Textbooks
Got in another debate with a hardcore conservative today. Different one this time. I learned some pretty awesome things.
1. If you spend more money on your military, it will always be stronger. No matter what! If you slightly reduce spending on your military while removing troops from conflicts such as Iraq, thereby freeing troops up for other things, your military will still be weaker.
2. Military might is virtually solely determined by number of people in it. China has a better military than the US. In fact, China could successfully land invade the US right now!!! When presented with the fact that China has not even attempted a land invasion of Taiwan because a portion of the US navy is sitting between the two, this was ignored. When I pointed out the US spends multiple times more than China does on military, and therefore he contradicted himself, this was promptly ignored because China apparently also has a better economy than the US, too.
3. When I disputed the proposition that China could successfully land invade the US by pointing out that amphibious assaults require air power, and China doesn't have sufficient aircraft carriers, I was told that air power is not required for a successful massive land invasion. For example, the only thing air power was used for during D-Day was patrols and to parachute some troops in behind enemy lines. They were not required to protect naval vessels carrying troops, nor did they participate in any significant bombings of Normandy. Also, the US successfully invaded Normandy without aircraft carriers, so the fact that China only has one aircraft carrier is irrelevant. I asked how China would get its air force over to the West Coast of the US without aircraft carriers, but that was ignored because an air force wasn't necessary.
4. When I pointed out multiple sources of info showing that air superiority was needed during D-Day, and was specifically sought out prior to even contemplating invasion, and the fact that I have a degree in History, taught it, and my concentration in college was WWI to the present, he responded that he knew more because he was in the navy for 8 years.
In the end, I was accused of thinking I knew more about everything than anyone else, and ridiculed for thinking I knew things because I went to college.
Sadly, this is a true story, and I'm related to this person.
I know there are idiots in every political group, but the amount of ignorance and idiocy coming out of the right these days is staggering, and so many of them are obnoxiously loud and proud about these kinds of views.
Agilite IPC (Injured Personnel Carrier)
>> ^Confucius:
The best part is that you get a built in body shield when carrying someone with the IPC.
That's just wrong! ...You need to strap the injured guy to your front.
World Record 100 Tesla Magnetic Field Created -w/eerie sound
"No, no, I'm sure it's well within normal limits....Go ahead Gordon, just slump the carrier into the receiver port."
Can Wisdom Save Us? – Documentary on preventing collapse.
If religion is the disease, then why did we have over 100 million deaths from atheistic regimes in the 20th century? They made it their express goal to exterminate religion and in the process committed some of the worst atrocities in history. No, the problem is clearly human nature. When man tries to get rid of God he just replaces God with himself. I agree with you, that religion itself has contributed to the suffering and degeneration of the planet. Jesus hated religion. That's why He drove the moneychangers out of the temple. That is why He railed against the pharisees. He said, these people worship God with their lips but their hearts are far from Him. Scripture says this about religion:
James 1:27
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.
The problem has always been that people follow the traditions of men rather than demonstrate the love of God. Even just a few decades after the cross, Paul wrote about men who preached a different gospel, one that glorified men rather than God. The contamination is universally human nature. Nothing is pure in the hands of an impure heart.
Examine history and see the parallels. Humanity is just repeating the same story, over and over again. There is nothing going on today that hasn't already happened before. The set and props have changed, but our nature hasn't changed. Man corrupts everything he touches because his scheming is against the will of God. There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end are the ways of death. The problem is outlined in this video. Yes we have more knowledge, but knowledge doesn't help us. What we need is wisdom. However, wisdom doesn't come from man, it comes from God. Wisdom isn't something you can engineer..explore some philosophy and you will see that ultimately it has no real answers.
The divine wisdom, however, ordained that Jesus Christ would come in the flesh to give us our answer. It says that message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing. The world in its wisdom knows nothing of the ways of God, so God chose what the world would consider foolish to shame the wise. God chose to save us in a way people would consider foolish, because the foolishness of God is wiser than mans wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than mans strength. You think it's ridiculous, but God is simply showing up the wisdom of the world for what it is: foolishness.
>> ^Fletch:
Religion is the disease, Blurry. You're feverish rants, nonsense ramblings, and tone-deafness are primary symptoms. Reason is the only thing that can save you or this planet, but I fear it is too late for you and your fellow carriers. The infection has mutated into hundreds of different, self-preserving variations, and reason, although a powerful medicine (and requisite for wisdom), cannot cure those who refuse treatment in the first place, or have simply become immune to it's healing due to past, repeated undertreatment. Religion has evolved into a superbug.
Can the next version of VS please hide ignored comments that have been quoted in a subsequent comment?
Can Wisdom Save Us? – Documentary on preventing collapse.
Religion is the disease, Blurry. You're feverish rants, nonsense ramblings, and tone-deafness are primary symptoms. Reason is the only thing that can save you or this planet, but I fear it is too late for you and your fellow carriers. The infection has mutated into hundreds of different, self-preserving variations, and reason, although a powerful medicine (and requisite for wisdom), cannot cure those who refuse treatment in the first place, or have simply become immune to it's healing due to past, repeated undertreatment. Religion has evolved into a superbug.
Can the next version of VS please hide ignored comments that have been quoted in a subsequent comment?