search results matching tag: louisiana

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (124)     Sift Talk (6)     Blogs (11)     Comments (226)   

Gravitational Waves Jam

eric3579 says...

And I know they could be testing me
The data might be wrong
A preplanned concocted recipe
And played up all along
But at least my graphs are beautiful
With sigma 5.1
This I know
This I know

They told me don't worry about it
Analyze the chirp and
No more
They told me be careful
And doubt it
But I've seen a merger
Of black hole-ole-ole-oles!

LIGO feels when space is rippling through
With a wave of
Gravitation

LIGO feels when space is rippling due
To a tensor
Perturbation

Vacuum sealed interferometer
An L 5-mile long
Split a laser, bounce 300 times
Compare the distance gone
One built in Louisiana and one more in Washington
That's LIGO
Yeah LIGO

A Billion lightyear journey
To cover
Then it hit the Fabry-Perot
Lengthening one leg then
The other
Making fringes dance on
The dio- o- o- ode!

LIGO feels when space is rippling through
With a wave of
Gravitation

LIGO feels when space is rippling due
To a tensor
Perturbation

LIGO feels that space is rippling through
From an ancient
Amalgamation

LIGO feels that space because it's crew
Gave it seismic
Isolation

This event's power is
Enormous
Fifty universes
Of suns
We had indirect clues
Before this
All you GR haters
You were wrong -ong -ong

LIGO feels when space is rippling through
With a wave of
Gravitation

LIGO feels when space is rippling due
To a tensor
Perturbation

LIGO feels that space is rippling through
Can you feel the
Excitation?

LIGO's view of space is rippling through
Our collective
Imagination

Michigan Republicans Said What-What? Not in the Butt!

newtboy says...

I never intended to imply that it was an either/or choice. (EDIT: Sadly, it seems that may be the case, as they have yet to meaningfully address the water issue)

Since they DID change the law, they debated it. Are you saying you believe adding the topic of removing these unconstitutional parts of the law would stall, or even log jam that debate to the point of failure?
And for the reasons I delineated above, it's not pointless. Removing unconstitutional laws that are designed to target 'undesirable' portions of the population is not pointless. They certainly have been a problem in the past, and as I said, holding the specter of their use returning is a horror we should not tolerate being inflicted on so many for no reason.
IANAL?
Your next paragraph is my point...I can't imagine anyone publicly supporting it, so there should be no debate, it should simply be easily adopted in 2 minutes. That they neglect to take those 2 minutes, and instead again ratified this disgusting, unconstitutional part of an otherwise (seemingly) reasonable law is more than disgusting, it's a total shirking of their duty.
But yes, that's the US political climate. We're doomed.

*How's 1 year ago? Recent enough? There may be more recent.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/02/20/3624719/louisiana-police-arrest-two-men-anti-sodomy-law-declared-unconstitutional-2003/

EDIT: I understand that most people outside the US would be surprised that these laws are still on the books and being used, but they are. Often not prosecuted, but used to PERSECUTE instead.

The Israel-Palestine conflict: a brief, simple history

newtboy says...

I can never understand why anyone thought taking Palestine from the Palestinians because Jews were oppressed in Europe made any sense at all. Why was a new country not carved out of Germany? It makes no sense.
I'm disgusted that my government is Zionist. Land thieves should not be supported, especially when they're conquering religious zealots.
I often wonder how people would react if the Zionists had created their country in Texas, expelled the Texans, then expanded into New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Louisiana 'to create a buffer zone' that they then move into, and were supported by the international community?

Disturbing Muslim 'Refugee' Video of Europe

shang says...

You wouldn't like my resolution.

Course main reason majority of Americans are against it is our culture and heritage. Americans have never ran. During British rule we didn't run to Louisiana territory begging Spain or France to accept refuges. We took up arms and bled for our land. Patriotism is not bad as political correctness morons try to push.

That's why for us, or many of us, refugee makes no sense. And our forefathers even exclaimed if any Americans became refugees they deserved no country, our creed "give me liberty or give me death!" The 2nd amendment left behind by our founders to ensure a free society.

"We need a revolution every 200 years, because all governments become stale and corrupt after 200 years. " - Benjamin Franklin

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

The word refugee makes absolutely zero sense to Americans. At least me being Generation X and all my generation and older. You do not run you die fighting. The beginning of the Revolution Americans didn't have hardly any weapons, it was sabotage and terrorism and the capture of gun stockpiles by militias the armed the beginning, then France helped supply us.

They should right, but the proof is they are not refugees! That's media political correctness lies. Just as said in that video
Quote by Muslim - "this isn't refugees, this is invasion"
They use political correctness as a shield to get in.

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: U.S. Territories

yonderboy says...

While I find it entertaining and hilarious, this is simply horrible strawmanning. The US has one of the simplest systems of inclusion of any major nation. He either is not understanding, or he's simply being a demagogue about it.

It's really, really simple.

Want full rights? Then join permanently. Become a state. It's literally the exact same thing that Tennessee, Ohio, Louisiana, Indiana, Mississippi, Illinois, Alabama, Missouri, Arkansas, Michigan, Florida, Iowa, Wisconsin, California, Minnesota, Oregon, Kansas, Nevada, Nebraska, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Washington, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Alaska, and Hawaii did.

Guam, the Marianas, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands have the EXACT SAME OPTIONS as those states listed above had when those states were territories.

Samoa is different because they don't meet the minimum population requirement (60K) to be bumped up to qualify for statehood.

They're pretty close tho.

But yeah... it has nothing to do with race or bigotry or anything like that. If John Oliver can't understand that simple system, then how does he explain the different rights of citizens in the British Overseas Territories vs the British Crown Dependencies, or how Wales and Scotland are sort of countries and sort of not countries.

I'm assuming he can understand the wonky UK system, and if that's so, he should easily understand the simple US system (want full rights, vote to join permanently).

Just last year, there was a movement in Guam to call for a vote of statehood. Basically a glorified (but meaningful) petition. They didn't get the required % of people wanting to vote, so, in essence, Guam doesn't even care enough to vote for statehood.

They have every right that every other territory has had in terms of what category they fall under.

Basically, just look at states as permanent (and thusly more rights as well as more responsibilities) and territories as temporary until they decide what they want to be. Or territories can stay in limbo forever.

Guam, PR, and the rest can go the route of Hawaii (okay, that was naked imperialism but whatever) or the route of Cuba and the Philippines... or just stay how they are.

It's Illegal To Feed The Homeless In Florida

Stormsinger says...

Have you actually looked at a map of the US? Florida is clearly the prick, Texas is the butt, and Louisiana is the asshole. Mississippi and Alabama would be the taint.

Seems about right to me.

billpayer said:

Florida is the asshole of America

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Prison (HBO)

Jerykk says...

1) The problem is that the U.S. is so large that even a single state is often larger than entire European countries. As such, there's a large amount of income and crime disparity between states. Michigan, for example, has a high crime rate because it contains Detroit, which would qualify as a third-world country by most standards. Other states have significantly lower crime rates. Just as in Russia, some regions are far more prosperous (and safe) than others.

For example, Minnesota has a comparable population to Norway. As of 2012, it had a murder rate of 1.8, which is admittedly higher than that of Norway. However, Louisiana had a murder rate of 10.8 and actually has a smaller population than either of the aforementioned regions. The murder rates per state ranged from 1.1 to 10.8. That's a huge range in this context. Both states are part of the U.S. If the U.S. only consisted of one state, the murder rates would be radically different based on which state it was. That's the inherent problem with comparing small countries to the U.S. The sample size of the European countries is so small that you can't derive any meaningful data for comparison.

2/3) A large amount of violence is the result of drugs. Either people committing crimes to obtain drugs, people committing crimes because they are on drugs or cartels committing crimes to distribute drugs and maintain their stranglehold on the market. Would legalizing narcotics alleviate these issues? Maybe. They might also cause a rise in other issues, like traffic accidents. Alcohol already causes an absurd amount of lethal and non-lethal accidents on the road and no doubt legally-obtainable PCP, cocaine, heroin, meth, LSD, etc, would only exacerbate that.

RedSky said:

1) Northern Europe is the closest comparison income wise to the US besides Japan which is culturally very different. I don't think it's unreasonable to aggregate these countries in comparing. There isn't going to be a perfect example, but Russia is very far from it.

Your argument about the death penalty is a null point because what you're proposing is impractical and thus not worth debating.

2) & 3) Greenland has a GDP per capita of 22K and is a highly idiosyncratic example given its population density. I think that's pretty much self evident. If Greenland is your best example I think I've proven my point.

I have no doubt that greater surveillance and enforcement will reduce crime rates. I'm not disputing that. Technology will naturally improve this through the likes of ever improving facial recognition. But I don't think a UK style CCTV policing system would be affordable given that the US is less densely populated in cities. As for enforcement, I don't think there's been a lack of money thrown in that direction. The issue, as this video points out, is more that if it was targeted at violent rather than drug offenders the overall benefit to society would be greater. There I would not disagree.

4)

Germany and the Netherlands are other examples where it has worked:

http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/11/14/some-european-prisons-are-shrinking-and-closing-what-can-america-learn

What you're proposing (visa vi death penalty) is something no democratic country has accepted (or will, I think). What I propose is at least accepted by to a large extent by many European developed countries. The US may shift eventually if it is recognised the current policies have been consistently failing.

5)

Yes there are many reasons why Venezuela is not a fair example. I think you make my point. Surveillance and enforcement are both necessary to reduce crime. Of course if you pick countries distinctly lacking in them then it supports your case.

But I'm arguing about which would be better given the baseline of current US policy. I think you would agree that both surveillance and enforcement are of a much higher standard in the US, with largely meritocratic and corruption free police forces. If that's the case then other developed countries, with roughly similar incomes and therefore tax revenues to afford comparable police force standards are a good reference. Venezuela is not.

eric3579 (Member Profile)

dotdude says...

The issue is a concern for the southern part of Louisiana. It is said we lose one football field of protection (from hurricanes) each year - to erosion.

New Orleans does have a levy system along, Lake Pontchartrain, the Mississippi River and various canals. There has been maintenance on them since Katrina.

eric3579 said:

Your neck of the woods...well your state http://vimeo.com/97243508

Lake Peigneur (disappearing lake)

siftbot says...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'lake, peigneur, louisiana, vortex, whirlpool' to 'lake, peigneur, louisiana, vortex, whirlpool, salt mine' - edited by eric3579

Massive sinkhole swallows a dozen trees

blankfist (Member Profile)

trailer park boys-the original movie that started it all

Man Clinging to Car Hood Asks Nearby Driver to Call Police

silvercord says...

The reason that it's crazy in Baton Rouge is that it's Louisiana. I used to live in Louisiana, so I know. Did you see what happened there after Hurricane Katrina? If you think the federal gov't was to blame for that insane crap, you've never lived there. My wife and I watched the news and said to each other, "that behavior is exactly what you would expect in a dire situation." FEMA could have been stationed on every corner before the hurricane hit and you still would have had people crying afterward because the rain got in their drinks.

This video makes me miss my old home.

Man Clinging to Car Hood Asks Nearby Driver to Call Police

How Its Made - Tabasco Hot Sauce



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon