Previous 11 - 20 Next
3
Fresh water has a lower specific gravity than does salt water. The question being thrown around though seems to be this: Does this affect the total volume of water in a given area? IE if you have a glass half full of salt water and add Ice cubes (fresh water usually) to it to the point that it is 3/4 full does it get more than 3/4 full as the ice melts? If I remember my ancient science texts the answer is no. Thus anyone arguing that floating ice makes a difference in sea levels is not using correct science. Now if all the land bound glaciers melt (and there a lot of them) there will be some change in the sea levels. But the arctic ice melting has 0, make that much more clear than 0b0z0 ever was, no effect on sea levels. This is because it is floating ice already. Unless it is thick enough to be resting on the sea floor, it is already displacing as much volume of the ocean as it will ever displace. I know that is hard to understand for some people but that is the way water works. A mass always displaces a volume of water either equal to its volume, or if it is lighter than water equal to its mass in water. Normally fresh water is equal to one cc equals one gram.
Greed is evil. However what socialists or others like them do is conflate self-interest with evil. Self-interest is good, and drives men out of their caves into the fields, out of their fields and into factories, out of factories and into business. Self interest is the desire for a better life. Greed is the desire to have more than anyone else, and to break what the other guy has if you can't have something better. Greed is 0webomba whining about auto executives flying to DC when he has a plane and limo provided by people he apparently despises.
In response to:

Poverty

Vic156 Wrote: Oct 08, 2014 7:25 PM
Corbett is correct. He usually is except when he gets on a paulbot rant.
In response to:

Poverty

Vic156 Wrote: Oct 08, 2014 7:24 PM
Flagged paulbot!
In response to:

Poverty

Vic156 Wrote: Oct 08, 2014 7:21 PM
Stuart 95 is a moron at best.
In response to:

Poverty

Vic156 Wrote: Oct 08, 2014 7:20 PM
Corbett, even if they were major PR campaigns they still bought real things and produced real results. Results that redound to the benefit of everyone on Earth today.
In response to:

Poverty

Vic156 Wrote: Oct 08, 2014 7:14 PM
Below, Stuart 95 wrote the following: And by what authority* did the government blow $109 billion of today's dollars to do something as useless as putting a man on the moon for 10 or 15 minutes? In retrospect, don't you wish they had spent that money on something else or, better yet, let the taxpayers spend that money on something else, something a little more practical? * Probably the same authority under which they just spent a couple of trillion dollars on TARP, too-big-too-fail bailouts, and quantitative easing (the latter of which I predict will eventually be uncovered as the largest contributor to income inequality in history). Since putting a man on the moon could be seen as a part of the defense budget (a rocket may not need to be moon capable to launch an ICBM but proving we could go to the moon meant that there was no doubt that we could launch an ICBM) I say nonsense to your first point and that your second point while valid has nothing to do with the first!
In response to:

Poverty

Vic156 Wrote: Oct 08, 2014 7:10 PM
Nor should the govt, having given benefits take them away at a rate that in essence equals more than 100% taxation for people who try to escape the spiderweb of govt dependency.
In response to:

Poverty

Vic156 Wrote: Oct 08, 2014 7:08 PM
Capt Pam, I think you are misreading this. Maybe... I don't care what Walmart pays its employees. What i wish they did was employ more people but they won't because it costs too much in various ways. Why do I wish they employed more people? 'Cause while I don't need someone hovering over me waiting for me to buy something I'd also like to be able to find someone who knows where they hid item x that I want! But the main thing that I thought that the comment got correct was that the govt should not be offering 'benefits' that in essence supplement substandard wages or jobs.
In response to:

Poverty

Vic156 Wrote: Oct 08, 2014 7:03 PM
Below a typical libturd carps about the moon (Apollo program) landings. Saying that the govt had no business doing such a thing. Yet the idiot is using the internet and a personal computer that are both direct descendants of the technology that was developed for the Apollo program. I'd also bet that he has a cell phone in his pocket, and a pocket calculator that cost less than a dollar. I have a scientific calculator that is better than the computers that were in the Apollo capsules that I can carry in my pocket and I love my Laptop computer. Give me programs like the Apollo program any day and stop giving my money to people who are lazy!
Previous 11 - 20 Next