Best Trend Tattoos Design

I invite you to demonstrate how Islam is a threat to freedom and democracy.

should we start with the freedom of choices for women?

I think people are missing the point....
Anyway who really gives a crap what a bunch of pot smoking tree hugging hippies think.
I know I don't :cool:
Congratulations! You just got added to the list (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=2772247#post2772247).

Ummm.... everyone that's into gaming HATES Activision.

So does that means you didn't like Jungle Hunt?

Would it make a difference if a huge portion of what you've been exposed to, regarding religion/Christianity, was fundamentally incorrect? For example, there's no such place as hellfire; nobody is going to burn forever. Everybody isn't going to heaven; people will live right here on the earth. If you learned that a huge portion of those really crazy doctrines were simply wrong, would it cause you to view Christianity/religion differently?

I was thinking about this after appleguy123 mentioned the idea of hellfire. My initial thought is that the heaven/hell idea is boring! It's so much less interesting and inspiring than what really happens to you. The processes and work and how every living being fits into the ecosystem is just amazing. I think the idea that this has evolved over millions of years is just brilliant. Science adds such wonder to the world. The majesty of god has nothing on this!

I also love the idea that anybody can challenge an idea and change the way everybody thinks. How dull would it be if we just accepted everything at face value (ie. God did it!)?

It won't be an issue. Please refer to my previous post in this thread.

I feel like the fear mongering done by the international media is just unreal-- is everyone that uneducated?

well flooding the inner containment vessel with seawater + added boric acid is by all means an absolute last resort option in any playbook
(hardly a DIY solution: many reactors have the option and external connectors to do just that)
afterall they don't even know the situation inside because the temperature sensors aren't working anymore
also since that water can't be exchanged directly it means that they might have to cool the containment construction from the outside with additional water

obviously it won't be a disaster on the scale of chernobyl but it is already high up on the scale of disasters (6 reactors without cooling, 2 core meltdowns), it's pretty much confirmed that nuclear material has been spilled even if it was just hydrogen blowing up the external construction
it shouldn't be forgotten IMHO that a lot of radition will be spilled in the clean up progress (not only radiation: boric acid is actually quite toxic)

as a consequence the german government for example is already thinking about taking back their early decision to extend the use of their current nuclear plants

edit: according to some reports the evacuation zone was extended to 20 km
edit: don't forget that reducing the heat of a molten core might take quite some time so i wouldn't call the danger off as well: even when being cooled it still might have just enough remaining heat to melt through the bottom of the pressure chamber. i suspect we will know more in 24 hours

NB. I guess the most critical things that can get damaged in Japan are the nuke power stations, the reports so far say none are leaking.

I wouldn't worry about those. They're incredibly well designed. If Japan has any of the new AP1000's, then there's really nothing to worry about.

that could be one way to go, another would be having sun/wind farms in the middle of the ocean, to be moved out of the way when weather comes along.Haven't we screwed with the oceans long enough?

one problem with this off-site approaches is that you still have to transfer the energy long distanceDC power lines. Edison would approve.

Adjust their thinking? With all due respect, I hate this type of (fill in the blank).

So then, if someone can use their Windows laptop on their lap -- while wearing shorts -- without a problem... then they try using a Mac laptop the same way but they burn their legs (or worse)... you would suggest that they just need to adjust their thinking?

Seriously??
Since you can't change the heat characteristics of Mac portables, or the heat conductivity of aluminum enclosures.... yes! It's simple common sense. If it's too hot on bare legs, then common sense says, "don't put it on bare legs!" It's so simple, even a cave man could figure it out.

Nope; it says that they are required to deny their sexuality; to deny who they really are.

And if the argument goes that they have to deny their sexuality because they aren't married (just as non-married heterosexual people do), well isn't that grand: you've also denied them the right to marry. Why do you do that, pray tell? Because the invisible creator the universe told you that only men and women may marry.

That's a nice little roundabout way of making you feel better for your discrimination, isn't it?

Right, because civil marriage is required for gays to have sex with each other. Nobody is forcing you to do anything. You can have sex with whomever you want to.

We're talking about gay Catholics here, who ostensibly value being Catholic more than they value satisfying their sexual desires in a manner compatible with their sexuality. There is no theocratic regime forcing them to live as Catholics in good standing - it is a personal lifestyle choice, if you will.

Even if the internal architecture of the two chips is the same, a Dual 3.0ghz Woodcrest configuration is still going to outperform a Single 2.66ghz Conroe. While Conroe might be very good, it's not the best, which is what pro customer's expect from Apple's highest-end workstation offering.
I thought it was pretty obvious that I was talking about a potential single CPU Mac Pro. Woodcrest would obviously have to be used in a dual CPU machine. Also, I'd expect that lower speed grades would be offered too, which would make a 2.66GHz Conroe a nice pick. Or is only the absolutely highest clocked version of the CPU good enough to satisfy the demanding professional Mac users? :rolleyes:

Sorry, just tired of the so called professionals that can't stop whining about how anything other than the best is an insult... It's annoying and it gets old fast.

These groups don't care at all about the environment. They only want to hinder businesses.

Sure, I guess calling them the greenest company will really hinder Nokia's business - or indeed any of the companies that got rated near the top. :rolleyes:

The fact is this report says something which, as Apple fans, many of us don't like. However, if there was a comparable Lenovo forum, they'd all be saying the same thing –*"the report is rubbish"? Does it make it true? No.

What if Apple still came fourth from bottom, but Dell was third from bottom. Does that make the report more credible? No.

The fact that this report is gaining traction across multiple tech sites, not just MacRumors, plus the fact that Apple speedily responded proves that the issue is real. Did Apple reject outright the report's claims and say they are actually just as good as Nokia and whoever else? Did they come out and say, "greenpeace is b/s"? No. They said "we don't agree with the grading system used, it's not reflective of our other efforts" or some such politician-esque answer.

It could just as easily have been Apple at the top if they were up to scratch with regard to the materials used in their products, then you same critics would be loving the report. For example, if tomorrow Greenpeace ran a report on the grading of tech company recycling programs and put Apple at the top, what would that say? That Apple was good in one area and bad in another so they need to do more.

Stop being fickle and naive and understand the bigger picture. :rolleyes:

Ugh, so much ignorance (hopefully unintentional), I don't know where to start...


Nice. You've proven my point with that one statement. Congratulations, you are my first I & R.

You mean like the OS X pop up that asks for your password for the umpteenth time ? ;)

Users are as conditioned to just enter it on OS X as they are on clicking Allow on Windows.

Huge difference in my experience. The Windows UAC will pop up for seemingly mundane things like opening some files or opening applications for the first time, where as the OS X popup only happens during install of an app - in OS X, there is an actual logical reason apparent to the user. It is still up to the user to ensure the software they are installing is from a trusted source, but the reason for the password is readily apparent.

I'd be willing to bet that our crusades for oil have costs thousands of more lives than nuclear power accidents ever have.

Apple is more green than dell. period.

Makes me question the whole report if greenpeace thinks dell is more green then apple.

Do you have evidence of this just out of interest? I too was surprised to read this, so I'd be interested if you had evidence the other way.

Edit:

Did I read that correctly?

Sorry, I may not have been clear. I meant it as in I would much prefer to use OSX over Windows or Linux, and so would find it difficult to choose, say, a Dell because it ran Windows and I would find that unpleasant, even if Dell had a better environmental record.