The Energon Pub

News Credits: 1 · by **njb902** » Sun Feb 17, 2013 4:35 am

If you guys had a chance to volunteer to have a experimental prosthesis would you do it?

by **shortwave** » Sun Feb 17, 2013 5:47 am

Depends iam partialy deaf and blind. so a prostetic leg wont be any good. ears or eyes yeah.
2001 bored me to death and i hate any movie based on a book . terable books annoy me. i detest Twighlight and prefere Jhon Wyndam.

News Credits: 1 · by **RhA** » Sun Feb 17, 2013 6:00 am

njb902 wrote:If you guys had a chance to volunteer to have a experimental prosthesis would you do it?

Everything that is attached to me from birth and the stuff that grew naturally afterwards all seem to function well. I wouldn't need it.

News Credits: 1 · by **njb902** » Sun Feb 17, 2013 8:17 am

RhA wrote:
njb902 wrote:If you guys had a chance to volunteer to have a experimental prosthesis would you do it?

Everything that is attached to me from birth and the stuff that grew naturally afterwards all seem to function well. I wouldn't need it.

Well what if your leg is messed up. The procedure would require them to remove your leg from just above the knee down and then attach a artificial joint, calf, and foot.

News Credits: 1 · by **RhA** » Sun Feb 17, 2013 10:34 am

njb902 wrote:
RhA wrote:
njb902 wrote:If you guys had a chance to volunteer to have a experimental prosthesis would you do it?

Everything that is attached to me from birth and the stuff that grew naturally afterwards all seem to function well. I wouldn't need it.

Well what if your leg is messed up. The procedure would require them to remove your leg from just above the knee down and then attach a artificial joint, calf, and foot.

Then, yeah. I guess. There's always the chance that it wouldn't work or mess up you leg even worse... I'd think about it.

by **Henry921** » Mon Feb 18, 2013 6:26 am

Sinnertwin wrote:From what I've read, there are no casualties from the Russian Meteorite, only injuries. Hope that this is true and that those affected are able to return to stability as soon as possible.

I purchased Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, yesterday. I've never sat through a Kubrick film and the price point was low enough for me to indulge my curiosity. I won't delve into the specifics but does anybody else feel that it was an overblown affair?

2001 has a select few scenes that would be considered classics... the apes discovering the monolith, the repeated mention of "human error", and of course "Daisy".

It also has another two hours of film.

It is not, in my humble opinion, bad but it certainly fails to live up to the hype.

by **d_sel1** » Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:36 am

Sinnertwin wrote:From what I've read, there are no casualties from the Russian Meteorite, only injuries. Hope that this is true and that those affected are able to return to stability as soon as possible.

Here is a side question, the nations of the world have spent a combined $0 on asteroid defense system. Is this a bad thing or just minor problem?

News Credits: 251 · by **Mindmaster** » Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:57 am

d_sel1 wrote:
Sinnertwin wrote:From what I've read, there are no casualties from the Russian Meteorite, only injuries. Hope that this is true and that those affected are able to return to stability as soon as possible.

Here is a side question, the nations of the world have spent a combined $0 on asteroid defense system. Is this a bad thing or just minor problem?

You realize that, so far, "asteroid defense" is science fiction, right?

News Credits: 22 · by **Rodimus Prime** » Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:00 am

Mindmaster wrote:You realize that, so far, "asteroid defense" is science fiction, right?

I think after last week the Russians will change that.

News Credits: 251 · by **Mindmaster** » Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:02 am

Rodimus Prime wrote:
Mindmaster wrote:You realize that, so far, "asteroid defense" is science fiction, right?

I think after last week the Russians will change that.

Sounds about right. >:oP

by **Sinnertwin** » Wed Feb 20, 2013 3:35 am

d_sel1 wrote:
Sinnertwin wrote:From what I've read, there are no casualties from the Russian Meteorite, only injuries. Hope that this is true and that those affected are able to return to stability as soon as possible.

Here is a side question, the nations of the world have spent a combined $0 on asteroid defense system. Is this a bad thing or just minor problem?

I wouldnt say its necesarily bad, but do we have technolgy available to us thats capable of doing so? How long do we think before we do? Whats the science involved in tracking celestial objects? Alot of questions there, D.

by **d_sel1** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:20 am

Mindmaster wrote:
d_sel1 wrote:
Sinnertwin wrote:From what I've read, there are no casualties from the Russian Meteorite, only injuries. Hope that this is true and that those affected are able to return to stability as soon as possible.

Here is a side question, the nations of the world have spent a combined $0 on asteroid defense system. Is this a bad thing or just minor problem?

You realize that, so far, "asteroid defense" is science fiction, right?

Yeah, but science fiction that many scientists might justify. It is brought by Neil DeGrasse Tyson when he was on PBS News Hour.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9HzU73JPxQ&list=FL6ZFN9Tx6xh-skXCuRHCDpQ&index=4[/youtube]

News Credits: 251 · by **Mindmaster** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:07 am

d_sel1 wrote:
Mindmaster wrote:
d_sel1 wrote:
Sinnertwin wrote:From what I've read, there are no casualties from the Russian Meteorite, only injuries. Hope that this is true and that those affected are able to return to stability as soon as possible.

Here is a side question, the nations of the world have spent a combined $0 on asteroid defense system. Is this a bad thing or just minor problem?

You realize that, so far, "asteroid defense" is science fiction, right?

Yeah, but science fiction that many scientists might justify. It is brought by Neil DeGrasse Tyson when he was on PBS News Hour.

Fixed.

But you're not getting my point: as of right now, it's all just science fiction. They may be looking into it, but for right now, it's nonexistant. The closest we got to an "asteroid" defense was research for President Reagan's "Star Wars", but that was for shooting Soviet missiles out of the atmosphere (should they have launched one at us).

News Credits: 1 · by **RhA** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:10 pm

Mindmaster wrote:
d_sel1 wrote:
Mindmaster wrote:
d_sel1 wrote:
Sinnertwin wrote:From what I've read, there are no casualties from the Russian Meteorite, only injuries. Hope that this is true and that those affected are able to return to stability as soon as possible.

Here is a side question, the nations of the world have spent a combined $0 on asteroid defense system. Is this a bad thing or just minor problem?

You realize that, so far, "asteroid defense" is science fiction, right?

Yeah, but science fiction that many scientists might justify. It is brought by Neil DeGrasse Tyson when he was on PBS News Hour.

Fixed.

But you're not getting my point: as of right now, it's all just science fiction. They may be looking into it, but for right now, it's nonexistant. The closest we got to an "asteroid" defense was research for President Reagan's "Star Wars", but that was for shooting Soviet missiles out of the atmosphere (should they have launched one at us).

No science fiction to it. Putin will rocketpunch those bastards right back to their moms in space next time.

by **shortwave** » Thu Feb 21, 2013 3:15 pm

Anyone see fox news ask is climate change was to blame?

My answer is NO YOU IDIOTS.

News Credits: 2 · by **Twitchythe3rd** » Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:56 am

shortwave wrote:Anyone see fox news ask is climate change was to blame?

My answer is NO YOU IDIOTS.

It's Fox News. This is normal.

by **d_sel1** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 10:05 pm

Twitchythe3rd wrote:
shortwave wrote:Anyone see fox news ask is climate change was to blame?

My answer is NO YOU IDIOTS.

It's Fox News. This is normal.

Whatever get you to believe in climate change.

by **d_sel1** » Thu Mar 21, 2013 11:33 pm

This is a summary of the situation in Cyprus.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/cyprus-crisis-explained-idiot/story?id=18782212#.UUvdejenfJw
There are three questions I like to ask? Answer any of them you like

1. Is there any justifications for any government to take money from its citizens' bank account?

2. How bad is this for the economy, especially here is the US?

3. Is this the one of the most condescending pieces of journalism you ever read?

News Credits: 1 · by **njb902** » Fri Mar 22, 2013 7:56 am

d_sel1 wrote:This is a summary of the situation in Cyprus.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/cyprus-crisis-explained-idiot/story?id=18782212#.UUvdejenfJw
There are three questions I like to ask? Answer any of them you like

1. Is there any justifications for any government to take money from its citizens' bank account?

2. How bad is this for the economy, especially here is the US?

3. Is this the one of the most condescending pieces of journalism you ever read?

1. I'm sure there are a lot of justifications for doing so. What I believe you should really be asking is why should it ever be necessary and or permissible for a government to do so.

2. I don't think anyone actually understands the world economy.

3. Yes it hilariously was.

by **Hammer** » Sun Mar 24, 2013 5:48 am

There are three questions I like to ask? Answer any of them you like

1. Is there any justifications for any government to take money from its citizens' bank account?
No.
2. How bad is this for the economy, especially here is the US?
Unclear.
3. Is this the one of the most condescending pieces of journalism you ever read?
Perhaps.

by **d_sel1** » Thu Mar 28, 2013 7:29 pm

Thanks guys,

May I ask a different question, should one day should Economics be a required subject?

I admit that this would be difficult right now with all of State's cutting back on education, but if we ever get out of this recession, would be good for future generation to learn the basics of economics.

News Credits: 1 · by **njb902** » Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:07 am

With America as war weary as she is, should she go to war with the DPRK if it attacks the ROK?

News Credits: 251 · by **Mindmaster** » Sun Apr 07, 2013 7:08 am

njb902 wrote:With America as war weary as she is, should she go to war with the DPRK if it attacks the ROK?

If and only if they take the first shot. Kinda like the First and Second World Wars.

by **Sinnertwin** » Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:00 am

njb902 wrote:With America as war weary as she is, should she go to war with the DPRK if it attacks the ROK?

Lets hope it never gets to that.
But to answer your question, unlike occupying the middle east, considering there is very little if anything to be gained, i suspect that it'll be a short campaign.

by **d_sel1** » Sun Apr 07, 2013 2:28 pm

Sinnertwin wrote:
njb902 wrote:With America as war weary as she is, should she go to war with the DPRK if it attacks the ROK?

Lets hope it never gets to that.
But to answer your question, unlike occupying the middle east, considering there is very little if anything to be gained, i suspect that it'll be a short campaign.

Even the neocons at the Bush White House thought that a second Korean War would have 30000 casualties minimum and that figure was before the Gulf War. North Korea has a standing army of about 250000, one of four (I can't remember the exact rank) largest armies on the planet! It is a fairly mountainous country, if you want to check out the citizens' mentally, check that National Geographic special "Inside North Korea," scary stuff filmed with a hidden camera.