The US Geological Survey has confirmed its existence with satellite photos, that show it as an integral part of the Greenland coast in 1985, but linked by only a small ice bridge in 2002, and completely separate by the summer of 2005. It is now a striking island of high peaks and rugged rocky slopes plunging steeply to a sea dotted with icebergs.
http://news.independent.co.uk/environmen...
PRE-EMPTIVE RESPONSE TO MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING DENIERS
They will come here with links to youtube videos, editorials (read opinion articles) from political and media websites, copy and pastes from a wikipedia article (about individual scientists against the MAINSTREAM scientific consensus on man made global warming), and propaganda. For example, they will cite an MIT link saying there is global warming in Pluto (trying to convince you its the sun) without mentioning the fact that the scientist cited in the article says it has nothing to do with the sun.
Is it time to believe in global warming know that it has created an island?
I don't disbelieve the measurement of increasing global temperatures.
What *NONE OF YOU* have done...anywhere...even the scientists you lemmings follow because of "consensus"...is prove the percentage of global warming caused by man, and caused by natural variation of the sun. *THAT* is the science you ought to ask for.
Reply:I've yet to see any scientist who can tell conclusively how much man has contributed without using general vague terms. Why do so many who so strongly believe in Global Warming not believe that the Earth just recently came out of a little mini ice age (that's also been proven) in which scientist haven't been able to conclusively say why it occurred.
Something you might consider as well, as fresh water enters the Ocean the salinity of the ocean decreases. It's this salinity that runs the oceans currents that is so critical in our current weather patterns. When this stops (which it will as it has in the past) another ice age will occur (not warming).
Reply:Time will tell....
Reply:Global warming is one thing linking it to human activity is another. I believe in global warming because the Great lakes are the result of a huge glacier melting. Since the lakes are lakes and not Glaciers there must be global warming.
Its not necessarily a bad thing, and most of the previous events of global warming occured well before human activity could have possibly had any effect, I believe it is far more reasonable to assume the current global warming phase is a natural event than to make a leap that all previous global warming episodes were natural and this one time it was caused by humans. After all the ice caps on mars are also receding and they don't drive SUV's there, at least not yet.
Particularly when the loudest voices in this debate seen to have the agenda of using it as an excuse to strip us of freedom.
Reply:Green is good. When Greenland was discovered in the years before SUVs and America, the earth was warm enough for Greenland to be green instead of frozen white like it is now. We need global warming to make Greenland green again. We need more SUVs and more American CO2 to help global warming make Greenland green. Green is good. Global warming will make Greenland green again like when it was discovered. Global warming is good. Help make Greenland green again!
Reply:PEOPLE. with an agenda keep lying about this, and believe if they say it enough, that it will become a fact!
Wrong! There is no Global Warming, and the lies and fabrications that ALL the Scientist, Geologist, etc. agree to it, IS NOTHING BUT MORE LIES!
Reply:Anyone who doesn't believe in global warming is an idiot.
Anyone who believes global warming DEFINITELY is caused mostly by man is an idiot also.
Reply:You know what other glacier melted? Take your pick of any part of the massive sheet of ice that used to cover most of North America or Europe. When did that melt? Before or after human industrialization?
I'm afraid science and logic simply don't support your whole theory.
Reply:Wow, if you just found out about it you are a moron, get an education. Nowadays, this is all they teach in schools, its because of you uneducated and ignorant people that dont know anything about global warming
Reply:so what ?
Reply:you fail to state that just as many if not more prominent scientist are not on board with your assessment. Whether or not it is man made is not the real issue, shouldn't we just accept the fact the earth is warming and the less crap in the air the better.
Reply:Believe what you want to, it will not change reality, and by the time the U.S. population stops bickering among themselves about meaningless trivia, it will all be over.
Reply:Ok how many times have we seen this question? My sister is a geologist and she doesn't buy this crap, so quit assuming that all of the geologists think this, and all of them agree with it. Nobody cares! Get on with your life! There is NO global warming!!
Reply:But...but...but... the Cons said Global Warming was a Myth!
Reply:IT IS A DANGER AND I FEEL SORRY FOR YOUNG FOLKS OUT THERE. i LIVE IN THE ARCTIC AND WE SEE THE DIFFIRENCE. PEOPLE NEED TO GET OFF THEIR BUTTS AND WALK AND BICYCLE INSTEAD OF DRIVING ALL THE TIME. i ONLY USE MY CAR WHEN NEEDED. IF I NEED ONLY A FEW THINGS I WALK OR BIKE. CARS ARE NOT ONLY A CAUSE OF POLLUTION, BUT ALSO OBESITY. WANT A GREAT WEIGHT CONTROL SOLUTION TO LOOK GREAT? GET OFF YOUR BUTT AND WALK!!!
Reply:Clearly the Earth is getting warmer. It warms and cools all the time.
Why in the world would anyone think the warming is a man-made phenomenon.
Monday, May 11, 2009
Wake up Al Gore! He's got another issue to make a "documentary" about. What can we do?
Today the very astute geologist of the U.S. Geological Survey in Pasadena stated that California faces an almost certain risk of being rocked by a strong earthquake by, everyone prepare, Gasp, by, 2037. Al, we need you! California and Earthquakes, This is unbelievable!
Al Help,
What can we do to reduce the threat of Californian Earthquakes?
Wake up Al Gore! He's got another issue to make a "documentary" about. What can we do?
What does his peer reviewed scientific reports say? I mean Dana will not believe the sun is warming us unless he has peer reviewed scientific reports to back that up. So, where is his peer scientific reviewed information. By the way, that Northridge Earthquake didn't occur because I have not seen peer reviewed scientific reports to prove that it did. Where is the scientific consensus on this matter? I think there has to be far more money thrown at this 'problem' and billions and billions of research money before we recognize anything.....
lol
Reply:Keep a couple weeks worth of food and water buried in your backyard away from any structures because the US Government won't be capable of helping you at least until that long.
I've lived in California my entire life and we've been warned since I was a child that "The Big One" could occur any day, so we well know the risks and preparations necessary.
Reply:There isnt much you can do, they are real.
At anytime one could hit.
I use to live there many yrs. after a while you just live with it don't think much abt them.
Get use to the idea that at any moment you might have one no matter where or what time it is.
Reply:Evacuate. If California is too dangerous a place to live, get out while you still can.
Reply:Unfortunately, earthquakes in California are real. Not enough controversy for his documentaries.
Reply:Move to Canada!
Reply:Lol!!!
Reply:don't think anything lol
Al Help,
What can we do to reduce the threat of Californian Earthquakes?
Wake up Al Gore! He's got another issue to make a "documentary" about. What can we do?
What does his peer reviewed scientific reports say? I mean Dana will not believe the sun is warming us unless he has peer reviewed scientific reports to back that up. So, where is his peer scientific reviewed information. By the way, that Northridge Earthquake didn't occur because I have not seen peer reviewed scientific reports to prove that it did. Where is the scientific consensus on this matter? I think there has to be far more money thrown at this 'problem' and billions and billions of research money before we recognize anything.....
lol
Reply:Keep a couple weeks worth of food and water buried in your backyard away from any structures because the US Government won't be capable of helping you at least until that long.
I've lived in California my entire life and we've been warned since I was a child that "The Big One" could occur any day, so we well know the risks and preparations necessary.
Reply:There isnt much you can do, they are real.
At anytime one could hit.
I use to live there many yrs. after a while you just live with it don't think much abt them.
Get use to the idea that at any moment you might have one no matter where or what time it is.
Reply:Evacuate. If California is too dangerous a place to live, get out while you still can.
Reply:Unfortunately, earthquakes in California are real. Not enough controversy for his documentaries.
Reply:Move to Canada!
Reply:Lol!!!
Reply:don't think anything lol
Arrange these exploration techniques in the most likely order a mining company would use them please?
I need the following arranged in the most likely order a mining company would use them.
Geochemical survey, study of geological maps, drilling and geophysical survey.
Thankyou very much =)
Arrange these exploration techniques in the most likely order a mining company would use them please?
study of geological maps
geochemical survey
drilling and geophysical survey
teeth
Geochemical survey, study of geological maps, drilling and geophysical survey.
Thankyou very much =)
Arrange these exploration techniques in the most likely order a mining company would use them please?
study of geological maps
geochemical survey
drilling and geophysical survey
teeth
How did you become a left-wing liberal or a right-wing conservative?
What specifically caused you to go from nonpolitical/nonpartisan to what you are today? What were the influences? Your parents, Rush Limbaugh, your preacher?
For me, it was yahoo message board and facts. Prior to yahoo, I considered myself a Democrat and had a general sense in what I believed in, but I did not become a full fledged anti-con liberal until I visited yahoo. People were very partisan. I considered myself a moderate for a while, but after some time, I gravitated toward liberalism. I did so because one side would say one thing, the other side would say another. To see who was telling the truth I visited third party sites, and suprise, suprise, liberals were usually right.
For example, to this day, conservatives pass around the lie that one volcanic eruption spews out more CO2 then all human activity combined. Check out the U.S. Geological Survey website and it will tell you human activty actually produces more then 150 times more CO2 then all volcanic activity combined
How did you become a left-wing liberal or a right-wing conservative?
For me it was education and a very keen interest in politics.
Before I begin, I should state I'm from Alberta, Canada, and not the United States... so Conservativism and Liberalism may be defined a little differently. In Canada, Liberals are moderates, while New Democrats are left wingers.
In my province, everyone is Conservative. So when I was young, I was also conservative becuase that's all I ever really knew. However, looking into policies I began to question Conservativism a little bit. I studied history and political science, and Native American Studies at two Universities since I was a young man. My studies (which included lots of research and philosophies.. as well as quantitative evidence), convinced me to swtich stances.
Some reasons I disagree with Conservativism... mostly having to do with quantitative evidence:
1) Conservativism tends to leave people behind in society. Cutting social programs and government functions for that matter usually results in privatization and higher actual costs for the most part. This can be seen in degregulation of several industries including airlines, rail, and power in Canada.
2) Due to slashing in social funding, disparity increases. Not since the INdustrial Revoltuion has the Western World seen such disparity growing at such a fast rate. Real wages are dropping, while real inflation is rising. Lots of people are getting left behind.
My own moral judgements would assume that Conservative policies generally are aimed to the "elite" of society, while pretty much ignoring the rest. I belive society is only as strong as it's weakest link. Therefore, I am Liberal.
Reply:The Vietnam conflict did it for me, voted as soon as I turned eighteen. As an Independent I don't consider myself either of your choices.
Reply:You are great proof that free and open debate does stimulate learning. Also, that conservatives are becoming increasingly fascistic and frightening.
In that situation, the only thing in the middle of the road is dead armadillos.
Reply:As soon as I got off my rusty dusty and got a job, started paying taxes I became a conservative.
Reply:You become a left wing liberal when you believe capitalism bites, that everyone else should pay taxes and the government should use that money to solve all your problems.
Your become a right wing conservative when you believe only capitalism can work, the church should guide our personal lives and the government should nearly be eliminated for taking too much of your hard earned wealth.
Reply:Before Bush, I usually voted whichever party I thought had the best candidate. Then the 2000 election and Gore got way more votes....and lost. That did not seem right to me. I listened to more and more bull from that party and the more that happened, the more my heart and mind said that it was wrong. That this war was wrong and that Bush was a blatant liar. I became a total liberal after hearing so much about Iraq and hearing his inflexibility and stubbornness. I realized that it is now a contest of wills. He does not care about the people or what they want. He was "selected" to serve the people but he serves himself. I realized that people are dying daily because he does not have the grace or guts to admit his mistake and the way to fix a mistake is not to do more of it and on a bigger scale. I became totally liberal when i heard about the unaccounted for billions that have just disappeared. Before this, I voted as many republicans as I did democrats. No more tho.....if my vote counts at all, it will not be for any of these self-rightous, lying politicians that don't blink an eye when a soldier dies. I don't know how they sleep at night; The "decider" is upset because Congress seeks to limit his blood bath.....geez, this crap has already lasted longer than WW2 or WW1. Republicans are out of touch with the people and they are also out of touch with reality.
Reply:Believe it or not I got my political views from the music I listend to. While back in the day (more like 7 years ago) I took what they said a little too seriously (Sex Pistols = anarchy) I eventually began to read up on politics a little bit and soon after I started to get my own point of view. I eventually learned that anarachy couldn't work, and soon became a democratic person.
Another factor was my mom. Not that my mom was a liberal, but she was the most hardcore conservative that I have ever met in my entire life. I never stopped hearing about how the republicans are always right and how liberals are so stupid, and just hearing her rant all the time about how great Bush was tore me further away from from the republican side. I didn't even register to vote for the Bush/Kerry election, despite being the first election that I was 18, just so I didn't have to hear from my mother about who I should vote for.
Soon afterword, I started to believe in higher taxes, that the rich can gie up a little more, that we can do more to help this country because we're not doing enough now.
Reply:Most of the influences for my generally-liberal thought came from my parents, but they only took me so far to provide me a framework for my beliefs. I filled in the rest on my own, by talking to friends/strangers/teachers and reading newspapers and participating in (online and offline) discussion groups and message boards. These served to further reinforce most of the positions that I already held, but also to change my mind on a few of them.
The smartest thing my parents ever did was read a newspaper (sometimes a news magazine) with me every day, and ask me to choose an opinion article and discuss it. I would ask them questions on what I didn't understand, and I would tell them what I thought and why, and they would often play the devil's advocate to help me. By doing this, they taught me to see all points of view and break it down into smaller parts, enabling me to think for myself and disseminate facts from opinions.
We do disagree on a number of issues, but thanks to their parenting I can at least defend what I have to say with logic, background, and evidence.
Edit: I also majored in engineering in college and my parents are both pharmacists, but I made the effort to take plenty of diverse courses in other subjects that interested me, including political science and history; I didn't want to spend all day around science nerds (you know the stereotypes are true). I didn't get into message boards until college, but much of my influences in high school also came from history teachers, and I wouldn't have voted for Bush (wasn't 18 for another few months) the first time around.
Reply:I'm republican. My sole belief is that everyone needs to earn what they want no matter what . If you want something don't look to government, work hard and achieve. The only person that can stop you is yourself.
Reply:Im right-wing. I agree w/ libs on things like environment. However, science has disproved the illigetimacy of birth control abortion, and libs are for that. abortion is genocide, which is unacceptable to me as a human. I also think morals do have a place in politics. Politicians must do the right thing, whether it is popular or not. I became a con due to research and my upbringing in a moral family. I dont think everything under the sun should be legalized. I think pork barrell should be reduced in legislation. And the libs loaded the Iraqi withdrawal bill with stuff that had nothing to do with Iraq. I think there is corruoption on both sides, and I hope it will be diminished one day.
Reply:I'm neither, I'm a cranky libertarian. I support the end of welfare and the legalization of drugs so drive both the demopublicans and republicrats nuts.
Reply:my university profesors convinced me to be left wing. and i like people with open minds. i really cant stand the right wing type who are always talking about religion. i also dont like the aggressive types who are pro military and police. they are usually the ones who violate peoples human rights.
Reply:Watergate and growing up in poverty, Watergate taught me I couldn't always trust our national leadership and poverty that was just beginning to get addressed as a national issue (Civil rights movement also had a big impact) I knew that liberalism would become a way of life for me, I'm now 48 own my own business, am an active community volunteer and am proud of the bulk of the work Liberals address in their agenda like anything in life it's not 100% perfect but for my life it's better than what the conservative movement offers
For me, it was yahoo message board and facts. Prior to yahoo, I considered myself a Democrat and had a general sense in what I believed in, but I did not become a full fledged anti-con liberal until I visited yahoo. People were very partisan. I considered myself a moderate for a while, but after some time, I gravitated toward liberalism. I did so because one side would say one thing, the other side would say another. To see who was telling the truth I visited third party sites, and suprise, suprise, liberals were usually right.
For example, to this day, conservatives pass around the lie that one volcanic eruption spews out more CO2 then all human activity combined. Check out the U.S. Geological Survey website and it will tell you human activty actually produces more then 150 times more CO2 then all volcanic activity combined
How did you become a left-wing liberal or a right-wing conservative?
For me it was education and a very keen interest in politics.
Before I begin, I should state I'm from Alberta, Canada, and not the United States... so Conservativism and Liberalism may be defined a little differently. In Canada, Liberals are moderates, while New Democrats are left wingers.
In my province, everyone is Conservative. So when I was young, I was also conservative becuase that's all I ever really knew. However, looking into policies I began to question Conservativism a little bit. I studied history and political science, and Native American Studies at two Universities since I was a young man. My studies (which included lots of research and philosophies.. as well as quantitative evidence), convinced me to swtich stances.
Some reasons I disagree with Conservativism... mostly having to do with quantitative evidence:
1) Conservativism tends to leave people behind in society. Cutting social programs and government functions for that matter usually results in privatization and higher actual costs for the most part. This can be seen in degregulation of several industries including airlines, rail, and power in Canada.
2) Due to slashing in social funding, disparity increases. Not since the INdustrial Revoltuion has the Western World seen such disparity growing at such a fast rate. Real wages are dropping, while real inflation is rising. Lots of people are getting left behind.
My own moral judgements would assume that Conservative policies generally are aimed to the "elite" of society, while pretty much ignoring the rest. I belive society is only as strong as it's weakest link. Therefore, I am Liberal.
Reply:The Vietnam conflict did it for me, voted as soon as I turned eighteen. As an Independent I don't consider myself either of your choices.
Reply:You are great proof that free and open debate does stimulate learning. Also, that conservatives are becoming increasingly fascistic and frightening.
In that situation, the only thing in the middle of the road is dead armadillos.
Reply:As soon as I got off my rusty dusty and got a job, started paying taxes I became a conservative.
Reply:You become a left wing liberal when you believe capitalism bites, that everyone else should pay taxes and the government should use that money to solve all your problems.
Your become a right wing conservative when you believe only capitalism can work, the church should guide our personal lives and the government should nearly be eliminated for taking too much of your hard earned wealth.
Reply:Before Bush, I usually voted whichever party I thought had the best candidate. Then the 2000 election and Gore got way more votes....and lost. That did not seem right to me. I listened to more and more bull from that party and the more that happened, the more my heart and mind said that it was wrong. That this war was wrong and that Bush was a blatant liar. I became a total liberal after hearing so much about Iraq and hearing his inflexibility and stubbornness. I realized that it is now a contest of wills. He does not care about the people or what they want. He was "selected" to serve the people but he serves himself. I realized that people are dying daily because he does not have the grace or guts to admit his mistake and the way to fix a mistake is not to do more of it and on a bigger scale. I became totally liberal when i heard about the unaccounted for billions that have just disappeared. Before this, I voted as many republicans as I did democrats. No more tho.....if my vote counts at all, it will not be for any of these self-rightous, lying politicians that don't blink an eye when a soldier dies. I don't know how they sleep at night; The "decider" is upset because Congress seeks to limit his blood bath.....geez, this crap has already lasted longer than WW2 or WW1. Republicans are out of touch with the people and they are also out of touch with reality.
Reply:Believe it or not I got my political views from the music I listend to. While back in the day (more like 7 years ago) I took what they said a little too seriously (Sex Pistols = anarchy) I eventually began to read up on politics a little bit and soon after I started to get my own point of view. I eventually learned that anarachy couldn't work, and soon became a democratic person.
Another factor was my mom. Not that my mom was a liberal, but she was the most hardcore conservative that I have ever met in my entire life. I never stopped hearing about how the republicans are always right and how liberals are so stupid, and just hearing her rant all the time about how great Bush was tore me further away from from the republican side. I didn't even register to vote for the Bush/Kerry election, despite being the first election that I was 18, just so I didn't have to hear from my mother about who I should vote for.
Soon afterword, I started to believe in higher taxes, that the rich can gie up a little more, that we can do more to help this country because we're not doing enough now.
Reply:Most of the influences for my generally-liberal thought came from my parents, but they only took me so far to provide me a framework for my beliefs. I filled in the rest on my own, by talking to friends/strangers/teachers and reading newspapers and participating in (online and offline) discussion groups and message boards. These served to further reinforce most of the positions that I already held, but also to change my mind on a few of them.
The smartest thing my parents ever did was read a newspaper (sometimes a news magazine) with me every day, and ask me to choose an opinion article and discuss it. I would ask them questions on what I didn't understand, and I would tell them what I thought and why, and they would often play the devil's advocate to help me. By doing this, they taught me to see all points of view and break it down into smaller parts, enabling me to think for myself and disseminate facts from opinions.
We do disagree on a number of issues, but thanks to their parenting I can at least defend what I have to say with logic, background, and evidence.
Edit: I also majored in engineering in college and my parents are both pharmacists, but I made the effort to take plenty of diverse courses in other subjects that interested me, including political science and history; I didn't want to spend all day around science nerds (you know the stereotypes are true). I didn't get into message boards until college, but much of my influences in high school also came from history teachers, and I wouldn't have voted for Bush (wasn't 18 for another few months) the first time around.
Reply:I'm republican. My sole belief is that everyone needs to earn what they want no matter what . If you want something don't look to government, work hard and achieve. The only person that can stop you is yourself.
Reply:Im right-wing. I agree w/ libs on things like environment. However, science has disproved the illigetimacy of birth control abortion, and libs are for that. abortion is genocide, which is unacceptable to me as a human. I also think morals do have a place in politics. Politicians must do the right thing, whether it is popular or not. I became a con due to research and my upbringing in a moral family. I dont think everything under the sun should be legalized. I think pork barrell should be reduced in legislation. And the libs loaded the Iraqi withdrawal bill with stuff that had nothing to do with Iraq. I think there is corruoption on both sides, and I hope it will be diminished one day.
Reply:I'm neither, I'm a cranky libertarian. I support the end of welfare and the legalization of drugs so drive both the demopublicans and republicrats nuts.
Reply:my university profesors convinced me to be left wing. and i like people with open minds. i really cant stand the right wing type who are always talking about religion. i also dont like the aggressive types who are pro military and police. they are usually the ones who violate peoples human rights.
Reply:Watergate and growing up in poverty, Watergate taught me I couldn't always trust our national leadership and poverty that was just beginning to get addressed as a national issue (Civil rights movement also had a big impact) I knew that liberalism would become a way of life for me, I'm now 48 own my own business, am an active community volunteer and am proud of the bulk of the work Liberals address in their agenda like anything in life it's not 100% perfect but for my life it's better than what the conservative movement offers
Will Egyptian Antiquities ever allow someone to explore the 'anomalies' found under the paws of the Sphinx?
As in the geological survey anomalies that have been found in various locations below it.
Will Egyptian Antiquities ever allow someone to explore the 'anomalies' found under the paws of the Sphinx?
I hope so. Its one of the ancient wonders of the world. I would like to know what secrets are hidden under the Sphinx, if any. Could there be something there that might clue us in as to how the Sphinx and the Great Pyramids were built? I would like to know. Its not like there was much in the way of technology back then that would create such precision in such massive architectural works.
Reply:What anomalies? How deep? How were they detected?
If there were any geological anomalies they were probably just earthworks or foundations.
Reply:Good Luck!
Will Egyptian Antiquities ever allow someone to explore the 'anomalies' found under the paws of the Sphinx?
I hope so. Its one of the ancient wonders of the world. I would like to know what secrets are hidden under the Sphinx, if any. Could there be something there that might clue us in as to how the Sphinx and the Great Pyramids were built? I would like to know. Its not like there was much in the way of technology back then that would create such precision in such massive architectural works.
Reply:What anomalies? How deep? How were they detected?
If there were any geological anomalies they were probably just earthworks or foundations.
Reply:Good Luck!
Do you think that satellite images on the internet are an invasion of privacy?
I know that these images were sold by the U.S. Geological Survey to anyone who wanted to buy them, but now that it's free to anyone with access, do you feel even slightly violated knowing that anyone can get a clear close-up satellite image of your home and place of business? I looked up my own home last night and felt a little creeped out by it.
Do you think that satellite images on the internet are an invasion of privacy?
Do you want to live in a cave? I'll bet you have no idea that those images were available to the US govt in the 70s. Did you feel less safe yesterday before you knew that? If you are not doing anything wrong, what are you worried about? I would be more worried about people acually outside my house looking at it.
Reply:Yes I'm well aware that the govt has much more satellite capability. It's not about being caught doing something wrong. It's about the general public who wouldn't see my yard without trespassing unless they were flying. Live in a cave? I don't even know what that has to do with it. Report Abuse
Reply:It doesn't bother me in the least bit. I mean, if you don't give your address out, who cares? And anyone who has your address could just as easily drive by your house. I think I'd rather have people looking at my house on their computer than actually knocking on my door.
Reply:No because the pictures are not up to date or realtime i looked up my house on google earth and found the pictures to be more than 3 yrs old. So i would not call it and invasion of privacy it would be different if i could log on to the net and track a person from a satellite live and in real time this would really creep me out but the average person cannot i`m sure the goverment has this option though.
Reply:Yes I do. But what should worry people are the images that are not on the internet. At least you can see those pictures on the internet. Who gave them permission to photograph private property from a satelite anyway?
Maybe we should paint the words "NO PHOTOGRAPHS! ARIAL AND/OR SATELITE PHOTOGRAPHY OF THIS PROPERTY CONSTITUTES TRESSPASSING." on our roof tops.
Just a thought :)
Reply:the national center for security always have had this technology. I believe it rides on that privacy act and even the chicago police cameras that are posted on almost ever corner here lets us know big brother is watching.
Reply:Yes.
Do you think that satellite images on the internet are an invasion of privacy?
Do you want to live in a cave? I'll bet you have no idea that those images were available to the US govt in the 70s. Did you feel less safe yesterday before you knew that? If you are not doing anything wrong, what are you worried about? I would be more worried about people acually outside my house looking at it.
Reply:Yes I'm well aware that the govt has much more satellite capability. It's not about being caught doing something wrong. It's about the general public who wouldn't see my yard without trespassing unless they were flying. Live in a cave? I don't even know what that has to do with it. Report Abuse
Reply:It doesn't bother me in the least bit. I mean, if you don't give your address out, who cares? And anyone who has your address could just as easily drive by your house. I think I'd rather have people looking at my house on their computer than actually knocking on my door.
Reply:No because the pictures are not up to date or realtime i looked up my house on google earth and found the pictures to be more than 3 yrs old. So i would not call it and invasion of privacy it would be different if i could log on to the net and track a person from a satellite live and in real time this would really creep me out but the average person cannot i`m sure the goverment has this option though.
Reply:Yes I do. But what should worry people are the images that are not on the internet. At least you can see those pictures on the internet. Who gave them permission to photograph private property from a satelite anyway?
Maybe we should paint the words "NO PHOTOGRAPHS! ARIAL AND/OR SATELITE PHOTOGRAPHY OF THIS PROPERTY CONSTITUTES TRESSPASSING." on our roof tops.
Just a thought :)
Reply:the national center for security always have had this technology. I believe it rides on that privacy act and even the chicago police cameras that are posted on almost ever corner here lets us know big brother is watching.
Reply:Yes.
Why do links in news stories only look for more news stories?
Why do links in news stories only look for more news stories about the linked item, rather than send you to real reasources? For example, a link in a story about an earthquake in Peru is to the US Geological Survey. It would be much more useful to be able to click on the link and go to the USGS web site, rather than have a useless link that looks for more stories about the USGS. Similarly, a link for Peru or Lima in the story would be more useful for people if they would find non-news related items and web sites, rather than just other stories.
Why do links in news stories only look for more news stories?
Most of the news agencies are trying to create the news instead of just reporting it. We are a polarized nation between the Bush haters and the ones who like him. The major newspapers around the country are leftists and many of the talk radio shows are rightists. Each have the ratings to contend with and will say or do anything for those ratings which translate into advertising dollars. Follow the money sonny.
Reply:The question is intended to highlight a deficiency in Yahoo!News functions, not to ask for commentary about news organizations' lack of objectivity. Report Abuse
Reply:There are far more Republican newspapers in our country today than Liberal newspapers. This is because most major newspapers have been bought up by huge Corporations and have benefited from the Corporate tax cuts and other benefits given them by the Bush Administration.
All you have to do is read the Editorial Section of any newspaper to find out what political affiliation it is associated with.
Contrary to what some people say, newspaper reporters do not create stories rather than report them. If they do, they risk exposure as did the famed reporter from the New York Times. There is plenty of material out there to write about. One does not have to invent material.
What people are complaining about is undoubtedly the columnists. A reporter simply reports the news. A columnist can freely write his interpretation of events. Many papers have Op Ed columnists, who write articles containing their opinion of events. Many people do not understand the distinction between the two types of writers.
Reply:There is definitely "spin" going on, but it's not by the left, which for the most part believe in letting everybody have a crack at telling the truth. What obstructs them, obstructs everybody. It's the right wing lunatic fringe that tries to control the media. They want ONLY their message to get out. (Propaganda, not news) Forvever has it been this way.
See: Nixon, Frank Zappa's "Dickie's such an ***hole", "Broadway the Hardway", culture reflects these hypocrisies in a wholesale fashion. This usually earns them emnity from that same Right Wing lunatic fringe, but it doesn't change the truth. Pay attention to who is trying to mute, defund and obliterate who. Moderates believe that everybody gets a voice. The right wing nut jobs believe in their "microphone" being the only one that gets plugged in.
A bigger conspiracy to me is why some people can vote on Iraq news stories and others can't. (It's not my browser, some stories come up just fine....)
I believe that voting is being manipulated in some way to benefit those that believe in fascist expansionist colonialism (also known as allowing us to bleed ourselves to death slowly so Al Queda or whoever doesn't actually have to work or die to defeat us) and to make this God forsaken War look better in Public Opinion Polls than it does.
I can vote on some stories just fine. The ability to access the voting mechnanism has been locked on some stories though.
Very creepy.
I would point out that I try to do try to vote on the quality of the journalism and not the "news" itself. But I don't think very many people do that. It's just my opinion but I believe that 90% of all voting is "shoot the messenger" no matter what the news being reported actually is........
The Pentagon calls it (they invented it but the Internet has exploited it) "Incestuous Amplification". I.E., groups of people clump together and refine ever more "fact absent"
points of view. It can affect both sides, but right now the right wing is riddled with it.
wisdom teeth
Why do links in news stories only look for more news stories?
Most of the news agencies are trying to create the news instead of just reporting it. We are a polarized nation between the Bush haters and the ones who like him. The major newspapers around the country are leftists and many of the talk radio shows are rightists. Each have the ratings to contend with and will say or do anything for those ratings which translate into advertising dollars. Follow the money sonny.
Reply:The question is intended to highlight a deficiency in Yahoo!News functions, not to ask for commentary about news organizations' lack of objectivity. Report Abuse
Reply:There are far more Republican newspapers in our country today than Liberal newspapers. This is because most major newspapers have been bought up by huge Corporations and have benefited from the Corporate tax cuts and other benefits given them by the Bush Administration.
All you have to do is read the Editorial Section of any newspaper to find out what political affiliation it is associated with.
Contrary to what some people say, newspaper reporters do not create stories rather than report them. If they do, they risk exposure as did the famed reporter from the New York Times. There is plenty of material out there to write about. One does not have to invent material.
What people are complaining about is undoubtedly the columnists. A reporter simply reports the news. A columnist can freely write his interpretation of events. Many papers have Op Ed columnists, who write articles containing their opinion of events. Many people do not understand the distinction between the two types of writers.
Reply:There is definitely "spin" going on, but it's not by the left, which for the most part believe in letting everybody have a crack at telling the truth. What obstructs them, obstructs everybody. It's the right wing lunatic fringe that tries to control the media. They want ONLY their message to get out. (Propaganda, not news) Forvever has it been this way.
See: Nixon, Frank Zappa's "Dickie's such an ***hole", "Broadway the Hardway", culture reflects these hypocrisies in a wholesale fashion. This usually earns them emnity from that same Right Wing lunatic fringe, but it doesn't change the truth. Pay attention to who is trying to mute, defund and obliterate who. Moderates believe that everybody gets a voice. The right wing nut jobs believe in their "microphone" being the only one that gets plugged in.
A bigger conspiracy to me is why some people can vote on Iraq news stories and others can't. (It's not my browser, some stories come up just fine....)
I believe that voting is being manipulated in some way to benefit those that believe in fascist expansionist colonialism (also known as allowing us to bleed ourselves to death slowly so Al Queda or whoever doesn't actually have to work or die to defeat us) and to make this God forsaken War look better in Public Opinion Polls than it does.
I can vote on some stories just fine. The ability to access the voting mechnanism has been locked on some stories though.
Very creepy.
I would point out that I try to do try to vote on the quality of the journalism and not the "news" itself. But I don't think very many people do that. It's just my opinion but I believe that 90% of all voting is "shoot the messenger" no matter what the news being reported actually is........
The Pentagon calls it (they invented it but the Internet has exploited it) "Incestuous Amplification". I.E., groups of people clump together and refine ever more "fact absent"
points of view. It can affect both sides, but right now the right wing is riddled with it.
wisdom teeth
Global warming will make the oceans rise 39" and the rise cannot be stopped. Where will we go?
This rise in sea level will effect San Francisco, New York, Silicon Valley, Kennebunkport, Florida, Texas and that is only in the USA. All this per the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change in Paris, Seth Borenstein of Associated Press, University of Arizona in conjunction with the US Geological Survey, Lawrence Livermore National Lab in California. Is it time to buy beachfront property in Arizona?
Global warming will make the oceans rise 39" and the rise cannot be stopped. Where will we go?
The seas have raised and lowered many times. The ice caps have come and gone many times. The globe has warmed and cooled many times.
The gulf of Mexico coast was about 100 miles south of Dallas. Half of Florida was under water thousands of years ago. We just came along at the wrong time and may be accelerating the change.
The earth is constantly changing very slowly. We may be able to slow it down, but nature has no conscience, and will kill what ever gets in it's way.
Reply:I don't know chicken Little. Where will we go?
Reply:To higher ground.
Reply:sea levels aren't going anywhere. arctic ice is floating, and if it all melts, nothing happens. antarctic ice is on land, and it would take an 80 degree temp increase to melt it. in reality, global warming will cause more ocean evaporation, causing more rain fall. this will make the ice pack in the antarctic thicker, LOWERING sea levels. any of you morons who think the coasts are going to flood, sell me your beach front property for a dollar since it is going to be under water and worthless.......whats that? no sellers???? thats what i thought
Reply:umm hasent happened yet so why would i care?? When i see nemo passing outside my bedroom window then well talk.
Reply:Well, since I live about 600' above sea level, I'll probably stay where I am.
Reply:Just go with the flow. It takes a long time to be really concerned about this issue. So just relax and take your time to do the research for the better and more suitable place for you to move when the time is coming. How about that?
Reply:i live in the bay area near san franisco
i guess we will just have to move inward
Reply:I agree with GABY.
Reply:First, climate change is ALREADY forcing people from their homes in India, Bangladesh, and parts of Oceana.
Second, check the wording on that statement: it doesn't say it can't be stopped, it says it will happen "regardless of any future actions to curb greenhouse gases." That's because at the moment we're still increasing our greenhouse gas emissions. It's not just the CO2 concentration that's increasing, but the rate at which it's increasing is also increasing.
Our politicans are talking in terms of slowing the rate of increase. That's not enough to stop climate change. What we need is not to slow the rate of increase, but to begin to decrease the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere-- and the quicker the better.
That's not to say that if we immediately halted all possible CO2 emissions and allowed trees to absorb what's there that we'd avoid all climate consequences-- they are already upon us. But we'd probably avoid the 39" rise in sea levels that scientists are talking about.
Of course, politicans are too concerned about getting elected and most people are to concerned with comfort to make any real reductions in CO2 emissions. So, in the absence of real change, the scientists are probably right.
Reply:A 39 inch higher sea level will not make Arizona beachfront property. New York and San Francisco are not in danger, but parts of Florida and silicon valley are. So I guess that means the people from silicon valley have to move to San Francisco and the people from Florida have to move to New York. Me, I am safe in Austin, Texas, which is 6,000 inches above sea level. But since it will take 100 years for the assumed 39 inch rise to happen, I won't live to see it anyway.
Reply:Go right ahead, Lex Luthor.
Reply:First of all, I'm not sure if your question is true or not. Sure, the oceans might rise a foot or two while our grand kids or our great grand kids are living, but probably not as much as 39". To answer your question, I would move to ground that's about four or five feet above sea level.
Reply:global warming won't change where you need to live. That's just an urban legend. It will take 100s of years of constant sealevl rising to do that and because global warming isn't human caused, the rise should end well before that
Reply:I live 1,000 feet above sea level.
I'm staying here
Reply:No such thing as global warming. the earth is cyclical, this is just a blip.
Reply:I will stay home. I live in Iowa, the state that will be least affected. For the rest of you, I don't know.
Reply:Let's face it people. If this does happen do
you think there will be enough room for
everybody and room enough for raising crops.
Pasture land for farm animals? Something
has got to give a little.
Reply:Relax. Sea level today is 30cm below levels they were in the 1840's.
The level of the oceans isn't going to change.
Reply:I just bought a sub. Let it come ! I'm going to take 2 blonds,2 red heads and 2 brunettes.
Global warming will make the oceans rise 39" and the rise cannot be stopped. Where will we go?
The seas have raised and lowered many times. The ice caps have come and gone many times. The globe has warmed and cooled many times.
The gulf of Mexico coast was about 100 miles south of Dallas. Half of Florida was under water thousands of years ago. We just came along at the wrong time and may be accelerating the change.
The earth is constantly changing very slowly. We may be able to slow it down, but nature has no conscience, and will kill what ever gets in it's way.
Reply:I don't know chicken Little. Where will we go?
Reply:To higher ground.
Reply:sea levels aren't going anywhere. arctic ice is floating, and if it all melts, nothing happens. antarctic ice is on land, and it would take an 80 degree temp increase to melt it. in reality, global warming will cause more ocean evaporation, causing more rain fall. this will make the ice pack in the antarctic thicker, LOWERING sea levels. any of you morons who think the coasts are going to flood, sell me your beach front property for a dollar since it is going to be under water and worthless.......whats that? no sellers???? thats what i thought
Reply:umm hasent happened yet so why would i care?? When i see nemo passing outside my bedroom window then well talk.
Reply:Well, since I live about 600' above sea level, I'll probably stay where I am.
Reply:Just go with the flow. It takes a long time to be really concerned about this issue. So just relax and take your time to do the research for the better and more suitable place for you to move when the time is coming. How about that?
Reply:i live in the bay area near san franisco
i guess we will just have to move inward
Reply:I agree with GABY.
Reply:First, climate change is ALREADY forcing people from their homes in India, Bangladesh, and parts of Oceana.
Second, check the wording on that statement: it doesn't say it can't be stopped, it says it will happen "regardless of any future actions to curb greenhouse gases." That's because at the moment we're still increasing our greenhouse gas emissions. It's not just the CO2 concentration that's increasing, but the rate at which it's increasing is also increasing.
Our politicans are talking in terms of slowing the rate of increase. That's not enough to stop climate change. What we need is not to slow the rate of increase, but to begin to decrease the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere-- and the quicker the better.
That's not to say that if we immediately halted all possible CO2 emissions and allowed trees to absorb what's there that we'd avoid all climate consequences-- they are already upon us. But we'd probably avoid the 39" rise in sea levels that scientists are talking about.
Of course, politicans are too concerned about getting elected and most people are to concerned with comfort to make any real reductions in CO2 emissions. So, in the absence of real change, the scientists are probably right.
Reply:A 39 inch higher sea level will not make Arizona beachfront property. New York and San Francisco are not in danger, but parts of Florida and silicon valley are. So I guess that means the people from silicon valley have to move to San Francisco and the people from Florida have to move to New York. Me, I am safe in Austin, Texas, which is 6,000 inches above sea level. But since it will take 100 years for the assumed 39 inch rise to happen, I won't live to see it anyway.
Reply:Go right ahead, Lex Luthor.
Reply:First of all, I'm not sure if your question is true or not. Sure, the oceans might rise a foot or two while our grand kids or our great grand kids are living, but probably not as much as 39". To answer your question, I would move to ground that's about four or five feet above sea level.
Reply:global warming won't change where you need to live. That's just an urban legend. It will take 100s of years of constant sealevl rising to do that and because global warming isn't human caused, the rise should end well before that
Reply:I live 1,000 feet above sea level.
I'm staying here
Reply:No such thing as global warming. the earth is cyclical, this is just a blip.
Reply:I will stay home. I live in Iowa, the state that will be least affected. For the rest of you, I don't know.
Reply:Let's face it people. If this does happen do
you think there will be enough room for
everybody and room enough for raising crops.
Pasture land for farm animals? Something
has got to give a little.
Reply:Relax. Sea level today is 30cm below levels they were in the 1840's.
The level of the oceans isn't going to change.
Reply:I just bought a sub. Let it come ! I'm going to take 2 blonds,2 red heads and 2 brunettes.
Geological map of midwest pre-civil war?
WOrking on a paper and really could use a map/ geological survey. Tried a google and a few other things.. help?
Geological map of midwest pre-civil war?
go to www.archivesprints.com
Reply:find it on google
Geological map of midwest pre-civil war?
go to www.archivesprints.com
Reply:find it on google
Any body knows how to make profile of a pit, mean a geological pit?
for geological surveys.......
Any body knows how to make profile of a pit, mean a geological pit?
To really do this, you need modeling software like Vulcan. These programs are amazing and have great capabilities.
Reply:You don't need a $1000 program to make a two dimensional profile. Report Abuse
Reply:I have previously used three methods depending on what was generally available on-site and what the client specified. The first being to record the individual layers of the pit with their corresponding characteristics i.e. color, soil type, depth, moisture, etc. and create a profile using auto cad or microstation.
The second method is to actually get into the hole and take a digital picture of the pit wall. Then edit the picture by adding in the approximate layers breaks on the picture along with the other characteristics mentioned above. Of course, this method depends on the size of the pit.
The last is to use logging software such as GINT or even just MS Excel to provide a boring log of sorts with each layer broken down according to their characteristics.
Hope this help.
Any body knows how to make profile of a pit, mean a geological pit?
To really do this, you need modeling software like Vulcan. These programs are amazing and have great capabilities.
Reply:You don't need a $1000 program to make a two dimensional profile. Report Abuse
Reply:I have previously used three methods depending on what was generally available on-site and what the client specified. The first being to record the individual layers of the pit with their corresponding characteristics i.e. color, soil type, depth, moisture, etc. and create a profile using auto cad or microstation.
The second method is to actually get into the hole and take a digital picture of the pit wall. Then edit the picture by adding in the approximate layers breaks on the picture along with the other characteristics mentioned above. Of course, this method depends on the size of the pit.
The last is to use logging software such as GINT or even just MS Excel to provide a boring log of sorts with each layer broken down according to their characteristics.
Hope this help.
Where can do study about oil and gas geological survey in mumbai?
go to the library dear
Where can do study about oil and gas geological survey in mumbai?
Mideast
Reply:here
Reply:Google That
Nanny Agency
Where can do study about oil and gas geological survey in mumbai?
Mideast
Reply:here
Reply:Google That
Nanny Agency
After the McAfee fiasco today, I have the U.S Geological Survey icon on my homepage instead of the Y from Yaho
If you are trying to indicate that your homepage changed from yahoo.com to some geological survey site, then click Tools on Internet Explorer and click Internet Options and then change your Home Page. If McAfee gets involved, allow the change.
How are geological surveys done?
Where can I find information on how geological surveys were carried out in:
Ontario, year 1850
Ontario, year 1950
The World, year 1980
The World, year 1995
How are geological surveys done?
How are they done?.......very carefully.
Ontario, year 1850
Ontario, year 1950
The World, year 1980
The World, year 1995
How are geological surveys done?
How are they done?.......very carefully.
I'm looking for the date of the 1:50000 geological survey solid and drift map of staffordshire?
The best I can tell the 1:50.000 came out in 1964 and most good book stores in the UK have them. All the 1:50,000 really and truly is just a easier readable version of the 1:25,000 and shows a few more streams and rivers and a few different formations that are man made.
I am trying to locate Kazue Ueda from the Geological Survey or the University of Japan.?
You can check with the US Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
Office of Communication
119 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Pat Jorgenson - pjorgenson@usgs.gov
Phone: 650-329-4011
CAT
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
Office of Communication
119 National Center
Reston, VA 20192
Pat Jorgenson - pjorgenson@usgs.gov
Phone: 650-329-4011
CAT
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Is the US Geological Survey unconstitutional spending our tax money on Darwinian theory?
http://www.usgs.gov/science/science.php?...
Is the US Geological Survey unconstitutional spending our tax money on Darwinian theory?
Even England is spending more on science research and education than the USA is. I guess people are easier to control if you keep them religious and dumb.
Reply:no. Teaching and studying proven science is not unconstitutional. Thank God. And thank God for giving us the brains to know that "theory" doesn't mean "unproven". And thank God for giving us the ability to know that learning about science does not negate religion, but some of the translations of the Bible are false translations made by people with their own agenda.
Reply:If it is unconstitutional, then your constitution needs a new amendment.
Reply:I am not sure exactly what your point is? A science site teaching a proven scientific theory?
Reply:Its separation of CHURCH and state,Thankfully,not separation of science and knowledge and state
Reply:Science left Darwinian Theory behind a long time ago.
Evolutionary theory has come a long way since Darwin. If you had to misrepresent the facts in your question, how legitimate can your question be?
Reply:When are you bible bangers going to stop believing in a non-existant god that people made up (like the Easter Bunny)?
Darwinian Theory is true, the bible is fake. Besides, would you rather save the environment, or pray to a god that doesn't exist and HOPE things change? You are denying problems in the world if you don't think this project is feasable.
Reply:If science is unconstitutional, we'd have to cut back the medical research budget even further.
Not to mention the space program, the EPA, FDA...
Reply:no
Reply:If you want to live in the Dark Ages, fine. But please, don't force me to live there with you.
Reply:It's not unconstitutional to teach science in school no. They just need to keep the religion out.
Reply:maybe so, you know what is really bothering me?
In school they only teach one theory on how this world came to be and teach no other theories, and when/if you speak against it everyone thinks your a total idiot. I think it is unconstitutuonal that they only teach one theory.
Is the US Geological Survey unconstitutional spending our tax money on Darwinian theory?
Even England is spending more on science research and education than the USA is. I guess people are easier to control if you keep them religious and dumb.
Reply:no. Teaching and studying proven science is not unconstitutional. Thank God. And thank God for giving us the brains to know that "theory" doesn't mean "unproven". And thank God for giving us the ability to know that learning about science does not negate religion, but some of the translations of the Bible are false translations made by people with their own agenda.
Reply:If it is unconstitutional, then your constitution needs a new amendment.
Reply:I am not sure exactly what your point is? A science site teaching a proven scientific theory?
Reply:Its separation of CHURCH and state,Thankfully,not separation of science and knowledge and state
Reply:Science left Darwinian Theory behind a long time ago.
Evolutionary theory has come a long way since Darwin. If you had to misrepresent the facts in your question, how legitimate can your question be?
Reply:When are you bible bangers going to stop believing in a non-existant god that people made up (like the Easter Bunny)?
Darwinian Theory is true, the bible is fake. Besides, would you rather save the environment, or pray to a god that doesn't exist and HOPE things change? You are denying problems in the world if you don't think this project is feasable.
Reply:If science is unconstitutional, we'd have to cut back the medical research budget even further.
Not to mention the space program, the EPA, FDA...
Reply:no
Reply:If you want to live in the Dark Ages, fine. But please, don't force me to live there with you.
Reply:It's not unconstitutional to teach science in school no. They just need to keep the religion out.
Reply:maybe so, you know what is really bothering me?
In school they only teach one theory on how this world came to be and teach no other theories, and when/if you speak against it everyone thinks your a total idiot. I think it is unconstitutuonal that they only teach one theory.
Who is the director of the US Geological survey?
The current acting director of the USGS is a person named P. Patrick Leahy.
Can anyone including United States Geological Survey, predicts earthquakes?
An earthquake prediction is a prediction that an earthquake in a specific magnitude range will occur in a specific region and time window. Seismologists bring forth seismic hazard assessment programs by estimating the probabilities that a given earthquake or suite of earthquakes will occur. That is not a true earthquake predication. Earthquake predications are not accepted by seismologists. Earthquake prediction is controversial because data are sparse and there is little evidence or verified physical theory to link observable phenomena to subsequent seismicity. It is virtually inevitable that some will succeed by chance. Assessing whether a successful prediction is a fluke is challenging. Earthquake pre detection is more reliable than earthquake prediction since it is based upon detecting the non destructive primary waves that travel more quickly through the earth's crust. I find it interesting that Chinese earthquake prediction research is largely based on unusual events before earthquakes, such as change of ground water levels, strange animal behavior and foreshocks. They successfully predicted the February 4, 1975 7.3 Haicheng earthquake and the China State Seismological Bureau ordered an evacuation of 1 million people the day before the earthquake. The best method of earthquake predication and ever since the beginning of recorded history, observations of unusual animal behavior before earthquakes have been recorded by people from almost all civilizations. I believe animals sense the immediate onset of earthquakes. In support of this claim, instances are cited when people have witnessed flight of animals just before an earthquake disaster. A few minutes before the killer tsunami waves generated by an underwater earthquake hit that Indian coastline in December 2004, a 500 herd of blackbucks rushed away from the coastal areas to the safety of a nearby hilltop. Personally, I prescribe to the idea that a special hotline or Web site where people could call or write in if they saw strange behavior in their animals. A computer would then analyze the incoming messages to determine where they originated. A sudden surge of calls or e-mails from a particular region might indicate that a quake was imminent. This just may be the best thing going for us in the next few years until we learn more about earthquake predications.
Can anyone including United States Geological Survey, predicts earthquakes?
Whatever affects sound at different altitudes is enough to make birds walk drunk when on the surface especially before earthquake and storm activity.Something brittle
Reply:NO, they can only predict where they have the potential to occur
Can anyone including United States Geological Survey, predicts earthquakes?
Whatever affects sound at different altitudes is enough to make birds walk drunk when on the surface especially before earthquake and storm activity.Something brittle
Reply:NO, they can only predict where they have the potential to occur
Where can I find US Geological Survey maps of (nutritional) mineral deposits.?
I heard a discussion based on their map of selenium deposits, where it was mentioned that maps exist for many other minerals. If the minerals are not in the soil, they're not in the food, and simply being organic cannot overcome this. I'm curious as to the correlation of soil mineral deficiencies to certain medical conditions.
Where can I find US Geological Survey maps of (nutritional) mineral deposits.?
go to:
www.usgs.gov
They have just about every kind of map you could imagine.
Reply:I don't know but a physics prof once told me that too much selenium causes hairloss. The latest on vitamins is that they're basicly worthless unless your entire diet is nothing but rice.
loan rates
Where can I find US Geological Survey maps of (nutritional) mineral deposits.?
go to:
www.usgs.gov
They have just about every kind of map you could imagine.
Reply:I don't know but a physics prof once told me that too much selenium causes hairloss. The latest on vitamins is that they're basicly worthless unless your entire diet is nothing but rice.
loan rates
U.S. Geological Survey reported that 3.65 billion barrels of oil were discovered.....Why no one talk about it?
Energy %26amp; Capital Newsletter
June 22nd, 2008
The U.S. Geological Survey just published its official results of a groundbreaking study.
Its report confirmed a massive oil reserve in an area the locals have nicknamed the "Bakken," which stretches across North Dakota, Montana and southeastern Saskatchewan.
The new USGS study estimates a whopping 3.65 billion barrels of oil in the Bakken...
The reported 3.65 billion barrels of oil mean estimate is for 'undiscovered' oil only, and doesn't include known oil, such as reserves.
Discovered over 50 years ago, the Bakken deposit--once impossible to extract--is now being hailed as the single largest oil find in US history.
That's because, today, thanks to breakthrough drilling techniques like horizontal drilling, the Bakken's oil shales can be extracted relatively cheaply.
just $16 per barrel! And trade for $140
U.S. Geological Survey reported that 3.65 billion barrels of oil were discovered.....Why no one talk about it?
Because oil companies would rather drill through the skull of a baby seal to get cheap oil than put any effort into R%26amp;D of more expensive solutions like oil shale or CTL.
The are just looking for gimmies from the federal government.
Reply:Come on now, you should already know the answer to that question.
The media is hellbent on the ruination of America, and the liberal socialist democrats are just behind them. If the media actually reported that, it would be in direct contradiction to their ultimate goal.
America must suffer!
America is evil and needs to be punished!
And high gas prices are the best way to do that.
A crying, embarrassing shame for a country founded on conservative values. Reporting that find and then actually using that oil would help make MADE IN AMERICA stronger and prouder than it is today. The media cannot have that.
Reply:How much crude does the US consume anually? A hell lot. Somewhere near billions of barrels.
Production costs=joke for small amounts of any commodity (Global crude reserves amount to 1 trillion+ barrels) If you talk about cost, the Middle East can produce for less than your $16/barrel if it is even existant in the US.
Think more about the capital gains for producers, levies, taxes, and inflation that goes into what is paid at the pump, how people are reacting to the current economic trouble, and how crude is traded globally with the US dollar.
Reply:we all know about the sand (or shale) deposits dude
many experts say (the majority for now) that oil would be expensive to extract
the equipment to go get it doesn't even exists yet
and.. when the Red State Conservatives who live there are asked if we can go and get it they say "NO FU*KING WAY !"
as they hold their guns in their hands.
also, some estimates are has high as ..$ 250 per barrel
and one last thing - that oil can't be drilled and pumped !!!
it must be dug up in huge open pit mines
Reply:If we said that we would drill anywhere and everywhere, it would automatically TANK the price of oil overnight regardless of whether or not we even did it.
Then again the popping of that bubble might not be such a good thing for American financial institutions. I think the foot dragging right now by politicians is them giving the signal and warning to those financial institutions that they had better get out of the speculation business now before they have to do something and the bubble POPS.
Reply:Horizontal drilling? How do you get rock through drill pipe? Oil shale is a rock, need to heat it up to extract the oil and it is certainly not as easy as you make it sound.
Reply:At our current consumption rate of over 20 million barrels a day that HUGE deposit would only last us 176 (give or take a few) days.
Then we would be right back where we are today, but with less of our own oil, leaving us even more dependent upon foreign oil.
Reply:Because the liberal news media and liberal politicians don't want you to know. "Energy shortages" are contrived by environmentalists to force up prices and to destroy our economy.
There are no energy shortages, only debilitating regulations.
Reply:This is about six months of oil for the U.S.
We use about 20 million barrels per day.
As such, this find is nothing more than a tiny bit of what the world consumes, and doesn't have any lasting impact on total supply.
Reply:It has been available for a long time but environmentalist are preventing the drilling, damn Libs.!!
Reply:Nothing can be gotten out of the ground for $16 a barrel and $140 a barrel is for the very best light crude that is easiest to refine, if anyone will let a refinery be built in their backyard. How about you?
June 22nd, 2008
The U.S. Geological Survey just published its official results of a groundbreaking study.
Its report confirmed a massive oil reserve in an area the locals have nicknamed the "Bakken," which stretches across North Dakota, Montana and southeastern Saskatchewan.
The new USGS study estimates a whopping 3.65 billion barrels of oil in the Bakken...
The reported 3.65 billion barrels of oil mean estimate is for 'undiscovered' oil only, and doesn't include known oil, such as reserves.
Discovered over 50 years ago, the Bakken deposit--once impossible to extract--is now being hailed as the single largest oil find in US history.
That's because, today, thanks to breakthrough drilling techniques like horizontal drilling, the Bakken's oil shales can be extracted relatively cheaply.
just $16 per barrel! And trade for $140
U.S. Geological Survey reported that 3.65 billion barrels of oil were discovered.....Why no one talk about it?
Because oil companies would rather drill through the skull of a baby seal to get cheap oil than put any effort into R%26amp;D of more expensive solutions like oil shale or CTL.
The are just looking for gimmies from the federal government.
Reply:Come on now, you should already know the answer to that question.
The media is hellbent on the ruination of America, and the liberal socialist democrats are just behind them. If the media actually reported that, it would be in direct contradiction to their ultimate goal.
America must suffer!
America is evil and needs to be punished!
And high gas prices are the best way to do that.
A crying, embarrassing shame for a country founded on conservative values. Reporting that find and then actually using that oil would help make MADE IN AMERICA stronger and prouder than it is today. The media cannot have that.
Reply:How much crude does the US consume anually? A hell lot. Somewhere near billions of barrels.
Production costs=joke for small amounts of any commodity (Global crude reserves amount to 1 trillion+ barrels) If you talk about cost, the Middle East can produce for less than your $16/barrel if it is even existant in the US.
Think more about the capital gains for producers, levies, taxes, and inflation that goes into what is paid at the pump, how people are reacting to the current economic trouble, and how crude is traded globally with the US dollar.
Reply:we all know about the sand (or shale) deposits dude
many experts say (the majority for now) that oil would be expensive to extract
the equipment to go get it doesn't even exists yet
and.. when the Red State Conservatives who live there are asked if we can go and get it they say "NO FU*KING WAY !"
as they hold their guns in their hands.
also, some estimates are has high as ..$ 250 per barrel
and one last thing - that oil can't be drilled and pumped !!!
it must be dug up in huge open pit mines
Reply:If we said that we would drill anywhere and everywhere, it would automatically TANK the price of oil overnight regardless of whether or not we even did it.
Then again the popping of that bubble might not be such a good thing for American financial institutions. I think the foot dragging right now by politicians is them giving the signal and warning to those financial institutions that they had better get out of the speculation business now before they have to do something and the bubble POPS.
Reply:Horizontal drilling? How do you get rock through drill pipe? Oil shale is a rock, need to heat it up to extract the oil and it is certainly not as easy as you make it sound.
Reply:At our current consumption rate of over 20 million barrels a day that HUGE deposit would only last us 176 (give or take a few) days.
Then we would be right back where we are today, but with less of our own oil, leaving us even more dependent upon foreign oil.
Reply:Because the liberal news media and liberal politicians don't want you to know. "Energy shortages" are contrived by environmentalists to force up prices and to destroy our economy.
There are no energy shortages, only debilitating regulations.
Reply:This is about six months of oil for the U.S.
We use about 20 million barrels per day.
As such, this find is nothing more than a tiny bit of what the world consumes, and doesn't have any lasting impact on total supply.
Reply:It has been available for a long time but environmentalist are preventing the drilling, damn Libs.!!
Reply:Nothing can be gotten out of the ground for $16 a barrel and $140 a barrel is for the very best light crude that is easiest to refine, if anyone will let a refinery be built in their backyard. How about you?
I have't Talk to the People yet but i need to know on the MISSION TWO "A GEOLOGICAL SURVEY"FINAL FANTASY XI?
OK help me? it is at Bastok Missions.
Your contact for this mission is Cid, a well - known person in FINAL FANTASY cir -
cles and the chief engineer of the Metalworks. Cid is concerned about some of the environmental effects taking place in Bastok, and he gives you a tester to gather some
data for him. He wants you to travel into the Dangruf Wadi and see if the tester turns red. When you step on the
geyser in area I-8, the tester changes color. Return to cid in Bastok to report the results.
so can you Tell me about the RANK ONE: MISSION TWO - "A GEOLOGICAL SURVEY" OK give me a answer. ok bye see you later i am going to go to sleep now.
I have't Talk to the People yet but i need to know on the MISSION TWO "A GEOLOGICAL SURVEY"FINAL FANTASY XI?
I'm on sylph/ seraph Try Caitlyn or gumballs as a /t What is your character name? Use http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/
And what is your server name also?
Your contact for this mission is Cid, a well - known person in FINAL FANTASY cir -
cles and the chief engineer of the Metalworks. Cid is concerned about some of the environmental effects taking place in Bastok, and he gives you a tester to gather some
data for him. He wants you to travel into the Dangruf Wadi and see if the tester turns red. When you step on the
geyser in area I-8, the tester changes color. Return to cid in Bastok to report the results.
so can you Tell me about the RANK ONE: MISSION TWO - "A GEOLOGICAL SURVEY" OK give me a answer. ok bye see you later i am going to go to sleep now.
I have't Talk to the People yet but i need to know on the MISSION TWO "A GEOLOGICAL SURVEY"FINAL FANTASY XI?
I'm on sylph/ seraph Try Caitlyn or gumballs as a /t What is your character name? Use http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/
And what is your server name also?
According to the alberta geological survey, diamondiferous kimberlite pipes fall under metallic minerals. Why?
No Geological Survey would classify diamondiferous Kimberlite pipes into metallic minerals. Neither diamonds nor Kimberlite falls under the category of metallic minerals geologically speaking per se.
But, for sake of granting lease for prospecting, production etc. sometimes minerals are grouped into various categories to bring them in a group of minerals covered under already existing rule, regulations or mining laws by state. Sometimes a particular rock is mined or prospected for a particular mineral commodity or metal and latter on becomes a source of altogether different mineral commodity. To avoid legal complications, the source rock of the new mineral commodity can be kept under the previous set of rules and category and the cess, royality etc. can be charged on the new mineral commodity separately.
Sometimes such grouping is not compatible or is in conformity to geological classification of minerals based on their properties or use (economic geology).
Perhaps this could be the reason for the situation pointed out by you.
You can always discuss it with their geologists, remember geologists are very open people world over and I am sure he would give you the right explanation, better than mine.
thnks
According to the alberta geological survey, diamondiferous kimberlite pipes fall under metallic minerals. Why?
After looking at the site, my impression is that kimberlites are grouped with the metallic minerals on the site primarily because of the organization of the survey (and kimberlites being among the "hardrock" group), and perhaps the organization of the permitting rules and regulations. I do not believe they meant to imply that diamonds are metallic.
But, for sake of granting lease for prospecting, production etc. sometimes minerals are grouped into various categories to bring them in a group of minerals covered under already existing rule, regulations or mining laws by state. Sometimes a particular rock is mined or prospected for a particular mineral commodity or metal and latter on becomes a source of altogether different mineral commodity. To avoid legal complications, the source rock of the new mineral commodity can be kept under the previous set of rules and category and the cess, royality etc. can be charged on the new mineral commodity separately.
Sometimes such grouping is not compatible or is in conformity to geological classification of minerals based on their properties or use (economic geology).
Perhaps this could be the reason for the situation pointed out by you.
You can always discuss it with their geologists, remember geologists are very open people world over and I am sure he would give you the right explanation, better than mine.
thnks
According to the alberta geological survey, diamondiferous kimberlite pipes fall under metallic minerals. Why?
After looking at the site, my impression is that kimberlites are grouped with the metallic minerals on the site primarily because of the organization of the survey (and kimberlites being among the "hardrock" group), and perhaps the organization of the permitting rules and regulations. I do not believe they meant to imply that diamonds are metallic.
Does anyone in US geological Survey has a study about Thera Volcano in Aigean Sea?
I work in disaster management in Red ross of Greece and I am trying to collect info regardin the potential hazard of the Thera Volcano for the next decades
Does anyone in US geological Survey has a study about Thera Volcano in Aigean Sea?
go to the USGS web site.
Reply:All of us in USA r TERRIFIED about Thera we dont talk about it... pls let it go worse than Iraq!
web browser
Does anyone in US geological Survey has a study about Thera Volcano in Aigean Sea?
go to the USGS web site.
Reply:All of us in USA r TERRIFIED about Thera we dont talk about it... pls let it go worse than Iraq!
web browser
What is address of the United States Geological Survey?
Must have by 10:25a.m.....
What is address of the United States Geological Survey?
http://www.usgs.gov/ask/
The exact addresses, phone numbers, e-mail, etc. are in the link.
.
What is address of the United States Geological Survey?
http://www.usgs.gov/ask/
The exact addresses, phone numbers, e-mail, etc. are in the link.
.
Is there a Canadian equivlent to the US Geological Survey?
Strangely enough, the "Canadian Geological Survey" is a magazine. The Geological Survey of Canada is the government organization.
Is there a Canadian equivlent to the US Geological Survey?
Department of Natural Resources Canada.
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/com/deptmini/hist...
Reply:Yes. It's the possibly confusingly named Geological Survey of Canada.
Is there a Canadian equivlent to the US Geological Survey?
Department of Natural Resources Canada.
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/com/deptmini/hist...
Reply:Yes. It's the possibly confusingly named Geological Survey of Canada.
Can a fresh graduate in Geology get employment in Geological survey of India?Is there any recruitment exam?
You might want to try the yahoo q%26amp;a in that country's language's web site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)