Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mainframe

  1. ^Blood Meridian was actually given to me as a gift by my AP English teacher when I graduated from high school, she thought it was right up my alley...not sure what that says about me. I like McCarthy a lot though from what I've read so far; I'll definitely pick up Suttree.
  2. The Road is the worst book I've read from Cormac McCarthy, though it wasn't bad. All the Pretty Horses, The Crossing, and Blood Meridian were all a lot better.
  3. Mainframe


    At first I was intrigued...but then I realized you're just an idiot.
  4. Bradbury is dope. Read most of this: DFW is a smart motherfucker. Also just finished Dostoevsky's The Possessed.
  5. ^You're probably right but with McCoy it might at least be a decent game. I would have rather seen Boise or TCU against Alabama anyway though.
  6. Do biceps after your back exercises, and triceps after chest. When you hit back you also work your biceps, so doing some curls afterward breaks em down even more. Same reasoning goes for chest/triceps. Deadlifts work your legs quite a bit, so when I do them I usually cut the squats out of my leg workout the next day. You could try doing rows instead sometimes, that will leave your legs fresh. Bent-over barbell rows and T-bar rows are good. In general you want to vary the exercises you do quite a bit. If you do the same stuff every time you will plateau much quicker. Also, do some abs every day.
  7. Good shit in here, those windows are amazing. A few from a series of pen/ink drawings I'm working on. They're all based on one-sentence "proverbs" but I haven't done the lettering yet... "In seed time learn, in harvest teach, in winter enjoy.": "Drive your cart and your plow over the bones of the dead.": "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom.": Kinda fuzzy lookin photos, I don't have a big enough scanner.
  8. Mainframe


    Ignore that stupid movie, read this book:
  9. Don't talk shit on E-40: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibOMqINc_m8 Woke up in the a.m., toasted out of my cranium. Gotta take a shit, took a dump in the mediterranean...
  10. I asked a professor about this today. She said, "Don't be a skeptic just for the sake of skepticism," then went on to point out that it's really too bad that a scandal like climategate draws attention from the fact that the science behind climate change is still very very good. This person is in a position to know about 10000 times more about the subject than your average person (yes that is an exact measurement.) Oh, and she's still waiting for her big payoff from Al Gore...:rolleyes:
  11. Dude, in this thread you're only allowed to hate Obama or blindly love and support every decision he makes. Nothing in between. Stop having such a realistic opinion. And who are all these people who put blind faith in our politicians? I sure haven't met many of them.
  12. I don't even need to say anything in here anymore. Mamerro wins. /thread
  13. This is an illusion. Internet research can give you a very skewed view of things.
  14. Maybe this was simply a response to the storm of uneducated skepticism that sprang up when people realized (gasp!) it still snows in the winter. Extreme weather has always been a part of global warming predictions, I thought this was clear even in the mass media. Other than that, I refer you back to Mamerro's post. I agree with him 100%.
  15. I kinda agree, but if you look at the match-ups, one undefeated underdog (Cinci) gets a shot at a big name team (Florida), and the rest of the bowl tie-ins are automatic except for Iowa. So that means the only other options would have been TCU/Boise against Georgia Tech/Iowa. I think the TCU/Boise is a more interesting game than either of those other options would have been. Of course I was pulling for TCU to make the championship, I think after that Big 12 title game either TCU or Cinci should have moved ahead of Texas. But yeah the BCS is fucked. Where's Obama with the playoff edict?
  16. Right, "global warming" is sort of an overused, fear-mongering media term. "Climate change" is pretty much the preferred term used by scientists, because it includes more than just greenhouse gases. But for the most part of these changes still seem to correspond to a relatively rapid increase in global temperature of a couple degrees, which throws off established climate patterns.
  17. Damn! There was a little snow up on Grizzly Peak last year. Very unusual. I think the El Nino prediction was based on historical patterns. I wouldn't call it evidence of warming or cooling right off the bat. Things are clearly changing though.
  18. The thing is, these types of observations don't really mean all that much. Day to day climate is subject to a whole mess of influences that don't necessarily reflect global trends. You're right that the question is very complex and difficult to understand, but techniques of climate modeling and prediction are also getting much more sophisticated. I still choose to listen to the experts, with the fact in mind that even the experts can be fallible. Looking through some of that information I can't say any conclusions jump out at me. I would still have to take the claim that these scientists are lying and manipulating data on faith in the article casek posted; unfortunately, the author has a very clear agenda and it is not even close to objective reporting. The e-mails casek pointed out seem damning, but only if you approach them assuming that these scientists are in the wrong. In reality they don't seem to say anything very clear, though they might suggest foul play. Big difference. In the case that these particular scientists are being dishonest, well, that's interesting to know but extending that to all other scientists supporting global warming is totally unwarranted. I retain my respect for the integrity of the scientific community. Anyway, there can be lies on both sides of the question. It seems to me that the obvious financial incentive to manipulate data would come from the oil industry and those denying warming.
  19. By the looks of that graph that's probably a yearly cyclical phenomenon (note the sinusoidal shape). Anyways it's sea ice, which is only one part of the picture and isn't of concern as far as sea levels go. Glacial ice is what could potentially raise sea levels. I read something in National Geographic a while back about how glacial melting isn't always obvious, there can be melted rivers carving away the bottom of a glacier, which eventually causes large chunks to break off unexpectedly. From that site: Summer rain replaces snow as Antarctica 'turns green' http://www.news.com.au/features/summer-rain-replaces-snow-as-antarctica-turns-green/story-e6frfl0i-1225805697113
  20. It's remarkably naive to think global warming would mean higher temperatures everywhere all over the world. The idea is that if the overall temperature of the planet increases by a few degrees, this will cause changes in the heat cycles that create the local conditions we are familiar with. For example, some people think that warming would alter the course of the gulf stream, which carries heat from the equator up the Atlantic coast and on towards Europe. This could potentially make Britain/Northern Europe a good deal colder. I took a differential equations based atmospheric/oceanic fluid dynamics course in college, so I think I at least have an idea of how complicated this stuff is. Record low temperatures are in line with the theory that global warming will create more extreme weather conditions (hot and cold) in many places, especially inland. That's why people who really know what's going on call it "climate change." Colder overall temperatures would not result in melting ice caps. However, the recent retreat of glaciers is very well documented, as is a great deal of melting in the antarctic ice shelf. The polar bear thing is kind of cheesy though.
  • Create New...