CrackerJack2 1 point ago +1 / -0

it's yet another platform to spread the message of Jesus Christ.
Don't think it's allowed in Communist China.

CrackerJack2 8 points ago +8 / -0

"You put windmills ON the airplane and generate electricity, then pull the airplane through the air with electric powered propellers".

  • Blue haired woke thought.
CrackerJack2 4 points ago +4 / -0

Any Aussie should be allowed to seek asylum in America because of this.

CrackerJack2 2 points ago +2 / -0

The good news is that cancer deaths have dropped to almost nothing
these last 18 months.

CrackerJack2 2 points ago +2 / -0

I just thought of Von Mises stress calculations too. Although done being lectured to.

Never knew this guy's full name: Richard Edler von Mises.

CrackerJack2 16 points ago +16 / -0

It's some weak multi-millionaire computer nerds who helped steal the election. Along with a number of weak spineless lawyers.
Look at Georgia, no one can ever even look at one physical ballot at all to make sure they weren't tampered with.
Unfreaking believable! Something must be done to correct this situation.
The whole reason why the federal gov't requires the States to retain those ballots for 22 months is for investigative purposes!

CrackerJack2 2 points ago +2 / -0

Very good.
You have to know the person. Not some jury member 50+ miles away in a 1 million plus metropolis.

CrackerJack2 2 points ago +2 / -0

civil justice needs to be speed up appreciably. Imagine being in times of the Pilgrims, justice was swift and sure.

CrackerJack2 2 points ago +2 / -0

but couldn't I claim my anonymous presence on the internet is akin to being one persona of someone who has a schizophrenic disorder? ☺

CrackerJack2 10 points ago +10 / -0

Question for a legal scholar:
Could, say Dominion Voting Systems, Inc., if they ever found out or became known the name of a previously anonymous person who allegedly said something defamatory about them, sue them for defamation?

Or does the fact that they speak as an anonymous person shield them from any later potential lawsuit?
P.S. By the way, Dominion sucks!

CrackerJack2 2 points ago +2 / -0

Mark of The Bees[t].
The honeycomb looking mark.
How else would you describe this
Mark 2000 years ago to anyone?

CrackerJack2 1 point ago +1 / -0

All of a sudden tons more Amish out there,
me included
(except here and on other web sites anonymously ).

CrackerJack2 2 points ago +2 / -0

Some are completely brainwashed, but repeated exposure of the facts will indeed flip some of them.

CrackerJack2 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's why I said it would have to be maybe 8x bigger. A hunk of uranium which is less than that required for critical mass can still heat up things. Heck, they have thermal generators on deep space probes that are nuclear powered and definitely generate over 1kw of electricity. I'm sure they can come up with something that won't become critical yet kicks out 10s of kw of power, especially since drones don't need shielding.
Here you go:

Each GPHS is a block about four by four by two inches in size, weighing approximately 3.5 pounds (1.5 kilograms). They are nominally designed to produce thermal power at 250 watts at the beginning of a mission, and can be used individually or stacked together...

( https://rps.nasa.gov/technology/ )

1kw ~ 16 lbf.
10 kw ~ 160 lbf.
10 kw ~ 14 hp.
14 hp. is definitely enough to get keep you flying. Worst case it can be towed until it reaches the designed altitude. It'll then be good for months and months, until the bearings fail or something like that. Then catch it or deploy a parachute over friendly territory or waters. Just avoid T-storms at all cost. Wright brothers built an engine that kicked out 8-10 hp. at something under 200 lbf. Wright Brothers engine:

... design goals for weight (less than 200 pounds) and horsepower (8-10 horsepower).

( https://wright.nasa.gov/airplane/eng03.html )

The Wright Brothers really did have the Right Stuff !!!

CrackerJack2 -1 points ago +1 / -2

Well, what the heck,
if you can build a nuclear bomb small enough for an ICBM you can certainly build a reactor that size, or maybe 3x-8x as big.
You just don't want to loose one after all of that investment in technology. As an engineer, I don't see any insurmountable barriers towards completing this task. A still better approach is to [... redacted by the DOD... ]. Now that would be an extremely valuable idea. A game breaker! Wow. Got to patent that idea. I wonder if the gov't will steal it or let it be published in the Patent Gazette.

CrackerJack2 0 points ago +1 / -1

They probably have some now that can even be remotely piloted.
I wouldn't want to be a ground crew member though.
May be we can draft some of the glowies from here for that task.

CrackerJack2 0 points ago +1 / -1

You, as do I know full well the hazards of radiation. I worked at a company that made nuclear reactor components. Radiation exposure is no joke. And neither is the byproducts that stay around for 1,000s of years.
"Too cheap to measure".
Yeah, right.

Now fusion energy is definitely something that should explored further. Hense the new race to the Moon.
( https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Preparing_for_the_Future/Space_for_Earth/Energy/Helium-3_mining_on_the_lunar_surface )

CrackerJack2 0 points ago +1 / -1

Maybe, just maybe the Coast Guard is doing their job and making sure the CHICOMS aren't shipping some real nasty $l-lIT into the country.
After all, we are likely in a warm war now with them, right as we speak.
Chip shortage, etc.

CrackerJack2 20 points ago +20 / -0

I'm a Native American VIKING!
My ancestors have been here for a 1,000 years.
Resident of Vinland.
Prove me wrong.

CrackerJack2 0 points ago +2 / -2

The Judiciary should NOT have say over what laws are Constitutional and what are not, as they are approved merely by a simple majority of the Senate. The Constitution and amendments, however, are approved by a minimum of 2/3rds of the States. A much higher bar to cross. Something is wrong here, there must be a mistake in how the Judiciary is selected.

view more: Next ›