deutschlandia (1045) 23 SFW Posts | 39 Space Comments | Favorites | RSS Feed Registered 2007-08-22 01:17:48 Comment Karma: 2 Featured Comments: 0 Member of :

Recent Comments from deutschlandia

Comment on Waves against the bridge (2008-11-02 03:28:38)
i'm drunk and about to beat off to porn. this has nothing to do with the pic, just putting it out there.
Comment on Octocube (2008-10-21 17:30:31)
So what you're saying is that I should use this in my water-cooling system?
Comment on House Representation (2008-09-23 16:22:06)
Umm, no. Gerrymandering is still a big problem. Gerrymandering based *solely* on race is illegal under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, but doing it for political reasons is still legal. And the Census doesn't determine the districts, just how many districts each state gets. The states themselves set their own districts. This is done every ten years (because that's when the state knows if it's gaining or losing seats), unless you're in Texas, when it's done how ever often Tom DeLay wants. This chart is only tangentially related to gerrymandering.
Comment on House Representation (2008-09-22 21:40:40)
@caio I'm pretty sure the Census works out how many representatives each state gets. I don't know how their formula works, but it's probably based around getting each state as close to the average as possible. That's why the states that deviate from the average on that chart are almost all single-district states: Montana can either be one over-average district, or two under-average districts. The redistricting is done every ten years, because that's how often the Census is taken, and so how often the states are told how many districts they'll have.
Comment on House Representation (2008-09-22 19:03:13)
This is a reason to increase the size of the House. It's been stuck at 435 since about the 1920's (I think, not totally sure). Why 435? Because that is how many that can fit into the Capitol Building, and they don't want to change the damn thing. I like the Capitol Building. It's very pretty. But I like functional democracy a lot more.
Comment on A candle and a jack (2008-04-02 18:02:44)
It's a joke, the idea being that when you say "candlejack" you're instantly
Comment on Jesus takes issue with you (2008-04-02 02:53:26)
christians == pwnt
Comment on are all the fucking pedos gone? (2008-04-02 01:04:19)
lol epic april fools
Comment on Rape Only Hurts If you fight it (2008-04-01 00:55:12)
Stupid joke is stupid.
Comment on How the moon landing was faked (2008-03-29 02:01:59)
Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capricorn_One
Comment on How the moon landing was faked (2008-03-29 01:59:29)
@PanikAttac: Well, Hubble isn't the point. My 2nd favorite argument (above) is the most convincing one. Why else would certain patches of the lunar dust be so consistently reflective?
Comment on How the moon landing was faked (2008-03-28 23:34:48)
@Tastyzippo: yeah, my second favorite argument is the laser reflectors the Apollo astronauts left on the moon, which how we know how far away the moon is.
Comment on How the moon landing was faked (2008-03-28 23:33:50)
My favorite argument against the moon landings being a hoax is that most (basically, all) of the Apollo equipment was built by contractors who were handed specs and a budget. The contractors can't possibly all be in on the conspiracy, that would be way too many people to be feasible. Therefore, they must have made the parts to the specs. And either the specs weren't good and therefore the Apollo rockets would have have worked, or the specs were good, and the rockets would have worked (mostly, cf Apollo 13). If the specs were good, there would be no reason to fake the moon landings since the rockets would have worked and they'd already spent all the money to make them. If the specs were bad, someone would have noticed, since the contractors were all engineering firms (obviously) and someone along the way would have no doubt realized that the parts they were building could never have worked in the way necessary. Eat it, conspiracy theorists.
Comment on City Lights (2008-03-25 22:35:23)
This is definitely Chicago from the south. You can see Washington and Jackson Park, Navy Pier, the river, Midway, and the highways. Claims this is New York are retarded and/or trolls.
Comment on City Lights (2008-03-24 18:50:02)
Also, how could you possibly tell there aren't winding alleys based on a picture from above cloud level?