scn64

It looks like it could be extremely useful for certain applications but I can't see using it for everyday computing.

I never even noticed it until this poll.

Last night I dreamed that I woke up and, this morning, I actually woke up!

Time Commando It looked like such a great game when it first came out but I didn't buy it until it was pretty old and in a used games bin. I think I paid about $5 for it but that was $5 too much.

1. B 2. D 3. B

I've kept one since the end of my senior year in high school which was in 2002. I try to update it every day but sometimes I don't get around to it. It's cool to read about things you've done that you almost forgot about. I usually don't write down my feelings about things, it's more of just a log of what activities I did during that day. So, if someone else read it, there's not really much I'd be embarrassed about.

*GASP* I just looked at my clock and it said 7:42. If you multiply the seven by the last number, 2, you get 14. Subtract that same 2 and you get 12. Then multiply the 15 from 12:15 by that same 2 and you get 30. Add the 12 from 12:15 and you get a final answer of 12:42 which is a combination of both our times! Coincidence? I think not!

One time a ghost appeared and killed me while I was sleeping. I knew I should have forwarded that chain mail.

Literally every time I look at my clock, it's flashing "12:00" at me. Do you think this is some kind of a sign?

I wish I lived close enough to work to bike there every day. I live about 15 miles away. For me, that is way too far to be biking every day, especially when it's raining or below freezing.

I started when I was a junior in high school. So, that's about 6 years.

May 7, 1984 - $180 million out-of-court settlement reached in Agent Orange suit - Sharon Barrett wins LPGA Potamkin Cadillac Golf Classic

I own a 2004 Chevy Malibu. It's nothing special but it gets me around just fine.

Technically, you're not even supposed to be on these forums if you're under 13.

What I always hated in school was when most of the kids in my class would be noisy or causing some sort of trouble but there were a few of us just calmly doing our work. Several times, the teacher would just punish the whole class. So I basically got punished for doing what I was told to do. The teachers claimed we should have told the other students to calm down but, first of all, we all know that wouldn't have worked, and second, it's the teachers job to get control over the class, not the students job.

Lol, your signature is tricking my eyes. I keep thinking the different pictures on it are moving.

No, I don't listen to it. In fact, I find it very annoying.

I answered "occasionally". It's not like I'm actively looking for rule-breakers, though, so maybe I'm around them and just don't know it.

After trying that, Firefox wouldn't load any pages in the forum. Clearing the cache fixed it though. Still a cool experiment.

I usually carry a paper towel, my cellphone, keys, wallet, and my wris[bleep]ch. Of course I'm wearing the watch so I don't know if that counts as an inventory item.

We use coupons but not to the extent that you do.

dark brown

Learn to read. Already disproved everything you said in this post. How did you disprove facts? You must be good. It seems like you guys aren't asking if it will take off, but if it will have enough thrust via it's engines to take off... ...This is the dumbest problem I've ever seen. The treadmill is now irrelevant. What the hell? If it's going to use it's thrust to move forward, then DUH, yes it will take off, but now the treadmill makes no damn difference. This is perhaps the most unnecessarily stupid question ever asked. What do you think a jet plane normally uses to move itself down the runway? Of course it's going to use thrust. The treadmill is introduced into the question in an attempt to trick the reader. Many people, including myself, see the word "treadmill" and immediately think of a person or a car trying to move on it. Call it a trick question. Call it poorly worded. But don't call it a stupid question. I rarely see a stupid question get 8 pages of back and forth argument about the answer.

If you really want to know, please read through the thread. Several people, including myself, have already explained our thoughts over and over again. I really don't feel like repeating myself one more time.

I think you are being sarcastic, but at the end there it kind of sounds like you weren't. Ignore this next part if you were being sarcastic. A person walking forward on a treadmill doesn't go anywhere, just like if you were driving a car on a treadmill, it wouldn't go anywhere. Airplanes are different though, their jets are their means of movement. The jets don't move with relation to the ground, they move with relation to the air. Yeeeea...And a plane moving on a treadmill still has no air going through its turbines...Go run on a treadmill once and see how much wind you feel in your hair...None? Thought so. You guys are all thinking WAY too far into it. What you're not thinking about is the simple thing here...The plane is on a treadmill. The plane is not moving, the ground is. You're saying that the plane can then, once the ground reaches enough speed, take off. So you're saying that the plane can go from a dead stop with no forward momentum at all, no lift at all, nothing, and suddenly take off, forward, and fly away...All because the ground was moving at a speed relative to what that plane would need to take off. I still stand by calling you guys stupid, because this isn't even a problem. If phycisists are actually debating this, then the half of them debating FOR it need their degree's stripped away, because I haven't even gone to college or taken a physics class and even I realize that everything you guys are saying is completely irrelevant. The wheels are irrelevant. The wings are irrelevant. The turbine jet engines...All of it, completely irrelevant, because the plane has NO forward momentum, no lift...Nothing. You guys do realize, then, that you're saying that this plane can accelerate from 0 mph to 300 some mph in less than a second, too, right? It would have to in order to stay aflight. Even if it could get off the ground for a milisecond using this method (it couldn't) it would then have to accelerate to that speed in less than a second to stay aflight, and mind you, it still has no thrust, lift, forward momentum, etc. I don't mean to sound like a total jerk or like I'm smarter than everyone, but seriously...Anyone further disputing what I'm saying obviously doesn't have a very basic grasp on reality, let alone any actual science. If you're not going to read the replies to this thread then don't even bother arguing. We have already said, several times, that we don't think the plane will magically lift off the ground without any forward movement. You may still disagree that the plane can take off, but don't just assume we have absolutely no idea about what allows a plane to fly.