The missing WMD

“96 percent of cosmos puzzles astronomers...


100 percent of Iraq puzzles Bush.
Bush blames WMD for falling into "black hole."


WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Earth, moon, sun and all visible stars in the sky make up less than one percent of the universe. Almost all the rest is dark matter and dark energy, unknown forces that puzzle astronomers.

Observations in recent years have changed the basic understanding of how the universe evolved and have emphasized for astronomers how little is known about the major forces and substances that shaped our world.

Astronomers now know that luminous matter -- stars, planets and hot gas -- account for only about 0.4 percent of the universe. Nonluminous components, such as black holes and intergalactic gas, make up 3.6 percent. The rest is either dark matter, about 23 percent, or dark energy, about 73 percent.

Dark matter, sometimes called "cold dark matter," has been known for some time. Only recently have researchers come to understand the pivotal role it played in the formation of stars, planets and even people.

"We owe our very existence to dark matter," said Paul Steinhardt, a physicist at Princeton University and a co-author of a review on dark matter appearing this week in the journal Science.

Steinhardt said it is believed that following the Big Bang, the theoretical beginning of the universe, dark matter caused particles to clump together. That set up the gravitation processes that led to the formation of stars and galaxies. Those stars, in turn, created the basic chemicals, such as carbon and iron, that were fundamental to the evolution of life.

"Dark matter dominated the formation of structure in the early universe," Steinhardt said. "For the first few billion years dark matter contained most of the mass of the universe. You can think of ordinary matter as a froth on an ocean of dark matter. The dark matter clumps and the ordinary matter falls into it. That led to the formation of the stars and galaxies."

Without dark matter, "there would be virtually no structures in the universe," he said.

The nature of dark matter is unknown. It cannot be seen or detected directly. Astronomers know it is there because of its effect on celestial objects than can be seen and measured.

But the most dominating force of all in the universe is called dark energy, a recently proven power that astronomers say is causing the galaxies in the universe to separate at a faster and faster speed. It is the force that is causing the universe to expand at an accelerating rate.

Robert P. Kirshner, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, said the presence of dark energy was proved only five years ago when astronomers studying very distant exploding stars discovered they were moving away at a constant acceleration. It was a stunning discovery that has since been proved by other observations.

Kirshner said it is clear now that dark matter and dark energy engaged in a gravitational tug of war that, eventually, dark energy won.

Following the Big Bang some 14 billion years ago, matter in the universe streaked outward. It formed galaxies, thinned out and then began to slow down.

"Dark matter was trying to slow things down and dark energy was trying to speed it up," said Kirshner, the author of a review article on dark energy in Science.

"We think dark matter was winning for the first seven billion years, but then universe went from slowing down to speeding up. ... Dark energy took over."

Kirshner said astronomers do not really understand dark energy. Albert Einstein first proposed a form of the idea, but discarded it later. Now, researchers know it exists, but its exact form and nature are mysterious, although it is thought to be related to gravity.

"What this is pointing to is a deep mystery at the heart of physics," said Kirshner. "We don't understand gravity in the same way we understand other forces."

He said there are virtually no experiments on Earth that would explore the nature of dark energy. It can only be studied across vast stellar distances by observing the motion of objects extremely far away, a skill that has been possible only in recent decades with the development of very powerful telescopes.

"Dark energy will cause the universe to expanded faster and faster and eventually, over time, we will see less and less of it," Kirshner said. Over millions of years, familiar stars and nearby galaxies will disappear from view and the sky, now choked with stars, will slowly darken.

"The piece of the universe that we can see will get lonelier and lonelier," he said

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/06/20/dark.energy.ap/index.html

.”

“Alaska is too main stream for me.”

“lmao bcapac!


the left;defined by it's kooks...”

“sorry dude but dark matter has fallen out of favor since they proved that there is a black hole at the center of most galaxies.

(yes ours too)”

“Active Galactic Nuclei kick all forms of ass!”

“t - 1,000,000,000 years....”

“speaking of black holes sci-am has a nice feature article on how they help create new stars...”

“Quantum black holes would make for some truly nasty slugs.

Hollowpoints? PHFFFFFT!”

“i hate slugs......

}8/”

“For years, it has been believed that electric bulbs emit light, but recent information has proved otherwise. Electric bulbs don't emit light; they suck dark. Thus, we call these bulbs Dark Suckers.

The Dark Sucker Theory and the existence of dark suckers prove that dark has mass and is heavier than light. First, the basis of the Dark Sucker Theory is that electric bulbs suck dark. For example, take the Dark Sucker in the room you are in. There is much less dark right next to it than there is elsewhere. The larger the Dark Sucker, the greater its capacity to suck dark. Dark Suckers in the parking lot have a much greater capacity to suck dark than the ones in this room.

So with all things, Dark Suckers don't last forever. Once they are full of dark, they can no longer suck. This is proven by the dark spot on a full Dark Sucker. The dark which has been absorbed is then transmitted by pylons along to power plants where the machinery uses fossil fuel to destroy it.

A candle is a primitive Dark Sucker. A new candle has a white wick. You can see that after the first use, the wick turns black, representing all the dark that has been sucked into it. If you put a pencil next to the wick of an operating candle, it will turn black. This is because it got in the way of the dark flowing into the candle.

One of the disadvantages of these primitive Dark Suckers is their limited range. There are also portable Dark Suckers. In these, the bulbs can't handle all the dark by themselves and must be aided by a Dark Storage Unit. When the Dark Storage Unit is full, it must be either emptied or replaced before the portable Dark Sucker can operate again.

Dark has mass. When dark goes into a Dark Sucker, friction from the mass generates heat. Thus, it is not wise to touch an operating Dark Sucker. Candles present a special problem as the mass must travel into a solid wick instead of through clear glass. This generates a great amount of heat and therefore it's not wise to touch an operating candle. This is easily proven for lightbulbs too. When you compress a gas, it gets hot, right? So the light bulb gets hot because of all the dark being squished into the wires. Also, dark is heavier than light. If you were to swim just below the surface of the lake, you would see a lot of light. If you were to slowly swim deeper and deeper, you would notice it getting darker and darker. When you get really deep, you would be in total darkness. This is because the heavier dark sinks to the bottom of the lake and the lighter light floats at the top. The is why it is called light.

Finally, we must prove that dark is faster than light. If you were to stand in a lit room in front of a closed, dark closet, and slowly opened the closet door, you would see the light slowly enter the closet. But since dark is so fast, you would not be able to see the dark leave the closet.

So next time you see an electric bulb, remember that it is not a light emitter but a Dark Sucker.

Oh yea....
Ever seen the blue glow in vacuum tubes? That's because electrons are blue..........”

“OY!”

“Kinda obvious when you think about it....huh.”

“Ah... the Classics! LOL


That's right up there with Clif Clavin's Buffalo Theory...

"Well ya see Norm, it's like this.... A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed
and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members.

In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as
the slowest brain cells. Excessive intake of alcohol, as we all know,
kills brain cells, but naturally it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. That's why you always feel smarter after a few beers."”

“Tilt is a genius.”

“actually....it's a little known fact that the ancient celts invented parkay floors....”

“Well boys, it'll be July in another week or so and the WMD still haven't been found.

And it doesn't bother you at all.

Amazing... and yet... just another day in Republican La-La Land, I suppose.


Actually, Dubya is a living counterexample to the Buffalo Theory. With all the booze he sucked down in the bad old days one would think he could at least pronounce the word "nuclear".

But Nooooooooooooooooo...

LOL”

“good one tilt.....yer uhmm....in rare form tonight....”

“is new intelligence anything like new math?

rumor has it saddam is still kickin.

no osama
no saddam
no wmd

what can I say?”

“"Deep down, those who scream for Iraq's weapons of mass death
right now! probably hope they remain concealed. If they never
materialize, they will focus on the absence of equipment rather
than the presence of evil, now vanquished, and thus dismiss Iraq's
liberation as a worthless escapade." --Deroy Murdock”

“This is almost like a religeon for you isnt it?”

“nope....”

“concise,to the point.

you sure that wasnt a cut and paste?

:} kidding...”

“That's a really funny quote.

Back in February, who was "screaming for Iraq's weapons of mass death"? LOLOLOL

Bush? Cheney? Rice? Powell? Rumsfeld? Perle? Wolfowitz?
Stratdewd?”

“go sniff some pachulii tilt....”

“So what some are saying is when the pres said that...

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."

He was lieing?”

“Maybe lying as to degree and timing as he did with Iraq...”

“No - Nigal, I don't think so.

I think he clearly fudged and maybe lied about the immediacy and magnitude of the risk from Iraq.

It is getting to be so f-ing obvious. If the Bush administration really believes that there were loads of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq ready to be used, and major components of advanced nuclear and other wmd development, then they ought to be frantic about finding and locating them. If they believed their own hype, they ought to be mobilizing everyone and anyone everywhere to follow up - instead they are keeping international inspectors out of Iraq.

This begs the question: "Were Bush and his people lying then, or are they being stupid and/or reckless now?"

I don't know the answer. My guess is that they are not that stupid or reckless, and the evidence of intelligence fudging points in that direction.”

“they did find weapons of mass destruction...his sons”

“Hmmmm, well that's funny you guys should say that because these aren't even Pres. Bush's words. They are Pres. Clinton's from 1998 when he went in and used the exact same intell and reasons as Bush did. Yet where were all the nay sayers then? Why no catterwalling about his reasons? Every single one of the people who are calling Bush a liar and a warmonger were marchin' right behind Bill saying, "Yep, dats right!".

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998
_______________________________

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others
_______________________________

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998
______________________________

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
_______________________________

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998
_______________________________

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
_______________________________

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
________________________________

It seams clear that they are willing to go along with the administration until they see a clear opportunity to use it against them for their own political gains.”

“No Nigal. There is a major difference in the level of threat described. The idea that Hussein hasn't destroyed his weapons program and probably has some capacity left is consistent with Bush's successful push to reintroduce a tough inspections regime.

Bush argued that there was a huge imminent danger and there was no time to play around with sanctions.

IMHO - Bush did one better than Clinton when he managed to get inspections back on track under threat of war. That would have been something to crow about.

This is why I said I didn't think Bush was lying when he said what you quoted him as saying. What he said there completely justified sanctions and inspections.”