elfprince13
elfprince13
elfprince13

There is a significant distinction between saying "people in a group retain their rights" and "the group has rights as its own entity". While corporate personhood is often justified in terms of the former, any inspection of our legal system reveals that this is obviously not the case - the corporation exists as its

People liking him doesn't effect his (or the movie's) status as canon. Or that the Time War happened under his watch (including the Master being revived again after the events of the movie). Remember that Eccleston is freshly off a regeneration in Rose (checking out his face and commenting on new teeth in the mirror).

Bad reading comprehension. They're not defending the assertion that a corporation is a person, they're defending the rights of the individuals associated in a corporation.

The intended connection was to the industrial revolution in England.

He was also staunchly agrarian, and agrarian/localist philosophy is very tightly interwoven with anarchism & libertarianism.

See my other post replying to you explaining my point further (my edit failed for some reason, stupid io9). As a libertarian, I can tell you that we heartily believe in your rights to democratically organize your society as you choose, as long as you don't coerce us to participate on your terms.

You're pretty close to the point though, concerning orc governance. "Social darwinism" (or "meritocratic" where "merit" is defined by "combat skills"). But definitely not the same as anarcho-libertarianism - it's the difference between Murray Rothbard and Ayn Rand. cf. http://xkcd.com/1049/

Libertarianism isn't concerned with freedom to act as you please, it's concerned with protecting individual liberties and property from aggressive actions on the part of others. Anarcho-libertarianism is the belief that we can achieve an existence where liberties are protected without the aid of a government.

Unrelated to the gluten issue, why on earth would you want commercial pizza instead of making it infinitely more delicious, for cheaper, at home?

Though honestly, Rose is a terrible place to start for people who don't have a high tolerance for cheese-festivals. Girl in the Fireplace is an excellent (every female I've shown it too has demanded further Doctor Whoing) standalone episode to understand what makes Doctor Who great. If you want to start with Season 1,

Why no love for McGann, who we've never seen regenerate at a certain age?

in either case, a much spottier proposition.

a) We're talking about building one in this little sub-thread (seriously, go look at the article he's talking about)

It's not a Dyson "Sphere". It's a swarm.

Why does everyone forget about the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_theorem ? We ought to be looking for Dyson swarms or rings of one type or another. Unfortunately these would be pretty difficult to find since they would block significantly less of the host star's radiant output.

Dyson *swarm*. There's a difference.

I heard Bane all over the place in the test screens. That weird thing he does with rising tones through his nose. It definitely wasn't in the shots from Nemesis.

yeah, he actually looks pretty par for the course, as Green Lanterns go.

Speaking as someone who actually works-in and studies physics, no, being internally consistent doesn't get you a free pass. It gets you mathematics. That only becomes science when you start caring about external consistency, and until String/M-theory is experimentally differentiable from current physics, as far as

So which part, exactly, of that article conflicts with my description of theory and data?