Ehhhh, traditional fan bases are strange. Look at teams like Green Bay, Kansas City, Oakland...

Even when these teams are not great (its been a while for green bay) the stadiums still regularly sell out. In the Chiefs’ most recent season of terribleness, maybe 2009 or something like that, they only did not sell out 2…

That attitude bleeds into the workplace too.

“Oh, Kumal is on the fast track? But he can’t program himself out of a wet paper bag! I once told him his code didn’t work in a code review and he complained that he would ‘have to go re do some work’. Like, yeah, that is your job Kumal. Oh right, he is indian and we don’t…

Mine is actually possible, you mentioned something with authority that is just flat out not true.

You did not draw that in paint. I win, bitch.

I bet you $1000 you cannot draw anything close to that in paint.

Quick, draw me the steps you took when you came to the conclusion that the edge of all cliffs are parallel to the force of gravity, and not sloped in either direction at all, “The velocity in the vertical axis would almost certainly be zero if driving off…

Your continual use of the word retarded makes me think you are trying to cover up something... you know, kind of like how teens, insecure about their sexuality, call everybody fags online. That is you, right now.

Uh, yes, I am saying you start at 0 on that steep down slope. How is this hard to grasp? Oh right, it is because you are just a dipshit redneck who thinks he is a fucking genius.

I like this rails system. 2% more acceleration might get it to 2.3%.

The prius is questionable in this example.

The car I drew (a Bugatti Veyron, clearly) could do this.

You are correct. Mine could be considered driving down a cliff, and his could be considered dropped.

In the movies, when someone drives off a cliff, there is always a portion where the car moves under it’s own power.

If you operate under the assumption that driving off a cliff means at some point the car is moving with…

I responded to David’s initial response to my statement. Please see my illustration there.

I responded to your first response. My solution might not be considered falling, but certainly if you drove down a cliff as I illustrated, it could be considered “off a cliff” as was printed on the sticker.

Here, you can accelerate vertically faster than you can fall. Falling limits your acceleration to 9.8... meters per second squared, where as nearly falling but while also accelerating could theoretically accelerate you at a higher rate. This illustration here should help identify what I am talking about:

I am an engineer, this is possible, I’ll draw a picture.

I mentioned uncompressed suspension because nearly straight down, there would not be enough weight on the suspension to keep it from pushing you away from the cliff. But suppose the cliff is just non-vertical enough to maintain that contact with the tires?

Right, it does start at 0, but in my hypothetical nearly vertical cliff, you could still accelerate and hit that mark.

Dude, really? Here is a photo of a real cliff and a car I drew on the cliff:

So, I said this earlier on another post, but suppose the tires were against the cliff wall (uncompressed as to avoid pushing off of the wall).

That bit of acceleration could push it past the time to beat.

This is not a safe assumption, you could already be driving down before you hit the edge of the cliff. The sticker also does not indicate which direction the velocity is directed, only that the velocity is hit.

You started calculating at 0. In what scenario does a car not already have velocity when moving off of a cliff? Even increasing to idle speeds might tip the scale in favor of the sticker. The only way your calculations work is if it is dropped from a crane.

There are ideal scenarios that beat this sticker as well,…