|
Greetings from the year 2049 (pg. 29)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Alberto Falk |
| quote: | Originally posted by idoru
And this, right here, is where I call bull. You CANNOT change a tune from 4:4 to 3:3 and have it sound near the same. How in the are we expected to believe that? Not to mention the simple fact that there's not much melody or variation in most of generalized pop-EDM to allow for an orchestra to play more than three or four minutes of a song.
Get the out. |
You can, of course it doesn't sound near the same. Which is how age-old copyrights are avoided. Maybe I should have explained it more. But, if Beethoven's 5th can be turned later into a Disco song in the 1970's. Does it sound the same? Of course not.
You'll understand once the times change, I suppose. |
|
|
| jupiterone |
| quote: | Originally posted by Alberto Falk
You'll understand once the times change, I suppose. |
isn't there some timeline paradox that says if one thing happens in one timeline then it doesn't mean it'll happen in another? or something like that?
if so, then what makes you certain this will happen in ours? |
|
|
| Alberto Falk |
| quote: | Originally posted by jupiterone
isn't there some timeline paradox that says if one thing happens in one timeline then it doesn't mean it'll happen in another? or something like that?
if so, then what makes you certain this will happen in ours? |
This time line, and my original time line overlap up to Feb, 16th, 2008. Then they separate.
Think of it as the time lines being parallel as of feb 16th. Much can be compared, but are they the same? No. Music will not change, But you having met me, and myself traveling to this time have changed minute things, which will make this time line's future ever so slightly different. |
|
|
| curleyq994 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Alberto Falk
You can, of course it doesn't sound near the same. Which is how age-old copyrights are avoided. Maybe I should have explained it more. But, if Beethoven's 5th can be turned later into a Disco song in the 1970's. Does it sound the same? Of course not.
You'll understand once the times change, I suppose. |
Answer here:
X-Noize - Rules Of Engagement
| quote: | | http://www.sendspace.com/file/m5g6qe |
|
|
|
| Vivid Boy |
Hold on Hold on, I remember reading that the reason why we have never been visited by time travellers is because a time traveller can only go as far back as the time machine was invented.
so there must be a time machine out there......which means, we just may be able to get these 30 secs of our life back... |
|
|
| Alberto Falk |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vivid Boy
Hold on Hold on, I remember reading that the reason why we have never been visited by time travellers is because a time traveller can only go as far back as the time machine was invented.
so there must be a time machine out there......which means, we just may be able to get these 30 secs of our life back... |
Where did you read this? We can travel anytime, anywhere. Remember, space and time are directly related, without one, the other simply does not exist. |
|
|
| Vivid Boy |
| well why dont u prove it then. travel back to when i was 13 yrs old smoking weed behind larose bakery for my first time. run up behind me and yell boo. if it becomes my memory i know ur telling me the truth.... |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by Alberto Falk
The hunt for Osama Bin Laden is basically given up by 2009. There are much more important matters. I urge you all to pay close attention to the United States/Russia/China as the United States destroys the Spy satellite. The new arms race is at hand. |
As someone who has paid attention I call bull.
1. It won't be successful.
2. Even if it were, it's no real victory - the satellite is larger than a school bus and is making regular orbits around the Earth 16 times per day. Shooting down an actual missile (of which there would be multiple simultaneous launches) is like hitting a bullet with a bullet. Implausible.
3. China and Russia have scarcely even issued statements, and have certainly not moved to condemn the US. In fact, some are speculating that they are rather concerned about the potential loss of life should the missile come down in one of their respectively large geographic territories.
| quote: | Unless it is shot down, the satellite, which has been out of ground communication since its launch more than a year ago, is expected "to make an uncontrolled reentry . . . on or about March 6," according to documents the Bush administration provided to the United Nations yesterday. "At present," said an official notification sent yesterday to countries around the world as well as to the United Nations and NATO, "we cannot predict the entry impact area."
Asked whether the plan is really an attempt to test the Aegis system as an anti-satellite system -- which would be a very controversial step internationally -- Cartwright said the amount of special modifications being done to the programs used to guide the system would "not be transferable to fleet use."
He also rejected widely disseminated blog allegations that the destruction of the satellite had been planned to keep classified information aboard from landing in non-U.S. hands. Everything other than the gas container, he said, would be destroyed on reentry even without a missile strike.
Members of Congress were briefed on the plan yesterday, as were diplomats from other nations. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) said in a statement that "I attended a Congressional briefing this morning by the Department of Defense, and I am satisfied that the destruction of the malfunctioning satellite is the best option available to protect public safety."
"However, it should be understood by all, at home and abroad, that this is an exceptional circumstance and should not be perceived as the standard U.S. policy for dealing with errant satellites," he said. "The House Armed Services Committee will work closely with the Department of Defense and other concerned agencies to oversee the broader policy implications of this action in relation to our space assets." |
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...ST2008021403174
You're going to have to start trying a lot harder if you are going to fool anyone. |
|
|
| Vivid Boy |
| no no he's good. i remmeber the boo now. |
|
|
| idoru |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vivid Boy
no no he's good. i remmeber the boo now. |
:stongue: |
|
|
| eROs.au |
i still want to know about australia in 2049.
p.s. is Alberto xeno??? |
|
|
|
|
