Madre

No no, claramente compararon gente jugando un "action-packed, shoot-'em-up video game" con gente jugando un "non-action-packed puzzle game"... Violento resumiendo...

Madre

#41 Pero no todo el mundo puede acabar trabajando en León en un banco o en una farmacia o en una tienda de regalos o de embutidos tradicionales, que es lo único que hay en León a parte de bares.
Si tienes un trabajo especializado o acabas en Madrid o Barcelona o te vas al extranjero... Que es lo que hemos hecho el 90 % de la gente de León y por lo que en León hay tantísimos viejos y tan poca gente joven... Y donde dice León podemos poner muchas de las capitales de provincia...

En cuanto a la polémica Madrid-Barcelona y habiendo vivido en las dos por motivos laborales (ahora en Barcelona), creo que se llevan poco.

Madre

Si, hay mucha gente que estos genes los tiene realmente mutados... Supongo que en 50 años se considerará una enfermedad como la diabetes y hasta se podrá curar...

Madre

Un poco de investigación antes de menear... Aquí va uno de 45 cm, "hacinque" la noticia es falsa...

http://mr18incher.com/home.html?nats=easygals:PPS35:MR18,0,0,0,0

Atención, el enlace puede resultar muy ofensivo...

Madre

Otra cosa, ¿cómo puede ser que alguien vote esto como erróneo?

Madre

La de vueltas que dan las cosas en Internet...
Escolar hace un wiki... Yo pongo en el wiki el enlace a "Logeneveses.net" y "La Opinión Alternativa" con los ya clásicos artículos racistas y rancios de Mariano en el Faro de Vigo y luego Meneo el wiki... Llega a la portada.... En chuza.org ven el wiki, y el enlace a los artículos y lo "chuzan"... Y esto vuelve a Menéame...
¿Cómo llamamos a esto? ¿Re-ultra-meneado? ¿Biuni-meneado?

Madre
Madre

¿Sigue usted igual de racista que cuando era diputado gallego?
Leer: http://www.losgenoveses.net/Rajoy/Marianoracista.htm

Madre

Hay que ser idiota para cerrar un blog... Para empezar que no sirve para nada y para seguir que le das una publicidad del carajo... Además de reaccionarios y censuradores, muy listos no son.

Madre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steorn

Steorn claimed to seek the support of the scientific community with its announcement of a "Challenge" seeking experts to evaluate its perpetual motion claims. In announcing how the validation process would work, McCarthy said "We are now seeking twelve of the most qualified and most cynical from the world’s scientific community to form an independent jury, test the technology in independent laboratories and publish their findings. " [1] The "jury" is said to be now testing the technology (as of Jan 1st 2007). It was to have appointed one of the scientists as its own chairman. Steorn was then to present the jury with an in-depth explanation of the technology and provide it with data from various tests conducted in the past.[20]

Steorn states that the validation process will consist of three phases. The first phase will confirm or deny that the Steorn technology has a coefficient of performance greater than 100%. In the second phase the jury will decide whether the operation of Steorn technology affects any of its component parts. The third and final phase will carry out a full thermodynamic analysis of the technology.

Steorn states that post validation, irrespective of the results, Steorn will publish the analysis of the jury on its website. It will then seek to license the technology in various markets and will also launch its own products that it is currently developing.

Within hours of its advertisement in The Economist, Steorn reports it was contacted by hundreds of scientists world-wide and many thousands of other interested people.[21]

According to Steorn CEO Sean McCarthy, "[U]ntil this thing is validated by science we won't be doing anything commercial with it."[22] McCarthy has also been quoted as saying, "We have to fight public opinion, we have to fight the scientific community and we have to fight the energy industry. We couldn't pick a worse battleground."[23]

On 8 September 2006, Steorn stopped taking applications for scientists to serve on the 12-member jury, and on 5 November 2006 Steorn confirmed that all twelve jury members had been selected, had signed NDAs and that validation was due to start "in the near term".[24]

Viewpoints on the claim's validity

Arguments in favor

Steorn's advertisement in the Economist cost £75,000 [6], and Steorn has stated it will not accept funds from investors until after its technology has been validated by the jury of "qualified cynics".[43][44] These facts are not consistent with a company knowingly attempting to profit from a hoax.

Arguments against

Instead of opening up their technology for public inspection, Steorn has pitched their claim directly to the media. This is considered by Dr Robert L. Park, a professor of physics at the University of Maryland at College Park, to be an important indicator that a scientific claim lies well outside the bounds of rational scientific discourse.[45][46]

Steorn's claim violates the first law of thermodynamics. Ordinary people and established scientists including Leonardo da Vinci have attempted to do this for centuries and failed.[47]

In particular, Steorn claims to violate the law using "a way to construct magnetic fields so that when you travel round the magnetic fields, starting and stopping at the same position, you have gained energy". Such experiments date back to the Magic wheel of the 700's and continue to the present day in the form of many variations on the "Magnet Motor"[48]. It is also established that the energy of motion which one gains when two magnets attract or repel is exactly equal to the energy needed to restore the starting position, no matter how you arrange the magnets.[49]

In view of the fundamental nature of the laws of thermodynamics within physics,[50] overwhelming evidence would be required to support Steorn's claim that these laws have been violated. No such evidence has been provided.

April Fool's Day

A page on Steorn's website titled "Press Coverage" had a broken link to a news story claiming the discovery in The Guardian on April 1, 2006. The date "April 1" is commonly observed as "April Fool's Day" in many countries, including Ireland and Great Britain, and is often a target date for hoaxes. No such news story from the Guardian exists. The press coverage page was edited shortly thereafter but the earlier version was still available to see on their website for a number of days afterwards. It was finally removed by Steorn on 25 August 2006. Steorn responded to this claim saying: "it was a placeholder left by the website designer."[40]

Madre
Madre

#3 Estoy de acuerdo con que se intente citar la fuente original de las noticias, pero en el caso de los ensayos o artículos de opinión no se puede...