ICanSleepWhenI'mDead

Do you think all those clever people simultaneously decided not to entertain you any more, or might there be some other reason?

Flat 2% back on all purchases with no annual fee: https://www.nerdwallet.com/reviews/credit-cards/fidelity-rewards You can set up a Fidelity "cash management account" to accept the 2% cash back each month. The cash back money doesn't need to stay in that account for any specific length of time. You can set it up so that you can make an online transfer from the Fidelity "cash management account" to your checking account at any bank you choose whenever you want.

I'm not saying the strange fluid on the seafloor is coming from a buried alien ship, but: https://weather.com/science/video/strange-fluid-leaking-from-seafloor-and-scientists-want-to-know-more

Pretty smart - - hold back the best evidence for your theory until the football illiterates who don't remember 2004 have chimed in with their criticisms. For those who may not remember, the Chargers drafted Eli Manning, and then almost immediately traded him to the Giants. The Chargers got Phillip Rivers AND a third round pick AND a first round pick the following year. That 1st round pick turned into LB Shawne Merriman - - exactly the position that is currently the biggest question mark in our defense. For the illiterates among us, here are the facts about that trade: https://boltbeat.com/2020/05/30/la-chargers-eli-manning-philip-rivers-robbery/ Now I'll grant you that Hooker is not the prospect that Eli Manning was, but there are a lot more QB needy teams than there used to be. Remember the years the Bills recently spent wandering around the QB wilderness before they drafted Josh Allen? And Beane is a magician with roster moves - - I bet he could send Hooker to a QB needy team for enough draft picks to fill some roster holes, even if Hooker in a Bills uniform wouldn't fetch a first round pick. If I recall right, we got Milano in the fifth, and we could really use a good rookie LB this year. Get er' done, Beane ! !

Well, because you specifically asked, at least as recently as 2018 (google is my friend):

I know a guy who is fond of saying: "If you're not the lead dog, the view never changes."

Now that I have your attention, what are your favorite rhetorical responses to questions that have an obvious yes or no answer? Here are a few for starters: For "yes:" 1. Does a bear s**t in the woods? 2. Is the Pope Catholic? 3. Does a one legged duck swim in a circle? [my favorite, even though the real answer to that question is probably no] For "no:" 1. Does a chicken have lips? Personally, I sometimes take the Yogi Berra approach and mix and match just to see people's reactions, for example: Does the Pope s**t in the woods? or Are bears Catholic? Expand my repetoire - - whaddaya got?

For the same reason that the North American Indians would have fared better, in the short term at least, if they had killed Christopher Columbus and his entire party of explorers.

Unlike 4merper4mer, I don't claim to have absolute certainty that there is no other intelligent life in the universe. That's why I'm open to considering anybody's logical explanation for the Fermi paradox. But it's disingenuous to pejoratively call the Fermi paradox a "rabbit hole." IF life hypothetically somehow forms from the right mix of non-living chemicals when the circumstances of temperature, pressure, etc are just right, then given the vast number of other planets in the universe, those conditions statistically would be expected to exist and have caused life to form in numerous locations. So where is everybody? If they ain't around, and we currently have no evidence that they have ever existed anywhere , then maybe the hypothesis that life will form from the right mix of non-living chemicals under specific but currently unknown conditions is simply wrong. If you think the hypothesis is correct, where is everybody? Of course, you can always avoid the logic of the analysis by calling the Fermi paradox a "rabbit hole" that isn't worthy of your consideration.

The folks at SETI think that, just like in 1961, we only know the value of one of the 7 factors that have made up the Drake equation since it was first postulated in 1961. Here's the proof: Excerpted from https://www.seti.org/drake-equation-index (for more complete details read the full link): ___________ "The Drake Equation was cooked up by astronomer Frank Drake in 1961 to serve as the agenda for the first meeting on the topic of SETI. . . . At the time of the meeting, essentially none of the seven factors in the equation was known excepting the first, the production rate of stars. . . . It has been sixty years since the Drake Equation was conceived. Have we nailed down more of the terms than the single one known in 1961? Sadly, no. . . ." __________ Like any formula or mathematical model, the adage "Garbage in, garbage out" applies. The fact that most people in this thread disagree with 4merper4mer's conclusions doesn't make him a troll. When you make what the SETI folks readily concede are just "guesses" about the value of 6 of the 7 factors, everybody is just speculating. Although 4merper4mer doesn't explain his analysis particularly well, if any of the 6 unknown factors have a true value of ZERO, then we are alone in the universe. That is true whether or not that math dashes the hopes and dreams of the scientists and ordinary people who would like, and in some cases fervently hope, that we are not alone. SETI says that the fraction of suitable planets on which life actually appears is unknown. If your own "guess" is that life actually appears on some planet anywhere in the universe other than earth, you have to explain the Fermi paradox to justify your "guess." I have yet to hear an explanation for the Fermi paradox that makes me think that 4merper4mer's conclusion is wrong. I find the topic interesting enough that I am willing to entertain new explanations for the Fermi paradox from people with some basis for attempting an explanation. With most human knowledge available on the internet, anybody can do google searches to look for a rational explanation for the Fermi paradox provided by someone with the appropriate education or training to enlighten the rest of us. If you ever find such an explanation, please post a link. I'll read it.

I'm not saying it was aliens, but when the earth's core starts spinning in the opposite direction, you gotta wonder what's happening on the ocean floor . . . https://www.cbsnews.com/news/earth-inner-core-started-spinning-other-direction-study/

By a team-mate in my younger days to opponents when things first started to get chippy (not if there was any imminent likelihood of a fight): " Little guys get in groups - - big guys single file ! "

In both hands (so that I didn't need a fire hose to wash up afterwards)!

What's "xmas?"

What's "Xmas?"

JA "You know that thing baseball pitchers have about not stepping on the baseline on their way back to the dugout? After the Jets and Vikings games, I'm not stepping on any yardlines after a TD pass!"

Most memorable fortune cookie I ever got was just one word - - RUN.

We need to shoot Billy Buffalo from a moving train, but nobody listens to me (can't imagine why).

That's just dumb. If you were a person falsely accused, should your life be diminished even though you did nothing wrong? Ask yourself if Nate Allen should have been blackballed from the NFL because he was falsely accused of exposing himself to a 16 year old girl in Florida in 2015: https://archive.naplesnews.com/news/crime/nfls-nate-allen-speaks-out-after-police-admit-wrongfully-detaining-him-ep-953070045-335607741.html/

In case anybody was wondering, here's a recent update on this: https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a29417939/unidentified-submarine-objects/ "Something is out there—in the skies and beneath the waves." Do sources of underwater UFO info get any more authoritative than Popular Mechanics ?

<< What say ye? >> I say they're twits. It's a "model." For any model (not just this one), the following adage applies: Garbage in, Garbage out They have a lot of bad assumptions (i.e., a lot of "garbage in"). The result was garbage out.

Well, Elvis (yes, Elvis) has recently discussed the high potential upside of Harvard professor Avi Loeb's project to search the Pacific for any underwater fragments of a 2014 meteor that could reveal remnants of alien technology. I sh*t you not: https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2022/9/21/avi-loeb-pacific-search/

If they do wind up cutting him before he ever plays a down for us, they could always re-sign him to a 1 day contract down the Rhode so that he could retire as a Bill.

If you don't mind waiting about 3 hours and watching a full game replay shortly after the game ends, check out the free trial option for NFL+ Premium, described here: https://www.nfl.com/plus/learn-more As discussed in a different thread, some people have had trouble getting the service to work, and I don't know if being in Argentina would further complicate things. I have not been able to get the service to stream the replays to my XBox console even after re-downloading and re-installing the free NFL app from the Microsoft store (which worked fine last year), but I can still stream the replays to my laptop with no problems after logging in at nfl.com (no VPN required, at least for me in the US). The NFL "Digitial Care" customer service absolutely sucks, so if you sign up for the free 7 day trial and then cancel, I would keep careful records of the cancellation request. I vaguely recall reading that the "Game Pass" service (which is what the NFL called it last year), is still available outside the US. I don't know if there is a similar free 7 day trial for "Game Pass" like there is for "NFL+ Premium" in the US. Maybe try googling "NFL Game Pass free trial Argentina" and see what turns up. Good luck!

If the new incentives are scheduled to get paid for performance this year only if it exceeds his actual performance last year, then they are considered "not likely to be earned" incentives that, if earned this year, will count against NEXT year's salary cap. If they don't get earned this year, they won't be paid, and will never count against the salary cap at all. From https://russellstreetreport.com/salarycap/nfl-salary-cap-faqs/ : "How do incentives affect the Salary Cap? Incentives are written into some contracts to pay a player for reaching certain performance criteria. Incentives come in two varieties – Likely To Be Earned (LTBE) and Not Likely To Be Earned (NLTBE) – each of which has different Salary Cap implications. Likely To Be Earned Incentives (LTBE) are incentives based on performance levels that were reached in the prior season. LTBEs count against the Salary Cap in the year they are scheduled. For example, if a RB ran for 1,200 yards last year and he has an incentive that will pay him $100,000 if he runs for 1,000 yards this year, the incentive would be a LTBE Incentive and would count against the Salary Cap this year. On the other hand, if the RB ran for 1,000 yards last year and he has an incentive that will pay him $100,000 if he runs for 1,200 yards this year, then incentive would be Not Likely To Be Earned (NLTBE) and would not count against this year’s Salary Cap. If the player does not earn a LTBE Incentive, then the amount of the incentive ($100K in our example) will be credited against the following year’s Salary Cap and the team would have $100K in additional Cap space in the following year. The opposite happens with NLTBE Incentives. If those are earned, they are charged to the following year’s Salary Cap. In our example, that would mean that the team would have $100K less in Cap space the following year."