Search results

  1. S

    Montreal or Quebec City?....

    Montreal. There are tons of festivals in Montreal at summer time. It also has its share of old buildings, if that's what you really like. Check out the following website: http://www.vieux.montreal.qc.ca/eng/accueila.htm
  2. S

    Lady botches US anthem at a hockey game

    O Canada! O Canada! Terre de nos aïeux, Ton front est ceint de fleurons glorieux! Car ton bras sait porter l'épée, Il sait porter la croix! Ton histoire est une épopée Des plus brillants exploits. Et ta valeur, de foi trempée, Protégera nos foyers et nos droits. Protégera nos...
  3. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    That place... is strong with the dark side of the Force. A domain of evil it is. In you must go.
  4. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you? Hmm? Hmm. And well you should not. For my ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the Force around...
  5. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    How do you do it, Brian? Everytime you explain something, you leave me speechless. Believe me, that's not easy to do.
  6. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    Actually, I never saw him play either. I started watching hockey at the beginning of the 80s. So, I missed all those classic players. 99 Reasons Why Wayne Gretzky is "The Great One" ;)
  7. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    I think Roy was better in Montreal. He won 2 Cups in Montreal with average teams at best. He was pretty much the only reason why we won those Cups. He won 11 consecutive overtime playoff games. That, also, won't be beaten for a very long time. With Colorado, he was quite good too. But, he had...
  8. S

    Happy 50th to RobertR

    Happy Birthday, my favorite arrogant "friend". :D
  9. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    Thanks for the lesson, Jeff, but it still doesn't change anything about my main point. Jeff, Jeff, Jeff. What am I gonna do with you? I love you man! Are you happy now? :D
  10. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    You still don't get it. You're doing it on purpose or what? What I said is that I don't want a firm conclusion about something we don't have all the information from. That's just asking for another "ether" fiasco. The universe out of the world of science? How ridiculous.
  11. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    Pretty much all the english commentators I've heard were wrongly pronouncing his name. The correct pronunciation is "Roo-Ah".
  12. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    This is where you don't get it. I don't have any conclusion about the universe. I just have a belief. How can it be a firm conclusion when I have nothing that supports it? I simply have that belief because, to me, it makes more sense than our current understanding. I might be wrong, I might be...
  13. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    Agreed. An eighteenth-century German philosopher (Immanuel Kant) argued that our minds impose a certain amount of structure on the raw data that we take in with our senses. As a result, we inevitably draw conclusions about nature that in fact stem only from the way our minds organize...
  14. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    #33 for me. He won two Cups for us (Habs) just by himself.
  15. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    Okay, but the real problem with you is that you're a Bruins' fan. Now, that's unacceptable! :D
  16. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    Damn, what's happening today? I'm having trouble keeping up with the pace. You were not kidding. Interesting read.
  17. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    "The universe has all sorts of secrets still to reveal to us, but this shows that we are beginning to understand how to look at it in the right way," said astronomer Jon Davies of Cardiff University. "It's a really exciting discovery." Look at that, the universe still has a lot of secrets to...
  18. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    What's happening to you today, Kevin? You're on a posting spree. :D
  19. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    I like that quote. Here's a quote that pretty much sums up what I think: "It's quite conceivable that the universe doesn't run along lines which are in tune with human intuition. The universe... might be chaotic, completely irrational on the whole, but, here and there, there might be...
  20. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    If physical laws are the same everywhere in the universe, then I agree with your statement.
  21. S

    Our tax dollars now tell us that Star Trek's "transporters" are not possible.

    Are you saying that we've pretty much seen everything the universe as to offer? I hardly think so. I think we'll see things that we never thought possible when we'll be able to explore the universe. If we don't exterminate ourselves before that time comes, of course.
Top