RISTAR!

jenkins · Post by **jenkins** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:34 am

Call it a hunch, but I'm pretty damn sure that Sonic Team could save their asses by releasing a sequel to Ristar. It would have a hell of a lot to live up to, but if they can do it, I would buy it.

Gwilym · Post by **Gwilym** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:05 pm

Post by **Crazy Penguin** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:09 pm

I kid you not!

plasticwingsband · Post by **plasticwingsband** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:10 pm

Jenkins!

Jenkins....

Isn't that a breakfast cereal or somethin'?

IF YOU GET THE REFERENCE I LOVE YOU WITH MOUTH

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:36 pm

The Armalite Rifle Model 15 or M16 designed by Eugene Stoner is a semi-automatic or select fire family of rifles chambered for the .223 Remington (5.56mm x 45 NATO) cartridge that uses gas impingment to cycle the action and load the next cartridge. This mechanism which is less popular and somewhat less reliable then the AR-18's short stroke gas piston or Heckler & Koch's delayed roller blowback system has created the euphenism "It shits where it eats." That said the system belongs to one of the most accurate, ergonomic, and customizeable family of rifles in the world. With updated magazines and internals the weapon is now reported to have near Kalishnikov reliability, though many still remember (the no longer relevant) problems involved in the original model M16s used in Vietnam and have an irrational dislike for the "varmint cartridge" the rifle is most often chambered for, so much criticism is still voiced.

Current United States military issue weapons are the M16A2, M16A3, M16A4 and the M4A1, all optimized for the M855/SS109 ball loading. A special upper reciever chambered for the 6.8mm Remington Special Purpose Cartridge is being developed for limited issue for special forces. Additionally another upper designed for the Coast Guard is chambered for the .499LWR cartridge for use in a limited anti-material role.

jenkins · Post by **jenkins** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:53 pm

No, I don't get the reference.

What's with chriscaffee's comment?

But seriously...

Ristar rocks

Gwilym · Post by **Gwilym** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 1:53 pm

The sense of time in John Berger's novel To the Wedding does not follow the conventional point A to point B structure in most books - it fluctuates wildly throughout the novel, and the reader is placed through many events that happened in different instances of time, sometimes to a scene that has no bearing or relation to the previous. Throughout the entire book we are submitted into the characters' memories, happy or traumatic, and sometimes simple, and returned to some point in the near future or past. Within this structure, we are also given insight into the past on a broader scale, through museums and the characters' experiences, and also into the future, drawn up by inevitability. From the way Berger has organised To the Wedding, can the reader draw meaning from the themes of past, present, and future, interconnect them, and gain better insight into Berger's intended message?

Post by **Delphine** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 3:45 pm

LEEEEEEERRRRROOOOOOOOY

Light Speed · Post by **Light Speed** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 3:50 pm

Argh! I am so fucking sick of that Leeroy crap. Pretty much every single raid I ever went on in WoW after that video came out had someone yelling LEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRRRROOOOOOOYYY as a joke.

Post by **Delphine** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 3:57 pm

I couldn't help it, s/h/it named itself jenkins. ]:

Double-S- · Post by **Double-S-** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 3:58 pm

LEROY TREBEK

jenkins · Post by **jenkins** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 4:06 pm

Leroy Trebek...

that's scary, because my real name is Alex...

As for s/h/it, let's leave it at it.

My name is nicely ambiguous, as is my avatar ;)

Owen Axel · Post by **Owen Axel** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 4:40 pm

Is s/h/it pronounced as written? Assuming the slashes are mute, of course.

jenkins · Post by **jenkins** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 4:42 pm

So I had assumed...

Not that I take it badly either way.

Kishi · Post by **Kishi** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 5:33 pm

The superfluid transition is displayed by quantum liquids below a characteristic transition temperature. The phase change to the superfluid state is referred to as the lambda transition, because of the shape of the specific heat curve vs. temperature resembles the greek letter lambda(Λ). Helium-4, the most abundant isotope of helium, becomes superfluid at temperatures below 2.17 K (−270.98 Ã‚Â°C). The less abundant isotope helium-3 becomes superfluid at a much lower temperature of 2.6 mK, only a few thousandths of a kelvin above absolute zero.

Although the phenomenology of superfluidity in these two systems is very similar, the nature of the two superfluid transitions is very different. Helium-4 atoms are bosons, and their superfluidity can be understood in terms of the Bose statistics that they obey. Specifically, the superfluidity of helium-4 can be regarded as a consequence of Bose-Einstein condensation in an interacting system. On the other hand, helium-3 atoms are fermions, and the superfluid transition in this system is described by a generalization of the BCS theory of superconductivity. In it, Cooper pairing takes place between atoms rather than electrons, and the attractive interaction between them is mediated by spin fluctuations rather than phonons. See fermion condensate. A unified description of superconductivity and superfluidity is possible in terms of gauge symmetry breaking.

plasticwingsband · Post by **plasticwingsband** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 6:37 pm

plasticwingsband wrote:Jenkins!

Jenkins....

Isn't that a breakfast cereal or somethin'?

IF YOU GET THE REFERENCE I LOVE YOU WITH MOUTH

it was johnny bravo but replace jenkins with jinkies on the scooby-doo episodes you philistines

jenkins · Post by **jenkins** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 6:53 pm

Okay, Okay, I'll find some longwinded bullshit too. Just wait a while. I have a lot to try and trump.

Post by **Crazy Penguin** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:53 pm

plasticwingsband wrote:
plasticwingsband wrote:Jenkins!

Jenkins....

Isn't that a breakfast cereal or somethin'?

IF YOU GET THE REFERENCE I LOVE YOU WITH MOUTH
it was johnny bravo but replace jenkins with jinkies on the scooby-doo episodes you philistines

I got the reference, I just didn't want your mouth love.

plasticwingsband · Post by **plasticwingsband** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 8:07 pm

jenkins · Post by **jenkins** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 8:08 pm

woe is plasticwingsband

Frieza2000 · Post by **Frieza2000** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 8:21 pm

Crazy Penguin wrote:I got the reference, I just didn't want your mouth love.

plasticwingsband · Post by **plasticwingsband** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 8:25 pm

jenkins · Post by **jenkins** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 8:25 pm

Careful, Freeza. You've died once...

chriscaffee · Post by **chriscaffee** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 9:24 pm

Kishi loses for using copy-and-paste from Wiki. Shame on you.

Kishi · Post by **Kishi** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 9:50 pm

How do you know I'm not the author of that Wiki article?