ZRod

That maybe true, but from an outsider's perspective I'd venture to say he's par for the course and hasn't done anything to damage the University as a whole. He seems to be leading it successfully into the future actually.

I don't know if Maryland is proof, they just had to have the money if they were joining the conference or they would exist. The one way I did see him bungling it it waiting till, I think 2017, to get full revenue. 5 years should have been enough, an extra year with full revenue would have been pretty nice for the AD.

Can you or someone else claiming this explain why you believe this to be true? Sure, Perlman's drawn ire from fans for some questionable hires inside the athletic department, but there's far more to his job than that. Under Perlman's watch, enrollment for the university has gone up and the boosters (from what I've heard) are pretty supportive of him. He typically only gets media attention for his interactions with the athletic department, but he's the chancellor. There's far more to his job than athletics. The AAU debacle is one knock that I can think of, it's debatable whether it's really that big of a deal though. I think they also dialed back they're enrollment goals for the next few years. Again not a huge deal. Harvey's no spring chicken, so there's that. Not academically related but he does serve as the chairman of the BCS oversight committee, and he was a part of the problem with the bowl systems more than he was the solution. I've personally never cared for him, he just comes off as too pompous. That being said other than typical student complaints of ridiculous tuition rates (which is actually comparatively low) and general dislike of authoritarian figures I can't really see a reason to fire him. He has done far more positive things for the University than Negatives, if anything his only negatives center around the athletic department. Like Enhance said enrollment is up under his watch. They are constructing Innovation Campus, which could be huge for UNL. The CB3 center in east stadium is complete and is the first venture of it's kind. Colleges such as the Physics and Business departments have or are being upgraded. New recreational facilities and student housing are being constructed. And all this while seeming to have the college's state funding cut annually.

Are you thinking of the IROC series (International Race of Champions)? They closed up shop about 6 years ago. *edit* Ebly beat me to it.

Frick!

I'm not sure bringing in the Ryan Brothers is going to upgrade the talent level at this Hooters. Yeesh. Do those two own anything other than sweats?

Or, you know, you weren't a nerd.

Tire pressure sensors have other issues that aren't necessarily going to overlap with this type of item, not to mention they're not all created equal anyways. I read another article that said a US company had this idea a few years back but went bankrupt, so yes it's going to cost an arm and a leg (all new technologies do). But at the same time there's always a fool out there that will pay for something. Maybe they would rather spend a couple seconds deploying this than getting out of the vehicle to put chains on. This thing is just a demo at this point, but I think it's a pretty interesting idea.

Then you have the quite real problem that the people above their section can not see as the students not only stand, but stand on the bleachers. Pretty sure that was one of the reasons they moved them up there to start with, people behind them were complaining.

Didn't for me either. Some of my friends found out it was though.

It doesn't actually have to be very complex, more complex than a non-studded tire but not all that complicated. Some kind of piezoelectric material to push the studs out and wiring is all it would take, you could tie it into the tire pressure sensors and you've got everything you need. Of course the actual engineering would be pretty complex, but the assembled system could be pretty basic.

It's absolutely not a myth. There are people that stand out front of the student union and tell everyone they are sinners and going to hell. And there are also the LGBT groups that try to raise awareness for their views. There are a good number of religious organizations and a fair number of the "equal rights" organizations. Knap gave you a perfect example of how tolerant college is. College is overflowing with different view points and beliefs. If you're not forcing your views on anyone you will be overwhelmingly accepted. In my time at UNL I hung out with pot smokers, boozers (or college kids if you will), other drug users, hardcore Catholics, moderate Catholics, Bereans, Lutherans, Jews, Muslims, Atheist, and general "non believers". And you know what, we all get along pretty well and know how to have a good time. That doesn't mean we didn't have the occasional philosophical/religious discussions that could get pretty heated, but in the end you just have to agree to disagree. That doesn't mean you can't still be friends though.

Most of them are engineers... I got Astronaut as well.

Wyoming as well, and not far from the truth except I'm probably to liberal to live there.

I want to ask specifically where you see a higher power involved, because I am genuinely curious. But I don't want to have you get ripped apart like it tends to happen in these threads.

Good thing I don't use it.

I have a professor who is over 70 and he plays with his smart phone during class.

Richie is going with the old scorched earth tactic. Nice!

The default young-earth view is that neanderthals weren't primitive pre-humans from pre-history, they were actually diseased or defective 'normal' humans that were exiled or cast out from civilization. I mean I guess that works, we share 99% of our DNA.

I think that's an easy conclusion to come to. Personally I have yet to hear a valid explanation of how there is something instead of nothing. I think Knap referenced Lawrence Krauss in another thread about something from nothing, but I don't really find his argument fulfilling. He's definition of nothing is, I think, dark matter and dark energy. Which to me is something not nothing. I think the more we learn about our world and universe the more "god" becomes a receding idea used to justify things we don't have an explanation for yet. To me it would be much more beautiful and elegant if this "creator" set all his rules (that we know as physics, biology, etc.) and then just said go (the big bang) and left everything else alone, and it's played out the way it has. Here's my question, where to neanderthals and the like fit in with the creationist view?

Can we all agree that no one knows how the tides work? Tide comes in Tide goes out. You can't explain that!

Are you saying she's fat?