Risto, Reinhart, Mitts for Laine, Niku, Roslovic - Pegullaville
Not terrible but I’d pass. I don’t like roslovic as much as others and Niku is a big? They list him as a rhd but he shoots left so if he is a natural LHD That would be a bonus
Not terrible but I’d pass. I don’t like roslovic as much as others and Niku is a big? They list him as a rhd but he shoots left so if he is a natural LHD That would be a bonus - turbo044
I do not. As a kid, sure - I used to believe in this crap. But now ? Nope. Wouldn't we have seen them by now ? Shouldn't there be a ton of proof by now ? And before you say it, yes, out of the entire galaxy, we are the only planet supporting life. Book it.
Also, I don't believe this either. There has to be some sort of explanation :
This is a very hot take, but I think running backs are created by the system, and they're largely interchangeable. McCaffrey's replacement is doing better than him.
With the exception of an absolute unit of a man like Henry, I'm starting to think running backs don't matter.
I dont think Bell would make the Bills running game that much better. Their o line is fine in protection but not set up for the run - jcragcrumple
Mike Anderson, Clinton Portis, Reuben Droughns, Olandis Gary, and Tatum Bell say hello. Having said that, you also have Terrell Davis who was a HOFer, and was clearly way better than those listed above even though they all had huge seasons under Shanahan. I think it can be both.
This makes more sense to me than another high priced (one dimensional) winger - jdfitz77
If we can get slightly above average goaltending we will make the playoffs and can go on a run in the playoffs. Especially if we get anything from Cozens, Tage and mitts. Defense is a big ? But is okay as presently constituted
Mike Anderson, Clinton Portis, Reuben Droughns, Olandis Gary, and Tatum Bell say hello. Having said that, you also have Terrell Davis who was a HOFer, and was clearly way better than those listed above even though they all had huge seasons under Shanahan. I think it can be both. - Wetbandit1
K. Shanahan, Sean McVay, Matt Lafleur, Zac Taylor, Gary Kubiak, Kevin Stefanski. All come from the same coaching tree as well.
Rams got elite production out of Gurley and are humming along with a Brown/Henderson/Akers trio right now.
Aaron Jones and Jamaal Williams are having huge years in GB.
Kubiak rode CJ Anderson in Denver and helped earn Dalvin Cook a lot of money in Minnesota.
Stefanski brought that offence to Cleveland and is running all over the NFL with Chubb (prior to injury) and Hunt.
Raheem Mostert, Matt Breida, Tevin Coleman,
Jerick Mickinnon and company have all taken turns running the 49ers to a Super Bowl last year.
Joe Mixon is taking off in Cincinnati right now.
Heck even the Titans use the same outside zone scheme and run Henry outside
I do not. As a kid, sure - I used to believe in this crap. But now ? Nope. Wouldn't we have seen them by now ? Shouldn't there be a ton of proof by now ? And before you say it, yes, out of the entire galaxy, we are the only planet supporting life. Book it.
Also, I don't believe this either. There has to be some sort of explanation :
- kritter65
We live in a galaxy. You mean universe. There is an estimated 100-200 billion galaxies in the universe. That means 100-200 billion permutations with a chance that has results like our galaxy. Each Galaxy could have a multitude of planets. Chances are there is planets with life, what kind of life? Who knows.
If we can get slightly above average goaltending we will make the playoffs and can go on a run in the playoffs. Especially if we get anything from Cozens, Tage and mitts. Defense is a big ? But is okay as presently constituted - turbo044
Location: Look, it's a situation where thats a great question, OH Joined: 07.01.2020
Oct 16 @ 1:08 AM ET
Aliens/UFO's ... do you believe ?
I do not. As a kid, sure - I used to believe in this crap. But now ? Nope. Wouldn't we have seen them by now ? Shouldn't there be a ton of proof by now ? And before you say it, yes, out of the entire galaxy, we are the only planet supporting life. Book it.
Also, I don't believe this either. There has to be some sort of explanation :
- kritter65
So, a UFO can be terrestrial. It doesn't have to be 'alien'.
Also, they just found several brine lakes under the surface of Mars that may be salty enough that they don't freeze, but too salty to host life, but might be in the middle and be able to support microbes.
They also just found evidence of life in the Venusian atmosphere.
Europa almost certainly has a sub-surface ocean that is massive and able to support life. Ceres, the largest asteroid in the asteroid belt, has a liquid presence under it's surface.
100% Earth isn't the only place in our Solar System, let alone our Galaxy, to harbor life. Microbial life, but still, life.
We are just as likely to be the first planet with "intelligent" life as we are to be the last planet with it.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson described the age of the Universe as such: At approximately 13 billion years old, think of the Universe as a 30-day calendar. We are at the first second of the first day of the calendar at 13 billion years since the Big Bang. We are at the very beginning.
From everything I've read and all the scientific opinions and Astronomers' theories and beliefs, I can say that we're more likely to be among the first intelligent, space-faring life in the Universe.
There's a chance that there was a mass evolution of and extinction of life in the early few billion years of the Universe, where conditions may have been suitable for rapid evolution but unsustainable to support that life. Had they become intelligent enough to know of the greater Universe, the conditions where they were located were unstable and incapable of sustained collection of knowledge, let alone allotting enough time for the ability to make vehicles capable of traveling into and through space.
What's more likely is that an aquatic species became the apex predator of a primordial soup environment and never even came close to self-awareness, let alone evolving to the point of being a boney fish or cetacean. At most, we would have had a microorganism that acted as a singular organism and that planet was destroyed by a larger cosmic body or rapid climate change, super-nova, volcanism, plate-tectonics or some other probable destruction event.
There is a very, very high chance we are the first, or among the first species in the entire Universe to have had favorable enough conditions to have evolved after several mass extinctions on our own planet. We're talking a 4.5 Billion year old planet and only about 500 million years of fossil evidence to support a sustained period of advanced life - and even then, the most dominant species we know of that flourished before us, the Dinosaurs, had a mass-extinction event that resulted in mammals becoming the dominant species on the planet.
From that event, only a few species of Great Ape evolved enough to result in modern humans as we know them, and only a few species more are capable of being self-aware. Humans, Orangutans, Elephants and that's about it. We're not even sure if Gorillas and Chimpanzees are self-aware.
4.5 Billion years it took, so about 10 Billion years after the Big Bang, were there conditions favorable enough on a planet to support the evolution of life for a period of time extended enough to produce ONE completely self-aware species that has managed to survive long enough to study the cosmos and invent vehicles capable of not only traveling through space, but also carrying members of it's species only a few hundred million miles away to a dead rock we call the Moon, which is slowly leaving our gravitational pull at about a CM per year.
We very well could be the first to have made it this far, for this long, under these conditions. We're more likely among the first to arise in a period of relative stability in the Universe. But we are on the outer edge of our own galaxy, who knows if conditions are more conducive to support life as you go toward the center, or so volatile that there's no chance for anything to get past primordial states of life.
I always come back to Pi. 3.14..... Is the percentage of the chances of life evolving to a similar point as we have, sometimes 2Pi, Tao, 6.28..... If those conditions are even more favorable. So there's a chance that a species has not only had it better than us, but evolved twice as fast and gotten twice as advanced in half the time.
We're pioneers exploring the frontier of the Universe. Absolutely there's been predecessors - Are they still alive and exploring? Colonizing? Raping and pillaging? Committing genocide? We've done that on our own planet, for Christ's sake.
We're almost certainly not alone but even more likely, we're among the few. If we can send a God damn Beatles song past Pluto, you can bet your ass another intelligent species has sent a d!ck-pic across their own galaxy.
So, a UFO can be terrestrial. It doesn't have to be 'alien'.
Also, they just found several brine lakes under the surface of Mars that may be salty enough that they don't freeze, but too salty to host life, but might be in the middle and be able to support microbes.
They also just found evidence of life in the Venusian atmosphere.
Europa almost certainly has a sub-surface ocean that is massive and able to support life. Ceres, the largest asteroid in the asteroid belt, has a liquid presence under it's surface.
100% Earth isn't the only place in our Solar System, let alone our Galaxy, to harbor life. Microbial life, but still, life.
We are just as likely to be the first planet with "intelligent" life as we are to be the last planet with it.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson described the age of the Universe as such: At approximately 13 billion years old, think of the Universe as a 30-day calendar. We are at the first second of the first day of the calendar at 13 billion years since the Big Bang. We are at the very beginning.
From everything I've read and all the scientific opinions and Astronomers' theories and beliefs, I can say that we're more likely to be among the first intelligent, space-faring life in the Universe.
There's a chance that there was a mass evolution of and extinction of life in the early few billion years of the Universe, where conditions may have been suitable for rapid evolution but unsustainable to support that life. Had they become intelligent enough to know of the greater Universe, the conditions where they were located were unstable and incapable of sustained collection of knowledge, let alone allotting enough time for the ability to make vehicles capable of traveling into and through space.
What's more likely is that an aquatic species became the apex predator of a primordial soup environment and never even came close to self-awareness, let alone evolving to the point of being a boney fish or cetacean. At most, we would have had a microorganism that acted as a singular organism and that planet was destroyed by a larger cosmic body or rapid climate change, super-nova, volcanism, plate-tectonics or some other probable destruction event.
There is a very, very high chance we are the first, or among the first species in the entire Universe to have had favorable enough conditions to have evolved after several mass extinctions on our own planet. We're talking a 4.5 Billion year old planet and only about 500 million years of fossil evidence to support a sustained period of advanced life - and even then, the most dominant species we know of that flourished before us, the Dinosaurs, had a mass-extinction event that resulted in mammals becoming the dominant species on the planet.
From that event, only a few species of Great Ape evolved enough to result in modern humans as we know them, and only a few species more are capable of being self-aware. Humans, Orangutans, Elephants and that's about it. We're not even sure if Gorillas and Chimpanzees are self-aware.
4.5 Billion years it took, so about 10 Billion years after the Big Bang, were there conditions favorable enough on a planet to support the evolution of life for a period of time extended enough to produce ONE completely self-aware species that has managed to survive long enough to study the cosmos and invent vehicles capable of not only traveling through space, but also carrying members of it's species only a few hundred million miles away to a dead rock we call the Moon, which is slowly leaving our gravitational pull at about a CM per year.
We very well could be the first to have made it this far, for this long, under these conditions. We're more likely among the first to arise in a period of relative stability in the Universe. But we are on the outer edge of our own galaxy, who knows if conditions are more conducive to support life as you go toward the center, or so volatile that there's no chance for anything to get past primordial states of life.
I always come back to Pi. 3.14..... Is the percentage of the chances of life evolving to a similar point as we have, sometimes 2Pi, Tao, 6.28..... If those conditions are even more favorable. So there's a chance that a species has not only had it better than us, but evolved twice as fast and gotten twice as advanced in half the time.
We're pioneers exploring the frontier of the Universe. Absolutely there's been predecessors - Are they still alive and exploring? Colonizing? Raping and pillaging? Committing genocide? We've done that on our own planet, for Christ's sake.
We're almost certainly not alone but even more likely, we're among the few. If we can send a God damn Beatles song past Pluto, you can bet your ass another intelligent species has sent a d!ck-pic across their own galaxy. - 3rd GM's the charm
Jesus, Beady, put the bong down for a few seconds. The moon is barely 235K miles from Earth, not "hundreds of millions", microbes ARE life, and as far as the "calendar" we're at the very end, not the very beginning.
So, a UFO can be terrestrial. It doesn't have to be 'alien'.
Also, they just found several brine lakes under the surface of Mars that may be salty enough that they don't freeze, but too salty to host life, but might be in the middle and be able to support microbes.
They also just found evidence of life in the Venusian atmosphere.
Europa almost certainly has a sub-surface ocean that is massive and able to support life. Ceres, the largest asteroid in the asteroid belt, has a liquid presence under it's surface.
100% Earth isn't the only place in our Solar System, let alone our Galaxy, to harbor life. Microbial life, but still, life.
We are just as likely to be the first planet with "intelligent" life as we are to be the last planet with it.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson described the age of the Universe as such: At approximately 13 billion years old, think of the Universe as a 30-day calendar. We are at the first second of the first day of the calendar at 13 billion years since the Big Bang. We are at the very beginning.
From everything I've read and all the scientific opinions and Astronomers' theories and beliefs, I can say that we're more likely to be among the first intelligent, space-faring life in the Universe.
There's a chance that there was a mass evolution of and extinction of life in the early few billion years of the Universe, where conditions may have been suitable for rapid evolution but unsustainable to support that life. Had they become intelligent enough to know of the greater Universe, the conditions where they were located were unstable and incapable of sustained collection of knowledge, let alone allotting enough time for the ability to make vehicles capable of traveling into and through space.
What's more likely is that an aquatic species became the apex predator of a primordial soup environment and never even came close to self-awareness, let alone evolving to the point of being a boney fish or cetacean. At most, we would have had a microorganism that acted as a singular organism and that planet was destroyed by a larger cosmic body or rapid climate change, super-nova, volcanism, plate-tectonics or some other probable destruction event.
There is a very, very high chance we are the first, or among the first species in the entire Universe to have had favorable enough conditions to have evolved after several mass extinctions on our own planet. We're talking a 4.5 Billion year old planet and only about 500 million years of fossil evidence to support a sustained period of advanced life - and even then, the most dominant species we know of that flourished before us, the Dinosaurs, had a mass-extinction event that resulted in mammals becoming the dominant species on the planet.
From that event, only a few species of Great Ape evolved enough to result in modern humans as we know them, and only a few species more are capable of being self-aware. Humans, Orangutans, Elephants and that's about it. We're not even sure if Gorillas and Chimpanzees are self-aware.
4.5 Billion years it took, so about 10 Billion years after the Big Bang, were there conditions favorable enough on a planet to support the evolution of life for a period of time extended enough to produce ONE completely self-aware species that has managed to survive long enough to study the cosmos and invent vehicles capable of not only traveling through space, but also carrying members of it's species only a few hundred million miles away to a dead rock we call the Moon, which is slowly leaving our gravitational pull at about a CM per year.
We very well could be the first to have made it this far, for this long, under these conditions. We're more likely among the first to arise in a period of relative stability in the Universe. But we are on the outer edge of our own galaxy, who knows if conditions are more conducive to support life as you go toward the center, or so volatile that there's no chance for anything to get past primordial states of life.
I always come back to Pi. 3.14..... Is the percentage of the chances of life evolving to a similar point as we have, sometimes 2Pi, Tao, 6.28..... If those conditions are even more favorable. So there's a chance that a species has not only had it better than us, but evolved twice as fast and gotten twice as advanced in half the time.
We're pioneers exploring the frontier of the Universe. Absolutely there's been predecessors - Are they still alive and exploring? Colonizing? Raping and pillaging? Committing genocide? We've done that on our own planet, for Christ's sake.
We're almost certainly not alone but even more likely, we're among the few. If we can send a God damn Beatles song past Pluto, you can bet your ass another intelligent species has sent a d!ck-pic across their own galaxy. - 3rd GM's the charm
