sarchasm

Members
  • Content count

    3,326
  • Runs

    35,000 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  • Time Online

    40d 20h 10s
  1. Have I mistakenly created this thread in the wrong forum? Not quite. This is America's prime time hour (don't get too technical over it). India's meant to be fast asleep at this hour. But what's this? WWC17 is trending world wide on Twitter along with the news of parole granted to the notorious showman from USA. *THIS* is what India brings to the international cricketing calendar. India ALONE provides relevance, eyeballs, context, meaning, and, most importantly, $$$ to global cricketing ORPHANS. Without India, this world cup would have slipped quietly into two-lined and platitude-ridden section of sports pages. For all the money pumped in by ICC (again, on the back of money generated from Indian cricket), nobody would blame the average consumer of cricket if s/he wondered if this tournament took place at all. India single handedly upends all these assumptions and equations. Now think about how the true potential of Indian cricket is held hostage by impotent interlocutors of global cricketing order.
  2. When I said largest state, in the context of this thread, of course I meant in terms of population.
  3. Is this the stupidest op ever?
  4. UP is the largest state in India comprising of mostly fertile plains but it doesn't have a larger population than Pakistan. UP has 204 millions vs 250 millions in Pakistan. UP also has the largest muslim population, contributing to a relatively higher growth rate. What I found truly shocking was that UP has an education budget (combined state plus center) of 12 billion USD compared to the WHOLE of Pakistan that together spends 7.5 billion USD on education.
  5. That's a good point. From what I understand Pakistan still calculates it's GDP with 2006 as base year. In other words, with a population estimate of around 150 millions. If and when they update it, the per capita figure would come crashing down. Probably by 40%.
  6. Why I felt it might not be a typo is that it also provides a figure for Karachi that would be commensurate with the 300 million figure. I did see the other news reports stating the 220 million figure which is DEFINITELY understated if you look your population growth rate since 1980. Probably closer to 250 millions.
  7. I have to say that beyond the routine incidence of terror and occasional cricket, there's not much news that generates headlines in India. I'd say that an average Indian wouldn't be able to name any city beyond Lahore, karachi and Islamabad. Which is why I was struck by the following piece of news while scrolling my news feed. http://dailytimes.com.pk/sindh/11-Jul-17/pakistan-unable-to-control-population-growth-despite-huge-spending WHAT? All these years on cricket forum I have read 'A nation of 180 millions'. Where is this 300 million coming from? Like an honest-to-bone sleuth, I dug deeper and discovered that our neighbors just had their first census completed after 2 decades. The estimate from the census given in Pakistani papers hints at a population of 220 millions. So is that figure of 300 million above a typo or (equally plausibly) has the real figure been accidentally revealed and would be hushed up later? I looked at the historical population growth rate and total fertility rate of Pakistan since 1980s and compared it to India. My *extremely* crude back of the hand calculation suggests their current population to be no less than 230-240 millions. Would like the input from persecuted Pakistani posters here @KeyboardWarrior @Shaz1 @Asim
  8. Only hope is that Australia send a pacy attack when they tour for the ODI series in November(?). Then there's the series against Saffers in SA. Pray hard that these two series show up the two has-beens for what they are - liabilities. Realistically. these two seasoned players know exactly which injury to fake to avoid these two series.
  9. Have to say, I have not come across many, online or otherwise, who can be as brazenly shameless in the face of such breathtaking ignorance. I mean your head is so far up the sphincter you dont even see how you make arguments on the fly. At this point, I am not even responding to you, only typing it for the others who may read this. According to this guy, loss of oxygen means loss of lift. He then tried to spin it saying he meant thrust, that it is thrust that CAUSES lift. Notice the importance of the word - CAUSE. Then I asked him, why is that our cars do not take off given that they have engines and hence thrust? Finding himself in a knot, he says because of aerodynamic shape, which is exactly I have been trying to school him since the very beginning. That is, lift is a function of the aerodynamic shape and the pressure differential generated by aerofoil. Now this fool cites Bernoulli's equation without the foggiest idea. Bernoulli's equation establishes the factors affecting the lift of an aircraft, and NOT that thrust causes lift. Still makes me chuckle. Here is an exercise in logical deduction for everyone. Premise one: Both cars and aircrafts have engines with thrust. Premise two: Only the aircraft has wings creating pressure differential. Deduction: It's the wings and NOT the thrust that causes lift.
  10. But but but, do you want me to quote your posts from that thread - in verbatim - where you said 1) Oxygen causes lift 2) and then tried to limit damage by saying, thrust causes lift My car gets oxygen and has ample thrust, it should be flying! Aerodynamic surface That's what I have been trying to school you, you illiterate argumentative tool - that it's the wings and lift induced by them that causes plane to fly. Thrust has sweetfvuckall to do with lift.
  11. Are you still embarrassing yourself over this? If thrust causes planes to fly, tell me why my car doesn't take off?
  12. Sad. Most Indians are obsessed with IT not because of any love for programming or math but monetary reasons. IT field is also attractive because it's got a white collar appeal to it, no matter how grunt level the job itself is.