Slashdot Mirror
On the Future of Science
bj8rn writes "Kevin Kelly, the founding executive editor of Wired magazine, speculates about the future of science based on a talk he have gave a few weeks ago. Kelly sees recursion as the essence of science and chronicles the introduction of different recursive devices in science; projecting forward from this, he makes several interesting predictions about what the near future may hold in store. Some highlights: there will be more change in the next 50 years of science than in the last 400 years; the new century will be the century of Biology; new ways of knowing will emerge, with 'Wikiscience' leading to perpetually refined papers with thousands of authors."
Wow, I don't know you, but your post seems..., well, underinformed. First of all, you are ARE a monkey, all humans are. We are animals like all the rest on this rock. God is a story created by fearful and ignorant men. Belief in a sentient creator flys in the face of all rational observation. I would welcome the opportunity to talk to a God if it existed, but all evidence says it does not.
Second, we will have human-competitive reasoning engines based on silicon within 15 years. No doubt in my mind. There is no technical barrier to this now, it's simply a coding and organization task that can be accomplished by the coordinated efforts of large groups of people and a small dedicated groups of programmers.
The Internet will not be the brain, it will provide the external information source and training sets.
That is not true. People were created by God, in His image. We did not decend from monkeys.
For evolution to happen, it would be like taking a watch and hitting it with a hammer until it was broken into a thousand peices, and then putting those peices in a bag and shaking the bag so the watch is magically put back together.
God is a story created by fearful and ignorant men.
God walked the earth, he was here. His name was Jesus. People saw him, he healed the sick, he walked on water, and he rose from the dead. There were witnesses to His actions.
Belief in a sentient creator flys in the face of all rational observation
No, everything a rational observer looks at gives proof that God does exist. He made everything, and when we look at a beautiful flower or the stars in the sky, we see our Creators work.
Without God, we would not exists. We're here because of his love.
have you read the news lately?
I wrote those who are true to Gods love are at peace and happy. The reason there is suffering is because we have turned our back on God's instructions. Look at how our society has changed the past 20 years. We let gays think they are okay, when in fact they are sick. We let women kill their babies, and call it abortion. We don't take care of the poor in society. And we expect a reward for being enlightened with science?? Science is not all knowing, it can not tell us what is right and wrong.To be happy, we need to do Gods will. If we follow his direction, and love, we will be happy and at peace.
These guys seem to have a pretty weird idea of what Wikipedia is. It's chock full of errors and trash, badly written and formulated articles, and sometimes it's hard to tell if someone is lying or not. I work on Wikipedia, but there's no way that this form of document creation is ever going to be as reliable, credible and well-sourced as single/couple authored documents, and I don't think it was even meant to be.
Slashdot: Playing Favorites Since 1997
For one thing, we can see clear signs of human adaptation. People in warm, sunny climates have darker skin than those living in colder climates. Humans living at high altitudes have expnaded lung capacity. People living in extremely cold climates have smaller bodies with shorter limbs than those living in warm climates. We see small changes on those levels all the time.
Creationists do not dispute the existence of microevolution. In the mainstream reconciliation of biblical history with modern science, God created genes to allow creatures to survive in all sorts of environments. Sin caused thermodynamics, which in turn caused mutations that disabled specific genes. Natural selection then caused individuals that lost those genes to thrive in niches where loss of those genes would be an advantage. For instance, Adam and Eve had several competing genes for stimulating and inhibiting production of melanin. Descendants in Africa lost melanin-inhibiting genes, while descendants in more polar climates lost melanin-stimulating genes. They dispute the validity of radioisotope dating and that E. coli and H. sapiens had a common ancestor.
I've yet to see a flower or a star with the words "God wuz here" writen on it.
That's because you skipped all the mushrooms. Haven't you played Super Mario? :-)
There is no evidence of God.
Other than that the prophecies of the Bible are falsifiable but have in fact held up? For instance, rchaeologists once believed Jericho and Nineveh were myths until they unearthed the cities' ruins. Psalm 22 contains a graphic depiction of a crucifixion, a method of execution that would not be practiced until centuries later when the Romans invented it.
What's more realistic?
Some magical creature created the universe out of nothing and wants us to follow its intructions, but refuses to give any evidence of its existance.
Or
You're a delusional brainwashed individual.
I'll give you some help. The next list consists of made up characters. They do not exist, but people love to make their children believe in them.
* Santaclaus
* Fairies
* The Boogyman
* God
* The monster under the bed
* The toothfairy
* Dwarfs
* Witches
* Vampires (excluding the bat species with the same name)
* Ghosts
* The members of the QA team of any TV channel
I know it's tough, but part of growing up involves growing out of these juvenile fantasies. Don't worry, you'll get over it.