> (if it's -less- than 5 bucks a bottle it's not something I'm going to spend the time enjoying
Go to a strip club (I mean full nudity, not those pansy topless bars -- also, not a juice bar, a club where you can buy alcohol) and you'll easily spend 5 bucks for a Budweiser. Does that mean you can now enjoy a Bud? I hope no one does.
Price has little to do with the quality of beer, IMO. I have tried quite a few different kinds (unfortunately only 2-3 "real" German beers) and the price & taste are not directly proportionate, although the best, admittedly, are generally more expensive.
Well, comedy is in the eye.. er, ear(?) of the beholder, but I didn't find it funny. Assuming you are correct, though, close-to-truth posing as comedy is therefore more important that pointing out the truth and trying to get people to understand? So THAT'S why I hate everyone.
> his ability to imagine, mentally conceive and create is the genesis of all that makes humans unique.
There are elephants in Asia that are trained to paint, and some of them have painted things that resemble the subject, so we aren't necessarily all that unique. Just much more advanced with our imagination.
> But classification by genus and higher levels is fairly arbitrary, based mostly on what people see as significant differences and similarities (e.g. people are different from apes, cats all kind of look alike)
May not be too insightful, but maybe cats look at humans and mew "Hey, there's one of those giant, hairless chimps!"
This isn't like choosing whether or not to believe in God. That requires faith, because "God" is unprovable. OTOH, we have here real evidence of a connection and you won't believe? How about instead of not believing, you have strong suspicions against it. At least then you still have some credibility, instead of "I don't believe and you can't make me, so nyah!" (Yeah, that's a bit over-the-top, but you get my idea).
> Note that the researchers ignored DNA that is not expressive.
AFAICR, Most of that DNA is identical among all mammals, some of it among other kingdoms, so it shouldn't affect too much to bring that into the question.
> The repulicans will like this... Another 50 million that pay taxes
Flamebait, Democrats are more likely to raise/create new taxes. Well, at least according to the ideologies of the parties. In reality, they all raise taxes too much and/or don't lower them enough.
> But I don't see anyone pushing to call a wolf a dog, do you?
They're not? I thought wolves were a subset of Canines (Canis?). If they are not, then they should be, and someone should push for it.
If you are 100% against this, then you would appear to be making an anti-scientific statement. If you don't want things classified according to their traits, then just ignore it/them.
> it is like poor spelling or bad grammer the marks of genius...
If only... I almost failed English countless times in primary school, despite the fact that I spoke better English than probably 95% of the students. Doesn't mean I'm a genius... or does it...?
I hate mods. Flamebait because they are pissed off that you took the time to find links to back up what you said. We can't have truthfulness here, when we are trying to hold famous dead people up to godly standards. People seem to forget that he was just a man. Same as Ghandi, except Ghandi was a lot more merciless and deserves more insults.
> How else can you truly explain the complexity and perfection of a young world
The world is far from perfect. There are tons of design flaws with it which have been listed many times over.
> and it is young... how else can you explain the salt content of the ocean?
This is a rather uninformed statement.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-y ea 2.html#proof24
It seems that most "young-earth creationists" really have no idea what they are talking about. Not to call them stupid, by any means; they usually understand well what they are told to believe, but they ignore so much additional data that it makes the argument useless.
Also, the point seems to be to discredit science, which is imperfect. Why, then, would you try to use science to prove your point and not look at all of it? The people you are trying to discredit will almost always know more about the subject. Seems like a mission into folly, but that's what I consider most theist religions.
Something else just occurred to me. What about that Giant Flood we supposedly had about, oh... 10,000 years ago? If you believe that the whole earth was flooded, the salt would be distributed pretty evenly across the earth, and therefore the salt content of the ocean would drop drastically. All that salt would now be deep under lots of rock instead of filling the ocean. Maybe the ocean was 100x saltier at one point.
Just because you disable a part of your HTML browser doesn't mean a site is broken, it just means you aren't using all of the features. I don't use them either. I'm not going to say Slashdot is broken because I decide to turn off image downloading.
Because you don't like something does not make it "broken."
> That reminds me, if c is a constant why isn't this just written as e=m?
Because Einstein believed in God and that he, the ultimate programmer, might need to tweak some variables in the future. That way the math still works after Armageddon.
If something is created it needs a creator. So if consciousness was created, that means there was none before the first conscious being. How did the non-conscious creator of that being create something he did not possess nor have any knowledge of (because it didn't exist)? Your answer? "Have faith, you'll find out after you die!" Please...
(Warning: I'm not the original poster) You have the free will to choose to look at the monitor. Although, I don't know how anything, short of a plant, can _not_ choose whether or not to look at it. You either look or you don't.
> You are not conscious. You only think you are [...]
You are not correct, you only think you are. One problem with your statement is that it's unprovable, and really it doesn't mean anything. But I guess that's the point.
Slashdot Mirror
> (if it's -less- than 5 bucks a bottle it's not something I'm going to spend the time enjoying
Go to a strip club (I mean full nudity, not those pansy topless bars -- also, not a juice bar, a club where you can buy alcohol) and you'll easily spend 5 bucks for a Budweiser. Does that mean you can now enjoy a Bud? I hope no one does.
Price has little to do with the quality of beer, IMO. I have tried quite a few different kinds (unfortunately only 2-3 "real" German beers) and the price & taste are not directly proportionate, although the best, admittedly, are generally more expensive.
> Where do I find a laptop gade by the Good Lord?
They are all over the place, except they the keyboard & spiritual interface are only viewable from the 4th dimension.
> But where are you going to find real wallpaper with a pic of pamela anderson with a mouthful of cum??
That's easy, everyone has that. The real question is, how are you gonna get your friends to leave at night.
> just overlay a transparent LCD over a "blank" license plate
Now, THAT'S what I'm talking about. That's the first truly useful suggestion for this tech, thanks for the idea *evilgrin*.
Well, comedy is in the eye.. er, ear(?) of the beholder, but I didn't find it funny. Assuming you are correct, though, close-to-truth posing as comedy is therefore more important that pointing out the truth and trying to get people to understand? So THAT'S why I hate everyone.
> his ability to imagine, mentally conceive and create is the genesis of all that makes humans unique.
There are elephants in Asia that are trained to paint, and some of them have painted things that resemble the subject, so we aren't necessarily all that unique. Just much more advanced with our imagination.
> I make 50k/year. I'm not rich
Shit, compared to me and almost every other person that lives in this town, you are. But still, I agree on the point.
> Sorry, just had to point out that you misspelled democrats
Yes, of course. I say the same thing with an explanation why and get modded offtopic. *SIGH* I think I really am hated by the world.
> But classification by genus and higher levels is fairly arbitrary, based mostly on what people see as significant differences and similarities (e.g. people are different from apes, cats all kind of look alike)
May not be too insightful, but maybe cats look at humans and mew "Hey, there's one of those giant, hairless chimps!"
> web page should fail gracefully. I should still be able to navigate it
> any site that uses a pop-up cannot be said to have good design
According to your arguments, though, if there was another way to get all of that info without using popups, then it would suddenly not be bad design.
There's a difference between bad design and broken standards.
>White to Blue and Brown to Black, OR White to Black, and Brown to Blue??
White-Black, Brown-Blue. Everyone should know that... Just make sure you unplugged it first.
> but I'm not believing
This isn't like choosing whether or not to believe in God. That requires faith, because "God" is unprovable. OTOH, we have here real evidence of a connection and you won't believe? How about instead of not believing, you have strong suspicions against it. At least then you still have some credibility, instead of "I don't believe and you can't make me, so nyah!" (Yeah, that's a bit over-the-top, but you get my idea).
> Note that the researchers ignored DNA that is not expressive.
AFAICR, Most of that DNA is identical among all mammals, some of it among other kingdoms, so it shouldn't affect too much to bring that into the question.
> to see if they can make babies?
Excellent...
"No, your honor, I was screwing the Chimp as a scientific experiment."
> The repulicans will like this... Another 50 million that pay taxes
Flamebait, Democrats are more likely to raise/create new taxes. Well, at least according to the ideologies of the parties. In reality, they all raise taxes too much and/or don't lower them enough.
> But I don't see anyone pushing to call a wolf a dog, do you?
They're not? I thought wolves were a subset of Canines (Canis?). If they are not, then they should be, and someone should push for it.
If you are 100% against this, then you would appear to be making an anti-scientific statement. If you don't want things classified according to their traits, then just ignore it/them.
> it is like poor spelling or bad grammer the marks of genius...
If only... I almost failed English countless times in primary school, despite the fact that I spoke better English than probably 95% of the students. Doesn't mean I'm a genius... or does it...?
> The Best way to get into someone's head is with a powerdrill.
;P
Pssh, try thinking. It may be the EASIEST way, but the best way is definitely via a rusty spork.
I hate mods. Flamebait because they are pissed off that you took the time to find links to back up what you said. We can't have truthfulness here, when we are trying to hold famous dead people up to godly standards. People seem to forget that he was just a man. Same as Ghandi, except Ghandi was a lot more merciless and deserves more insults.
> How else can you truly explain the complexity and perfection of a young world
y ea 2.html#proof24
The world is far from perfect. There are tons of design flaws with it which have been listed many times over.
> and it is young... how else can you explain the salt content of the ocean?
This is a rather uninformed statement.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-
It seems that most "young-earth creationists" really have no idea what they are talking about. Not to call them stupid, by any means; they usually understand well what they are told to believe, but they ignore so much additional data that it makes the argument useless.
Also, the point seems to be to discredit science, which is imperfect. Why, then, would you try to use science to prove your point and not look at all of it? The people you are trying to discredit will almost always know more about the subject. Seems like a mission into folly, but that's what I consider most theist religions.
Something else just occurred to me. What about that Giant Flood we supposedly had about, oh... 10,000 years ago? If you believe that the whole earth was flooded, the salt would be distributed pretty evenly across the earth, and therefore the salt content of the ocean would drop drastically. All that salt would now be deep under lots of rock instead of filling the ocean. Maybe the ocean was 100x saltier at one point.
> When you can post your thoughts without considering how it will affect your karma score you will become a benefit
Hey, I don't give a crap about Karma, but I'm not a benefit to the community! IN YOUR FACE!!! haha! Wait, err.. hmmm.
> FilePlanet is completely broken too.
Just because you disable a part of your HTML browser doesn't mean a site is broken, it just means you aren't using all of the features. I don't use them either. I'm not going to say Slashdot is broken because I decide to turn off image downloading.
Because you don't like something does not make it "broken."
> That reminds me, if c is a constant why isn't this just written as e=m?
Because Einstein believed in God and that he, the ultimate programmer, might need to tweak some variables in the future. That way the math still works after Armageddon.
> [Consciousness] was created.
If something is created it needs a creator. So if consciousness was created, that means there was none before the first conscious being. How did the non-conscious creator of that being create something he did not possess nor have any knowledge of (because it didn't exist)? Your answer? "Have faith, you'll find out after you die!" Please...
> I don't see where freedom comes in.
(Warning: I'm not the original poster)
You have the free will to choose to look at the monitor. Although, I don't know how anything, short of a plant, can _not_ choose whether or not to look at it. You either look or you don't.
> You are not conscious. You only think you are [...]
You are not correct, you only think you are. One problem with your statement is that it's unprovable, and really it doesn't mean anything. But I guess that's the point.