I know what Obama was trying to say and i know what you are saying as well.
That doesn't make you or Obama or your professor any less wrong when claiming that conversation is a source. It doesn't generate anything. It's like coupons, sure you save money by using them but without the initial money it doesn't matter how much you save.
I'm not saying conservation or coupons are bad. I was merely pointing out that Obama was using the word "source" very liberally or flat out incorrectly. I didn't mean to offend you or your professor.
I know the libertarian party in the US advocates a "none of the above" choice on all ballots so that when people really are disgusted with all of the choices they can distinguish their disdain of the candidates from the purely apathetic.
Too bad there's no such thing as a 3rd party in the US....
Maybe a story about scientists being cautious and thoughtful doesn't lead to dire consequences which just doesn't make a good book.
chapter 20: After verifying his results once again the scientist then circulates his findings amongst peers to scrutinize his work from a different perspective.....
Ok, I have to chime in here. Anyone who has read the bible obviously knows why Bush cannot and will never be the antichrist. It says that when the antichrist comes he will be popular
I'd say that wipes away any doubt I could ever have about Bush being the dark one.
I know most wont rtfa but my god the examples they use are hillariously bad. I was expecting whole sentences constructed out of *s+ 3 or 4 letters but no. It was talking about how celebrities had a flamewar or two online or one politician used a racial slur and surprise surprise, it got reported online.
the only decent example was the myspace girl who commited suicide, meagan.
im not sure i want to listen to a major news corp that cant even find decent examples of anon hate online. i mean jesus christ, just pick any slashdot and browse at -1!
the problem is that/. designates idle to be full of crap. all of the good articles get shoehorned into other categories. For example, the article about how Heinlein responded to fans with a preformed checklist was under entertainment. Something like that is much better suited to idle and it would make the section worth reading.
You have been watching too much star trek or futurama or something. the idea of stereotype planet and homogenous populations just isn't feasible. new colonies offer new opportunities and where there are opportunities there will be immigrants coming. maybe if some group wants to colonize a complete dump that serves no value then it might be possible to isolate themselves but then i doubt there would be sufficient drive to colonize it in the first place.
plus, you are mostly right, people don't change but ideologies are not people and they change quite a bit. I dont think god said on the 8th day let there be communism. ideologies come and go and change over time. People might not even know what communism or democracy is by the time we reach the point of multiple space colonies.
well, in TFA they won't even mention what the third is about until the second on is out so I suppose they are gonna go all out on the fourth and deny its existance completely
I swear that what I read the first time I saw the title and then it got me thinking wouldn't that be a cool idea? Instead of us geeks having to find our own lobbyist we could just use distributed funding to pay for the laws that we want. Kind of like community special interest pressure.
People have a hard time reading things apart from their biases. Look at all of the fanboyism that runs rampant. Look at any politically motivated debate.
People tend to intepret vague things the way they want. Here is a section from the bottom of the WTF article linked:
the Royal Society has put out a statement affirming that it is opposed to creationism being taught as science.
In a statement Reiss has also clarified his comments. "When young people ask questions about creationism in science classes, teachers need to be able to explain to them why evolution and the Big Bang are scientific theories but they should also take the time to explain how science works and why creationism has no scientific basis."
Well, no-one would argue with that. But it's a bit different from implying that creationism should be taught alongside science, as he did when he said that "in certain classes, it can be appropriate to deal with the issue".
That last sentence seems very far from advocating teaching it in a class but if you are looking at this with the preface of a priest talking about the topic i suppose it can seem different.
Slashdot Mirror
I know what Obama was trying to say and i know what you are saying as well.
That doesn't make you or Obama or your professor any less wrong when claiming that conversation is a source. It doesn't generate anything. It's like coupons, sure you save money by using them but without the initial money it doesn't matter how much you save.
I'm not saying conservation or coupons are bad. I was merely pointing out that Obama was using the word "source" very liberally or flat out incorrectly. I didn't mean to offend you or your professor.
Freedom, who among us is against that?
Terrorists, that's who!
Deploy the Cheapest, Cleanest, Fastest Energy Source - Energy Efficiency.
I gather rhetoric rather than science is his key policy.
I know the libertarian party in the US advocates a "none of the above" choice on all ballots so that when people really are disgusted with all of the choices they can distinguish their disdain of the candidates from the purely apathetic.
Too bad there's no such thing as a 3rd party in the US....
Maybe a story about scientists being cautious and thoughtful doesn't lead to dire consequences which just doesn't make a good book.
chapter 20: After verifying his results once again the scientist then circulates his findings amongst peers to scrutinize his work from a different perspective.....
Yeah, I'm gonna preorder that puppy!
Ok, I have to chime in here. Anyone who has read the bible obviously knows why Bush cannot and will never be the antichrist. It says that when the antichrist comes he will be popular
I'd say that wipes away any doubt I could ever have about Bush being the dark one.
He's probably just some pissant underling :)
Yeah but if you say you are independent then you cannot vote during any of the party primaries.
independent means you can only vote in non-partisan, etc
It's my understanding that you register your party afiliation to vote in the primaries
I know most wont rtfa but my god the examples they use are hillariously bad. I was expecting whole sentences constructed out of *s+ 3 or 4 letters but no. It was talking about how celebrities had a flamewar or two online or one politician used a racial slur and surprise surprise, it got reported online.
the only decent example was the myspace girl who commited suicide, meagan.
im not sure i want to listen to a major news corp that cant even find decent examples of anon hate online. i mean jesus christ, just pick any slashdot and browse at -1!
the problem is that /. designates idle to be full of crap. all of the good articles get shoehorned into other categories. For example, the article about how Heinlein responded to fans with a preformed checklist was under entertainment. Something like that is much better suited to idle and it would make the section worth reading.
See that requires climbing out of an ivory tower and actually creating media. strictly offlimits!
No, real geeks brag about watching failed pilots, just to make sure there's no chance of the show ever going mainstream
If you are relying on the TV for emergency broadcast information instead of a battery powered radio then you are doing it wrong, let's be real.
"over the counter" and "off the shelf" are the same thing. I don't want to be an ass but I figured I'd point that out.
Jamestown over and over and over again.
Jamestown was a permanent settlement that still exists to this day. Perhaps you wanted to refer to the lost colony on roanoke island?
You have been watching too much star trek or futurama or something. the idea of stereotype planet and homogenous populations just isn't feasible. new colonies offer new opportunities and where there are opportunities there will be immigrants coming. maybe if some group wants to colonize a complete dump that serves no value then it might be possible to isolate themselves but then i doubt there would be sufficient drive to colonize it in the first place.
plus, you are mostly right, people don't change but ideologies are not people and they change quite a bit. I dont think god said on the 8th day let there be communism. ideologies come and go and change over time. People might not even know what communism or democracy is by the time we reach the point of multiple space colonies.
It's got a malevolent, omnipotent zombie master that puts 1 vs all. Cuz honestly, there's just not enough zombie games..... ever
well, in TFA they won't even mention what the third is about until the second on is out so I suppose they are gonna go all out on the fourth and deny its existance completely
where's the -1 too informative mod?
I just wish I could beat you over the head with the SUMMARY that you didn't even bother to read before blasting off a comment.
Go back to youtube
I swear that what I read the first time I saw the title and then it got me thinking wouldn't that be a cool idea? Instead of us geeks having to find our own lobbyist we could just use distributed funding to pay for the laws that we want. Kind of like community special interest pressure.
The "makers of a documentary" here is "Ben Stein" and the "documentary" is "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed".
I was actually hoping that Yoko and EMI would win this one.
I totally agree. People who disagree with my views don't deserve the same rights as I do.
People have a hard time reading things apart from their biases. Look at all of the fanboyism that runs rampant. Look at any politically motivated debate.
People tend to intepret vague things the way they want. Here is a section from the bottom of the WTF article linked:
the Royal Society has put out a statement affirming that it is opposed to creationism being taught as science.
In a statement Reiss has also clarified his comments. "When young people ask questions about creationism in science classes, teachers need to be able to explain to them why evolution and the Big Bang are scientific theories but they should also take the time to explain how science works and why creationism has no scientific basis."
Well, no-one would argue with that. But it's a bit different from implying that creationism should be taught alongside science, as he did when he said that "in certain classes, it can be appropriate to deal with the issue".
That last sentence seems very far from advocating teaching it in a class but if you are looking at this with the preface of a priest talking about the topic i suppose it can seem different.
I've heard a lifetime supply of just bigmacs is only 9 days tops depending on how athletic you are.
"Your wrong and have no business being here."
I believe you meant to say "You're" instead of "Your". I hope you learned something from your mistake.