The giraffe's neck is obviously a benefit to its species, but none of the steps needed to "evolve" that neck would be beneficial. The veins in their neck need to be able to restrict blood flow when the giraffe bends down to take a drink while at the same time, the heart needs to be strong enough to pump blood all the way to the brain. Without either of these features, a giraffe with its long neck would never survive, yet none of these features are beneficial without the long neck. The giraffe's neck is not just a neck, but an entire system of organs and features that are all worthless or even fatal without all of the required components being in place.
This is just a way your way of saying that, "I can't think of how this could have happened via the theory, therefore the theory is wrong." In this particular case it's easy to show it can occur.
Start with a creature with a short neck that eats leaves. One gets a slightly longer neck, allowing it to eat from branches that are slightly higher on the tree/bush. This may or may not be beneficial, but nor is it a detriment. Repeat over many, many generations, while similarly selecting in the other traits as necessary since, by necessity, the creature still needs to drink water.
This is entirely true -- they do call it a half-life for a reason, so there would be some question about if there's enough material for the bombs to actually detonate.
That aside, I can still at least accept that a nuke has a partial chance of working, since the half-life of U-235 is still well over 1 million years (or plutonium about 24,000 years).
A harrier still being able to fly after sitting around without maintenance, not so much. I imagine at least some parts of it would be prone to corrosion.
The novel's OK -- far from the best sci-fi, but it's certainly not as bad as the movie. Gets kinda stupid after Psychlo blows up, IMO, but before then it's really a basic sci-fi action novel.
And at least it makes some sense within the guidelines set out, unlike the movie. For instance, these three plot points in particular irked me about the movie:
1) The Psychlos are gold hungry -- do you REALLY think they'd have not found as large a deposit as the bars Fort Knox (or any other large bank, for that matter)? Fort Knox (or some other large bank, I can't recall exactly) is in the book, but it was cleaned out. The humans happened to find a few gold bars gold in an abandoned Brinks van, but that's it.
2) The events takes place 1000 years after the Psychlos invaded. How likely is it that Harrier jets would still be fueled and in working order after all that time? The humans use a few of the Phychlo's own transport pads against them in the book.
3) They also KNOW their planet would be susceptible to nuclear attack, due to the composition of the atmosphere. The movie would have you believe they're so dumb that they had no protection against accidentally/intentionally transported nuclear weapons and that a single nuke would work to blow up the planet. In the book, due to the shielding in place, it actually took 7, with the shielding around the transport area actually forcing the combined explosions down into the mined out core of the planet. Granted, by the same logic as #2, it's hard to believe a nuke would work after 1000 years, but at least a nuke isn't as mechanically complicated (to my knowledge) as a harrier.
I'm not trying to defend the book -- if you haven't read it, you're not missing much -- but it actually did have the basis for a half-decent, if quite typical, sci-fi movie, instead of the atrocity that came about.
Unlike similar levels on blank media, at least an MP3 player is designed with a PRIMARY purpose of playing music, as opposed to the levy we currently pay on blank DVDs and the like.
With that said, I'm sure this won't make people who legally pay for music via iTunes and the like happy.
So you're OK with taxing (if I read the article correctly) EVERYTHING that goes through an ISP regardless of the fact that the vast majority of it has nothing to do with what they're trying to protect?
I can count on one hand the number of times I've had a problem with Firefox that would have been solved by it being in its own process.
Possibly you can, but the biggest one I can count is having a flash plug-in (or similar) crash the entire browser when there's only a problem on one tab. That happens more frequently than I'd care for, so if there was a change that only brought down one tab, that would be great.
What I disliked about WALL-E was that it purports to be anti-commercialism/waste, while being part of that same commercialism.
There's also the fact that I just don't buy that a race that still throws out massive amount of garbage FROM A SPACESHIP can return to a ruined Earth and make everything better.
The interplay between WALL-E and EVE was great, though.
I'd rate it just ahead of "A Bug's Life" as the worst Pixar film -- which I rate as the least-good (I won't say worse, as no Pixar movie has been bad, just not-as-good) simply because I always forget about A Bug's Life when I try to list Pixar's movies, so it didn't leave an impression on me.
When did I say it was a perfect A? All I said is that is that Iron Man was the best movie I've seen all year. Mind you, I do rate it 5/5, but still...
I will say this, though: where did you get any, "support the troops" messages out of the movie? All I saw was a movie about a weapons manufacturer who was deeply disturbed that his weapons were being used AGAINST his beliefs, and he decides to take matters into his own hands to prevent it. As JudgeFurious said, it also fits the character.
Also, for the record, the other movies I have seen this year (ie, summer), for comparision:
Indianna Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull The Incredible Hulk Wall-E -- didn't like this nearly as much as I'd hoped Hancock Get Smart Wanted
None of those come close to Hellboy II or Iron Man in my book.
Summary: Should America adopt universal health insurance, could we live to see the same kind of individual health regulations imposed on us by the government?
Canada has universal health insurance, and there's no such government imposed size regulation here.
Also, why would this be different than if a company's private insurance chooses this approach? I doubt any company would simply switch insurance companies should said insurance company adopt a regulation to check employee's waistlines. As I understand it, t's happened with cigarettes already, why would it stop there?
I've not noticed any traffic shaping on Rogers, but they did do one thing that annoyed me.
I was surfing on Friday, when all of my pages started coming up with HTML-injected by Rogers warning me that I was at 75% of my capacity for the month (from the 23-22nd).
It pissed me off that they were injecting HTML into my web pages. You can opt out of it permanently with a single mouse click, but it's still annoying.
I apologize for being slightly-off topic, but it is at least related.
Actually, the default search engine on the top right defaults to Google, but if you actually type an unknown address in the address bar it seems to default to Yahoo's search engine.
I haven't figured out how to switch that (the title bar search) one over to google yet, either. Then again, I haven't looked very hear either.
Last time I checked -- and I mean back in my high school and university paper writing days -- it was perfectly fine to quote portions of someone else's work provided you properly referenced that work and accredited that quote as coming from that reference.
The internet equivalent of that, in my mind, would be posting a link to the relevant source.
Re:Spain vs. Sweden: Spain wins 2-1
on
The Red Team Wins
·
· Score: 1
Spain wins after scoring with 1 minute of stoppage time remaining. Seems to go towards the theory.
Spain vs. Sweden is on Euro right now
on
The Red Team Wins
·
· Score: 1
... so long as he only burns property belongs to and is voluntarily given by private individuals.
A line will have been crossed if when he starts petitioning public libraries and governments to do the same or if said entities decided to take up that cause too.
Until then, I'll only consider him wrong in his reasoning and arguments, but what he does with is own stuff is his business.
Yes, but I don't believe C/C++/etc were fasttracked standards. In those cases, defining the standard was necessary to work out the kinks before implementations were produced. That *should* be the way things normally are done.
However, OOXML *was* fasttracked, and as I understand the purpose of fasttracking, it *IS* for standards that are already in wide use. If you go with the proposition that the Ecma standard which eventually became ISO OOXML was the standard that was submitted, then there was exactly ONE implementation (not sure how complete) of that standard: MSWORD. So it had a fairly market penetration, but not industry, and I'm not sure by which (market or industry) ISO defines a standard as "in wide use".
I'm not trying to defend OOXML, just pointing out that the "these weren't in use" argument doesn't apply in this case.
Again, this is my opinion, and not necessarily that of my employer.
Slashdot Mirror
The giraffe's neck is obviously a benefit to its species, but none of the steps needed to "evolve" that neck would be beneficial. The veins in their neck need to be able to restrict blood flow when the giraffe bends down to take a drink while at the same time, the heart needs to be strong enough to pump blood all the way to the brain. Without either of these features, a giraffe with its long neck would never survive, yet none of these features are beneficial without the long neck. The giraffe's neck is not just a neck, but an entire system of organs and features that are all worthless or even fatal without all of the required components being in place.
This is just a way your way of saying that, "I can't think of how this could have happened via the theory, therefore the theory is wrong." In this particular case it's easy to show it can occur.
Start with a creature with a short neck that eats leaves. One gets a slightly longer neck, allowing it to eat from branches that are slightly higher on the tree/bush. This may or may not be beneficial, but nor is it a detriment. Repeat over many, many generations, while similarly selecting in the other traits as necessary since, by necessity, the creature still needs to drink water.
Macroevolution is even accepted on most ID/creationist fronts -- as proof, the Creation Museum even has a display on it/i>, even if they don't call it that because that would, well, make them look even more foolish.
This is entirely true -- they do call it a half-life for a reason, so there would be some question about if there's enough material for the bombs to actually detonate.
That aside, I can still at least accept that a nuke has a partial chance of working, since the half-life of U-235 is still well over 1 million years (or plutonium about 24,000 years).
A harrier still being able to fly after sitting around without maintenance, not so much. I imagine at least some parts of it would be prone to corrosion.
The novel's OK -- far from the best sci-fi, but it's certainly not as bad as the movie. Gets kinda stupid after Psychlo blows up, IMO, but before then it's really a basic sci-fi action novel.
And at least it makes some sense within the guidelines set out, unlike the movie. For instance, these three plot points in particular irked me about the movie:
1) The Psychlos are gold hungry -- do you REALLY think they'd have not found as large a deposit as the bars Fort Knox (or any other large bank, for that matter)? Fort Knox (or some other large bank, I can't recall exactly) is in the book, but it was cleaned out. The humans happened to find a few gold bars gold in an abandoned Brinks van, but that's it.
2) The events takes place 1000 years after the Psychlos invaded. How likely is it that Harrier jets would still be fueled and in working order after all that time? The humans use a few of the Phychlo's own transport pads against them in the book.
3) They also KNOW their planet would be susceptible to nuclear attack, due to the composition of the atmosphere. The movie would have you believe they're so dumb that they had no protection against accidentally/intentionally transported nuclear weapons and that a single nuke would work to blow up the planet. In the book, due to the shielding in place, it actually took 7, with the shielding around the transport area actually forcing the combined explosions down into the mined out core of the planet. Granted, by the same logic as #2, it's hard to believe a nuke would work after 1000 years, but at least a nuke isn't as mechanically complicated (to my knowledge) as a harrier.
I'm not trying to defend the book -- if you haven't read it, you're not missing much -- but it actually did have the basis for a half-decent, if quite typical, sci-fi movie, instead of the atrocity that came about.
Mind you, the name of the characters sucked.
Unlike similar levels on blank media, at least an MP3 player is designed with a PRIMARY purpose of playing music, as opposed to the levy we currently pay on blank DVDs and the like.
With that said, I'm sure this won't make people who legally pay for music via iTunes and the like happy.
The first video game I was ever addicted to.
Yes, please :).
I'm not even sure there's been a correlation made.
So you're OK with taxing (if I read the article correctly) EVERYTHING that goes through an ISP regardless of the fact that the vast majority of it has nothing to do with what they're trying to protect?
I'm sorry, as a Canadian, that's overkill.
Can't argue with that. :)
I can count on one hand the number of times I've had a problem with Firefox that would have been solved by it being in its own process.
Possibly you can, but the biggest one I can count is having a flash plug-in (or similar) crash the entire browser when there's only a problem on one tab. That happens more frequently than I'd care for, so if there was a change that only brought down one tab, that would be great.
Actually, I disagree with this.
Martial art's training is invaluable.
You will inevitably be in better shape than your attackers, so you should be able to outrun the majority of them anyway.
That is, if you see them coming at you first.
Seems to me he didn't have to go through 12 years of training to become Batman! If he can do it, surely I can!
Wait, what you do you mean, "stunt doubles?"
Missed a "worst" reference... oh, well.
What I disliked about WALL-E was that it purports to be anti-commercialism/waste, while being part of that same commercialism.
There's also the fact that I just don't buy that a race that still throws out massive amount of garbage FROM A SPACESHIP can return to a ruined Earth and make everything better.
The interplay between WALL-E and EVE was great, though.
I'd rate it just ahead of "A Bug's Life" as the worst Pixar film -- which I rate as the least-good (I won't say worse, as no Pixar movie has been bad, just not-as-good) simply because I always forget about A Bug's Life when I try to list Pixar's movies, so it didn't leave an impression on me.
When did I say it was a perfect A? All I said is that is that Iron Man was the best movie I've seen all year. Mind you, I do rate it 5/5, but still...
I will say this, though: where did you get any, "support the troops" messages out of the movie? All I saw was a movie about a weapons manufacturer who was deeply disturbed that his weapons were being used AGAINST his beliefs, and he decides to take matters into his own hands to prevent it. As JudgeFurious said, it also fits the character.
Also, for the record, the other movies I have seen this year (ie, summer), for comparision:
Indianna Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
The Incredible Hulk
Wall-E -- didn't like this nearly as much as I'd hoped
Hancock
Get Smart
Wanted
None of those come close to Hellboy II or Iron Man in my book.
Loved the visuals, and the song scene had me nearly rolling on the theatre floor with laughter.
Stop believing, start thinking.
While I do hold that I.D. as science bunk, I'd still rather see you say:
Start thinking, and think critically about what you believe.
Or even simply:
Start thinking critically.
Asking people to just stop believing isn't going to get anyone on your cause. So long as it's critical belief and not blind belief.
So what does a PI -- Private Investigator -- license have to do with repairing a computer?
Summary:
Should America adopt universal health insurance, could we live to see the same kind of individual health regulations imposed on us by the government?
Canada has universal health insurance, and there's no such government imposed size regulation here.
Also, why would this be different than if a company's private insurance chooses this approach? I doubt any company would simply switch insurance companies should said insurance company adopt a regulation to check employee's waistlines. As I understand it, t's happened with cigarettes already, why would it stop there?
I've not noticed any traffic shaping on Rogers, but they did do one thing that annoyed me.
I was surfing on Friday, when all of my pages started coming up with HTML-injected by Rogers warning me that I was at 75% of my capacity for the month (from the 23-22nd).
It pissed me off that they were injecting HTML into my web pages. You can opt out of it permanently with a single mouse click, but it's still annoying.
I apologize for being slightly-off topic, but it is at least related.
Actually, the default search engine on the top right defaults to Google, but if you actually type an unknown address in the address bar it seems to default to Yahoo's search engine.
I haven't figured out how to switch that (the title bar search) one over to google yet, either. Then again, I haven't looked very hear either.
Last time I checked -- and I mean back in my high school and university paper writing days -- it was perfectly fine to quote portions of someone else's work provided you properly referenced that work and accredited that quote as coming from that reference.
The internet equivalent of that, in my mind, would be posting a link to the relevant source.
Spain wins after scoring with 1 minute of stoppage time remaining. Seems to go towards the theory.
Spain's in red, so let's see if this holds.
Tied 1-1 at the moment.
... so long as he only burns property belongs to and is voluntarily given by private individuals.
A line will have been crossed if when he starts petitioning public libraries and governments to do the same or if said entities decided to take up that cause too.
Until then, I'll only consider him wrong in his reasoning and arguments, but what he does with is own stuff is his business.
Yes, but I don't believe C/C++/etc were fasttracked standards. In those cases, defining the standard was necessary to work out the kinks before implementations were produced. That *should* be the way things normally are done.
However, OOXML *was* fasttracked, and as I understand the purpose of fasttracking, it *IS* for standards that are already in wide use. If you go with the proposition that the Ecma standard which eventually became ISO OOXML was the standard that was submitted, then there was exactly ONE implementation (not sure how complete) of that standard: MSWORD. So it had a fairly market penetration, but not industry, and I'm not sure by which (market or industry) ISO defines a standard as "in wide use".
I'm not trying to defend OOXML, just pointing out that the "these weren't in use" argument doesn't apply in this case.
Again, this is my opinion, and not necessarily that of my employer.