I asked for contradictions, and you insult me with silly questions that look like they were taken from a 2nd grade Sunday School lesson?
In what order are things created again?
Gen. 1.
Is man allowed to use every plant for food, or is there a limitation on that?
They were allowed to eat of every plant except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. What is so fucking difficult to understand about that command, hmm?
Reading further, are there people outside the garden?
No, what makes you think there were? Until Adam and Eve got sent out of the garden...
How many of each animal were put on the Ark?
Of most kinds, one pair, a male and a female. Of certain ones, 7 were taken instead of 2. Again... this is difficult to understand?
Are we allowed to kill or not?
Who... animals or people? The commands are all right there. They aren’t hard to follow.
What exactly happened on Jesus' last day? How did Judas die?
I’m pretty sure I could answer either of those without even referring to the Bible to check my memory, but I wasn’t aware there was much controversy over it, so I’m pretty sure I’d be wasting my time. As if I’m not already.
Some of the biggest contradictions are in what the bible says and what people try to claim it says.
Now you’ve identified the problem: not contradictions within the Bible, but people contradicting it.
Funny that you should mention the car analogy because if I’m not mistaken laws specifically state that modifications or additives cannot void your car’s warranty unless the company can conclusively prove that the mod or additive actually caused the failure.
A single dinosaur bone in Precambrian sandstone would disprove evolution quite nicely, or a bird fossil found in sediments that date from before the evolution of reptiles.
Sigh. No it wouldn’t... just like the scores of oddities that exist in the fossil record that evolution has similarly chosen to explain away. Upside-down strata, trees standing vertically for millions of years waiting for the fossils to be deposited around them...
Hell, if a SINGLE dinosaur bone was found in Precambrian sandstone, scientists would call it a fake or a hoax. Unless perhaps it was discovered in the middle of a live TV broadcast and seen by millions. And then they would DEFINITELY call it a hoax. And quite likely it would be.
Now, if dozens of bones were found, evolutionists would have more of a problem, but even so I have no doubt they could quite easily find a good enough explanation to satisfy just about everyone except the creationists.
Oh... you mean that one guy who never taught evolution but went to the Supreme Court and falsely testified that he had taught evolution cuz they needed a test case to force it into the schools?
Science doesn't really work on proving a hypothesis, but on disproving enough alternative hypothesis that you can be fairly sure you're close to the truth.
That is how a hypothesis becomes a theory, but it is not how falsification works.
No... people thinking that the speed is the substitute for writing code in an intelligent way is the cause of those things. Optimizing at a high level is absolutely necessary. Dropping down to a low-level language to gain a few more fractions of a percent in efficiency is usually not.
If you are running one application, then yes, it has to be optimized for multi-threaded execution or you won’t get the benefit of your multiple cores. However, most people are not running just one application – at the least there is the OS with all of its background services and tasks running in addition to whatever application you’re running.
I did not mean to imply that you should not optimize your code.
High-level code should be optimized at a high level. The compiler will do a little bit of low-level optimization, and that will almost always be perfectly adequate.In the rare instance where you have to optimize at a lower level, you will have to code in a lower-level language.
What you described is the result of high-level code that wasn’t optimized at all anywhere in the process from the programmer’s initial concept to the high-level code that was supposed to do that.
umm... did you miss the part where the guy also bitched that interpreted languages are "too slow"?
Where from my statement did you seem to infer that interpreted languages are any better than compiled ones?
and compiler researchers concede that a competent human will outperform a compiler for the foreseeable future. so your statement about compilers is total hand-waving away of facts inconvenient to your argument.
I stated that the efficiency of the compiler, paired with the speed of the computer, is such that any competent programmer should, on most projects, be able to get performance out of the high-level language more than sufficient to meet the demands of that project. Yes, a human optimizing assembly could make it a little bit faster, but at some point it isn’t worth the time and effort and complexity.
Most of them only run one program, do it well, and will probably never be updated with new software. Somebody programmed them once and was glad to forget about them afterward, sort of like the embedded project I did in Senior Design...
Slashdot Mirror
It is a form of denying the antecedent:
The courts have affirmed my right to mod, therefore it is legal. Had they not affirmed my right to mod, it would not have been legal for me to do it.
I asked for contradictions, and you insult me with silly questions that look like they were taken from a 2nd grade Sunday School lesson?
In what order are things created again?
Gen. 1.
Is man allowed to use every plant for food, or is there a limitation on that?
They were allowed to eat of every plant except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. What is so fucking difficult to understand about that command, hmm?
Reading further, are there people outside the garden?
No, what makes you think there were? Until Adam and Eve got sent out of the garden...
How many of each animal were put on the Ark?
Of most kinds, one pair, a male and a female. Of certain ones, 7 were taken instead of 2. Again... this is difficult to understand?
Are we allowed to kill or not?
Who... animals or people? The commands are all right there. They aren’t hard to follow.
What exactly happened on Jesus' last day? How did Judas die?
I’m pretty sure I could answer either of those without even referring to the Bible to check my memory, but I wasn’t aware there was much controversy over it, so I’m pretty sure I’d be wasting my time. As if I’m not already.
Some of the biggest contradictions are in what the bible says and what people try to claim it says.
Now you’ve identified the problem: not contradictions within the Bible, but people contradicting it.
Funny that you should mention the car analogy because if I’m not mistaken laws specifically state that modifications or additives cannot void your car’s warranty unless the company can conclusively prove that the mod or additive actually caused the failure.
Or a magic marker, whiteout, or a strip of clean white paper. But hey, some people are really that dumb.
Not really. Gen. 1 gives a broad plot outline and Gen. 2 details a bit on the creation of the shrubs and man. Problem?
But there's plenty of other contradictions, too.
I’m sure you’ve heard that said plenty of times, but can you personally name any without referring to Google etc?
He meant NOT falsifiable. Not falsifiable means you can’t disprove the thing.
Original sin, redemption, and death before the fall.
Jailbreaking iPhone WAS Legal.
“What they said... but in my theory, GOD DID IT!” is not a valid theory.
Occam’s razor comes to mind.
A single dinosaur bone in Precambrian sandstone would disprove evolution quite nicely, or a bird fossil found in sediments that date from before the evolution of reptiles.
Sigh. No it wouldn’t... just like the scores of oddities that exist in the fossil record that evolution has similarly chosen to explain away. Upside-down strata, trees standing vertically for millions of years waiting for the fossils to be deposited around them...
Hell, if a SINGLE dinosaur bone was found in Precambrian sandstone, scientists would call it a fake or a hoax. Unless perhaps it was discovered in the middle of a live TV broadcast and seen by millions. And then they would DEFINITELY call it a hoax. And quite likely it would be.
Now, if dozens of bones were found, evolutionists would have more of a problem, but even so I have no doubt they could quite easily find a good enough explanation to satisfy just about everyone except the creationists.
Oh... you mean that one guy who never taught evolution but went to the Supreme Court and falsely testified that he had taught evolution cuz they needed a test case to force it into the schools?
Science doesn't really work on proving a hypothesis, but on disproving enough alternative hypothesis that you can be fairly sure you're close to the truth.
That is how a hypothesis becomes a theory, but it is not how falsification works.
Says you!
I never said that other people couldn’t lose. It’s not unwinnable, remember?
Tic-tac-toe isn’t unwinnable, it’s unlosable. Much different from global thermonuclear war.
For certain things. If you’re doing it millions of times in a loop, it might be worth it to drop down to assembly language.
No... people thinking that the speed is the substitute for writing code in an intelligent way is the cause of those things. Optimizing at a high level is absolutely necessary. Dropping down to a low-level language to gain a few more fractions of a percent in efficiency is usually not.
If you are running one application, then yes, it has to be optimized for multi-threaded execution or you won’t get the benefit of your multiple cores. However, most people are not running just one application – at the least there is the OS with all of its background services and tasks running in addition to whatever application you’re running.
That graph completely ignores the number of cores in the CPU.
I did not mean to imply that you should not optimize your code.
High-level code should be optimized at a high level. The compiler will do a little bit of low-level optimization, and that will almost always be perfectly adequate.In the rare instance where you have to optimize at a lower level, you will have to code in a lower-level language.
What you described is the result of high-level code that wasn’t optimized at all anywhere in the process from the programmer’s initial concept to the high-level code that was supposed to do that.
umm... did you miss the part where the guy also bitched that interpreted languages are "too slow"?
Where from my statement did you seem to infer that interpreted languages are any better than compiled ones?
and compiler researchers concede that a competent human will outperform a compiler for the foreseeable future. so your statement about compilers is total hand-waving away of facts inconvenient to your argument.
I stated that the efficiency of the compiler, paired with the speed of the computer, is such that any competent programmer should, on most projects, be able to get performance out of the high-level language more than sufficient to meet the demands of that project. Yes, a human optimizing assembly could make it a little bit faster, but at some point it isn’t worth the time and effort and complexity.
Re 1: Typesetting is not really needed for ebooks. It is just some markup, with the ebook reader linebreaking.
Some ebooks convert easily to plain, boring paragraphs of text. Some do not.
I once used an e-encyclopedia which was produced by dumping the entire text of an encyclopedia into a database.
I missed the pictures.
How dare you even suggest that there’s any question as to which of those is clearly superior...
Most of them only run one program, do it well, and will probably never be updated with new software. Somebody programmed them once and was glad to forget about them afterward, sort of like the embedded project I did in Senior Design...