"If it could be shown that mutations do not occur." "If it could be shown that, although mutations do occur, they are not passed down through the generations." "If it could be shown that, although mutations are passed down, no mutation could produce the sort of phenotypic changes that drive natural selection." "If it could be shown that selection or environmental pressures do not favor the reproductive success of better adapted individuals."
He is an evolutionary biologist, and a climatologist. So, ask the experts. Well, you don't need to ask becasue scientific consensus among the experts clearly say yes, it is real, and yes we are the cause for temperature changes on top of normal cycles.
No one else has presented in credible argument to the contrary in decades.
"How can I separate the BS claims and the politicization of the issue from what the factual data actually is?" Read the data and not the media reports? Try to remember the the media makes money form controversy, not accurate reporting.
"claims that the world is going to explode soon unless we do something right now." no rational person says that; what is said that if we get to a tipping point, we don't know how to stop it. That tipping point may be 100 years away. However,based on how long it takes to change, and how long it will take the extra carbon in the atmosphere to be removed, we should do something about it right now. In fact, if people would stop listening to pundits and the media, and start listening to expert we could be doing something about it, and it won't be as costly or alarming as the deniers have you believe. Of course, the closer to the tipping point, the more radical and immediate the change must be.
Of course, climatologist give actual verifiable evidence supported by a historic trend and predictions. religious people saying the world will end have no such evidences. Based on that, they aren't really comparable.
You're link isn't to an climate expert either. The items he reference to show it's not man made are irrelevant, out of contexts and/or based on local events. here is just one example: " The extreme haste with which seemingly the entire world immediately accepted the idea of Anthropogenic" This is false. The theory is over 100 years old. it has a lot of data to support it.
Protip: When anyone uses the 'medieval warm period' of proof against AGW, they have no clue what they are talking about.
Seriously, experts in the field agree, and you pull a 'scientist' that isn't an expert. Why would you give a few non experts more credence then the experts?
A) You have exactly 0 evidence of god, so asking someone else about there position based on lack of evidences is, at best, laughable.
B) "400 genes is so much complex to be generated by luck or by mutation from nothing" no one says it mutated from nothing. It's a chemical chains. Give the amount of time, it's an inevitable combination to end up with, eventually.
Lets say I have 100 six sided dies. Not, it's highly unlikely(but possible) that on the firs roll I will roll 100 6's. However, over enough time it will happen.
" Atheists seem to be very, very angry at everything even remotely related to a religion " Tat's becasue you only know of the ones who are very angry. It's a bias, look it up. I have noticed that even in the most polite conversation atheist get tagged with 'Angry' by people who loose a debate.
" only difference between a fetus and a baby is which end of the vagina you're looking at." and you would be wrong. Sorry. You probably should let you emotional based bias guide actual science or policy.
" If I even suggest that it shouldn't be legal in a society to reach through that vagina with a knife and a hose to suck out his brain, again, I'm labelled a religious fanatic." no, the fact that you go to such ridiculous extremes and emotion verbiage to try and make a point is why you get labeled as fanatic. No that you ego centric bias an even for a moment let you consider that maybe it's you that's the issue.
A class at a communit college should never cost more then an hour of minum wage. An educated society the support innovation is stronger, safer, richer, and happier then any uneducated populace
And that's why it would mean less profit for Apple. So instead, they do what they can to screw over the country and people that made there success possible.
Ye,s I am well aware they aren't the only ones. But they are one of the worse, right along side wal-mart.
you're enviroment doesn't need a union. Many people work in less favorable enviromants where managment constant threatens them if they don't wiork without pay, abuse them, make them buy from the comany store. SO those poeple from a group to protect them selves from abuse.
Thos escenerious unions are needed.
Unions also have lobbying power. Did you know that id you are a softwar developer, there are laws in the US the exempt you from receiving overtime if you make more the 28 an hour? That's the kind of shenagans unions can help prevent.
"Consumers will buy whatever is the cheapest on the price-quality curve, almost without exception."
the please explain the iPod. It was inferior in every metric to other devices on the market, and it was more expensive.
I am a huge fan of globalization. It will be the only way to get cultures to mingle and reduce wars. However I prefer jobs be here in the US for products sold in the US
Bottom line, Apple would still make shit tons of money of they made them in the US. Not as many shit tons, but still they would have the growth to support their market numbers.
Not having them built in the country that gave you the freedom to start a company in your garage becasue you would make slightly less money is pretty shitty.
They probably wouldn't cost more, but Apple would make less money. Probably 10-20 bucks less per unit. I think they have maximize the price point already.
Frankly, if they built them in the US, I would make my next phone an iPhone. It's not as good as my Samsung, but I'll take slightly fewer features of convenience in exchange for helping to support jobs in this country.
"Which was already shown not to work." A) That's not true B) China is hugely successful Communist government.
"Incentives like better working conditions and fair pay go a lot farther than threats of violence." Threats of violence are totalitarianism, not communism. Soviet Union didn't fall becasue of Communism.
Tax the money being held. You can not have a healthy economy id money doesn't keep flowing. When people who are basically buying everything they they need keep hording money about that, it hurts the economy. Now when you are talking about a tiny percentage of the money, it doesn't matter much, but when a significant amount is held buy relativily. few, you have economic issues. The kind of economic issues that destroys class structures and lead to internal strife
This is why I am a fan of remove all not for profit deductions, remove most business deduction for companies worth over 10 million, and a 100% tax on money over a billion dollars; with the only deduction being RnD. The the choice becomes: Spend money over a billion on RnD, Higher more people to bring the money below a billion, or loose it in taxes. Social motivators for corporations to pay better, higher more, and develop new technologies.
Yes they did. They got it from the Greeks, who got it from the Syrians. About about 4 millennium ago. Banking was very highly developed in Roman law. As I have said may times, take a few minutes to look up the subject you know nothing about before posting. Seriously, I bet a simple google search would have the information you need in the first spot. If you don't want to do a google search, then ASK if the Romans had banking instead of making a blanket statement about something you never studied.
Slashdot Mirror
I've known far too many software engineers who are not capable of logical thinking, or understanding.
And he is our father, so any impression of 'logical thinking' form his son is worthless as evidence of actual logical thinking.
Oh look who completely misunderstood philosophy 101.
Sure you have.
My Nexus 1 worked like trooper., Now I have a nexus II.
Also works like a trooper.
I take you you aren't smart enough and the only way your ego can handle it is by blaming them.
no. Only matter ON the planet.
There are 4:
"If it could be shown that mutations do not occur."
"If it could be shown that, although mutations do occur, they are not passed down through the generations."
"If it could be shown that, although mutations are passed down, no mutation could produce the sort of phenotypic changes that drive natural selection."
"If it could be shown that selection or environmental pressures do not favor the reproductive success of better adapted individuals."
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Disproving_evolution
He is an evolutionary biologist, and a climatologist.
So, ask the experts. Well, you don't need to ask becasue scientific consensus among the experts clearly say yes, it is real, and yes we are the cause for temperature changes on top of normal cycles.
No one else has presented in credible argument to the contrary in decades.
"How can I separate the BS claims and the politicization of the issue from what the factual data actually is?"
Read the data and not the media reports? Try to remember the the media makes money form controversy, not accurate reporting.
"claims that the world is going to explode soon unless we do something right now."
no rational person says that; what is said that if we get to a tipping point, we don't know how to stop it. That tipping point may be 100 years away. However,based on how long it takes to change, and how long it will take the extra carbon in the atmosphere to be removed, we should do something about it right now. In fact, if people would stop listening to pundits and the media, and start listening to expert we could be doing something about it, and it won't be as costly or alarming as the deniers have you believe. Of course, the closer to the tipping point, the more radical and immediate the change must be.
Of course, climatologist give actual verifiable evidence supported by a historic trend and predictions. religious people saying the world will end have no such evidences. Based on that, they aren't really comparable.
You're link isn't to an climate expert either. The items he reference to show it's not man made are irrelevant, out of contexts and/or based on local events.
here is just one example:
" The extreme haste with which seemingly the entire world immediately accepted the idea of Anthropogenic"
This is false. The theory is over 100 years old. it has a lot of data to support it.
Protip: When anyone uses the 'medieval warm period' of proof against AGW, they have no clue what they are talking about.
Seriously, experts in the field agree, and you pull a 'scientist' that isn't an expert. Why would you give a few non experts more credence then the experts?
The people trying to shove religion as fact and tell you how to behave based on there religion are the ones being asshats.
"c, and the fact that it's far easier to attract flies with honey as opposed to vinegar?"
flys are to be swatted and not attracted.
A) You have exactly 0 evidence of god, so asking someone else about there position based on lack of evidences is, at best, laughable.
B) "400 genes is so much complex to be generated by luck or by mutation from nothing"
no one says it mutated from nothing. It's a chemical chains. Give the amount of time, it's an inevitable combination to end up with, eventually.
Lets say I have 100 six sided dies. Not, it's highly unlikely(but possible) that on the firs roll I will roll 100 6's. However, over enough time it will happen.
Well, no. cause, you know, birds.
Of course. You get scared, you have adrenaline pump, you vision gets sharper. Pretty handy thing to have in the dark.
" Atheists seem to be very, very angry at everything even remotely related to a religion "
Tat's becasue you only know of the ones who are very angry. It's a bias, look it up.
I have noticed that even in the most polite conversation atheist get tagged with 'Angry' by people who loose a debate.
" only difference between a fetus and a baby is which end of the vagina you're looking at."
and you would be wrong. Sorry. You probably should let you emotional based bias guide actual science or policy.
" If I even suggest that it shouldn't be legal in a society to reach through that vagina with a knife and a hose to suck out his brain, again, I'm labelled a religious fanatic."
no, the fact that you go to such ridiculous extremes and emotion verbiage to try and make a point is why you get labeled as fanatic.
No that you ego centric bias an even for a moment let you consider that maybe it's you that's the issue.
A class at a communit college should never cost more then an hour of minum wage.
An educated society the support innovation is stronger, safer, richer, and happier then any uneducated populace
Oh, someone with other income and time will do it cheaper. Gosh, surprise.
You are retired old man, stop taking a living wage from other people.
So great pension AND screwing over the next generation. well.. Fuck You.
And that's why it would mean less profit for Apple.
So instead, they do what they can to screw over the country and people that made there success possible.
Ye,s I am well aware they aren't the only ones. But they are one of the worse, right along side wal-mart.
you're enviroment doesn't need a union. Many people work in less favorable enviromants where managment constant threatens them if they don't wiork without pay, abuse them, make them buy from the comany store. SO those poeple from a group to protect them selves from abuse.
Thos escenerious unions are needed.
Unions also have lobbying power. Did you know that id you are a softwar developer, there are laws in the US the exempt you from receiving overtime if you make more the 28 an hour? That's the kind of shenagans unions can help prevent.
"Consumers will buy whatever is the cheapest on the price-quality curve, almost without exception."
the please explain the iPod. It was inferior in every metric to other devices on the market, and it was more expensive.
I am a huge fan of globalization. It will be the only way to get cultures to mingle and reduce wars. However I prefer jobs be here in the US for products sold in the US
Or the value goes up..
Bottom line, Apple would still make shit tons of money of they made them in the US. Not as many shit tons, but still they would have the growth to support their market numbers.
Not having them built in the country that gave you the freedom to start a company in your garage becasue you would make slightly less money is pretty shitty.
They probably wouldn't cost more, but Apple would make less money. Probably 10-20 bucks less per unit. I think they have maximize the price point already.
Frankly, if they built them in the US, I would make my next phone an iPhone. It's not as good as my Samsung, but I'll take slightly fewer features of convenience in exchange for helping to support jobs in this country.
"Which was already shown not to work."
A) That's not true
B) China is hugely successful Communist government.
"Incentives like better working conditions and fair pay go a lot farther than threats of violence."
Threats of violence are totalitarianism, not communism.
Soviet Union didn't fall becasue of Communism.
"Slashdot is faltering, "
no, it's the same as it's always been,.
Are you paid 50 cents to derail topics?
Yes, it's in Taiwan...which is part of China.
It's like saying a Hawaiian company isn't a US company.
Tax the money being held. You can not have a healthy economy id money doesn't keep flowing.
When people who are basically buying everything they they need keep hording money about that, it hurts the economy.
Now when you are talking about a tiny percentage of the money, it doesn't matter much, but when a significant amount is held buy relativily. few, you have economic issues. The kind of economic issues that destroys class structures and lead to internal strife
This is why I am a fan of remove all not for profit deductions, remove most business deduction for companies worth over 10 million, and a 100% tax on money over a billion dollars; with the only deduction being RnD.
The the choice becomes:
Spend money over a billion on RnD, Higher more people to bring the money below a billion, or loose it in taxes.
Social motivators for corporations to pay better, higher more, and develop new technologies.
Yes, the mediocre work known as the Dresden files is the go to places on the history and fact about the 30 denarians Judas was payed..
But they can't remove modern radioactive isotopes.
Using silver as a mean to detect fraud? what the fuck is this, 1930?
Yes they did. They got it from the Greeks, who got it from the Syrians. About about 4 millennium ago.
Banking was very highly developed in Roman law. As I have said may times, take a few minutes to look up the subject you know nothing about before posting. Seriously, I bet a simple google search would have the information you need in the first spot. If you don't want to do a google search, then ASK if the Romans had banking instead of making a blanket statement about something you never studied.