and for the record, I did not need to tell you that I was speaking figuratively about "raining cats and dogs" - it is implied. Same with the bible - it doesn't need to spell it out when things are literal or not. It should be obvious. So when you're reading about these measurements - its literal - but when you're reading about monsters and dragons in revelation, they are clearly symbolic and figurative. its not that hard.
Its 10 cubits from one edge OF THE BRIM to the other, but the line placed around it is not around the top, its slightly below the top. the cup is curved, so there you go 30 cubits exactly.
Lets also not assume that God couldn't have used the methods indicated by science.
For example, science says that for earth to form etc etc etc its all theoretically possible, it just needed an insane amount of luck. Well, put God into the picture and suddenly you dont need luck. And if you dont need luck, you also dont need so much time. Take the luck and time out of it, and you have, well, Genesis 1 - in 6 days no less. How long were the days? who knows? We can say 24 hours, but its meaningless. How many things can God do in an hour? I dont know - do you?
Read Genesis 1 carefully - it says the earth itself "brought forth" all the animals. We were literally "from the dust".
When scientists are able to reproduce things in the lab, using precise measurements, intelligence, and skill, are they simulating evolution? or reenacting creation (albeit vaguely)?
Your statement shows that you've already blocked your ears and your shouting "la la la la" at the top of your voice so that you cant hear me...but I'm going to reply anyway and say that its more like the Bible claiming 2 + 2.1 = ~4 (in the absense of any way to measure it or represent it more accurately). And yes, we are taking it literally. And no we dont have to take everything literally, because we dont do that in our daily lives anyway.
Another example: Let's say you have 5 hammers and some asked you to throw half of them away. What would you do? Ok, so that seems real obvious. Suppose you had 41 hammers and you were told to throw half of them away. I reckon you'd keep 21, or 20. but probably not 20.5.
Do we need to spell out that Genesis 6 isn't about a maths lesson?
If I said it was raining cats and dogs would you take it literally? No. So does that mean you shouldn't take anything else I say literally either? We're all intelligent creatures - I'm pretty sure we can use our heads and work out based on the context of what is being said, whether something is intended literally or not.
I didn't think I'd need to qualify it, but what if I said "our understanding of gravity is quite vague compared to what there is to know about it".
And our current understanding is only a model (and indeed, thats probably all we can do), and is fairly primitive when you compare it to how much we know we dont know (I hope that makes sense).
To explain it better:
A = what we know B = what we know we dont know C = what we dont know
I would suggest that when talking of gravity, B is at least as big as A, and the sum of B+C makes A = "not much". Hence my original statement.
I'm not trying to make a point about the article, just saying that the analogy chosen probably didn't support the claim being made.
I'm starting to think that drive quality comes down to the "batch", not the "brand", but it'd be difficult to try to prove this. every brand has a faulty drive now and then.
I use samsung drives now and they've been great. (I've had a WD and a seagate fail. both were years ago though - the seagate was 20GB).
Is it really so difficult for you to understand that the bible actually isn't trying to calculate pi for you in this chapter?
So to suggest that "the bible lays out Pi" is just wrong. It intended nothing of the sort, and when you understand that the cubit itself was an approximate measurement, its no wonder they rounded everything to the nearest cubit.
You'd be surprised how many people believe evolution is about making less complex organisms into more complex ones, or making the next generation "better" in some objective way than the current one.
I used to agree with you, and yes its cool to be caffeine-dependant...
but the truth is that caffeine actually sort of works in reverse.
If you are not caffeine dependent (and yet healthy), you can be alert all the time naturally, without drugs.
Once you start feeding your brain caffeine, suddenly it starts to feel tired unless you give it caffeine. Sure, you may be able to force yourself to be awake/alert longer, or whatever, but certainly there is a point past which you get the "lights are on but nobody's home" thing starting to happen (particularly while driving).
I've had 1-2 coffees a day probably for about 17 years, but over the past few months I've been going without caffeine (as well as only eating unprocessed food (most of the time)) and I have to say I dont feel any more tired. Actually its the opposite - I still have plenty of energy when I get home from work, and the bonus is I'm able to manage my weight much easier. Just 1 coffee per day affects me in more ways than just feeling more alert for a bit.
I dont believe caffeine in such low quantities is a killer - but I do believe that I actually feel better without it. YMMV of course.
"...OR, you can just buy the WHOLE GAME with ALL the bonuses for just $60, then its yours, and you can play the whole thing whenever you want, for as long as you want."
I'll take the $60 game any day.
That is.... until they take down the license activation servers...
but that stings both sides doesn't it?
There are still some games that dont require an internet connection to play...
"...OR, you can just buy the WHOLE GAME with ALL the bonuses for just $60, then its yours, and you can play the whole thing whenever you want, for as long as you want."
I have a quad-core AMD machine, 4GB RAM, 2TB disk.
I dont know what it is except that its windows and over time it slows down. I haven't reinstalled it since about 12 months ago, and that wasn't for performance reasons.
I'm not sure what the problem is, and I really dont have enough patience with windows to bother finding out. Its just slow. Linux has always been faster in daily use in my experience, but then I use linux daily and I use windows for letting my kids watch DVDs occasionally (I dont have a tv, strange i know - but its a small house and it makes sense to use the PC for everything).
other than the slowness, I admit win7 is pretty good.
I bought a mac recently too, and sold it 3 weeks later. OSX is crap - sure its all pretty but its too "minimalist" for me. Windows 7 supports a hell of a lot more features, as does linux. OSX is kind of "just enough to do what you need, and no more". I think if you started with it and learnt that first, it'd be fine. But its too difficult to change one's workflow and I felt that I was giving up too much stuff from linux and windows...and after a while I just wanted my features back. I use KDE after all.
I could list a bunch of complaints, but I thought I'd answer you by telling you what my wife says about windows 7.
She's not a technical user, and she complains about how slow it is. Everything is slow. Linux took under a minute to start up on the same machine (to a usable gui), yet win7 takes over 2 minutes, probably more. Its probably an extra minute until you can actually click or do anything in the GUI.
I dont use windows much so I cant really say much more than that - other than its still a mess the way programs and data are organised and it still requires a reinstall every 6-12 months in order to stay running well, otherwise you have a machine like mine that takes forever to do anything.
Incidently, we use windows 7 because of a linux bug (in the evdev mouse driver) that only seems to affect my logitech mice (a specific model) - where it wont detect clicks properly unless I restart X before logging in. That bug made linux so irritating to use that we started booting into win7 instead.
So while I'm a fan of Linux - I do accept that all OS's have their failings. I can deal with linux but wouldn't wish it on anyone who didn't have a good deal of patience.
Slashdot Mirror
If swapping in the petrol engine takes a whole day, it aint gonna be useful to anyone.
It really does depend on the process to switch engines, and how convenient/time consuming it is, not to mention how much it costs.
If its cheaper to just own 2 cars, guess which option people would rather?
what if the item was shaped like a cup (which it was) and the line was not around the very top, but slightly below the top?
30 cubits seems about right then.
So its shaped like a cup.
The brim is 10 cubits across. and there's a line around the side (slightly below the top) which is 30 cubits long.
If the line was around the very top, sure 31.4 cubits. But it wasn't. Clearly the line sat just below the top - where the circumference was shorter.
Careful bible reading. You're welcome.
and for the record, I did not need to tell you that I was speaking figuratively about "raining cats and dogs" - it is implied. Same with the bible - it doesn't need to spell it out when things are literal or not. It should be obvious. So when you're reading about these measurements - its literal - but when you're reading about monsters and dragons in revelation, they are clearly symbolic and figurative. its not that hard.
I solved the riddle - have a read of it again.
Its shaped like a cup.
Its 10 cubits from one edge OF THE BRIM to the other, but the line placed around it is not around the top, its slightly below the top. the cup is curved, so there you go 30 cubits exactly.
Can we move on now?
Lets also not assume that God couldn't have used the methods indicated by science.
For example, science says that for earth to form etc etc etc its all theoretically possible, it just needed an insane amount of luck. Well, put God into the picture and suddenly you dont need luck. And if you dont need luck, you also dont need so much time. Take the luck and time out of it, and you have, well, Genesis 1 - in 6 days no less. How long were the days? who knows? We can say 24 hours, but its meaningless. How many things can God do in an hour? I dont know - do you?
Read Genesis 1 carefully - it says the earth itself "brought forth" all the animals. We were literally "from the dust".
When scientists are able to reproduce things in the lab, using precise measurements, intelligence, and skill, are they simulating evolution? or reenacting creation (albeit vaguely)?
Its a trick!
I'll bet Gru still has the real moon in his basement.
Either that or you could spend peanuts on one of those silly little whistle-sensitive beeping keyrings that have been around for at least 20 years. :-)
and hope never to lose your keys at your girlfriend's place...
"i cant remember where I put my keys, but its ok honey, I'll just whistle to them"
Your statement shows that you've already blocked your ears and your shouting "la la la la" at the top of your voice so that you cant hear me...but I'm going to reply anyway and say that its more like the Bible claiming 2 + 2.1 = ~4 (in the absense of any way to measure it or represent it more accurately). And yes, we are taking it literally. And no we dont have to take everything literally, because we dont do that in our daily lives anyway.
Another example:
Let's say you have 5 hammers and some asked you to throw half of them away. What would you do? Ok, so that seems real obvious. Suppose you had 41 hammers and you were told to throw half of them away. I reckon you'd keep 21, or 20. but probably not 20.5.
Do we need to spell out that Genesis 6 isn't about a maths lesson?
If I said it was raining cats and dogs would you take it literally? No. So does that mean you shouldn't take anything else I say literally either?
We're all intelligent creatures - I'm pretty sure we can use our heads and work out based on the context of what is being said, whether something is intended literally or not.
I hope I'm not mistaken in that assumption.
I didn't think I'd need to qualify it, but what if I said "our understanding of gravity is quite vague compared to what there is to know about it".
And our current understanding is only a model (and indeed, thats probably all we can do), and is fairly primitive when you compare it to how much we know we dont know (I hope that makes sense).
To explain it better:
A = what we know
B = what we know we dont know
C = what we dont know
I would suggest that when talking of gravity, B is at least as big as A, and the sum of B+C makes A = "not much". Hence my original statement.
I'm not trying to make a point about the article, just saying that the analogy chosen probably didn't support the claim being made.
I'm starting to think that drive quality comes down to the "batch", not the "brand", but it'd be difficult to try to prove this. every brand has a faulty drive now and then.
I use samsung drives now and they've been great. (I've had a WD and a seagate fail. both were years ago though - the seagate was 20GB).
well, he did claim time travel was impossible.
Is it really so difficult for you to understand that the bible actually isn't trying to calculate pi for you in this chapter?
So to suggest that "the bible lays out Pi" is just wrong. It intended nothing of the sort, and when you understand that the cubit itself was an approximate measurement, its no wonder they rounded everything to the nearest cubit.
Its amazing that she could get a degree in biology without "believing" in evolution. It's a bit like a physicist that doesn't believe in gravity.
Great analogy...because we dont understand much about gravity either...
You'd be surprised how many people believe evolution is about making less complex organisms into more complex ones, or making the next generation "better" in some objective way than the current one.
Anyone got an example of this?
I used to agree with you, and yes its cool to be caffeine-dependant...
but the truth is that caffeine actually sort of works in reverse.
If you are not caffeine dependent (and yet healthy), you can be alert all the time naturally, without drugs.
Once you start feeding your brain caffeine, suddenly it starts to feel tired unless you give it caffeine. Sure, you may be able to force yourself to be awake/alert longer, or whatever, but certainly there is a point past which you get the "lights are on but nobody's home" thing starting to happen (particularly while driving).
I've had 1-2 coffees a day probably for about 17 years, but over the past few months I've been going without caffeine (as well as only eating unprocessed food (most of the time)) and I have to say I dont feel any more tired. Actually its the opposite - I still have plenty of energy when I get home from work, and the bonus is I'm able to manage my weight much easier. Just 1 coffee per day affects me in more ways than just feeling more alert for a bit.
I dont believe caffeine in such low quantities is a killer - but I do believe that I actually feel better without it. YMMV of course.
This is also a good point. And then I'll buy it off you for $1 when you're done with it.
and the obvious flipside to balance it out:
"...OR, you can just buy the WHOLE GAME with ALL the bonuses for just $60, then its yours, and you can play the whole thing whenever you want, for as long as you want."
I'll take the $60 game any day.
That is.... until they take down the license activation servers...
but that stings both sides doesn't it?
There are still some games that dont require an internet connection to play...
isn't it in C&C Generals? hmmm, just looked on wikipedia and apparently it is referenced in several C&C titles, including the first one.
you are correct though - there's no nod or gdi in red alert...
and the obvious flipside to balance it out:
"...OR, you can just buy the WHOLE GAME with ALL the bonuses for just $60, then its yours, and you can play the whole thing whenever you want, for as long as you want."
I'll take the $60 game any day.
True, but if you bought one of these just to look at text and vector art, you probably wasted your money...
I think this sounds a lot like "if a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it..."
I have a quad-core AMD machine, 4GB RAM, 2TB disk.
I dont know what it is except that its windows and over time it slows down. I haven't reinstalled it since about 12 months ago, and that wasn't for performance reasons.
I'm not sure what the problem is, and I really dont have enough patience with windows to bother finding out. Its just slow. Linux has always been faster in daily use in my experience, but then I use linux daily and I use windows for letting my kids watch DVDs occasionally (I dont have a tv, strange i know - but its a small house and it makes sense to use the PC for everything).
other than the slowness, I admit win7 is pretty good.
I bought a mac recently too, and sold it 3 weeks later. OSX is crap - sure its all pretty but its too "minimalist" for me. Windows 7 supports a hell of a lot more features, as does linux. OSX is kind of "just enough to do what you need, and no more". I think if you started with it and learnt that first, it'd be fine. But its too difficult to change one's workflow and I felt that I was giving up too much stuff from linux and windows...and after a while I just wanted my features back. I use KDE after all.
get KatMouse - it fixes the scrolling issue :) awesome little tool (and no its not mine).
What's wrong with Win 7?
I could list a bunch of complaints, but I thought I'd answer you by telling you what my wife says about windows 7.
She's not a technical user, and she complains about how slow it is. Everything is slow. Linux took under a minute to start up on the same machine (to a usable gui), yet win7 takes over 2 minutes, probably more. Its probably an extra minute until you can actually click or do anything in the GUI.
I dont use windows much so I cant really say much more than that - other than its still a mess the way programs and data are organised and it still requires a reinstall every 6-12 months in order to stay running well, otherwise you have a machine like mine that takes forever to do anything.
Incidently, we use windows 7 because of a linux bug (in the evdev mouse driver) that only seems to affect my logitech mice (a specific model) - where it wont detect clicks properly unless I restart X before logging in. That bug made linux so irritating to use that we started booting into win7 instead.
So while I'm a fan of Linux - I do accept that all OS's have their failings. I can deal with linux but wouldn't wish it on anyone who didn't have a good deal of patience.