I'd like to see an article that clearly shows evolutions FROM ONE SPECIES TO ANOTHER as a fact, with evidence. I'm not talking about CHANGES WITHIN THE SAME SPECIES.
A new species of mosquito, isolated in London's Underground, has speciated from Culex pipiens (Byrne and Nichols 1999; Nuttall 1998).
Helacyton gartleri is the HeLa cell culture, which evolved from a human cervical carcinoma in 1951. The culture grows indefinitely and has become widespread (Van Valen and Maiorana 1991). A similar event appears to have happened with dogs relatively recently. Sticker's sarcoma, or canine transmissible venereal tumor, is caused by an organism genetically independent from its hosts but derived from a wolf or dog tumor (Zimmer 2006; Murgia et al. 2006).
Several new species of plants have arisen via polyploidy (when the chromosome count multiplies by two or more) (de Wet 1971). One example is Primula kewensis (Newton and Pellew 1929).
Recall that these are not alleged muggers picked up on the streets of LA, rather they are enemies captured on the battlefields of Afghanistan & Iraq.
Some are, some aren't. Boumediene, one of the people in this case, was arrested by the Bosnian police, ordered released by their Supreme Court due to lack of evidence against him, at which point the Bosnian police turned him over to the US rather than release him. Not a battlefield detainee. Other detainees were turned in by Afghanis for the cash bounty we were offering for captured terrorists, whether they actually were terrorists or not.
As someone who has published in physics journals (though not PRL), I'd like to point out that page charges are often (usually?) optional. There is an exception of additional charges for color printing, though that seems reasonable to me.
What the real problem is is that the fundamental Atheists has successfully used scare tactics and FUD to get parents to believe that *teaching* about religion is the same as *preaching* religion and it's time people wake up to this tactic.
Actually, no. Speaking on behalf of all fundamentalist atheists everywhere, we have no problem with teaching about religion. Personally, I don't see how it would be possible to even have a significant understanding of most of Western literature (e.g., Shakespeare) without some understanding of the Bible.
The real problem is that the fundamentalist Christians don't want students learning about religion. They want teachers to be able to witness to students about Jesus. They're not interested in an intellectual discussion or about exposure to different ideas.
Evolution needs to be taught with both sides presented so that the students can discuss and make up their own minds. Kids tend to learn better when given the facts and allowed to draw their own conclusions.
Stark-ravingly wrong. We do not give kids a massive pile of information, some correct and some incorrect, and say "OK kids, pick out the right conclusion!" We give them the best, most accurate information we have. Grade-school kids simply aren't qualified to make informed judgments about scientific matters.
Unlike philosophy, math and science actually *do* have right answers. Regardless of what the "Biblical astronomers" teach, the Sun does not revolve around the Earth. We don't give kids data from NASA and from Catholics Apologetics International or the Creation Science Association for Mid-America and tell them to draw their own conclusions about astronomy.
We don't teach both the Germ Theory of Disease and the Miasma Theory of Disease.
We don't teach both the periodic table and the Aristotelean Four Elements.
We don't teach both chemistry and phlogiston theory.
We don't teach both the electromagnetism and Aether theory.
One of the greatest is the fact that reputable biology programs will accept, much less graduate, Ph.D. students who express the slightest doubt about evolution.
Similarly, reputable astronomy programs will not accept, much less graduate, Ph.D. students who express the slightest doubt about heliocentrism.
The most distressing argument the government makes in the Warshak case is that the government need not follow the Fourth Amendment in reading emails sent by or through most commercial ISPs. The terms of service (TOS) of many ISPs permit those ISPs to monitor user activities to prevent fraud, enforce the TOS, or protect the ISP or others, or to comply with legal process. If you use an ISP and the ISP may monitor what you do, then you have waived any and all constitutional privacy rights in any communications or other use of the ISP.
I live in an apartment. My apartment management can enter my apartment to perform maintenance, spray for bugs, etc. Does this mean I have no rights stopping the federal government or even just the local cops from searching my apartment sans warrant at any time they choose?
Forget whether this involved breaking into computers or not. It sounds to me that the MPAA did not have copyright over these emails. Therefore copying them was piracy, right?
And how would that conversation be fun exactly? How would it entertain your audience? Have the gamers of the world been asking for games that "talk about homosexuality"?
Maybe, just maybe, there are some gamers in the world that are not white male heterosexual conservatives. Some gamers may appreciate a game world containing characters that are similar to the real world, which means a mix of people, appearances, religious, and backgrounds. They appreciate a virtual world where they can see themselves and not some white-breadified version of Middle America, focus-tested to appeal to the broadest possible audience in the blandest possible manner.
Take The Longest Journey, for example. The second character the protagonist comes across is a middle-aged lesbian. There's nothing sexual about the character. But I strongly suspect that, and the profanity, is why it's M-rated.
Just think of this from a slightly different angle:
Is it OK to send unsolicited e-mail to users telling them about the Lord Jesus Christ and their possibility for salvation if they accept Him as their Savior?... But I think the question involves ethical issues that would not apply to most discussions of spam.
Just because you think your message is valuable to the recipient doesn't mean the recipient thinks so. It doesn't matter if your message is about getting around censorship or about a valuable low-rate mortgage.
The fact is, the entire environmental movement is part of an overall socialist agenda to try and deindustrialize western nations so that the third world can be "equal".
That has got to be one of the most ridiculous, paranoid, conspiracy-theory-laden sentences I've ever read. If you're just trying to parody Ann Coulter, bravo to you. If you genuinely believe that, I'd suggest going back on your meds.
The pastor at my church says it's the gays promoting their choices as normal behind all this.
Well, if your pastor said it, it must be true!
They are forcing the government to back their behavior with laws... Laws against God and Jesus."
Really? Please tell us what Jesus had to say on the topic of homosexuality. He talked a lot about it, right?
And what's with this "forcing" business? Exactly what laws are being passed that are forcing you to do anything at all? Please be specific. You do understand that even if gay marriage becomes the law of the land in every state and at the federal level it will still be voluntary, right? Even in Massachusetts I'm not aware of gangs of gays rounding up innocent straight people and forcing them to get gay-married at gunpoint.
Ahhh, you young kids are so amusing. The "correct" way to quote is to add your discussion after the text you're quoting. You should also snip out the parts of the email which you are not replying to.
That works well for Usenet, where presumably everyone has access to the message history. In email, I've often had an multiple-round email thread forwarded to me asking if I can comment or if I can do something mentioned. Without the history of the email discussion present, it would make no sense.
...good education for a low cost, and sex education (abstinence).
Why is sex ed the only place we consider ignorance as a safety mechanism? You wouldn't teach driver's ed and refuse to give out information on what to do in slippery conditions to prevent kids from driving recklessly. Abstinence-only programs routinely misinform, distort, and outright lie about sex and safety. That's probably because their main focus is to prevent sin, not to keep kids safe.
We're in a war. We don't arrest wartime enemies and give them lawyers and court dates. We kill them.
Who specifically are we at war with? That is to say, other than "the terrorists." Who do we have to kill or who has to surrender to end this war, bin Laden, the Taliban? The fact is, we are not at war in any meaningful sense of the word. We are at war only in the same sense that we are at war with drugs and poverty.
I don't know about the yacht in international waters, but I agree that Spamhaus wreaks havoc on organizations that have done nothing wrong. Our organization has been black listed before too, and it was in error. It finally got cleared up, but it is still damaging.
Maybe you'd like to tell us what your organization is, so we can judge the veracity of your statments for ourselves?
It has been much more reliable than RBL's, and keeps the junk from ever getting to our server in the first place. I haven't had a complaint about a false positive since we switched, and it blocks over 100,000 spam/viruses/phishing attempts a day.
If it stops mail from ever getting to your server, and so no one ever sees it, how do you expect people to know a false positive has occurred, and to complain about it?
It comes down to this: if one ISP starts charging/. for bandwidth, enough people will switch to a competitor that it will cost, not make, the ISP money.
You have it backwards. People will not know that their ISP is demanding money from/. for bandwidth. It's not even bandwidth charges that are in question, it's whether or not an ISP can charge for priority.
I have ISP A. Slashdot has ISP B. At some point this page gets handed from B to A so I can see it. One of the questions now up in the air is whether ISP A can now charge Slashdot to handle the packets in a timely manner. Note that, up until now, Slashdot has had no business relationship with ISP A, just with their own ISP.
Slashdot already pays for bandwidth (I suspect). The question is now, does it have to pay for bandwidth and for priority?
Slashdot Mirror
OK, here you go. From talkorigins.org:
A similar event appears to have happened with dogs relatively recently. Sticker's sarcoma, or canine transmissible venereal tumor, is caused by an organism genetically independent from its hosts but derived from a wolf or dog tumor (Zimmer 2006; Murgia et al. 2006).
Many other examples there, too.
Some are, some aren't. Boumediene, one of the people in this case, was arrested by the Bosnian police, ordered released by their Supreme Court due to lack of evidence against him, at which point the Bosnian police turned him over to the US rather than release him. Not a battlefield detainee. Other detainees were turned in by Afghanis for the cash bounty we were offering for captured terrorists, whether they actually were terrorists or not.
As someone who has published in physics journals (though not PRL), I'd like to point out that page charges are often (usually?) optional. There is an exception of additional charges for color printing, though that seems reasonable to me.
I wish I had mod points. You deserve one just for "vector into a conversation."
Actually, no. Speaking on behalf of all fundamentalist atheists everywhere, we have no problem with teaching about religion. Personally, I don't see how it would be possible to even have a significant understanding of most of Western literature (e.g., Shakespeare) without some understanding of the Bible.
The real problem is that the fundamentalist Christians don't want students learning about religion. They want teachers to be able to witness to students about Jesus. They're not interested in an intellectual discussion or about exposure to different ideas.
Stark-ravingly wrong. We do not give kids a massive pile of information, some correct and some incorrect, and say "OK kids, pick out the right conclusion!" We give them the best, most accurate information we have. Grade-school kids simply aren't qualified to make informed judgments about scientific matters.
Unlike philosophy, math and science actually *do* have right answers. Regardless of what the "Biblical astronomers" teach, the Sun does not revolve around the Earth. We don't give kids data from NASA and from Catholics Apologetics International or the Creation Science Association for Mid-America and tell them to draw their own conclusions about astronomy.
We don't teach both the Germ Theory of Disease and the Miasma Theory of Disease.
We don't teach both the periodic table and the Aristotelean Four Elements.
We don't teach both chemistry and phlogiston theory.
We don't teach both the electromagnetism and Aether theory.
We don't teach both evolution and creationism.
Similarly, reputable astronomy programs will not accept, much less graduate, Ph.D. students who express the slightest doubt about heliocentrism.
Tell that to the Serbs.
Michael Stipe has called for mechanics to confiscate the cars of people who speed on highways.
Forget whether this involved breaking into computers or not. It sounds to me that the MPAA did not have copyright over these emails. Therefore copying them was piracy, right?
Maybe, just maybe, there are some gamers in the world that are not white male heterosexual conservatives. Some gamers may appreciate a game world containing characters that are similar to the real world, which means a mix of people, appearances, religious, and backgrounds. They appreciate a virtual world where they can see themselves and not some white-breadified version of Middle America, focus-tested to appeal to the broadest possible audience in the blandest possible manner.
Take The Longest Journey, for example. The second character the protagonist comes across is a middle-aged lesbian. There's nothing sexual about the character. But I strongly suspect that, and the profanity, is why it's M-rated.
Just think of this from a slightly different angle:
Just because you think your message is valuable to the recipient doesn't mean the recipient thinks so. It doesn't matter if your message is about getting around censorship or about a valuable low-rate mortgage.
Unsolicited bulk email is spam. Period.
That has got to be one of the most ridiculous, paranoid, conspiracy-theory-laden sentences I've ever read. If you're just trying to parody Ann Coulter, bravo to you. If you genuinely believe that, I'd suggest going back on your meds.
This is where I stopped reading. SpamCop requires proof in the form of the spam email itself. What other proof of spamminess could there be?
Well, if your pastor said it, it must be true!
Really? Please tell us what Jesus had to say on the topic of homosexuality. He talked a lot about it, right?
And what's with this "forcing" business? Exactly what laws are being passed that are forcing you to do anything at all? Please be specific. You do understand that even if gay marriage becomes the law of the land in every state and at the federal level it will still be voluntary, right? Even in Massachusetts I'm not aware of gangs of gays rounding up innocent straight people and forcing them to get gay-married at gunpoint.
That works well for Usenet, where presumably everyone has access to the message history. In email, I've often had an multiple-round email thread forwarded to me asking if I can comment or if I can do something mentioned. Without the history of the email discussion present, it would make no sense.
Yeah, someone should tell those astrophysicists that they're not really scientists.
Why is sex ed the only place we consider ignorance as a safety mechanism? You wouldn't teach driver's ed and refuse to give out information on what to do in slippery conditions to prevent kids from driving recklessly. Abstinence-only programs routinely misinform, distort, and outright lie about sex and safety. That's probably because their main focus is to prevent sin, not to keep kids safe.
Out of curiosity, what do you actually think yogurt is made out of?
He isn't Iranian. He's an American. Born in Los Angeles, in fact. By "Iranian" did you mean "not-white guy"?
Who specifically are we at war with? That is to say, other than "the terrorists." Who do we have to kill or who has to surrender to end this war, bin Laden, the Taliban? The fact is, we are not at war in any meaningful sense of the word. We are at war only in the same sense that we are at war with drugs and poverty.
Really? In what peer-reviewed journal was it published?
Maybe you'd like to tell us what your organization is, so we can judge the veracity of your statments for ourselves?
If it stops mail from ever getting to your server, and so no one ever sees it, how do you expect people to know a false positive has occurred, and to complain about it?
You have it backwards. People will not know that their ISP is demanding money from /. for bandwidth. It's not even bandwidth charges that are in question, it's whether or not an ISP can charge for priority.
I have ISP A. Slashdot has ISP B. At some point this page gets handed from B to A so I can see it. One of the questions now up in the air is whether ISP A can now charge Slashdot to handle the packets in a timely manner. Note that, up until now, Slashdot has had no business relationship with ISP A, just with their own ISP.
Slashdot already pays for bandwidth (I suspect). The question is now, does it have to pay for bandwidth and for priority?