Honestly, there is already so much art in the world that no person can consume all of it in a lifetime. There is enough public domain or freely released art to occupy a person for far more of their free time than a person should spend on such things. I don't believe we really need art to be carried in such a high protected status as it has been anymore. Author's life plus 20 years should be plenty of time for the author's kids to recover from his death, grow up, and find jobs.
+1 there. Your government needs to get itself kicked back into line. So far Canada is looking like a better and better place to stay. I've still got the option of getting my citizenship expanded to be dual with the US, but that's never going to happen.
Might I remind you that without PC games and Quake, there would never have been Team Fortress 2.
PC games are where great ideas are created without a budget that rivals the US military. Of course they show up in their polished form on consoles, but not before us PC gamers have laid the ground work.
I see you've never head of pathfinding AI. Hundreds of units moving around, all having to figure out where they want to go over a gigantic map with different speed values for every tile of terrain. Having to do that can make almost any processing unit shake in sheer terror. Not something console FPS games have to deal with.
This is a breach of national security by their new standards regardless of why they did it. Thousands of people got on aircraft that could have been carrying explosives undetectable by metal detectors.
I think you're completely missing the point: If he is obviously muslim, then he isn't trying to hide anything. The men who hijacked the 9/11 planes didn't look obviously muslim but were.
It could be perfectly possible for the 911 operator to text back using a different number entirely. And we just need to train people to give the four W's: Who, What, Where, and Weapons. With those four facts you can generally get the response level you need.
You do realize that most waste products that can be used as you mentioned contain toxins themselves? Bottom ash and fly ash from coal plants is comparable to nuclear waste.
If you're going to go saying this nonsense, you could at least say it in a way that makes it sound like you didn't just shove together a bunch of random conspiracy theory (and environmental?) catchphrases as a joke.
As it is, it just looks like you've been smoking pot with your spiritual being too much.
It's the physical structure and method of breeding that makes it a virus or a parasite. The common cold is a virus and it definitely doesn't kill in most cases.
Thinking that the genomes of two similar creatures might also be similar is not rocket science. After comparing your first three creatures with no historical background whatsoever you could easily come to that conclusion. Even a creationist could come up with that conclusion given a government grant and a few million dollars worth of equipment.
And you're still missing the ape point completely. 2.3 millions years ago, the creature that we theoretically diverged from was still an ape by every definition of the word. Just because it doesn't exist now and might be slightly different from the apes we have now does not make it any less an ape.
This ancestor would probably qualify as an ape under any definition of ape wielded by modern science. What is to be gained by saying that this tailless primate that gave rise to both man and modern ape was not, in fact, an ape itself? What qualities did it lack that would remove it from true apedom?
But any species divergence we will see in modern science will happen in a time frame testable by modern science. Trying to apply the hypothesis beyond the testable time frame is useless, since there is no application for the resulting conclusions. (Besides giving people something to argue about on Slashdot of course.)
Can they account for the development of the eyeball though? We've never seen them do so. Saying otherwise violates the scientific method, which is based on observation, not speculation.
If these children are so bright as you like to think, why can't they decide for themselves between evolution and creationism? You claim the answer is obvious enough.
Also, you seem to have great faith in the unfailing accuracy of your scientists' speculations about the past. What if they're wrong? We all know that archaeologists make mistakes about things that happened mere thousands of years ago.
If the past is interpreted according to a single theory without competition, errors will go undetected as anything that does not fit the assumption is ignored or completely unnoticed. Be glad you have creationists to pick off some of your unscientific flaws, frauds, and weak points.
No, they didn't come from modern apes according to historical evolution. However, anyone who discovered such a proto-ape living now would in all likelihood throw it in the ape category with the others since it would fit all the required criteria for a tailless primate.
Why are you being overly technical?
As for your chromosome point, why is the origin of the chromosome significant so long as we know what it does in the present and will do in the future? Why is it worth fighting over? Why do people spend millions of dollars fighting, indoctrinating, teaching, and campaigning for one side or the other?
You have this idea that the past is somehow important. It's not. True experimental science is only concerned with the possibilities of the present and future.
Technically speaking, historical evolution isn't science either, it's theoretical history. We don't teach ancient Egypt in science class, why evolution?
What part of believing that men came from apes in the past is required to understand how mutations, genetics, and natural selection work in the present day? The history of the earth was supposedly engineered from what we know in the present, so why bother with the history part at all? Why is the origin of the planet such a big deal?
Slashdot Mirror
And so hardcore internet culture switches to waking up early instead of staying up late. Even less contact with the living human race.
Honestly, there is already so much art in the world that no person can consume all of it in a lifetime. There is enough public domain or freely released art to occupy a person for far more of their free time than a person should spend on such things. I don't believe we really need art to be carried in such a high protected status as it has been anymore. Author's life plus 20 years should be plenty of time for the author's kids to recover from his death, grow up, and find jobs.
Hello, DHS. I'm about 12 hours drive north of your northern border and I'm using a torrent based file sharing service right now. Come get me.
+1 there. Your government needs to get itself kicked back into line. So far Canada is looking like a better and better place to stay. I've still got the option of getting my citizenship expanded to be dual with the US, but that's never going to happen.
This is not the DHS's job. Get off the Internet you gun wielding freaks.
Hang on, that fee will only make you stop receiving ads, not make them stop snooping your data.
Might I remind you that without PC games and Quake, there would never have been Team Fortress 2. PC games are where great ideas are created without a budget that rivals the US military. Of course they show up in their polished form on consoles, but not before us PC gamers have laid the ground work.
I see you've never head of pathfinding AI. Hundreds of units moving around, all having to figure out where they want to go over a gigantic map with different speed values for every tile of terrain. Having to do that can make almost any processing unit shake in sheer terror. Not something console FPS games have to deal with.
And go upgrade your memory you caveman.
This is a breach of national security by their new standards regardless of why they did it. Thousands of people got on aircraft that could have been carrying explosives undetectable by metal detectors.
I think you're completely missing the point: If he is obviously muslim, then he isn't trying to hide anything. The men who hijacked the 9/11 planes didn't look obviously muslim but were.
So simply dunk it in baking soda and watch the fireworks.
Of course there are cities in Canada that aren't as safe as the one you live in. I should know, I live in one.
It could be perfectly possible for the 911 operator to text back using a different number entirely. And we just need to train people to give the four W's: Who, What, Where, and Weapons. With those four facts you can generally get the response level you need.
I thought it was a parent's job to hunt around for acceptable role models for their kids.
You do realize that most waste products that can be used as you mentioned contain toxins themselves? Bottom ash and fly ash from coal plants is comparable to nuclear waste.
...wut?
If you're going to go saying this nonsense, you could at least say it in a way that makes it sound like you didn't just shove together a bunch of random conspiracy theory (and environmental?) catchphrases as a joke.
As it is, it just looks like you've been smoking pot with your spiritual being too much.
It's the physical structure and method of breeding that makes it a virus or a parasite. The common cold is a virus and it definitely doesn't kill in most cases.
As was Mad Cow, Hoof and Mouth, Y2K, Terrorists, Avian Flu, and a half dozen other incidents in the past couple decades.
Thinking that the genomes of two similar creatures might also be similar is not rocket science. After comparing your first three creatures with no historical background whatsoever you could easily come to that conclusion. Even a creationist could come up with that conclusion given a government grant and a few million dollars worth of equipment. And you're still missing the ape point completely. 2.3 millions years ago, the creature that we theoretically diverged from was still an ape by every definition of the word. Just because it doesn't exist now and might be slightly different from the apes we have now does not make it any less an ape.
This ancestor would probably qualify as an ape under any definition of ape wielded by modern science. What is to be gained by saying that this tailless primate that gave rise to both man and modern ape was not, in fact, an ape itself? What qualities did it lack that would remove it from true apedom?
But any species divergence we will see in modern science will happen in a time frame testable by modern science. Trying to apply the hypothesis beyond the testable time frame is useless, since there is no application for the resulting conclusions. (Besides giving people something to argue about on Slashdot of course.)
Can they account for the development of the eyeball though? We've never seen them do so. Saying otherwise violates the scientific method, which is based on observation, not speculation.
If these children are so bright as you like to think, why can't they decide for themselves between evolution and creationism? You claim the answer is obvious enough.
Also, you seem to have great faith in the unfailing accuracy of your scientists' speculations about the past. What if they're wrong? We all know that archaeologists make mistakes about things that happened mere thousands of years ago.
If the past is interpreted according to a single theory without competition, errors will go undetected as anything that does not fit the assumption is ignored or completely unnoticed. Be glad you have creationists to pick off some of your unscientific flaws, frauds, and weak points.
No, they didn't come from modern apes according to historical evolution. However, anyone who discovered such a proto-ape living now would in all likelihood throw it in the ape category with the others since it would fit all the required criteria for a tailless primate.
Why are you being overly technical?
As for your chromosome point, why is the origin of the chromosome significant so long as we know what it does in the present and will do in the future? Why is it worth fighting over? Why do people spend millions of dollars fighting, indoctrinating, teaching, and campaigning for one side or the other?
You have this idea that the past is somehow important. It's not. True experimental science is only concerned with the possibilities of the present and future.
Technically speaking, historical evolution isn't science either, it's theoretical history. We don't teach ancient Egypt in science class, why evolution? What part of believing that men came from apes in the past is required to understand how mutations, genetics, and natural selection work in the present day? The history of the earth was supposedly engineered from what we know in the present, so why bother with the history part at all? Why is the origin of the planet such a big deal?