How can a species adapt (in the biological sense) without changing their genes?
Well, first I don't think their genes change because of force of will. Most of the "micro-evolution" that has been observed is not adaptation at all, but the propogation of traits. Whose to say how these traits were introduced into the gene pool in the first place? Mutation? Divine intervention? No proof for either.
The rest of your text is just one big unsubstantiated assertion
Actually, it is called opinion. And just because I choose to not share my faith promoting experiences does not make it any less true.
I love the happy they/them we/us mentality here. As for "small-scale evolution" being observed, a better term would be adaptation. Maybe even adaptation through mutation. However evolutionsists veiw it, the theory falls down flat because it requires evidence and there is none that supports cross-species changes/mutations. Fossile records are great, but they can't replace seeing the beasts directly. Supposition will never convince those who are truely searching.
More on the Amazon Phenomenon
on
Heart of the Net
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
For better or worse, Amazon has changed marketing in America for good.
A niche question here, but I would be interested to hear from John (or anyone) on why you think this is or is not so. I have spent a lot of money there and have seen it absorb the online entities of Toys 'R Us, IMDb and others. In what ways has this affected all marketing across America?
evolution is accepted as fact because it works it explains what exists and doesnt. The amount of evidence for it is huge.
It's alright if this is your view, but I would bring to light several academicians and scientists whose own research would show that this simply is not true. While there is evidence supporting evolution, I would not categorize it as 'huge'. Indeed there are several 'huge' holes in the theory. Namely, an incomplete succession of fossil records between Neanderthal Man and Homo Sapiens; until now, a lack of macro evolutionary methods that fit with the theory; and the fact that there is no evidence for any macro-evolutionary changes in the past 150-200 years. While true that most scientists accept the theory of evolution to the point that it is a point of study in most high school biology classes, that does not make it fact. In my opinion, fact can only be established by a person who has all knowledge and the power to comprehend all things. Everything else is based on perspective and is therefore inherently flawed.
How can they know that evolution and geological processes are not just more tools in God's toolbox? They can't know, and they who presume to know how God created the universe or to put limits on the methods God used in creation are both small-minded and arrogant beyond belief!
I would submit that you fall victim to your own reasoning. If, that is you presume to limit God's toolbox to exclusively use evolution and geological processes. Personally, I believe that God created the Universe and everything we see in it. Furthermore I believe that all living things were created such that it's "seed should be in itself, after his kind". Meaning that from protozoa to humans were all created as they are now with no evolution taking place, ever.
Now don't misunderstand me. I am an EE student and my wife teaches AP biology at a public high school. I have attended college level evolution lectures and spoken to several professors on the subject. Yet I remain unconvinced that evolution has actually taken place. However, that is not to say that I want to implant my views with a 2x4 into someone elses skull.
I wonder if Creationists are afraid of the power and knowledge of the God who created evolution and the Big Bang; I wonder if they want to cut Him down to a size they can comprehend?
On the contrary. As a 'creationist' I strive to comprehend all of God's creations while realizing that as a mortal man, I will never achieve this goal. Perhaps you will agree that God is perfect and men and women are not. If so, understand that by sweeping all people who do not believe in evolution into one big "creationist" basket, you are including people who don't as you say, "resort to blatant misinformation". I have my reasons for believing the way I do and they are based in what I term to be fact. If you are interested in them, please e-mail me and I would be happy to explain my views.
I agree. The only thing better however, is having two screens, one to work on said programming, the other for docs, reference material and mp3 player controls. I get much more work done with two 18" LCD's than I did with my old 21" CRT.
My vote then would be b) eBook/PDF if you throw in a free LCD for first time customers;)
Look at Intel and AMD (Celeron and Duron). Both came out when their counterpart procs (P-III and Athlon) were faster both in Mhz and design (cache, architecture, etc). And they fit their market segment with very good results. If you think about it, the MX line is really the same thing. It's just that Nvidia came out with all flavors at the same time, instead of releasing the Pro/Ti then the MX.
The article mentions that controlling Lithium flow is the main problem of this design:
"...scientists use a magnetic field to control the high-energy plasma inside a fusion reactor. And since liquid lithium is a metal, it's tugged around and made erratic by the magnetic field.
So they basicaly have introduced a new problem by trying to solve the containment issues with a liquid metal. My understanding of previous reactor designs was that the magnetic field was so strong that the plasma never touched the walls of the containment unit and thus did not create as much of the thermal problems (neutron bombardment is another matter). So by introducing liguid Lithium into the reactor core as a sheilding agent, they solve containment but the same magnetic field now causes flow problems with the Li.
No being a fusion technology specialist, I wonder how feasible it would be to refine and control the magnetic fields they are using. Create one for the plasma and another for the Li. Would the fields interfere with each other? If so, could they dampen the plasma field to give stability to the Li? What kind of power generation is required for two fields of similar strength?
Next to the Civ series, Total Annihilation has got to be my all time single most addicting game. First it was single player in campaign mode. Then multi on LAN @ work. Jeez, how much time did I spend "working overtime" in the summer of '99? Now it's back to single player with my home brewed gargantuan metal maps. To bad kingdoms sucked. I played fours yesterday alone.
I agree, municipalities can offer both good and bad, but at least they are a second option. More than can be said in some parts of the country.
City Utilities in Springfield, MO has been offering a wide array of internet service to Greene County for a number of years. They provide a much better alternative than some of the for profit companies in that area of the country, IMO. Anything from dial-up to leased OC-12 on their in city SONET ring. The company I worked for there leased two OC-3's from them at $10,000 a month. Would be nice to have at the house... Telecommuting anyone?
I see this over and over. People squabbling over so and so's tax plan. Who cares? It's like choosing the lesser of two eavils (what about this election isn't?) I digress. My humble opinion is this: scrap the whole tax policy and rewrite it from scratch. Make it flat and then there is no pandering to special interest groups, swing voters, lesbigays, straights or anyone else. I pay 15% of my $50,000/year, joehomeless pays 15% of his $3000/year and Mr. Oil Tycoon pays 15% of his $3,000,000/year.
Thats $7500, $450 and $450,000 respectively. Sounds fair to me! Sure make the tax forms a lot simpler! Sure would put alot of IRS folks, tax attorneys, lobbyists and other bureacrats out of a job too. So until someone tells me they want to cut the tax laws not taxes, I will keep on ignoring their patronizing rhetoric.
I don't know... you see this kind of this happening all over the world. A dictatorship like Iraq or Cuba makes it easy to pull off wholesale control over the average citizen. Here in the US we actually do have freedom! Albeit the sad truth is that it is nothing like it was 100 years ago, it still exists. We have it better than 99% of the rest of the world.
So to say that the government will see the revolt coming and stop it is too Hollywood for me. I don't care how much they know, 250 million versus 1 million (the armed forces of the US) no matter how big the guns are, will win.
In any respect, the USA as corrupt as it has become will not get to the point of internal armed conflict. Not without some serious blows to the constitution. Not without a complete change in the checks and balances that exist today. IMHO, the USA will be conquered by Mexico before it will succumb to a civil war. We are too diverse to come to a consensus. The last civil war happened only because enough people agreed on something important enough to die for. Almost half the country's population (who happened to be in one geographic location) decided on the same thing. This simply cannot happen now. California has had countless chances to split into north and south but hasn't because no consensus could be found. The same is true for the rest of the country. We are too much a melting pot of the world for any one thing to foment a schism of that magnitude.
And unless you want to live like the Unabomber, it's nearly impossible to live, work or do business apart from corporatists. Sooner or later, like it or not, you'll be on one side or the other.
I dunno John. It seems to me that there is more than two options here. When you say 'apart from corporatists' do you mean the actual corps themselves or anyone who buys into their thinking?
Regardless of what you mean, there is another option. The choice to remove corporatism from your life without 'fighting' it. We have no choice but to live in this world (unless we choose to die). Therefore, we have to live with the people in it. This includes corporatists, individualists, communists, racists, etc... So instead of uniting against this threat of corporatism, I choose to be a true individual.
I make my purchasing decisions based on what I want to buy. I eat rasin bran because it tastes good and has some nutritional value. I don't eat grape nuts because it gets stuck in my teeth. I don't care about the packaging or commercials or even what my friends like. I spend my money on things I like.
So what I am doing is making up my own mind about where my money goes. Don't even start with me about corporate brainwashing or any of that crap. If I was being brainwashed, how would I even know??? Basically, you can't expect a bunch of individuals to band together and fight the evil corporations. Instead, look for people to make intelligent decisions about what they think is right. That is all you can possibly hope for (as small a chance as that is.)
Although I feel that Mr Lizard's reply deserved a much better score than '1', there are some things I must disagree with him on. In Mr. Katz's essay he makes the following statement "Except through the act of voting -- which citizens increasingly see as pointless and meaningless, since they have such restricted options to choose between...the bedrock of American democracy has been virtually eliminated." I feel this way even though I do vote. I feel this way when I go to the store and look for a new strategy game or pair of running shoes. Instead of looking for the best product available, we are being forced to choose the best of what is available. Mr. Katz contends that the people and entities producing our options are doing so with the intention of making money, not making the best choices available. I contend that he is right in this thing. I also contend that in it's purest form the global corporation can be the "ultimate sybmol of human excellence" as you say. What we have before us for the most part is pure un-adulterated greed. The corporate world is dominated by money and power hungry tyrants. I know, I've met them, i've worked for them and I see the results of their selfish decisions.
Welcome to a society filled with capitalists! The almighty $ (or whatever it is in your country) is more important than substance. Like a dog who licks his gonads, they milk it because they can....
http://www.fas.org/irp/overhead/groom.htm This site apparently is doing a side by side comparison of the photos of area 51 from the USGS, Aerial Images and soon IKONOS. I got the link from ZDNET: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2551 676,00.html?chkpt=zdhpnews01
Slashdot Mirror
How can a species adapt (in the biological sense) without changing their genes?
Well, first I don't think their genes change because of force of will. Most of the "micro-evolution" that has been observed is not adaptation at all, but the propogation of traits. Whose to say how these traits were introduced into the gene pool in the first place? Mutation? Divine intervention? No proof for either.
The rest of your text is just one big unsubstantiated assertion
Actually, it is called opinion. And just because I choose to not share my faith promoting experiences does not make it any less true.
I love the happy they/them we/us mentality here. As for "small-scale evolution" being observed, a better term would be adaptation. Maybe even adaptation through mutation. However evolutionsists veiw it, the theory falls down flat because it requires evidence and there is none that supports cross-species changes/mutations. Fossile records are great, but they can't replace seeing the beasts directly. Supposition will never convince those who are truely searching.
For better or worse, Amazon has changed marketing in America for good.
A niche question here, but I would be interested to hear from John (or anyone) on why you think this is or is not so. I have spent a lot of money there and have seen it absorb the online entities of Toys 'R Us, IMDb and others. In what ways has this affected all marketing across America?
evolution is accepted as fact because it works it explains what exists and doesnt. The amount of evidence for it is huge.
It's alright if this is your view, but I would bring to light several academicians and scientists whose own research would show that this simply is not true. While there is evidence supporting evolution, I would not categorize it as 'huge'. Indeed there are several 'huge' holes in the theory. Namely, an incomplete succession of fossil records between Neanderthal Man and Homo Sapiens; until now, a lack of macro evolutionary methods that fit with the theory; and the fact that there is no evidence for any macro-evolutionary changes in the past 150-200 years. While true that most scientists accept the theory of evolution to the point that it is a point of study in most high school biology classes, that does not make it fact. In my opinion, fact can only be established by a person who has all knowledge and the power to comprehend all things. Everything else is based on perspective and is therefore inherently flawed.
How can they know that evolution and geological processes are not just more tools in God's toolbox? They can't know, and they who presume to know how God created the universe or to put limits on the methods God used in creation are both small-minded and arrogant beyond belief!
I would submit that you fall victim to your own reasoning. If, that is you presume to limit God's toolbox to exclusively use evolution and geological processes. Personally, I believe that God created the Universe and everything we see in it. Furthermore I believe that all living things were created such that it's "seed should be in itself, after his kind". Meaning that from protozoa to humans were all created as they are now with no evolution taking place, ever.
Now don't misunderstand me. I am an EE student and my wife teaches AP biology at a public high school. I have attended college level evolution lectures and spoken to several professors on the subject. Yet I remain unconvinced that evolution has actually taken place. However, that is not to say that I want to implant my views with a 2x4 into someone elses skull.
I wonder if Creationists are afraid of the power and knowledge of the God who created evolution and the Big Bang; I wonder if they want to cut Him down to a size they can comprehend?
On the contrary. As a 'creationist' I strive to comprehend all of God's creations while realizing that as a mortal man, I will never achieve this goal. Perhaps you will agree that God is perfect and men and women are not. If so, understand that by sweeping all people who do not believe in evolution into one big "creationist" basket, you are including people who don't as you say, "resort to blatant misinformation". I have my reasons for believing the way I do and they are based in what I term to be fact. If you are interested in them, please e-mail me and I would be happy to explain my views.
I agree. The only thing better however, is having two screens, one to work on said programming, the other for docs, reference material and mp3 player controls. I get much more work done with two 18" LCD's than I did with my old 21" CRT.
;)
My vote then would be b) eBook/PDF if you throw in a free LCD for first time customers
Look at Intel and AMD (Celeron and Duron). Both came out when their counterpart procs (P-III and Athlon) were faster both in Mhz and design (cache, architecture, etc). And they fit their market segment with very good results. If you think about it, the MX line is really the same thing. It's just that Nvidia came out with all flavors at the same time, instead of releasing the Pro/Ti then the MX.
The article mentions that controlling Lithium flow is the main problem of this design:
"...scientists use a magnetic field to control the high-energy plasma inside a fusion reactor. And since liquid lithium is a metal, it's tugged around and made erratic by the magnetic field.
So they basicaly have introduced a new problem by trying to solve the containment issues with a liquid metal. My understanding of previous reactor designs was that the magnetic field was so strong that the plasma never touched the walls of the containment unit and thus did not create as much of the thermal problems (neutron bombardment is another matter). So by introducing liguid Lithium into the reactor core as a sheilding agent, they solve containment but the same magnetic field now causes flow problems with the Li.
No being a fusion technology specialist, I wonder how feasible it would be to refine and control the magnetic fields they are using. Create one for the plasma and another for the Li. Would the fields interfere with each other? If so, could they dampen the plasma field to give stability to the Li? What kind of power generation is required for two fields of similar strength?
Next to the Civ series, Total Annihilation has got to be my all time single most addicting game. First it was single player in campaign mode. Then multi on LAN @ work. Jeez, how much time did I spend "working overtime" in the summer of '99? Now it's back to single player with my home brewed gargantuan metal maps. To bad kingdoms sucked. I played fours yesterday alone.
Why haven't I heard about these Beowulf "clusters" on Slashdot before?
./ers follow pagan heros?
Since when do
They also supported Alpha but now only support x86.
Look the System Requirements for 2000 and XP.
I bet they still won't support my PPC proc and mobo! Damn Microsoft bastards!
I agree, municipalities can offer both good and bad, but at least they are a second option. More than can be said in some parts of the country. City Utilities in Springfield, MO has been offering a wide array of internet service to Greene County for a number of years. They provide a much better alternative than some of the for profit companies in that area of the country, IMO. Anything from dial-up to leased OC-12 on their in city SONET ring. The company I worked for there leased two OC-3's from them at $10,000 a month. Would be nice to have at the house... Telecommuting anyone?
Thats $7500, $450 and $450,000 respectively. Sounds fair to me! Sure make the tax forms a lot simpler! Sure would put alot of IRS folks, tax attorneys, lobbyists and other bureacrats out of a job too. So until someone tells me they want to cut the tax laws not taxes, I will keep on ignoring their patronizing rhetoric.
Enjoy
So to say that the government will see the revolt coming and stop it is too Hollywood for me. I don't care how much they know, 250 million versus 1 million (the armed forces of the US) no matter how big the guns are, will win.
In any respect, the USA as corrupt as it has become will not get to the point of internal armed conflict. Not without some serious blows to the constitution. Not without a complete change in the checks and balances that exist today. IMHO, the USA will be conquered by Mexico before it will succumb to a civil war. We are too diverse to come to a consensus. The last civil war happened only because enough people agreed on something important enough to die for. Almost half the country's population (who happened to be in one geographic location) decided on the same thing. This simply cannot happen now. California has had countless chances to split into north and south but hasn't because no consensus could be found. The same is true for the rest of the country. We are too much a melting pot of the world for any one thing to foment a schism of that magnitude.
And unless you want to live like the Unabomber, it's nearly impossible to live, work or do business apart from corporatists. Sooner or later, like it or not, you'll be on one side or the other.
I dunno John. It seems to me that there is more than two options here. When you say 'apart from corporatists' do you mean the actual corps themselves or anyone who buys into their thinking?
Regardless of what you mean, there is another option. The choice to remove corporatism from your life without 'fighting' it. We have no choice but to live in this world (unless we choose to die). Therefore, we have to live with the people in it. This includes corporatists, individualists, communists, racists, etc... So instead of uniting against this threat of corporatism, I choose to be a true individual.
I make my purchasing decisions based on what I want to buy. I eat rasin bran because it tastes good and has some nutritional value. I don't eat grape nuts because it gets stuck in my teeth. I don't care about the packaging or commercials or even what my friends like. I spend my money on things I like.
So what I am doing is making up my own mind about where my money goes. Don't even start with me about corporate brainwashing or any of that crap. If I was being brainwashed, how would I even know??? Basically, you can't expect a bunch of individuals to band together and fight the evil corporations. Instead, look for people to make intelligent decisions about what they think is right. That is all you can possibly hope for (as small a chance as that is.)
Even thgough your thoughtless post doesn't warrant a reply, I will give you one.
Perhaps I wasn't being as clear as I could have. Even so, you pulled my comment completely out of context and sarcastically railed against it.
Feel better?
Although I feel that Mr Lizard's reply deserved a much better score than '1', there are some things I must disagree with him on. In Mr. Katz's essay he makes the following statement "Except through the act of voting -- which citizens increasingly see as pointless and meaningless, since they have such restricted options to choose between...the bedrock of American democracy has been virtually eliminated." I feel this way even though I do vote. I feel this way when I go to the store and look for a new strategy game or pair of running shoes. Instead of looking for the best product available, we are being forced to choose the best of what is available. Mr. Katz contends that the people and entities producing our options are doing so with the intention of making money, not making the best choices available. I contend that he is right in this thing. I also contend that in it's purest form the global corporation can be the "ultimate sybmol of human excellence" as you say. What we have before us for the most part is pure un-adulterated greed. The corporate world is dominated by money and power hungry tyrants. I know, I've met them, i've worked for them and I see the results of their selfish decisions.
Welcome to a society filled with capitalists! The almighty $ (or whatever it is in your country) is more important than substance. Like a dog who licks his gonads, they milk it because they can....
http://www.fas.org/irp/overhead/groom.htm This site apparently is doing a side by side comparison of the photos of area 51 from the USGS, Aerial Images and soon IKONOS. I got the link from ZDNET: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2551 676,00.html?chkpt=zdhpnews01