why choose water as the determining factor in deciding what a gram is (g=1cm^3 of water)
We didn't. The gram is NOT defined as 1 cm^3 of water, although it's close. The gram is defined to be 1/1000 the mass of the platinum-iridium cylider kept in a room in Paris somewhere. The kilogram is the only unit left that's still defined by a physical object.
If an explanation is requested and the answer is to "just believe" in an unsubstantiated theory, then that, my friend, is a request of "faith" as the answer.
Evolution is anything but an unsubstantiated theory. This is a good site to start with.
So it's the faith thing again. I'm just supposed to believe.
No. Consider these two statments:
God made the angler fish that way.
Given the known mechanisms of evolution, here is a plausible series of steps that could have produced the angler fish.
If I make the first statement, I am asserting that God made the fish and that's that. You must have faith to agree with me.
If I make the second statement, I am only offering a possibility. Agreeing with me in this case only means that you agree that my scenario is *possible*.
Substitute 'car' for 'angler fish. If you point at a car and ask where it came from, I can either say that God made it, or I can say that I know that some cars come from Europe on a boat, and that some come from Detroit on a train, so it might have been one of those two possiblities. Which one requires faith?
I remember when the standard was the bombadier beetle. Now it's the angler fish. Evolution in action!:)
I can't tell you *how* it evolved, because I, personally, wasn't sitting around watching it. However, you ought to be able to come up with a scenario of how it *could* have happened.
Re:sigh .. there is no such thing as "macroevoluti
on
Shapes of Time
·
· Score: 2
But can we observe speciation or massive shifts from one type of organism to another? No.
I doubt that the moon landings actually occurred. However, I am not a nut.
Actually, upon closely inspection, you are.
For example, if the space suits that nasa had in the 60s were good enough to allow a person to pass through the van allen belt, then why are they not good enough to allow someone to don one and clean up Three Mile Island?
A) The Van Allen belts are not so dangerous as the conspiracists want you to believe. B) While travelling through the belts, the astronauts had the added benefit of being INSIDE A SPACECRAFT. C) Three Mile Island was cleaned up years ago.
What I don't get is how everyone here is so quick to dismiss any person who doubts the government as a nut.
We don't. We dismiss people who continue to doubt the moon landings in spite of all evidence and logic.
Dr. Hasinger noted that humans on Earth would not have to worry about this galactic collision: they will not be around. The Sun is expected to blow up into a nova in three billion years, and perhaps then collapse to form a small black hole of its own, he said.
Um. No. The Sun is not massive enough to "blow up into a nova" or to collapse into a black hole. It will, most likely, expand into a red giant (and swallowing Mercury, Venus, and maybe the Earth). Whatever is left after that will shrink into a white dwarf.
Spanish is like singing, french is like talking, german is like spitting and english is like vomiting.
Actually, based on my experience, I'd say: English is like talking, French is like lisping, Spanish is like mumbling, and German is like gnawing on a piece of granite.
Some people are better at math than others. I'm not. It's much easier for me to add 15 + 5 = 20 than 15 + 5 = N then N * 0.06 = X then N + X = H. Hell, I probably have even that wrong... do you see what I mean now!?!?!
Your argument for buying online that you suck at math? You should get a calculator. You can buy one online for six bucks here.
why do you think we buy stuff on the internet? Cheap prices, and no tax!
Not really. There are only two categories of things I buy off the Internet: 1) stuff that I can't find anywhere else and 2) plane tickets.
Everything else I buy at brick-and-mortar store. At a store, I can actually look at the item, not a jpg of the item; if I have to return it, it's much easier; I can have it NOW, no waiting on UPS or FedEx; and I don't have to pay for shipping.
) According to my Bible, animals were created in a day.
What is a "day" to God? That's where your argument falls apart. For all we know 'day' in Genesis might mean a billion years.
For the record, I do reject any teaching of man that doesn't line-up with the Bible.
So we should teach that rabbits chew the cud, bats are birds, and grasshoppers have four legs? (Leviticus)
We should not teach that the Earth is round, becuase the Bible implies that it is flat? (four corners of the world)
Genesis 1 says the the order of creation was birds and fish, then land animals, then man. Genesis 2 says man, then animals and birds. Which one should we teach? Either way we have a contradiction.
I would rather place my beliefs on a set of stable principals, rather than shifting ideologies that have yet to offer me what my Father can already provide.
This is too far off topic, and it's getting old, so this is my last post. But what you are saying is that you would essentially live in a fantasy world that reality. You don't KNOW that your Father can provide anything because you don't KNOW that He even exists. Is that a stable principal? It sounds more like building your dream house on quicksand. Those "shifting ideologies" gave you the computer you are posting your messages with, and yet you reject it. Those shifting ideologies gave us vaccines and cars and electricity and radio, and yet you reject it. That's a shame.
For me, the most convincing "evidence" supportng the conspiracy theory is the radiation belt, and NASA's inability (even at present IIRC) to send any living thing through it without receiving a lethal dose
The van Allen belts are regions above the Earth's surface where the Earth's magnetic field has trapped particles of the solar wind. An unprotected man would indeed get a lethal dose of radiation, if he stayed there long enough. Actually, the spaceship traveled through the belts pretty quickly, getting past them in an hour or so. There simply wasn't enough time to get a lethal dose, and, as a matter of fact, the metal hull of the spaceship did indeed block most of the radiation.
Yeah, but if you're a Christian and believe in the Old Testament it does.
No, it doesn't. Genesis only says "God created...". It doesn't say HOW He created. He could have used (and still be using) evolution to do the creating.
I had it happen to me back somewhere around 0.99. It always wanted to save.exe files with a.jpg extension, as in foo.exe.jpg. Made it kind of annoying downloading patches for Dungeon Siege.:)
You said you preferred creationism because evolution doesn't offer much "comfort".
The theories of evolution (there are several) aren't *supposed* to offer comfort. They are scientific theories, not religion. Do you reject General Relativity because it doesn't provide comfort? Do you reject the germ theory of disease because it doesn't provide hope? How about the heliocentric theory of the solar system?
Why do you single out evolution from all of science? If you reject evolution because you feel it conflicts with your faith, you don't have to worry. You can accept evolution and still believe in God. Maybe God is guiding the forces of natural selection? Maybe She's running a big experiment to see what She can make? Such questions are outside the realm of science, so feel free to put God in charge if you want.
Too bad the evidence for evolution as we know it isn't enough to bring it out of the 'theory' stage. Never mind the fact that a growing majority of schools teach the concept as fact.
Grumble. Nothing in science ever gets beyond the 'theory' stage. We still have the Germ Theory of disease and the General Theory of relativity don't we?
Theories are science's attempt to explain facts.
Fact: Things are attracted to other things. Theory: Mass distorts spacetime and objects follow the shortest path in curved space.
Fact: Species change over time. Theory: Traits are inherited from parents with occasional mutations. Environmental pressures cause certain traits to be more successful than others.
one of the reasons I prefer creationism (and the beliefs one can have with faith in God) is that evolution doesn't offer me much comfort in the face of depression, loss, hurt, uncertainty, death, etc.
What does evolution have to do with any of that? The truth of evolution doesn't preclude the existence of God.
I'd much rather have the money spent on getting evolution out of the school systems
You don't want our kids taught good science then? Pity.
and if neither theory (evolution or creation)
Evolution is a theory. Creationism is not. For something to be a theory it has to be supported by objective evidence, make testable predictions, and be falsifiable. Creationism is none of these.
And since we've *seen* evolution (change in allele frequencies) happen, we're not arguing about *if* it happens. The only real debate these days is the *mechanism* by which it happens.
I think evolutionists like yourself are bigoted, faithless, hopeless souls who have no idea what's in store for them when they finally figure out they were wrong.
How dare you call me black, Mr. Pot!
Evolution is too stupid to figure out how to make a complex human being from scratch and keep the human growing effortlessly throughout its lifetime.
Evolution doesn't have to do that. Evolution only has to make humans from a species that's sort of like humans. And make *that* species from one a little less like humans. And make *THAT* species from...
Slashdot Mirror
why choose water as the determining factor in deciding what a gram is (g=1cm^3 of water)
We didn't. The gram is NOT defined as 1 cm^3 of water, although it's close. The gram is defined to be 1/1000 the mass of the platinum-iridium cylider kept in a room in Paris somewhere. The kilogram is the only unit left that's still defined by a physical object.
If an explanation is requested and the answer is to "just believe" in an unsubstantiated theory, then that, my friend, is a request of "faith" as the answer.
Evolution is anything but an unsubstantiated theory. This is a good site to start with.
No. Consider these two statments:
If I make the first statement, I am asserting that God made the fish and that's that. You must have faith to agree with me.
If I make the second statement, I am only offering a possibility. Agreeing with me in this case only means that you agree that my scenario is *possible*.
Substitute 'car' for 'angler fish. If you point at a car and ask where it came from, I can either say that God made it, or I can say that I know that some cars come from Europe on a boat, and that some come from Detroit on a train, so it might have been one of those two possiblities. Which one requires faith?
If you're trying to convince me
What am I supposed to be convincing you of?
but explain to me how angler fish evolved.
:)
I remember when the standard was the bombadier beetle. Now it's the angler fish. Evolution in action!
I can't tell you *how* it evolved, because I, personally, wasn't sitting around watching it. However, you ought to be able to come up with a scenario of how it *could* have happened.
But can we observe speciation or massive shifts from one type of organism to another? No.
Yes. Read this and this.
I've never seen a film about the Verrazano Narrows bridge collapse.. In fact, there isn't even a bridge with that name.
Really?
Programmers are morally obligated to give the code to their users and allow their users to freely modify and redistribute the code.
Sez you. I'll decide what my morals say, thank you.
Yes. And they were watching every move we made and no doubt were tracking the spacecraft and were probably listening in on the communications...
I doubt that the moon landings actually occurred. However, I am not a nut.
Actually, upon closely inspection, you are.
For example, if the space suits that nasa had in the 60s were good enough to allow a person to pass through the van allen belt, then why are they not good enough to allow someone to don one and clean up Three Mile Island?
A) The Van Allen belts are not so dangerous as the conspiracists want you to believe.
B) While travelling through the belts, the astronauts had the added benefit of being INSIDE A SPACECRAFT.
C) Three Mile Island was cleaned up years ago.
What I don't get is how everyone here is so quick to dismiss any person who doubts the government as a nut.
We don't. We dismiss people who continue to doubt the moon landings in spite of all evidence and logic.
BUT, the Earth's orbit will decay over the course of around 5 billion years, so we are going to get sucked in, one way or another.
No. The sun is losing mass; something like 4.6 million tons per second. This means that the Earth's orbit is gradually getting larger, not decaying.
We are meddling with forces we do not comprehend,
Yes. The technical name for such meddling is "science".
Dr. Hasinger noted that humans on Earth would not have to worry about this galactic collision: they will not be around. The Sun is expected to blow up into a nova in three billion years, and perhaps then collapse to form a small black hole of its own, he said.
Um. No. The Sun is not massive enough to "blow up into a nova" or to collapse into a black hole. It will, most likely, expand into a red giant (and swallowing Mercury, Venus, and maybe the Earth). Whatever is left after that will shrink into a white dwarf.
Spanish is like singing, french is like talking, german is like spitting and english is like vomiting.
:)
Actually, based on my experience, I'd say: English is like talking, French is like lisping, Spanish is like mumbling, and German is like gnawing on a piece of granite.
But YMMV
Some people are better at math than others. I'm not. It's much easier for me to add 15 + 5 = 20 than 15 + 5 = N then N * 0.06 = X then N + X = H. Hell, I probably have even that wrong... do you see what I mean now!?!?!
Your argument for buying online that you suck at math? You should get a calculator. You can buy one online for six bucks here.
why do you think we buy stuff on the internet? Cheap prices, and no tax!
Not really. There are only two categories of things I buy off the Internet: 1) stuff that I can't find anywhere else and 2) plane tickets.
Everything else I buy at brick-and-mortar store. At a store, I can actually look at the item, not a jpg of the item; if I have to return it, it's much easier; I can have it NOW, no waiting on UPS or FedEx; and I don't have to pay for shipping.
) According to my Bible, animals were created in a day.
What is a "day" to God? That's where your argument falls apart. For all we know 'day' in Genesis might mean a billion years.
For the record, I do reject any teaching of man that doesn't line-up with the Bible.
So we should teach that rabbits chew the cud, bats are birds, and grasshoppers have four legs? (Leviticus)
We should not teach that the Earth is round, becuase the Bible implies that it is flat? (four corners of the world)
Genesis 1 says the the order of creation was birds and fish, then land animals, then man. Genesis 2 says man, then animals and birds. Which one should we teach? Either way we have a contradiction.
I would rather place my beliefs on a set of stable principals, rather than shifting ideologies that have yet to offer me what my Father can already provide.
This is too far off topic, and it's getting old, so this is my last post. But what you are saying is that you would essentially live in a fantasy world that reality. You don't KNOW that your Father can provide anything because you don't KNOW that He even exists. Is that a stable principal? It sounds more like building your dream house on quicksand. Those "shifting ideologies" gave you the computer you are posting your messages with, and yet you reject it. Those shifting ideologies gave us vaccines and cars and electricity and radio, and yet you reject it. That's a shame.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
Copied from the Bad Astronomy site:
Yeah, but if you're a Christian and believe in the Old Testament it does.
No, it doesn't. Genesis only says "God created...". It doesn't say HOW He created. He could have used (and still be using) evolution to do the creating.
where here in the US we dont see much of a move away from the full sized washers.
Um, that's because I have a lot of clothes and don't want to either wash them every day or do 20 loads every week or so.
One of the reasons I chose the apartment I live in is because it had a full size washer and dryer.
8. NEVER have i had this or heard of it happening
.exe files with a .jpg extension, as in foo.exe.jpg. Made it kind of annoying downloading patches for Dungeon Siege. :)
I had it happen to me back somewhere around 0.99. It always wanted to save
2) View source opens notepad. I want to be able to edit, save (without it downloading the damn thing again!), and whatever.
File --> Edit Page
Good non-answer.
You said you preferred creationism because evolution doesn't offer much "comfort".
The theories of evolution (there are several) aren't *supposed* to offer comfort. They are scientific theories, not religion. Do you reject General Relativity because it doesn't provide comfort? Do you reject the germ theory of disease because it doesn't provide hope? How about the heliocentric theory of the solar system?
Why do you single out evolution from all of science? If you reject evolution because you feel it conflicts with your faith, you don't have to worry. You can accept evolution and still believe in God. Maybe God is guiding the forces of natural selection? Maybe She's running a big experiment to see what She can make? Such questions are outside the realm of science, so feel free to put God in charge if you want.
Traits are inherited from parents? That's a theory?
:)
You cut the rest of my sentence, but in any case...
No, that traits are inherited from parent is a _fact_. The _theory_ in this particular case is that the traits are encoded in the organism's DNA.
But that's only one part of the various theories of evolution.
And that's your excuse for creationism?
No, there's no excuse for creationism.
Too bad the evidence for evolution as we know it isn't enough to bring it out of the 'theory' stage. Never mind the fact that a growing majority of schools teach the concept as fact.
Grumble. Nothing in science ever gets beyond the 'theory' stage. We still have the Germ Theory of disease and the General Theory of relativity don't we?
Theories are science's attempt to explain facts.
Fact: Things are attracted to other things.
Theory: Mass distorts spacetime and objects follow the shortest path in curved space.
Fact: Species change over time.
Theory: Traits are inherited from parents with occasional mutations. Environmental pressures cause certain traits to be more successful than others.
one of the reasons I prefer creationism (and the beliefs one can have with faith in God) is that evolution doesn't offer me much comfort in the face of depression, loss, hurt, uncertainty, death, etc.
What does evolution have to do with any of that? The truth of evolution doesn't preclude the existence of God.
I'd much rather have the money spent on getting evolution out of the school systems
...
You don't want our kids taught good science then? Pity.
and if neither theory (evolution or creation)
Evolution is a theory. Creationism is not. For something to be a theory it has to be supported by objective evidence, make testable predictions, and be falsifiable. Creationism is none of these.
And since we've *seen* evolution (change in allele frequencies) happen, we're not arguing about *if* it happens. The only real debate these days is the *mechanism* by which it happens.
I think evolutionists like yourself are bigoted, faithless, hopeless souls who have no idea what's in store for them when they finally figure out they were wrong.
How dare you call me black, Mr. Pot!
Evolution is too stupid to figure out how to make a complex human being from scratch and keep the human growing effortlessly throughout its lifetime.
Evolution doesn't have to do that. Evolution only has to make humans from a species that's sort of like humans. And make *that* species from one a little less like humans. And make *THAT* species from