As a Christian, I believe that the entire Bible is true.
Oh dear, oh dear:
Leviticus 11:21-22 (KJV) Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth;
Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind.
This bug is why mozilla insists on adding.exe extensions to anything delivered as application/octet-stream
In my case it was adding.jpg to.exe files. I was able to figure out what caused this, at least on my system. Under "Helper Applications", I had JPEGs set to be opened with Mozilla. As soon as I deleted the association, the problem disappeared.
I reported the bug, and how to reproduce it, but it got marked as "WORKSFORME".
Also, are we all forgetting that IT IS ILLEGAL FOR ANYONE UNDER THE AGE OF 18 IN MOST STATES TO VIEW PORNOGRAPHY? Do you realize that you're happy that someone's right to break a law is being upheald? Where is the comstock act when we need it?
OK, have it your way. Now, who gets to decide what constitutes "pornography"? You? Me? George Bush? Is a picture of a nude woman porn? What about a picture of a woman showing how to give a breast self-exam? What about a statue, say, Michelangelo's David?
I highly suggest that you check out some of the recordings.... *much* better than standard CD!
Much better than a *standard* CD, maybe, but that's probably because the music samples on any new format are deliberately done very carefully so that they will sound impressive. If SACD or DVDA became the new standard, do you think the average quality would remain the same?
As another post said, the CD format is already good enough to perfectly reproduce any sound the average human can hear.
Sometimes I wish it was required for people to take a signal processing class before buying a stereo.:-/
both the Ender sequels (Speaker for the Dead, Xenocide, etc.)
Actually, while I love Ender's Game, I thought the sequels were complete, unadulterated, Grade-A crap. I struggled to get through the second one. I *barely* made it through the third one. I leafed through the fourth one at the book store and put it back on the shelf.
IF any aspect of the Cydonia region is artificial,
Except that it isn't. We now have much higher resolution photographs of the area than the Viking photos which started the whole "face" bullshit. There's nothing there other than some hills, mesas, and rocks.
I think both replies help to prove my original point -- that many people who back science are just as blind to alternatives as fundamentalist Christians.
Nope, you are wrong. Completely and utterly wrong. Science give its greatest awards to people who can successfully overturn established thought.
Patients who were prayed for by others (even in double blind studies) healed much faster than those who were not. (I'd post a URL, but I can't remember the name of the group without wading through a few books here.)
In that case I'm calling 'bullshit'.
Science is sure they have all the answers and that religion is worthless.
Most of these things, like ESP or alien abduction have not been conclusively disproven.
If I claim I have ESP, it's not your job to prove that I don't, it's my job to prove that I do. No one have ever been able to prove that they do. There's a million dollars waiting for the first person who can.
and as for the big bang- religious leaders aren't the only ones to reject this idea- many legit scientists don't believe it either!
However, at least there's hard evidence for it, which is more than we can say for ESP or alien abduction.
1. How do you know which God to worship? What if you lived your whole life as a Christian and when you die you suddenly find yourself before the throne of Odin in the Halls of Asgard? Boy is he going to be pissed!
2. Any God with His salt is going to know that you only believed not out of genuine feeling, but only to cover your bets.
3. If you believe in God and you are wrong, it's not "no big deal". You still have lost something. You spent all that time going to church, praying, reading your Bible, etc, when you could have been out doing something productive.
At the moment, modern science isn't capable of giving serious attention to things like the possibility of extraterrestrial visitors.
Sure it is. The problem with the possibility of extraterresitral visitors is that of all the thousands of reports over the decades, we still don't have one single piece of solid evidence. What we have is a lot of photographs that could have been faked, blurry videos of something flying around the sky, and the word of the purported witnesses. It's a shame. It would be *cool* if there really were aliens with advanced hyperdrive capability visiting, for *some* reason, this speck of a planet, but unfortunately, there's no reason to think it's true.
OK, you win. Evolution is for real. Although evidence is lacking, I concede. God does not exist. Now what?
*Sigh* Evolution is real. We have seen it happen, which is pretty good evidence. However, the fact that evolution happens does not mean that God (if you believe in one) does not exist. You don't have to reject one to accept the other.
By your same arguments, Evolutionism is not a theory.
Is it testable? Umm - no.
Umm - yes. We have seen species change. We have even seen speciation happen.
Is it falsifiable? Umm - no.
Umm - yes. All we would need would be to find, say, fossils of the skeleton of a modern human in Cretaceous rocks. Or if you could should the DNA of humans and chimps was not similar.
Is it predictive? Umm -
Umm - yes. If you keep using insecticides that aren't 100% effective, theory predicts that you will soon end up with insect populations that are resistant to insecticides. And, hey! It happened!
No there won't, and if you had bothered to read the article closely, or you followed world politics at all, you'd know there has been an international ban on testing nuclear weapons since 1992.
If you bothered to follow *US* politics at all, you'd know that the US Senate voted against ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, so it doesn't apply to the US.
So, we have two options to weigh, is it more important to provide internet access in a library, or is it more important to maintain obscenity standards in a public place (and prevent children from being subjected to porn).
Or, as a third option, have the damn parents come with their kids for a change.
There are already laws protecting copyright, but the MPAA and RIAA (two major supporters of the bill) don't seem to want to use those laws; instead they'd rather shove responsibility onto an entirely separate industry. The analogy I use is that it's like punishing AT&T because someone used a telephone to plan a robbery.
While illegal copying definitely happens, it's not hurting the entertainment industry's bottom line. More people went to the movie theaters in 2001 than ever before. In 2000 when Napster was at it's height, the RIAA sold more CDs that it ever had. They only starting complaining about pirates after their sales dropped in 2001. But wait, didn't the *entire* economy put on the brakes in 2001? Which kind of touches on the next point...
The MPAA tried this once before with the VCR. They claimed it would destroy them. Today, over half the movie studios' income come from video rentals. The industry should be figuring out how to take advantage of new technology rather than banning it.
Bad for electronics industry. More hardware, more design work, higher prices. Also, what about overseas sales? Why should a company in (say) Germany shell out for half-crippled devices from the US when they could get a similar, fully-functional device somewhere else?
Assumes everyone who uses a computer is a criminal. Senator Hollings, who introduced the bill, said that "any device that can legitimately play, copy or electronically transmit one or more categories of media also can be misused for illegal copyright infringement, unless special protection technologies are incorporated." While no one would doubt the truth of this statement, it is also true that I could use my car to mow someone down in the street or to get away after robbing the local 7-11. But that doesn't mean we should be making Detroit build cars that magically sense when they are being used to commit a crime and automatically shut off the engine.
Slashdot Mirror
As a Christian, I believe that the entire Bible is true.
:)
Oh dear, oh dear:
Leviticus 11:21-22 (KJV)
Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth;
Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind.
So, do grasshoppers have four legs then?
) As a Christian, I do take the Bible literally, except where it is not to be taken literally
Followup question: How do you tell the literal bits from the non-literal bits?
This bug is why mozilla insists on adding .exe extensions to anything delivered as application/octet-stream
.jpg to .exe files. I was able to figure out what caused this, at least on my system. Under "Helper Applications", I had JPEGs set to be opened with Mozilla. As soon as I deleted the association, the problem disappeared.
In my case it was adding
I reported the bug, and how to reproduce it, but it got marked as "WORKSFORME".
Remember, none of this has totaly been proven.
But remember, nothing is even totally proven in science. The best we ever have is a theory that hasn't been proven wrong yet.
Also, are we all forgetting that IT IS ILLEGAL FOR ANYONE UNDER THE AGE OF 18 IN MOST STATES TO VIEW PORNOGRAPHY? Do you realize that you're happy that someone's right to break a law is being upheald? Where is the comstock act when we need it?
OK, have it your way. Now, who gets to decide what constitutes "pornography"? You? Me? George Bush? Is a picture of a nude woman porn? What about a picture of a woman showing how to give a breast self-exam? What about a statue, say, Michelangelo's David?
I highly suggest that you check out some of the recordings.... *much* better than standard CD!
:-/
Much better than a *standard* CD, maybe, but that's probably because the music samples on any new format are deliberately done very carefully so that they will sound impressive. If SACD or DVDA became the new standard, do you think the average quality would remain the same?
As another post said, the CD format is already good enough to perfectly reproduce any sound the average human can hear.
Sometimes I wish it was required for people to take a signal processing class before buying a stereo.
Just as an FYI, a CD's sampling rate is 44.1Khz (44,100 samples per second), SACD by comparison is 1.2Mhz (1,200,000 samples per second)
Except, audio-wise, it won't make a damn bit of difference unless you have super-human hearing.
Do we really care precisely how Anakin Skywalker got pissed off and turned to the Dark Side?
I do. Otherwise, what's the point of the movies?
both the Ender sequels (Speaker for the Dead, Xenocide, etc.)
Actually, while I love Ender's Game, I thought the sequels were complete, unadulterated, Grade-A crap. I struggled to get through the second one. I *barely* made it through the third one. I leafed through the fourth one at the book store and put it back on the shelf.
Am I missing an undocumented keyboard shortcut here?
Ctrl-PageUp/PageDn
These questions are legitimate "scientific" questions
...
No, they're not, because science cannot answer them.
these are the ones that give you meaning, security, and hope to keep on living.
It's a shame that you can't find any other reason to live, like family, friends, seeing the world, improving your mind,
IF any aspect of the Cydonia region is artificial,
Except that it isn't. We now have much higher resolution photographs of the area than the Viking photos which started the whole "face" bullshit. There's nothing there other than some hills, mesas, and rocks.
Oh well.
I think both replies help to prove my original point -- that many people who back science are just as blind to alternatives as fundamentalist Christians.
Nope, you are wrong. Completely and utterly wrong. Science give its greatest awards to people who can successfully overturn established thought.
Patients who were prayed for by others (even in double blind studies) healed much faster than those who were not. (I'd post a URL, but I can't remember the name of the group without wading through a few books here.)
In that case I'm calling 'bullshit'.
Science is sure they have all the answers and that religion is worthless.
I think you have that backwards.
I've worked as a science and math teacher
I fear for the future of our children.
Most of these things, like ESP or alien abduction have not been conclusively disproven.
If I claim I have ESP, it's not your job to prove that I don't, it's my job to prove that I do. No one have ever been able to prove that they do. There's a million dollars waiting for the first person who can.
and as for the big bang- religious leaders aren't the only ones to reject this idea- many legit scientists don't believe it either!
However, at least there's hard evidence for it, which is more than we can say for ESP or alien abduction.
Just something to think about.
Gee, Pascal's Wager again.
1. How do you know which God to worship? What if you lived your whole life as a Christian and when you die you suddenly find yourself before the throne of Odin in the Halls of Asgard? Boy is he going to be pissed!
2. Any God with His salt is going to know that you only believed not out of genuine feeling, but only to cover your bets.
3. If you believe in God and you are wrong, it's not "no big deal". You still have lost something. You spent all that time going to church, praying, reading your Bible, etc, when you could have been out doing something productive.
At the moment, modern science isn't capable of giving serious attention to things like the possibility of extraterrestrial visitors.
Sure it is. The problem with the possibility of extraterresitral visitors is that of all the thousands of reports over the decades, we still don't have one single piece of solid evidence. What we have is a lot of photographs that could have been faked, blurry videos of something flying around the sky, and the word of the purported witnesses. It's a shame. It would be *cool* if there really were aliens with advanced hyperdrive capability visiting, for *some* reason, this speck of a planet, but unfortunately, there's no reason to think it's true.
Why should anyone care what the low level addressing modes are?
Well, it helps if you're writing a compiler.
OK, you win. Evolution is for real. Although evidence is lacking, I concede. God does not exist. Now what?
*Sigh* Evolution is real. We have seen it happen, which is pretty good evidence. However, the fact that evolution happens does not mean that God (if you believe in one) does not exist. You don't have to reject one to accept the other.
By your same arguments, Evolutionism is not a theory.
Is it testable? Umm - no.
Umm - yes. We have seen species change. We have even seen speciation happen.
Is it falsifiable? Umm - no.
Umm - yes. All we would need would be to find, say, fossils of the skeleton of a modern human in Cretaceous rocks. Or if you could should the DNA of humans and chimps was not similar.
Is it predictive? Umm -
Umm - yes. If you keep using insecticides that aren't 100% effective, theory predicts that you will soon end up with insect populations that are resistant to insecticides. And, hey! It happened!
We would filter them the same way adult magazines are filtered.
In other words, "I know it when I see it."
No there won't, and if you had bothered to read the article closely, or you followed world politics at all, you'd know there has been an international ban on testing nuclear weapons since 1992.
If you bothered to follow *US* politics at all, you'd know that the US Senate voted against ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, so it doesn't apply to the US.
very few projects should have more than 10 programmers (if any).
*blink*. Have you ever worked on anything of more than, say, 100,000 lines of code?
I might also point out that a rat is a rodent, not a mammal.
Um, all rodents are also mammals.
So, we have two options to weigh, is it more important to provide internet access in a library, or is it more important to maintain obscenity standards in a public place (and prevent children from being subjected to porn).
Or, as a third option, have the damn parents come with their kids for a change.