Well, a transporter is guaranteed to kill you. The question is whether you are comforted by the existence of an exact duplicate of yourself continuing to exist.
The SciFi channel has turned down "Polaris" - a series concept from Straczynski that was "too science-fictiony", in favor of "Bloodsuckers", a show about intergalactic vampires.
Really? I'd rather have any taxes except property taxes - and not for monetary reasons. In fact, what that somebody you know said probably holds true for me as well. But a property tax essentially means that you do not own the property. If you stop paying the tax, they can take the property. That's rent.
Well, that's not the question. The question is whether 1000 people buying 10 more happy meals is better than 1 person buying 10000 shares of stock. Note that the happy meals are revenue, while the stock purchases provide capital for expansion - and McDonalds in particular is NOT in expansion mode these days, due to lack of revenue. Also note that my numbers are pulled out of the air, so the answer could go either way, depending on their actual values. So don't be so quick to call people dumbasses.
But that means there was intent and purpose, rather than random chance at work. I have an easier time believing in that.
Well, if intent and purpose can zap aminos in just the right way, then so can random chance, given enough time. It's no less likely than someone with your exact genetic code existing at this exact time in your exact location. No matter how unlikely an event is, its probability is 1.0 after the fact.
As another poster said, life is SO complex, even in relatively simple organisms, that its highly unlikely it just naturally spontaneously appeared.
Well, even relatively simple organisms have evolved for millions of years and would make short work of a hypothetical "original life" being. The original "life" would be no more than a molecule that self-replicated in a nontrivial way (ie not a crystal). Duplication errors would have started the process of natural selection. Now, modern life is in almost every energy source available, so new spontaneous generation of life is unlikely to take hold anywhere.
The answer to that, of course is "it came from outer space" which is chicken/egg as far as I'm concerned.
Indeed. Where life first occurred does not answer the question of how. But it does point to where to look for evidence.
Having said that, I have no real issue with natural selection.. my issue is with the lightning whacking an amino acid once and everything here springing
from that.
(I am one of those wonky creationists who believe that evolution and creation are not necessarily mutually exclusive.. who is to say things werent
"created" and then left to their own devices?)
Could God have whacked an amino acid with lightning?
Although an evolutionist, and without problems of it, I am not closed minded enough to believe there are just 2 possible explanations. I've studied too much of history of science to pretend that we know it all.
Indeed, and the pedant in me considered mentioning that. I opted for brevity in that post. I will spell it out here for you. If you believe in evolution, this is a reasonable hypothesis. If you believe in any form of creationism, then "God did it". If you are open minded, then this is a hypothesis that, if corroborated, may sway you towards evolution. If you have a different theory, you will have to consider the implication of the similarity between hiccoughs and gill-breathing to your theory. If you have no theory, and are not open minded, you may safely ignore my messages.
Slashdot Mirror
If a television is not used for 2.5 years, would you be OK with it then only being able to display "Please buy a new TV"?
What if the person decides, "Oh, I haven't used that printer or cartridge for two years, maybe I should sell it.", but it has expired?
...hiring an openly declared Nazi as Ambassador to Israel
Or a good buddy of Ariel Sharon as the interim military governor of Iraq.
In other news...
Patrick Doyle makes a sarcastic request.
Unless you do it over the internet.
Uck Ox. And uck Sci-i while we're at it.
Not to mention the insects.
Well, it is considerably based on Japanese animation.
Every terminal could be piped to one column of the green text waterfall background...
Question 5 gives a list of some of his books, and other titles are mentioned in other questions. What more do you need for an author's background?
Well, a transporter is guaranteed to kill you. The question is whether you are comforted by the existence of an exact duplicate of yourself continuing to exist.
I'm still pissed at West Wing for killing it.
Don't be silly. Just put the TV in the same room as the computer. Multitask, man, multitask!
The SciFi channel has turned down "Polaris" - a series concept from Straczynski that was "too science-fictiony", in favor of "Bloodsuckers", a show about intergalactic vampires.
I doubt that. I expect it was based on the movie "Dangerous Liaisons", which itself may have been somewhat based on said French novel.
How could someone NOT?
Really? I'd rather have any taxes except property taxes - and not for monetary reasons. In fact, what that somebody you know said probably holds true for me as well. But a property tax essentially means that you do not own the property. If you stop paying the tax, they can take the property. That's rent.
Well, that's not the question. The question is whether 1000 people buying 10 more happy meals is better than 1 person buying 10000 shares of stock. Note that the happy meals are revenue, while the stock purchases provide capital for expansion - and McDonalds in particular is NOT in expansion mode these days, due to lack of revenue. Also note that my numbers are pulled out of the air, so the answer could go either way, depending on their actual values. So don't be so quick to call people dumbasses.
But that means there was intent and purpose, rather than random chance at work. I have an easier time believing in that.
Well, if intent and purpose can zap aminos in just the right way, then so can random chance, given enough time. It's no less likely than someone with your exact genetic code existing at this exact time in your exact location. No matter how unlikely an event is, its probability is 1.0 after the fact.
As another poster said, life is SO complex, even in relatively simple organisms, that its highly unlikely it just naturally spontaneously appeared.
Well, even relatively simple organisms have evolved for millions of years and would make short work of a hypothetical "original life" being. The original "life" would be no more than a molecule that self-replicated in a nontrivial way (ie not a crystal). Duplication errors would have started the process of natural selection. Now, modern life is in almost every energy source available, so new spontaneous generation of life is unlikely to take hold anywhere.
The answer to that, of course is "it came from outer space" which is chicken/egg as far as I'm concerned.
Indeed. Where life first occurred does not answer the question of how. But it does point to where to look for evidence.
Although an evolutionist, and without problems of it, I am not closed minded enough to believe there are just 2 possible explanations. I've studied too much of history of science to pretend that we know it all.
Indeed, and the pedant in me considered mentioning that. I opted for brevity in that post. I will spell it out here for you. If you believe in evolution, this is a reasonable hypothesis. If you believe in any form of creationism, then "God did it". If you are open minded, then this is a hypothesis that, if corroborated, may sway you towards evolution. If you have a different theory, you will have to consider the implication of the similarity between hiccoughs and gill-breathing to your theory. If you have no theory, and are not open minded, you may safely ignore my messages.
Feel better now?
Explanation for those who don't believe in evolution: God did it.
Feel better now?
Oh woe is the Status Quo!
Let's just add one more woe in there:
Oh woe, woe is the Status Quo!
Isn't that more poetic?
I beg to differ. Of the many things that Valenti lacks, ignorance is not one of them. ;)
It's because the cast is still in leotards. In the TOS movies, they at least graduated to real clothing.
Actually, I was referring to the overuse of exclamation points!!!