Can't say I'll miss porn written for schoolgirls, but in general Amazon has been adopting such a manipulative corporate mindset that I have to hold my nose to use them anymore. Where do people go when they give up Amazon?
In Modern America, why is anyone surprised when universities start cutting technical programs? That's just not what American culture is about today.
The university near where I live is cutting programs, but notably *skipping* the technical programs.
Most of the science and engineering programs have good enrollment numbers, and they bring in a lot of grant money. Most of the programs being eliminated are the low-enrollment specializations of the fine and liberal arts.
By some accounts the IRA quit after 9/11, when American donors suddenly decided that terrorism wasn't cool.
Methinks the fact that pretty much every suicide bomber and terrorist these days is a Muslim *might* just suggest a pattern.
There's a shocking amount of stuff going on in the USA these days, especially since the last election. Fortunately law enforcement has busted most of it up before it bears fruit. (E.g., the plan to murder a couple of cops and then kill everyone at the funeral.)
Unfortunately our "liberal" media portrays it as an endless series of isolated incidents - when they mention it at all.
Oh, and these aren't the acts and conspiracies of Muslims, either.
U.S. General William Shelton, commander of Air Force Space Command, underscored the worrisome issue of orbital debris during a presentation at the National Space Symposium on April 12, 2011. In a recent conference here, Gen. William Shelton, commander of the U.S. Air Force Space Command, relayed his worries about rising amounts of human-made space junk.
Two generals with the same name and the same job, expressing concerns on the same topic!
I keep hearing that SGU was disappointing for many SG fans but I really have to disagree.
I enjoyed parts 1 & 2 of the pilot, and thought the scenario had a lot of promise, but by the end of part 3 I was feeling like it had already degenerated to where all SF shows do if they run long enough. I watched one or two more episodes, and haven't bothered tuning it in since.
This is the first SG series that felt like it was written without the cheesy humor and contained real characters, not simple stereotypes that didn't evolve in the series.
The fact that some of those realistic characters were assholes was not a plus, IMO. I can see as much of that as I want in the real world.
Atlantis was good but really just a copy of SG with new faces in the same characters.
I watched it now and then, but yeah, it wasn't very compelling.
This makes no sense in today's world. It's not like it would be difficult for them to manage this, especially now that to get any cable provider at all you have to install a big, unsightly box in your entertainment system.
I suspect that it has nothing to do with managing it, and everything to do with how they can squeeze the most money out of you.
This of course does not disprove a god, but it does disprove a just god, which I believe is part of the basic premise of Christianity.
Christian theology is ludicrous to anyone who isn't busy drinking the kool-aide.
Once upon a time, God decided to go for a walk. To ensure that Adam and Eve behaved while he was gone, he warned them that death would be the result of breaking the rules. (It never occurred to him that Adam and Eve didn't have the faintest idea what death was, since it didn't yet exist.) His renowned prescience also failed to tell him what was going to happen when he left, and his equally renowned omniscience also failed to trigger an alarm while the crisis was in progress. Yet despite his own incompetence in dealing with the matter, he punished them viciously.
In the next episode, God regrets creating mankind, and decides to destroy them. (Regrets? Where was his renowned prescience this time?) Rather than merely uncreating them, he decides to create an giant miraculous flood, which incidentally drowns all the evil babies and kittens, as well as the unrighteous adults. But he also wants to preserve the biological system he created, so he has one guy build a boat that requires about a thousand more miracles to do what it's supposed to do. Never mind that - God doesn't go for doing things the easy way. Yeah, he spoke the universe into being, but that was really boring so he used his foresight to discover Rube Goldberg, and eternity has been a lot more fun ever since. Oh, and this episode ends with that One Righteous Man lying drunk and naked in his tent, both abominations to God. (Maybe he put the wrong man on the boat.) And of course, evil is thriving again; God is not only evil (babies, kittens), but powerless or incompetent to manage his own creation.
If I were Chinese or Indian, I would be loving this. Imagine, my biggest competitor, ensuring their next generation is superstitious and ignorant. Perfect!
I wonder whether they're smart enough to be funding the fundies.
OTOH, they might not like the idea of their nuclear-armed competitor swirling down the drain with the superstitious and ignorant in control of the world's largest nuclear arsenal.
The fundamental difference between evolution and ID is that evolution tells me what should happen if i put bacteria in a nutrient and change the nutrient compostion slowly over 100000 generations of bacteria. ID doesn't.
That's an important difference, but IMO an even more fundamental difference is that (the theory of) evolution is the result of an evidence-based attempt to understand part of the natural world, and ID is a scam intended to (a) make a myth also appear to have some evidential support, and to (b) sneak the religious myth past a court system that has already ruled that teaching creationism in public schools violates the national constitution.
The difference you point out follows directly from that.
"Evolution" is both a theory and a fact. The "Theory of Evolution" is science's explanation for the fact of evolution.
What few (if any) creationists don't realize is that the fact of evolution was recognized over half a century before Darwin published his explanatory hypothesis. Lamarck published his (incorrect) theory in 1809.
"Intelligent Design" already had its day in a lower court, and was made to look ridiculous. (Google for "cdesign proponentists".)
I suspect that its advocates now find it more effective to play the martyr card than to pursue it any further in court. (Except for this clown, who apparently just discovered what was in vogue a decade or more ago.)
Of course, our current SCOTUS is perfectly happy to discard decades of jurisprudence. The question is whether they'll do it for crank beliefs, or just for moneyed interests.
If Evolutionists can't provide sufficient evidence to disprove the null hypothesis then why should should Evolutionism itself not be considered just as much a matter of faith as Intelligent Design? Arguing that the existence of a process proves the non-existence of the process engineer is no better than saying we were all created as we are in an instant. Neither argument carries any logical validity and can only be considered as statements of "faith".
Apples fall because of gravity - along with God's help.
Combining hydrogen and oxygen produces water via a chemical reaction - along with God's help.
We get rain because water vapor in the atmosphere condenses into droplets - along with God's help.
My car moves because internal combustion is converted to rotary power with a crankshaft, and the rotary power is transmitted to the wheels via the drive train - along with God's help.
I can compose this message on my computer because...
You can read it on the internet because...
How come "maybe God helped it" only needs to be considered when ordinary explanations contradict someone's religious beliefs?
Slashdot Mirror
Can't say I'll miss porn written for schoolgirls, but in general Amazon has been adopting such a manipulative corporate mindset that I have to hold my nose to use them anymore. Where do people go when they give up Amazon?
In Modern America, why is anyone surprised when universities start cutting technical programs? That's just not what American culture is about today.
The university near where I live is cutting programs, but notably *skipping* the technical programs.
Most of the science and engineering programs have good enrollment numbers, and they bring in a lot of grant money. Most of the programs being eliminated are the low-enrollment specializations of the fine and liberal arts.
And the IT business never cared about education all that much anyway. Lots of smart people go far on a HS degree or a little college
In my experience, at big companies there is a glass ceiling separating those with degrees from those without.
What the degree is in is irrelevant; just having a 4-year degree distinguishes the ordinary peons from the casteless peons.
If TSA ignores the new Texas law Texas has grounds to go to the US Supreme Court and challenge TSA's authority.
Is there some reason you think our current SC won't side with the TSA?
Not to mention if you do it near the naked-body-scanners you'll damage something worth a few million dollars.
And then the manufacturer will get to sell another one to replace it.
Even the IRA put its C-4 away a long time ago.
By some accounts the IRA quit after 9/11, when American donors suddenly decided that terrorism wasn't cool.
Methinks the fact that pretty much every suicide bomber and terrorist these days is a Muslim *might* just suggest a pattern.
There's a shocking amount of stuff going on in the USA these days, especially since the last election. Fortunately law enforcement has busted most of it up before it bears fruit. (E.g., the plan to murder a couple of cops and then kill everyone at the funeral.)
Unfortunately our "liberal" media portrays it as an endless series of isolated incidents - when they mention it at all.
Oh, and these aren't the acts and conspiracies of Muslims, either.
Did he know before they announced it?
No good will come of releasing the pix.
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
U.S. General William Shelton, commander of Air Force Space Command, underscored the worrisome issue of orbital debris during a presentation at the National Space Symposium on April 12, 2011. In a recent conference here, Gen. William Shelton, commander of the U.S. Air Force Space Command, relayed his worries about rising amounts of human-made space junk.
Two generals with the same name and the same job, expressing concerns on the same topic!
You can't fix stupid.
Evolution usually fixes it, sooner or later.
Would it bring Firefly back?
Yes... in the same way the prequels brought Star Wars back.
History Channel(we're 100% certain that this piece of rock was portal to alien jesus, here's an "expert")
Yeah, nobody even calls it the Hitler Channel anymore.
That was a good indicator that the executives of the channel stopped caring about people like me.
How many other companies have executives that care about people like your? Or anyone else.
Premium SyFy? Hell no! But a Zombie Channel? Now there's something I could sink my necrotic teeth into!
Maybe a mini-series where the SyFy staff and execs are holed up in their office building, fending off attacks by a world gone zombie.
I keep hearing that SGU was disappointing for many SG fans but I really have to disagree.
I enjoyed parts 1 & 2 of the pilot, and thought the scenario had a lot of promise, but by the end of part 3 I was feeling like it had already degenerated to where all SF shows do if they run long enough. I watched one or two more episodes, and haven't bothered tuning it in since.
This is the first SG series that felt like it was written without the cheesy humor and contained real characters, not simple stereotypes that didn't evolve in the series.
The fact that some of those realistic characters were assholes was not a plus, IMO. I can see as much of that as I want in the real world.
Atlantis was good but really just a copy of SG with new faces in the same characters.
I watched it now and then, but yeah, it wasn't very compelling.
This makes no sense in today's world. It's not like it would be difficult for them to manage this, especially now that to get any cable provider at all you have to install a big, unsightly box in your entertainment system.
I suspect that it has nothing to do with managing it, and everything to do with how they can squeeze the most money out of you.
with a nice list of benefits.
Apparently protection from slashdotting isn't on the list.
This of course does not disprove a god, but it does disprove a just god, which I believe is part of the basic premise of Christianity.
Christian theology is ludicrous to anyone who isn't busy drinking the kool-aide.
Once upon a time, God decided to go for a walk. To ensure that Adam and Eve behaved while he was gone, he warned them that death would be the result of breaking the rules. (It never occurred to him that Adam and Eve didn't have the faintest idea what death was, since it didn't yet exist.) His renowned prescience also failed to tell him what was going to happen when he left, and his equally renowned omniscience also failed to trigger an alarm while the crisis was in progress. Yet despite his own incompetence in dealing with the matter, he punished them viciously.
In the next episode, God regrets creating mankind, and decides to destroy them. (Regrets? Where was his renowned prescience this time?) Rather than merely uncreating them, he decides to create an giant miraculous flood, which incidentally drowns all the evil babies and kittens, as well as the unrighteous adults. But he also wants to preserve the biological system he created, so he has one guy build a boat that requires about a thousand more miracles to do what it's supposed to do. Never mind that - God doesn't go for doing things the easy way. Yeah, he spoke the universe into being, but that was really boring so he used his foresight to discover Rube Goldberg, and eternity has been a lot more fun ever since. Oh, and this episode ends with that One Righteous Man lying drunk and naked in his tent, both abominations to God. (Maybe he put the wrong man on the boat.) And of course, evil is thriving again; God is not only evil (babies, kittens), but powerless or incompetent to manage his own creation.
Etc.
If I were Chinese or Indian, I would be loving this. Imagine, my biggest competitor, ensuring their next generation is superstitious and ignorant. Perfect!
I wonder whether they're smart enough to be funding the fundies.
OTOH, they might not like the idea of their nuclear-armed competitor swirling down the drain with the superstitious and ignorant in control of the world's largest nuclear arsenal.
The fundamental difference between evolution and ID is that evolution tells me what should happen if i put bacteria in a nutrient and change the nutrient compostion slowly over 100000 generations of bacteria. ID doesn't.
That's an important difference, but IMO an even more fundamental difference is that (the theory of) evolution is the result of an evidence-based attempt to understand part of the natural world, and ID is a scam intended to (a) make a myth also appear to have some evidential support, and to (b) sneak the religious myth past a court system that has already ruled that teaching creationism in public schools violates the national constitution.
The difference you point out follows directly from that.
"Evolution" is both a theory and a fact. The "Theory of Evolution" is science's explanation for the fact of evolution.
What few (if any) creationists don't realize is that the fact of evolution was recognized over half a century before Darwin published his explanatory hypothesis. Lamarck published his (incorrect) theory in 1809.
How long before this issue ends up in the SCOTUS?
"Intelligent Design" already had its day in a lower court, and was made to look ridiculous. (Google for "cdesign proponentists".)
I suspect that its advocates now find it more effective to play the martyr card than to pursue it any further in court. (Except for this clown, who apparently just discovered what was in vogue a decade or more ago.)
Of course, our current SCOTUS is perfectly happy to discard decades of jurisprudence. The question is whether they'll do it for crank beliefs, or just for moneyed interests.
It's fascinating how many people cling to logical positivism
Could you explain the relevance of that claim? Or did you post to the wrong thread?
A null hypothesis must be falsifiable, and therefor "it must be a wizard that did it" cannot be the null hypothesis.
Q.E.D.
Maybe it's just a terminological mistake, and he meant to say "vacuous hypothesis".
If Evolutionists can't provide sufficient evidence to disprove the null hypothesis then why should should Evolutionism itself not be considered just as much a matter of faith as Intelligent Design? Arguing that the existence of a process proves the non-existence of the process engineer is no better than saying we were all created as we are in an instant. Neither argument carries any logical validity and can only be considered as statements of "faith".
Apples fall because of gravity - along with God's help.
Combining hydrogen and oxygen produces water via a chemical reaction - along with God's help.
We get rain because water vapor in the atmosphere condenses into droplets - along with God's help.
My car moves because internal combustion is converted to rotary power with a crankshaft, and the rotary power is transmitted to the wheels via the drive train - along with God's help.
I can compose this message on my computer because...
You can read it on the internet because...
How come "maybe God helped it" only needs to be considered when ordinary explanations contradict someone's religious beliefs?