Both the humans and the apes came from the same place: the space station
Of course, there is no explaination of how so many species of apes evolved form one chimpanzee, while the humans evolved not at all. But at least it explains how everyone speaks english, sorta.
"Does it make you happy to crap on other people's faith?"
Do you believe in enabling other people's ignorance, just because they cloak that ignorance in the name of 'faith'? What about people claiming the earth is flat? Their faith tells them so. Does that make them any more right? Or that the earth is the center of the solar system. Or that 2+2=5?
If some mental midget wants to believe utter lies and crap, they will. But I feel no particular compulsion to enable them in their self-delusion.
Besides, there are tons of people who simply dont' understand evolution. Evolution is the fact we observe. Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection was but one early theory trying to explain evolution. We don't know exactly how it works. Maybe it works entirely by devine intervention, who knows. We just know it DOES happen.
Creationism is just pure bunk, through-and-through. It's using pseudo-science and hand-waving in order to try and 'scientifically' rationalize the LITERAL interpretation of creation in the bible.
Which of course doesn't (and can't) work.
But more than that, it is an amazingly stupid argument to begin with, totally ignoring the fact that virtually every religion out there has its own creation myth. What makes the christian one "right"? Why isn't the Norse myth of creation the right one? Why aren't we teaching THAT in schools? Or the Shinto version? Or the Hindu version? Or any of the other 4,000+ creation myths out there?
True enough, due to the fact that you're trying to argue SCIENCE by using FAITH. The two are incompatable at a fundamental level. You cannot ever PROVE anything by using faith-based reasoning, by definition.
I only ask you to fully examine the evidence supporting your beliefs. Personally, I find it weak and incomplete.
Oh, I've fully examined them, and it all makes perfect sense. I've also read up on Creationism, and it makes no sense what-so-ever. You may think the evidence is 'weak and incomplete'... it's not weak at all, but I'll certainly agree it's incomplete since we don't understand the MECHANICS of it all and still have a lot to learn... but it's a far cry better than the evidence for Creationism, which is nearly zero. The only 'evidence' there is is the book of Genisis. Hardly compelling in any way, scientifically. There is NO other evidence supporting a 6000 year old earth with static species.
You might want to investigate DNS studies, especially mitochondrial DNA. You might want to investigate embryo development, where our common roots with other species are far more evident (the residual tail that forms in early stages of development, which then disappears... same with gill structures). You might want to map DNA across species and see how the mutations and changes of occured over time. Never mind the fossil record, the geological record, etc. Hell, the way the HIV virus mutates so rapidly is an excellent example of very rapid small-time-scale evolution at work.
The evidence for creationism? Your belief because someone told you so. Hrm. Not exactly compelling, and it certainly doesn't hold up under scientific scrutiny.
Oh yeah. And even the Pope belives in evolution. "Christianity" does not require the believe in "creationism", at least as literally described in Genisis. There is no fundamental incompatibility with belief in the Christian God and/or Jesus, and the theory of evolution. The only incompatibility is if you believe the story of Adam and Eve is LITERAL, rather than allegory. And most intelligent people know it as allegory. A story. A simplified version. MOST Christians I know do not believe in 'creationism'. So debunking the inanity of creationism does not in any way "disprove all of Christianity".
If you still believe in creationism then you are a fool. I've read up on it, and it's so much pseudo-scientific gibberish. There is NO evidence that the world is only 6000 years old, and NO evidence that all species were created more or less simultaneously, and haven't changed since.
I treat kooks and morons that believe in creationism with the same exact level of ridicule that I treat kooks and morons who believe the "world is flat". Because they are exctly the same ilk... brainwashed, intellectually dishonest, gullible fools.
Yes, I am telling you there is not the slightest chance that creationism is the truth. How any intelligent thinking being could even imagine that it is The Truth is beyond me. Tell me, is the tooth-fairy The Truth? Santa Clause? A flat earth? An earth-centered solar system?
And you call ME naive? You *are* simple minded, given this reply.
Because they don't subscribe to the myth of evolution (a theory growing weaker and weaker by "conventional" science), doesn't make it crack-pot science
Oh PLEASE.
Evolution is a fact. Pure and simple, and as well established a fact as virtually any other scientific principle. DNA and the human genome is pretty rock solid proof of it. Now, HOW evolution works is still a theory, and there are many theories that try and explain it. That's an entirely different issue.
But ANYONE who believes some 'god' just created earth and then poof, man and all the animals "just appeared", is a simple-minded moron. The Bible is a book of MYTHOLOGY and FABLE. A learning text for simpleminded illiterate tribesmen. Adam and Eve is an interesting little fable, but there is no way any rational intelligent human could believe that that cute story is REAL DOCUMENTED HISTORY unless they had been brainwashed by a religious cult all their lives, and are incapable of escaping those mental chains.
The movie studios are up to their old tricks. The TV commercials for Jurassic III take bits of the movie and not only re-arrange them out of sequence but out of context as well. The purpose of this, of course, is to make the movie seem more exiting than it really is.
They did the same thing with The Phanom Menace. There were four previews/ads. All of them made the movie seem to be incredibly intense and wonderful. NONE of them had Jar Jar;-) The previews were arguably ten times better than the movie they were from.
You've never heard of Java on the server, have you? The war on doing web UIs may be over, and Java ain't it THERE... but Java is certainly winning on the business logic front, with EJBs and J2EE.
It's worth the money, actually. You can control your PC remotely anywhere from within a browser, or using a client. And it's JUST like being on the remote computer. I understand the next version (in WindowsXP) even sends sounds through.
What if I would RATHER download a different JVM, rather than the out-dated Microsoft one? Seems that microsoft is still pushing ITS JVM on everyone, and that the market will still be bound to the 1.1 JVM as a result...
(unless a lot of OEMs decide to preinstall Sun's JVM for Windows or something...)
They can't really do anything that ASP/COM can't do...
Well, except for one MAJOR thing... write once, run across multiple platforms. I develop Java code that runs on the server, and did all my development on NT. Copied the files over to Solaris, and it just worked. Try THAT with ASP/COM...:-)
This, I think, is one of the biggest wins of the Java-on-the-server platform. And one of the biggest reasons that.Net is going to struggle (other than being very very late to the table)
No, it's not ZIPPING them. It's compression done at the file system "cluster" level, below most APIs. It is not creating an "archive" of files by any stretch of imagination.
I'm just curious why anyone NEEDED computer simulation to figure this out...
Ever stand by a road-side with big trucks passing you at speed? The predominate feeling is being sucked INTO the street. As a bicyclist, it's something you have to deal with... and it really shouldn't be news to ANYONE.
But I'm glad people are spending so much time proving the obvious.
I do use compressed files/folders under NT's NTFS. They're fast and efficient and I've never experienced any corruption problems. Great way to archive some little used directories without ever having to deal with zip/unzip or anything else. Just use the directories as any other... it's totally transparent, but you can get up to a 50% space-savings... and yes, even with today's BIG disks, it's sometimes meaningful and desirable.
Here's the one of Captain Gray (not in a swimsuit, but shirtless). And it's damn impressive, with the veins in the arms, and the chest hair...check out the link:
AND NO KATE CAPSHAW!! God, the Temple of Doom was hard to sit through... Ugh!
- Spryguy
Re:You've All Missed the Point
on
Review: A.I.
·
· Score: 2
Most people seem to be 'missing' this movie. Which isn't too surprising, since most people are idiots who need things spoon-fed to them, and this movie is quite a bit more demanding than that.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that doesn't explain the General's memorial... how did HE get there?
- Spryguy
Both the humans and the apes came from the same place: the space station
Of course, there is no explaination of how so many species of apes evolved form one chimpanzee, while the humans evolved not at all. But at least it explains how everyone speaks english, sorta.
- Spryguy
"Does it make you happy to crap on other people's faith?"
Do you believe in enabling other people's ignorance, just because they cloak that ignorance in the name of 'faith'? What about people claiming the earth is flat? Their faith tells them so. Does that make them any more right? Or that the earth is the center of the solar system. Or that 2+2=5?
If some mental midget wants to believe utter lies and crap, they will. But I feel no particular compulsion to enable them in their self-delusion.
Besides, there are tons of people who simply dont' understand evolution. Evolution is the fact we observe. Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection was but one early theory trying to explain evolution. We don't know exactly how it works. Maybe it works entirely by devine intervention, who knows. We just know it DOES happen.
Creationism is just pure bunk, through-and-through. It's using pseudo-science and hand-waving in order to try and 'scientifically' rationalize the LITERAL interpretation of creation in the bible.
Which of course doesn't (and can't) work.
But more than that, it is an amazingly stupid argument to begin with, totally ignoring the fact that virtually every religion out there has its own creation myth. What makes the christian one "right"? Why isn't the Norse myth of creation the right one? Why aren't we teaching THAT in schools? Or the Shinto version? Or the Hindu version? Or any of the other 4,000+ creation myths out there?
- Spryguy
Nothing I say will convince you of anything.
... it's not weak at all, but I'll certainly agree it's incomplete since we don't understand the MECHANICS of it all and still have a lot to learn ... but it's a far cry better than the evidence for Creationism, which is nearly zero. The only 'evidence' there is is the book of Genisis. Hardly compelling in any way, scientifically. There is NO other evidence supporting a 6000 year old earth with static species.
True enough, due to the fact that you're trying to argue SCIENCE by using FAITH. The two are incompatable at a fundamental level. You cannot ever PROVE anything by using faith-based reasoning, by definition.
I only ask you to fully examine the evidence supporting your beliefs. Personally, I find it weak and incomplete.
Oh, I've fully examined them, and it all makes perfect sense. I've also read up on Creationism, and it makes no sense what-so-ever. You may think the evidence is 'weak and incomplete'
You might want to investigate DNS studies, especially mitochondrial DNA. You might want to investigate embryo development, where our common roots with other species are far more evident (the residual tail that forms in early stages of development, which then disappears... same with gill structures). You might want to map DNA across species and see how the mutations and changes of occured over time. Never mind the fossil record, the geological record, etc. Hell, the way the HIV virus mutates so rapidly is an excellent example of very rapid small-time-scale evolution at work.
The evidence for creationism? Your belief because someone told you so. Hrm. Not exactly compelling, and it certainly doesn't hold up under scientific scrutiny.
- Spryguy
Oh yeah. And even the Pope belives in evolution. "Christianity" does not require the believe in "creationism", at least as literally described in Genisis. There is no fundamental incompatibility with belief in the Christian God and/or Jesus, and the theory of evolution. The only incompatibility is if you believe the story of Adam and Eve is LITERAL, rather than allegory. And most intelligent people know it as allegory. A story. A simplified version. MOST Christians I know do not believe in 'creationism'. So debunking the inanity of creationism does not in any way "disprove all of Christianity".
- Spryguy
If you still believe in creationism then you are a fool. I've read up on it, and it's so much pseudo-scientific gibberish. There is NO evidence that the world is only 6000 years old, and NO evidence that all species were created more or less simultaneously, and haven't changed since.
I treat kooks and morons that believe in creationism with the same exact level of ridicule that I treat kooks and morons who believe the "world is flat". Because they are exctly the same ilk... brainwashed, intellectually dishonest, gullible fools.
Yes, I am telling you there is not the slightest chance that creationism is the truth. How any intelligent thinking being could even imagine that it is The Truth is beyond me. Tell me, is the tooth-fairy The Truth? Santa Clause? A flat earth? An earth-centered solar system?
And you call ME naive? You *are* simple minded, given this reply.
- Spryguy
Infinity is not a number, so the phrase 'infinityth digit' is meaningless.
- Spryguy
i'd hazard a guess that pi, in base pi, is 1.
I guess you think that means that ten in base ten is "1", eh?
- Spryguy
Because they don't subscribe to the myth of evolution (a theory growing weaker and weaker by "conventional" science), doesn't make it crack-pot science
Oh PLEASE.
Evolution is a fact. Pure and simple, and as well established a fact as virtually any other scientific principle. DNA and the human genome is pretty rock solid proof of it. Now, HOW evolution works is still a theory, and there are many theories that try and explain it. That's an entirely different issue.
But ANYONE who believes some 'god' just created earth and then poof, man and all the animals "just appeared", is a simple-minded moron. The Bible is a book of MYTHOLOGY and FABLE. A learning text for simpleminded illiterate tribesmen. Adam and Eve is an interesting little fable, but there is no way any rational intelligent human could believe that that cute story is REAL DOCUMENTED HISTORY unless they had been brainwashed by a religious cult all their lives, and are incapable of escaping those mental chains.
- Spryguy
The movie studios are up to their old tricks. The TV commercials for Jurassic III take bits of the movie and not only re-arrange them out of sequence but out of context as well. The purpose of this, of course, is to make the movie seem more exiting than it really is.
;-) The previews were arguably ten times better than the movie they were from.
They did the same thing with The Phanom Menace. There were four previews/ads. All of them made the movie seem to be incredibly intense and wonderful. NONE of them had Jar Jar
- Spryguy
You've never heard of Java on the server, have you? The war on doing web UIs may be over, and Java ain't it THERE... but Java is certainly winning on the business logic front, with EJBs and J2EE.
- Spryguy
It's worth the money, actually. You can control your PC remotely anywhere from within a browser, or using a client. And it's JUST like being on the remote computer. I understand the next version (in WindowsXP) even sends sounds through.
- Spryguy
I've used VNC. And it sucks. Updates are slow and spotty. Use Terminal Services on Win2K. Very fast, and never any screen artifacts...
- Spryguy
Aparently you've never used Windows Terminal Server on Win2K. It rocks. PC Anywhere sucks.
- Spryguy
What if I would RATHER download a different JVM, rather than the out-dated Microsoft one? Seems that microsoft is still pushing ITS JVM on everyone, and that the market will still be bound to the 1.1 JVM as a result...
(unless a lot of OEMs decide to preinstall Sun's JVM for Windows or something...)
- Spryguy
They can't really do anything that ASP/COM can't do...
:-)
.Net is going to struggle (other than being very very late to the table)
Well, except for one MAJOR thing... write once, run across multiple platforms. I develop Java code that runs on the server, and did all my development on NT. Copied the files over to Solaris, and it just worked. Try THAT with ASP/COM...
This, I think, is one of the biggest wins of the Java-on-the-server platform. And one of the biggest reasons that
- Spryguy
...but have YOU tried that on a dial-up connection? Or did it just seem that quick and easy because you're sitting on a T1?
- Spryguy
No, it's not ZIPPING them. It's compression done at the file system "cluster" level, below most APIs. It is not creating an "archive" of files by any stretch of imagination.
- Spryguy
I'm just curious why anyone NEEDED computer simulation to figure this out...
Ever stand by a road-side with big trucks passing you at speed? The predominate feeling is being sucked INTO the street. As a bicyclist, it's something you have to deal with... and it really shouldn't be news to ANYONE.
But I'm glad people are spending so much time proving the obvious.
- Spryguy
I do use compressed files/folders under NT's NTFS. They're fast and efficient and I've never experienced any corruption problems. Great way to archive some little used directories without ever having to deal with zip/unzip or anything else. Just use the directories as any other... it's totally transparent, but you can get up to a 50% space-savings... and yes, even with today's BIG disks, it's sometimes meaningful and desirable.
- Spryguy
Here's the one of Captain Gray (not in a swimsuit, but shirtless). And it's damn impressive, with the veins in the arms, and the chest hair...check out the link:
Gray
- Spryguy
You want to see realistic? Okay, so it's not a *chick*, but still, I think this is impressive for a completely CGI character... check out the link:
Gray
Pretty damn amazing, as far as I'm concerned.
- Spryguy
Besides, even when manufacturers do reach the size limit, can't we just use a holepunch to double it?
:-)
That was HILARIOUS, and probably quite lost on some of the youngsters around here...
- Spryguy
And no jar-jar.
AND NO KATE CAPSHAW!! God, the Temple of Doom was hard to sit through... Ugh!
- Spryguy
Most people seem to be 'missing' this movie. Which isn't too surprising, since most people are idiots who need things spoon-fed to them, and this movie is quite a bit more demanding than that.
- Spryguy