All known organisms except bacteria do both asexual and sexual reproduction.
Not true. Most of the lower protozoa (things like Euglena) don't have sexual reproduction, and some animals and plants have secondarily lost it, like certain rotifers. Plus, even among organisms which do have sexual reproduction, many can reproduce asexually indefinitely.
People can inherit money, and there are absolutely no restrictions on the intelligence necessary to do so. A good portion of rich people received their fortune in just this way. And a for staying rich, it is a lot easier than getting to be so in the first place, especially since you can pay advisors.
Honestly, once you get beyond an introductory level on most subjects, the information dries up. Try looking for any details on the evolution of the Byzantine military organization or the ultrastructure of heliozoans. You won't get a lot...of course the same is true of most other sources.
Surprised! I though the Sumerians were the people who came up with those myths, but here it turned out to be the Akkadians! Wow...I wonder what the Sumerians believed for that first millenium?
The nearest white dwarf is the companion to Sirius, eleven light-years away. But almost anything at that distance would be an interesting target for a probe; we know very little, for instance, about stars other than the sun. And it's not nearly as easy as you might think; your sailship would take a century or more, and would require very powerful lasers if they were to have noticeable effects at even interplanetary distances.
Learning from others is not the same as reasoning, and is a lot easier. The figuring out how to open the jars is darn impressive, though, presuming they didn't open them by accident and then learn from the experience. The latter would still be smart (octopi and their kin are the smartest invertebrates) but not sentient.
And, no, reasoning isn't just learning from accidents.
We have excellent observational evidence that we are - namely we can feel ourselves think, and we can watch other people do things that clearly involve reasoning. What more do you want?
He's wrong, since he is assuming that the same trick can't be applied to show that humans aren't conscious. It can, unless you assume some sort of cartesian dualism or other deus ex machina to save them - he takes quantum effects, but there's no evidence that these matter on the large scale of neurons, and quite a bit to the contrary.
The Egyptians new what they were doing when they worshipped Ammon-Ra as a god. Now we have neglected our sacrifices, and are punished with dread plagues.
The obvious thing to claim, when you see mineral features that you haven't seen before, is that you are witnessing some new geologic effect. Given the large differences between the climate of Mars and Earth, it makes sense that we should see some new things. Invoking life into the picture is easy but far less likely, and in the end explains a lot less.
For the record, they have never found a crater associated with the Permian-Triassic extinction. However, they have found the large igneous province that tends to form opposite an impact, and it seems it should have been pretty close to where Pangaea split up. Maybe it was even a cause, although there have been other supercontinents (Rodinia) before...
Dinosaurs were almost definitely warm blooded, and were certainly not the only group knocked out at the KT boundary. Most mammals were lost, too, not to mention most of everything else. It's quite likely that surviving the impact was a matter of luck.
There are hundreds of well known non-human manipulated mutations in other living things. As an extreme example, they did a study on some trout in a stream that got separated a few generations ago, and they will hardly even breed anymore - mating signals changed. Just a few generations and they are close to speciating (noone expected it to be so fast)! Another thing that comes to mind is the well-known extremely high mutation rate of pathogenic bacteria - and not nearly always in response to our medicines.
I did not read the article for I am too frightened of what it may say! Science today is scary! They should not engineer bacteria like this for they may kill us all - many diseases are caused by bacteria just like these and if it gets out of hand! Also when the bacteria run out of food do they die or go find new food - watches or cyclotrons or oil? Maybe they do not reproduce? But with all the radioactive they are eating why after one or two generations would they not mutate back? And would we be able to stop them when they have been engineered to be invincible!
Also I am wondering what they will do with the bacterial waste! If I ate glowing radioactive, I would be too and we would be no better off than if I did not eat it! Maybe the bacteria are smart enough to put it in a box? But I do not think we should make smart bacteria because like the proverbial Frankenstein they could turn on us!
Were that so, some socialist country should have one. Canada is a corporate playground with some public education and health services left over, and some provinces are working really hard at fixing that.
The Roman empire persecuted two: Druidism, since they practiced human sacrifice, and Christianity, since they pretty much denied imperial authority. The Jews were also persecuted a fair bit, but for political reasons. That the last two wrote the history books has given the Romans a bad image, but the fact is that other than these, the Romans were fully tolerant. They certainly did not fight wars on religious grounds.
Likewise, calling what happened to the Native Americans a result of religion is severe distortion. The church had some influence in the area, its missionary activity was draining, and it did nothing to stop what was happening. But the death, destruction, and enslavement happened because people could.
Religion has played a major role in a lot of wars, but mostly because it's a convenient ground for hatred.
Theoretically, silicon-oxygen chains don't work. There's not nearly enough you can do with them; that's why most silicates are unreactive rocks. The cool silicones that we use have their properties because the also have organic components. Why not simplify and drop the silicone chain?
They haven't merged because consoles are a lot cheaper than an equivalent (in terms of game-playing) computer. If all you want to do is play games, you shouldn't bother with extra functionality. So they'll always have a niche market.
I find it unfortunate that since we just can't prove something, then it doesn't exist... what about faith and hope?
It is indeed a problem, but I think it's a lot more unfortunate when people believe in something just because they hope it's true, or refuse to have faith in anything else.
Slashdot Mirror
Not true. Most of the lower protozoa (things like Euglena) don't have sexual reproduction, and some animals and plants have secondarily lost it, like certain rotifers. Plus, even among organisms which do have sexual reproduction, many can reproduce asexually indefinitely.
People can inherit money, and there are absolutely no restrictions on the intelligence necessary to do so. A good portion of rich people received their fortune in just this way. And a for staying rich, it is a lot easier than getting to be so in the first place, especially since you can pay advisors.
Yeah, because we all know the atmosphere rotates completely independently of the Earth, and any angular momentum lost to it won't be coming back.
Honestly, once you get beyond an introductory level on most subjects, the information dries up. Try looking for any details on the evolution of the Byzantine military organization or the ultrastructure of heliozoans. You won't get a lot...of course the same is true of most other sources.
When Emperor Justin of Constantinople made weapons more available, do you think crime went up or down?
Surprised! I though the Sumerians were the people who came up with those myths, but here it turned out to be the Akkadians! Wow...I wonder what the Sumerians believed for that first millenium?
That's what he's doing. I myself was framed for second degree murder and sentenced to five years of reading slashdot. I...I'll never make it...
The nearest white dwarf is the companion to Sirius, eleven light-years away. But almost anything at that distance would be an interesting target for a probe; we know very little, for instance, about stars other than the sun. And it's not nearly as easy as you might think; your sailship would take a century or more, and would require very powerful lasers if they were to have noticeable effects at even interplanetary distances.
And, no, reasoning isn't just learning from accidents.
We have excellent observational evidence that we are - namely we can feel ourselves think, and we can watch other people do things that clearly involve reasoning. What more do you want?
Not those particular hamsters and lemmings. :)
He's wrong, since he is assuming that the same trick can't be applied to show that humans aren't conscious. It can, unless you assume some sort of cartesian dualism or other deus ex machina to save them - he takes quantum effects, but there's no evidence that these matter on the large scale of neurons, and quite a bit to the contrary.
The Egyptians new what they were doing when they worshipped Ammon-Ra as a god. Now we have neglected our sacrifices, and are punished with dread plagues.
The obvious thing to claim, when you see mineral features that you haven't seen before, is that you are witnessing some new geologic effect. Given the large differences between the climate of Mars and Earth, it makes sense that we should see some new things. Invoking life into the picture is easy but far less likely, and in the end explains a lot less.
For the record, they have never found a crater associated with the Permian-Triassic extinction. However, they have found the large igneous province that tends to form opposite an impact, and it seems it should have been pretty close to where Pangaea split up. Maybe it was even a cause, although there have been other supercontinents (Rodinia) before...
Millions of different species against one? That's not a particularly fair comparison.
Dinosaurs were almost definitely warm blooded, and were certainly not the only group knocked out at the KT boundary. Most mammals were lost, too, not to mention most of everything else. It's quite likely that surviving the impact was a matter of luck.
There are hundreds of well known non-human manipulated mutations in other living things. As an extreme example, they did a study on some trout in a stream that got separated a few generations ago, and they will hardly even breed anymore - mating signals changed. Just a few generations and they are close to speciating (noone expected it to be so fast)! Another thing that comes to mind is the well-known extremely high mutation rate of pathogenic bacteria - and not nearly always in response to our medicines.
Also I am wondering what they will do with the bacterial waste! If I ate glowing radioactive, I would be too and we would be no better off than if I did not eat it! Maybe the bacteria are smart enough to put it in a box? But I do not think we should make smart bacteria because like the proverbial Frankenstein they could turn on us!
Were that so, some socialist country should have one. Canada is a corporate playground with some public education and health services left over, and some provinces are working really hard at fixing that.
Not all bacteria are identical. Most are, genetically, more different than animals and euglenae.
Likewise, calling what happened to the Native Americans a result of religion is severe distortion. The church had some influence in the area, its missionary activity was draining, and it did nothing to stop what was happening. But the death, destruction, and enslavement happened because people could.
Religion has played a major role in a lot of wars, but mostly because it's a convenient ground for hatred.
Theoretically, silicon-oxygen chains don't work. There's not nearly enough you can do with them; that's why most silicates are unreactive rocks. The cool silicones that we use have their properties because the also have organic components. Why not simplify and drop the silicone chain?
They haven't merged because consoles are a lot cheaper than an equivalent (in terms of game-playing) computer. If all you want to do is play games, you shouldn't bother with extra functionality. So they'll always have a niche market.
It is indeed a problem, but I think it's a lot more unfortunate when people believe in something just because they hope it's true, or refuse to have faith in anything else.