Really? Because I'm pretty sure that calling someone a "typical black person" would be called, oh, I don't know....racist. And rightfully so. But, of course, racism, like tolerance, is a one-way stree I am a typical black person, who would be honored to be called that.
As a Creationist, we try to teach people that every point of view is equally valid, and all deserve equal consideration. .
The problem with this statement is that evolution is not a matter of opinion. One may have opinions about Darwin et al, but having an opinion that evolution occurred does not make sense; you either know or you don't know.
The U.S. federal government does prosecute people for technology that, while harmless, may seem threatening. Please see this about Steve Kurtz, and artist who was charged with bioterrorism for art using "containing harmless forms of bacteria, and scientific equipment for testing genetically altered food." The charges have since been downgraded to mail fraud, but he has been indicted by a grand jury, and faces trial next year.
That depends on the application. I do believe that most of the heavy processing in Python, Perl, and PHP apps normally occurs in the database, so they are probably responsible for most of the power consumption in those apps.
Every scientific theory is up for debate and when you say this one isn't then you're no longer a scientist.
Evolution is not a theory in the sense of people not being sure whether its true or not. It is established as something that has happened, and which can be observed at so many levels; radiological dating, genetics, sedimentation, even direct observation. The theory behind evolution concerns the mechanisims behind it; how it happens, rather than whether it happens; the math behind it, stuff like that.
It might seem to you to conflict with what the Bible says in Genesis, but evolution is as a visible as an elephant in your face; its just there; we just have to deal with it.
Chris Crawford, the game designer, is organizing a project to build a three-dimensional map of the Augrid meteor shower, by combining the observations of many amateurs.
I like Java, but the fact is that every end-user GUI desktop application I have ever seen written in Java is perceptibly slower than similar apps written in compiled languages, at least in terms of GUI rendering and responsiveness.
Java is a compiled language. Its main gui(JFC/Swing) is slower than native guis because it is designed as a cross-platform system; the Java language itself is not a problem, and is definitely not slow.
Have you thought about believing in Creation without. Have you considered that the Bible does not really support creationism, not any more than slavery?
I checked your link; that is not made-up be creationists. The confusion comes in differences in measuring the commonality of genes. When humans DNA is compared with chimpanzee DNA, they are compared by base-pairs. The comparison with bananas was did not involve that level of detail. A clarification, from New Scientist magazine, a source of that statistic, can be found here: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17523584.000 -people-arent-bananas.html
We still share over 60% of our DNA with that banana the chimp is eating. Percentage of DNA should never be used as a benchmark for what is and is not human.
The notion that we share over 60% or our DNA with a banana sounds suspicious; I think that it is just another "fact" made-up to support creationism.
Look, instead of talking about how evolution MUST be true just CREATE LIFE IN THE LAB and that will fix it. I am sure that since evolution has to be true and happens all the time that ANY one of you Darwinists can create life in the lab, right??
Creating life in a lab would not support evolution, but creationism, correct? Instead, observing life evolve from one form to another would support evolution, and that is done all of the time.
Because the very existence of religion creates extremism, and if you want evidence of this then, well, you've got basically the whole of human existence to choose from.
That is an extremely vacuous statement. It is like saying "If you want evidence that what I said is true, go look for it yourself!" The burdon of proof is on you when you make such statements. The rest of your argument is based on that, so I'll stop here.
Slashdot Mirror
Java isn't just for selling books. Look at how many Java libraries are around.
FYI, the "Deikto" language, mentioned in the article, is a part of Chris Crawford's Storytron product, previously covered in Slashdot (see http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/15/1630249 ). It is now in beta, nearing commercial release.
Be humble. Listen. Stick to established facts. Don't say too much, and don't try to fix his thinking; only he can do it.
The problem with this statement is that evolution is not a matter of opinion. One may have opinions about Darwin et al, but having an opinion that evolution occurred does not make sense; you either know or you don't know.
Believing that science can disprove the existence of spiritual stuff is wishful thinking of the highest order.
The U.S. federal government does prosecute people for technology that, while harmless, may seem threatening. Please see this about Steve Kurtz, and artist who was charged with bioterrorism for art using "containing harmless forms of bacteria, and scientific equipment for testing genetically altered food." The charges have since been downgraded to mail fraud, but he has been indicted by a grand jury, and faces trial next year.
I should also add that if the database leaves any spare cycles, XML processing will use them up, long before the scripting code will.
That depends on the application. I do believe that most of the heavy processing in Python, Perl, and PHP apps normally occurs in the database, so they are probably responsible for most of the power consumption in those apps.
Evolution is not a theory in the sense of people not being sure whether its true or not. It is established as something that has happened, and which can be observed at so many levels; radiological dating, genetics, sedimentation, even direct observation. The theory behind evolution concerns the mechanisims behind it; how it happens, rather than whether it happens; the math behind it, stuff like that.
It might seem to you to conflict with what the Bible says in Genesis, but evolution is as a visible as an elephant in your face; its just there; we just have to deal with it.
Bad spelling mistake; it is the "Aurigid" project, not "Augrid".
Chris Crawford, the game designer, is organizing a project to build a three-dimensional map of the Augrid meteor shower, by combining the observations of many amateurs.
Details are here in his website.
Truly a British icon
Actually, he did die once:
http://www.aschulze.net/ultima/stories9/beta.htm
Java is a compiled language. Its main gui(JFC/Swing) is slower than native guis because it is designed as a cross-platform system; the Java language itself is not a problem, and is definitely not slow.
I agree with you in general, but on occasions when one must work in a command-line environment, what choice is there?
Have you thought about believing in Creation without. Have you considered that the Bible does not really support creationism, not any more than slavery?
I checked your link; that is not made-up be creationists. The confusion comes in differences in measuring the commonality of genes. When humans DNA is compared with chimpanzee DNA, they are compared by base-pairs. The comparison with bananas was did not involve that level of detail. A clarification, from New Scientist magazine, a source of that statistic, can be found here: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg17523584.000 -people-arent-bananas.html
Correction: I should have listed Gibbons instead of Baboons. Baboons are monkeys. Gibbons are apes.
Monkeys all have tails. Apes, including gorillas, baboons, chimpanzees, bonobos, and humans, do not.
The notion that we share over 60% or our DNA with a banana sounds suspicious; I think that it is just another "fact" made-up to support creationism.
Creating life in a lab would not support evolution, but creationism, correct? Instead, observing life evolve from one form to another would support evolution, and that is done all of the time.
Amen.
nuclear weapons
the internal combustion engine
cod fishing on the Grand Banks
clearcutting of rainforest in Brazil to raise cattle
software patents
the patriot act
"the solution to pollution is dilution"
lawyers You forgot to include Slashdot in that list.
That is an extremely vacuous statement. It is like saying "If you want evidence that what I said is true, go look for it yourself!" The burdon of proof is on you when you make such statements. The rest of your argument is based on that, so I'll stop here.