I live in downtown Cincinnati - the reason I live here is because I can walk to work, there are a lot of places to eat and hang out and life is quite nice. More importantly, the crowd that lives in downtown for the most part tends to be fairly young, a lot of whom work in downtown. I have the added advantage of not having to drive except for groceries or to go hangout somewhere outside of downtown, which saves me a lot in gas. This also means I have to walk to work, which is great. This also gives me a lot of time to spend on other things, because I save the odd hour or two from not driving. There is also a community of folks out here, because most of the crowd tends to be young and belong to a certain demographic.
Now, contrast this with some people I know - they spend as much as an hour in the morning and evening driving. Apart from the time spent, you have the problem of energy - the last thing you want to do after having driven an hour after a long day's work is do something, like say swim, work out or playing a game of tennis or even work on something. So, a lot of people just sit and watch TV or read. If you can't walk to a place to eat or do something, then you either decide to stay at home or you decide to drive, both of which don't really help you in any way.
And ironically, the best neighbourhood in Cincinnati happens to be Hyde Park, which is another part of town which is primarily one where you have a lot of places you can walk to.
Now, I do not know if this is cause and symptom or mere correlation, but the healthier crowd tends to live in one of these two neighbourhoods, or other similar neighbourhoods. While I can understand why some folks may not want to live in downtown (crime-rate*, family, kids, schools etc.), there are other similar neighbourhoods around the city. Of course, Cincinnati is modelled after European cities, so that might explain it too.
I guess what I am trying to say (supported by no less than anecdotal evidence, of course) is that while it may not entirely be the cause of being in poor shape, it almost certainly contributes towards it. I'd imagine that it is a question of lifestyle - hell, I do not even own a TV because I often tend to have so many things going on that I have picked up because of the free time.
* The crime rate in downtown Cincinnati used to be bad a few years ago, these days it's just changed a lot. Partly because of the kind of crowd that is coming in and partly due to the city's efforts, it's negligent in most parts of downtown (of course, there are *always* shady, seedy parts of town). As far as my experience goes, it's been perfectly safe and quite comfortable (then again, I used to live in Atlanta, so take that as you will).
"watch a conversation between two people and, using natural-language processing, figure out what are the tasks they agreed upon." Anyone care to guess what they plan to use that little gadget for?
> Umm, well then use the money to build infrastructure.
Infrastructure needs engineers, resources and a system that can produce such people.
> Good point. Seriously, I hadn't really considered that. I wonder if going to the moon helps too.
Oh, I do not know - maybe the fringe benefit of discovering all these other technologies along the way. Not to mention a technological know-how that brings business to launch satellites for other countries into space. Something that helps the economy, you know?
> Way to go, Strawman! I never mocked technological achievements. Not once.
Umm, India did something technological (i.e. bring a satellite back from orbit) and you said that the money was better spent on poverty blah blah (classic troll) - if not mockery, perhaps derision? That, or stupidity. Sorry, I just couldn't figure out between all those, "Oooh, sit back and live mundane lives without any thinking or progress till you have solved every problem in your country" statements.
> Such an asinine statement, that it doesn't really need to be refuted...but what the heck. A man (or woman) doesn't have the > right to fulfill his/her dream on public money. Public money is presumably for the public good. If it is his/her dream, let > him come up with or raise the cash like Jeff Bezos.
Ever strike you that a lot of people in India maybe proud of what is going on? Ever strike you that a large chunk of the "tax payers" maybe folks who are in the middle class who would like to see their nation make it big? It's called national pride, d'oh.
> Dream on then, Oh Great Strawman Dreamer!
Hey, being a strawman dreamer than a party pooper.
Your post, however, glibly trivializes the dire circumstances that exist in many parts of the world where there simply is not enough food.
Umm, the biggest problem in India is not production but storage and distribution.
And oh, these satellite thingys have helped improve agriculture by weather forecasting, geological and geographical surveys, communications etc. Amongst other things, such as education, industrialization, early weather warning systems and the like.
But hey, you go ahead. In your total idiocy and lack of vision, sit there mocking at technological achievements which are the crux for the foundation and development of any society.
But before you go, you should consider reading a little something about economics and Japan before and after WW2.
People have won Nobels for proving that you cannot solve any economic problem by throwing money at it -- oh, and the guy who won it happens to be an Indian. Turns out that you actually need a grassroots system, and a system capable of needing and sustaining higher order tasks and needs within a society.
What sheer stupidity. Denying a man his dream is the worst kind of sin one could commit. To quote Oscar Wilde, "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."
But hey, if the gutter smells wonderful to you, who am I to stop you from sniffing at it. Those that can dream will dream.
It is a valuable deterrent, especially given that India is surrounded by China on one side and Pakistan on the other - both of which are quite trigger happy.
Secondly, India has a no first use policy, which Pakistan does not share (I am not sure if China has a no first use policy).
Given the region, I'd say it's better to have a deterrent than none.
Besides, if there were no deterrent, there would be more frequent skirmishes and the like which would cost more money in the long term. With this, folks are afraid of any serious incursions because it could escalate into something bigger. So, you save more lives, money and resources that may have been spent on war.
The kind of crowd that is likely to buy the iPhone will be the kind that probably travels a lot (i.e. business and corporate users).
Therefore, the national GSM network is what will matter to them.
And I use T-mobile, not bad, but I do not get reception in several outdoorsy places (and I do a lot of outdoor stuff, not to mention my fiancée's family lives in Oklahoma, which makes it very hard for me).
I do not know how good/bad Cingular's service is, but they sound just as bad as T-mobile, if not worse. But one thing is that T-mobile does seem to have better customer service (in my experience) - and T-mobile also has a presence in Europe and Asia. Not sure about Cingular/AT&T.
Why should I hold someone else responsible for my actions? At some point of time or the other, you should draw the line and say that the only person responsible is the person who made it happen.
If you plan to go drinking, don't drive your car - if I know I am going to get smashed, I take a cab. If you did not do that, then you are to blame. It's nice, isn't it? Blaming someone else - the bartender, the website, the guy who sold the gun etc?
No, the people who should be held responsible here are the parents -- it's their duty, and they failed to do their jobs.
I got myself a new SUV - and all my "go green" friends went bonkers. Now, I live in downtown and hardly ever drive, except to buy groceries.
The only time I ever drive anywhere is when I am headed for outdoorsy stuff (rock climbing, camping, rafting etc). So, having an SUV is very useful. And since I live in downtown, I walk everywhere - to work, to eat out, to the bars etc.
To me, the car is only for either long distance trips and for outdoorsy stuff, and an SUV makes the most sense.
However, some people just don't seem to get that. I think I save more on gas than most people by living in downtown and walking everywhere, but all they see is the SUV and harp on that.
The other thing is FLs in my house - my girlfriend has migraine and FLs give her a bad headache, so we do not use those. But that does not stop people from "strongly suggesting" it.
Folks seem to find it hard to understand that these things are not cast in black and white.
The market forces of supply and demand will control which universities succeed and which fail.
The ones that keep teaching useless crap, will fail.
That's a very short-sighted perspective.
The Fourier series was discovered in the 1700s, and calculus before that, by people who thought they were doing pure sciences. Any applied value then? Nope, none whatsoever.
Ditto for boolean algebra, which came about long before we had computers.
The ones that teach in a modern way will succeed.
Care to define what "modern" is?
Why do we still teach CS and engineering majors tons of higher math? It's a vestigial remnant of what computers and engineering used to be about.
Oh, I do not know, maybe because most of _actual_ engineering is applied math? You should probably read up some papers on graphics, AI, game theory or theoretical CS -- it's almost entirely all math.
Today we have computers to do the math for us.
No, today we have computers to repeat and apply existing solutions to problems we have already solved. New problems? The human mind still kicks ass at pattern recognition and problem solving.
Universities will adapt or die. The ones that insist on teaching CS or engineering like it's just some subset of a math major will go away.
Most areas of CS and engineering are subsets of math and physics. Computer Science is more than writing some code, it's about mathematics, formal logic and other applied areas.
In fact, in the days to come, I'd imagine that CS itself is likely to breakup into smaller areas of focus.
Goodluck, though. Methinks you flunked math in school?
Leave them alone for a moment, think of the people themselves.
Most do not want to think for themselves and would rather do something mundane that pays the bills.
The percentage of people that actually want to think for their living is quite dismal in the grand scheme of things.
Secondly, look at who is more respected/has more resources in the society -- a "pop" star or a mathematician?
While the mathematician may be content with what s/he may have, society for the most part does not care about its "thinkers".
If we did, there would be far more folks out there doing things like pure mathematics, theoretical physics and other abstract areas that genuinely require thinking (not to discount the thinking in engineering and applied sciences, but pure sciences generally require more of a deidication than applied sciences and engineering).
So while engineering schools may be geared towards thinking, the question boils down to how many jobs out there require you to think as opposed to obey? How many people out there like people that think rather than do as they are told (while doing as you are told is certainly an important part of your learning experience, how many folks here have felt that they could find a better solution than the ones they have been asked to implement?).
No, if you want thinkers you need a society that encourages thinking.
To a great extent, this is a problem of social perception.
For instance, if someone were to speak the Queen's English with a crisp Standard RP, I would be more likely to listen to them for two reasons - one, I would understand them better and two, I would assume that someone who takes the pains to speak a particular language in the proper vernacular is, for want of a better word, sophisticated (or at the very least educated).
On the other hand, while there is an African American Vernacular, you do not see it being used in education, business or commerce. You only see it within the community, in certain neighbourhoods and by folks who use the language to underscore a cultural identity.
Even African Americans I know who are educated tend to stay away from the AAV and would rather speak (and have their children speak) good old English, whatever that may entail. In fact, I know a lot of well-educated African Americans who go out of their way to ensure that their children do not speak anything resembling the AAV.
Now, this might be social, for whatever reason - but it cannot be ignored.
Combined with the fact that a lot of the world learns English from proscriptivist norms, it is not surprising. And secondly, I might be wrong, but it seems to me that it is only in the US that descriptivist vernaculars take over proscriptivist vernaculars (for English, at least).
For instance, English in some of the commonwealth countries tends to be very proscriptivist in nature. Of course, I do not know what an educational system for learning a language effected by society may mean to lingustics, but it may be social and societal factors contribute to the fact that many people do not consider vernaculars to be part of the language per se.
Actually, born and having spent my formative years in India, I can attest to this.
While growing up, I lived in a few states, which entailed not only learning to speak the local language, but also read and write the said language. The good news is that once you've gotten the hang of it, it's not particularly hard.
Usually, folks learn the language of the state they are in, they learn Hindi (the national language) and of course English since it is the language of education and commerce, owing to the fact that we were a British colony.
End result? I am quite conversant in reading and writing several languages (speak 5 and read/write 4 - of course, I can read serious literature in only three of these languages). And do note that when I mean different languages, I mean languages - not dialects (I have noticed that a lot of folks tend to mistake all Indian languages as being dialects - they are not, and depending on which part of the country the language originated, they even have different linguistic roots).
I have also found that having learnt the skills for picking up languages as a child, it is a lot easier for me to learn a new language than it is for most people who've not had such an opportunity.
I don't care WHAT you believe (unless you're a scientologist, that's just wacky shit)
Why?
I mean, Christianity is just as messed up as Scientology. Or worse. Christianity makes Scientology look normal.
A religion that whose followers believe in a book that talks about incest, violence, brutality, bigotry and utter superstition. And the followers who have destroyed, killed, pillaged and plundered in its name. To speak nothing of the harm it has caused to science, society, free will and what not. A religion that propounds sexism, slavery, human sacrifice, rape.
Compared to Christianity, Scientology is benign.
Tell me, how many people's deaths has Scientology been responsible for? How many science ideas were killed by Scientology? How many religious wars and civilizations were destroyed ruthlessly by Scientology?
To this day, Christianity is affecting our lives - idiots who believe in a fairytale who want to stop research, stop teaching our kids from learning science, go back to the stone age and follow a book written by men for an era long gone.
No, sir.
Even the worst things mentioned in Operation Clambake (google for it) does not compare to what Christianity has been responsible for over the ages.
Slashdot Mirror
WHOOOOOOSH!
Do you hear that? That's not the sound of someone from MickeyD's farting, but the sound of the joke going over your head.
And oh, if your body needs more, it will burn your fat to get what it needs. Which I imagine is the whole purpose of working out.
Well, here's the thing.
I live in downtown Cincinnati - the reason I live here is because I can walk to work, there are a lot of places to eat and hang out and life is quite nice. More importantly, the crowd that lives in downtown for the most part tends to be fairly young, a lot of whom work in downtown. I have the added advantage of not having to drive except for groceries or to go hangout somewhere outside of downtown, which saves me a lot in gas. This also means I have to walk to work, which is great. This also gives me a lot of time to spend on other things, because I save the odd hour or two from not driving. There is also a community of folks out here, because most of the crowd tends to be young and belong to a certain demographic.
Now, contrast this with some people I know - they spend as much as an hour in the morning and evening driving. Apart from the time spent, you have the problem of energy - the last thing you want to do after having driven an hour after a long day's work is do something, like say swim, work out or playing a game of tennis or even work on something. So, a lot of people just sit and watch TV or read. If you can't walk to a place to eat or do something, then you either decide to stay at home or you decide to drive, both of which don't really help you in any way.
And ironically, the best neighbourhood in Cincinnati happens to be Hyde Park, which is another part of town which is primarily one where you have a lot of places you can walk to.
Now, I do not know if this is cause and symptom or mere correlation, but the healthier crowd tends to live in one of these two neighbourhoods, or other similar neighbourhoods. While I can understand why some folks may not want to live in downtown (crime-rate*, family, kids, schools etc.), there are other similar neighbourhoods around the city. Of course, Cincinnati is modelled after European cities, so that might explain it too.
I guess what I am trying to say (supported by no less than anecdotal evidence, of course) is that while it may not entirely be the cause of being in poor shape, it almost certainly contributes towards it. I'd imagine that it is a question of lifestyle - hell, I do not even own a TV because I often tend to have so many things going on that I have picked up because of the free time.
* The crime rate in downtown Cincinnati used to be bad a few years ago, these days it's just changed a lot. Partly because of the kind of crowd that is coming in and partly due to the city's efforts, it's negligent in most parts of downtown (of course, there are *always* shady, seedy parts of town). As far as my experience goes, it's been perfectly safe and quite comfortable (then again, I used to live in Atlanta, so take that as you will).
Voyeur radio porn?
> Umm, well then use the money to build infrastructure.
Infrastructure needs engineers, resources and a system that can produce such people.
> Good point. Seriously, I hadn't really considered that. I wonder if going to the moon helps too.
Oh, I do not know - maybe the fringe benefit of discovering all these other technologies along the way. Not to mention a technological know-how that brings business to launch satellites for other countries into space. Something that helps the economy, you know?
> Way to go, Strawman! I never mocked technological achievements. Not once.
Umm, India did something technological (i.e. bring a satellite back from orbit) and you said that the money was better spent on poverty blah blah (classic troll) - if not mockery, perhaps derision? That, or stupidity. Sorry, I just couldn't figure out between all those, "Oooh, sit back and live mundane lives without any thinking or progress till you have solved every problem in your country" statements.
> Such an asinine statement, that it doesn't really need to be refuted...but what the heck. A man (or woman) doesn't have the
> right to fulfill his/her dream on public money. Public money is presumably for the public good. If it is his/her dream, let
> him come up with or raise the cash like Jeff Bezos.
Ever strike you that a lot of people in India maybe proud of what is going on? Ever strike you that a large chunk of the "tax payers" maybe folks who are in the middle class who would like to see their nation make it big? It's called national pride, d'oh.
> Dream on then, Oh Great Strawman Dreamer!
Hey, being a strawman dreamer than a party pooper.
Your post, however, glibly trivializes the dire circumstances that exist in many parts of the world where there simply is not enough food.
Umm, the biggest problem in India is not production but storage and distribution.
And oh, these satellite thingys have helped improve agriculture by weather forecasting, geological and geographical surveys, communications etc. Amongst other things, such as education, industrialization, early weather warning systems and the like.
But hey, you go ahead. In your total idiocy and lack of vision, sit there mocking at technological achievements which are the crux for the foundation and development of any society.
But before you go, you should consider reading a little something about economics and Japan before and after WW2.
People have won Nobels for proving that you cannot solve any economic problem by throwing money at it -- oh, and the guy who won it happens to be an Indian. Turns out that you actually need a grassroots system, and a system capable of needing and sustaining higher order tasks and needs within a society.
What sheer stupidity. Denying a man his dream is the worst kind of sin one could commit. To quote Oscar Wilde, "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."
But hey, if the gutter smells wonderful to you, who am I to stop you from sniffing at it. Those that can dream will dream.
It is a valuable deterrent, especially given that India is surrounded by China on one side and Pakistan on the other - both of which are quite trigger happy.
Secondly, India has a no first use policy, which Pakistan does not share (I am not sure if China has a no first use policy).
Given the region, I'd say it's better to have a deterrent than none.
Besides, if there were no deterrent, there would be more frequent skirmishes and the like which would cost more money in the long term. With this, folks are afraid of any serious incursions because it could escalate into something bigger. So, you save more lives, money and resources that may have been spent on war.
It's not a zero sum game.
The kind of crowd that is likely to buy the iPhone will be the kind that probably travels a lot (i.e. business and corporate users).
Therefore, the national GSM network is what will matter to them.
And I use T-mobile, not bad, but I do not get reception in several outdoorsy places (and I do a lot of outdoor stuff, not to mention my fiancée's family lives in Oklahoma, which makes it very hard for me).
I do not know how good/bad Cingular's service is, but they sound just as bad as T-mobile, if not worse. But one thing is that T-mobile does seem to have better customer service (in my experience) - and T-mobile also has a presence in Europe and Asia. Not sure about Cingular/AT&T.
Devil and the deep sea?
Same-sex appeal? I didn't know quantum physicists were mostly gay...
Oh, they are just not sure - nobody's opened the closet yet to find out. =)
Why?
Why should I hold someone else responsible for my actions? At some point of time or the other, you should draw the line and say that the only person responsible is the person who made it happen.
If you plan to go drinking, don't drive your car - if I know I am going to get smashed, I take a cab. If you did not do that, then you are to blame. It's nice, isn't it? Blaming someone else - the bartender, the website, the guy who sold the gun etc?
No, the people who should be held responsible here are the parents -- it's their duty, and they failed to do their jobs.
I agree.
I got myself a new SUV - and all my "go green" friends went bonkers. Now, I live in downtown and hardly ever drive, except to buy groceries.
The only time I ever drive anywhere is when I am headed for outdoorsy stuff (rock climbing, camping, rafting etc). So, having an SUV is very useful. And since I live in downtown, I walk everywhere - to work, to eat out, to the bars etc.
To me, the car is only for either long distance trips and for outdoorsy stuff, and an SUV makes the most sense.
However, some people just don't seem to get that. I think I save more on gas than most people by living in downtown and walking everywhere, but all they see is the SUV and harp on that.
The other thing is FLs in my house - my girlfriend has migraine and FLs give her a bad headache, so we do not use those. But that does not stop people from "strongly suggesting" it.
Folks seem to find it hard to understand that these things are not cast in black and white.
The market forces of supply and demand will control which universities succeed and which fail.
The ones that keep teaching useless crap, will fail.
That's a very short-sighted perspective.
The Fourier series was discovered in the 1700s, and calculus before that, by people who thought they were doing pure sciences. Any applied value then? Nope, none whatsoever.
Ditto for boolean algebra, which came about long before we had computers.
The ones that teach in a modern way will succeed.
Care to define what "modern" is?
Why do we still teach CS and engineering majors tons of higher math? It's a vestigial remnant of what computers and engineering used to be about.
Oh, I do not know, maybe because most of _actual_ engineering is applied math? You should probably read up some papers on graphics, AI, game theory or theoretical CS -- it's almost entirely all math.
Today we have computers to do the math for us.
No, today we have computers to repeat and apply existing solutions to problems we have already solved. New problems? The human mind still kicks ass at pattern recognition and problem solving.
Universities will adapt or die. The ones that insist on teaching CS or engineering like it's just some subset of a math major will go away.
Most areas of CS and engineering are subsets of math and physics. Computer Science is more than writing some code, it's about mathematics, formal logic and other applied areas.
In fact, in the days to come, I'd imagine that CS itself is likely to breakup into smaller areas of focus.
Goodluck, though. Methinks you flunked math in school?
Employers?
Leave them alone for a moment, think of the people themselves.
Most do not want to think for themselves and would rather do something mundane that pays the bills.
The percentage of people that actually want to think for their living is quite dismal in the grand scheme of things.
Secondly, look at who is more respected/has more resources in the society -- a "pop" star or a mathematician?
While the mathematician may be content with what s/he may have, society for the most part does not care about its "thinkers".
If we did, there would be far more folks out there doing things like pure mathematics, theoretical physics and other abstract areas that genuinely require thinking (not to discount the thinking in engineering and applied sciences, but pure sciences generally require more of a deidication than applied sciences and engineering).
So while engineering schools may be geared towards thinking, the question boils down to how many jobs out there require you to think as opposed to obey? How many people out there like people that think rather than do as they are told (while doing as you are told is certainly an important part of your learning experience, how many folks here have felt that they could find a better solution than the ones they have been asked to implement?).
No, if you want thinkers you need a society that encourages thinking.
Yeah, but they might have had Queen Liz as the French queen, too.
Well, yes.
They are called the French and they across the pond.
=)
(Sorry, couldn't resist!)
Ascended replicator wraith prior inhabited by a goa'uld would be better, don't you think? =)
Yeah, as my girlfriend says, good at English and Hick English (TM). =)
To a great extent, this is a problem of social perception.
:)
For instance, if someone were to speak the Queen's English with a crisp Standard RP, I would be more likely to listen to them for two reasons - one, I would understand them better and two, I would assume that someone who takes the pains to speak a particular language in the proper vernacular is, for want of a better word, sophisticated (or at the very least educated).
On the other hand, while there is an African American Vernacular, you do not see it being used in education, business or commerce. You only see it within the community, in certain neighbourhoods and by folks who use the language to underscore a cultural identity.
Even African Americans I know who are educated tend to stay away from the AAV and would rather speak (and have their children speak) good old English, whatever that may entail. In fact, I know a lot of well-educated African Americans who go out of their way to ensure that their children do not speak anything resembling the AAV.
Now, this might be social, for whatever reason - but it cannot be ignored.
Combined with the fact that a lot of the world learns English from proscriptivist norms, it is not surprising. And secondly, I might be wrong, but it seems to me that it is only in the US that descriptivist vernaculars take over proscriptivist vernaculars (for English, at least).
For instance, English in some of the commonwealth countries tends to be very proscriptivist in nature. Of course, I do not know what an educational system for learning a language effected by society may mean to lingustics, but it may be social and societal factors contribute to the fact that many people do not consider vernaculars to be part of the language per se.
And can't say that I disagree, either.
Actually, born and having spent my formative years in India, I can attest to this.
While growing up, I lived in a few states, which entailed not only learning to speak the local language, but also read and write the said language. The good news is that once you've gotten the hang of it, it's not particularly hard.
Usually, folks learn the language of the state they are in, they learn Hindi (the national language) and of course English since it is the language of education and commerce, owing to the fact that we were a British colony.
End result? I am quite conversant in reading and writing several languages (speak 5 and read/write 4 - of course, I can read serious literature in only three of these languages). And do note that when I mean different languages, I mean languages - not dialects (I have noticed that a lot of folks tend to mistake all Indian languages as being dialects - they are not, and depending on which part of the country the language originated, they even have different linguistic roots).
I have also found that having learnt the skills for picking up languages as a child, it is a lot easier for me to learn a new language than it is for most people who've not had such an opportunity.
A most equitable bargain, I'd say.
Personally, I thought that it looked like the armour Aris Boch wears in one of the Stargate SG-1 episodes.
Hey, I stop at organic life forms. Of the feminine human variety, I must add.
Oooh, baby. Check out those transistors. Let me jingle my electron around your hole.
Sorry, couldn't resist. =)
Don't worry.. if it has holes, we can fill it.
:-\
I *shudder* to think of it.
Must clean mind's eye. ARGH!
And... while... thaaat.... conversatiooon... goes on... about.... who's.... e.g..o..... is.... bi.g..g...er...
Spock will stand their with his ears all pointy.
I don't care WHAT you believe (unless you're a scientologist, that's just wacky shit)
Why?
I mean, Christianity is just as messed up as Scientology. Or worse. Christianity makes Scientology look normal.
A religion that whose followers believe in a book that talks about incest, violence, brutality, bigotry and utter superstition. And the followers who have destroyed, killed, pillaged and plundered in its name. To speak nothing of the harm it has caused to science, society, free will and what not. A religion that propounds sexism, slavery, human sacrifice, rape.
Compared to Christianity, Scientology is benign.
Tell me, how many people's deaths has Scientology been responsible for? How many science ideas were killed by Scientology? How many religious wars and civilizations were destroyed ruthlessly by Scientology?
To this day, Christianity is affecting our lives - idiots who believe in a fairytale who want to stop research, stop teaching our kids from learning science, go back to the stone age and follow a book written by men for an era long gone.
No, sir.
Even the worst things mentioned in Operation Clambake (google for it) does not compare to what Christianity has been responsible for over the ages.
*shudder*
Mommy, I found these balloons lying around my desk...
I spy with my litle eye something that starts with S.
SOJOURNER? Yay!