As corporations are a creation of the state, being pro-libertarian doesn't necessarily mean being pro-corporation. Personally, I'm all for getting rid of the fiction known as the corporation.
So what piece of evidence would it take to convince you that you are a descendant of apes? If no such evidence exists, why would you even bother having this conversation?
Before you ask, yes, there are things that could convince me that gods are real.
>Well, about Harry Potter, we can prove, today, observationally that he was dreamed up by a person and only ever existed on paper.
And at one time, the same was true of the books of the bible. While the authors may have incorporated some historical facts in their texts, they also added their own little fairy tales. Just like Harry Potter incorporates actual things like train stations and cars, it also has fun stuff like wizards and monsters.
So, it Scientology a real religion? Mormonism?
>But the Bible on the other hand, was written over a 1400 year period, 66 books by several authors. And you can map out things that either took a massive load of collusion, or has to be fact.
Not really. If you were writing the books of the NT with an eye towards making some particular man fulfill all of the prophesies about a messiah, it would be easy to tweak your stories wherever necessary.
You misunderstand me. All I'm saying is that as far as we know, intelligence is incapable of creating universes, since you seem to think that everything was created by some intelligence when that's not apparent at all.
Also, your argument about god's existence can equally be applied to any fanciful thing you can come up with. No, I can't prove that Harry Potter doesn't actually exist somewhere in the universe, but everyone agrees that looking for him would be insane.
Here's my question to those people who think the world is less than 10,000 years old: When did Supernova 1987A occur? As we have directly measured its distance from us using simple trigonometry and the speed of light and found it to be about 168,000 light-years away, when did that star actually explode? Before the universe was created?
>I have to tell you in all honesty.. i have NO idea how people can look around and not see there was a creator.
It's easy. Since human beings are the only creatures we know are capable of creation, and we know that our intelligence is utterly insufficient to create something like a universe, why would you assume that any intelligence could do so?
What's not adding up is that you're not considering that until around 10,000 years ago, the Earth was in an ice age, which made survival much more tricky than it is today. Even the areas that weren't covered with ice were much drier at that time, making agriculture nearly impossible.
>But fundamentally, I have the right to decide to gamble or not gamble, but my post is about being forced to pay for gambling via my taxes if the US ends up paying any kind of penalty at all because of how a treaty has been used against the U.S. in spite of the idea that nations govern themselves within their own jurisdictions.
If the US would just get their noses out of people's gambling all together, this wouldn't be a problem. As it is, we signed the WTO treaty and can hardly complain about it when it's used against us after all the times we've used it against other countries.
If there were more than a tiny group of followers who ever witnessed these miracles, maybe. If people came from all over the world and made video evidence and wrote extensively about their experiences with the man, they just might. If the consensus of the whole world was that, yes, this man really is supernatural, then there is a pretty good chance that people would still believe it after 1000 years.
I mean, the testimony of a few persecuted guys in some tiny corner of the world is hardly conclusive, especially when they make claims about things that simply weren't reported anywhere else (like the sky going dark at the time of the crucifixion).
How so? Even when I'm sitting in a dark, silent room I can be thinking about any number of things that could be activating different areas of my brain. Even when I'm sleeping, my brain is still active even though it is receiving no sensory input. What's so hard to believe about one part of your brain stimulating another part, and so on and so on in all sorts of strange patterns?
Truth is, while there may be no conflict between religion and science in the most general meaning of the words, there are conflicts between specific religions and branches of science.
Your denial of the truth does nothing to lessen it.
>Take the gun experiment. Suppose I don't shoot myself, but I shoot someone else in the head. If that person lives, is that proof of parallel universes?
No, other people are perfectly free to die, it is only your personal consciousness that would be uninterrupted in a MWI immortality scenario. It only works because *you* can't experience death if there is always some quantum possibility that your consciousness will go on.
Personally, I think that artificially induced unconsciousness (anastesia, being knocked out, etc) proves that this does not work.
>Collapse of superposed states only occurs during measurement
And really, just like the cat, you only join the superposition. Say you're in a locked room making the measurement and haven't communicated it to anyone outside the room, that wave has only collapsed for you. As far as the rest of the universe is concerned, you're in both states.
Perhaps you're asking the exact same question in a whole bunch of other universes...
Maybe since once a quantum "decision" is made, there is no more communication possible between the different states. Our consciousness rides along both paths, but has no way of knowing about the others.
I had my identity stolen about three years ago and as a result, I put a 7 year freeze on my credit reports. What this means is that if I request any kind of credit, or if someone else does so in my name, the company offering the credit has to call me and verify that I am making the request before it can be opened. There is really no reason to "unfreeze" your credit under any circumstance, and IMHO this should be the default behavior for giving credit.
>We already have geological proof that the world gets hotter and colder in cycles and we are (geologically speaking) getting out of an ice age.
No, according to the history of climate cycles, we should be well on our way into another ice age by now, but instead the temperatures just keep rising.
Umm, if they wanted to restrict what people can do with their code, they should have chosen a different license. Is that not the whole point of the BSD license?
Slashdot Mirror
>Only if you round up somewhere.
Nope. 2.999... is exactly equal to 3.
Hey! That's still 3!
In 3, 2, 1...
As corporations are a creation of the state, being pro-libertarian doesn't necessarily mean being pro-corporation. Personally, I'm all for getting rid of the fiction known as the corporation.
So what piece of evidence would it take to convince you that you are a descendant of apes? If no such evidence exists, why would you even bother having this conversation?
Before you ask, yes, there are things that could convince me that gods are real.
>Well, about Harry Potter, we can prove, today, observationally that he was dreamed up by a person and only ever existed on paper.
And at one time, the same was true of the books of the bible. While the authors may have incorporated some historical facts in their texts, they also added their own little fairy tales. Just like Harry Potter incorporates actual things like train stations and cars, it also has fun stuff like wizards and monsters.
So, it Scientology a real religion? Mormonism?
>But the Bible on the other hand, was written over a 1400 year period, 66 books by several authors. And you can map out things that either took a massive load of collusion, or has to be fact.
Not really. If you were writing the books of the NT with an eye towards making some particular man fulfill all of the prophesies about a messiah, it would be easy to tweak your stories wherever necessary.
You misunderstand me. All I'm saying is that as far as we know, intelligence is incapable of creating universes, since you seem to think that everything was created by some intelligence when that's not apparent at all.
Also, your argument about god's existence can equally be applied to any fanciful thing you can come up with. No, I can't prove that Harry Potter doesn't actually exist somewhere in the universe, but everyone agrees that looking for him would be insane.
While I agree with the part about abstraction, I think we simply applied it to our existing apelike power structure. God is the ultimate Alpha Male.
Here's my question to those people who think the world is less than 10,000 years old: When did Supernova 1987A occur? As we have directly measured its distance from us using simple trigonometry and the speed of light and found it to be about 168,000 light-years away, when did that star actually explode? Before the universe was created?
>I have to tell you in all honesty.. i have NO idea how people can look around and not see there was a creator.
It's easy. Since human beings are the only creatures we know are capable of creation, and we know that our intelligence is utterly insufficient to create something like a universe, why would you assume that any intelligence could do so?
What's not adding up is that you're not considering that until around 10,000 years ago, the Earth was in an ice age, which made survival much more tricky than it is today. Even the areas that weren't covered with ice were much drier at that time, making agriculture nearly impossible.
>but nobody can outline, what it is, exactly.
They are selling your confidential information without your permission. Easy enough?
>But fundamentally, I have the right to decide to gamble or not gamble, but my post is about being forced to pay for gambling via my taxes if the US ends up paying any kind of penalty at all because of how a treaty has been used against the U.S. in spite of the idea that nations govern themselves within their own jurisdictions.
If the US would just get their noses out of people's gambling all together, this wouldn't be a problem. As it is, we signed the WTO treaty and can hardly complain about it when it's used against us after all the times we've used it against other countries.
700 mhz has a considerably longer range than 2 miles...
>So why the drug users use those drugs again and again and again?
For the same reason you do anything you enjoy more than once. It's fun.
>Using such drugs for 'recreational' purposes is the stupidest (and quite damaging) way of recreation, if you ask me.
Are they more damaging than skateboarding or skiing, or riding a bike? Point being, that however you decide to have fun is going to have some risks.
If there were more than a tiny group of followers who ever witnessed these miracles, maybe. If people came from all over the world and made video evidence and wrote extensively about their experiences with the man, they just might. If the consensus of the whole world was that, yes, this man really is supernatural, then there is a pretty good chance that people would still believe it after 1000 years.
I mean, the testimony of a few persecuted guys in some tiny corner of the world is hardly conclusive, especially when they make claims about things that simply weren't reported anywhere else (like the sky going dark at the time of the crucifixion).
How so? Even when I'm sitting in a dark, silent room I can be thinking about any number of things that could be activating different areas of my brain. Even when I'm sleeping, my brain is still active even though it is receiving no sensory input. What's so hard to believe about one part of your brain stimulating another part, and so on and so on in all sorts of strange patterns?
;)
Or were you just joshing us?
Truth is, while there may be no conflict between religion and science in the most general meaning of the words, there are conflicts between specific religions and branches of science.
Your denial of the truth does nothing to lessen it.
>Take the gun experiment. Suppose I don't shoot myself, but I shoot someone else in the head. If that person lives, is that proof of parallel universes?
No, other people are perfectly free to die, it is only your personal consciousness that would be uninterrupted in a MWI immortality scenario. It only works because *you* can't experience death if there is always some quantum possibility that your consciousness will go on.
Personally, I think that artificially induced unconsciousness (anastesia, being knocked out, etc) proves that this does not work.
>Collapse of superposed states only occurs during measurement
And really, just like the cat, you only join the superposition. Say you're in a locked room making the measurement and haven't communicated it to anyone outside the room, that wave has only collapsed for you. As far as the rest of the universe is concerned, you're in both states.
Crud. That actually kinda made sense to me. I don't get why we would experience it going the other direction, though.
Perhaps you're asking the exact same question in a whole bunch of other universes...
Maybe since once a quantum "decision" is made, there is no more communication possible between the different states. Our consciousness rides along both paths, but has no way of knowing about the others.
I had my identity stolen about three years ago and as a result, I put a 7 year freeze on my credit reports. What this means is that if I request any kind of credit, or if someone else does so in my name, the company offering the credit has to call me and verify that I am making the request before it can be opened. There is really no reason to "unfreeze" your credit under any circumstance, and IMHO this should be the default behavior for giving credit.
>We already have geological proof that the world gets hotter and colder in cycles and we are (geologically speaking) getting out of an ice age.
No, according to the history of climate cycles, we should be well on our way into another ice age by now, but instead the temperatures just keep rising.
Umm, if they wanted to restrict what people can do with their code, they should have chosen a different license. Is that not the whole point of the BSD license?