Agree wholeheartedly. Also to add, Celsius isn't REALLY metric. It's just part of the metric system by arbitrary decision. Another thing is, Fahrenheit's 100 was originally set to be about the average human body temperature. Even today, it's easy to tell that if you have a temp over 100 you probably are sick. Setting the bounds of 0-100 based on when water freezes and cools is incredibly arbitrary honestly. As water boils at different temps based on atmospheric pressure. Lastly, Rankine units. If you want to get into science and math, Rankine I think is better than Kelvin. Why? Same bound for 0 (absolute), but the units are the higher resolution Fahrenheit. Better precision, means less fractions, easier to do math with.
Just because a foundational principle is wrong, doesn't mean everything else is broken. The law or theorem could just be flawed. I don't understand your zero-sum way of thinking here.
Fanboyism knows no limits when you're taught that Macs are all safe, secure, and virus free. So long as an actual exploit isn't published Apple's statistics are untarnished.
Wow, you drank the Koolaid I see. Is this why when some formerly feminist scholars try to hold talks on campuses about these issues that there is always at the very least a group of gender studies students "protesting" the speaker's presence? Is that why when an egalitarian group holds a meeting to discuss these issues that feminists protest out in the halls and pull fire alarms to disrupt the meetings?
As for the "pay gap," please friend cite this gap. Or do you mean the gap where women are actually earning more than men? http://content.time.com/time/b...
So they can't see far enough and assume the universe is flat? Couldn't it just be really really really big and changes in curvature are just too unnoticeable?
Spreading out will actually help in the long run. Overly dense urban areas are blights to natural habitats and put strains on natural waste management. This all assumes of course that logistics can or will be improved. For example, more teleworking.
You can not be detained with being arrested. That may sound redundant, but you can be arrested without being detained. An example is a traffic ticket. You were arrested for a traffic infraction. In order to be arrested you must be charged with performing an illegal action.
No, see you're confusing some things. Society does not have the right to protect itself from dangerous individuals. Individuals have the right to this. In order to achieve these goals, individuals have empowered their government to protect their right to life and property. Society has no right to demand anything of its members. Individuals empowered government to collect taxes to fund operations in the service of the general welfare. Society again does not have the right to decide who is a member (citizen). Individuals empowered government to regulate the border. The government regulating a nation's border are inherent from their mandate from individuals to protect them. I say border because government has no say in whether you create new citizens or not. As an individual, I may birth as many citizens as I wish (well as I and my significant other wish).
Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish.
Well first, you need to understand that monks copied or translated works. They didn't write history books, etc; so you're probably not going to find books penned by monks. Partly for the whole humility thing. So, for example while not exactly a history book, Beowulf. We have Beowulf because monks copied and preserved the story or wrote down the oral tale. That literacy rate you're talking about while harmful didn't stop the monks. The clergy was the literate of the "dark ages" (a misnomer but I'll still use it for our purposes here); they could read and write.
Your history is slightly off too. The Renaissance came about because of the works coming out of the Arab world at that time. The Crusades ironically are what kick started this. Prior to the Crusades, Arab works trickled into Europe.
They weren't against free thought or free exchange in general. They were against free thought and free exchange when it dealt with theological matters. The early colleges and universities were started by them. Those institutions allowed the free flow of knowledge in Europe.
The key aspect of the creation of man with respect to Catholicism is that man's soul was the direct creation of God. Not something that sprung from evolution or natural phenomenon.
2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity. Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man's dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.
Slashdot Mirror
Agree wholeheartedly. Also to add, Celsius isn't REALLY metric. It's just part of the metric system by arbitrary decision. Another thing is, Fahrenheit's 100 was originally set to be about the average human body temperature. Even today, it's easy to tell that if you have a temp over 100 you probably are sick. Setting the bounds of 0-100 based on when water freezes and cools is incredibly arbitrary honestly. As water boils at different temps based on atmospheric pressure. Lastly, Rankine units. If you want to get into science and math, Rankine I think is better than Kelvin. Why? Same bound for 0 (absolute), but the units are the higher resolution Fahrenheit. Better precision, means less fractions, easier to do math with.
Just because a foundational principle is wrong, doesn't mean everything else is broken. The law or theorem could just be flawed. I don't understand your zero-sum way of thinking here.
Unless there's a flaw in "Noether's Principle;" a possibility that is and should never be left out of scientific research.
Anytime Galileo is brought up it's as proof that the Church is/was anti-science; which is patently false. Don't get pissy because your example is bad.
Fanboyism knows no limits when you're taught that Macs are all safe, secure, and virus free. So long as an actual exploit isn't published Apple's statistics are untarnished.
Wow, you drank the Koolaid I see. Is this why when some formerly feminist scholars try to hold talks on campuses about these issues that there is always at the very least a group of gender studies students "protesting" the speaker's presence? Is that why when an egalitarian group holds a meeting to discuss these issues that feminists protest out in the halls and pull fire alarms to disrupt the meetings?
As for the "pay gap," please friend cite this gap. Or do you mean the gap where women are actually earning more than men? http://content.time.com/time/b...
Feminists don't want to do anything for men.
Is that why no one is talking about male rape victims? Or that they're forced to pay child support?
So they can't see far enough and assume the universe is flat? Couldn't it just be really really really big and changes in curvature are just too unnoticeable?
Spreading out will actually help in the long run. Overly dense urban areas are blights to natural habitats and put strains on natural waste management. This all assumes of course that logistics can or will be improved. For example, more teleworking.
Such as?
*detained without being arrested
Gotta start rereading my posts better...
You can not be detained with being arrested. That may sound redundant, but you can be arrested without being detained. An example is a traffic ticket. You were arrested for a traffic infraction. In order to be arrested you must be charged with performing an illegal action.
No, see you're confusing some things. Society does not have the right to protect itself from dangerous individuals. Individuals have the right to this. In order to achieve these goals, individuals have empowered their government to protect their right to life and property. Society has no right to demand anything of its members. Individuals empowered government to collect taxes to fund operations in the service of the general welfare. Society again does not have the right to decide who is a member (citizen). Individuals empowered government to regulate the border. The government regulating a nation's border are inherent from their mandate from individuals to protect them. I say border because government has no say in whether you create new citizens or not. As an individual, I may birth as many citizens as I wish (well as I and my significant other wish).
Any more fail than just the Dems Hilary Clinton?
Believing that something not being a top priority isn't still a priority fail.
I fail to see how being a religious figure and a scientific figure are mutually exclusive. I think George Lemaitre would disagree.
Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish.
Pope John Paul II
Well first, you need to understand that monks copied or translated works. They didn't write history books, etc; so you're probably not going to find books penned by monks. Partly for the whole humility thing. So, for example while not exactly a history book, Beowulf. We have Beowulf because monks copied and preserved the story or wrote down the oral tale. That literacy rate you're talking about while harmful didn't stop the monks. The clergy was the literate of the "dark ages" (a misnomer but I'll still use it for our purposes here); they could read and write.
Your history is slightly off too. The Renaissance came about because of the works coming out of the Arab world at that time. The Crusades ironically are what kick started this. Prior to the Crusades, Arab works trickled into Europe.
They weren't against free thought or free exchange in general. They were against free thought and free exchange when it dealt with theological matters. The early colleges and universities were started by them. Those institutions allowed the free flow of knowledge in Europe.
You apparently have never heard an oxymoron then lol.
Or if you think it was common when Galileo was arrested, you'd still be wrong.
As far as scientific knowledge goes, you are dead wrong. Barbarians razing things tended to do that.
The key aspect of the creation of man with respect to Catholicism is that man's soul was the direct creation of God. Not something that sprung from evolution or natural phenomenon.
It's a tenet of the Church actually.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/... :
2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity. Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man's dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.
What's your problem with pudding?