"you'd realize that Microsoft wouldn't go this far just to stop Linux from supporting NTFS. They'd just change a few important things about how NTFS works. They wouldn't throw it out unless there was a good reason to do so. And no, Linux having nearly decent support for NTFS doesn't qualify as a "good reason"."
Well according to their past history this is exactly what they would do. Messing with NTFS might break backward compatibility.
Why do you think MS has changed their stripes? Same management, same philosophy, same monoply. They are the same company as always and there is no reason to believe that they will act differently today.
Think about evidence. Think about why you believe or don't believe things. For you why you believe or don't believe something has nothing to do with firsthand or secondhand evidence. For you if a credible source says so then it must be true and until a credible source says so it can not be true.
Did I get that right?
For me when somebody tells me the sun is 93 million miles away I give them the benefit of the doubt. Probably because I have nothing to gain or lose if they are right or wrong. By the same token if somebody tells me that they saw a UFO or took a picture of one, or took some videotape of one I also give them the benefit of the doubt.
"Then go out and bust your ass to make the money it takes to be in the bracket and fill out a 1040EZ"
I havent filled out an EZ form in eight years. That's for the suckers and the poor. The tax code contains hundreds of thousands of pages, if you are filling out a 1040ez you are seriously overpaying taxes.
" Man, you just don't get it do you? Verifiable means that someone tells me something, and I can go check it out myself."
No it's you who don't get it. Just for one second think about what you are saying. You (that's you, your body, your eyes, your brain) are not able to verify the existance of pluto. You have to trust somebody else's word that it exists.
"Pluto Is A Bad Example and is not relevant when talking about UFO sightings. "
I am using pluto because it is a regularly occuring phenomena.
Here let me try this.
Even though pluto is a regularly occuring phenomena AND even though UFOs are an irregularly occuring phenomena you (yourself) have more evidence for the existance of UFOs then you do for the esitance of pluto.
The entirety of your evidence for the existance of pluto is "they told me and I believed them". In the meanwhile you can see hundreds of pictures and videos of UFOs and listen to hundreds of testimonies.
" know quite a few lawyers, and they seem to be split roughly 50-50 on Bush v Gore."
That's most likely due to the fact that lawyers like the rest of america is split about 50/50 along democrats and republicans.
More telling is the fact that the supreme court itself put language into the ruling along the lines of "don't takae this as precedent, this was just a one time thing, we will now go back to our strong sates rights stance. We just did this to elect a republican this one time."
" But for someone getting hit with most of their income in the highest tax bracket, they have to use the loopholes in the system to acheive the same percentage."
This is such bullshit. We have a progressive tax system they are not supposed to achieve the same percentage. The fact that they can hide income and avoid paying their percentage tells volumes.
Could it be a form of incriminating yourself. You have the right to remain silent and not to incriminate yourself, shouldn't your property be covered in that?
"UFO sitings are not verifiable - by anyone, no matter how much they want to believe, no matter how qualified they are, and are generally reported by the same people who want to get on "Springer"."
This is an out and out lie. There have been tens of thousands of witnesses to UFOs by all kinds of people. From children to little old ladies to astranauts, pilots, cops, and yes even scientists.
"I am 99% sure Pluto exists "
You have no basis for being that sure. You have no first hand evidence. Your belief stems purely from the fact that somebody told you it exists and you believed them. You also proably read it in a book and believed what you read. That's it. That is entire basis for your 99% proof. Pretty damned flimsy if you ask me.
"Can you find one example of a "recorded UFO phenomena" that you are equally sure of?"
There are tens of thousands of pictures, hours of videotape, tens of thousands of eyewitnesses, even some material. There are govt documents, recordings from cockpits of planes and the space shuttle, there are radar traces from numerous radar sites.
There is an amazing amount of evidence for the existance of UFOs. It's obvious you are not aware of them but dig a little and you'll see. Sure some of it's fake, some of it's loonies but even if less then 1% of it was credible you would still have more evidence for the existance of UFOs then pluto.
"In-kind "earnings", capital gains, etc. are all included."
Are they? Do you know that for sure?
"Did you ever stop and think that the few hundred bucks the average middle class family writes off every year in charitable donations and possibly mortage interest, etc. is probably about the same percentage of their overall income that people who make millions per year "hide"?"
It's highly unlikely. Your average joe can not hire a good enough CPA to hide income and shuffle paperwork and money to offshore accounts and such.
"he couldn't negotiate a deal on his own terms, he would be beholden to layers of beaurocracy to make deals for him. If he doesn't like those deals, he can't do anything about it, except quit."
"People have a reason to lie about aliens, not new planets."
People also have reasons to lie about where they were last night. Of course people have a reason to lie but that does not mean everybody is lying. You have to evaluate the eyewitness testimony just like you'd evaluate any other evidence. Was there collabrating evidence? pictures? movies? other eyewitnesses?. You can't simply throw out all eyewitness evidence because "people have a reason to lie".
" but I trust Dr. Clyde Tombaugh and his recorded, verifiable observations"
So you would 100% trust somebody who you never met talking about a phenomena you haver never observed right? Why? Just because he has a degree? There are lots of scientists who believe in UFOs why not trust them too?
"Any astronomer with time on a large enough telescope can look up and see pluto."
So they say. You don't know this for sure. Once again you trust other people to tell you truth. Anyway like I said pluto is a regularly occuring phenomena what about irregular phenomena. What we are talking about here is rarely occuring irregular phenomena.
"When some drunken redneck says he got anal probed, you have to take him at his word. "
Of course all people who report UFOs are drunk rednecks. All those cameras which took pictures are drunk redneck cameras and all those videotapes are shot by drunk redneck video recorders.
Also the radar traces were by drunk redneck radars. The police, pilots, military personell, scientists who have this phenomena were all drunk rednecks too.
It's a little known fact that all people and equipments that have observed or recorded UFO phenomena were drunk AND redneck. In fact the equipment were not only drunk and redneck but they were built by drunk rednecks and operated by drunk rednecks.
" According to the IRS, the top 1% of wage earners payed 37.42% of the tax burden while only making 20.81% of earned income. The top 10% payed 67.33% of the tax burde while only making 46.01% of earned income."
That's because those people are very adept at hiding income. Were you paying attention to the enron goings on? Now those guys knew how to hide money. Look at Steven Jobs. His official salary is $1.00 per year. Yes one dollar per year. You really think that's his total income?
" The Egyptians did record all sorts of nasty things, but it was always propaganda for the rulers."
I would think that the kings would be proud to carve the fact that they conquered and enslaved a race of people in stone. The mayans did it and so did the egyptians (although slavery seems to be less common in egypt).
"Until we do find evidence, there's no reason to think it was any more than a myth, just like about everything else."
You completely missed the point. Go ahead and re-read my post.
In fact I actually think you are replying to another post altogether and have mistakenly clicked on reply to my story.
My post was about nature of evidence. It was about how little evidence you have for things you actually believe in compared to the evidence you have for UFO.
You can not use a sliding scale for evidence just because the thing you are trying to prove or disprove seems outragous.
Who cares what the social effects would be? It's either true or not. Either the evidence supports you or it does not. Nothing else comes into it.
" The Egyptians only recorded good things in stone."
That's not true at all. All kinds of nasty things were recorded.
"The fact that the Hebrews didn't take credit for the pyramids they must surely have been building in a set of books that is otherwise filled with propaganda is a bit more damning."
They did not even mention them. Not a word. No mention of pyramids, the sphynx, the nile delta, nothing. You'd think there would be some factual description of egypt or at least one of it's many architectural marvels. Why would the jews write all kinds of history in the bible but leave out any description of egypt whatsoever. I have a theory. I don't think they ever were in egypt. Just like they never went to the south pole and wrote about it they never went to egypt and wrote about it.
"capable of covering up Kennedy's FBI assassination, a faked moon landing, and space aliens."
I don't know about the other two but the govt coverup of space aliens failed miserably thereby proving your point. We are talking about it here on slashdot and more people believe in UFOs then don't.
Just like the clinton blowjob this could not be effectively covered up.
Just because there was a flood that does not mean jesus christ was the son of god.
Every culture in the world has a legend about a big flood which indicates there was some sort of a global event but that does not make jesus the son of god. Following your logic then all myths by all cultures are true because they all mention the same flood.
I have no doubt that the bible was documenting a lot the cultural legends and history of the jewish people but I don't for one second believe that it was the word of god.
The bible is a book of the jews. It makes the jews look good and everybody else look bad (which is understandable). It does not contain any information which would not be available to the jews living at that time.
There is no mention of the poles, no mention of pluto, jupiter, saturn or any other planets, not even a mention of the pyramids or the sphynx.
Surely if the jews were slaves of the egyptians they would have said something about the pyramids and as a previous poster said the egyptians would have written something about it. They seemed to have documented everything else that went on in their lives.
You can't say that because the bible mentions some event or another that all of it is true. Not even you believe that jonah lived in the belly of a whale do you?
Hey look we are discussing it on slashdot. It wasn't hidden well was it. You are right. Something this significant could not have been hidden and it wasn't.
"Im not saying that all phenomena can be explained away so easily, but until we have proof (alien artifact/body/public first contact)I'll remain anchored to what logic seems to point too."
The problem with people like you are that you have double standards. Is that the only proof you will accept for aliens? Some sort of a body or contact?
Think about it this way. Do you believe in pluto? If so why?
Have you ever seen it? Have you ever seen a picture of it? A movie of it? Have you ever touched it? Have you ever met anybody who has seen it?
You have almost no evidence for the existance of pluto and yet you believe it because you read it in a book. Flimsy evidence if you ask me. Especially considering it's a regularly occuring phenomena.
Take an irregularly occuring phenomena and things get even more complicated. Take a phenomena that might actually stay hidden from you and you are up shits creek.
Face it, you have more evidence for the existance of UFOs then for the existance of pluto or god or even truk (a small island in the pacific, you believe me?).
"That we are indeed alone as far as intelligent life and people are still desperately trying to find something to believe in."
Perhaps it's the opposite. Perhaps we are people hopelessly denying or ignoring evidence because it does not fit into out preconceived notions of reality.
Slashdot Mirror
"you'd realize that Microsoft wouldn't go this far just to stop Linux from supporting NTFS. They'd just change a few important things about how NTFS works. They wouldn't throw it out unless there was a good reason to do so. And no, Linux having nearly decent support for NTFS doesn't qualify as a "good reason"."
Well according to their past history this is exactly what they would do. Messing with NTFS might break backward compatibility.
Why do you think MS has changed their stripes? Same management, same philosophy, same monoply. They are the same company as always and there is no reason to believe that they will act differently today.
It's not so funny.
SCO hired a law firm which employs Sen. Hatch's son.
You think a judge or jury in Utah is going to rule for hippie liberal linux over republican SCO?
I don't think so.
You are hopelessly lost by now aren't you.
Think about evidence. Think about why you believe or don't believe things. For you why you believe or don't believe something has nothing to do with firsthand or secondhand evidence. For you if a credible source says so then it must be true and until a credible source says so it can not be true.
Did I get that right?
For me when somebody tells me the sun is 93 million miles away I give them the benefit of the doubt. Probably because I have nothing to gain or lose if they are right or wrong. By the same token if somebody tells me that they saw a UFO or took a picture of one, or took some videotape of one I also give them the benefit of the doubt.
They are both the same kind of evidence.
"Then go out and bust your ass to make the money it takes to be in the bracket and fill out a 1040EZ"
I havent filled out an EZ form in eight years. That's for the suckers and the poor. The tax code contains hundreds of thousands of pages, if you are filling out a 1040ez you are seriously overpaying taxes.
" Man, you just don't get it do you? Verifiable means that someone tells me something, and I can go check it out myself."
No it's you who don't get it. Just for one second think about what you are saying. You (that's you, your body, your eyes, your brain) are not able to verify the existance of pluto. You have to trust somebody else's word that it exists.
"Pluto Is A Bad Example and is not relevant when talking about UFO sightings. "
I am using pluto because it is a regularly occuring phenomena.
Here let me try this.
Even though pluto is a regularly occuring phenomena AND even though UFOs are an irregularly occuring phenomena you (yourself) have more evidence for the existance of UFOs then you do for the esitance of pluto.
The entirety of your evidence for the existance of pluto is "they told me and I believed them". In the meanwhile you can see hundreds of pictures and videos of UFOs and listen to hundreds of testimonies.
" know quite a few lawyers, and they seem to be split roughly 50-50 on Bush v Gore."
That's most likely due to the fact that lawyers like the rest of america is split about 50/50 along democrats and republicans.
More telling is the fact that the supreme court itself put language into the ruling along the lines of "don't takae this as precedent, this was just a one time thing, we will now go back to our strong sates rights stance. We just did this to elect a republican this one time."
" But for someone getting hit with most of their income in the highest tax bracket, they have to use the loopholes in the system to acheive the same percentage."
This is such bullshit. We have a progressive tax system they are not supposed to achieve the same percentage. The fact that they can hide income and avoid paying their percentage tells volumes.
Could it be a form of incriminating yourself. You have the right to remain silent and not to incriminate yourself, shouldn't your property be covered in that?
"UFO sitings are not verifiable - by anyone, no matter how much they want to believe, no matter how qualified they are, and are generally reported by the same people who want to get on "Springer"."
This is an out and out lie. There have been tens of thousands of witnesses to UFOs by all kinds of people. From children to little old ladies to astranauts, pilots, cops, and yes even scientists.
"I am 99% sure Pluto exists "
You have no basis for being that sure. You have no first hand evidence. Your belief stems purely from the fact that somebody told you it exists and you believed them. You also proably read it in a book and believed what you read. That's it. That is entire basis for your 99% proof. Pretty damned flimsy if you ask me.
"Can you find one example of a "recorded UFO phenomena" that you are equally sure of?"
There are tens of thousands of pictures, hours of videotape, tens of thousands of eyewitnesses, even some material. There are govt documents, recordings from cockpits of planes and the space shuttle, there are radar traces from numerous radar sites.
There is an amazing amount of evidence for the existance of UFOs. It's obvious you are not aware of them but dig a little and you'll see. Sure some of it's fake, some of it's loonies but even if less then 1% of it was credible you would still have more evidence for the existance of UFOs then pluto.
"In-kind "earnings", capital gains, etc. are all included."
Are they? Do you know that for sure?
"Did you ever stop and think that the few hundred bucks the average middle class family writes off every year in charitable donations and possibly mortage interest, etc. is probably about the same percentage of their overall income that people who make millions per year "hide"?"
It's highly unlikely. Your average joe can not hire a good enough CPA to hide income and shuffle paperwork and money to offshore accounts and such.
"This is rediculous, those people make me sick."
They actually make you sick?
You really need a life.
"he couldn't negotiate a deal on his own terms, he would be beholden to layers of beaurocracy to make deals for him. If he doesn't like those deals, he can't do anything about it, except quit."
How is this different then his current position.
"People have a reason to lie about aliens, not new planets."
People also have reasons to lie about where they were last night. Of course people have a reason to lie but that does not mean everybody is lying. You have to evaluate the eyewitness testimony just like you'd evaluate any other evidence. Was there collabrating evidence? pictures? movies? other eyewitnesses?. You can't simply throw out all eyewitness evidence because "people have a reason to lie".
" but I trust Dr. Clyde Tombaugh and his recorded, verifiable observations"
So you would 100% trust somebody who you never met talking about a phenomena you haver never observed right? Why? Just because he has a degree? There are lots of scientists who believe in UFOs why not trust them too?
"Any astronomer with time on a large enough telescope can look up and see pluto."
So they say. You don't know this for sure. Once again you trust other people to tell you truth. Anyway like I said pluto is a regularly occuring phenomena what about irregular phenomena. What we are talking about here is rarely occuring irregular phenomena.
"When some drunken redneck says he got anal probed, you have to take him at his word. "
Of course all people who report UFOs are drunk rednecks. All those cameras which took pictures are drunk redneck cameras and all those videotapes are shot by drunk redneck video recorders.
Also the radar traces were by drunk redneck radars. The police, pilots, military personell, scientists who have this phenomena were all drunk rednecks too.
It's a little known fact that all people and equipments that have observed or recorded UFO phenomena were drunk AND redneck. In fact the equipment were not only drunk and redneck but they were built by drunk rednecks and operated by drunk rednecks.
That's my point exactly. The non salary income probably does not enter into the statistics you mentioned.
" According to the IRS, the top 1% of wage earners payed 37.42% of the tax burden while only making 20.81% of earned income. The top 10% payed 67.33% of the tax burde while only making 46.01% of earned income."
That's because those people are very adept at hiding income. Were you paying attention to the enron goings on? Now those guys knew how to hide money. Look at Steven Jobs. His official salary is $1.00 per year. Yes one dollar per year. You really think that's his total income?
" The Egyptians did record all sorts of nasty things, but it was always propaganda for the rulers."
I would think that the kings would be proud to carve the fact that they conquered and enslaved a race of people in stone. The mayans did it and so did the egyptians (although slavery seems to be less common in egypt).
"Until we do find evidence, there's no reason to think it was any more than a myth, just like about everything else."
On this we agree.
You completely missed the point. Go ahead and re-read my post.
In fact I actually think you are replying to another post altogether and have mistakenly clicked on reply to my story.
My post was about nature of evidence. It was about how little evidence you have for things you actually believe in compared to the evidence you have for UFO.
You can not use a sliding scale for evidence just because the thing you are trying to prove or disprove seems outragous.
Who cares what the social effects would be? It's either true or not. Either the evidence supports you or it does not. Nothing else comes into it.
" The Egyptians only recorded good things in stone."
That's not true at all. All kinds of nasty things were recorded.
"The fact that the Hebrews didn't take credit for the pyramids they must surely have been building in a set of books that is otherwise filled with propaganda is a bit more damning."
They did not even mention them. Not a word. No mention of pyramids, the sphynx, the nile delta, nothing. You'd think there would be some factual description of egypt or at least one of it's many architectural marvels. Why would the jews write all kinds of history in the bible but leave out any description of egypt whatsoever. I have a theory. I don't think they ever were in egypt. Just like they never went to the south pole and wrote about it they never went to egypt and wrote about it.
"capable of covering up Kennedy's FBI assassination, a faked moon landing, and space aliens."
I don't know about the other two but the govt coverup of space aliens failed miserably thereby proving your point. We are talking about it here on slashdot and more people believe in UFOs then don't.
Just like the clinton blowjob this could not be effectively covered up.
Just because there was a flood that does not mean jesus christ was the son of god.
Every culture in the world has a legend about a big flood which indicates there was some sort of a global event but that does not make jesus the son of god. Following your logic then all myths by all cultures are true because they all mention the same flood.
I have no doubt that the bible was documenting a lot the cultural legends and history of the jewish people but I don't for one second believe that it was the word of god.
The bible is a book of the jews. It makes the jews look good and everybody else look bad (which is understandable). It does not contain any information which would not be available to the jews living at that time.
There is no mention of the poles, no mention of pluto, jupiter, saturn or any other planets, not even a mention of the pyramids or the sphynx.
Surely if the jews were slaves of the egyptians they would have said something about the pyramids and as a previous poster said the egyptians would have written something about it. They seemed to have documented everything else that went on in their lives.
You can't say that because the bible mentions some event or another that all of it is true. Not even you believe that jonah lived in the belly of a whale do you?
"No one ever finds out the truth"
In this case many of the people involved have come forward and told their stories. Some were military and some were civillians.
Hey look we are discussing it on slashdot. It wasn't hidden well was it. You are right. Something this significant could not have been hidden and it wasn't.
What was your point again?
How did you get modded up to 5?
"Im not saying that all phenomena can be explained away so easily, but until we have proof (alien artifact/body/public first contact)I'll remain anchored to what logic seems to point too."
The problem with people like you are that you have double standards. Is that the only proof you will accept for aliens? Some sort of a body or contact?
Think about it this way. Do you believe in pluto? If so why?
Have you ever seen it? Have you ever seen a picture of it? A movie of it? Have you ever touched it? Have you ever met anybody who has seen it?
You have almost no evidence for the existance of pluto and yet you believe it because you read it in a book. Flimsy evidence if you ask me. Especially considering it's a regularly occuring phenomena.
Take an irregularly occuring phenomena and things get even more complicated. Take a phenomena that might actually stay hidden from you and you are up shits creek.
Face it, you have more evidence for the existance of UFOs then for the existance of pluto or god or even truk (a small island in the pacific, you believe me?).
"That we are indeed alone as far as intelligent life and people are still desperately trying to find something to believe in."
Perhaps it's the opposite. Perhaps we are people hopelessly denying or ignoring evidence because it does not fit into out preconceived notions of reality.
"The Filipino was not."
DO you know how to read? Do you speak english? Here is a quote from his post.
"I say fuck that, and fuck those people. I say nuke them and make a nice big parking lot."
"Truth is truth, regardless."
Yes but you don't seem too familiar with the concept.
"Besides, Hitler was never anonymous."
Which just means he was more brave then you. You are both nazis it's just that he was not afraid to say so.
"The ideas weren't even the same, in fact they were as far from Hitler as you can get."
What was so different?. Both were calling for genocide.
BTW why post anonymously if you are so convinced you are right.