Re:Picking and choosing...
on
God Mode
·
· Score: 1
It makes you wonder though... What if I don't think there is a God, but I think there is but I disagree with him morally?
Re:Picking and choosing...
on
God Mode
·
· Score: 1
But the trouble with your reply and the other posters reply is that you both chose particular bits of the bible to back up your point. What about the parts in the old testament where God kills lots of people, where God asks other people to kill for him, and so on.
You say that people point out the murder etc in the bible and say they miss the point. You can't just dismiss it, but have to say why you can ignore those parts and only select the parts you want.
Re:Picking and choosing...
on
God Mode
·
· Score: 1
And yet the bible says people asked Jesus whether they should then ignore the old testament, and he replied that they must not.
I don't get your point. Are you saying that we shouldn't go to war with them to save their people from their oppressive government (in which case I, along with everybody else, would agree with), or that we shouldn't discuss it at all (which I don't think anybody would agree with).
It seems you are trying to make a strawman argument. If we complain it means we want to go to war with them to fix it, which is wrong, so therefore we can't complain.
As a 24 year old male student, I often see young girls teenage girls wearing clothing that I can only describe as slutty. While I do enjoy looking when I know they are within the legal age (and even more fun, teasing my gf about it), I don't know what to think when they are younger, even more so when I'm not even sure if they _are_ teenagers:/
I do wonder about the motivation. I know that from 13 or so girls do become sexually aware (or whatever the term is for when their bodies are ready), so is that reason? Or is it just to copy their favourite singer? Or do they want to tease older men (and in turn enjoy the attention?) Or is it rebelling against the parents?
Ennis's work isn't a mystery, it's just flawed. Google for when Ennis tried to replicate the results in a proper way, when checked over by Randi. No results at all. And no one else has replicated it under proper conditions. Ennis was just sloppy.
How is this possibly a failure of modern physics, an embarassment, or any such thing? It means scientists had a hypothesis, tested it against the evidence, find it doesn't fit, and keep on working on the problem. That's what science _is_! Or should be tell, for example, Isaac Newton that he should be 'embarrassed' for not getting his equations 100% right in the first place, and the same with most other scientists?
The idea of the eye being like a camera and the brain just has a raw feed and does image processing neatly in one area is seriously flawed.
At the back of the eye the 'data lines' mesh into each other, and with data lines from the other eye. The meshing is like a neural network, and does huge amounts of image processing. (People who have damaged one eye from a laser, like I stupidly did last week, find that it can affect vision in the other eye due to the meshing of neurons. Luckily I retained my vision, mostly.).
The brain recieves a highly filtered and analysed scene, well before it reaches the image analsis part of the brain. So you can see that if the eye developed color receptors, the neurons can make use of this information before the brain has to.
A frog's. for example, sees movement and circular and partly circular objects, just in the eye. That information comes just from the meshing of the neurons and is sent to the brain along with (some) of the raw info.
I didn't know that was so dangerous. I used to do it all the time. Partly because the moon is cool, partly because I loved putting in green filters and taking picture of a 'green cheese moon', but mostly because the moon was the only object I could see with the stupid non-automatic-focussing telescope. *grin*.
FWIW, my eye is getting better, but I think I'll permanently have a blind spot in the very centre of my vision. Means i can't read with that eye, but that's all. My worry at the moment is that I'll over stretch the other eye because when reading it has to do the work of both.
3 days ago I accidently looked into a blue (440nm) 5mJ pulse laser beam. Burnt out a tiny bit of my retina. Now I really do have only one good eye:( I was really lucky and the damage is pretty tiny.
oh. Yeah I get that. I've been using it for so long that I'm totally blind to such things now. It seemed obvious to me, and I couldn't see your problem.
You have to be careful. The mafias, for example, would give money to local schools and events etc, to gain good publicity and to be liked in the community. How they actually got that money was another story though. I'm not comparing MS to a charity, just saying don't wear rose tinted glasses just because a fraction of their proceeds go to good causes.
There was an experiment where they showed that ducks still have the genetics for teeth (they actually grew a duck with teeth to prove it - most wierd looking hehe). That's pretty strong evidence that they evolved from another species. Humans continually get back problems due to our frame comming from a bent-over shape - like a ape. There's tons of evidence that we evolved from another species.
How could it be falsified? Well if we found a large animal without any DNA, that would be most interesting. Or a DNA that is completely different from any other species - that would be hard to explain.
You keep mentioning that you just get insulted when you say your view. I don't find that surprising because you have said things that show you have clearly not listened to the debate. It's not really surprising that people choose to just give up and insult you.
Slashdot Mirror
It makes you wonder though... What if I don't think there is a God, but I think there is but I disagree with him morally?
But the trouble with your reply and the other posters reply is that you both chose particular bits of the bible to back up your point. What about the parts in the old testament where God kills lots of people, where God asks other people to kill for him, and so on.
You say that people point out the murder etc in the bible and say they miss the point. You can't just dismiss it, but have to say why you can ignore those parts and only select the parts you want.
And yet the bible says people asked Jesus whether they should then ignore the old testament, and he replied that they must not.
So how to fix this paradox?
Maybe VLC will do what you want.
I don't get your point. Are you saying that we shouldn't go to war with them to save their people from their oppressive government (in which case I, along with everybody else, would agree with), or that we shouldn't discuss it at all (which I don't think anybody would agree with).
It seems you are trying to make a strawman argument. If we complain it means we want to go to war with them to fix it, which is wrong, so therefore we can't complain.
Ask and ye shall recieve. (Quick answer, 70% increase)
i ew_of_the_nvidia_quad_gpu_setup/
http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/12/14/sneak_prev
I have a first class degree in physics, first class degree in computing and a phd in engineering. But I still cannot remember my fiance's name.
:/
Go figure
As a 24 year old male student, I often see young girls teenage girls wearing clothing that I can only describe as slutty. While I do enjoy looking when I know they are within the legal age (and even more fun, teasing my gf about it), I don't know what to think when they are younger, even more so when I'm not even sure if they _are_ teenagers :/
I do wonder about the motivation. I know that from 13 or so girls do become sexually aware (or whatever the term is for when their bodies are ready), so is that reason? Or is it just to copy their favourite singer? Or do they want to tease older men (and in turn enjoy the attention?) Or is it rebelling against the parents?
Or are afraid of him.
What does equal rights have to do with whether we were created equal or not??
Ennis's work isn't a mystery, it's just flawed. Google for when Ennis tried to replicate the results in a proper way, when checked over by Randi. No results at all. And no one else has replicated it under proper conditions. Ennis was just sloppy.
How is this possibly a failure of modern physics, an embarassment, or any such thing?
It means scientists had a hypothesis, tested it against the evidence, find it doesn't fit, and keep on working on the problem. That's what science _is_! Or should be tell, for example, Isaac Newton that he should be 'embarrassed' for not getting his equations 100% right in the first place, and the same with most other scientists?
What authority was he appealing to?
You've just described why an electron doesn't fall into an atom.
The idea of the eye being like a camera and the brain just has a raw feed and does image processing neatly in one area is seriously flawed.
At the back of the eye the 'data lines' mesh into each other, and with data lines from the other eye. The meshing is like a neural network, and does huge amounts of image processing.
(People who have damaged one eye from a laser, like I stupidly did last week, find that it can affect vision in the other eye due to the meshing of neurons. Luckily I retained my vision, mostly.).
The brain recieves a highly filtered and analysed scene, well before it reaches the image analsis part of the brain. So you can see that if the eye developed color receptors, the neurons can make use of this information before the brain has to.
A frog's. for example, sees movement and circular and partly circular objects, just in the eye. That information comes just from the meshing of the neurons and is sent to the brain along with (some) of the raw info.
Wow, was the water cycle the best you could come up with?
And as for the deaths, maybe you didn't pray enough. I thought you God was suppose to answer your prayers.
Scientists have saved millions of lives.
And some how I doubt a God is going to be impressed that you believed in him just to hedge your bets.
I didn't know that was so dangerous. I used to do it all the time. Partly because the moon is cool, partly because I loved putting in green filters and taking picture of a 'green cheese moon', but mostly because the moon was the only object I could see with the stupid non-automatic-focussing telescope. *grin*.
FWIW, my eye is getting better, but I think I'll permanently have a blind spot in the very centre of my vision. Means i can't read with that eye, but that's all. My worry at the moment is that I'll over stretch the other eye because when reading it has to do the work of both.
3 days ago I accidently looked into a blue (440nm) 5mJ pulse laser beam. Burnt out a tiny bit of my retina. Now I really do have only one good eye :( I was really lucky and the damage is pretty tiny.
:)
Such is life
It depends what age you are talking about. We did logo programming at 9 years old in my school, so don't underestimate kids.
oh. Yeah I get that. I've been using it for so long that I'm totally blind to such things now. It seemed obvious to me, and I couldn't see your problem.
;)
File a bug against apt for it
What part of REMOVED did you not understand?
You have to be careful. The mafias, for example, would give money to local schools and events etc, to gain good publicity and to be liked in the community. How they actually got that money was another story though. I'm not comparing MS to a charity, just saying don't wear rose tinted glasses just because a fraction of their proceeds go to good causes.
To be fair, as they say - 90% of work takes 10% of the time. It's the last 10% that's the pain
Um, we've seen plants change species all the time.
There was an experiment where they showed that ducks still have the genetics for teeth (they actually grew a duck with teeth to prove it - most wierd looking hehe). That's pretty strong evidence that they evolved from another species. Humans continually get back problems due to our frame comming from a bent-over shape - like a ape. There's tons of evidence that we evolved from another species.
How could it be falsified? Well if we found a large animal without any DNA, that would be most interesting. Or a DNA that is completely different from any other species - that would be hard to explain.
You keep mentioning that you just get insulted when you say your view. I don't find that surprising because you have said things that show you have clearly not listened to the debate. It's not really surprising that people choose to just give up and insult you.