Amino acids have already been detected in other parts of the universe - even in the dead of space. No need for a laboratory or a rigidly controlled environment.
Atheism is NOT agnosticism. You probably also call an Australian a Limey. Atheism rejects "belief systems" and insists on proof. We call it a "belief system", whereas in fact it is not. It is an absence of a belief system. It's the same way we define a vacuum as the absence of air.
Beliefs that are not only not supported by the evidence, but contradicted by the evidence, are stupid. Religion is stupid.
Your attempt to confabulate atheism with religion is also stupid, and intellectually dishonest.
I "believe" what the facts tell me - that is not the same as your crock-pot religion (because christianity is just the latest mish-mash of beliefs thrown into the stew pot and left to sit. It's not like humans didn't have many other fables for thousands of years before the old and new testaments were made up)..
In the article, they admit that there are no "hard and fast rules". Gee, talk about dumbing down the game - Scrabble to cater to semi-literates. Like they even know what a proper noun is...
You don't need a sword if you don't shove your beliefs in other peoples faces over and over again. The "Great Commission" was exactly that. We're tired of all the religious BS,
which is why atheism is now the fastest-growing belief in the US.
Watching the fundies burn themselves over and over again in the political arena has been a real slice...
Religion is stupid and foolish. It is based on "belief", not facts. Egro, the people who believe, despite a total absence of facts, are also stupid and/or foolish. All of them. Every single one.
I'm a software engineer, my last job was at Apple but for the last two years I've been working on my own startup called Mailana. The name comes from 'Mail Analysis', and my goal has been to use the data sitting around in all our inboxes to help us in our day-to-day lives.
Yes. He was actually the adjudicator in charge of the final disposition of one of the cases, and approved the guy going back to work with kids, despite the memos saying the priest was going to re-offend. And then he goes around calling the newspapers reporting all this as indulging in "petty gossip."
Chocolate has been proven to reduce the stickiness of platelets, allowing for better blood flow without the associated risks of the "aspirin for the heart" regimen.
You were wrong. Get over it.
Even dihydrogen monoxide, in too large a quantity, is deadly. But reasonable consumption of chocolate has health benefits, contrary to your knee-jerk complaint.
Nowhere in the Bible, and I assume most other religious books, does it say "Shove your nose into other's business."
I guess you never read it. Matthew 10:34-36
34. Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
Setting people against their own flesh and blood, and their neighbors as well, has to qualify as "shoving your nose into others' business."
It's also immoral as all heck... but then again, Jesus also thought it was more important to fight over money (the temple) than slavery - nowhere did he say "Owning people is wrong, you stupid sh*ts!"
We see the same thing today, with the Pope moving pedophile priests to other parishes (where they then re-offend) because exposing them and punishing them will turn people away, reducing the $$$. More important to fleece the flock than to protect it.
The evidence shows that he sent the priest back into the field, after being sent memos saying that the guy would re-offend. (The priest went on to abuse more than 200 more children).
Fuck the pope. Preferably with a broomstick. With splinters.
Heart attack victims may want to gravitate toward the chocolate choices on the menu, thinking of it not just as a treat, but as a potential lifesaver. While past reports have indicated some potential benefits to eating chocolate, we now have new evidence showing a previous heart attack patient may be avoiding death by consuming two or more servings of chocolate per week.
A study released in the September issue of the Journal of Internal Medicine, indicates death from heart disease in previous heart attack victims are cut threefold when sufferers eat two are more servings of chocolate weekly, compared to those who refrain from eating chocolate. The study indicates the less chocolate consumed the lower the protection against heart attacks for previous heart attack survivors.
Research has indicated the myriad benefits of cocoa, the main ingredient of chocolate, such as lowering blood pressure and improving blood flow, but the new report is the first to make the connection between chocolate consumption and the prevention of death from heart attacks in heart attack victims. The new study, lead by Imre Janszky of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm and co-author Dr. Kenneth Mukamal, a researcher with the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, tracked 1,169 non-diabetic men and women, ranging in age from 45 to 70, located in Stockholm county. The study began in the early 1990's, with patient data being gathered, beginning when they were hospitalized from their first heart attack. Study participates were asked several questions in regards to their diets from the previous year, prior to their first heart attack, including questions regarding chocolate consumption and frequency. Three months following discharge from the hospital, study participants, were given health examinations and they were continually monitored over the next eight years.
The researchers said, "Our findings support increasing evidence that chocolate is a rich source of beneficial bioactive compounds." They found the more chocolate a previous heart attack sufferer consumed during a week, the lower their risks of dying from a heart attack. Dr. Kenneth Mukamal said, the study only involved chocolate and they did not find a benefit from sweets in general. He explained the life saving properties of chocolate realized during the study, were probably a result of the antioxidants in the cocoa.
Ah, but you're ignoring the big reason why people continue to smoke, once they start - it's addicting. All things being equal, a dumb person and a smart person should have similar addiction risks. Perhaps here we're seeing that smarter people are less likely to become addicts, or maybe their intelligence is able to override the addictive drive.
You can't fix stupid.
And don't argue addiction - it sounds too much like the Pope trying to justify hiding pedophiles for decades - we KNOW smoking is bad for you, and we KNOW sexually abusing kids is bad for them. Both are stupid.
What next - excuse these pedophile priests because are addicted to sexually molesting and otherwise abusing kids? Only a low-IQ smoker would buy into that.
And that's the reason why Christianity never really caught on among the native Americans. For they already had a paradise waiting for them full of women and sex.
Half of all native Americans are women. Are you implying that native American women are all lesbians?
Or that paradise isn't open to native American women - just native American men? If native American men are like other men, the women will be too busy trying to teach them how to change the toilet paper roll instead of leaving one lonely square on it so that it's "someone else's turn", and pick their dirty underwear and used towels up off the floor.
It's too bad that we don't have a better means of evaluating a persons' knowledge and capabilities. Stuffing people in a room for 4 years and expecting them to be the next generation of innovators is simply not going to work.
And whoever modded you off-topic needs to look at the topic in the larger context.
Slashdot Mirror
Nah - the acting in those episodes could hardly be called "animated" ... "wooden" is more like it.
Want to try again?
Atheism is NOT agnosticism. You probably also call an Australian a Limey. Atheism rejects "belief systems" and insists on proof. We call it a "belief system", whereas in fact it is not. It is an absence of a belief system. It's the same way we define a vacuum as the absence of air.
Apple To Introduce iPDA
I don't need to stream scaled-down "used-to-be-hi-definition" video in 1024x576, so I'll get the iPDA instead of the iPad.
It's pretty bad, but don't take my word for it ...Advance Video Of The New Star Wars Animated Sitcom.
The problem was his misplaced priorities - a character flaw from back when he didn't stand up and refuse to join the Hitler Youth.
Besides, the Pope would be getting off easy compared to the "punishment" he believes non-believers merit.
Pope Wants Unborn Children To Have Citizenship, Voting Rights.
This pope is great - he's done more to discredit religion than anyone else in the last 100 years! At this rate, I hope he stays pope a LOOONG time.
Don't compound your stupidity. Oops, too late.
Beliefs that are not only not supported by the evidence, but contradicted by the evidence, are stupid. Religion is stupid.
Your attempt to confabulate atheism with religion is also stupid, and intellectually dishonest.
I "believe" what the facts tell me - that is not the same as your crock-pot religion (because christianity is just the latest mish-mash of beliefs thrown into the stew pot and left to sit. It's not like humans didn't have many other fables for thousands of years before the old and new testaments were made up)..
In the article, they admit that there are no "hard and fast rules". Gee, talk about dumbing down the game - Scrabble to cater to semi-literates. Like they even know what a proper noun is ...
You don't need a sword if you don't shove your beliefs in other peoples faces over and over again. The "Great Commission" was exactly that. We're tired of all the religious BS, which is why atheism is now the fastest-growing belief in the US.
Watching the fundies burn themselves over and over again in the political arena has been a real slice ...
Religion is stupid and foolish. It is based on "belief", not facts. Egro, the people who believe, despite a total absence of facts, are also stupid and/or foolish. All of them. Every single one.
FTFA:
All Facebook is doing is nailing has "anal".
RMS mis-quotes Gordon Brown.
Yes. He was actually the adjudicator in charge of the final disposition of one of the cases, and approved the guy going back to work with kids, despite the memos saying the priest was going to re-offend. And then he goes around calling the newspapers reporting all this as indulging in "petty gossip."
Even dihydrogen monoxide, in too large a quantity, is deadly. But reasonable consumption of chocolate has health benefits, contrary to your knee-jerk complaint.
... or they can plug an external keyboard, mouse, and screen into it as needed. A laptop with dual monitors is much nicer anyway.
I guess you never read it. Matthew 10:34-36
Setting people against their own flesh and blood, and their neighbors as well, has to qualify as "shoving your nose into others' business."
It's also immoral as all heck ... but then again, Jesus also thought it was more important to fight over money (the temple) than slavery - nowhere did he say "Owning people is wrong, you stupid sh*ts!"
We see the same thing today, with the Pope moving pedophile priests to other parishes (where they then re-offend) because exposing them and punishing them will turn people away, reducing the $$$. More important to fleece the flock than to protect it.
The evidence shows that he sent the priest back into the field, after being sent memos saying that the guy would re-offend. (The priest went on to abuse more than 200 more children).
Fuck the pope. Preferably with a broomstick. With splinters.
Too bad you got the facts wrong. People who consume more chocolate live longer. Just one example:
http://www.healthnews.com/medical-updates/heart-attack-survivors-benefit-chocolate-consumption-3571.html
Both the Pope and smokers exhibit cognitive dissonance - the ability to simultaneously hold two conflicting or contradictory ideas simultaneously.
Smokers KNOW that smoking is bad for them, and yet they continue to do it.
The Pope KNOWS that pedophiles are bad for the flock, and yet he hid them.
Neither one of them wants to do what any rational person would do (both smoking and protecting pedophiles are irrational behaviour).
You can't fix stupid.
And don't argue addiction - it sounds too much like the Pope trying to justify hiding pedophiles for decades - we KNOW smoking is bad for you, and we KNOW sexually abusing kids is bad for them. Both are stupid.
What next - excuse these pedophile priests because are addicted to sexually molesting and otherwise abusing kids? Only a low-IQ smoker would buy into that.
I certainly don't need a browser-based music player .... and yes, I'm on linux :-)
How will you know if you like gay anal sex with a donkey until you try it?
Some things, you just know ...
Half of all native Americans are women. Are you implying that native American women are all lesbians?
Or that paradise isn't open to native American women - just native American men? If native American men are like other men, the women will be too busy trying to teach them how to change the toilet paper roll instead of leaving one lonely square on it so that it's "someone else's turn", and pick their dirty underwear and used towels up off the floor.
It's too bad that we don't have a better means of evaluating a persons' knowledge and capabilities. Stuffing people in a room for 4 years and expecting them to be the next generation of innovators is simply not going to work.
And whoever modded you off-topic needs to look at the topic in the larger context.
Neither does the original story.
What's Songbird? Who cares ...