1. I have read many times in this forum that the argument against evolution that states that there have never been any positive mutations observed is a bad one. I have yet to read, however, any reason for this arguement being bad. I could understand completely if it had been called untrue, but it has been called "bad." Despite the many time I have seen this arguement called "bad" I have never seen any logical reason given for its "bad"ness. Is it fallacious? Does it not address the issue being discussed? In what way is it bad?
2. It has been stated many times on this forum that this article disproves the arguement of creationists that no positive mutation has ever been observed. Upon careful reading of the article it is clear that this is not true. The article states the large mutations have now been observed not beneficial ones. The arguement of creationists that the article refuted was that there was no way for major changes in body structure to come about without the simultaeneous mutation of many different genes. The article no where states that the observed mutation was in any way beneficial to the crustacean in question.
I disagree. According to Adam Smith (famous Scottish economist) the basic unit of wealth is not subjective, it is objective. It is human labor. Therefore, since people spend time and exert energy in order to obtain things in Everquest, those thing have every bit as much value as anything that requires wealth to obtain.
The market for Linux computer games is far smaller than that of Windows. Therfore, not as many computer games can be commercially successful in Linux as in Windows (even considering the far lower cost of porting vs. development). Because of this Loki must only port games that have a strong appeal with a large portion of gaming subset of the linux crowd. It is usually very difficult to determine which games will be successful with the afore said group. Therfore, Loki must wait until it sees which games are popular with that group and port only those games.
Slashdot Mirror
1. I have read many times in this forum that the argument against evolution that states that there have never been any positive mutations observed is a bad one. I have yet to read, however, any reason for this arguement being bad. I could understand completely if it had been called untrue, but it has been called "bad." Despite the many time I have seen this arguement called "bad" I have never seen any logical reason given for its "bad"ness. Is it fallacious? Does it not address the issue being discussed? In what way is it bad? 2. It has been stated many times on this forum that this article disproves the arguement of creationists that no positive mutation has ever been observed. Upon careful reading of the article it is clear that this is not true. The article states the large mutations have now been observed not beneficial ones. The arguement of creationists that the article refuted was that there was no way for major changes in body structure to come about without the simultaeneous mutation of many different genes. The article no where states that the observed mutation was in any way beneficial to the crustacean in question.
Or four, beacause you have an icurable greed for power.
Hmm... These things always break down somewhere.
There are some beautiful dual booting machines available at pogolinux.com (RedHat with Optional Windows 2000 as second operating system).
I disagree.
According to Adam Smith (famous Scottish economist) the basic unit of wealth is not subjective, it is objective. It is human labor.
Therefore, since people spend time and exert energy in order to obtain things in Everquest, those thing have every bit as much value as anything that requires wealth to obtain.
The market for Linux computer games is far smaller than that of Windows. Therfore, not as many computer games can be commercially successful in Linux as in Windows (even considering the far lower cost of porting vs. development). Because of this Loki must only port games that have a strong appeal with a large portion of gaming subset of the linux crowd. It is usually very difficult to determine which games will be successful with the afore said group. Therfore, Loki must wait until it sees which games are popular with that group and port only those games.