There's been a concerted effort in academia to pit science against religion. Probably because many in religion have pitted themselves against science. As man's knowledge of science grew it began to tug at many ideas man had about God. So religious figures resisted and the tension began. But the same thing happened to many scientists. Not content with understanding more about he world and the universe alone, many set out to prove God didn't exist. Of course, there are a myriad of scientists and theists in between. But like so many things political, both sides often attempt to force us and each other to the other side. Atheistic scientists will often vilify and seek to discredit scientists who believe in God and theists will often vilify those who would try to accept certain scientific theories. That Hawking has sought to just into this fray is disappointing. Ultimately, science studies what is around us. It need not prove or disprove God unless there is a need for it in the person's mind. Perhaps he's angry with God over his lot in life. Certainly he could have achieved much more had he been able-bodied. Or could he? Maybe his lot in life is why he was able to focus his energy. Or...maybe there is no God. But there could be.
Actually I can. I can tell you for a fact that here in Atlanta people in rehab halfway houses are hired to go to protests. Usually they have no vested interest in what they're there for other than they can make some money. That's personal knowledge as someone close to me who was getting treatment was approached to do just that. Apparently several in the center where she was staying in fact did go. This from someone who has little to do with politics and thought the whole thing rather odd and humorous.
The left has been hiring protesters for some time, which is why you often see familiar faces at differing rallies. As has been mentioned, there are plenty of funded left-wing blogs. As usual, it's only an issue when it's right-wing.
What's funny here, if you RTFA, is that these are hardly huge blogs and certainly not really news blogs per se' and doesn't appear to be coming from the RNC. So we're talking about certain Republican campaigns. Much ado about nothing.
The bigger picture is that companies, by definition, aren't ultimately concerned with good and evil. That's an easy thing to hide behind however they are run by people. And those people need to have some sense of good and evil. Hell, when Google can't even hold to their own principles what can we expect?
I agree with others, drop the ads. $50 isn't worth the hassle. Better yet, move! Screw Philly. I paid $63 for my license here in Georgia. There are better places to live and states that are more business friendly. Frankly, for $50 I wouldn't even report it as income. It's too small of an amount anyway and given that she probably spent more on her broadband writing it, it's far more than a wash.
This could easily go the other way. What if the accuser was a plant for Wikileaks. Everyone sympathizes with Assuage, conspiracy theories run a muck and suddenly leaking classified material is heralded by more of the mainstream. You know, as opposed to the usual crowd.
Except in Windows they're called:
Programs
Program Files
Applications
Application Files
My stuff (as in, "I think I installed too much stuff on my computer and I'm running out of memory)
My icons
The thing, you know, that I click when I need to do so-and-so
Teachers, like most government workers and academia as well, want to be free to do as they wish under the protection of tenure, unions, and like-minded administrators. I've always advocated for less spending in education. First, we're not getting a return on investment. Second, the number of administrators per student is crazy. And third, the curriculum is bloated. We're so busy teaching them the cultural changes we wish for them to adopt that they come out knowing very little about math, language, or science. There's been a lot of investigative work done on how there's been a concerted effort to dumb-down our kids. It's time to get them back to the basics. Several years ago I recall a rural West Virginian high school student blew the national curve. I bet they don't focus too much on cultural curriculum at that school.
Between this and hospital computers rebooting themselves after auto-updating how can people defend Windows in critical operations? At the very least run embedded WIndows or something more specialized. Though, yes, I admit I'd rather see them not run Windows at all.
I hope if he is found guilty he gets what he deserves. But more importantly, I hope Assuage get's it too. He's hiding behind "freedom of the press" but he's arguably guilty by simply having possession of these documents. He'll come to the U.S. eventually.
I think it was John Dvorak who pontificated: "How long will IE be free? Until Netscape is out of business." He was right but it continued to be free and ironically would be challenged by the son of Netscape in Firefox, arguably a safer/better browser. The only compelling reason to use IE is to correctly render bastardize sites that were coded towards it or in companies that don't allow other browsers. Other than that, it serves little use.
As long as Americans die I guess he doesn't care. Frankly, he's a douche for doing this regardless if someone dies or not. My guess it it's just a matter of time before the U.S. and Australia work out a way to bring him to trial. At which I hope he's dealt with accordingly.
I really haven't seen anything compelling with 3D. Most tend to only have certain parts that really "show off" the effect but mostly it just distracts from the film. The push to 3D is an attempt to rekindle interest in cinema but people are still going to the theaters. I had a couple of friends who saw a 3D film only because they wanted to see the movie at that time when only it was showing. By and large, it doesn't seem like anyone really wants 3D.
Once again MS goes after something simply because they can't stand someone else's success. The idea that they'll throw tons of money at something they'll fail miserably at does warm me up a little.
16 whole miles on electric! I'm amazed! I mean, that's really gonna satisfy my tree-hugging jones. Think I'll buy a Volt. Wait, it's also overpriced and will only go 40miles emissions free.
People, this is simple. Hybrids suck. This hybrid doesn't suck because it's mated to a kick-ass V-8. Kick-ass V-8's make most cars not suck. As for Tesla? Screw 'em. We're paying them (government subsidy??) to develop a car they will sell us back at a ridiculous price.
The data is moot, (though there are serious questions about the way it's gathered). It's only confirms what is blatantly obvious. The Earth's climate changes. It always has. What it doesn't "prove" is that you and I are the sole or even primary causation. But the media, academia, politicians, and those who stand to gain from the broad descriptions and conclusions are bent on labeling causation skeptics and "climate change deniers" and such. Such rhetoric is designed to do one thing, marginalize skepticism (something science has taught us to keep in our pocket lest we be duped). This marginalization is meant to quell any dissent that might interfere with policy and therefore any gain to be had.
Scientists generally ask for money and deliver slowly. Unfortunately, we really won't know if it's a waste of money until more money is poured into it. They should nickname it "Government."
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. :p
There's been a concerted effort in academia to pit science against religion. Probably because many in religion have pitted themselves against science. As man's knowledge of science grew it began to tug at many ideas man had about God. So religious figures resisted and the tension began. But the same thing happened to many scientists. Not content with understanding more about he world and the universe alone, many set out to prove God didn't exist. Of course, there are a myriad of scientists and theists in between. But like so many things political, both sides often attempt to force us and each other to the other side. Atheistic scientists will often vilify and seek to discredit scientists who believe in God and theists will often vilify those who would try to accept certain scientific theories. That Hawking has sought to just into this fray is disappointing. Ultimately, science studies what is around us. It need not prove or disprove God unless there is a need for it in the person's mind. Perhaps he's angry with God over his lot in life. Certainly he could have achieved much more had he been able-bodied. Or could he? Maybe his lot in life is why he was able to focus his energy. Or...maybe there is no God. But there could be.
It's not surprising. Google Louisville, KY and you'll find the city but you won't see it labeled.
Actually, it was a family member who I can trust. Grow up and learn how to make a point.
Argh....I used tag brackets. Do anywordbook.com.
Try randomly typing book.com and see how many sites you go to and how many are social in nature. That should be all the ammo Teachbook.com needs.
Actually I can. I can tell you for a fact that here in Atlanta people in rehab halfway houses are hired to go to protests. Usually they have no vested interest in what they're there for other than they can make some money. That's personal knowledge as someone close to me who was getting treatment was approached to do just that. Apparently several in the center where she was staying in fact did go. This from someone who has little to do with politics and thought the whole thing rather odd and humorous.
The left has been hiring protesters for some time, which is why you often see familiar faces at differing rallies. As has been mentioned, there are plenty of funded left-wing blogs. As usual, it's only an issue when it's right-wing.
What's funny here, if you RTFA, is that these are hardly huge blogs and certainly not really news blogs per se' and doesn't appear to be coming from the RNC. So we're talking about certain Republican campaigns. Much ado about nothing.
The bigger picture is that companies, by definition, aren't ultimately concerned with good and evil. That's an easy thing to hide behind however they are run by people. And those people need to have some sense of good and evil. Hell, when Google can't even hold to their own principles what can we expect?
I agree with others, drop the ads. $50 isn't worth the hassle. Better yet, move! Screw Philly. I paid $63 for my license here in Georgia. There are better places to live and states that are more business friendly. Frankly, for $50 I wouldn't even report it as income. It's too small of an amount anyway and given that she probably spent more on her broadband writing it, it's far more than a wash.
This could easily go the other way. What if the accuser was a plant for Wikileaks. Everyone sympathizes with Assuage, conspiracy theories run a muck and suddenly leaking classified material is heralded by more of the mainstream. You know, as opposed to the usual crowd.
Except in Windows they're called:
Programs
Program Files
Applications
Application Files
My stuff (as in, "I think I installed too much stuff on my computer and I'm running out of memory)
My icons
The thing, you know, that I click when I need to do so-and-so
See post #33313394 above.
LOL! Understood. :p
Teachers, like most government workers and academia as well, want to be free to do as they wish under the protection of tenure, unions, and like-minded administrators. I've always advocated for less spending in education. First, we're not getting a return on investment. Second, the number of administrators per student is crazy. And third, the curriculum is bloated. We're so busy teaching them the cultural changes we wish for them to adopt that they come out knowing very little about math, language, or science. There's been a lot of investigative work done on how there's been a concerted effort to dumb-down our kids. It's time to get them back to the basics. Several years ago I recall a rural West Virginian high school student blew the national curve. I bet they don't focus too much on cultural curriculum at that school.
So the problem with his long comment was that it wasn't short like yours?
Pizza-pizza!?
Between this and hospital computers rebooting themselves after auto-updating how can people defend Windows in critical operations? At the very least run embedded WIndows or something more specialized. Though, yes, I admit I'd rather see them not run Windows at all.
I hope if he is found guilty he gets what he deserves. But more importantly, I hope Assuage get's it too. He's hiding behind "freedom of the press" but he's arguably guilty by simply having possession of these documents. He'll come to the U.S. eventually.
I think it was John Dvorak who pontificated: "How long will IE be free? Until Netscape is out of business." He was right but it continued to be free and ironically would be challenged by the son of Netscape in Firefox, arguably a safer/better browser. The only compelling reason to use IE is to correctly render bastardize sites that were coded towards it or in companies that don't allow other browsers. Other than that, it serves little use.
As long as Americans die I guess he doesn't care. Frankly, he's a douche for doing this regardless if someone dies or not. My guess it it's just a matter of time before the U.S. and Australia work out a way to bring him to trial. At which I hope he's dealt with accordingly.
Can this happen while you're awake? It might explain why teens don't pay attention in class or why wives won't fetch beer.
I really haven't seen anything compelling with 3D. Most tend to only have certain parts that really "show off" the effect but mostly it just distracts from the film. The push to 3D is an attempt to rekindle interest in cinema but people are still going to the theaters. I had a couple of friends who saw a 3D film only because they wanted to see the movie at that time when only it was showing. By and large, it doesn't seem like anyone really wants 3D.
Once again MS goes after something simply because they can't stand someone else's success. The idea that they'll throw tons of money at something they'll fail miserably at does warm me up a little.
16 whole miles on electric! I'm amazed! I mean, that's really gonna satisfy my tree-hugging jones. Think I'll buy a Volt. Wait, it's also overpriced and will only go 40miles emissions free.
People, this is simple. Hybrids suck. This hybrid doesn't suck because it's mated to a kick-ass V-8. Kick-ass V-8's make most cars not suck. As for Tesla? Screw 'em. We're paying them (government subsidy??) to develop a car they will sell us back at a ridiculous price.
The data is moot, (though there are serious questions about the way it's gathered). It's only confirms what is blatantly obvious. The Earth's climate changes. It always has. What it doesn't "prove" is that you and I are the sole or even primary causation. But the media, academia, politicians, and those who stand to gain from the broad descriptions and conclusions are bent on labeling causation skeptics and "climate change deniers" and such. Such rhetoric is designed to do one thing, marginalize skepticism (something science has taught us to keep in our pocket lest we be duped). This marginalization is meant to quell any dissent that might interfere with policy and therefore any gain to be had.
Scientists generally ask for money and deliver slowly. Unfortunately, we really won't know if it's a waste of money until more money is poured into it. They should nickname it "Government."