What would be REALY cool is if you can set up Photoshop-like real time filters for the visuals. Change the lighting situation, play with the colors etc.
Sometimes it's the other way around and there might just be a faction that says you can't be religious if you "have faith" in science. However it was not always so and back in the days of galilleo there were some kick ass jesuit astronomers around. Mendel is another case in point.
Headlines like this one in slashdot contribute to the prominency of this 'faction'. 'Progress' is always 'at war' with something that 'tries to hinder it' - be it religion, crackpots, regulations or whatever. And when 'war' is in the air the other side takes notice and prepares its own onslaught. Let the crackpots be! Examine their sources yourself and decide on your own - not because NASA's PR machine will pour a lot of money into hammering 'faith in science' into your head.
It's interesting how you use the words 'faith' and 'science' in the same sentence. Phrasing it like that you almost make it seem like it's a PR battle between two faiths...
Here's the blurb on Michael Marshal Smith's SF novel 'Spares':
"Imagine a future--next year, perhaps?--in which the wealthy clone themselves at birth to provide spare parts for their bodies as they become needed..."
So in our world it's gonna be slightly different. Instead of planting a tree in the backyard when your child is born, and see them grow together, you'll buy him a dog that'll have the right insides to match the child's and then when anything happens, the pet can double as a spares repository:)
But I suppose that's too gruesome. Here's the more plausible scenario: instead of growing the spares in a pet, we'll grow them in cattle, put them all in a dark place, lock it up and throw away the key until we'll need to slaughter them.
Now, that's civilized!
Slashdot Mirror
What would be REALY cool is if you can set up Photoshop-like real time filters for the visuals. Change the lighting situation, play with the colors etc.
The peer review process is full of HUMAN logic.
Sometimes it's the other way around and there might just be a faction that says you can't be religious if you "have faith" in science. However it was not always so and back in the days of galilleo there were some kick ass jesuit astronomers around. Mendel is another case in point. Headlines like this one in slashdot contribute to the prominency of this 'faction'. 'Progress' is always 'at war' with something that 'tries to hinder it' - be it religion, crackpots, regulations or whatever. And when 'war' is in the air the other side takes notice and prepares its own onslaught. Let the crackpots be! Examine their sources yourself and decide on your own - not because NASA's PR machine will pour a lot of money into hammering 'faith in science' into your head.
It's interesting how you use the words 'faith' and 'science' in the same sentence. Phrasing it like that you almost make it seem like it's a PR battle between two faiths...
Why you mothercaster!
Here's the blurb on Michael Marshal Smith's SF novel 'Spares': "Imagine a future--next year, perhaps?--in which the wealthy clone themselves at birth to provide spare parts for their bodies as they become needed..."
:)
So in our world it's gonna be slightly different. Instead of planting a tree in the backyard when your child is born, and see them grow together, you'll buy him a dog that'll have the right insides to match the child's and then when anything happens, the pet can double as a spares repository
But I suppose that's too gruesome. Here's the more plausible scenario: instead of growing the spares in a pet, we'll grow them in cattle, put them all in a dark place, lock it up and throw away the key until we'll need to slaughter them. Now, that's civilized!