"Even specifying colors by the wavelength of the light emitted or reflected covers only a small subset of colors--in fact an even smaller subset than any of the primary color representations."
If I were to construct a discrete function N(lambda), where N is the number or photons, and lambda is the wavelength. Then I would be done.
You see. This is true because it is completely independent of any subjective judgements made by human or animal.
(assuming of course that the different receptors in the eye are independent of each other in space and in time, which they might very well not be, but all of the other models assume this too)
You aren't using an AGP videocard with and AMD athlon?
I was getting almost 1 crash perday with that type off setupt. Then I found out about the AMD bug, so I pass mem=nopentium to the kernel and edited my XFree config not to use AGP, and I haven't had a crash.
Each stargate is seperated by many lightyears and hasn't been used in quite a while. Right?
Howcome 97% of every one on the other side is white and speaks american english?
What gives man? They don't even have accents and they have like american black people (european african mix) that have never existed en masse until the past few centuries.
Was there an episode that I missed that explained all of this?
By introducing creationism you push the real issue under the rug. Evolution is actually far, Far, FAR simpler.
With creationism you have many extra complications like the nature of the intelligent creator (as It is now the immediate cause) and about the actual process of the Devine transforming thought into action into being.
You cannot simply devide time between before and after creation and then claim that creation is simple because after creation is simple, when however during creation...
I believe that the universe didn't arise until exactly one second ago. All of your memories are falsely imprinted to make you believe that some continuity of time has existed. Everything is as it is to complete the deception.
This belief cannot be proven false, many things are like this, and almost none of them are of any use and any practical application to anything.
That is why science only deals with things that are verifiable. Science tries to provide the best and simplest solution. I love science and I also love philosophy and religion, but I trust science far more than I trust religion. Science cares about its limits and its certainty, very few religions care about this, I can only think of Jainism and maybe Bah'hai.
But above all I search for the truth, and if I see a 3 on 3 debate and one side lies and the other side is honest...
While it is true that modern medicine and human culture has nearly (not completely) stoped natural selection on humans, cultural prefrences still exhibit selective breeding.
What does this mean? Human beings will continue to become more intelligent, probably taller, and probably more beautiful.
Intelligence creates material success, which is a prize factor for breeding.
But why only probably more beautiful? Beauty is fairly relative, and for the human race to become more beautuful there has to be prolonged cultural stability.
So we will stop being wolves and start being domestic dogs.
1) They misaplied the 2nd law of thermodynamics very poorly by treating a race of species as a closed system. A few chemist and myself (a physics major) were very upset at these outright lies.
2) They denied the existence of any transitional fossils, and basically said that scientists were arranging bones and fossils how they wanted to see them.
3) They made false accusations against radioactive dating that haven't applied sense the birth of the field.
4) And finally they had to make up for logical loop holes by stating that early man was far superior to present man, and that in the begining all species existed at once, including the dinosaurs.
5) In all of the debate, they only had one true argument, and it was a bad argument at that. Guess what that argument was? "Positive" mutations haven't been reproduced or observed in the laboratory, therefore they do not exist, therefore evolution is false. And this article is about just that.
Before the debate, I thought it would be interesting to see why someone would believe in creation. Afterwards I was a bit depressed. I had no idea how far a person would go to decieve themself and perpetuate a lie. I felf very sorry for the young teenagers that came with their church group. They were being raised by liars.
One of the debaters agrugment was based on the very results that this article brings up. I know if he saw this now, it would not change his opinion one bit. He has no reason, he creates what ever psuedo reason needed to calm the conflict between his arogant soul and his mind. I bet he doesn't even know that his words are lies.
Any way, I thought I would share this with you people. I don't know what can be learned from this, but anyway, good luck in this sad and ignorant world maya.
Slashdot Mirror
"Even specifying colors by the wavelength of the light emitted or reflected covers only a small subset of colors--in fact an even smaller subset than any of the primary color representations."
If I were to construct a discrete function N(lambda), where N is the number or photons, and lambda is the wavelength. Then I would be done.
You see. This is true because it is completely independent of any subjective judgements made by human or animal.
(assuming of course that the different receptors in the eye are independent of each other in space and in time, which they might very well not be, but all of the other models assume this too)
You aren't using an AGP videocard with and AMD athlon?
I was getting almost 1 crash perday with that type off setupt. Then I found out about the AMD bug, so I pass mem=nopentium to the kernel and edited my XFree config not to use AGP, and I haven't had a crash.
Each stargate is seperated by many lightyears and hasn't been used in quite a while. Right?
Howcome 97% of every one on the other side is white and speaks american english?
What gives man? They don't even have accents and they have like american black people (european african mix) that have never existed en masse until the past few centuries.
Was there an episode that I missed that explained all of this?
java 43,421 sec
c# 24,769 sec
Let me add to that
(gcc 2.96, RedHat 7.2, Athlon 1.4GHz)
14.71 sec
Though , I don't know how much of this can be attributed to the overhead of WinNT.
No, wait a minute, it can't just be that because your proc is 400 MHz faster than mine.
So in this case C must be twice as fast as C# must be twice as fast as Java. Makes sense I guess.
"Occam's razor can't touch it either"
...
Actually, no, that is a very incorrect statement.
By introducing creationism you push the real issue under the rug. Evolution is actually far, Far, FAR simpler.
With creationism you have many extra complications like the nature of the intelligent creator (as It is now the immediate cause) and about the actual process of the Devine transforming thought into action into being.
You cannot simply devide time between before and after creation and then claim that creation is simple because after creation is simple, when however during creation
Sorry to burst your bubble, AC, but you're wrong.
Webster, American Heritage, and WorldNet would disagree.
Despite anyone's opinion atheism is a belief. The belief that God does not exist. Because God cannot be proven or disproven, theism and atheism are both beliefs.
Very true, but also very absurd.
...
Think about this. Let's pretend . . .
I believe that the universe didn't arise until exactly one second ago. All of your memories are falsely imprinted to make you believe that some continuity of time has existed. Everything is as it is to complete the deception.
This belief cannot be proven false, many things are like this, and almost none of them are of any use and any practical application to anything.
That is why science only deals with things that are verifiable. Science tries to provide the best and simplest solution. I love science and I also love philosophy and religion, but I trust science far more than I trust religion. Science cares about its limits and its certainty, very few religions care about this, I can only think of Jainism and maybe Bah'hai.
But above all I search for the truth, and if I see a 3 on 3 debate and one side lies and the other side is honest
While it is true that modern medicine and human culture has nearly (not completely) stoped natural selection on humans, cultural prefrences still exhibit selective breeding.
What does this mean? Human beings will continue to become more intelligent, probably taller, and probably more beautiful.
Intelligence creates material success, which is a prize factor for breeding.
But why only probably more beautiful? Beauty is fairly relative, and for the human race to become more beautuful there has to be prolonged cultural stability.
So we will stop being wolves and start being domestic dogs.
Just happened like a week or two ago.
The creationists mostly lied the whole time.
1) They misaplied the 2nd law of thermodynamics very poorly by treating a race of species as a closed system. A few chemist and myself (a physics major) were very upset at these outright lies.
2) They denied the existence of any transitional fossils, and basically said that scientists were arranging bones and fossils how they wanted to see them.
3) They made false accusations against radioactive dating that haven't applied sense the birth of the field.
4) And finally they had to make up for logical loop holes by stating that early man was far superior to present man, and that in the begining all species existed at once, including the dinosaurs.
5) In all of the debate, they only had one true argument, and it was a bad argument at that. Guess what that argument was? "Positive" mutations haven't been reproduced or observed in the laboratory, therefore they do not exist, therefore evolution is false. And this article is about just that.
Before the debate, I thought it would be interesting to see why someone would believe in creation. Afterwards I was a bit depressed. I had no idea how far a person would go to decieve themself and perpetuate a lie. I felf very sorry for the young teenagers that came with their church group. They were being raised by liars.
One of the debaters agrugment was based on the very results that this article brings up. I know if he saw this now, it would not change his opinion one bit. He has no reason, he creates what ever psuedo reason needed to calm the conflict between his arogant soul and his mind. I bet he doesn't even know that his words are lies.
Any way, I thought I would share this with you people. I don't know what can be learned from this, but anyway, good luck in this sad and ignorant world maya.