My favorite line is when Syndrome (when he is just a boy) after Mr. Incredible telling him "Everyone is special," says "Which means no one is special."
My biggest issue with the movie was the modeling of the character's ears. It sounds small, but considering how well modeled the rest of the characters' facial features are, the lego-looking ears are really distracting.
And of course, my favorite thing about the movie was the RotS trailer...
Speaking of theming and such...
on
Mac Contest Roundup
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The OS X icon needs to be changed. It's already two years behind.
Not that I'm complaining or anything.
They thank you for noticing (twice)
on
PC In An XP Box
·
· Score: 1
Now that their servers are done being/.'ed, they've changed the page's title to "mini-itx.com - projects - windows xp box.. so good they slashdotted it twice..."
ID and creation are different. One simple claims that life was originated with intelligence, the other tries to explain the who and why of intelligent design. You can beleive in ID without beleiving in creation.
Creation is falsifiable by: proof of earth's old age, explaination of the origin of matter, proof that genetic information can increase over time.
What kind of predictions would you like?
Um. Evolution is the change in allele frequencies over time. One way that happens is random mutation followed by natural selection. In other words, you've asked for an example of evolution that is counter to the definition of evolution.
No, you missed the point. Random mutations is a modification of existing genes, *not* the creation of new ones that is required for evolution to take place.
No, you're missing th point. There *is* a difference between intelligent design and creation. ID simply claims that all things originated from an intelligent source and makes no claims as to who or why. Creation is a seperate theory that builds on ID and attempts to explain who and why. You can beleive in ID without beleiving in creation.
The evidence for ID is complex natural structures, irreducible complexity, etc. The how it works is that something intelligent made it happen.
I beleive (and you may differ, or course) that philosophy and (if it's reasonable) theology should be based on sound science.
Like what kind of "miracles"? Even evolutionists will agree there have been periods of lardge amounts of water covering the earth (ie the ice age) and that there have been global cliamte shifts.
So there is no creation going on now?
I'm not aware of the appearance of any new organisms in the last few thousand years.
Pretty thin explanation there, and I am not really sure what the evidence for this is supposed to be.
You asked what I thought the method was. This is where the evidence leads me. But if you want to debate this you first have to accept intelligent design.
See, as far as I can tell from reading Creationist literature (and I have read quite a bit) it all amounts to little more than the claim that "God did it" plus a laundry list of objections to the theory of evolution. There is no actual creationist theory. Just that one singular claim. No evidence is ever given for Creationism, no explanation is ever given of what the creator was, no explanation is ever given of how the creating was done or even why it was done, no use of the theory is ever made in answering the kinds of questions that scientists want to answer.
Since you're asking for an explantion of the process, creator, or reasons, I would have to stray from your idea of "pure science". The reason I have to do that is simple: if we accept intelligent design (let's say we do for the sake of argument) we then have to choose (again from the best evidence) who did the creating. Then we can look at his/her reasons as given.
If you want to accept ID (even for the sake of argument, then I'l continue.
Like you can do the same.
Um, the creation is the proof on intelligent design. Once we agree there's an intelligent designer, we can go into more details (ie the identity of the designer). Creationism is a belief system, not a theory.
Creations is a theory, belief system, and religion to the same extent as evolution is.
creationists refuse to accept evidence against their point of view I'll accept any evidence against my point of view. Evolution does NOT proceed by pure chance. And whatever other "natural forces" are required. Gee, you almost make it sound like nature is intelligent.
Yes, I would stop believing in God, should the evidence point to evolution. a short video
I don't think video cameras existed about the time of creation. sufficient details of his (or her I suppose) methodology
He spoke and it happened. Feel free to repliacte that in you lab.
As far as you other questions, I'd love to hear the evolutionary explaination for those.
The scientifically sound creationists that I'm aware of do beleive that dinosaurs existed. The fossil record is easily explained by the global flood (which I suppose you'll want to debate next).
Slashdot Mirror
My old iPod LOVED Moby.
My favorite line is when Syndrome (when he is just a boy) after Mr. Incredible telling him "Everyone is special," says "Which means no one is special."
My biggest issue with the movie was the modeling of the character's ears. It sounds small, but considering how well modeled the rest of the characters' facial features are, the lego-looking ears are really distracting.
And of course, my favorite thing about the movie was the RotS trailer...
Here's a BitTorrent mirror of the large (30MB) version of the new trailer (not the old one):s _Trailer_2_large.torrent
http://demonoid.com/download/21729/The_Incredible
Ignore the parent torrent, here's the 0.5 one4 &name=playfair-0.5.0.tar.gz.torrent
http://btiteam.bttracker.co.uk/download.php?id=38
http://btiteam.bttracker.co.uk/download.php?id=370 &name=playfair-0.2.tar.gz.torrent
http://btiteam.bttracker.co.uk/download.php?id=370 &name=playfair-0.2.tar.gz.torrent
Here's a BitTorrent for it: http://btiteam.bttracker.co.uk/download.php?id=347 &name=playfair-0.2.torrent
The OS X icon needs to be changed. It's already two years behind. Not that I'm complaining or anything.
Now that their servers are done being /.'ed, they've changed the page's title to "mini-itx.com - projects - windows xp box.. so good they slashdotted it twice..."
Torrent for Knoppix 3.3 availible here
http://www.torrentreactor.net/torrents/view_979
Be certain to read how to remotely control your^H^H^H^Hsomeone's Mac. ;)
And yes, this is some shameless self-promo
My favorite and current mouse is my Logitech MX700.e t :)
Scrollwheel.
Optical.
Corldless.
Sweee
Have you read all of this?
How does selecting certain members of species over other create new species?
ID and creation are different. One simple claims that life was originated with intelligence, the other tries to explain the who and why of intelligent design. You can beleive in ID without beleiving in creation.
Creation is falsifiable by: proof of earth's old age, explaination of the origin of matter, proof that genetic information can increase over time.
What kind of predictions would you like?
Um. Evolution is the change in allele frequencies over time. One way that happens is random mutation followed by natural selection. In other words, you've asked for an example of evolution that is counter to the definition of evolution.
No, you missed the point. Random mutations is a modification of existing genes, *not* the creation of new ones that is required for evolution to take place.
No, you're missing th point. There *is* a difference between intelligent design and creation. ID simply claims that all things originated from an intelligent source and makes no claims as to who or why. Creation is a seperate theory that builds on ID and attempts to explain who and why. You can beleive in ID without beleiving in creation.
The evidence for ID is complex natural structures, irreducible complexity, etc. The how it works is that something intelligent made it happen.
I beleive (and you may differ, or course) that philosophy and (if it's reasonable) theology should be based on sound science.
Like what kind of "miracles"? Even evolutionists will agree there have been periods of lardge amounts of water covering the earth (ie the ice age) and that there have been global cliamte shifts.
The evidence is the blood clotting, eye, etc is for intelligence. As is any complex natural structure.
;)
I take it that the only way "you folk" can win any kind of argument is by labeling posts flamebait?
Is that a troll?
So there is no creation going on now?
I'm not aware of the appearance of any new organisms in the last few thousand years.
Pretty thin explanation there, and I am not really sure what the evidence for this is supposed to be.
You asked what I thought the method was. This is where the evidence leads me. But if you want to debate this you first have to accept intelligent design.
See, as far as I can tell from reading Creationist literature (and I have read quite a bit) it all amounts to little more than the claim that "God did it" plus a laundry list of objections to the theory of evolution. There is no actual creationist theory. Just that one singular claim. No evidence is ever given for Creationism, no explanation is ever given of what the creator was, no explanation is ever given of how the creating was done or even why it was done, no use of the theory is ever made in answering the kinds of questions that scientists want to answer.
Since you're asking for an explantion of the process, creator, or reasons, I would have to stray from your idea of "pure science". The reason I have to do that is simple: if we accept intelligent design (let's say we do for the sake of argument) we then have to choose (again from the best evidence) who did the creating. Then we can look at his/her reasons as given.
If you want to accept ID (even for the sake of argument, then I'l continue.
Like you can do the same.
Um, the creation is the proof on intelligent design. Once we agree there's an intelligent designer, we can go into more details (ie the identity of the designer).
Creationism is a belief system, not a theory.
Creations is a theory, belief system, and religion to the same extent as evolution is.
There are no examples of random mutation followed by natural selection producing new creatures. Only more specialized versions of existing ones.
creationists refuse to accept evidence against their point of view
I'll accept any evidence against my point of view.
Evolution does NOT proceed by pure chance.
And whatever other "natural forces" are required. Gee, you almost make it sound like nature is intelligent.
Yes, I would stop believing in God, should the evidence point to evolution.
a short video
I don't think video cameras existed about the time of creation.
sufficient details of his (or her I suppose) methodology
He spoke and it happened. Feel free to repliacte that in you lab.
As far as you other questions, I'd love to hear the evolutionary explaination for those.
The scientifically sound creationists that I'm aware of do beleive that dinosaurs existed. The fossil record is easily explained by the global flood (which I suppose you'll want to debate next).