there is no evidence of macroevolution, one species evolving from another. Scientists and other evolutionists have been looking for the "missing link" for years, without being able to find it
Besides the missing link (for humans), they have still found many examples in the fossil layer to prove their ideas for so-called macroevolution.
The last time I checked, suggestions weren't forcing.
Exactly! But that's why I didn't reply to that post, sir. I replied to your follow-up, where you mocked logical theories (this particular one not being explcitly proven to be fair) with sarcasm.
Creationism and intelligent design has the burden of proof. Not the theory of evolution. Note that it is denoted a theory but has such overwhelming evidence in favor of it that it has been accepted by general scientific community as fact until rebuffed.
A while back I heard a joke about how God and a bunch of Evolutionists were discussing the origins of life. The Evolutionists said they could show how to create life. God said to go ahead and show Him. They said "let's take some dirt and water and..."
God interrupted and said "Wait a minute. That is My dirt and water. Go create your own."
The most disturbing thing is not that you believe in God, it is that you force me to believe in him as well.
It gives you the feeling that there are people out there who care enough to send you personalized, thoughtful solicitations. They wouldn't send it to you if they thought you didn't really, really be interested in the product they're selling.
Also, it's pink and tasty.
DONT CLICK ON LINK IN ABOVE POST!!!! GOATSE LINK!!
on
Open Source Housing
·
· Score: 2
a word of warning, for anyone who thought this ass-clown might have something funny to say: he doesn't he's just another angry loner with not one original thought in his tiny brain. just a sheep, your bus is leaving, you fuckstick.
I've seen some ghastly web pages created by 8-year old AOLers and housewives who sell knit mittens from their home in Montana. Can't imagine when we have some real winners designing their own house:)
Seriously, though. Seems like technology combined with the homes systems is not only a great idea around for a while but will be more unavoidable.
I;ve always thought that having one fiber optic line with phone, broadcast tv, inet access all accessible through on line. An having a central master computer controlling everything from programming tv shows (tivo-like) to the security system to controlling lights, heating for optimum energy savings (even depending on inhabitants current position in home and habits, by maybe even using integrated systems like the motion detection from the security system).
Combined with solar/alternative fuels and increasing affordability of technology, it seems promising.
Actually I didn't click on the link Anonymous Coward.
See dimwit, I have something called a memory, which is a feature of something called a mind which in turn is a manefestation of an organ called a brain. This unique device actually helps me recall experiences I've had before and learn from them.
Am I going too fast for you, little troll?
As for your poorly-formed inquiry: here you go, fuckstick. Also, you're one of these as well.
a word of warning, for anyone who thought this ass-clown might have something funny to say: he doesn't he's just another angry loner with not one original thought in his tiny brain. just a sheep, your bus is leaving, you fuckstick.
Cryptonomicon was truly great, but Snow Crash was boring (I totally bought the environment thought, -- franchises dominate as local authorities in the defunct US)
I also like Michael Crichton (congo was amazing, and terminal man, and andromeda strain,...). He gets into the subjects he discusses and goes on wild, but interesting tangents explaining technology, events, etc. Some of his latest work is lacking though.
I was wondering where exactly does it say in the US Constitution. Next time, try reading the document you are talking about. Question (n.
) - An interrogative statment used to gather knowledge...
It was a question not a challenge, you fuckwit.
Then I proposed where does anyone have the right to do so?
Apparently we do.
You should pay attention to the ironic sig your sport.
...but I was wondering where exactly does it say in the US Constitution or when does anyone have the rigth to revoke the basic human rights from someone who has violated the basic human rights of another? Seriously, I really think people confuse vengeance for justice sometimes.
That said, I really have no strong stance on the Death Penalty, because isn't putting someone in jail for their lives, also a violation of their basic human right to be free?
Anyways, I would think that if I was guilty and sentenced to jail w/o the possibility of parole, I'd rather be painlessly sent to death by having a needle in my arm, rather than living in jail for the rest of my life.
Do these Goverment Agencies/Ultra-companies/Secret societies ALWAYS create the ultimate weapon then invariably decide to turn against him?
They try to arrest him with 3 people.
Yeah, like that Saturday Night Live skit where they show a clip of black-clad ninjas attacking two karate masters and then the ninjas are all sitting in their locker room at their hideout nursing their injuries and talking about how they could have done better.
"Why do we always attack one at a time?!"
"And when we do attack at the same time, let's try not to do a running attack directly opposite each other, because the guy always just moves out of the way and we clunk our heads together..."
Well, I'm not sure but I think that most people who would be interested in this are admins who still run or must run 2.2 in order to not break binary compatibility with any drivers they need or software they've written.
You could argue that if the source is open, a nasty cracker (133t, is that it?) might stumble upon a security hole... But it wouldn't take long before the rest of the 'net (or whatever the fora) knew it as well, and some smart people at FAA would at that time probably pick up the information...
I agree with that view, I simply wouldn't bet my life on it for critical things whether it's a plane ride for a vacation, or a Dept of Homeland Security database with my public library checkout history;-).
Of course you could have that cracker that works for the company, which would be less likely to occur and make them easier to find.
I see your point, but I contest that open-sourced products have just as many holes/patches. Look at any project on sourceforge. But the closed-source takes longer to patch, because by definition only one company has the code to fix it.
They can take a piece of Open Source software(GPL,BSD,APL,whathaveyou), modify it for there use and not have to disclose the source code of their changes.
I'm going on the assumption that, all things being equal, one can more easily find an exploit (3xpl01tz, for you) in source rather than byte code.
However, if the closed source program is developed by a third party without some sort of auditing, then it can be a disaster as well.
IMHO, I would rather the FAA develop a closed, in-house systems application to schedule and route my airplane properly than for it to be an open system.
I'm just giving you my honest opinion, don't be condescending and talk down to every one you disagree with because you have the opinion that happens to be the popular one on this forum.
Yeah, I've got one for you as well: that's what news is, it's the raising of issues with which people have differing opinions. And this article at least is unbiased as far as whcih way they are leaning.
Personally, I think open source is really not that great an idea for important software that may be related to national security etc, only because I don't believe that the number of white hats who can find, report, and patch critical security holes outnumber the baddies out there who would love to find a way into an important DoD database or system.
Actually, I don't totally disagree with it, I just believe there must be some extensive methodology put forth to audit the source code of services and applications that are used.
assuming they even believe the private or government department that releases images of a rover or flag (!), they would simply say that that stuff was planted on later missions and that the original mission had to be faked to win the space race for the propaganda value.
That, "I want to believe" slogan/whatever is indicative of the minds and attitudes one is dealing with when dealing with people who think they are agent Mulder and that they are the only ones who realize the truth.
Slashdot Mirror
So what compelling evidence have you found that God exists. Philiosphers, indeed men, since the beginning of time would love to have this knowledge.
there is no evidence of macroevolution, one species evolving from another. Scientists and other evolutionists have been looking for the "missing link" for years, without being able to find it
Besides the missing link (for humans), they have still found many examples in the fossil layer to prove their ideas for so-called macroevolution.
The last time I checked, suggestions weren't forcing.
Exactly! But that's why I didn't reply to that post, sir. I replied to your follow-up, where you mocked logical theories (this particular one not being explcitly proven to be fair) with sarcasm.
Creationism and intelligent design has the burden of proof. Not the theory of evolution. Note that it is denoted a theory but has such overwhelming evidence in favor of it that it has been accepted by general scientific community as fact until rebuffed.
[snipo sarcasm]
There is at least overwhelming evidenc for evolution, where is there evidence for and invisible, omnipotent being?
Just because you cannot understand something doesn't mean that it is rubbish. This goes for both of us.
A while back I heard a joke about how God and a bunch of Evolutionists were discussing the origins of life. The Evolutionists said they could show how to create life. God said to go ahead and show Him. They said "let's take some dirt and water and ..."
God interrupted and said "Wait a minute. That is My dirt and water. Go create your own."
The most disturbing thing is not that you believe in God, it is that you force me to believe in him as well.
We would likely self-replicate a lot easier if we were crowded together in a small dark room, isn't it?
*frantically jumps and looks around*
Who's touching my leg!
It gives you the feeling that there are people out there who care enough to send you personalized, thoughtful solicitations. They wouldn't send it to you if they thought you didn't really, really be interested in the product they're selling.
Also, it's pink and tasty.
a word of warning, for anyone who thought this ass-clown might have something funny to say: he doesn't he's just another angry loner with not one original thought in his tiny brain. just a sheep, your bus is leaving, you fuckstick.
Rats, I'll finally have to release the moves to my Twisty Nimble Fingers Maneuver (tm)
I've seen some ghastly web pages created by 8-year old AOLers and housewives who sell knit mittens from their home in Montana. Can't imagine when we have some real winners designing their own house :)
Seriously, though. Seems like technology combined with the homes systems is not only a great idea around for a while but will be more unavoidable.
I;ve always thought that having one fiber optic line with phone, broadcast tv, inet access all accessible through on line. An having a central master computer controlling everything from programming tv shows (tivo-like) to the security system to controlling lights, heating for optimum energy savings (even depending on inhabitants current position in home and habits, by maybe even using integrated systems like the motion detection from the security system).
Combined with solar/alternative fuels and increasing affordability of technology, it seems promising.
Computer! Beer me!
Actually I didn't click on the link Anonymous Coward.
See dimwit, I have something called a memory, which is a feature of something called a mind which in turn is a manefestation of an organ called a brain. This unique device actually helps me recall experiences I've had before and learn from them.
Am I going too fast for you, little troll?
As for your poorly-formed inquiry: here you go, fuckstick. Also, you're one of these as well.
Oh and read a book, fuckwit.
a word of warning, for anyone who thought this ass-clown might have something funny to say: he doesn't he's just another angry loner with not one original thought in his tiny brain. just a sheep, your bus is leaving, you fuckstick.
Cryptonomicon was truly great, but Snow Crash was boring (I totally bought the environment thought, -- franchises dominate as local authorities in the defunct US)
...). He gets into the subjects he discusses and goes on wild, but interesting tangents explaining technology, events, etc. Some of his latest work is lacking though.
I also like Michael Crichton (congo was amazing, and terminal man, and andromeda strain,
Something tells me thought that there will be less splattered body matter in Solaris, and less people pulling their eyes out of their sockets.
You should have seen the audience in Con Air.
I was wondering where exactly does it say in the US Constitution.
Next time, try reading the document you are talking about.
Question (n. ) - An interrogative statment used to gather knowledge...
It was a question not a challenge, you fuckwit.
Then I proposed where does anyone have the right to do so?
Apparently we do.
You should pay attention to the ironic sig your sport.
...but I was wondering where exactly does it say in the US Constitution or when does anyone have the rigth to revoke the basic human rights from someone who has violated the basic human rights of another? Seriously, I really think people confuse vengeance for justice sometimes.
That said, I really have no strong stance on the Death Penalty, because isn't putting someone in jail for their lives, also a violation of their basic human right to be free?
Anyways, I would think that if I was guilty and sentenced to jail w/o the possibility of parole, I'd rather be painlessly sent to death by having a needle in my arm, rather than living in jail for the rest of my life.
Do these Goverment Agencies/Ultra-companies/Secret societies ALWAYS create the ultimate weapon then invariably decide to turn against him?
They try to arrest him with 3 people.
Yeah, like that Saturday Night Live skit where they show a clip of black-clad ninjas attacking two karate masters and then the ninjas are all sitting in their locker room at their hideout nursing their injuries and talking about how they could have done better.
"Why do we always attack one at a time?!"
"And when we do attack at the same time, let's try not to do a running attack directly opposite each other, because the guy always just moves out of the way and we clunk our heads together..."
Funny stuff.
Well, I'm not sure but I think that most people who would be interested in this are admins who still run or must run 2.2 in order to not break binary compatibility with any drivers they need or software they've written.
Just a guess.
That will fix it
Perhaps a lobotomy will fix you...
You could argue that if the source is open, a nasty cracker (133t, is that it?) might stumble upon a security hole ... But it wouldn't take long before the rest of the 'net (or whatever the fora) knew it as well, and some smart people at FAA would at that time probably pick up the information...
;-).
I agree with that view, I simply wouldn't bet my life on it for critical things whether it's a plane ride for a vacation, or a Dept of Homeland Security database with my public library checkout history
Of course you could have that cracker that works for the company, which would be less likely to occur and make them easier to find.
I see your point, but I contest that open-sourced products have just as many holes/patches. Look at any project on sourceforge. But the closed-source takes longer to patch, because by definition only one company has the code to fix it.
I gave the other post this reply.
Here is a clue for you.
Ah shit...
They can take a piece of Open Source software(GPL,BSD,APL,whathaveyou), modify it for there use and not have to disclose the source code of their changes.
I'm going on the assumption that, all things being equal, one can more easily find an exploit (3xpl01tz, for you) in source rather than byte code.
However, if the closed source program is developed by a third party without some sort of auditing, then it can be a disaster as well.
IMHO, I would rather the FAA develop a closed, in-house systems application to schedule and route my airplane properly than for it to be an open system.
I'm just giving you my honest opinion, don't be condescending and talk down to every one you disagree with because you have the opinion that happens to be the popular one on this forum.
Yeah, I've got one for you as well: that's what news is, it's the raising of issues with which people have differing opinions. And this article at least is unbiased as far as whcih way they are leaning.
Personally, I think open source is really not that great an idea for important software that may be related to national security etc, only because I don't believe that the number of white hats who can find, report, and patch critical security holes outnumber the baddies out there who would love to find a way into an important DoD database or system.
Actually, I don't totally disagree with it, I just believe there must be some extensive methodology put forth to audit the source code of services and applications that are used.
assuming they even believe the private or government department that releases images of a rover or flag (!), they would simply say that that stuff was planted on later missions and that the original mission had to be faked to win the space race for the propaganda value.
That, "I want to believe" slogan/whatever is indicative of the minds and attitudes one is dealing with when dealing with people who think they are agent Mulder and that they are the only ones who realize the truth.
Well, one sure way to have UPN pick it up is to change the cast of characters entirely to African American actors.
Then again, they do carry Enterprise...