This would be rather more convincing to me if the listeners were not part of a group where they could possibly confer with each other (groups of people discussing a subjective subject are likely to come to the same conclusion), and/or if the results have been shown to be consistently repeatable.
Still an interesting start, though. Definitely merits further investigation.
I wonder how much overlap there is between those that don't want a couple lines from the Qur'an quoted in a song in a videogame, and those that want intelligent design to be taught in science class.
Yeah, because your anecdotal example is indicative of all used car buying experiences.:)
Seven years ago I bought a heavily used car for $5,000. Over 120k miles later, it's still running strong despite being driven by my Asian wife (sometimes the stereotypes are true).
I don't have a source, but I remember reading at one point that there was more oxygen in the atmosphere back then, resulting in larger creatures being possible; take with a grain of salt (i.e. do your research).
I wondered how china's gold medal count would look if i broke the sports down into three basic types:
Timed (almost impossible to sway the result by biased judging).
Scored goals/points (basketball, baseball, etc. where points are obviously scored, but judging can affect aspects of the gameplay - penalties and such).
Judged (all points are awarded based on whether a judge deems the point should be awarded - martial arts, gymnastics, etc. Basically, a corrupt judge can easily and drastically alter the outcome).
I then compared the number of golds won to the number of golds possible for each category. Here's how it all breaks down at the time of this posting:
Timed: China has won 2.94% of available gold medals
Scored goals/points: China has won 39.62% of available gold medals
Judged: China has won 52.27% of available gold medals.
Note that available means the medal a medal has been awarded to the winner.
So, the higher the influence judging has on the outcome, the better China does. Interesting, no?
This is exactly the problem: it isn't about 'knowing things about science' - which is how our current education system works - so much as it is about being able to understand what the scientific method is and how it works. If everybody was a skeptical thinker, then the media couldn't get away with the kind of reporting it does now, we wouldn't elect the bonehead politicians to office we do, we wouldn't have these silly politicizing of scientific issues, hijacking of the education system, and we would not tolerate the government and corporate abuses of power that are happening.
What's with all the doom and gloom predictions and massive stock declines every time one of the 'underdog' companies (AMD, Apple, etc.) has a rough year? These up and down cycles are a natural part of business.
AMD still has a lot going for it, and a lot to offer, even if they don't currently hold the technological 'edge' in the x86 market. Given a few years, the picture between Intel and AMD may well switch again - unless too many investors bail out prematurely, of course.
"...end all the ethical issues with raising an animal for food, potential issues from mad cow disease, bird flu and whatever the next media induced panic is."
No media enduced panic for cloned meat products?
Bwaaaah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha~!
Slightly genitically engineered veggies have already been causing controversy for awhile.
Just a thought: suppose that evolution, creation of the earth, solar system, universe, big bang, etc. are things that happened at the guidance of this all powerful supreme intelligence ('God' for the purpose of this post).
So, who or what created that intelligence?
The concept of God does not answer any questions about the ultimate origins of the universe, it just moves the focus of the question - it changes the question from 'where did the universe come from?' to 'where did God come from?'.
You could state that God has always existed, but if that is a viable possibility, you could also state with the same ammount of certainty that the universe itself has always existed, completely independent of God. Or, perhaps, (if God exists) you could even say that the universe created God, not the other way around.
The local NPR station, KUER, interviewed this guy recently, concerning the whole idea of evolution and gay rights. When pressed to provide an answer as to for why he really wanted to, in effect, take away gay's rights, his answer was that he "doesn't agree with their lifestyle". Eh? It wasn't made clear if 'lifestyle' meant living together in a committed relationship as a family and contributing to the society, or by having nasty extramarital sex - both of which are things committed by many more straights than gays (not to mention completely aside from human rights in the first place). He couldn't give a single specific example backed up by any evidence of any way that gays would in any way threaten the concept of family, marriage, and society... yet somehow still parrots over and over that gays undermine family, marriage, etc. etc. etc.
Gotta love bigotry.
Oh, and why do so many people not grasp the basic concept of why evolution is taught in science class, but not intelligent design? If the scientific method supported the concept of creationism, then creationism would be taught in science class. Simple as that.
Science is not just 'facts' so much as it is a tool to find out what makes things work and why. I.E. science in practice is completely opposite of faith based religion.
Faith, however valid it may be to anybody's belief system, does not belong in science class.
Yes, I can see how it is such a better idea to ignore what (plentiful) evidence there is completely until there is 'proof' that we are contributint to global warming. Lets by all means make no precautionary changes to our emmisions at all, because there is no 'proof'.
By the time such 'proof' exists, it may be too late to do anything about it.
Will you please stop arguing on the side of the PC users? No really, I mean it. Seriously, who would want such a blathering, mindless, crude, rambling, idiotic, unevolved neanderthal on their side? Now shut your cheeks, hold your breath, and put youself out of our misery.
You wouldn't replace the engine in your car and tweak the timing with no knowledge, why are computers any different?
Well, yeah, but you don't need to know how to replace the engine in your car or tweak the timings in order to drive it, now do you? If you have the skills and know-how to do it, there's nothing from stopping you from doing so. In fact, more power to you. But, it should not be a requirement.
Slashdot Mirror
... we shall see how much money google can make over VPN only traffic!
I'm still waiting for that AOLED display...
This would be rather more convincing to me if the listeners were not part of a group where they could possibly confer with each other (groups of people discussing a subjective subject are likely to come to the same conclusion), and/or if the results have been shown to be consistently repeatable.
Still an interesting start, though. Definitely merits further investigation.
I wonder how much overlap there is between those that don't want a couple lines from the Qur'an quoted in a song in a videogame, and those that want intelligent design to be taught in science class.
Yeah, because your anecdotal example is indicative of all used car buying experiences. :)
Seven years ago I bought a heavily used car for $5,000. Over 120k miles later, it's still running strong despite being driven by my Asian wife (sometimes the stereotypes are true).
I don't have a source, but I remember reading at one point that there was more oxygen in the atmosphere back then, resulting in larger creatures being possible; take with a grain of salt (i.e. do your research).
Sure, go ahead. It's all publicly available data after all ;)
I wondered how china's gold medal count would look if i broke the sports down into three basic types:
Timed (almost impossible to sway the result by biased judging).
Scored goals/points (basketball, baseball, etc. where points are obviously scored, but judging can affect aspects of the gameplay - penalties and such).
Judged (all points are awarded based on whether a judge deems the point should be awarded - martial arts, gymnastics, etc. Basically, a corrupt judge can easily and drastically alter the outcome).
I then compared the number of golds won to the number of golds possible for each category. Here's how it all breaks down at the time of this posting:
Timed: China has won 2.94% of available gold medals
Scored goals/points: China has won 39.62% of available gold medals
Judged: China has won 52.27% of available gold medals.
Note that available means the medal a medal has been awarded to the winner.
So, the higher the influence judging has on the outcome, the better China does. Interesting, no?
This is exactly the problem: it isn't about 'knowing things about science' - which is how our current education system works - so much as it is about being able to understand what the scientific method is and how it works. If everybody was a skeptical thinker, then the media couldn't get away with the kind of reporting it does now, we wouldn't elect the bonehead politicians to office we do, we wouldn't have these silly politicizing of scientific issues, hijacking of the education system, and we would not tolerate the government and corporate abuses of power that are happening.
What's with all the doom and gloom predictions and massive stock declines every time one of the 'underdog' companies (AMD, Apple, etc.) has a rough year? These up and down cycles are a natural part of business. AMD still has a lot going for it, and a lot to offer, even if they don't currently hold the technological 'edge' in the x86 market. Given a few years, the picture between Intel and AMD may well switch again - unless too many investors bail out prematurely, of course.
...I swear to uphold and defend the scientific method?
"Magic Smoke" is fun, too: http://google.com/codesearch?hl=en&lr=&q=%22magic+ smoke%22&btnG=Search
"...end all the ethical issues with raising an animal for food, potential issues from mad cow disease, bird flu and whatever the next media induced panic is."
No media enduced panic for cloned meat products?
Bwaaaah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha~!
Slightly genitically engineered veggies have already been causing controversy for awhile.
Just a thought: suppose that evolution, creation of the earth, solar system, universe, big bang, etc. are things that happened at the guidance of this all powerful supreme intelligence ('God' for the purpose of this post).
So, who or what created that intelligence?
The concept of God does not answer any questions about the ultimate origins of the universe, it just moves the focus of the question - it changes the question from 'where did the universe come from?' to 'where did God come from?'.
You could state that God has always existed, but if that is a viable possibility, you could also state with the same ammount of certainty that the universe itself has always existed, completely independent of God. Or, perhaps, (if God exists) you could even say that the universe created God, not the other way around.
The local NPR station, KUER, interviewed this guy recently, concerning the whole idea of evolution and gay rights. When pressed to provide an answer as to for why he really wanted to, in effect, take away gay's rights, his answer was that he "doesn't agree with their lifestyle". Eh? It wasn't made clear if 'lifestyle' meant living together in a committed relationship as a family and contributing to the society, or by having nasty extramarital sex - both of which are things committed by many more straights than gays (not to mention completely aside from human rights in the first place). He couldn't give a single specific example backed up by any evidence of any way that gays would in any way threaten the concept of family, marriage, and society... yet somehow still parrots over and over that gays undermine family, marriage, etc. etc. etc.
Gotta love bigotry.
Oh, and why do so many people not grasp the basic concept of why evolution is taught in science class, but not intelligent design? If the scientific method supported the concept of creationism, then creationism would be taught in science class. Simple as that.
Science is not just 'facts' so much as it is a tool to find out what makes things work and why. I.E. science in practice is completely opposite of faith based religion.
Faith, however valid it may be to anybody's belief system, does not belong in science class.
Yes, I can see how it is such a better idea to ignore what (plentiful) evidence there is completely until there is 'proof' that we are contributint to global warming. Lets by all means make no precautionary changes to our emmisions at all, because there is no 'proof'. By the time such 'proof' exists, it may be too late to do anything about it.
Hmm...looks like I broke your brain. Sorry about that dude.
Will you please stop arguing on the side of the PC users? No really, I mean it. Seriously, who would want such a blathering, mindless, crude, rambling, idiotic, unevolved neanderthal on their side? Now shut your cheeks, hold your breath, and put youself out of our misery.
You wouldn't replace the engine in your car and tweak the timing with no knowledge, why are computers any different?
Well, yeah, but you don't need to know how to replace the engine in your car or tweak the timings in order to drive it, now do you? If you have the skills and know-how to do it, there's nothing from stopping you from doing so. In fact, more power to you. But, it should not be a requirement.
Why should an operating system be any different?