but i really don't see how it's intended to promote some religious point or to argue a fact.
Then you must be stupid or blind.
Why not drop evolution from the sticker completely. Just "This book should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered." It could be stamped on EVERY book. Including religious ones.
The reality, though, is that it isn't completely verifiable, and that's why it isn't a fact.
NOTHING can be completely verified. You can't prove your own existence, for instance. You can't prove that what you see is really there. You can't know that what you observe is the same as what others observe. You can't prove that 2+2 is always 4.
Does this render all science invalid? Of course not. I'll leave it to you to figure out how scientists get around this. Suffice to say, the argument you give is very unscientific.
yeah... wtf? I mean, telling kids to have an open mind and view something critically... it's almost like we want them to think for themselves. Well, at least you can always trust the government to put an end to that.
The problem is - the kids weren't really being told to think critically. There's a difference between saying "Think critically!" and, "Evolution isn't a fact - think critically!" Don't you think?
Correct. Weather is only one aspect of our planet's climate. What's interesting about the grandparent's point is that the climate as a whole is a vastly more complex system, so if we can't solve for cloud-cover....
In fact, it's much easier to look at the system as a whole than try to go for extreme detail such as cloud-cover on a very small area, such as a city. We can forecast cloud-covers in a larger scale very accurately. As an analogy, neither do we need to know where every strain of sand is in order to draw a map.
"Climate is what we expect, wheather is what we get."
Any evidence or sources to back that statement up or did you pretty much pull that from your rear?
IANTOP, but it's a pretty well established fact that juries convict innocent people all the time. DNA testing is helping a little nowadays, though.
There is some good information here, here and here.
I'm still skeptical about global warming seeing as how antartica is getting colder and the ice there is growing, among other things.
I've seen this stated in exactly one TV documentary. A documentary, which claimed that each and every other study on global warming is based on false data. Has this new study been peer-reviewed? Does anyone have any more info?
I bow down before this "bunch of Europeans" on a forum called "Purple Motion."
That was just the first discussion group I Googled up. Had you actually bothered to READ what's written there, you might have realized they are actually quite well informed. Of course, on Slashdot, that's always a long shot...
To twist around your arguement, how about guns then ? It can be argued that committing crimes is the primary use for firearms. Yet I do not see them being banned.
Well, they should be. But then again, a lot of America disagrees, because apparently it's safer living amidst of millions of guns instead of none.
Why do I feel like these "consultants" will favour Windows anyway, and bring examples like how Linux infringes on a ton of stuff and throw in some SCO as well.
In that case, I hope they are paying for their corporate licenses (from TFA):
Bill Hilf:
[...] Having run large Linux environments before, and now I run a lab here in Redmond with about 200 servers, we run over 40 different types of Linux distribution. We also run a lot of Unix and a lot of Windows, of course. We use SMS Vintela [Management Extensions] here to manage that heterogeneous system. It's a good example of how we've taken a Microsoft technology, SMS, and built it in a way that's open and allowing our partners, such as Vintela, which is a Microsoft partner, to build on top of our software stack to enable management in a heterogeneous environment. So it's a nice proof point of both: how do you do interoperability across different types of systems, but also how do you build software that other people can build upon.
Am I really the only one who thought it was absolutely delightful to read relatively unbiased information about Linux from MS consultants. They do mention that when choosing a Linux distribution for a mission-critical system, it's good to keep SCO's claims in mind and see what kind of indemnification is needed and what HP, IBM et al are offering. I agree that Bill & Martin are slightly tilted in the Microsoft direction, but it could be much much worse.
I have seen on the AP wire that this quake was large enough to affect the earth's rotation. Could that possibly in turn affect the earth's magnetic field.
No, the disruption isn't big enough. The rotation sped up by a 10,000th of a second. It's hardly worth mentioning in the news. Earth's orbit changed, too, according to this article.
But hey, we Americans don't care. Since only 8 Americans died (thus far) in the trajedy, the news isn't covering it the way you might think they would for a single event that has caused (so far) over 20,000 dead.
In fact, many many more people have been killed in bombings in Iraq, so I guess they should at least get equal attention.
Oh, I'm sorry. Most sarcasm where I come from contains at least traces of wit, so it was hard to recognize it in this case.
I thought that mentioning an 'evil Mexican-American-Canadian-British-Swedish-German-F rench-Finnish-Indian-Chinese-liberal conspiracy' would serve as a subtle hint. I suppose I was wrong.
I think its rather presumptuous to assume man can have any impact on the weather.
Exactly. Thousands and thousands of scientists (professors and otherwise) who have time and again proven global warming to be real and happening have repeatedly, collectively, and deliberately made mistakes in their experiments and calulatinons. In fact, as reported on a recent documentary on TV (forget the channel), there is an evil worldwide (at least Mexican-American-Canadian-British-Swedish-German-F rench-Finnish-Indian-Chinese-liberal) conspiracy against oil and energy companies trying to convince the world that CO2 emissions are bad.
Surely the problem is with the mirrors, rather than the search engine? If Google were to be held accountable for the legality of every site and image they point to, well that would be the end of Google.
Which is exactly why I said it seems a bit scary. It could very well mean the end of search engines as we know them.
Google's response is to remove any link to their website from their search results. As soon as they see the drastic decline in new visitors, they'll come crawling back.
If they win the court case, they'll get so much $$$ that they can retire straight away, and let the decline be someone else's headache.
He can't insert a ROBOTS.TXT file and can't seem to handle his passwd file, and he wants to sue Google for his ineptitude?
He is suing because Google has indexed unauthorized mirror sites, not his own site. This is a bit scary, because I think what Google is doing might actually be considered illegal, because the pictures are copyrighted.
Slashdot Mirror
Could it be that women simply are clever enough not to pay for stupid, meaningless IQ tests?
Just a thought...
Then you must be stupid or blind.
Why not drop evolution from the sticker completely. Just "This book should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered." It could be stamped on EVERY book. Including religious ones.
NOTHING can be completely verified. You can't prove your own existence, for instance. You can't prove that what you see is really there. You can't know that what you observe is the same as what others observe. You can't prove that 2+2 is always 4.
Does this render all science invalid? Of course not. I'll leave it to you to figure out how scientists get around this. Suffice to say, the argument you give is very unscientific.
The problem is - the kids weren't really being told to think critically. There's a difference between saying "Think critically!" and, "Evolution isn't a fact - think critically!" Don't you think?
In fact, it's much easier to look at the system as a whole than try to go for extreme detail such as cloud-cover on a very small area, such as a city. We can forecast cloud-covers in a larger scale very accurately. As an analogy, neither do we need to know where every strain of sand is in order to draw a map.
"Climate is what we expect, wheather is what we get."
For the umpteenth time: climate != weather.
IANTOP, but it's a pretty well established fact that juries convict innocent people all the time. DNA testing is helping a little nowadays, though. There is some good information here, here and here.
I've seen this stated in exactly one TV documentary. A documentary, which claimed that each and every other study on global warming is based on false data. Has this new study been peer-reviewed? Does anyone have any more info?
That was just the first discussion group I Googled up. Had you actually bothered to READ what's written there, you might have realized they are actually quite well informed. Of course, on Slashdot, that's always a long shot...
You are mistaken. See this forum for a bunch of Europeans discussing the American economy.
Innovative != invention
This is very, very, innovative. It's easily the most innovative thing to hit a kernel since the 70's.
Well, they should be. But then again, a lot of America disagrees, because apparently it's safer living amidst of millions of guns instead of none.
Is it really? When will we run out of carrots, then? Potatoes? Beef? Some proof, please.
Publicity won't buy you anything to eat. It's moot.
Do you also eat at restaurants and not pay because you felt the food wasn't that good afterall?
Wow, I want me a Suticase Stereo Radio / CD Player (Super Karaoke)!
In that case, I hope they are paying for their corporate licenses (from TFA):
Am I really the only one who thought it was absolutely delightful to read relatively unbiased information about Linux from MS consultants. They do mention that when choosing a Linux distribution for a mission-critical system, it's good to keep SCO's claims in mind and see what kind of indemnification is needed and what HP, IBM et al are offering. I agree that Bill & Martin are slightly tilted in the Microsoft direction, but it could be much much worse.
No, the disruption isn't big enough. The rotation sped up by a 10,000th of a second. It's hardly worth mentioning in the news. Earth's orbit changed, too, according to this article.
In fact, many many more people have been killed in bombings in Iraq, so I guess they should at least get equal attention.
I thought that mentioning an 'evil Mexican-American-Canadian-British-Swedish-German-F rench-Finnish-Indian-Chinese-liberal conspiracy' would serve as a subtle hint. I suppose I was wrong.
Exactly. Thousands and thousands of scientists (professors and otherwise) who have time and again proven global warming to be real and happening have repeatedly, collectively, and deliberately made mistakes in their experiments and calulatinons. In fact, as reported on a recent documentary on TV (forget the channel), there is an evil worldwide (at least Mexican-American-Canadian-British-Swedish-German-F rench-Finnish-Indian-Chinese-liberal) conspiracy against oil and energy companies trying to convince the world that CO2 emissions are bad.
Which is exactly why I said it seems a bit scary. It could very well mean the end of search engines as we know them.
If they win the court case, they'll get so much $$$ that they can retire straight away, and let the decline be someone else's headache.
In more ways than one.
He is suing because Google has indexed unauthorized mirror sites, not his own site. This is a bit scary, because I think what Google is doing might actually be considered illegal, because the pictures are copyrighted.