What predictions would you offer? It is easy to disagree, even with things that have past. Find someone whose prognostications have more relevance or insight, then complain. I do realize that he is worshiped, and people “follow” him. That is because most people are stupid, at least for now.
Do you work hard to have 10 fingers? Do you work hard to have an able mind? Could it be that you are endowed with an ability to control yourself with food that others aren't? I find it quite hopefull that someday we will not be able to discriminate based on what we think is important. Imagine, dumb people could be smart, short people could grow, skinny people could be bulky, lazy people could be ambitious. The fact is that we should be able to decide our genetic tendancies for ourselves.
Poor people won't have to afford it. They will be asked to take it or forfit governmental and private health insurance which will require it or a fittness test on a regular basis.
http://www.powergridfitness.com/ by far the best out there. I have used it extensively on both PS2 and PC for FPS, puzzle and racing games. This is a fantastic controller, not just an exercise machine. No I am not a paid representative.
If I am not mistaken childhood is the process whereby kids learn to become adults. If this process is accellerated successfully why would anyone dislike this? Are immaturity and ignorance virtues? I was a child, and yes I have children. What this article really demonstrates is how ignorant most people are about technolgies that affect society, and a resistance to change.
I think if we all just believe enough, we would have the strength and the courage to have faith in this. Please send this to 100 people to make sure the children are saved and we can give free power to the world. This will eliminate stupidity and arthritis if you only believe. It is tough getting someone who has a brain to look at this rediculous thing, but with enough faith we will find someone who believes in the power that wasn't. Jesus lives and God bless!
Attempting to shape your child's future based on your past has is silly. The future will have little resemblance in the areas of education, technology and work environment to what you are use to. Make sure they are morally responsible and have a very strong work ethic. If you can do that little else will matter. I say this in light of current trends in educational drug use and the shift in work to automation. The people left working will be the ones who really want to, and few others, but almost everyone will have the ability to perform well beyond our mental capacity.
Clone it, grow it, use it, one animal could power the planet, just clone the parts that make good fuel and slice it as you need it... just like we will do with food in a few years.
ISP's already do this sort of thing, if I download files from the wrong server my ISP throttles my service. Same thing... this isn't new it is just getting worse.
How many people try supplying you with newly contrived myths just to see if they get on TV? How do you filter out what are unrepeated vs. local or relatively unknown myths?
Great Question! There will never be only one operating system. Linux is fine and so are most of the others for one task or another. The Linux movement is more religious than practical. I liken it to the "bible christian" phenomenon. They have a chant, "we are christian", but they all disagree on almost every aspect of belief. The unifying factor is "We are Linux" / "We are Open Source". The movement has nothing to do with functionality or economics, but community. As aspects of the community become more mainstream, you will get your desktop OS, if it doesn't the communities will continue to be "freakish" "weird" "nerdy" and just like those "bible Christians" Linux nerds all want to be cool and normal.
What does ID have to do with Darwin or Science? - Fine ID folks are trying to push some anti-Darwin thing. But the concept of ID doesn't dispute Darwin's theory, it simply suggests a possible actuator. Big bangs are a result of something... Most importantly irreducible complexity only points to an order. Order then is a result of rules, and what/who/other? Implemented the very precise order of the Universe is a matter of Religion or Philosophy not science. I believe that often some scientists feel some obligation to weigh in on Philosophy within these matters. Should any text book state that humans evolved from single celled creatures through means of random mutation? There is evidence to support that, however there is no proof, and until the actual process is observed occurring we will never have proof. This means that the subject of origins is Theory not fact. Suggestions of potentials and probable's are philosophical and do not belong in a science class. If a conclusion cannot be drawn then leave the evidence on the table.
Ok, lets look at what we will be missing if we turn off "free broadcast television".
5% of stupid people will not be able to watch "COPS".
Now lets look at what we will get.
More bandwidth for newer more efficent media outlets.
More internet media competition for local news, sports, weather etc.
Government sponsored free or close to it broadband
(It seems like this is a basic human right at this point in our country)
I imagine wireless broadband, wifi, cell, telephone, cable companys would pick up the slack.
How many people here have viewed Broadcast Television in the past 5 years? Not me.
The bar recently evolved in a process remotely related to the creation of non-particles near black holes. It is amazing that the scientits at Harvard who will identify 42 within a year haven't noticed this. We should welcome the new systems to our galaxy.
They don't stay out unless you add energy, they only exist while they are disapearing, and the mere observation of them alters the perception of the experiment. What is 1 + -1... nothing. Send me a more technical link, I would love to read more. It would be interesting to read how they describe, quantify, isolate and monitor nothing so when it changes they can record it without iterfering with it's non-existance.
My Inital post..."We cannot prove why we are physically here. Intellegent Design is more valid than "Darwinism" because Darwinism doesn't ever try to answer that question."
Wow that was a stupid statement, but I wasn't meaning to put Darwinism in with Evolution. My personal bias is that many "Darwinists" "belive" in evolution in a manner and form consistent with religion instead of the scientific theory that it is. Manner and form being making random claims about others beliefs or ideas based on prejudice.
It seems that I made a random claim.
I don't disagree, everything in this post is correct. If science teachers could clearly teach facts (and if most theologians recognized them) this would be a better world. You may notice I never called ID a theory, or said it should be taught instead of or as an alternative to evolution. ID is an interesting idea that invites humanity to find reason in this sea of chance. The difference you and I have it seems is that I don't fear ID will make people think that Abram fought with an angel. (yikes.... at least I hope it won't make people think/"believe" that... )
I guess the real grip here is the way science is taught. Doing science and teaching science are different. Taking the evidence at hand as truth, and real truth can be different, that is rarely taught in High School science class. The students are told what the truth is and expected to swallow it. "kid you came from a fish"... maybe there is evidence to that effect, maybe the evidence was interpreted from an incomplete prospective, but the kid thinks that Gramps was a salmon. Any other view that looks at the evidence and sees something else is nowhere to be found. I also don't equate ID to God... it is a statement about design, or even creation, not necessairly God. ID says this place is well designed, and that's about it. Evolution is a "scientific" connect-the-dots, is that much better?.
"using external energy so that they avoid annihilation and become real particles."
This is still something in- something out, and there is nothing to suggest that a new anit-particle isn't "created" when the new particle becomes real.
I agree, any teaching that is theoretical, or theological should be as properly balanced as possible to ensure the pupil has the knolege and means to further pursue the subject if he or she so desires.
Darwinism however is so often associated and taught with it's own theology of, accidental existance or logical luck, which really has nothing to do with evolution, but some people's theological perspective of evolution.
I don't know about you, but my HS science teacher taught me that the Big Bang made the universe, we were once fish and all of this was a roll of the dice. (he may be right... but there is no proof or test you can apply to that)
The fact is that people will and should teach theology in schools. Each human needs to find an answer to these questions, which is why there are over 1000 posts on this subject every time it comes up.
I think if either are to be taught, they must be within the bounds of what they are, that's it.
Boy you got me there!!!
Darwinism is so often associated with it's own theology of, accidental existance or logical luck, which really has nothing to do with evolution, but some people's perspective of evolution. If we just happened... where is the evidence for that? I think if either are to be taught, they must be within the bounds of what they are.
Slashdot Mirror
What predictions would you offer? It is easy to disagree, even with things that have past. Find someone whose prognostications have more relevance or insight, then complain. I do realize that he is worshiped, and people “follow” him. That is because most people are stupid, at least for now.
Do you work hard to have 10 fingers? Do you work hard to have an able mind? Could it be that you are endowed with an ability to control yourself with food that others aren't? I find it quite hopefull that someday we will not be able to discriminate based on what we think is important. Imagine, dumb people could be smart, short people could grow, skinny people could be bulky, lazy people could be ambitious. The fact is that we should be able to decide our genetic tendancies for ourselves.
Poor people won't have to afford it. They will be asked to take it or forfit governmental and private health insurance which will require it or a fittness test on a regular basis.
I hope you don't expect to use any of this as valid information.
http://www.powergridfitness.com/ by far the best out there. I have used it extensively on both PS2 and PC for FPS, puzzle and racing games. This is a fantastic controller, not just an exercise machine. No I am not a paid representative.
If I am not mistaken childhood is the process whereby kids learn to become adults. If this process is accellerated successfully why would anyone dislike this? Are immaturity and ignorance virtues? I was a child, and yes I have children. What this article really demonstrates is how ignorant most people are about technolgies that affect society, and a resistance to change.
I think if we all just believe enough, we would have the strength and the courage to have faith in this. Please send this to 100 people to make sure the children are saved and we can give free power to the world. This will eliminate stupidity and arthritis if you only believe. It is tough getting someone who has a brain to look at this rediculous thing, but with enough faith we will find someone who believes in the power that wasn't. Jesus lives and God bless!
Attempting to shape your child's future based on your past has is silly. The future will have little resemblance in the areas of education, technology and work environment to what you are use to. Make sure they are morally responsible and have a very strong work ethic. If you can do that little else will matter.
I say this in light of current trends in educational drug use and the shift in work to automation. The people left working will be the ones who really want to, and few others, but almost everyone will have the ability to perform well beyond our mental capacity.
Clone it, grow it, use it, one animal could power the planet, just clone the parts that make good fuel and slice it as you need it... just like we will do with food in a few years.
ISP's already do this sort of thing, if I download files from the wrong server my ISP throttles my service. Same thing... this isn't new it is just getting worse.
How many people try supplying you with newly contrived myths just to see if they get on TV? How do you filter out what are unrepeated vs. local or relatively unknown myths?
Excellent site, I particularly enjoyed the Steve Wozniak audio programs.
Great Question! There will never be only one operating system. Linux is fine and so are most of the others for one task or another. The Linux movement is more religious than practical. I liken it to the "bible christian" phenomenon. They have a chant, "we are christian", but they all disagree on almost every aspect of belief. The unifying factor is "We are Linux" / "We are Open Source". The movement has nothing to do with functionality or economics, but community. As aspects of the community become more mainstream, you will get your desktop OS, if it doesn't the communities will continue to be "freakish" "weird" "nerdy" and just like those "bible Christians" Linux nerds all want to be cool and normal.
What does ID have to do with Darwin or Science? - Fine ID folks are trying to push some anti-Darwin thing. But the concept of ID doesn't dispute Darwin's theory, it simply suggests a possible actuator. Big bangs are a result of something... Most importantly irreducible complexity only points to an order. Order then is a result of rules, and what/who/other? Implemented the very precise order of the Universe is a matter of Religion or Philosophy not science. I believe that often some scientists feel some obligation to weigh in on Philosophy within these matters. Should any text book state that humans evolved from single celled creatures through means of random mutation? There is evidence to support that, however there is no proof, and until the actual process is observed occurring we will never have proof. This means that the subject of origins is Theory not fact. Suggestions of potentials and probable's are philosophical and do not belong in a science class. If a conclusion cannot be drawn then leave the evidence on the table.
Ok, lets look at what we will be missing if we turn off "free broadcast television". 5% of stupid people will not be able to watch "COPS". Now lets look at what we will get. More bandwidth for newer more efficent media outlets. More internet media competition for local news, sports, weather etc. Government sponsored free or close to it broadband (It seems like this is a basic human right at this point in our country) I imagine wireless broadband, wifi, cell, telephone, cable companys would pick up the slack. How many people here have viewed Broadcast Television in the past 5 years? Not me.
The bar recently evolved in a process remotely related to the creation of non-particles near black holes. It is amazing that the scientits at Harvard who will identify 42 within a year haven't noticed this. We should welcome the new systems to our galaxy.
read this... it isn't something from nothing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green's_function
They don't stay out unless you add energy, they only exist while they are disapearing, and the mere observation of them alters the perception of the experiment. What is 1 + -1... nothing. Send me a more technical link, I would love to read more. It would be interesting to read how they describe, quantify, isolate and monitor nothing so when it changes they can record it without iterfering with it's non-existance.
My Inital post..."We cannot prove why we are physically here. Intellegent Design is more valid than "Darwinism" because Darwinism doesn't ever try to answer that question." Wow that was a stupid statement, but I wasn't meaning to put Darwinism in with Evolution. My personal bias is that many "Darwinists" "belive" in evolution in a manner and form consistent with religion instead of the scientific theory that it is. Manner and form being making random claims about others beliefs or ideas based on prejudice. It seems that I made a random claim.
I don't disagree, everything in this post is correct. If science teachers could clearly teach facts (and if most theologians recognized them) this would be a better world. You may notice I never called ID a theory, or said it should be taught instead of or as an alternative to evolution. ID is an interesting idea that invites humanity to find reason in this sea of chance. The difference you and I have it seems is that I don't fear ID will make people think that Abram fought with an angel. (yikes.... at least I hope it won't make people think/"believe" that... )
I guess the real grip here is the way science is taught. Doing science and teaching science are different. Taking the evidence at hand as truth, and real truth can be different, that is rarely taught in High School science class. The students are told what the truth is and expected to swallow it. "kid you came from a fish"... maybe there is evidence to that effect, maybe the evidence was interpreted from an incomplete prospective, but the kid thinks that Gramps was a salmon. Any other view that looks at the evidence and sees something else is nowhere to be found. I also don't equate ID to God... it is a statement about design, or even creation, not necessairly God. ID says this place is well designed, and that's about it. Evolution is a "scientific" connect-the-dots, is that much better?.
"using external energy so that they avoid annihilation and become real particles." This is still something in- something out, and there is nothing to suggest that a new anit-particle isn't "created" when the new particle becomes real.
I agree, any teaching that is theoretical, or theological should be as properly balanced as possible to ensure the pupil has the knolege and means to further pursue the subject if he or she so desires.
Darwinism however is so often associated and taught with it's own theology of, accidental existance or logical luck, which really has nothing to do with evolution, but some people's theological perspective of evolution. I don't know about you, but my HS science teacher taught me that the Big Bang made the universe, we were once fish and all of this was a roll of the dice. (he may be right... but there is no proof or test you can apply to that) The fact is that people will and should teach theology in schools. Each human needs to find an answer to these questions, which is why there are over 1000 posts on this subject every time it comes up. I think if either are to be taught, they must be within the bounds of what they are, that's it.
Boy you got me there!!! Darwinism is so often associated with it's own theology of, accidental existance or logical luck, which really has nothing to do with evolution, but some people's perspective of evolution. If we just happened... where is the evidence for that? I think if either are to be taught, they must be within the bounds of what they are.