Ethanol is just plain stupid when you can do biodiesel instead.
Actually, you can't use biodiesel in a car that uses gas. However if you increased your cars compression and did everything to optimize your engine for alcohol, it will actually get better mileage and/or more power.
Algae, growing under glass in Arizona, would do a great job.
No, the volcanic regions in New Zealand are associated with a subduction zone (were tectonic plates move over one another). The volcanism in North America, Hawaii or Europe are the result of a local phenomenon in the crust called a hot spot or plume (crustal material moves up in these areas and creates a local heat source).
I've been reading this shitty thread from top to bottom and the best I.D. argument to date are links to books and titles of books. I guess those "educated I.D. proponents" don't dare to show their yellow faces here.
Outta here...
"how would a cow like animal gain an advantage by moving into the sea"
By doing it slowly... First it would move into wetland (which already is a perfect environment for cows). Its evolution would favor mutations that make life in wetlands easier. Like hoofs better suited for water. The ability to swim. Bigger lungs for eating sea grass. Etc. This all would mean that cows would gain an definite advantage over predators that don't like water. And it would also mean that those cows could get into deeper water.
Are you starting to get it now?
The problem is not the evolution theory, it is your imagination. You compensate this with fantasy. And with tired old examples like the Nebraska man.
I happened to read up earlier on this topic (because it was mentioned on a/. thread). And it doesn't say anything at all about all those evolutionists flogging a pigs tooth. It does tell a story about nationalism (just like the Piltdown man, a similar story) and a lot of criticism from many archaeologists. I also noticed something different when reading up, that IDist flog this story.
Damn right! I'd mod you up, if i hadn't been coming down on all those ID idiots like a vengefull god with fists full of mod points. It didn't take long.
It is NOT random development but random mutation. Possible development resulting from this random mutation is non-random because the evolutionary forces are quite logical. Please stop mucking up the issues.
"minimal intervention from God" Ah good! You DO know an example of Gods influence, please tell us what it is.
"For myself, I find no necessary conflict between the mechanisms described by science and the actions of God described by the Bible." That is because your God is an impotent, nebulous being only responsible for "starting it all".
People like you often also believe in heaven, and not in hell. Bah, i guess i prefer the mean, old-biblical, vengeful God of bible-thumpers (no, i'm not serious).
"natural selection itself could be "directed"", you mean like breeding? What a novel idea! It does shine a remarkable light on your creator though!
"Who deices that having blue eys makes you more fit in one are and less fit in another?"
I'll explain. It is just that blue eyes are less fit in certain areas of the world (the really sunny parts). In not so sunny parts the eye colour probably doesn't matter. But, (and i just make this up, but it's likely) blue eyes are considered a positive trait in certain communities and are thus given preference.
So nobody decides, but there are fitness or not-so-fitness influences for eye colour. And still there's no need for something besides evolution! But your needs seem to go deeper than that, and i can't help you there.
"So there you go - Evolution, Creation - two theories, with equal scientific standing."
Whoaah!!!! Hold it there. You NEVER proved (or even stated for that matter) that Creation is a theory. You did speak of a "tentative answer", but that's is not remotely a theory.
"though theologically I find it unlikely". Very true, as there's nothing up to date that makes the existence of a god scientifically likely (if theology is a science, that is). Tsk.
Thank you for my first laugh this morning! The US was neutral! I guess a few politicians saw some positive sides to Hitlers regime. And of course, people like Henry Ford were good personal friends of Adolf.
Suddenly i can also see the human side to US politics, heartwarming it is.
Listen you idiot, neutral during WWII is very, very close to being on the wrong side. Not something to be proud of.
Why were you living abroad? You seriously found something worthwhile outside the US? Maybe something other than capitalism? (you've got a strange way with capitals, b.t.w.)
"I'm one of those people who doesn't see why it couldn't be somewhere in the middle"
As far as i know, intelligent design is NOT a theory to explain life on earth, but a attempt to disprove the evolution theory. And little more than that. Intelligent design is only looking to raise questions, and finds those on the fronture of evolutionairy science, where questions still remain. Sure enough, practically every time an ID proponent raises one of these questions, evolution scientist answer them (or it had been answered all along).
This "favorable outcome" and "rolling boulder" nonsense you speak off, shows your utter and complete ignorance of evolution. Evolution does NOT move in a direction, time moves in a direction, and it is just your viewpoint here/now that makes you think that evolution moves.
In fact, mutation is the wildcard that drives change, and natural selection is the mechanism that orders the changes. It is really simple! And it does not need a nudge in the favorable direction. Natural selection is already pushing there, thank your very much.
The REAL problem is that some people think that a theory is just a theory, and that both ID and evolution theory are just theories. When in fact The Evolution Theory (have a look at those capitals, please) is supported by a true mountain of evidence and research and intelligent design by a few questions and no fact at all. You know, some people loose sight of what the difference is between fact and wish, and try to turn religion into science.
This is inevitable, by it very nature religion is not logical but does try to explain everything, and so it simply does not mix with science at all. And if one tries, like you seem to do, it takes a lot of acrobatic reasoning and only results in stupid posts. And then again, maybe it is just your poor education
So, what you are saying is: if you put something in crude, simple terms, people will have a stronger opinion about it. In contrast, if you put the same thing in vague, friendly terms, people will not care.
That is utter brilliant, and a reminder for all of us! You deserve a 5: Insightful.
And yes, i'm sarcastic, because i'm sick and tired of this discussion and the MORONIC moderation it entices. So, hit me...
Should we judge anyone for the OfF scandal? Well. Re-reading the U.S. media, names like DaimlerChrysler and Siemens AG fall, and British and Italian politicians and French ambassadors are named. I even found a few that did not name any U.S. company or person, at all. Sadly, that does lead to the wrong conclusion.
In reality, (according to the Senate investigation's report) "The United States was not only aware of Iraqi oil sales which violated UN sanctions and provided the bulk of the illicit money Saddam Hussein obtained from circumventing UN sanctions. On occasion, the United States actually facilitated the illicit oil sales." And, not really suprising, more than 50 percent of the kickbacks actually came from U.S. oil purchases.
1) There is no legal authority outside of the US to compel ICANN to give up their position, and the US has said they won't.
2) The UN can't pass a resolution to force it, the US will veto it.
3) Basically people can choose to use the DNS system as it is, or they can go make their own.
Did you actually read your OWN remark? It is point 3 that is the risk we are running here, because of points 1 and 2. And you forgot point 0: that many countries are simply getting royally pissed off at the US for its attitude in this and other issues.
And sure, you can get all arrogant again like the world is used by now, but i don't think it is going to resolve the problem at hand. It might even speed up point 3. Many countries would rather have the UN rule their DNS than the US by proxy of ICANN. BUT, a country like China can decide to take it out of the hands of ICANN and rule it themselves. It is very, very easy you know, simply point your DNSes elsewhere. It would be another fine result of Bush era diplomacy.
Is there anyone here that thinks sexy.jpg.exe will show up on a linux system as sexy.jpg? No? No! This has nothing to do with user friendlyness, and everything with sane behavior. And i that is exactly where the big differences can be found. Ms products offer brainless unrelenting user friendly behavior without regard for consequences, linux doesn't do that, even if it sometimes inhibits the user experience.
In the end, nobody on a linux system will double-click sexy.jpg.exe and expect to see a nude sunbathing picture of Anna Kournikova.
Well, the dvd and the box and the leaflet inside are your property, the content on the dvd and the picture on the leaflet are not. Just like software really.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, you can't use biodiesel in a car that uses gas. However if you increased your cars compression and did everything to optimize your engine for alcohol, it will actually get better mileage and/or more power.
Algae, growing under glass in Arizona, would do a great job.
And what job would that be?
No, the volcanic regions in New Zealand are associated with a subduction zone (were tectonic plates move over one another). The volcanism in North America, Hawaii or Europe are the result of a local phenomenon in the crust called a hot spot or plume (crustal material moves up in these areas and creates a local heat source).
I've been reading this shitty thread from top to bottom and the best I.D. argument to date are links to books and titles of books. I guess those "educated I.D. proponents" don't dare to show their yellow faces here.
Outta here...
For the rest you are perfectly right, of course.
But... i still don't the name of this particular designer.
By doing it slowly... First it would move into wetland (which already is a perfect environment for cows). Its evolution would favor mutations that make life in wetlands easier. Like hoofs better suited for water. The ability to swim. Bigger lungs for eating sea grass. Etc. This all would mean that cows would gain an definite advantage over predators that don't like water. And it would also mean that those cows could get into deeper water.
Are you starting to get it now?
The problem is not the evolution theory, it is your imagination. You compensate this with fantasy. And with tired old examples like the Nebraska man. /. thread). And it doesn't say anything at all about all those evolutionists flogging a pigs tooth. It does tell a story about nationalism (just like the Piltdown man, a similar story) and a lot of criticism from many archaeologists. I also noticed something different when reading up, that IDist flog this story.
I happened to read up earlier on this topic (because it was mentioned on a
Oh, and the same to rest of your arguments.
Damn right! I'd mod you up, if i hadn't been coming down on all those ID idiots like a vengefull god with fists full of mod points. It didn't take long.
I'm not convinced, i guess i have a closed mind.
"minimal intervention from God" Ah good! You DO know an example of Gods influence, please tell us what it is.
"For myself, I find no necessary conflict between the mechanisms described by science and the actions of God described by the Bible." That is because your God is an impotent, nebulous being only responsible for "starting it all".
People like you often also believe in heaven, and not in hell. Bah, i guess i prefer the mean, old-biblical, vengeful God of bible-thumpers (no, i'm not serious).
"Who deices that having blue eys makes you more fit in one are and less fit in another?"
I'll explain. It is just that blue eyes are less fit in certain areas of the world (the really sunny parts). In not so sunny parts the eye colour probably doesn't matter. But, (and i just make this up, but it's likely) blue eyes are considered a positive trait in certain communities and are thus given preference.
So nobody decides, but there are fitness or not-so-fitness influences for eye colour. And still there's no need for something besides evolution! But your needs seem to go deeper than that, and i can't help you there.
Ok, I find it exceedingly unlikely God or any god ever existed.
So, does this sound like a religion?
I've got this feeling that YOU should admit, wordplay does not equal philosophy.
Whoaah!!!! Hold it there. You NEVER proved (or even stated for that matter) that Creation is a theory. You did speak of a "tentative answer", but that's is not remotely a theory.
"though theologically I find it unlikely". Very true, as there's nothing up to date that makes the existence of a god scientifically likely (if theology is a science, that is). Tsk.
Suddenly i can also see the human side to US politics, heartwarming it is.
Listen you idiot, neutral during WWII is very, very close to being on the wrong side. Not something to be proud of.
Why were you living abroad? You seriously found something worthwhile outside the US? Maybe something other than capitalism? (you've got a strange way with capitals, b.t.w.)
As far as i know, intelligent design is NOT a theory to explain life on earth, but a attempt to disprove the evolution theory. And little more than that. Intelligent design is only looking to raise questions, and finds those on the fronture of evolutionairy science, where questions still remain. Sure enough, practically every time an ID proponent raises one of these questions, evolution scientist answer them (or it had been answered all along).
This "favorable outcome" and "rolling boulder" nonsense you speak off, shows your utter and complete ignorance of evolution. Evolution does NOT move in a direction, time moves in a direction, and it is just your viewpoint here/now that makes you think that evolution moves.
In fact, mutation is the wildcard that drives change, and natural selection is the mechanism that orders the changes. It is really simple! And it does not need a nudge in the favorable direction. Natural selection is already pushing there, thank your very much.
The REAL problem is that some people think that a theory is just a theory, and that both ID and evolution theory are just theories. When in fact The Evolution Theory (have a look at those capitals, please) is supported by a true mountain of evidence and research and intelligent design by a few questions and no fact at all. You know, some people loose sight of what the difference is between fact and wish, and try to turn religion into science.
This is inevitable, by it very nature religion is not logical but does try to explain everything, and so it simply does not mix with science at all. And if one tries, like you seem to do, it takes a lot of acrobatic reasoning and only results in stupid posts. And then again, maybe it is just your poor education
Sorry, please try again.
So, what you are saying is: if you put something in crude, simple terms, people will have a stronger opinion about it. In contrast, if you put the same thing in vague, friendly terms, people will not care.
That is utter brilliant, and a reminder for all of us! You deserve a 5: Insightful.
And yes, i'm sarcastic, because i'm sick and tired of this discussion and the MORONIC moderation it entices. So, hit me...
You mean something like: "So yea, ICANN run by the US sucks, but ICANN run by the UN would suck 191 times more."
You, sir, give the word "moron" a fresh meaning.
In reality, (according to the Senate investigation's report) "The United States was not only aware of Iraqi oil sales which violated UN sanctions and provided the bulk of the illicit money Saddam Hussein obtained from circumventing UN sanctions. On occasion, the United States actually facilitated the illicit oil sales." And, not really suprising, more than 50 percent of the kickbacks actually came from U.S. oil purchases.
And of course, the whole FfO program was an U.S. idea. Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil-for-Food_Programm e, and realize that the Food for Oil scandal is a little bit MORE than an U.N. scandal.
Thank you
Well mister CNE, try google, enter "bindery novell suse" and hit "i'm feeling lucky".
Internet Power Struggle Reaching Climax:/ 11/1841205&tid=95&tid=219
http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10
That is why he used the word "and", stupid.
2) The UN can't pass a resolution to force it, the US will veto it.
3) Basically people can choose to use the DNS system as it is, or they can go make their own.
Did you actually read your OWN remark? It is point 3 that is the risk we are running here, because of points 1 and 2. And you forgot point 0: that many countries are simply getting royally pissed off at the US for its attitude in this and other issues.
And sure, you can get all arrogant again like the world is used by now, but i don't think it is going to resolve the problem at hand. It might even speed up point 3. Many countries would rather have the UN rule their DNS than the US by proxy of ICANN. BUT, a country like China can decide to take it out of the hands of ICANN and rule it themselves. It is very, very easy you know, simply point your DNSes elsewhere. It would be another fine result of Bush era diplomacy.
In the end, nobody on a linux system will double-click sexy.jpg.exe and expect to see a nude sunbathing picture of Anna Kournikova.
No no no, you don't respond to a troll by being a troll.
It's a shame you are an AC and i don't have mod points, i might have given you one. It is true, *they* do want control it all.
Well, the dvd and the box and the leaflet inside are your property, the content on the dvd and the picture on the leaflet are not. Just like software really.