Hunter/gather tribes are usually less than a couple of hundred uncles, aunts, cousins, etc, but they have extremely complex inter-tribal networks that allow them to share territory when nature turns on a regular feast. The site in Turkey where wheat was domesticated has it's own "stone henge", not as impressive but it's at least 5ky older than the Druids.
Temporay cities: Wether it's bears or cavemen, animals will gather in unusuall numbers at certain natrual events such as salmon running up stream or certain plants in fruit. It's thought that the site where wheat was domesticated in Turkey 10+Kya was a place where tribes would gather once a year to feed on the natural wheat plains. In other words there was already a yearly inter-tribal "festival" going for millenia before some proto-geek worked out how to plant seeds and get a better crop next year.
"Nobody has ever observed a rat pushing a cocaine lever in the wild."
Cocaine levers would have to be put in the wild where the rats would have to compete with Whtney Huston. But in general animals will get stoned anyway they can, fermented fruit routinely sends elephants on village crushing rampages in India, dogs in Queensland get off by licking cane toads, wallabies in Tasmania go tripping on the (legal) opium poppies. Youtube has heaps of examples.
Yes, I think this was one of the clues he used. Can't remember if he used it to confirm his prediction or the other way around but IIRC he took the problem of the orbit to Newton who said he had written something on that, couldn't find it, and spent the next two years (re?)writting the principa to answer Haley's question.
To most Ausies, ID == Creationisim. The creationist brand died in the 60's here in Oz and the ID brand never really took off. It seems to me the only place left where creationists are not an endagered species is the southern US.
OTOH I'm a fan of the idea that the history of a concept is best taught at the same time as the concept. Australia is not Texas, we don't have a problem with rabid creationists. I'd have no problem with an Aussie school teaching why evolution is accepted over Adam and Eve in a science class, it would make a good case study.
"It should make people realize that they are capable of very bad behavior, and need to remember that and guard against going along with it, just because other people are telling them to."
Agree it's seems difficult to date a painting, the culture changes very slowly, the painting tells a story and when the artist paints the picture he does so by retelling the story at the same time. The original may have been repainted continiously for (ten's of) thousands of years.
Humans have inhabited that area for (up to) 60Kyrs, so it seems to idicate that if humans wiped big-bird out, it took them ~40Kyrs to get a population big enough to do it.
The post you link to is hearsay, it's not evidence. Evidence would be facts such as Sagan's "we are star stuff" or "we are a way for the universe to know itself", both statements are undeniablly in your face everyday but we don't really notice them. Evidence for miracles would be the four forces which nobody can explain but everyone agrees they exist.
However to turn Sagan's evidence into a religion you would have to add purpose to the universe's actions and surrond the whole thing with odd rituals and funny hats. Sorta like when the "New Age" crowd mutilated Jame's Lovelock's gaia theory by giving it concioussness and a purpose.
Of couse I haven't RTFA but I would think most of the scientists who are tagged as religious would be deists, which is the strong version of Sagan's POV. There is a vast difference between being a deists (Eienstien) and being religious (Newton).
Do you ever read what you type, there seems to be no attempt what so ever at consistency across your posts, in fact it appears your aiming for deliberate inconsistency.
One link that backs up your claim would be enough but you have not posted anything that backs up your original claim that "The EPA and others have begun pushing to label CO2 as a poison". You may have fooled a few mods but you have also reinforced my suspicion that your claim is bullshit.
"What is the basis for morality without a Higher Power? Why should I follow your morals if the physical is all there is?"
Yeah right, because our anscestors thought murder, theft, cheating, beastiality, etc, were all ok untill Moses came down from the mount. There were no rules what so ever in pre-christian societies and other pack/herd animals do no show any kind of moral behaviour toward their own kin./sarcasam
My sense of morality is inate, it may have been refined by the culture I grew up in but nobody "gave" it to me, I can no more deny it than I can deny my sense of smell. However a sense of morality is not universal, some people are born without any inate sense of morality, we call these people sociopaths or phycopaths depending on the severity of their disability.
The best test of your own inate moral behaviour is to ask the question "do I do the 'right thing' when I believe nobody is watching"? Of course if you are a theist you will believe that god is always watching. Therefore as a theiest you will never be able to test if your behaviour is motivated by inate morals. At best you can claim to be following a traditional technique designed to coerce sociopaths into moral behaviour via the fear of god.
It's all about different interpretations. There are some passages about "false idols" that some sects interpret as meaning images are not permitted (eg:sunni), other sects do not agree with those interpretations and have no problem with (non-blasphemous) images (eg:shia).
Of course it goes without saying that the whole thing is just as rediculous as every other argument about the alleged desires of a supernatural being. It doesn't matter if we're talking about cartoons or the number of angels that can dance on a pinhead, none of those arguments deserve respect, especially when the offended party goes around advocating and participating in murder and general mahem. They are within their rights to self censor their own society and ban facebook but they can go fuck themselves if they want to use violence and threats in an attempt to intimidate the free speech society which I live in. IMHO Viacom and others who have caved in to their temper tantrums are the worst kind of cowards.
I've been a "greenie" since the 70's, go ahead and build your nuclear plant with my full support. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Lovelock#Nuclear_power who is regarded as the "farther of Earth science" will also back you 100%. There is no logical reason from a green POV that nuclear can't be a major part of a solution, there's also no logical reason why wind can't also play a major role.
Slashdot Mirror
"Honestly, who keeps a soiled dress around?"
"He picked the only jewish girl in America who doesn't know how to get a stain out of a dress" - Robin Williams.
Hunter/gather tribes are usually less than a couple of hundred uncles, aunts, cousins, etc, but they have extremely complex inter-tribal networks that allow them to share territory when nature turns on a regular feast. The site in Turkey where wheat was domesticated has it's own "stone henge", not as impressive but it's at least 5ky older than the Druids.
Temporay cities: Wether it's bears or cavemen, animals will gather in unusuall numbers at certain natrual events such as salmon running up stream or certain plants in fruit. It's thought that the site where wheat was domesticated in Turkey 10+Kya was a place where tribes would gather once a year to feed on the natural wheat plains. In other words there was already a yearly inter-tribal "festival" going for millenia before some proto-geek worked out how to plant seeds and get a better crop next year.
You could just leave bowls of beer and whisky out in a forest and see what happens? :P
You end up w/ a bunch of (happily?) drowned gastropods.
Or a bowl full of cane toads, depending on where you live.
"Nobody has ever observed a rat pushing a cocaine lever in the wild."
Cocaine levers would have to be put in the wild where the rats would have to compete with Whtney Huston. But in general animals will get stoned anyway they can, fermented fruit routinely sends elephants on village crushing rampages in India, dogs in Queensland get off by licking cane toads, wallabies in Tasmania go tripping on the (legal) opium poppies. Youtube has heaps of examples.
Yes, I think this was one of the clues he used. Can't remember if he used it to confirm his prediction or the other way around but IIRC he took the problem of the orbit to Newton who said he had written something on that, couldn't find it, and spent the next two years (re?)writting the principa to answer Haley's question.
To most Ausies, ID == Creationisim. The creationist brand died in the 60's here in Oz and the ID brand never really took off. It seems to me the only place left where creationists are not an endagered species is the southern US.
OTOH I'm a fan of the idea that the history of a concept is best taught at the same time as the concept. Australia is not Texas, we don't have a problem with rabid creationists. I'd have no problem with an Aussie school teaching why evolution is accepted over Adam and Eve in a science class, it would make a good case study.
"It should make people realize that they are capable of very bad behavior, and need to remember that and guard against going along with it, just because other people are telling them to."
The Stanford prison experiment - "Most of the guards were upset when the experiment concluded early".
Great story, thanks :)
Agree it's seems difficult to date a painting, the culture changes very slowly, the painting tells a story and when the artist paints the picture he does so by retelling the story at the same time. The original may have been repainted continiously for (ten's of) thousands of years.
A bit of trivia: The Tasmanian Aborigines were cut off from the mainland about 30kyr ago and did not know how to make fire.
You can buy Emu steaks, pies, etc, here in Oz. Also crocodile and kangaroo steaks... Never tried any of it....
Do we always have to blame man?
It's not personal, there's no need for a guilt trip about climbing to the top of the food chain before agriculture was invented.
Humans have inhabited that area for (up to) 60Kyrs, so it seems to idicate that if humans wiped big-bird out, it took them ~40Kyrs to get a population big enough to do it.
The post you link to is hearsay, it's not evidence. Evidence would be facts such as Sagan's "we are star stuff" or "we are a way for the universe to know itself", both statements are undeniablly in your face everyday but we don't really notice them. Evidence for miracles would be the four forces which nobody can explain but everyone agrees they exist.
However to turn Sagan's evidence into a religion you would have to add purpose to the universe's actions and surrond the whole thing with odd rituals and funny hats. Sorta like when the "New Age" crowd mutilated Jame's Lovelock's gaia theory by giving it concioussness and a purpose.
Of couse I haven't RTFA but I would think most of the scientists who are tagged as religious would be deists, which is the strong version of Sagan's POV. There is a vast difference between being a deists (Eienstien) and being religious (Newton).
YEs, it's exactly the kind of citation you would use, ie: an irrelevant one that does not back up your claims.
You were just wrong before, now you're wrong and angry?
"Does Microsoft make anything that isn't slow, bloated, and fully integrated into skyne--I mean .NET?"
Notepad.
1/10000 what? - Oil rigs, barrels, gallons, years, days, milliseconds?
Do you ever read what you type, there seems to be no attempt what so ever at consistency across your posts, in fact it appears your aiming for deliberate inconsistency.
"Enough links?
One link that backs up your claim would be enough but you have not posted anything that backs up your original claim that "The EPA and others have begun pushing to label CO2 as a poison". You may have fooled a few mods but you have also reinforced my suspicion that your claim is bullshit.
"What is the basis for morality without a Higher Power? Why should I follow your morals if the physical is all there is?"
/sarcasam
Yeah right, because our anscestors thought murder, theft, cheating, beastiality, etc, were all ok untill Moses came down from the mount. There were no rules what so ever in pre-christian societies and other pack/herd animals do no show any kind of moral behaviour toward their own kin.
My sense of morality is inate, it may have been refined by the culture I grew up in but nobody "gave" it to me, I can no more deny it than I can deny my sense of smell. However a sense of morality is not universal, some people are born without any inate sense of morality, we call these people sociopaths or phycopaths depending on the severity of their disability.
The best test of your own inate moral behaviour is to ask the question "do I do the 'right thing' when I believe nobody is watching"? Of course if you are a theist you will believe that god is always watching. Therefore as a theiest you will never be able to test if your behaviour is motivated by inate morals. At best you can claim to be following a traditional technique designed to coerce sociopaths into moral behaviour via the fear of god.
It's all about different interpretations. There are some passages about "false idols" that some sects interpret as meaning images are not permitted (eg:sunni), other sects do not agree with those interpretations and have no problem with (non-blasphemous) images (eg:shia).
Of course it goes without saying that the whole thing is just as rediculous as every other argument about the alleged desires of a supernatural being. It doesn't matter if we're talking about cartoons or the number of angels that can dance on a pinhead, none of those arguments deserve respect, especially when the offended party goes around advocating and participating in murder and general mahem. They are within their rights to self censor their own society and ban facebook but they can go fuck themselves if they want to use violence and threats in an attempt to intimidate the free speech society which I live in. IMHO Viacom and others who have caved in to their temper tantrums are the worst kind of cowards.
PS: I don't think you have to shut down civilization but a morotorium on NEW coal plants would be a good start to fixing the problem.
I've been a "greenie" since the 70's, go ahead and build your nuclear plant with my full support. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Lovelock#Nuclear_power who is regarded as the "farther of Earth science" will also back you 100%. There is no logical reason from a green POV that nuclear can't be a major part of a solution, there's also no logical reason why wind can't also play a major role.