"Bush won in 2004 because the majority of the people who voted thought he would be a better president than Kerry."
Interesting that you presume to know the intentions of 122 million people in choosing to vote for one person or another. "Better" in what respect? As I said, it's the American public's fault for embracing unimportant issues and ignoring the important ones, and it's the parties' faults for purposely feeding the unimportant issues to the public. They did it in 2004 and they're still doing it. As for your "majority", 62 million isn't exactly representative when it only amounts to 1 in 5 people.
Bush won in 2004 because people have been trained like monkeys to jump at whatever hot-button issue they are fed. It's as much the Democrats fault as it is the Republicans (both of which embraced such trivial debates), as it is the American people for not even trying to give a shit about important matters.
"Evolution works towards more optimal forms, so it is likely and almost guaranteed that animals on other similar planets would share forms with animals on this one."
No, evolution works toward more optimal forms within a group's local environment, which is a small part of their planet, and with respect to coexistence with other species. Their planet doesn't necessarily need to have much in common with ours. Our form is by no means optimal - breathing and eating through the same hole leads leads to choking death; walking upright leads to back pain; the pleasure and waste management functions are done through the same tubes. What we've done is only optimize certain components as much as is necessary to endure in our given environment - and other species have done the same. We are not competing with other species toward some ideal form, but just toward some form that will sufficiently let us get the upper hand for a bit longer.
"4. The human-like form is somewhat universal after all."
It's only universal among the uncreative minds of most scifi authors. Even on earth the diversity is so great that you wouldn't consider birds/insects/slugs to be "human-like forms" but even they have most of the parts (eye, head, nose, ears) in approximately the same relative locations. The chances of this occurring on another planet seem remote.
What are you talking about? You seem to have misread the submission. What gave you the impression that the mummy was a new discovery??? The only thing that's new is the identification.
Jeepers, what is this foreign concept called "terraforming" [that's been discussed for at least 50 years] - I'll try looking for information on this new resource called the Inter-Net and report my findings as soon as possible.
"Also note that transmitting information superluminally would effectively be sending messages into the past. This violates causality."
Funny, I don't recall ever going over the "universal law against killing your grandparents before you're born" in any of my physics classes (but I only took 17 of them). This "law" of causality is an assumption; the universal speed limit appears to be the reason why causality remains intact, but "it violates causality" is an empty statement. As long as matter/energy isn't being created/destroyed in the process, and you're not going faster than c, the universe doesn't really care about your grandparents' past well-being.
Only on/. does this crap get modded +5 insightful (despite saying nothing of content), and for example, a comment I made that water is in fact BLUE gets modded -1 Troll (it only got up to +1 after I posted a source).
As others have pointed out, Moore regularly uses these tactics of improperly framing a situation and withholding information that would make you reassess his claim (and ultimately not accept his original framing). His most common tactics are: stating selective facts out of chronological order to present an entirely different situation; using quotes out of context; and most importantly, withholding information that would make it obvious he's messing with you. For example, he did this in Bowling for Columbine when he presented Charlton Heston as a racist by using a quote out of context, and did not bother to mention that Heston marched alongside Martin Luther King Jr, Sidney Poitier, etc, in favor of civil rights.
Disclaimer: I'm a liberal and I've never shot nor owned a gun.:D
"When you choose to go see a pshrink, or check yourself into a clinic, that is not an adjudication. When the cops talk you down from a ledge and Baker Act you for 72 hours, and you are ordered by a judge into a treatment program, that is a mental health adjudication. This bill cannot discourage the seeking of voluntary mental health care."
Maybe the guy on the ledge was up there because he didn't understand this distinction, and would rather be dead than in another database.
You were taught wrong, as, apparently, most people here were. Water has a slight blue tint; that's why it looks clear in a small glass, but in a deep indoor pool, lake (on a cloudy day) or underwater in the ocean, it's dark blue. Because: WATER IS BLUE.
Water has a slight blue tint to it. You don't notice it in a glass, but it's obvious in a lake on a cloudy day, or in a deep indoor pool. Since I was modded troll by imbeciles, I'll post this fact again: WATER IS BLUE.
And you're an imbecile. Water is slightly blue, though of course it's not noticeable in a small glass. A simple google search would have cleared that up for you, but feel free to spread the bullshit. http://amasci.com/miscon/miscon4.html#watclr
Why was I modded troll?!? Water DOES indeed have a slight blue tint to it. Oceans are blue even on cloudy days because the sky has little to do with the fact that water is already blue. For those who still hold to the misconception: fix your brain.
At least some of the photos used in their posters are stolen from Wikipedia without even acknowledging the photographer or the proper licensing. For example, the photos of the busts of Socrates and Voltaire, which are under Creative Commons licenses. So not only are they intellectually lazy, but also creatively.
You're leaving out the actual speech given to the senate by Sen. Lisa Murkowski [R-AK], which is a little more alarmist:
"Mr. President, today I introduced a resolution designating June 2007 as National Internet Safety Month.
"The Internet has become one of the most significant advances in the twentieth century and, as a result, it affects people's lives in a positive manner each day. However, this technology presents dangers that need to be brought to the attention of all Americans. Consider the pervasiveness of Internet access by children and the rapid increase in Internet crime and predatory behavior. Never before have powerful educational solutions--such as Internet safety curricula for grades kindergarten through 12--been more critical and readily at hand.
"Mr. President, i-SAFE America is one nonprofit organization that has worked tirelessly to educate our youth and our community on these important issues. Formed in 1998, i-SAFE America educates youth in all 50 states, Washington, DC, and Department of Defense schools worldwide to ensure that they have a safe experience online.
"It is imperative that all Americans learn about the Internet safety strategies which will help keep their children safe from victimization. Consider the facts: In the United States, about 35 million school-aged children have Internet access. Eighty percent of middle and high school students are online for at least one hour per week.
"An alarming statistic is that 61 percent of middle and high school youths admit to using the Internet unsafely or inappropriately. Furthermore, at least 20 percent of these students have met face-to-face with someone they first met online and 23 percent of these students know of someone who has been bullied online.
Now is the time for America to focus its attention on supporting Internet safety, especially bearing in mind that children will soon be on summer vacation and will spend more time online."
They should also include anyone who has gone to jail before, hell even anyone who's gone to trial (just in case someone was set free who was actually guilty). Why not just expand it to include everyone - after all, just because someone hasn't yet committed a crime doesn't mean they won't in the future. It's the only way to be safe!
You still believe in fantasies unsupported by reality. This makes it easier for the whackos to believe what they do, and the fundamentalists to act on their beliefs. Your acceptance of blind faith condones the same blind faith that leads to violence and murder.
Slashdot Mirror
"Bush won in 2004 because the majority of the people who voted thought he would be a better president than Kerry." Interesting that you presume to know the intentions of 122 million people in choosing to vote for one person or another. "Better" in what respect? As I said, it's the American public's fault for embracing unimportant issues and ignoring the important ones, and it's the parties' faults for purposely feeding the unimportant issues to the public. They did it in 2004 and they're still doing it. As for your "majority", 62 million isn't exactly representative when it only amounts to 1 in 5 people.
Bush won in 2004 because people have been trained like monkeys to jump at whatever hot-button issue they are fed. It's as much the Democrats fault as it is the Republicans (both of which embraced such trivial debates), as it is the American people for not even trying to give a shit about important matters.
"Evolution works towards more optimal forms, so it is likely and almost guaranteed that animals on other similar planets would share forms with animals on this one."
No, evolution works toward more optimal forms within a group's local environment, which is a small part of their planet, and with respect to coexistence with other species. Their planet doesn't necessarily need to have much in common with ours. Our form is by no means optimal - breathing and eating through the same hole leads leads to choking death; walking upright leads to back pain; the pleasure and waste management functions are done through the same tubes. What we've done is only optimize certain components as much as is necessary to endure in our given environment - and other species have done the same. We are not competing with other species toward some ideal form, but just toward some form that will sufficiently let us get the upper hand for a bit longer.
"4. The human-like form is somewhat universal after all."
It's only universal among the uncreative minds of most scifi authors. Even on earth the diversity is so great that you wouldn't consider birds/insects/slugs to be "human-like forms" but even they have most of the parts (eye, head, nose, ears) in approximately the same relative locations. The chances of this occurring on another planet seem remote.
Thank slashdot for not giving enough space to use proper grammar. "The first royal mummy found since the discovery of Tut has been identified."
What are you talking about? You seem to have misread the submission. What gave you the impression that the mummy was a new discovery??? The only thing that's new is the identification.
Jeepers, what is this foreign concept called "terraforming" [that's been discussed for at least 50 years] - I'll try looking for information on this new resource called the Inter-Net and report my findings as soon as possible.
Wish me luck.
"Also note that transmitting information superluminally would effectively be sending messages into the past. This violates causality."
Funny, I don't recall ever going over the "universal law against killing your grandparents before you're born" in any of my physics classes (but I only took 17 of them). This "law" of causality is an assumption; the universal speed limit appears to be the reason why causality remains intact, but "it violates causality" is an empty statement. As long as matter/energy isn't being created/destroyed in the process, and you're not going faster than c, the universe doesn't really care about your grandparents' past well-being.
"... and then, things really got interesting..."
Only on /. does this crap get modded +5 insightful (despite saying nothing of content), and for example, a comment I made that water is in fact BLUE gets modded -1 Troll (it only got up to +1 after I posted a source).
:D
As others have pointed out, Moore regularly uses these tactics of improperly framing a situation and withholding information that would make you reassess his claim (and ultimately not accept his original framing). His most common tactics are: stating selective facts out of chronological order to present an entirely different situation; using quotes out of context; and most importantly, withholding information that would make it obvious he's messing with you. For example, he did this in Bowling for Columbine when he presented Charlton Heston as a racist by using a quote out of context, and did not bother to mention that Heston marched alongside Martin Luther King Jr, Sidney Poitier, etc, in favor of civil rights.
Disclaimer: I'm a liberal and I've never shot nor owned a gun.
"When you choose to go see a pshrink, or check yourself into a clinic, that is not an adjudication. When the cops talk you down from a ledge and Baker Act you for 72 hours, and you are ordered by a judge into a treatment program, that is a mental health adjudication. This bill cannot discourage the seeking of voluntary mental health care."
Maybe the guy on the ledge was up there because he didn't understand this distinction, and would rather be dead than in another database.
We've known about gamma ray bursts for a long time. It's just that now we know how fast the matter is moving that causes these bursts.
At least that's what could result if this patent sticks.
You were taught wrong, as, apparently, most people here were. Water has a slight blue tint; that's why it looks clear in a small glass, but in a deep indoor pool, lake (on a cloudy day) or underwater in the ocean, it's dark blue. Because: WATER IS BLUE.
Water has a slight blue tint to it. You don't notice it in a glass, but it's obvious in a lake on a cloudy day, or in a deep indoor pool. Since I was modded troll by imbeciles, I'll post this fact again: WATER IS BLUE.
And you're an imbecile. Water is slightly blue, though of course it's not noticeable in a small glass. A simple google search would have cleared that up for you, but feel free to spread the bullshit. http://amasci.com/miscon/miscon4.html#watclr
Why was I modded troll?!? Water DOES indeed have a slight blue tint to it. Oceans are blue even on cloudy days because the sky has little to do with the fact that water is already blue. For those who still hold to the misconception: fix your brain.
Water has a blue tint to it. While ponds wouldn't look blue, because the tint is so faint, oceans on Mars would be blue, even if the sky is red.
At least some of the photos used in their posters are stolen from Wikipedia without even acknowledging the photographer or the proper licensing. For example, the photos of the busts of Socrates and Voltaire, which are under Creative Commons licenses. So not only are they intellectually lazy, but also creatively.
You're leaving out the actual speech given to the senate by Sen. Lisa Murkowski [R-AK], which is a little more alarmist:
"Mr. President, today I introduced a resolution designating June 2007 as National Internet Safety Month.
"The Internet has become one of the most significant advances in the twentieth century and, as a result, it affects people's lives in a positive manner each day. However, this technology presents dangers that need to be brought to the attention of all Americans. Consider the pervasiveness of Internet access by children and the rapid increase in Internet crime and predatory behavior. Never before have powerful educational solutions--such as Internet safety curricula for grades kindergarten through 12--been more critical and readily at hand.
"Mr. President, i-SAFE America is one nonprofit organization that has worked tirelessly to educate our youth and our community on these important issues. Formed in 1998, i-SAFE America educates youth in all 50 states, Washington, DC, and Department of Defense schools worldwide to ensure that they have a safe experience online.
"It is imperative that all Americans learn about the Internet safety strategies which will help keep their children safe from victimization. Consider the facts: In the United States, about 35 million school-aged children have Internet access. Eighty percent of middle and high school students are online for at least one hour per week.
"An alarming statistic is that 61 percent of middle and high school youths admit to using the Internet unsafely or inappropriately. Furthermore, at least 20 percent of these students have met face-to-face with someone they first met online and 23 percent of these students know of someone who has been bullied online.
Now is the time for America to focus its attention on supporting Internet safety, especially bearing in mind that children will soon be on summer vacation and will spend more time online."
They should also include anyone who has gone to jail before, hell even anyone who's gone to trial (just in case someone was set free who was actually guilty). Why not just expand it to include everyone - after all, just because someone hasn't yet committed a crime doesn't mean they won't in the future. It's the only way to be safe!
Never trust strangers, authorities, or people named Milorad Blagojevich.
You still believe in fantasies unsupported by reality. This makes it easier for the whackos to believe what they do, and the fundamentalists to act on their beliefs. Your acceptance of blind faith condones the same blind faith that leads to violence and murder.
Nope, it wasn't that. The two versions I saw are probably still listed on Best Buy's site.
Ahh yes, 50 cents a minute. That's reasonable.