"...all we have is theory, belief and evidence (theory and belief being differentiated only by the reliance on evidence)."
Seems awfully like religon to me. Facts are what make true science, no? Perhaps you reveal that science relies on the same basis and lacking anything else to prove otherwise, becomes fact?
Not sure what specifically caused them but when I was in 6th grade, I was having migranes pretty regularly (still do, but not as often) so my mom took me to the doctor. I was then refered to an eye doctor thinking it might be eye strain (it was the 70's, ok?). When the doctor asked me to tell me what I can see when looking at a plain white wall, I described seeing glass worms floating.
That freaked him out enough that he immediately started discussing possible drug usage with my mom. It was too funny because I was a really good kid and never messed with stupid stuff like that, I was just good at being creative with my observations. (Nowaadays, the tinfoil hat helps reduce the level of those observations). So anyways, they went ahead and gave me glasses. The headaches continued, no noticiable difference in vision between glasses and no-glasses so they went into a box, never to bee seen from again, afaik.
Anyways , I still have the couple "glass worms" which are just a bit off center from my eye so if I try to follow them my eye just rolls off to one side. kinda like chasing a banana hangin from a stick attached to me head.
My guess is they came from looking at the sun at an earlier age and have some kind of scar tissue or something that is in a fixed position relative to my retina/lens/etc...
I have heard rumors that the next AmigaOS GUI will be based on the Duke Nukem Forever EngineTM. Keep that to yourself though, as I don't want to run up the 3dRealms stock price quite yet.
Newspapers are not fed to us in a serial fashion. They are effectivly random access depending on which page you start on. To a limited extent they try to get you to skip around by having articles spread across multiple pages.
I can skip all the ads simply by not paying attention to them and reading the article.
In a document which outlined the specs for a new project a couple years ago, there was a particularly amusing typo which caused most in the room reviewing said document to lose their composure. In the very last paragraph of the document was the requirement for the lab to employ "two full-time testes."
I hope it is at least half as funny to you as it was for us in the room.
The guys obviously don't have kids: This system is simply not PB&J proof.....Besides, they don't have an output stage modded VHS player so Barney can be on the big screen.
Oh and also...The page refers to a CDP....as in a CD Player? So how do they synchronize the video to the audio?.... or is that just a slide projector with pause "spelti funni".
It seems there area lot of people wardriving and gathering up all this information regarding AP's, WEP status, etc...
The gamut of usage ranges from: * Simply listing to AP broadcasts * others connect to and use unsecured AP's as "public" AP's to read email, get directions, etc... * others use the access to perform dastardly acts of damage and mayhem on individuals and corporations. * even worse, some send spam from the hijacked AP's.
Ethics issues not withstanding, what are the legal implications for those who access and unsecured AP without explicit permission from the owner and yet do this with no intended "harm" on the hosting party or any other party for that matter.
18 USC 1030 seems to be the hinge point for the debate. A counterpoint is the unlicensed nature of the 2.4GHz range and what consitutes acceptable use/recpetion of transmissions in the WiFi band.
What about the wardriver, it might not be "illegal" today, but should it be? could it be? What legal/ethical implications does publicizing which AP's are unsecured and which are not hold?
http://www.wigle.net
Perhaps even a broader view of the legal implications on the hosting party are warranted (regardless if they area aware of their"hosting" status or not).
Soviet and US nuclear plants use a different substance as a moderator...
I have to wonder...what would happen if slashdot moderators were used to slow the reaction at a nuclear plant. I suspect disaster at the plant if their ability to affect reactions here are any clue.
> Why are there 4 Gospels in the NT? Why would God confuse us poor mortals with 4 recollections of the same story told in 4 such different ways?
Why would a reporter ask more than one person what they saw at an event? Because they might have been in different places in the facility to see different views of wat happened and provide additional info, not provided by the others. You can think of it as a sort of verification that it was not just one persons grand story. proof of that?, certainly not, but you asked. I have delivered a plausible explanation.
The problem with th KJV'ers is that they belive that it is the only inspired word of God depite th original texts.
A weird antiques store? most are, IMNSHO of course.
Each version is an attempt to clarify the text for better understanding. some are more or less literal translations (KJV, NIV, etc...) while others attempt to simplify complex ideas (living bible, etc...)
NIV is my prefernce though occasionally the KJV is actually clearer despite th olde english. there ae times where atrongs concordance really comes in handy to identify the original grek or hebrew word intended (i.e the various words for "love") which are generically translated as love but really do matter when the difference is sexual versus the brotherly type)
I don't really think the discussion has "degraded" into anything. From any discussion come up the corrolary issues which relate to the original issue. IMHO, seemed like a tame "debate" for/. if "debate" is even an applicable word.
Why yes, his book was titled that but discussing the "origin of the species" clearly leads to the "origin of life". They are IMHO related topics, no?
"For know we should stick with what we know and stop trying to convince each other that our beliefs are the correct ones. It sure would stop a lot of wars."
- I am not so sure about that. Lack of communication is a really quick way to polarize groups of people. Discussion is good. While I disagree with those who believe that evolution is how we came to be, unless someone is really interested in understanding the creationsist veiwpoint, aside from learning how to "debunk the myths", then I say have a nice day.
There is sooo much that science can't explain. Yes scientists can come up with theories on how the "facts" they have gathered fit together and without futher data, they assume that to be fact because they have nothing to refute it. Think of it like putting together a jigsaw puzzle without a picture to go by. Until you get to some arbitratry yet substantial point, there is NO reference as to which way is top, bottom, left or right. All you can do is find the corners then begin putting things together as they seem to fit (based on your prior experience). And even then, the initial thought on how things go together are not always as they first seem.
Do I believe in God? Absolutely.... and this is something that I cannot "explain" to you or "scientifically prove" to you. Have you ever had God talk to you or impress a thought upon you? I have never heard some voice from the sky while sitting in my backyard. It's not like that. The "voice", if I can call it, that is far more subtle yet not an audible sort of thing. It is not simply "guilt" or conscience. I can't quite explain this without sounding wacko. It's not just the "voice" of God but the events which occur in my life. Things which occur because of prayer. How can science explain the mind making things happen "if that were to be the case". It cannot physically explain some of the "miracles" and other spiritual and supernatural phenomena and such that occur. Can science find a logical explanation for these things? There is always someone with a theory, yet the obvious answer screams in silence, but because it cannot be "seen" in a lab then the possibility is explained away by "chance" (much like the way "the earliest forms of life are explained".
Do I expect to convince you that evolution is wrong or even desire to attempt to do so? absolutely not. won't happen in a/. post. Not even a relevant discussion point in the bigger picture of the spiritual realm. to me, the question is, how can both God and evolution be part of reality? Too often polarizaion occurs because discussion turns to debate rather than for mutual understanding or worse, because the two groups don't attempt to reconcile the reality of the other.
Either God exists as stated in the bible or He doesn't I really don't see room for much more of a decision point than that, regardless of the micro/macro evolutionary debate, etc...
Alas I have other things I MUST do now lest I have abusy night. Besides, I am obviously boring the/. scientists by not feeding them "facts" to dispute.;-)
In any event have a GREAT day! P.S. I will be praying that *you* have a GREAT life but that God will make His existence obvious to you to the point of you knowing Him without any "convincing you" on my part.
(sadly I have no time to spell check so here it goes...)
OK so that wasn't HTML formatted... how about this:
I just spent the last couple hours going over some of the links on: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
Obviously give the content, it would take many hours if not days or weeks to go over the entire content of this site. Hardly enough to convince me that my experiences are and observations are made up because I "want" to believe.
I have minimal scientific tools and research labs in my basement, so I must depend upon the scientists and the researchers to gather this information and summarize it for me. Because of this, I must be careful not to sway with every breeze of knowledge which passes my way.
I would urge caution on rejecting the bible because some disagree over the interpretation situation surrounding creation versus evolution. IMHO, that is the same degree of stupidity as those who deny any scientific truth as well.
funny thing is the sources used to "prove" the assertions are false are all over the board from so many sources including some of the religous fringe groups. Somehow weaving a fabric of untruth for all those who believe God created man, the earth, etc... I had to laugh at some of the conclusions the writer came to.
This one was particularly silly: From: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH100 .html
4. The Bible says several things that you probably don't believe.
Slavery is acceptable. [Wells, 1999] You should kill your child if he strikes you. [Ex. 21:15] If you work on Sunday, you should be put to death. [Ex. 35:2-3] If you curse, you should be stoned to death. [Lev. 24:14-15] Happiness is smashing children upon the rocks. [Psalms 137:9] Women should be subjugated by their husbands. [1 Pet. 3:1-7] etc.
This one in particular highlights some of the poor analysis and context extraction the author engages in. (Me thinks he must work for the New York Times.)
Anyways, thanks for the link, I will add it to my link list. Uncompellingly biased, though interesting. Have a GREAT day! (all of you/.r's)
(minor edits. will promise to use preview next time);-)
I just spent the last couple hours going over some of the links on:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
obviously give the content, it would take many hours if not days or weeks to go over the entire content of this site. Hardly enough to convince me that my experiences are and observations are made up because I "want" to believe.
I have minimal scientific tools and research labs in my basement, so I must depend upon the scientists and the researchers to gather this information and summarize it for me. Because of this, I must be careful not to sway with every breeze of knowledge which passes my way.
I would urge caution on rejecting the bible because some disagree over the interpretation situation surrounding creation versus evolution. IMHO, that is the same degree of stupidity as those who deny any scientific truth as well.
funny thing is the sources used to "prove" the assertions are false are all over the board from so many sources including some of the religous fringe groups. Somehow weaving a fabric of untruth for all those who believe God created man, the earth, etc...
I had to laugh at some of the conclusions the writer came to. This one was particularly silly:
From: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH100.html
4. The Bible says several things that you probably don't believe.
Slavery is acceptable. [Wells, 1999]
You should kill your child if he strikes you. [Ex. 21:15]
If you work on Sunday, you should be put to death. [Ex. 35:2-3]
If you curse, you should be stoned to death. [Lev. 24:14-15]
Happiness is smashing children upon the rocks. [Psalms 137:9]
Women should be subjugated by their husbands. [1 Pet. 3:1-7]
etc.
This one in particular highlights some of the poor analysis and context extraction the author engages in. (Me thinks he must work for the New York Times.)
Anyways, thanks of the link, I will add it to my link list. Uncompellingly biased, though interesting. Have a GREAT day!
..the strange things that happen to someone's mind when they get mod points."
Troll? was my post? I'll take the "slightly more refined" part, but this was hardly a "prank comment".
Just so you can clarify: "Troll -- A Troll is similar to Flamebait, but slightly more refined. This is a prank comment intended to provoke indignant (or just confused) responses. A Troll might mix up vital facts or otherwise distort reality, to make other readers react with helpful "corrections." Trolling is the online equivalent of intentionally dialing wrong numbers just to waste other people's time."
I almost didn't post this but became to infatuated with reading my own writing.
I would say they are as much frauds as the "Send me money and you will be healed" preachers are.
Just because there are charlatins and hypocrites, doesn't mean that what they use for their own financial gain is less true at it's core. Man tends to pervert things which are essentially "good". Consider sex. God intented it for the pleasure and reproductive purposes of a man and a woman. what is it today? it is what people have turned it into. a spectacle (ala J.Jackson/timberlake), recreation, entertainment, abuse, hate, rape...etc.... and even the idea that sex is "dirty". But in the intended relationship, sex is a very good thing depite the perversions which abound.
(What am I thinkin! this is slashdot, I can't wait to hear how my comments get twisted from this response so someone can get a +5 Funny.)
P.S. There are some things (both good and evil) are unexplainable even by science unless the context of God, and the spiritual dimension are considered.
On one hand there are those who explain the what we do not know with God doing something miraculous and on the other there are those who can only explain it by saying that it happened over billions of years, etc...
In reality, while God does do things outside of the ordinary (even when we don't notice), God still uses the object, processes, laws and concepts (time, gravity, etc...) which He created and controls to work out His plan. The key is to notice the not only the act but in the timing of what happened. Scientists will try to explain the star in the East as a comet or whatever, but they fail to understand that the timing of that otherwise "natural" event is designed to occur then, it was not just happenstance that Jesus was born then.
Getting a scientific explanation for what some assume to be a "miracle" in no way precludes God from being part of that. If anything it should reinforce the design behind it and that it is not just a random occurance.
FWIW...
one reference of use if you were to honestly explore the creation in the context of science:
"That, in turn, has been facilitated by a move away from proprietary OS/2-based platforms and toward open Windows NT- and IP-based platforms. Almost all legacy ATMs run on OS/2, explained Dove's Hayes. "IBM is withdrawing support of OS/2. The industry is moving to Windows NT as the new standard for ATMs."
Slashdot Mirror
I gotta believe that this is gonna be won by that casino that bought the virgin mary grilled chees and the Christmas presents from that dad.=
Certainly their style.
Why conquer an abondoned city? Did someone leave the keys on the inside of the locked door?
Perfect! The freeway system will now accomodate my ADD! woot!
(((Where are my carrot sticks....)))
everything, eh?
"...all we have is theory, belief and evidence (theory and belief being differentiated only by the reliance on evidence)."
Seems awfully like religon to me.
Facts are what make true science, no? Perhaps you reveal that science relies on the same basis and lacking anything else to prove otherwise, becomes fact?
Not sure what specifically caused them but when I was in 6th grade, I was having migranes pretty regularly (still do, but not as often) so my mom took me to the doctor. I was then refered to an eye doctor thinking it might be eye strain (it was the 70's, ok?). When the doctor asked me to tell me what I can see when looking at a plain white wall, I described seeing glass worms floating.
That freaked him out enough that he immediately started discussing possible drug usage with my mom. It was too funny because I was a really good kid and never messed with stupid stuff like that, I was just good at being creative with my observations. (Nowaadays, the tinfoil hat helps reduce the level of those observations). So anyways, they went ahead and gave me glasses. The headaches continued, no noticiable difference in vision between glasses and no-glasses so they went into a box, never to bee seen from again, afaik.
Anyways , I still have the couple "glass worms" which are just a bit off center from my eye so if I try to follow them my eye just rolls off to one side. kinda like chasing a banana hangin from a stick attached to me head.
My guess is they came from looking at the sun at an earlier age and have some kind of scar tissue or something that is in a fixed position relative to my retina/lens/etc...
It's hard to make the case that RFID will help track inventory when you can't reliably find 40% of it."
Sounds like Kmart to me.
AGP? virus scanner?
Perhaps you refer to AVG by http://www.grisoft.com/
I have heard rumors that the next AmigaOS GUI will be based on the Duke Nukem Forever EngineTM. Keep that to yourself though, as I don't want to run up the 3dRealms stock price quite yet.
Newspapers are not fed to us in a serial fashion. They are effectivly random access depending on which page you start on. To a limited extent they try to get you to skip around by having articles spread across multiple pages.
I can skip all the ads simply by not paying attention to them and reading the article.
In a document which outlined the specs for a new project a couple years ago, there was a particularly amusing typo which caused most in the room reviewing said document to lose their composure. In the very last paragraph of the document was the requirement for the lab to employ "two full-time testes."
I hope it is at least half as funny to you as it was for us in the room.
So... if they do find the ark there, my guess is that you will have to rethink the assumptions made on "the geologic record", now won't you?
Hmmm.. what *WILL* it take for you to believe? I suspect that it will take God himself to appear to you. Ooops. too late. bye-bye!
The guys obviously don't have kids: This system is simply not PB&J proof. ....Besides, they don't have an output stage modded VHS player so Barney can be on the big screen.
...as in a CD Player?
Oh and also...The page refers to a CDP.
So how do they synchronize the video to the audio?.... or is that just a slide projector with pause "spelti funni".
It seems there area lot of people wardriving and gathering up all this information regarding AP's, WEP status, etc...
The gamut of usage ranges from:
* Simply listing to AP broadcasts
* others connect to and use unsecured AP's as "public" AP's to read email, get directions, etc...
* others use the access to perform dastardly acts of damage and mayhem on individuals and corporations.
* even worse, some send spam from the hijacked AP's.
Ethics issues not withstanding, what are the legal implications for those who access and unsecured AP without explicit permission from the owner and yet do this with no intended "harm" on the hosting party or any other party for that matter.
18 USC 1030 seems to be the hinge point for the debate. A counterpoint is the unlicensed nature of the 2.4GHz range and what consitutes acceptable use/recpetion of transmissions in the WiFi band.
What about the wardriver, it might not be "illegal" today, but should it be? could it be? What legal/ethical implications does publicizing which AP's are unsecured and which are not hold?
http://www.wigle.net
Perhaps even a broader view of the legal implications on the hosting party are warranted (regardless if they area aware of their"hosting" status or not).
Soviet and US nuclear plants use a different substance as a moderator...
I have to wonder...what would happen if slashdot moderators were used to slow the reaction at a nuclear plant. I suspect disaster at the plant if their ability to affect reactions here are any clue.
Exploring the innards of a device is considered backwards now, and even frowned upon.
Your viewpoint is heard and ackowledged. please post again after you get sober. have a happy day!
> Why are there 4 Gospels in the NT? Why would God confuse us poor mortals with 4 recollections of the same story told in 4 such different ways?
Why would a reporter ask more than one person what they saw at an event? Because they might have been in different places in the facility to see different views of wat happened and provide additional info, not provided by the others. You can think of it as a sort of verification that it was not just one persons grand story. proof of that?, certainly not, but you asked. I have delivered a plausible explanation.
The problem with th KJV'ers is that they belive that it is the only inspired word of God depite th original texts.
A weird antiques store? most are, IMNSHO of course.
Each version is an attempt to clarify the text for better understanding. some are more or less literal translations (KJV, NIV, etc...) while others attempt to simplify complex ideas (living bible, etc...)
NIV is my prefernce though occasionally the KJV is actually clearer despite th olde english. there ae times where atrongs concordance really comes in handy to identify the original grek or hebrew word intended (i.e the various words for "love") which are generically translated as love but really do matter when the difference is sexual versus the brotherly type)
that help?
I don't really think the discussion has "degraded" into anything. From any discussion come up the corrolary issues which relate to the original issue. IMHO, seemed like a tame "debate" for /. if "debate" is even an applicable word.
/. post. Not even a relevant discussion point in the bigger picture of the spiritual realm. to me, the question is, how can both God and evolution be part of reality? Too often polarizaion occurs because discussion turns to debate rather than for mutual understanding or worse, because the two groups don't attempt to reconcile the reality of the other.
/. scientists by not feeding them "facts" to dispute. ;-)
Why yes, his book was titled that but discussing the "origin of the species" clearly leads to the "origin of life". They are IMHO related topics, no?
"For know we should stick with what we know and stop trying to convince each other that our beliefs are the correct ones. It sure would stop a lot of wars."
- I am not so sure about that. Lack of communication is a really quick way to polarize groups of people. Discussion is good. While I disagree with those who believe that evolution is how we came to be, unless someone is really interested in understanding the creationsist veiwpoint, aside from learning how to "debunk the myths", then I say have a nice day.
There is sooo much that science can't explain. Yes scientists can come up with theories on how the "facts" they have gathered fit together and without futher data, they assume that to be fact because they have nothing to refute it. Think of it like putting together a jigsaw puzzle without a picture to go by. Until you get to some arbitratry yet substantial point, there is NO reference as to which way is top, bottom, left or right. All you can do is find the corners then begin putting things together as they seem to fit (based on your prior experience). And even then, the initial thought on how things go together are not always as they first seem.
Do I believe in God? Absolutely.... and this is something that I cannot "explain" to you or "scientifically prove" to you. Have you ever had God talk to you or impress a thought upon you? I have never heard some voice from the sky while sitting in my backyard. It's not like that.
The "voice", if I can call it, that is far more subtle yet not an audible sort of thing. It is not simply "guilt" or conscience. I can't quite explain this without sounding wacko. It's not just the "voice" of God but the events which occur in my life. Things which occur because of prayer. How can science explain the mind making things happen "if that were to be the case". It cannot physically explain some of the "miracles" and other spiritual and supernatural phenomena and such that occur. Can science find a logical explanation for these things? There is always someone with a theory, yet the obvious answer screams in silence, but because it cannot be "seen" in a lab then the possibility is explained away by "chance" (much like the way "the earliest forms of life are explained".
Do I expect to convince you that evolution is wrong or even desire to attempt to do so? absolutely not. won't happen in a
Either God exists as stated in the bible or He doesn't I really don't see room for much more of a decision point than that, regardless of the micro/macro evolutionary debate, etc...
Alas I have other things I MUST do now lest I have abusy night. Besides, I am obviously boring the
In any event have a GREAT day!
P.S. I will be praying that *you* have a GREAT life but that God will make His existence obvious to you to the point of you knowing Him without any "convincing you" on my part.
(sadly I have no time to spell check so here it goes...)
OK so that wasn't HTML formatted... how about this:
0 .html
/.r's)
;-)
I just spent the last couple hours going over some of the links on: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
Obviously give the content, it would take many hours if not days or weeks to go over the entire content of this site. Hardly enough to convince me that my experiences are and observations are made up because I "want" to believe.
I have minimal scientific tools and research labs in my basement, so I must depend upon the scientists and the researchers to gather this information and summarize it for me. Because of this, I must be careful not to sway with every breeze of knowledge which passes my way.
I would urge caution on rejecting the bible because some disagree over the interpretation situation surrounding creation versus evolution. IMHO, that is the same degree of stupidity as those who deny any scientific truth as well.
funny thing is the sources used to "prove" the assertions are false are all over the board from so many sources including some of the religous fringe groups. Somehow weaving a fabric of untruth for all those who believe God created man, the earth, etc... I had to laugh at some of the conclusions the writer came to.
This one was particularly silly: From:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH10
4. The Bible says several things that you probably don't believe.
Slavery is acceptable. [Wells, 1999]
You should kill your child if he strikes you. [Ex. 21:15]
If you work on Sunday, you should be put to death. [Ex. 35:2-3]
If you curse, you should be stoned to death. [Lev. 24:14-15]
Happiness is smashing children upon the rocks. [Psalms 137:9]
Women should be subjugated by their husbands. [1 Pet. 3:1-7]
etc.
This one in particular highlights some of the poor analysis and context extraction the author engages in. (Me thinks he must work for the New York Times.)
Anyways, thanks for the link, I will add it to my link list. Uncompellingly biased, though interesting. Have a GREAT day! (all of you
(minor edits. will promise to use preview next time)
I just spent the last couple hours going over some of the links on: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html obviously give the content, it would take many hours if not days or weeks to go over the entire content of this site. Hardly enough to convince me that my experiences are and observations are made up because I "want" to believe. I have minimal scientific tools and research labs in my basement, so I must depend upon the scientists and the researchers to gather this information and summarize it for me. Because of this, I must be careful not to sway with every breeze of knowledge which passes my way. I would urge caution on rejecting the bible because some disagree over the interpretation situation surrounding creation versus evolution. IMHO, that is the same degree of stupidity as those who deny any scientific truth as well. funny thing is the sources used to "prove" the assertions are false are all over the board from so many sources including some of the religous fringe groups. Somehow weaving a fabric of untruth for all those who believe God created man, the earth, etc... I had to laugh at some of the conclusions the writer came to. This one was particularly silly: From: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH100.html 4. The Bible says several things that you probably don't believe. Slavery is acceptable. [Wells, 1999] You should kill your child if he strikes you. [Ex. 21:15] If you work on Sunday, you should be put to death. [Ex. 35:2-3] If you curse, you should be stoned to death. [Lev. 24:14-15] Happiness is smashing children upon the rocks. [Psalms 137:9] Women should be subjugated by their husbands. [1 Pet. 3:1-7] etc. This one in particular highlights some of the poor analysis and context extraction the author engages in. (Me thinks he must work for the New York Times.) Anyways, thanks of the link, I will add it to my link list. Uncompellingly biased, though interesting. Have a GREAT day!
..the strange things that happen to someone's mind when they get mod points."
Troll? was my post? I'll take the "slightly more refined" part, but this was hardly a "prank comment".
Just so you can clarify:
"Troll -- A Troll is similar to Flamebait, but slightly more refined. This is a prank comment intended to provoke indignant (or just confused) responses. A Troll might mix up vital facts or otherwise distort reality, to make other readers react with helpful "corrections." Trolling is the online equivalent of intentionally dialing wrong numbers just to waste other people's time."
I almost didn't post this but became to infatuated with reading my own writing.
I would say they are as much frauds as the "Send me money and you will be healed" preachers are.
Just because there are charlatins and hypocrites, doesn't mean that what they use for their own financial gain is less true at it's core. Man tends to pervert things which are essentially "good". Consider sex. God intented it for the pleasure and reproductive purposes of a man and a woman. what is it today? it is what people have turned it into. a spectacle (ala J.Jackson/timberlake), recreation, entertainment, abuse, hate, rape...etc.... and even the idea that sex is "dirty". But in the intended relationship, sex is a very good thing depite the perversions which abound.
(What am I thinkin! this is slashdot, I can't wait to hear how my comments get twisted from this response so someone can get a +5 Funny.)
P.S. There are some things (both good and evil) are unexplainable even by science unless the context of God, and the spiritual dimension are considered.
God and Science are not incompatible.
On one hand there are those who explain the what we do not know with God doing something miraculous and on the other there are those who can only explain it by saying that it happened over billions of years, etc...
In reality, while God does do things outside of the ordinary (even when we don't notice), God still uses the object, processes, laws and concepts (time, gravity, etc...) which He created and controls to work out His plan. The key is to notice the not only the act but in the timing of what happened. Scientists will try to explain the star in the East as a comet or whatever, but they fail to understand that the timing of that otherwise "natural" event is designed to occur then, it was not just happenstance that Jesus was born then.
Getting a scientific explanation for what some assume to be a "miracle" in no way precludes God from being part of that. If anything it should reinforce the design behind it and that it is not just a random occurance.
FWIW...
one reference of use if you were to honestly explore the creation in the context of science:
http://www.icr.org
...understood. Notice the use of "proprietary" and "open" below.
excerpted from:
http://www.banktech.com/story/coverStory/BNK20020
"That, in turn, has been facilitated by a move away from proprietary OS/2-based platforms and toward open Windows NT- and IP-based platforms. Almost all legacy ATMs run on OS/2, explained Dove's Hayes. "IBM is withdrawing support of OS/2. The industry is moving to Windows NT as the new standard for ATMs."