Maybe, just maybe, someone calling a small laptop "cute" is not a reflection on your sexual identity or masculinity.
I'm a girl. I call everything cute*. It's 'cause I think it's, well, cute. I've called ancient men's ties cute. It's an adjective that some girl's tend to use a lot.
*and bunny. and shiny. and other things that end in y.
Stigall said that most Web-based ballot systems had proved to be insecure.
Really? No kidding? You don't say?
These people should read Slashdot. Seriously. We've all been saying this since 1997 or 1998 when the first stories about "Internet voting" began to appear. Nothing has improved from a security standpoint since then and we all keep saying electronic voting of any kind is too easy to tamper with unless there is a verified paper record trail.
And since most of us agree on this when most of us can't even agree on which operating system is the best for general use, which programming language is best for rapid application development, or which text editor is the best, well, that kind of says something now doesn't it?
Ok at this point I'll admit my argument was flawed. The posts above do bring up an interestign question though. If we're willing to poke holes in long standing theories like gravity why can't we have a class discuss the possible flaws in evolution.
Jews, Muslims, and Hindus all have a creation myth where an intelligent being or beings creates the universe.
Are all these myths the same? Because if they're not, the school that teaches one of them has to teach all of them. I'd be fine with that, actually... the more kids learn about other cultures, the better, in my opinion. But are you ready to include Scientology creation myths, or Flying Spaghetti Monster creation myths, et al? Because the moment you exclude any of them, you're going to have a messy First Amendment lawsuit on your hands.
Wiether or not they use the word ID most religions believe in it or at least allow for the possibility.
There's a world of difference between "allowing for the possibility" and what the folks in Texas are doing, though. Allowing for the possibility means you're also allowing for the improbability and separating your faith from your ability to reason. Allowing for the possibility means you also allow for the possibility that someone else's creation myth could be right, or that everyone is equally wrong. What the folks in Texas are trying to do is incorporate Sunday School into the public school curriculum, and that -- by both Constitutional and Biblical standards -- is wrong.
I'm not defending what the idiots in Texas are doing. Let that strawman burn please. They're trying to force their beliefs into the science classroom.
Since God refuses to be stuck under a microscope
this is beyond stupid.
I'm offering an alternative and no you don't necessari;ly need to teach the specifics of each creation story to teach ID you only need to teach
the common thread of the exitance of a god or gods creating ex nihilo and the implications that has on modern thought. That's the difference between a philospohy class and a course on comparitive religions which conincidentally would also be a good idea.
ID is far to vague to be considered a religion. The theory by itself allows for any god or even a alien to have created the universe.
Find me a Pagan, a Buddhist or an atheist who supports intelligent design, and I might be more inclined to agree. No, ID is creationism with a new name, nothing more -- and as such, it is a strictly Christian creation.
Jews, Muslims, and Hidu's all have a creation
myth where an intelligent being or beings creates the universe. Buddhism side steps the issue an doesn't offer any creation story leaving the subject open to debate. Paganism refers to several diffrent belief systems many of which have creator gods. Wiether or not they use the word ID most religions believe in it or at least allow for the possibility. Protestants just happen to be loud and therefore get all the attention.
Anyone who says, "Evolution's just a theory" should read up on what the word "theory" means within the scientific community:
"A theory is a good theory if it satisfies two requirements: It must accurately describe a large class of observations on the basis of a model that contains only a few arbitrary elements, and it must make definite predictions about the results of future observations." (Wikipedia: Scientific Theory)
Natural selection meets these criteria, as does evolution as a whole. Saying "evolution is a theory" is like saying gravity is just a theory. If you want to test gravity (and natural selection, for that matter), jump off a tall building and see if you can fly.
Which is why we all call it the theory of gravity and not the law of gravity......wait.
I'm wondering why ID or other philosophical concepts can't be discussed in schools as philosophy?
Depends on whether you're talking about public or private schools. Private schools can do what they want; public schools, on the other hand, have to abide by separation of church and state, meaning that they either (a) can't discuss ID as a philosophy, or (b) have to discuss every creation philosophy they can find, no matter how crazy or offensive it might be to everyone else.
A better answer, I think, is for schools to teach children the basics of critical thinking. If children are allowed to develop their bullshit detectors, they might grow up into adults who wouldn't feel the need to push crap like six-day literal creationism, "Harry Potter is teh evil!!1!one," etc.
ID is far to vague to be considered a religion.
The theory by itself allows for any god or even a alien to have created the universe.
I'm not aware of any church that teaches this.
I agree wuith the parent that it belongs in Philosphy class along with every other metaphysical concept.
Or, on yet another level, what motivation do I have for launching Civ 4 and trying to conquer the world? What motivation do I have for logging into World of Warcraft and having my character beat the crap out of other characters? What motivation do I have for creating a universe for my friends to go tromping through when I run Mutants and Masterminds for them?
Meh...ok then I'm going back to bed.
I suddenly lack motivation.
Slashdot Mirror
This is one of the many dutires I had before I was laid off. I also shilled on Facebook. Explaining the Fail Whale to my boss made it all worth it.
Neither - it's just another alternate universe, which RD can get away with since the scifi isn't really the point.
Remember at the end of the last series the ship blew up and everyone died.. they can't have any real continuity from there.
They brought back dead people more than once on the show.
If that is your idea of paradise you have never tried to turn a three way into a relationship.
You've got me there.
I've never tried that.
What about waldo, coined by Robert A. Heinlein? That seems like a good candidate for this list.
Yeah where is waldo?
Someone had to say it.....
I predict Frack, Frell and Frag are coming soon...
What a load of felgercarb!
If you watched the original series, you can smile with me. :-)
Watch the 80's spinoff and cry with me.
:(
Wrong, the original Wolfenstien was the first FPS. Doom was the first multiplayer FPS though.
Maybe, just maybe, someone calling a small laptop "cute" is not a reflection on your sexual identity or masculinity.
I'm a girl. I call everything cute*. It's 'cause I think it's, well, cute. I've called ancient men's ties cute. It's an adjective that some girl's tend to use a lot.
*and bunny. and shiny. and other things that end in y.
My name ends in y. :)
...does TFA let us know when Duke Nukem will be released?
WHEN IT'S READY!
....and not a moment sooner.
Then again, poo sinks, so it's not a total loss.
I'm pretty sure poo floats.
Stigall said that most Web-based ballot systems had proved to be insecure.
Really? No kidding? You don't say?
These people should read Slashdot. Seriously. We've all been saying this since 1997 or 1998 when the first stories about "Internet voting" began to appear. Nothing has improved from a security standpoint since then and we all keep saying electronic voting of any kind is too easy to tamper with unless there is a verified paper record trail.
And since most of us agree on this when most of us can't even agree on which operating system is the best for general use, which programming language is best for rapid application development, or which text editor is the best, well, that kind of says something now doesn't it?
We all know it's emacs.
/ducks
Because there was no selective pressure.
Is that the best you can do? Boy that was pretty trivially easy.
No selective pressure for millions of years?
I'm sure you prove an assertion like that.
Because the current theory of gravity can be shown to be false at very small scales. Therefore there are holes to poke.
So far nothing has shown evolution to be false in any situation.
Oh there's holes.
Here's one post to slashdot not long ago.
Can you explain how evolutonary theory accounts for a certain species apparently not evolving for tens of millions of years.
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/17/1910242&from=rss
Because students wouldn't understand the curent problems that current exist in gravity. Most students never even learn the current theory of gravity.
Isn't the point of teaching to fill in the gaps of knowledge they currently don't have.
Ok at this point I'll admit my argument was flawed. The posts above do bring up an interestign question though. If we're willing to poke holes in long standing theories like gravity why can't we have a class discuss the possible flaws in evolution.
Are all these myths the same? Because if they're not, the school that teaches one of them has to teach all of them. I'd be fine with that, actually ... the more kids learn about other cultures, the better, in my opinion. But are you ready to include Scientology creation myths, or Flying Spaghetti Monster creation myths, et al? Because the moment you exclude any of them, you're going to have a messy First Amendment lawsuit on your hands.
There's a world of difference between "allowing for the possibility" and what the folks in Texas are doing, though. Allowing for the possibility means you're also allowing for the improbability and separating your faith from your ability to reason. Allowing for the possibility means you also allow for the possibility that someone else's creation myth could be right, or that everyone is equally wrong. What the folks in Texas are trying to do is incorporate Sunday School into the public school curriculum, and that -- by both Constitutional and Biblical standards -- is wrong.
I'm not defending what the idiots in Texas are doing. Let that strawman burn please. They're trying to force their beliefs into the science classroom. Since God refuses to be stuck under a microscope this is beyond stupid.
I'm offering an alternative and no you don't necessari;ly need to teach the specifics of each creation story to teach ID you only need to teach the common thread of the exitance of a god or gods creating ex nihilo and the implications that has on modern thought. That's the difference between a philospohy class and a course on comparitive religions which conincidentally would also be a good idea.
Find me a Pagan, a Buddhist or an atheist who supports intelligent design, and I might be more inclined to agree. No, ID is creationism with a new name, nothing more -- and as such, it is a strictly Christian creation.
Jews, Muslims, and Hidu's all have a creation myth where an intelligent being or beings creates the universe. Buddhism side steps the issue an doesn't offer any creation story leaving the subject open to debate. Paganism refers to several diffrent belief systems many of which have creator gods. Wiether or not they use the word ID most religions believe in it or at least allow for the possibility. Protestants just happen to be loud and therefore get all the attention.
Anyone who says, "Evolution's just a theory" should read up on what the word "theory" means within the scientific community:
Natural selection meets these criteria, as does evolution as a whole. Saying "evolution is a theory" is like saying gravity is just a theory. If you want to test gravity (and natural selection, for that matter), jump off a tall building and see if you can fly.
Which is why we all call it the theory of gravity and not the law of gravity......wait.
Depends on whether you're talking about public or private schools. Private schools can do what they want; public schools, on the other hand, have to abide by separation of church and state, meaning that they either (a) can't discuss ID as a philosophy, or (b) have to discuss every creation philosophy they can find, no matter how crazy or offensive it might be to everyone else.
A better answer, I think, is for schools to teach children the basics of critical thinking. If children are allowed to develop their bullshit detectors, they might grow up into adults who wouldn't feel the need to push crap like six-day literal creationism, "Harry Potter is teh evil!!1!one," etc.
ID is far to vague to be considered a religion. The theory by itself allows for any god or even a alien to have created the universe. I'm not aware of any church that teaches this.
I agree wuith the parent that it belongs in Philosphy class along with every other metaphysical concept.
Better than that - they dug up fossils.
Oh, by the way: "Water boils at 100c and freeze at 0c" is not a fact. You're being much too dogmatic there.
You are being too dogmatic if you can't admit that altitude affects the boling point of water.
I mean, this is the same state that gave us the amazingly anti-science George W. "I believe God wants me to run for president" Bush.
I agree'd with his statement. Clearly the Bush Presidency was divine punishment for our sinful ways.
Oh right, so a deus ex machina is ok if you mention it earlier on in the plot. Gotcha.
YES it does make it ok!
I swear if you picked up a copy of Paradise Lost you'd complain about the ending for the same reason.
That line exists becasue his name is Larry.
Angels are special creatures that can do all kinds of things and yet they don't really have free will - that's reserved for humans.
Citation Needed!
No free will?
How did Satan Rebel?
Or, on yet another level, what motivation do I have for launching Civ 4 and trying to conquer the world? What motivation do I have for logging into World of Warcraft and having my character beat the crap out of other characters? What motivation do I have for creating a universe for my friends to go tromping through when I run Mutants and Masterminds for them?
Meh...ok then I'm going back to bed.
I suddenly lack motivation.
Which is even worse than the age old cliche "and we will call this new planet 'Earth'".
They should have called it Larry and after a billion years of evolution it became Earth.