What I am thinking of is tracking mutations in DNA to show who descends from what, and approximately when. Then show that various groups of critters determined to have a common ancestor look like they have resulted from mutations from a parent genome (as opposed to a common designer) Basically, that would mean that these genomes result from a bunch of random mutations of the parent genome, including some that have no benefit (= not designed) such that they are properly dispersed in the right proportions, and proportional to mutation rate the amount of time since common ancestry. With the mapping of genomes going on as it is, this should be possible soon if not already.
Alternately, show that non-aquatic critters are not descended from a single pair (or seven (pairs?) for "clean" animals). Or that humans are not descended from Adam and Eve (and also from Noah's 3 sons and their wives).
PS: if Adam is fictional, so are all Jewish geneologies, including Jesus's. I think it is possible for Genesis 1 to be metaphorical, but subsequent chapters cannot.
Did you read the parent post? The difference is time. To go back to his walking analogy, he's saying they've walked in opposite directions for 30 seconds and are 20m apart. If this continued for a million years - well they'd be a lot farther apart.
Or they might walk around the world and meet each other again. You can muve as much and as long as you like on the surface of a sphere, but you are not going to get farther appart than PI*radius. Likewise, the infinite series 1+1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16... will forever get closer to 2 but never to 3. It is naive to think that because something works at a small scale, it will work the same way at the larger scale.
Call me a genocidal racist, but I concur with the parent. Perhaps society should promote the ofspring of those who are most benefitial to society (eg by sperm bank/egg donations/adoption/tax credits) and discourage the propagation of the "problem people"? Anyone have calculations on how quickly the offspring of our poor and uneducated will (or won't, since being rich has long-term survival advantage) outnumber the cream of the crop? It seems to me it would take many generations anyhow.
Where people have trouble is with something they call 'macro evolution', that these mutations can over time create entirely new species, organs, and reproductive behavior (sexual vs asexual). I believe it because I think people don't understand exactly how many years we are considering here in the long haul.
I think that it is a valid objection and should be looked at rather than dismissed as frivolous.
What about the series 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16...? Constantly changeing (getting bigger even), but will it ever add up to 3? The series 1, 2, 1, 2,... is constantly changing by a large amount, but will never get to 3 either. Please note that both those series are infinate. If I fall, I accelerate at 9.81 m/s, so if I am falling for 30000000 seconds I will get near the speed of light, right? I look outside, and the world *looks* flat, I can even assume that it is unless I am involving large distances. Just because something works on a small scale does not mean that it will on the larger scale.
Is there actual evidence out there that microevolution becomes macroevolution given enough time? (I am not sure I can trust the analysis of the scientific community, because of the fervor with which some people are looking for missing links and for ET and ostracizing of those who disagree with evolution, kind of reminds one of religion, no? The best thing I can think of would be genetic analysis, which could demonstrate common descent in a completely objective mathematical way.)
You seem to be a Christian, so let me ask you this: in the Bible, Jesus spent his time with the poor and destitute. He spent time with criminals and prostitutes.
You're also forgetting the incident at the cross. Mmmm, fetish God porn...
She never figured to win, she just wanted to see them jump through hoops. They eventually settled out of court with the usual NDA but I know it had to be a good chunk because she sent all the people she knew in the company a 250 dollar gift certificate for Walmart that christmas saying she knew the company wouldn't be able to afford the usual christmas turkeys that year.
While I'm almost tempted to say "good for her", I cannot bring myself to condone terrorism, legal or otherwise.
Why is the biggest and most important nerve in the body intertwined with the bones in the spine? It should follow a separate and more protected path inside the body.
Probably to protect it from damage. Any better path to take than through a hole in the vertebrae? Needs better healing mechanism, though.
Why do we have a single bone, the femur, in the thigh, but two separate bones in the ankle? These bones aren't redundant, breaking any one of the two makes one unable to walk, yet each of them is weaker and easier to break than the femur. Having one strong bone in the ankle would be a better design.
I'm not so sure. It is mostly the same design as the arm. I rather like the ability to twist my arm. I'm not sure how important that is to the leg, though, and would prefer more protection for the shin bone.
As long as google's search engine is better, everyone will search there. On the other hand google's search engine is still far from flawless, so msn could do a nice job if they improved on that. When people will have an actual reason to use MSN search, advertizers will have a reason to get their ads there.
Nonsense. Given the assumption that stupid people are more susceptible to ads, adverisers should pay a premium to advertise on bad search engines.
As a long-standing freelancer I've had many decades in which to observe management (and techies) in their respective roles, and that experience leaves no room for doubt. With an exception rate of far less than 1%, managers (in the UK) are entirely clueless, useless, pointless, worthless, and harmful to the success of their enterprise.
So then only the stupid companies hire managers, right? No, managers are (usually) profitable for their company, even when they are annoying and occasionally get in the way. I know I wouldn't do much if no one cared whether I worked or not, nor told me what to work on.
Why does Yahoo! need Microsoft? Microsoft has largely stumbled in its internet ventures, while Yahoo! has been fairly successful. I don't see what Microsoft brings to the table in this.
Cold, hard cash. Also, monopoly abuse power. </inciteful>
Well, what the fuck is your definition of a word then, you pretentious moron? I think he was pretty clear: "Dict.org doesn't have an entry, and the built-in Mac OS X dictionary doesn't have an entry. Arggh! I hate made-up words.":-)
Please explain how an electric car can take energy from chemical to kinetic to electric to chemical to electric to kinetic and possibly be more efficient or cleaner for the environment than a gas car.
It might be more efficient than converting solar to biochemical to chemical to thermal to kinetic (in a small, inefficient and polluting engine). Then there is regenerative brakeing vs the costs of finding oil, drilling for it, possibly fighting for it, transporting it, refining it (by distillation), and transporting it, and the issue of limited oil supplies.
There is absolutely no way that this is a step in the right direction until we have cheap clean electricity sources to power it.
Soooo... It's only a step in the right direction after we accomplish the second step?
What service? The one I pay for to connect to the Internet?
That would be you user account with LiveJournal.
Yes, they can. They can even print "you are a poopy head for using this service". Doesn't make it any more true, especially since I didn't agree to those terms.
If you are a user, I'll bet you at least said you agree.
Even putting all that aside, are you going to insist that someone be forced to view their ads? That's tantamount to thought control. That sounds pretty fascist to me.
Someone hasn't been paying attention to the latest Phillips patents and (proposed) broadcast flag laws.
The US justice system has long been a tool for revenge; just look at the death penalty.
What's wrong with the death penalty for the worst offenders? Some people deserve to die, IMNSHO. What worries me is that "life in prison" is not considered a death (by old age) penalty, so it is much too easy.
Slashdot Mirror
That seems to be pretty much what I was talking about. They reconstruceted the common ancestor of HIV usning several strains.
What I am thinking of is tracking mutations in DNA to show who descends from what, and approximately when. Then show that various groups of critters determined to have a common ancestor look like they have resulted from mutations from a parent genome (as opposed to a common designer) Basically, that would mean that these genomes result from a bunch of random mutations of the parent genome, including some that have no benefit (= not designed) such that they are properly dispersed in the right proportions, and proportional to mutation rate the amount of time since common ancestry. With the mapping of genomes going on as it is, this should be possible soon if not already.
Alternately, show that non-aquatic critters are not descended from a single pair (or seven (pairs?) for "clean" animals). Or that humans are not descended from Adam and Eve (and also from Noah's 3 sons and their wives).
PS: if Adam is fictional, so are all Jewish geneologies, including Jesus's. I think it is possible for Genesis 1 to be metaphorical, but subsequent chapters cannot.
Did you read the parent post? The difference is time. To go back to his walking analogy, he's saying they've walked in opposite directions for 30 seconds and are 20m apart. If this continued for a million years - well they'd be a lot farther apart.
Or they might walk around the world and meet each other again. You can muve as much and as long as you like on the surface of a sphere, but you are not going to get farther appart than PI*radius. Likewise, the infinite series 1+1/2+1/4+1/8+1/16... will forever get closer to 2 but never to 3. It is naive to think that because something works at a small scale, it will work the same way at the larger scale.
Just being the God's Advocate here.
Call me a genocidal racist, but I concur with the parent. Perhaps society should promote the ofspring of those who are most benefitial to society (eg by sperm bank/egg donations/adoption/tax credits) and discourage the propagation of the "problem people"? Anyone have calculations on how quickly the offspring of our poor and uneducated will (or won't, since being rich has long-term survival advantage) outnumber the cream of the crop? It seems to me it would take many generations anyhow.
You can all stone and/or flame me now.
Where people have trouble is with something they call 'macro evolution', that these mutations can over time create entirely new species, organs, and reproductive behavior (sexual vs asexual). I believe it because I think people don't understand exactly how many years we are considering here in the long haul.
...? Constantly changeing (getting bigger even), but will it ever add up to 3? The series 1, 2, 1, 2, ... is constantly changing by a large amount, but will never get to 3 either. Please note that both those series are infinate. If I fall, I accelerate at 9.81 m/s, so if I am falling for 30000000 seconds I will get near the speed of light, right? I look outside, and the world *looks* flat, I can even assume that it is unless I am involving large distances. Just because something works on a small scale does not mean that it will on the larger scale.
I think that it is a valid objection and should be looked at rather than dismissed as frivolous.
What about the series 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/8 + 1/16
Is there actual evidence out there that microevolution becomes macroevolution given enough time? (I am not sure I can trust the analysis of the scientific community, because of the fervor with which some people are looking for missing links and for ET and ostracizing of those who disagree with evolution, kind of reminds one of religion, no? The best thing I can think of would be genetic analysis, which could demonstrate common descent in a completely objective mathematical way.)
I going to stop procrastinating, starting tomorrow.
Don't let it wait another day. Procrastinate now!
Furthermore, if the game labels you as "Good," then your in-game salvation is assured.
If you kill them, they go to Hell, and you potentially go to Hell.
Careful not to contradict yourself there...
If you think through the possibilites, non-violence is the only logical conclusion one can reach
So how do you convert people when you are dead? It's not like he is the only evil guy in the world you know.
Why are Linux and BSD such complex-looking OS's? Because their systems are easier to use [than Microsoft]
Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Atheism is a religion like cleaning is an obsession. It all depends on how vital it is.
You seem to be a Christian, so let me ask you this: in the Bible, Jesus spent his time with the poor and destitute. He spent time with criminals and prostitutes.
You're also forgetting the incident at the cross. Mmmm, fetish God porn...
You can mod me down now.
She never figured to win, she just wanted to see them jump through hoops. They eventually settled out of court with the usual NDA but I know it had to be a good chunk because she sent all the people she knew in the company a 250 dollar gift certificate for Walmart that christmas saying she knew the company wouldn't be able to afford the usual christmas turkeys that year.
While I'm almost tempted to say "good for her", I cannot bring myself to condone terrorism, legal or otherwise.
Why is the biggest and most important nerve in the body intertwined with the bones in the spine? It should follow a separate and more protected path inside the body.
Probably to protect it from damage. Any better path to take than through a hole in the vertebrae? Needs better healing mechanism, though.
Why do we have a single bone, the femur, in the thigh, but two separate bones in the ankle? These bones aren't redundant, breaking any one of the two makes one unable to walk, yet each of them is weaker and easier to break than the femur. Having one strong bone in the ankle would be a better design.
I'm not so sure. It is mostly the same design as the arm. I rather like the ability to twist my arm. I'm not sure how important that is to the leg, though, and would prefer more protection for the shin bone.
Maybe flowers make you pay less?
Quite. Flowers generally signify gifts. The researchers should have used a neutral figure for their control.
As long as google's search engine is better, everyone will search there. On the other hand google's search engine is still far from flawless, so msn could do a nice job if they improved on that. When people will have an actual reason to use MSN search, advertizers will have a reason to get their ads there.
Nonsense. Given the assumption that stupid people are more susceptible to ads, adverisers should pay a premium to advertise on bad search engines.
As a long-standing freelancer I've had many decades in which to observe management (and techies) in their respective roles, and that experience leaves no room for doubt. With an exception rate of far less than 1%, managers (in the UK) are entirely clueless, useless, pointless, worthless, and harmful to the success of their enterprise.
So then only the stupid companies hire managers, right? No, managers are (usually) profitable for their company, even when they are annoying and occasionally get in the way. I know I wouldn't do much if no one cared whether I worked or not, nor told me what to work on.
Why does Yahoo! need Microsoft? Microsoft has largely stumbled in its internet ventures, while Yahoo! has been fairly successful. I don't see what Microsoft brings to the table in this.
Cold, hard cash. Also, monopoly abuse power.
</inciteful>
Wasn't this the one that Microsoft was going to sabatoge? What happenned to that?
Well, what the fuck is your definition of a word then, you pretentious moron? :-)
I think he was pretty clear:
"Dict.org doesn't have an entry, and the built-in Mac OS X dictionary doesn't have an entry. Arggh! I hate made-up words."
Please explain how an electric car can take energy from chemical to kinetic to electric to chemical to electric to kinetic and possibly be more efficient or cleaner for the environment than a gas car.
It might be more efficient than converting solar to biochemical to chemical to thermal to kinetic (in a small, inefficient and polluting engine). Then there is regenerative brakeing vs the costs of finding oil, drilling for it, possibly fighting for it, transporting it, refining it (by distillation), and transporting it, and the issue of limited oil supplies.
There is absolutely no way that this is a step in the right direction until we have cheap clean electricity sources to power it.
Soooo... It's only a step in the right direction after we accomplish the second step?
it speaks well of slashdot's operators that they are not summarily censored out of hand.
Yea, that they're smart enough to realize that the slashdot crowd would go elsewhere, and quickly, if they tried that.
What service? The one I pay for to connect to the Internet?
That would be you user account with LiveJournal.
Yes, they can. They can even print "you are a poopy head for using this service". Doesn't make it any more true, especially since I didn't agree to those terms.
If you are a user, I'll bet you at least said you agree.
Even putting all that aside, are you going to insist that someone be forced to view their ads? That's tantamount to thought control. That sounds pretty fascist to me.
Someone hasn't been paying attention to the latest Phillips patents and (proposed) broadcast flag laws.
Here's the article: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg16622425.000 .html, although I'm afraid you can't read much of it unless you're a subscriber.
It's called Bug Me Not
Seriously, what kind of sheltered environment did you grow up in?
You misspelled "fenced in, under a rock"
The US justice system has long been a tool for revenge; just look at the death penalty.
What's wrong with the death penalty for the worst offenders? Some people deserve to die, IMNSHO. What worries me is that "life in prison" is not considered a death (by old age) penalty, so it is much too easy.
Sometimes a cluestick isn't enough. A giant foam cluebat or a clue-by-four may be more appropriate for this situation.