There was an informant inside this organization that told authorities what was planned.
Here's a link about your informants: "Moles wanted". Informants only get paid if an arrest is made. Let's see, I'm a mole and I know if the info I give doesn't lead to an arrest do I tell the truth or do I lie?
I'm not sure what peaceful demonstrators need with a 5 gallons worth of urine, gas masks and home made caltrop to disable buses.
I'll see your Star_Tribune link, "The alleged urine, Nestor maintained, was actually three buckets, two of which contained dirty water used to flush toilets while conserving water. The third was seized from an illegal apartment occupied by someone not connected to the RNC protests. There was no bathroom in the illegal apartment and urine was collected in a bucket, Nestor said."
I just heard on the news they were planning to insight a riot according to an undercover informant and they confiscated a machete, a hatchet, throwing knives, axes, bolt cutters, equipment used in rappelling - and three 5-gallon buckets of urine.
Like all of those are illegal. NOT! As for 3 buckets of urine, from the Star-Tribune:
"The alleged urine, Nestor maintained, was actually three buckets, two of which contained dirty water used to flush toilets while conserving water. The third was seized from an illegal apartment occupied by someone not connected to the RNC protests. There was no bathroom in the illegal apartment and urine was collected in a bucket, Nestor said."
But hey, dont let that get in your way. please continue telling us about free speech and peaceful demonstrations.
There's a difference between showing up for a (hopefully) peaceful protest and bringing a rifle. As in one is a constitutionally-protected right, and the other is a very clear intent of first degree murder.
Ah, bearing a firearm shows clear proof a crime is going to be committed? Fact is is both protest and bearing firearms is constitutionally protected. And bearing a firearm does not mean any crime is going to be committed.
Bullshit. We had college-aged, playtime anarchists that wanted to start some shit. Daddy - in this case, in the body of law enforcement - came in and scared the shit out of them.
What's bullshit is you, then again maybe you're an authoritarian who wants a police state.
If you read the Star-Tribune article, you'll note that the protesters had buckets of urine at the ready
Obviously you either didn't read the whole Star-Tribune article or you're trolling. TFA says, cut and paste:
"The alleged urine, Nestor maintained, was actually three buckets, two of which contained dirty water used to flush toilets while conserving water. The third was seized from an illegal apartment occupied by someone not connected to the RNC protests. There was no bathroom in the illegal apartment and urine was collected in a bucket, Nestor said."
I also belive that anyone willing to take away the rights of others, should be delt with harshly, whether they be the police or in this case protesters seeking to disrupt someone else's assembly.
I've asked before but I'll ask again, where's your proof the protesters threatened anyone?
First off people that pull of the gloves or at least threaten to should always be delt with in a manner that involves a punch in the teeth. That is what these groups do, and they got what they asked for.
Where's your proof any of the protesters threatened anyone with violence?
So what we had here was a bunch of people planning on making an ass of themselves by engaging in criminal/border line criminal behavior
Where's your evidence?
I grow weary of children who cry about how "bad" it's getting when they don't even know how bad it really was before they even came along.
I lived through the '60s and '70s, through COINTELPRO, and through Wstergate. Did you or were you too young, not born yet?
The Ba'athist parties are about all thats left of that classical Socialist-Fascism
And guess who supported Saddam and the Ba'athists in Iraq in the 1980s? Republican presidents Reason and Bush Sr. Guess who was on Bush's staff or is now on Jr's staff who helped Saddam? Here are some photos of Rumsfeld and Saddam together. They're shaking hand like old pals. At first Secretary of State Cheney also supported Saddam during Bush Sr's term in office. Support for Saddam only ended after he invaded Kuwait who, Saddam had accused of and was later verified, was slant drilling into Iraq to pump Iraqi oil as if it was Kuwaiti oil. Before his invasion of Kuwait Saddam could do no wrong no matter how many people he used chemical weapons against.
The problem comes in where protesters make a disruption at the event (usually during the middle of a speech). This seems to be an effort to stop that kind of activity.
Where is there any evidence anything illegal was planned? Or is this going to be an "oops, we made a mistake" after the convention is over?
The Star-Tribune SUCKS. Can't trust them. I've lived in Twin Cities.
My sources (in MN) say that that most the buckets were gray water and a few were because there was no bathroom (the place was over crowded.)
GP obviously didn't read the entire Star-Tribune article, or simply left out pertinent info. TFA does in fact say all the buckets but one was filled with dirty water and that the only bucket with urine was in an apartment that did not has a toilet. Here it is:
"The alleged urine, Nestor maintained, was actually three buckets, two of which contained dirty water used to flush toilets while conserving water. The third was seized from an illegal apartment occupied by someone not connected to the RNC protests. There was no bathroom in the illegal apartment and urine was collected in a bucket, Nestor said."
It's more than half way down the page. Thanks for the new link.
unless someone has a better (serious) explanation for the buckets of urine.
Maybe they didn't pay their sewer bill.
There was no toilet in the apartment where the only bucket of urine was found. The other buckets were filled with dirty water, to flush the toilets that were in the building. But they, whoever they is, will turn off water. I live in Minneapolis in an apartment and so far this year we have gotten 3 notices the water will be turned off if the bill is not paid.
If you read the Star-Tribune article, you'll note that the protesters had buckets of urine at the ready
If you read the Star-Tribune article thoroughly you would have read this statement from it:
"The alleged urine, Nestor maintained, was actually three buckets, two of which contained dirty water used to flush toilets while conserving water. The third was seized from an illegal apartment occupied by someone not connected to the RNC protests. There was no bathroom in the illegal apartment and urine was collected in a bucket, Nestor said."
It also notes that these informants were working on the inside of the protest groups for quite some time, to minimize any doubt that these folks were up to no good. So, in other words, the cops were doing their job
This is the United States of America where innocence is presumed before guilt is proven. Where is the evidence of guilt? What is it? All this is is an attempt to silence protest during the Republican convention.
I'm talking about the political and legal history of the United States since 1860. Compared to the American Civil War, the First World War and the Second World War, the crackdown on civil rights has been tame, compared to the dangerous faced with new asymmetrical weapons and tactics.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because what happened before was worse doesn't make this ok.
First of all I would encourage you to read a few messages other than the one you responded to.
Why? But since you ask I will. I went up 4 levels and read all the posts, not one other than my and your posts said anything about OS X and FreeBSD. And not one of those offered any evidence OS X is not based on FreeBSD. I'll believe Apple, until they give me a reason not to believe them, before I'll believe you without you providing evidence to back up your claim. All you have to do is provide the evidence.
It should be obvious that I prefer OS X to FreeBSD+X11 as a desktop, for any number of reasons, but that doesn't mean that I have to prefer Darwin to FreeBSD... I think you're making a category error somewhere.
I don't recall my post saying Darwin was better, all I said was OS X is FreeBDS [apple.com] underneath and you replied it was not. So you're making an error somewhere. I've made plenty myself but in this case I believe the mistake is yours.
Darwin is not FreeBSD any more than FreeBSD is Version 7. In fact the design of FreeBSD has more in common with Version 7 than the design of OS X does with FreeBSD. Apple used FreeBSD the way Tru64 used 4.3-Reno and the way Lites uses 4.4-Lite, as the primary service provider in a Mach-based kernel. I wouldn't call that "being FreeBSD", any more than I would describe a truck that used a Ford V8 engine as being a Mustang.
I admit I have no idea what you mean here. Version7? I don't recall ever hearing of it. Ok, wiki says it's an older version of Unix, I've heard of System V, actually isn't that the version SCO claimed to own, but not 6 or 7. Tru64? I'm not sure but I think that was DEC's implementation of Unix. Yeap according to wiki Tru64 was DEC's version of Unix on the Alpha. I have Redhat on my Alpha.
Apart from a variety of things things Darwin includes that FreeBSD doesn't (such as its support for multiple CPU architectures in a single executable, and its kernel extension framework), the fundamental design of any Mach-based system is less efficient than a traditional UNIX kernel.
Okay, I'll accept FreeBSD is smaller than Apple's implementation for now.
I don't know what to make of the rest of your post, but I still need evidence OS X it not based on FreeBSD before I will believe it is not. I accept that it's possible but not that it's true. I did learn something from you though, I now know there's a Version 7 Unix. Which brings up a question I now have, why did it go from System V to Version 7?
Recorded history to me means what people write, not fossils.
Who's evading? I don't recall you saying once that recorded history was what people wrote. To me as far as history is concerned what's recorded is what's recorded no matter how it is recorded. Notice I didn't say "human history" I said history without qualifications, which "human" is.
Why should primates evolve into homo sapiens? Because that's what evolutionary theory said happened.
And history says primates can only evolve into humans? Or does history say thy can evolve into more than just humans?
So why would that process suddenly stop?
Who said it stopped? I don't recall but I'm pretty sure I didn't. Actually I believe humans are still evolving. Though I couldn't find it on/. I have said humans are still evolving. For instance I said because the SRI gene on the Y chromosome, which makes males male, is degenerating possibly the only hope for the survival of humans are intersexuals people who either have an ambiguous sex organs or have organs for both male and female.
You guys are all about testability and detecting false data - so answer the damn question. Why did the process stop?
See above.
And bodies don't last?
I guess you missed where I said a body would not last very long in the Everglades. Climate has a big impact on whether fossils will be preserved or not. I've got to say that if you didn't know that then your knowledge of science is poor, you don't know much about climatology, and I have no idea how you got a degree in engineering, if in fact you did.
Can you show me anywhere in this thread you said anything about forensics or SETI? This is the first tyme I recall reading either one. As for points 1 and 2 I did answer those. I even included them when I answered.
Do you now see that this means you actually do accept claim #1?
As I said in the my previous post above "I'll also admit that a supreme being might just might be testable and falsifiable. But I have no idea how it can be done such that someone can't twist any results around to say whatever they want." I accept it might be possible but I have no idea how.
I'll also admit that a supreme being might just might be testable and falsifiable.
Here, you are actually addressing claim #2. You see, claim #1 says, "Science can be used to look for intelligence. Forensics detects signs of intelligent activity at a crime scene
to bring up a "supreme being" is once again to bring up something I didn't claim
What is this intelligence if not a supreme being? As I see it by using "intelligence" is just an attempt to misdirect. However before we rehash old stuff I'll say I made some mistakes and end here.
The funny thing is a lot of these small-time PC shops usually deliver a better machine at a better price than the big guys...
So the question is: how the hell can the big guys fail so hard while the nobodies are doing just fine ?
No, my question is, are they doing just fine? When my last Windows PC, an HP PC, was in it's death throws I figured I'd upgrade the components so I went price shopping. To get just a mobo and cpu cost about $200, and that was on the low end. While out looking I found a prebuilt PC with Linux preinstalled for $250. A Windows PC right next to it was only $100 more. While they weren't major brands they were the store's brand which is a chain not a mom and pop shop.
Are you saying Apple is lying? It says it right on that Apple page OS X is "built on Mach 3.0 and FreeBSD 5"
It also does not support all the features of FreeBSD: the lack of standard UNIX SCSI tape support, the lack of Jails, and the more complex execution environment, are all things I have run into in the past. FreeBSD is smaller, faster, tighter, and more stable.
First you say OS X doesn't include all the things FreeBDS does then you say FreeBSD is smaller. It seems to me that if OX S doesn't include everything then it would be lighter, unless Apple includes more that's not in FreeBSD. And of course it does, there's Aqua for instance. So if you leave out the GUI, sure FreeBSD has less but many people want a GUI, you sit them down in front of a command line and they'll be lost.
I find OS X a much more comfortable environment than Linux... let alone Windows... but that doesn't mean it hasn't got its problems.
There is no perfect OS. Everybody has different expectations, needs, and wants. Every OS has problems, including FreeBSD, NetBSD, Standard BSD, and yes OS X.
Well, gee. The crapware business model for getting preloaded shitty tool software onto PCs doesn't work well when it can be simply uninstalled (paying $30 for this "service" is a small indicator that you don't have any business touching a keyboard or even staring at it for too long... that's another topic... I digress).
A person who uses a PC at work and who's employer pays an IT staff to take care of, fix, and install software on PCs doesn't have any business touching a keyboard?
The business model adopted here is astounding. Provide zero-value items and zero-value services, charge for them
Perhaps you haven't realized it but OEMs install bloatware on new PCs to keep their costs down not to jack it up.
Here's a crazy thought. Make a good product or provide a good service. Something people want. Charge a fair price for it.
Dare I say most people don't know what a good computer is, yeap I said it. Those same people don't know what a good price is. And if they are going to buy a new PC in today's economy they want something cheap, so they look around at prices, and maybe a name they recognize.
how many times have I suffered from weird defects/software issues that many people experience, but Apple completely chooses to ignore there is an issue entirely?
Too many, and I've owned, too many of their machines. So many, that, I think I have had a very good sample of quality of Apple machines in Europe.
Different people have different experiences with both Macs and PCs. I'm typing this on my first new Mac, a Macbook Pro. I've had it a year and in that tyme I've had two problems with it. the first isn't really a problem with the Mac but with software I ordered with it. When I ordered it I also ordered TechTools Pro. The disk I was sent was an old one and wouldn't bootup and run diagnostics. The other problem, I don't know if it's hardware or software but it sometimes does not wakeup when I reopen the lid. Occasionally I have to close and reopen it a number of tymes to get it to wakeup. Perhaps if I take it down to a Genius Bar in an Apple store, there are 3 within 15 to 20 minutes drive from where I am but it hasn't aggravated me enough yet, they may be able to fix it.
I have bought 2 other Macs though both were used when I bought them. The first was a Mac SE30 I bought in 1992. Because it did not have the superdrive capable of reading or writing double sided double density PC floppies I think it was made in 1988. The first problem, other than the inability to expand it, I had with it was in 2000 when the floppy drive died. A few months later I bought a used PowerPC Mac 7300/200. The first and only problem I had with it was when it would not bootup for me in 2006. They both lasted me several years without problems.
I wish I could say the same about PCs but I can't. I've bought 3 new Windows PCs, a factory reconditioned Windows laptop, and one new Linux PC. All three new PCs I had to replace the motherboard within a year. One was a Gateway laptop, another an HP tower and the third's a no name tower with Linux preinstalled. Within a year I also had to replace the hard disk in the Gateway and the HP as well. While the Linux PC ran fine until the motherboard had to be replaced all three Windows PC had to have Windows reinstalled a number of tymes.
Oh, and the new PC I didn't mention, it caused me the least hardware and the most software problems. It's CPU's a DEC Alpha and I couldn't get much software installed on it. Otherwise it's hardware was good. So whereas you've had problems with Macs I've had them with PCs.
When was the last time I saw a Mac outside of my home? Well, uh... A year I think? That's how common they are.
When I get out, which because I'm disabled and don't work isn't much, I see more Windows laptops than Macbook/Pros but I do see them. The last tyme was when I was walking to a store a few blocks from me a week or so ago, someone on a sidewalk in front of a cafe had one.
Mac or PC, Windows or Linux, it really depends on the person. I like Linux, and love open source, and I like Macs, but maybe because of my experiences with it I don't like Windows. It boils down to what hardware and OS will get the job a person needs done.
If mankind has evolved from apes, how come in the 5,000 years of recorded history
There are more than 5000 years of recorded history. History recorded dinosaurs 65 million years ago. As I told the reply above yours, the Clovis culture in North America is dated as around 13,000 years ago however the archaeological site Monte Verde on the southern tip of Chile is dated 1000 years before Clovis. Cro-Magna paintings in southwestern France are dated as being 20,000 to 10,000 years ago. Aztecs invented the calendar around 4236 B.C thus putting it as 6000 years ago.
If evolution is an on-going process, why are there not monkeys constantly evolving into hominids?
Why should primates only evolve into homos? Why can't they evolve into other species? Look at a tree of life, evolution loves diversity.
Shouldn't there be a continuum of species?
There could be one but a record may not be possible. A dead body left in the Florida Everglades won't last very long, not even the bones even if it's human. Guess what? They embalm people when they die to preserve the body. Even then though those bodies may not last thousands of years.
To me, this is just like the global warming scam
Here we go again. Another person who thinks they are more qualified than the thousands of climatologists who have concluded Global Warming is real. What makes you more qualified than all of them? Where did you get your PhD in a climatology field, and what field is it? And did you do any post-doc work?
Antartic ice shelf is about the same size as it was 100 years ago
Where's your proof? Even if the Antartic ice is the same size, and Larson B didn't break oh but it did off, that does not mean ice isn't melting elsewhere. I see your proof, if you provide any, with that from qalified scientists. For instance the Artic ice is near record lows. The glacier on Mount Kilimanjaro, which provides fresh water to millions of people in Africa, have almost disappeared. As have glaciers in the Andes of South America, which also provides millions with fresh water. Then there are the glaciers in Greenland. If there isn't warming how are all these glaciers melting faster than ever?
And when you read how Mann of the famous "hockey stick" chart cherry-picked and manipulated his data, and then refused to release the data for a number of years - well, that doesn't sound like science to me.
Where's your proof Mann cherry-picked his data? In this SciAm article Mann refutes some of his critics. For instance critics charge the hockey stick chart does not graph the Little Ice Age, yet that was a local not a global phenomenon and his chart was global not local. Only those who deny Global Warming continue to harp on stuff like this.
The Earth has actually cooled over the last 4-5 years
Citation.
To people like you there must be a conspiracy, however like those who deny conspiracies about JFK's assassination and 911 say, if there were a conspiracy how come someone hasn't come out and disclosed the facts? Why aren't the street lined with those assassinated because they tried to warn people?
Why should my children be denied this great history and literature in favour of "I Have Two Mommies"?
Why should my children, though I don't have any, be denied the great history in the "Analects of Confucius
Forensics is about law courts and medical knowledge used in legal matters or police investigations. SETI is about searching for extraterrestrial intelligence. With evolution creating life on earth I'd say it's highly unlikely out of billions of billions of stars in the universe there isn't another planet orbiting another star where life didn't evolve as well. As Jodie Foster's character in "Contact" says "That's an awful waste of space."
Are you counter-claiming that these disciplines do not employ testable and falsifiable hypotheses to detect evidence of intelligent tampering?
No, they are testable and falsifiable. I'll also admit that a supreme being might just might be testable and falsifiable. But I have no idea how it can be done such that someone can't twist any results around to say whatever they want.
Again, I said all this in my original post, so please respond to this specific point.
Can you show me anywhere in this thread you said anything about forensics or SETI? This is the first tyme I recall reading either one. As for points 1 and 2 I did answer those. I even included them when I answered.
You might be able to argue that archaeology, at least to some degree, is not founded on falsificationism
Actually no, I wouldn't say archeology isn't falsifiable. For instance some archaeologists have argued the Clovis people in North America were the first humans in the Americas. However Monte Verde on the southern tip of Chile predates Clovis thus falsifying Clovis. Monte Verde even predates the land bridge between Russia and Alaska thus falsifying the notion the first people in the Americas crossed the land bridge.
Slashdot Mirror
There was an informant inside this organization that told authorities what was planned.
Here's a link about your informants: "Moles wanted". Informants only get paid if an arrest is made. Let's see, I'm a mole and I know if the info I give doesn't lead to an arrest do I tell the truth or do I lie?
Falcon
I'm not sure what peaceful demonstrators need with a 5 gallons worth of urine, gas masks and home made caltrop to disable buses.
I'll see your Star_Tribune link, "The alleged urine, Nestor maintained, was actually three buckets, two of which contained dirty water used to flush toilets while conserving water. The third was seized from an illegal apartment occupied by someone not connected to the RNC protests. There was no bathroom in the illegal apartment and urine was collected in a bucket, Nestor said."
Falcon
I just heard on the news they were planning to insight a riot according to an undercover informant and they confiscated a machete, a hatchet, throwing knives, axes, bolt cutters, equipment used in rappelling - and three 5-gallon buckets of urine.
Like all of those are illegal. NOT! As for 3 buckets of urine, from the Star-Tribune:
"The alleged urine, Nestor maintained, was actually three buckets, two of which contained dirty water used to flush toilets while conserving water. The third was seized from an illegal apartment occupied by someone not connected to the RNC protests. There was no bathroom in the illegal apartment and urine was collected in a bucket, Nestor said."
But hey, dont let that get in your way. please continue telling us about free speech and peaceful demonstrations.
But hey, don't let the truth get in your way.
Falcon
There's a difference between showing up for a (hopefully) peaceful protest and bringing a rifle. As in one is a constitutionally-protected right, and the other is a very clear intent of first degree murder.
Ah, bearing a firearm shows clear proof a crime is going to be committed? Fact is is both protest and bearing firearms is constitutionally protected. And bearing a firearm does not mean any crime is going to be committed.
Falcon
Bullshit. We had college-aged, playtime anarchists that wanted to start some shit. Daddy - in this case, in the body of law enforcement - came in and scared the shit out of them.
What's bullshit is you, then again maybe you're an authoritarian who wants a police state.
Falcon
If you read the Star-Tribune article, you'll note that the protesters had buckets of urine at the ready
Obviously you either didn't read the whole Star-Tribune article or you're trolling. TFA says, cut and paste:
"The alleged urine, Nestor maintained, was actually three buckets, two of which contained dirty water used to flush toilets while conserving water. The third was seized from an illegal apartment occupied by someone not connected to the RNC protests. There was no bathroom in the illegal apartment and urine was collected in a bucket, Nestor said."
Falcon
I also belive that anyone willing to take away the rights of others, should be delt with harshly, whether they be the police or in this case protesters seeking to disrupt someone else's assembly.
I've asked before but I'll ask again, where's your proof the protesters threatened anyone?
Falcon
First off people that pull of the gloves or at least threaten to should always be delt with in a manner that involves a punch in the teeth. That is what these groups do, and they got what they asked for.
Where's your proof any of the protesters threatened anyone with violence?
So what we had here was a bunch of people planning on making an ass of themselves by engaging in criminal/border line criminal behavior
Where's your evidence?
I grow weary of children who cry about how "bad" it's getting when they don't even know how bad it really was before they even came along.
I lived through the '60s and '70s, through COINTELPRO, and through Wstergate. Did you or were you too young, not born yet?
Falcon
The Ba'athist parties are about all thats left of that classical Socialist-Fascism
And guess who supported Saddam and the Ba'athists in Iraq in the 1980s? Republican presidents Reason and Bush Sr. Guess who was on Bush's staff or is now on Jr's staff who helped Saddam? Here are some photos of Rumsfeld and Saddam together. They're shaking hand like old pals. At first Secretary of State Cheney also supported Saddam during Bush Sr's term in office. Support for Saddam only ended after he invaded Kuwait who, Saddam had accused of and was later verified, was slant drilling into Iraq to pump Iraqi oil as if it was Kuwaiti oil. Before his invasion of Kuwait Saddam could do no wrong no matter how many people he used chemical weapons against.
Falcon
The problem comes in where protesters make a disruption at the event (usually during the middle of a speech). This seems to be an effort to stop that kind of activity.
Where is there any evidence anything illegal was planned? Or is this going to be an "oops, we made a mistake" after the convention is over?
Falcon
The Star-Tribune SUCKS. Can't trust them. I've lived in Twin Cities.
My sources (in MN) say that that most the buckets were gray water and a few were because there was no bathroom (the place was over crowded.)
GP obviously didn't read the entire Star-Tribune article, or simply left out pertinent info. TFA does in fact say all the buckets but one was filled with dirty water and that the only bucket with urine was in an apartment that did not has a toilet. Here it is:
"The alleged urine, Nestor maintained, was actually three buckets, two of which contained dirty water used to flush toilets while conserving water. The third was seized from an illegal apartment occupied by someone not connected to the RNC protests. There was no bathroom in the illegal apartment and urine was collected in a bucket, Nestor said."
It's more than half way down the page. Thanks for the new link.
Falcon
unless someone has a better (serious) explanation for the buckets of urine.
Maybe they didn't pay their sewer bill.
There was no toilet in the apartment where the only bucket of urine was found. The other buckets were filled with dirty water, to flush the toilets that were in the building. But they, whoever they is, will turn off water. I live in Minneapolis in an apartment and so far this year we have gotten 3 notices the water will be turned off if the bill is not paid.
Falcon
If you read the Star-Tribune article, you'll note that the protesters had buckets of urine at the ready
If you read the Star-Tribune article thoroughly you would have read this statement from it:
"The alleged urine, Nestor maintained, was actually three buckets, two of which contained dirty water used to flush toilets while conserving water. The third was seized from an illegal apartment occupied by someone not connected to the RNC protests. There was no bathroom in the illegal apartment and urine was collected in a bucket, Nestor said."
It also notes that these informants were working on the inside of the protest groups for quite some time, to minimize any doubt that these folks were up to no good. So, in other words, the cops were doing their job
This is the United States of America where innocence is presumed before guilt is proven. Where is the evidence of guilt? What is it? All this is is an attempt to silence protest during the Republican convention.
Falcon
I'm talking about the political and legal history of the United States since 1860. Compared to the American Civil War, the First World War and the Second World War, the crackdown on civil rights has been tame, compared to the dangerous faced with new asymmetrical weapons and tactics.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because what happened before was worse doesn't make this ok.
Falcon
You're just a bigot that makes up stories about the people you hate.
Another mind reader.
Falcon
First of all I would encourage you to read a few messages other than the one you responded to.
Why? But since you ask I will. I went up 4 levels and read all the posts, not one other than my and your posts said anything about OS X and FreeBSD. And not one of those offered any evidence OS X is not based on FreeBSD. I'll believe Apple, until they give me a reason not to believe them, before I'll believe you without you providing evidence to back up your claim. All you have to do is provide the evidence.
It should be obvious that I prefer OS X to FreeBSD+X11 as a desktop, for any number of reasons, but that doesn't mean that I have to prefer Darwin to FreeBSD... I think you're making a category error somewhere.
I don't recall my post saying Darwin was better, all I said was OS X is FreeBDS [apple.com] underneath and you replied it was not. So you're making an error somewhere. I've made plenty myself but in this case I believe the mistake is yours.
Darwin is not FreeBSD any more than FreeBSD is Version 7. In fact the design of FreeBSD has more in common with Version 7 than the design of OS X does with FreeBSD. Apple used FreeBSD the way Tru64 used 4.3-Reno and the way Lites uses 4.4-Lite, as the primary service provider in a Mach-based kernel. I wouldn't call that "being FreeBSD", any more than I would describe a truck that used a Ford V8 engine as being a Mustang.
I admit I have no idea what you mean here. Version7? I don't recall ever hearing of it. Ok, wiki says it's an older version of Unix, I've heard of System V, actually isn't that the version SCO claimed to own, but not 6 or 7. Tru64? I'm not sure but I think that was DEC's implementation of Unix. Yeap according to wiki Tru64 was DEC's version of Unix on the Alpha. I have Redhat on my Alpha.
Apart from a variety of things things Darwin includes that FreeBSD doesn't (such as its support for multiple CPU architectures in a single executable, and its kernel extension framework), the fundamental design of any Mach-based system is less efficient than a traditional UNIX kernel.
Okay, I'll accept FreeBSD is smaller than Apple's implementation for now.
I don't know what to make of the rest of your post, but I still need evidence OS X it not based on FreeBSD before I will believe it is not. I accept that it's possible but not that it's true. I did learn something from you though, I now know there's a Version 7 Unix. Which brings up a question I now have, why did it go from System V to Version 7?
Falcon
Recorded history to me means what people write, not fossils.
Who's evading? I don't recall you saying once that recorded history was what people wrote. To me as far as history is concerned what's recorded is what's recorded no matter how it is recorded. Notice I didn't say "human history" I said history without qualifications, which "human" is.
Why should primates evolve into homo sapiens? Because that's what evolutionary theory said happened.
And history says primates can only evolve into humans? Or does history say thy can evolve into more than just humans?
So why would that process suddenly stop?
Who said it stopped? I don't recall but I'm pretty sure I didn't. Actually I believe humans are still evolving. Though I couldn't find it on /. I have said humans are still evolving. For instance I said because the SRI gene on the Y chromosome, which makes males male, is degenerating possibly the only hope for the survival of humans are intersexuals people who either have an ambiguous sex organs or have organs for both male and female.
You guys are all about testability and detecting false data - so answer the damn question. Why did the process stop?
See above.
And bodies don't last?
I guess you missed where I said a body would not last very long in the Everglades. Climate has a big impact on whether fossils will be preserved or not. I've got to say that if you didn't know that then your knowledge of science is poor, you don't know much about climatology, and I have no idea how you got a degree in engineering, if in fact you did.
Bye
Falcon
Can you show me anywhere in this thread you said anything about forensics or SETI? This is the first tyme I recall reading either one. As for points 1 and 2 I did answer those. I even included them when I answered.
Sure, in this post
My mistake then, I apologize I didn't recall it.
Do you now see that this means you actually do accept claim #1?
As I said in the my previous post above "I'll also admit that a supreme being might just might be testable and falsifiable. But I have no idea how it can be done such that someone can't twist any results around to say whatever they want." I accept it might be possible but I have no idea how.
I'll also admit that a supreme being might just might be testable and falsifiable.
Here, you are actually addressing claim #2. You see, claim #1 says, "Science can be used to look for intelligence. Forensics detects signs of intelligent activity at a crime scene
To make sure I didn't make another mistake I went up the thread. Your claim, in the quote above, did not originally say that. It says 1. It is possible to scientifically detect and study evidence of design. Forensics studies and detects evidence which is #1.
to bring up a "supreme being" is once again to bring up something I didn't claim
What is this intelligence if not a supreme being? As I see it by using "intelligence" is just an attempt to misdirect. However before we rehash old stuff I'll say I made some mistakes and end here.
Falcon
The funny thing is a lot of these small-time PC shops usually deliver a better machine at a better price than the big guys ...
So the question is: how the hell can the big guys fail so hard while the nobodies are doing just fine ?
No, my question is, are they doing just fine? When my last Windows PC, an HP PC, was in it's death throws I figured I'd upgrade the components so I went price shopping. To get just a mobo and cpu cost about $200, and that was on the low end. While out looking I found a prebuilt PC with Linux preinstalled for $250. A Windows PC right next to it was only $100 more. While they weren't major brands they were the store's brand which is a chain not a mom and pop shop.
Are you saying Apple is lying? It says it right on that Apple page OS X is "built on Mach 3.0 and FreeBSD 5"
It also does not support all the features of FreeBSD: the lack of standard UNIX SCSI tape support, the lack of Jails, and the more complex execution environment, are all things I have run into in the past. FreeBSD is smaller, faster, tighter, and more stable.
First you say OS X doesn't include all the things FreeBDS does then you say FreeBSD is smaller. It seems to me that if OX S doesn't include everything then it would be lighter, unless Apple includes more that's not in FreeBSD. And of course it does, there's Aqua for instance. So if you leave out the GUI, sure FreeBSD has less but many people want a GUI, you sit them down in front of a command line and they'll be lost.
I find OS X a much more comfortable environment than Linux... let alone Windows... but that doesn't mean it hasn't got its problems.
There is no perfect OS. Everybody has different expectations, needs, and wants. Every OS has problems, including FreeBSD, NetBSD, Standard BSD, and yes OS X.
Falcon
Well, gee. The crapware business model for getting preloaded shitty tool software onto PCs doesn't work well when it can be simply uninstalled (paying $30 for this "service" is a small indicator that you don't have any business touching a keyboard or even staring at it for too long... that's another topic... I digress).
A person who uses a PC at work and who's employer pays an IT staff to take care of, fix, and install software on PCs doesn't have any business touching a keyboard?
The business model adopted here is astounding. Provide zero-value items and zero-value services, charge for them
Perhaps you haven't realized it but OEMs install bloatware on new PCs to keep their costs down not to jack it up.
Here's a crazy thought. Make a good product or provide a good service. Something people want. Charge a fair price for it.
Dare I say most people don't know what a good computer is, yeap I said it. Those same people don't know what a good price is. And if they are going to buy a new PC in today's economy they want something cheap, so they look around at prices, and maybe a name they recognize.
Falco
how many times have I suffered from weird defects/software issues that many people experience, but Apple completely chooses to ignore there is an issue entirely?
Too many, and I've owned, too many of their machines. So many, that, I think I have had a very good sample of quality of Apple machines in Europe.
Different people have different experiences with both Macs and PCs. I'm typing this on my first new Mac, a Macbook Pro. I've had it a year and in that tyme I've had two problems with it. the first isn't really a problem with the Mac but with software I ordered with it. When I ordered it I also ordered TechTools Pro. The disk I was sent was an old one and wouldn't bootup and run diagnostics. The other problem, I don't know if it's hardware or software but it sometimes does not wakeup when I reopen the lid. Occasionally I have to close and reopen it a number of tymes to get it to wakeup. Perhaps if I take it down to a Genius Bar in an Apple store, there are 3 within 15 to 20 minutes drive from where I am but it hasn't aggravated me enough yet, they may be able to fix it.
I have bought 2 other Macs though both were used when I bought them. The first was a Mac SE30 I bought in 1992. Because it did not have the superdrive capable of reading or writing double sided double density PC floppies I think it was made in 1988. The first problem, other than the inability to expand it, I had with it was in 2000 when the floppy drive died. A few months later I bought a used PowerPC Mac 7300/200. The first and only problem I had with it was when it would not bootup for me in 2006. They both lasted me several years without problems.
I wish I could say the same about PCs but I can't. I've bought 3 new Windows PCs, a factory reconditioned Windows laptop, and one new Linux PC. All three new PCs I had to replace the motherboard within a year. One was a Gateway laptop, another an HP tower and the third's a no name tower with Linux preinstalled. Within a year I also had to replace the hard disk in the Gateway and the HP as well. While the Linux PC ran fine until the motherboard had to be replaced all three Windows PC had to have Windows reinstalled a number of tymes.
Oh, and the new PC I didn't mention, it caused me the least hardware and the most software problems. It's CPU's a DEC Alpha and I couldn't get much software installed on it. Otherwise it's hardware was good. So whereas you've had problems with Macs I've had them with PCs.
When was the last time I saw a Mac outside of my home? Well, uh... A year I think? That's how common they are.
When I get out, which because I'm disabled and don't work isn't much, I see more Windows laptops than Macbook/Pros but I do see them. The last tyme was when I was walking to a store a few blocks from me a week or so ago, someone on a sidewalk in front of a cafe had one.
Mac or PC, Windows or Linux, it really depends on the person. I like Linux, and love open source, and I like Macs, but maybe because of my experiences with it I don't like Windows. It boils down to what hardware and OS will get the job a person needs done.
Oh, btw my favorite computer was the Amiga.
Falcon
If mankind has evolved from apes, how come in the 5,000 years of recorded history
There are more than 5000 years of recorded history. History recorded dinosaurs 65 million years ago. As I told the reply above yours, the Clovis culture in North America is dated as around 13,000 years ago however the archaeological site Monte Verde on the southern tip of Chile is dated 1000 years before Clovis. Cro-Magna paintings in southwestern France are dated as being 20,000 to 10,000 years ago. Aztecs invented the calendar around 4236 B.C thus putting it as 6000 years ago.
If evolution is an on-going process, why are there not monkeys constantly evolving into hominids?
Why should primates only evolve into homos? Why can't they evolve into other species? Look at a tree of life, evolution loves diversity.
Shouldn't there be a continuum of species?
There could be one but a record may not be possible. A dead body left in the Florida Everglades won't last very long, not even the bones even if it's human. Guess what? They embalm people when they die to preserve the body. Even then though those bodies may not last thousands of years.
To me, this is just like the global warming scam
Here we go again. Another person who thinks they are more qualified than the thousands of climatologists who have concluded Global Warming is real. What makes you more qualified than all of them? Where did you get your PhD in a climatology field, and what field is it? And did you do any post-doc work?
Antartic ice shelf is about the same size as it was 100 years ago
Where's your proof? Even if the Antartic ice is the same size, and Larson B didn't break oh but it did off, that does not mean ice isn't melting elsewhere. I see your proof, if you provide any, with that from qalified scientists. For instance the Artic ice is near record lows. The glacier on Mount Kilimanjaro, which provides fresh water to millions of people in Africa, have almost disappeared. As have glaciers in the Andes of South America, which also provides millions with fresh water. Then there are the glaciers in Greenland. If there isn't warming how are all these glaciers melting faster than ever?
And when you read how Mann of the famous "hockey stick" chart cherry-picked and manipulated his data, and then refused to release the data for a number of years - well, that doesn't sound like science to me.
Where's your proof Mann cherry-picked his data? In this SciAm article Mann refutes some of his critics. For instance critics charge the hockey stick chart does not graph the Little Ice Age, yet that was a local not a global phenomenon and his chart was global not local. Only those who deny Global Warming continue to harp on stuff like this.
The Earth has actually cooled over the last 4-5 years
Citation.
To people like you there must be a conspiracy, however like those who deny conspiracies about JFK's assassination and 911 say, if there were a conspiracy how come someone hasn't come out and disclosed the facts? Why aren't the street lined with those assassinated because they tried to warn people?
Why should my children be denied this great history and literature in favour of "I Have Two Mommies"?
Why should my children, though I don't have any, be denied the great history in the "Analects of Confucius
Forensics is about law courts and medical knowledge used in legal matters or police investigations. SETI is about searching for extraterrestrial intelligence. With evolution creating life on earth I'd say it's highly unlikely out of billions of billions of stars in the universe there isn't another planet orbiting another star where life didn't evolve as well. As Jodie Foster's character in "Contact" says "That's an awful waste of space."
Are you counter-claiming that these disciplines do not employ testable and falsifiable hypotheses to detect evidence of intelligent tampering?
No, they are testable and falsifiable. I'll also admit that a supreme being might just might be testable and falsifiable. But I have no idea how it can be done such that someone can't twist any results around to say whatever they want.
Again, I said all this in my original post, so please respond to this specific point.
Can you show me anywhere in this thread you said anything about forensics or SETI? This is the first tyme I recall reading either one. As for points 1 and 2 I did answer those. I even included them when I answered.
You might be able to argue that archaeology, at least to some degree, is not founded on falsificationism
Actually no, I wouldn't say archeology isn't falsifiable. For instance some archaeologists have argued the Clovis people in North America were the first humans in the Americas. However Monte Verde on the southern tip of Chile predates Clovis thus falsifying Clovis. Monte Verde even predates the land bridge between Russia and Alaska thus falsifying the notion the first people in the Americas crossed the land bridge.
Falcon
I don't recall.
When did this occur?
In the late '60s or early '70s.
Was there a police report filed?
Police report? Like someone who's in elementary school would know to file a police report.
Falcon