I don't see forcing a.xxx or.pron^H^H^Horn extension as any worse than those brown paper covers. Of course it would need to be on a federal level and I'm assuming the covers are on a state level(IANAL).
I live in West Virginia, and I have been fighting for over a year now just to get an F(motercycle) class endorsment on an existing license because my house is rural enough we don't have a street address.
In Morgantown, WV we have had a PRT system since 1979. Its an interesting idea and Im glad to see it finaly catching on in a larger scale. Just so you know Detroit Michigan, Irving Texas, Jacksonville Florida, Miami Florida, and Morgantown, WV where the first 5 locations to have PRTs and where all installed in the 70's.
Many experiments go as far to proving creation as they do evolution. For instance the recent studies into the shift in colors humans see toward the blue spectrum. From an evolutionary stand point this goes to prove that human eyes began to evolve at a time we where water based creatures. From a creationist point stand point this goes to prove that are eyes became adjusted to those wavelengths during the time in which the earth was covered by a curtain of water. Neither are provable but both deserve the same chance to be seriously evaluated. You can not cast off the creationist because they view the evidence in a different way. The problem is that both sides start with predefined ideas and both evaluate the evidence from those view points. That does not show either as being some sort of fringe science that does not deserve serious study.
Actually, no. I have met many creationist working in the biological sciences. The resent debates on Mitochondrial Eve are a prime example. While this evidence is nether proof or disproof of a single creator, any one who views this as evidence of the true biblical eve is treated as a nut case practicing fringe science. Evolutionary scientists are just as much closed minded zealots as any creationist has ever been. For a very good scientifically sound view on what creationism is and is not go to http://www.answersingenesis.org/
The rise of medical technology does not indicate evolution. And from a biblical point of view lifespan are now much shorter than they where originally.
Just a quick note, The only method we have to accurately test the age of "ancient humanoids" is geological(what strata where they in), carbon13 dating is unreliable, due to the addition of carbon from other sources fires, floods, and other events. The creationists theory holds that there was a world flood and that bones settled in the various layers at this time. This can be attested to by the fact we find evidence of human remains(foot prints, bells in a lump of coal) right there with various remains of dinosaurs. There fore there is no evidence that the remains of "ancient humanoids" are any more than a few thousand years old. The same holds true with rocks and other geological evidence. As for the non terrestrial evidence, no one ever claimed to know the age of the universe and it does not seem to add anything to this debate, although if your curious read up on how the 2nd law of thermodynamics disproves the big bang and "celestial evolution".
Your argument is flawed, in that there is a great deal evidence supporting the science behind creationism. And no true creationist argues against the validity of science or even the idea that creatures evolve to better survive over time. They argue that evolution is not the mechanism of creation and is only part of the design. I think to say anyone who is a creationist is not a scientist is short sided and quit frankly shows a lack of understanding of the issues.
Most creationist believe that humans where created perfect and become less perfect over time. That we have become more prone to sickness and disease since the time of creation. This would be the tangible affect of introducing sin into humanity in the Garden of Eden, the price for sin is death. In essence this could be thought of as a kind of devolution.
As a certified right wing concervative I usualy don't go in with the tin hat croud, but I have got to say the therory of peak oil is sound and the only question to be answered is have we used half of the available oil. I think that if we have not we are getting close.
The only road CNN is in the middle of is the left had side of a four lane highway. They are the single most libral news station I have ever seen. I watch Fox, there people may not be unbiased but atleast they don't have a problem admitting it.
I think you all missed the important point. In order to give away music and still entice fans to pay for it, it has to be worth paying for in the first place. Other wise people will just take the free music, because its free and not support the band. The idea of "TALENT" is one, which has escaped a certain organization in America (cough**RIAA). The dead where and are great, that is why people will pay for music they already give away.
Dont get me wrong, I think M$ should completly overhall there security. However, is a service pack the correct time to do this. If M$ breaks programs people need they may not upgrade and that could cause even more security problems. Maybe such a change should wait for the next release of windows(oh, say 2015 or so).
Slashdot Mirror
As I recall "Admiral Janeway" made a cameo in the last movie.
I don't look at the phone when I dial, and I only dial with my thumb(like you would use a TV remote).
I thought patrick was an ok host, but to be honest it just wasn't tecttv after the screen savers got rid of kate.
You may also want to check out creationscience.com
I don't see forcing a .xxx or .pron^H^H^Horn extension as any worse than those brown paper covers. Of course it would need to be on a federal level and I'm assuming the covers are on a state level(IANAL).
I live in West Virginia, and I have been fighting for over a year now just to get an F(motercycle) class endorsment on an existing license because my house is rural enough we don't have a street address.
I tasted music once. Then I came down and havn't touched LSD since.
In Morgantown, WV we have had a PRT system since 1979. Its an interesting idea and Im glad to see it finaly catching on in a larger scale. Just so you know Detroit Michigan, Irving Texas, Jacksonville Florida, Miami Florida, and Morgantown, WV where the first 5 locations to have PRTs and where all installed in the 70's.
Now if they could only do a rm -rf /. on their webserver
Many experiments go as far to proving creation as they do evolution. For instance the recent studies into the shift in colors humans see toward the blue spectrum. From an evolutionary stand point this goes to prove that human eyes began to evolve at a time we where water based creatures. From a creationist point stand point this goes to prove that are eyes became adjusted to those wavelengths during the time in which the earth was covered by a curtain of water. Neither are provable but both deserve the same chance to be seriously evaluated. You can not cast off the creationist because they view the evidence in a different way. The problem is that both sides start with predefined ideas and both evaluate the evidence from those view points. That does not show either as being some sort of fringe science that does not deserve serious study.
Actually, no. I have met many creationist working in the biological sciences. The resent debates on Mitochondrial Eve are a prime example. While this evidence is nether proof or disproof of a single creator, any one who views this as evidence of the true biblical eve is treated as a nut case practicing fringe science. Evolutionary scientists are just as much closed minded zealots as any creationist has ever been. For a very good scientifically sound view on what creationism is and is not go to http://www.answersingenesis.org/
Its not the idea that you don't believe God did it that bothers me. Its the pig headed notion that creation science is not real sience because we do.
The rise of medical technology does not indicate evolution. And from a biblical point of view lifespan are now much shorter than they where originally.
Just because we can explain it does not mean God did not do it.
Just a quick note, The only method we have to accurately test the age of "ancient humanoids" is geological(what strata where they in), carbon13 dating is unreliable, due to the addition of carbon from other sources fires, floods, and other events. The creationists theory holds that there was a world flood and that bones settled in the various layers at this time. This can be attested to by the fact we find evidence of human remains(foot prints, bells in a lump of coal) right there with various remains of dinosaurs. There fore there is no evidence that the remains of "ancient humanoids" are any more than a few thousand years old. The same holds true with rocks and other geological evidence. As for the non terrestrial evidence, no one ever claimed to know the age of the universe and it does not seem to add anything to this debate, although if your curious read up on how the 2nd law of thermodynamics disproves the big bang and "celestial evolution".
Your argument is flawed, in that there is a great deal evidence supporting the science behind creationism. And no true creationist argues against the validity of science or even the idea that creatures evolve to better survive over time. They argue that evolution is not the mechanism of creation and is only part of the design. I think to say anyone who is a creationist is not a scientist is short sided and quit frankly shows a lack of understanding of the issues.
Most creationist believe that humans where created perfect and become less perfect over time. That we have become more prone to sickness and disease since the time of creation. This would be the tangible affect of introducing sin into humanity in the Garden of Eden, the price for sin is death. In essence this could be thought of as a kind of devolution.
Just what we need another organization with a name ending in AA(think riaa, mpaa ...) telling us what to think.
As a certified right wing concervative I usualy don't go in with the tin hat croud, but I have got to say the therory of peak oil is sound and the only question to be answered is have we used half of the available oil. I think that if we have not we are getting close.
when I play pacman on my 2.8ghz laptop :)
The only road CNN is in the middle of is the left had side of a four lane highway. They are the single most libral news station I have ever seen. I watch Fox, there people may not be unbiased but atleast they don't have a problem admitting it.
I think you all missed the important point. In order to give away music and still entice fans to pay for it, it has to be worth paying for in the first place. Other wise people will just take the free music, because its free and not support the band. The idea of "TALENT" is one, which has escaped a certain organization in America (cough**RIAA). The dead where and are great, that is why people will pay for music they already give away.
I guess you didn't read the memo. Microsoft invented all of those things last year. ;-)
Dont get me wrong, I think M$ should completly overhall there security. However, is a service pack the correct time to do this. If M$ breaks programs people need they may not upgrade and that could cause even more security problems. Maybe such a change should wait for the next release of windows(oh, say 2015 or so).
who read this as Vulcan astronomer, and thought finaly some real news.