Micro Evolution happens. However nobody can say with a straight face the Evolution alone explains all the diversity we see on earth. Other mechanisms or invisible hands had to be involved especially when it comes to species. No experiment in Evolution has made a new species.
I took Biology in the 9th grade and again as a Freshman in college. In neither did the Professor nor the textbook put forth any explanation of how evolution is an additive process.
Oh, so you mean when you TEST the theory that you can get tangible results which seem to verify the theory? Well, then devise a good test to prove the theory of Evolution. I'm not talking about mutation either. I'm talking about species arising from simple subtractive processes in the DNA/RNA replication process.
That's not even remotely true. You can understand mutation and still think we are created. Being able to apply the science involved in making and designing pharmaceuticals does not involve the theory of evolution in the slightest.
Its disingenuous to say that Faith is without evidence. I have faith that my chair will not collapse every time I sit in it. Did I independently have it verified or did I even inspect it? Nope. I just know it worked last time and it should work again. That's a little like how faith is with God. Many many many things point to God but you can't "prove" his existence. However you can take the facts you have and combine it with faith and still believe. By the way, none of this requires suspending any known facts whatsoever. It is a cheap ploy used by deniers to say that you have to ignore science to believe in God.
Yep, it has no real application in real life for humans at least. Humans have figured out how to stop it by enabling the worst of society to breed and prosper at the expense of the rest. There are few other areas of nature where the weakest / laziest are rewarded.
haha, this is so true. This is why Idiocracy is such a great movie. It was way ahead of its time.
First of all, do you really mean to tell me that in your warped view of creationists that they all also deny genetics? Really? Point me to one creationist who denies genetics. One. I implore you.
... It's not like evolutionists are closed minded idiots acting on faith....
Except most "Evolutionists" are not scientists at all and they are close minded and acting on faith. That faith is just in "experts" instead of in God.
I grew up in a fundamentalist atheist household. And inflicting the communicable memetic disease of faith on children and brainwashing them to believe in the evil of religion is absolutely child abuse. It imposes a severe mental, emotional and ethical harm to children's minds before they are capable of fighting off the infection. In most cases this harm is permanent, and the child never recovers and becomes healthy again.
And I certainly don't share your belief that evolution is unimportant. It's not the only, not the most important theory in science. But it is definately one of the biggies. Given that biology is one of the core scientific subjects, and understanding evolution is pretty important within that.
No its not. Its not important at all. Show me even one place where it makes any difference at all in the understanding of how biology works. Just one example. BTW, you can understand mutation and RNA replication errors and DNS degradation and all that and still be a creationist.
Obviously, this doesn't amount to child abuse. You sir are a troll. The theory of Evolution has almost no application in real life. Even for invertebrate zoologists. Some of the most widely respected invertebrate zoologists I know are also creationists. It just doesn't affect the understanding of the science at all. I know I shouldn't argue with trolls but your argument assumes so many wrong things that I feel like I need to point them out.
This is why the Pilgrims moved to the place that would become United States. They wanted both Freedom from and Freedom of religion. Neither were provided by the UK. I think we'll be seeing a lot more "pilgrims" in the near future.
Do you have any idea how expensive it is to build a network that is as robust and redundant as the Internet? Really, you just need to firewall and then tunnel everything with encryption.
I would beg to differ. I don't have the statistics but I think while people obviously misjudge things when they get into accidents, they are probably already taking a risk and that risk was intentional and UN-needed in the first place.
The other possibility is that your windows install got hosed by a rootkit. This is pretty common. If sfc/scannow is reporting errors that it can't fix then this is probably the case.
But to say that MSFT can't write a good OS is just the height of arrogance, its elitist horseshit to make little nerds feel good about themselves by ignoring the fact that there are literally hundreds of millions of Windows installs out there and you know what? people are happy with them, it does what they want it to do.
This is probably going to come off as rude, and for that I'm sorry. You say that Microsoft can write good software. Being a member of the community these last 30 years and skilled in the art, I would ask: "show me."
I ain't seen it yet.
Ask yourself this. What OS are all those data centers running which host Microsoft Exchange? Which email server is the most widely adopted in Enterprises everywhere? Don't pigeon hole MS into a desktop OS manufacturer.
The actual cause of most accidents can be boiled down to one simple rule that is broken. That is "failure to yield". Most people drive like complete dicks because they think they are more important then everybody else on the road. The driverless system will not be driving like that in the first place so it will hardly ever get into a traffic collision and even when it does it will minimize the damage because its responses are not emotional.
Slashdot Mirror
Ya, I mean why would their focus be on features that users actually want?
That's quite different then what is being discussed. The "Evolution" in that case is still man made.
Micro Evolution happens. However nobody can say with a straight face the Evolution alone explains all the diversity we see on earth. Other mechanisms or invisible hands had to be involved especially when it comes to species. No experiment in Evolution has made a new species.
I took Biology in the 9th grade and again as a Freshman in college. In neither did the Professor nor the textbook put forth any explanation of how evolution is an additive process.
You mean places like Sudan, Egypt and Iraq? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_British_Empire.png
Oh, so you mean when you TEST the theory that you can get tangible results which seem to verify the theory? Well, then devise a good test to prove the theory of Evolution. I'm not talking about mutation either. I'm talking about species arising from simple subtractive processes in the DNA/RNA replication process.
That's not even remotely true. You can understand mutation and still think we are created. Being able to apply the science involved in making and designing pharmaceuticals does not involve the theory of evolution in the slightest.
Have you ever except that you might be wrong about anything ever in your life or do you just know everything and bequeath it on to us lesser souls?
You get tangible results from a theory? Please explain to me how that works.
Its disingenuous to say that Faith is without evidence. I have faith that my chair will not collapse every time I sit in it. Did I independently have it verified or did I even inspect it? Nope. I just know it worked last time and it should work again. That's a little like how faith is with God. Many many many things point to God but you can't "prove" his existence. However you can take the facts you have and combine it with faith and still believe. By the way, none of this requires suspending any known facts whatsoever. It is a cheap ploy used by deniers to say that you have to ignore science to believe in God.
Yep, it has no real application in real life for humans at least. Humans have figured out how to stop it by enabling the worst of society to breed and prosper at the expense of the rest. There are few other areas of nature where the weakest / laziest are rewarded.
haha, this is so true. This is why Idiocracy is such a great movie. It was way ahead of its time.
First of all, do you really mean to tell me that in your warped view of creationists that they all also deny genetics? Really? Point me to one creationist who denies genetics. One. I implore you.
Mutation doesn't equal Evolution but nice try.
... It's not like evolutionists are closed minded idiots acting on faith....
Except most "Evolutionists" are not scientists at all and they are close minded and acting on faith. That faith is just in "experts" instead of in God.
I grew up in a fundamentalist atheist household. And inflicting the communicable memetic disease of faith on children and brainwashing them to believe in the evil of religion is absolutely child abuse. It imposes a severe mental, emotional and ethical harm to children's minds before they are capable of fighting off the infection. In most cases this harm is permanent, and the child never recovers and becomes healthy again.
FTFY
...
And I certainly don't share your belief that evolution is unimportant. It's not the only, not the most important theory in science. But it is definately one of the biggies. Given that biology is one of the core scientific subjects, and understanding evolution is pretty important within that.
No its not. Its not important at all. Show me even one place where it makes any difference at all in the understanding of how biology works. Just one example. BTW, you can understand mutation and RNA replication errors and DNS degradation and all that and still be a creationist.
Obviously, this doesn't amount to child abuse. You sir are a troll. The theory of Evolution has almost no application in real life. Even for invertebrate zoologists. Some of the most widely respected invertebrate zoologists I know are also creationists. It just doesn't affect the understanding of the science at all. I know I shouldn't argue with trolls but your argument assumes so many wrong things that I feel like I need to point them out.
This is why the Pilgrims moved to the place that would become United States. They wanted both Freedom from and Freedom of religion. Neither were provided by the UK. I think we'll be seeing a lot more "pilgrims" in the near future.
In "Being John Malkovich" you would shoot out onto the side of the New Jersey Turnpike once you got kicked out of his brain.
Do you have any idea how expensive it is to build a network that is as robust and redundant as the Internet? Really, you just need to firewall and then tunnel everything with encryption.
I would beg to differ. I don't have the statistics but I think while people obviously misjudge things when they get into accidents, they are probably already taking a risk and that risk was intentional and UN-needed in the first place.
Ya, power supplies are the most common cause of hardware related failure following hard drives.
The other possibility is that your windows install got hosed by a rootkit. This is pretty common. If sfc /scannow is reporting errors that it can't fix then this is probably the case.
But to say that MSFT can't write a good OS is just the height of arrogance, its elitist horseshit to make little nerds feel good about themselves by ignoring the fact that there are literally hundreds of millions of Windows installs out there and you know what? people are happy with them, it does what they want it to do.
This is probably going to come off as rude, and for that I'm sorry. You say that Microsoft can write good software. Being a member of the community these last 30 years and skilled in the art, I would ask: "show me."
I ain't seen it yet.
Ask yourself this. What OS are all those data centers running which host Microsoft Exchange? Which email server is the most widely adopted in Enterprises everywhere? Don't pigeon hole MS into a desktop OS manufacturer.
The actual cause of most accidents can be boiled down to one simple rule that is broken. That is "failure to yield". Most people drive like complete dicks because they think they are more important then everybody else on the road. The driverless system will not be driving like that in the first place so it will hardly ever get into a traffic collision and even when it does it will minimize the damage because its responses are not emotional.