Atheists on TV? I see plenty about evolution, which is basically atheist preaching.
No, evolution has NOTHING to do with athiesm or religion. I'll say again since so many fundies get this wrong - belief in evolution does NOT mean you dont believe in God.
"Only for Americans that were fed lies through their media. For nearly every other country on the planet the war was an unjustified fabrication - no one believed there were any WMDs in Iraq. "
People that say things like this just blow me away. Either they are purposely trying to rewrite history or they are just morons.
Neither actually - why would you say that?
I do not live in the US so I get a balanced persepective from multiple sources. What I said was true - basically every country but the US knew the justifaction for the war was complete bullshit, fabricated to support Bush's private agenda. Try watching news other than Fox for once and open your eyes.
That's a loaded question though, because the 'obvious' answer is different now than it was 6.5 years ago.
Only for Americans that were fed lies through their media. For nearly every other country on the planet the war was an unjustified fabrication - no one believed there were any WMDs in Iraq.
And for protesting the American government pushing through the war, other countries were villified. Next time when the entire world tells you that you are wrong, it might be a good idea to listen.
OK, when does it become human? Two cells? 100? Birth? When it finds a job and pays its own way? When does it become human? I bet if you perform a DNA test on it, it will show up as 100% human.
Yes it's human but it is not intelligent life - has no more rights than a fingernail clipping (which will also DNA test human).
Human life gets rights and should be protected when there is verifiable brain activity, somewhere near the end of the first trimester.
Even for those among you who think there's a god, this is spectacularly stupid. By your reasoning, not only is plastic surgery out, but so are makeup, hair coloring, sunscreen, and for that matter clothing.
It's not too hard to read your statement as disallowing medicine as well.
Sheesh.
Don't be an ass. Only an idiot would read into my statement what you did.
All the things you state are done to the person wanting them done, and in most cases are reversible. Gods greatest gift above all (if you believe in such things) is free will. However a circumcision is forced on the baby getting it done - he or she has no choice in the matter and it is not reversible. Besides the moral implications, there is no medical need to do that procedure whatsoever.
Hey, when it's your turn to be God, You can tell Your chosen people which parts come off and which parts stay on. Until then, shut up and hold still; this won't hurt a bit.
"God" said no such thing. God made us a certain way and we should respect that - not change it.
I'm glad to say that, like the vast majority of the people on the planet, I have not been mutilated. Doctors who perform this barbaric act should be banned from practicing surgery.
Then what are you trying to say? I never said that you shouldn't be paid based on the quality of your work. My point was it's unrealistic to expect everyone to work for free. Everyone has a right to be fairly compensated for work performed. And if someone does better quality work and is therefore in more demand, they have right to get paid more than the average joe.
You basically either need to find a broadband panel (and they are not common) or you need to get an ABN adapter and use NextAlarm. But no alarm will work as it's designed to over a standard VoIP connection, for a variety of reasons.
Sure they will. I just plugged the phone cord out of my ADT system into the phone port of my Vonage box and it worked. No additional hardware, no changes, no calls to ADT to change anything. I'm using Vonage over cable and as far as I'm concerned it works better than my land line ever did.
Suggesting that you should be paid because other people find your playing around valuable is just pretentious, not to mention pernicious.... So long as you are motivated to work on X, you shall never be paid to do X.
What are you, some kinda communist?? Why the hell shouldn't I get paid for my time and efforts?
If you are, think yourself lucky and shut up about it, otherwise the sucker who is paying you will figure out he doesn't have to.
Maybe the person that isn't getting paid should shut up and not while when they find out someone else is getting paid for the same work. For as you say, they are doing the work for the pure joy of it, so knowing someone else is getting paid should not reduce their happiness or will to work on the project.
You are right, but I would like to add a management perspective (although I am not a manager), I have worked on at least one very large OSS project. When you bring money into the equation -- you have to make a judgement call about who is most important, and who deserves money the most, and that inevitably pisses people off. There really is no fair way to distribute money in an OS project. So you loose people, and the project goes slower.
Sure but that is true in every company of every industry. If you pay people different salaries for the same work then you will get people complaining that they are getting screwed compared to someone else. If you pay everyone the same then the complaints will be that one person puts in much more effort than another so they should be compensated for that (or that Joe Airhead is a slacker and gets paid the same as me so why should I put in any extra effort?). Even if you manage to get salaries handed out fairly in an organization, invariably someone will compare their salary to one of their friends and wonder why they get paid more.
I'd argue that's not a very much utilized benefit. If you have old hardware you'd be more likely to keep the old software as well. Old software and old hardware will work exactly the same now as they would have 5 or 10 years ago.
If you are going to get new software, you'd probably get new supported hardware as well to get any benefit out of it.
What rights are those? You have no right to bear arms, there is pretty severe restrictions on freedom of speech, and a provincial premeir or the prime minister can suspend the constitution up to 5 years... What are these right that Canadians enjoy that Americans don't?
Ok AC troll - I'll play.
You dont have a constitutional right to bear arms - you have a right to an armed militia (read what you're trying to argue sometime). And some redneck with a shotgun in his pickup is not the intent of a well armed militia. Canadians have the same right to own weapons, with the exception of fully automatics which no sane person needs for self defence anyway.
There are no restrictions on freedom of speech - you can form any political party you like including marxist and communist which are illegal in the US (so much for your freedom of speech). What restrictions are you referring to?
It's perfectly ok to show nudity and swear on TV, even broadcast TV. Apparently in the US thats highly illegal. The world was laughing at the (over)reaction to the Janet Jackson thing - who cares!
It's legal for women (and men) to go topless in Canada. It's not immoral, illegal or dirty like it apparently is in the US. Gay marriage is also legal.
Our government has not made it legal to electronically eavesdrop on private phone and electronic conversations. Our government does not run an illegal offshore prison that contravenes the Geneva convention.
So, If Pluto was the size of Jupiter and still had its unique orbit, would the orbit matter?
Yes because it's mass would probably suck neptune out of its orbit, maybe uranus too, destroying the outer planets..
But no, not alone. Pluto's composition is rock-ice, just like a comet. That combined with the eccentric orbit and small size makes it likely a failed comet originally from the Oort cloud, not a true planet.
Here I thought that Pluto was classified as a planet because it was the next rock we found after Neptune.
Actually is was partly political in nature. The Americans reported the discovey, but many in the scientific community didn't believe it should be called a planet for a variety of reasons. President Hoover and the whitehouse liked the idea that an American would be named as the discoverer of a planet, since all of the other planets were discovered by Europeans or known since ancient times. The US government lobbied the other European governments to support the US assertion that it would be called a planet and they eventually agreed.
And for those that think that Pluto should be called a planet for historical reasons, the discoverer of Uranus originally classified it as a comet. Isn't it good that we are allowed to correct past mistakes instead of being forced to live with them?
What does the tilt of its orbit have to do with anything? There is nothing in the IAU Resolution that even hints that the planet's orbits need to be in the same plane. Also, I have never seen any astronomer state anything about the tilt of its orbit being reason demote it from being a planet.
I don't care about the IAU definition nor was I referring to it. I was giving arguments to why Pluto should have not been classified as a planet in the first place. Any astronomer will tell you that the orbit of Pluto is unique and does not follow the characteristics of the other planets' orbits. So if it's not like the planets, why call it a planet?
Re:Consistent terminology is crucial to any field
on
Pluto Making a Comeback
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Pluto should have never been classified as a planet, and was only done so for political reasons, not scientific. It's not in a standard orbit like a planet, it highly eccentric, crossing Neptune's orbit as well as being tilted significantly in the plane of the solar system as compared to the other planets. It's moon is over half its own diameter.
It's probably a rock/ice blob from the Oort cloud that came too close to one of the gas giants and ended up in a roughly stable orbit. It's more like a failed comet than a planet.
Slashdot Mirror
Geez you've really thought this through haven't you?
Have you ever thought of getting a girlfriend? Or a life?
Good points...
Hoewever, don't you get paid sick time? Why would calling in sick affect your pay?
No, evolution has NOTHING to do with athiesm or religion. I'll say again since so many fundies get this wrong - belief in evolution does NOT mean you dont believe in God.
Get a grip and get a clue.
Neither actually - why would you say that?
I do not live in the US so I get a balanced persepective from multiple sources. What I said was true - basically every country but the US knew the justifaction for the war was complete bullshit, fabricated to support Bush's private agenda. Try watching news other than Fox for once and open your eyes.
Only for Americans that were fed lies through their media. For nearly every other country on the planet the war was an unjustified fabrication - no one believed there were any WMDs in Iraq.
And for protesting the American government pushing through the war, other countries were villified. Next time when the entire world tells you that you are wrong, it might be a good idea to listen.
Yes it's human but it is not intelligent life - has no more rights than a fingernail clipping (which will also DNA test human). Human life gets rights and should be protected when there is verifiable brain activity, somewhere near the end of the first trimester.
Don't be an ass. Only an idiot would read into my statement what you did.
All the things you state are done to the person wanting them done, and in most cases are reversible. Gods greatest gift above all (if you believe in such things) is free will. However a circumcision is forced on the baby getting it done - he or she has no choice in the matter and it is not reversible. Besides the moral implications, there is no medical need to do that procedure whatsoever.
"God" said no such thing. God made us a certain way and we should respect that - not change it.
I'm glad to say that, like the vast majority of the people on the planet, I have not been mutilated. Doctors who perform this barbaric act should be banned from practicing surgery.
They're performing a simple surgery, not a barbaric mutilation.
Yea, you're speaking of the vast majority of painters and musicians :-)
I think that was Canadian..
Then what are you trying to say? I never said that you shouldn't be paid based on the quality of your work. My point was it's unrealistic to expect everyone to work for free. Everyone has a right to be fairly compensated for work performed. And if someone does better quality work and is therefore in more demand, they have right to get paid more than the average joe.
Are you telling me you pay more for your McBurger when it's busy, or if they manage to put it together nicely?
Sure they will. I just plugged the phone cord out of my ADT system into the phone port of my Vonage box and it worked. No additional hardware, no changes, no calls to ADT to change anything. I'm using Vonage over cable and as far as I'm concerned it works better than my land line ever did.
What are you, some kinda communist?? Why the hell shouldn't I get paid for my time and efforts?
Maybe the person that isn't getting paid should shut up and not while when they find out someone else is getting paid for the same work. For as you say, they are doing the work for the pure joy of it, so knowing someone else is getting paid should not reduce their happiness or will to work on the project.
I'd argue that's not a very much utilized benefit. If you have old hardware you'd be more likely to keep the old software as well. Old software and old hardware will work exactly the same now as they would have 5 or 10 years ago.
If you are going to get new software, you'd probably get new supported hardware as well to get any benefit out of it.
Ok AC troll - I'll play.
You dont have a constitutional right to bear arms - you have a right to an armed militia (read what you're trying to argue sometime). And some redneck with a shotgun in his pickup is not the intent of a well armed militia. Canadians have the same right to own weapons, with the exception of fully automatics which no sane person needs for self defence anyway.
There are no restrictions on freedom of speech - you can form any political party you like including marxist and communist which are illegal in the US (so much for your freedom of speech). What restrictions are you referring to?
It's perfectly ok to show nudity and swear on TV, even broadcast TV. Apparently in the US thats highly illegal. The world was laughing at the (over)reaction to the Janet Jackson thing - who cares!
It's legal for women (and men) to go topless in Canada. It's not immoral, illegal or dirty like it apparently is in the US. Gay marriage is also legal.
Our government has not made it legal to electronically eavesdrop on private phone and electronic conversations. Our government does not run an illegal offshore prison that contravenes the Geneva convention.
Shall I continue?
I don't see how any freedoms are being curtailed in that article. And Canadians have far more rights that Americans.
Yes because it's mass would probably suck neptune out of its orbit, maybe uranus too, destroying the outer planets..
But no, not alone. Pluto's composition is rock-ice, just like a comet. That combined with the eccentric orbit and small size makes it likely a failed comet originally from the Oort cloud, not a true planet.
Actually is was partly political in nature. The Americans reported the discovey, but many in the scientific community didn't believe it should be called a planet for a variety of reasons. President Hoover and the whitehouse liked the idea that an American would be named as the discoverer of a planet, since all of the other planets were discovered by Europeans or known since ancient times. The US government lobbied the other European governments to support the US assertion that it would be called a planet and they eventually agreed.
And for those that think that Pluto should be called a planet for historical reasons, the discoverer of Uranus originally classified it as a comet. Isn't it good that we are allowed to correct past mistakes instead of being forced to live with them?
I don't care about the IAU definition nor was I referring to it. I was giving arguments to why Pluto should have not been classified as a planet in the first place. Any astronomer will tell you that the orbit of Pluto is unique and does not follow the characteristics of the other planets' orbits. So if it's not like the planets, why call it a planet?
Pluto should have never been classified as a planet, and was only done so for political reasons, not scientific. It's not in a standard orbit like a planet, it highly eccentric, crossing Neptune's orbit as well as being tilted significantly in the plane of the solar system as compared to the other planets. It's moon is over half its own diameter.
It's probably a rock/ice blob from the Oort cloud that came too close to one of the gas giants and ended up in a roughly stable orbit. It's more like a failed comet than a planet.