The majority of the problems of the world are caused or at least exacerbated by a human or group of humans thinking they're better than the rest of the world. This is a universal constant.
A major component of the worth of a theory is the predictive power it has. Theories based on God, even if they are true, can be used to prove anything and therefore can be used to prove nothing. Theories based on existing natural laws, however, give much more specific predictions, which have mostly been verified. When a small discrepancy occurs, the equation is tweaked, like with Relativity.
No, but many of them don't look for God in their theories because one of the benchmarks for the power of a theory is what it can be used to prove, and God's proving power is very low.
You do realize that the "skeptics" have since backtracked into saying that we didn't cause it, right? Soon they'll be backtracking into saying it's too late to save things, which it wouldn't've been had they not been such dumbasses.
The writers of the bible claimed to be inspired by God, but no part of the Bible actually constitutes God's word, not even when Jesus speaks, as our minds rarely remember quotes exactly, and not a single book of the Bible was written by Jesus. I'm tired of the extremists from both sides telling me I can't accept the morality of Jesus without accepting every insane 4000-year-old metaphor given by people who had no word to literally explain what happened even if they knew.
I know nothing about this person either but I think this'll be like Daniel Robbins working for Microsoft--his job title was nominally "to help Microsoft understand Linux and the open source community" or something like that. We have no idea what Robbins actually did while there but this guy will probably end up doing something similar.
What makes it even worse is that the Sci-Fi channel is owned by NBC, which produces Heroes. I think Hammer and Stern are trying to show themselves as the biggest idiots in the universe.
And there was only one between 9/11 and the fall of the USSR. However, there have been hundreds of attacks by antichoicers and white supremacists in that timespan.
You're completely right on both counts. However, in Indonesia, which is where the majority of Muslims actually live, things aren't nearly as bad as they are in the Arab nations because they don't live in theocracies. Mounds of evidence show that no one particular religion is the problem but instead the entanglement of church and state(even nations that theoretically have a state church, like England and such, keep it firmly separated from politics and the actual operation of the state) and the latter issue is something you unfortunately cannot fix easily. (In fact, we killed the only secular rule in Iraq and had it replaced with fundie rule)
The one thing I remember most from AP US History class was this image of protesters against the Brown v. Board of Education decision. One of them had a sign saying "COMMUNIST JEWS BEHIND RACE-MIXING". That sign made me realize just how ridiculous racism and anticommunism was.
Islam, you mean the religion that preserved the knowledge of the Greeks while the Christians in Europe killed each other? It wasn't until the Mongol attacks and the rise of Saudi Arabia's Wahabi sect that Islam turned into what it is now. And it wasn't until the rise of petroleum(the Black Devil, as I like to call it, as it's the closest thing on this Earth to Satan, as it corrupts anything it touches) that the diplomatic tension started. And just so you know, the fault of Communism wasn't the concept of workers owning the means of production(that concept works just fine when it comes about peacefully) but of armed revolution, a concept which only produced even vaguely successful results once, and even that can be attributed to the fact that the Patriots fought mostly foreign soldiers in the American "Revolution" and that afterwards even the Loyalists were allowed to stay.
You really think an armed revolution would produce a positive change? Not a single internal armed revolution has led to better leaders being put in than those who left. (as for the American Revolution, the British had very little control over the colonies due to their policy of salutary neglect up until the French and Indian War, and most of the actual leaders, even those who were Loyalists, remained in the country)
If Democracies really worked, governments would outlaw it.
IE if cops really stopped law breakers, no one would commit a crime. A witty saying proves nothing.
That would imply the existence of a spectator sport that doesn't suck. The only cases in which sports don't suck are those in which either you are participating or somebody you directly know is participating.
Yeah, usually the initial twitter posts are mostly reasonable posts with one or two minor flaws. Then someone(whom I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same person as twitter) points out the minor flaw, usually in an offensive manner, then twitter gets defensive and responds violently, until both sides devolve into nonsense and dozens of innocent bystanders have been pulled into the conflict. It's like what would have happened had mutually assured destruction actually led to us being pushed off the brink.
Slashdot Mirror
That's funny, because I got patches for every single pirated Apache server I own!
The majority of the problems of the world are caused or at least exacerbated by a human or group of humans thinking they're better than the rest of the world. This is a universal constant.
I'm half-tempted to say USSR but that wasn't so much areligious as forced worship of Stalin, who was named "Son of Lenin".
A major component of the worth of a theory is the predictive power it has. Theories based on God, even if they are true, can be used to prove anything and therefore can be used to prove nothing. Theories based on existing natural laws, however, give much more specific predictions, which have mostly been verified. When a small discrepancy occurs, the equation is tweaked, like with Relativity.
No, but many of them don't look for God in their theories because one of the benchmarks for the power of a theory is what it can be used to prove, and God's proving power is very low.
The UN defines lack of religion to be a religion for the same type of reasons the DMV defines bald to be a hair color.
You do realize that the "skeptics" have since backtracked into saying that we didn't cause it, right? Soon they'll be backtracking into saying it's too late to save things, which it wouldn't've been had they not been such dumbasses.
The writers of the bible claimed to be inspired by God, but no part of the Bible actually constitutes God's word, not even when Jesus speaks, as our minds rarely remember quotes exactly, and not a single book of the Bible was written by Jesus. I'm tired of the extremists from both sides telling me I can't accept the morality of Jesus without accepting every insane 4000-year-old metaphor given by people who had no word to literally explain what happened even if they knew.
I know nothing about this person either but I think this'll be like Daniel Robbins working for Microsoft--his job title was nominally "to help Microsoft understand Linux and the open source community" or something like that. We have no idea what Robbins actually did while there but this guy will probably end up doing something similar.
I wholeheartedly agree with setting all SUVs on fire.
What makes it even worse is that the Sci-Fi channel is owned by NBC, which produces Heroes. I think Hammer and Stern are trying to show themselves as the biggest idiots in the universe.
Actually Andrew Jackson was accused of violating a bullshit law put in place to prevent him from firing Secretary of Defense Stanton.
The difference between LBJ and GWB is that LBJ got bad immigration acts repealed and supported civil rights.
And there was only one between 9/11 and the fall of the USSR. However, there have been hundreds of attacks by antichoicers and white supremacists in that timespan.
You're completely right on both counts. However, in Indonesia, which is where the majority of Muslims actually live, things aren't nearly as bad as they are in the Arab nations because they don't live in theocracies. Mounds of evidence show that no one particular religion is the problem but instead the entanglement of church and state(even nations that theoretically have a state church, like England and such, keep it firmly separated from politics and the actual operation of the state) and the latter issue is something you unfortunately cannot fix easily. (In fact, we killed the only secular rule in Iraq and had it replaced with fundie rule)
Better be prepared!
CCP's goal with these ombudsmen isn't to create oversight. It's to create controversy.
The one thing I remember most from AP US History class was this image of protesters against the Brown v. Board of Education decision. One of them had a sign saying "COMMUNIST JEWS BEHIND RACE-MIXING". That sign made me realize just how ridiculous racism and anticommunism was.
Islam, you mean the religion that preserved the knowledge of the Greeks while the Christians in Europe killed each other? It wasn't until the Mongol attacks and the rise of Saudi Arabia's Wahabi sect that Islam turned into what it is now. And it wasn't until the rise of petroleum(the Black Devil, as I like to call it, as it's the closest thing on this Earth to Satan, as it corrupts anything it touches) that the diplomatic tension started. And just so you know, the fault of Communism wasn't the concept of workers owning the means of production(that concept works just fine when it comes about peacefully) but of armed revolution, a concept which only produced even vaguely successful results once, and even that can be attributed to the fact that the Patriots fought mostly foreign soldiers in the American "Revolution" and that afterwards even the Loyalists were allowed to stay.
You really think an armed revolution would produce a positive change? Not a single internal armed revolution has led to better leaders being put in than those who left. (as for the American Revolution, the British had very little control over the colonies due to their policy of salutary neglect up until the French and Indian War, and most of the actual leaders, even those who were Loyalists, remained in the country)
Yes, but New York? I think I'd rather live somewhere where the soot doesn't cake onto your skin.
So that means it'll be canceled in the middle of a storyline?
That would imply the existence of a spectator sport that doesn't suck. The only cases in which sports don't suck are those in which either you are participating or somebody you directly know is participating.
Yeah, usually the initial twitter posts are mostly reasonable posts with one or two minor flaws. Then someone(whom I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same person as twitter) points out the minor flaw, usually in an offensive manner, then twitter gets defensive and responds violently, until both sides devolve into nonsense and dozens of innocent bystanders have been pulled into the conflict. It's like what would have happened had mutually assured destruction actually led to us being pushed off the brink.