I read a fascinating article in the Freeman comparing train security, mostly privately done, with airports security, done by the government. The key difference was that when it was done commercially the inconvenience to customers was quite minimal. On the other hand when the government runs it, it is very inconvenient for customers. Why do you think this is?
Actually the problem was really WWI. Americans were tricked into entering the war by federal government. The Zimmerman telegram was probably a fake. It didn't make sense for Mexico to attack the US. The Germans couldn't give them arms and the only person who had any to sell was the US.
The Lusitania was a munitions boat and the Germans tried to publish in eastern newspapers that they would sink it but the State Department stepped in and wouldn't let the newspapers publish the warnings. It actually got published in a midwest paper.
The reason I mention this is that we stayed had stayed out of Europe since the starting of the country and since this time we have had a very aggressive foreign policy.
There is no burden of proof on me. I know that God exists and I understand His characteristics and attributes. I do not have to prove it to you nor do I want to. That is not my role. Even when I consider myself a missionary it is to encourage others to learn about the characteristics and attributes of God and then seek Him out. He can choose to reveal Himself to you and then you will know of His existence.
Perhaps there is evidence that many do not understand God or that He does not do what people want him to do but there is no evidence God does not exist.
Because people from various religions have religious experience or even can be fooled to think they are having one does not prove that religious experiences are false. It doesn't prove a single thing. It might give strength to the argument that you do not understand religious experiences though.
Just because you do not understand something or it doesn't work quite how you think it will does not mean the whole thing is false.
But my point is that if I have an experience then it happened regardless of if I can prove it to you. I have my own personal evidence that God exists through my own religious experiences. This shows me that God exists but doesn't show you. You need to have your own experience for you to know that God exists and that is up to you to seek. I am OK with this aspect of it.
I personally feel that many have false religious experiences as the Devil is a great counterfeiter. But that does not mean that real ones cannot exist.
You cannot prove that God is not real just as I cannot prove to you He is. You cannot prove that all religions are false. And, in reality, you cannot even prove your own existence. Man is a very fallible creature with a very limited understanding.
Any other questions?
I don't base my testimony on others. I base it on my own very personal experiences. My faith, the LDS faith, is quite different than others. We teach that man should ask God if He is real and which church is His church. They shouldn't believe just because somebody else does. We also believe in continuing personal revelation. We do not believe the Bible to be the end but that God continues to reveal His word through prophets for the whole church but also will reveal to individuals more specific direction to their own lives.
My religious experiences and beliefs are based on more evidence than most of my scientific understanding.
Something does not have to be proveable for it to have happened. At least it doesn't have to be proveable by somebodies current understanding.
You can also observe the effects of religion. You can see how it has changed people's lives. They have been transformed. Perhaps scientists can replicate what some consider a spiritual experiences but there are some they cannot replicate.
Can you prove my arguments are nonsensical or is that just your opinion?
5 people saw car accident happen. 100 people did not. The 5 who saw it state their claims but are not believed by the 100 because the 100 didn't see it themselves. Does this mean the car accident didn't happen? What if they can't explain it adequately? Religion is a deeply personal experience and it is very difficult to correctly explain an experience to somebody else, much like it is very difficult to explain what salt tastes like to one who has never experienced it.
I personally know many good people from various religions and their religions make them better people. I also know those who claim they do not believe in a supreme being. But in almost every case I have looked at in depth I have found a very personal and quite illogical reason at the foundation of their disbelief.
I strongly disagree. There are very effective ways to keep teens away from porn. They involve teaching a kid to respect themselves and others. It involves talking to your kids about these things. It involves teaching your kids correct principles when they are young and being a good parent. Is it possible to have your child never see porn? Probably not as there are many conspiring men who have their hearts set on addicting as many as they can but you can teach your kid never to go looking for it and what to do if he accidentally finds it.
I really enjoyed your explanation and the method you explain is much better than the one in the article. I do have major problems with the ACLU as I feel they have been bought and paid for by the pornography industry. Do they have legitimate points and concerns? Sure, but they have spent so much effort defending the vile filth called pornography and removing religious belief from public life that most conservatives take a default position against them.
There is what government can do and what government should do. Remember that everything the government does has to be paid for. And that money is taken by force. If government leaves private companies alone then their incompetence is punished by lack of prophet. Just look at Ford. Among other things they have really upset some very large family groups which are boycotting them and their sales continue to fall.
Government is far less accountable for its actions. Let's say I am a senator who does something that my constituents hate. If it isn't right before the election then most people will forget. And even if they remember then it can still be sometime before something happens. Also, lets say I come from somewhere like Utah where the Republican almost always wins. If I'm the Republican then I can get away with a lot of stuff.
Do you really think the Democrats are better then the Republicans? As far as I am concerned they are largely the same party. The only candidate who voted against the war and will get us out is Ron Paul.
You don't have to keep everybody quiet about it. All you have to do is suitably make sure that no major conclusive evidence is taken out and make sure that you discredit all who try to link anything, or threaten and possibly kill them. Another option is to distract people and make them happy with their beer and television so they don't care anymore. Maybe even get them addicted to the system instead of being self-reliant. You also throw out a lot of wacky conspiracies out, like tinfoil hats, so anybody who believes that the government isn't telling the truth is labeled as a tinfoil hat wearing idiot.
You can even do a pseudo investigation into things by people who are part of the conspiracy. Just look at the Oklahoma City Bombing and the 'suicide' of Kenny Trentadue. Just look at the invasion of Normandy. The mighty German army was fooled. Why couldn't similar tactics be used? There are plenty of conspiracies in the world. These people aren't stupid and are highly organized.
Look at campaigns like Ron Paul which are seriously questioning those in power. These efforts are growing rather quickly. The Internet allows a much cheaper platform for these people to compete. Is this an effort to keep certain types of people in power?
The article has that problem too.
"Second, the hard drive industry's definition of a megabyte differs from the rest of the PC business. One megabyte of hard drive space is 1,000,000 bytes: 106 bytes. Operating systems calculate one megabyte as 220 bytes, or 1,048,576 bytes. Once installed and set up, Hitachi's 1TB hard drive offers up an actual formatted capacity of about 935GB, as measured by the OS."
Glad it was fixed on Slashdot.
Digital forensics is a very tough issue as laws are somewhat immature and judicial precedence over what is acceptable and what isn't, isn't set yet. What is considered in plain sight on a hard drive? These questions haven't been fully answered yet and it is going to take at least one high profile case before it is done.
And always remember to use a write blocker when examining somebody else's hard drive. Even booting into Windows will change the timestamps on a lot of files which might allow the theory of the evidence being planted.
You can. There is only religion where the amount of education has a positive correlation to how active and faithful you are in your religion. That is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, also known as Mormons. They believe very strongly in a good education.
It appears you have a problem with LDS people based on your sig. I do not support Mitt in his run for president but I would not dare say that Mormons in general are morons. In fact it is the only major religion where the amount of education and how active one is in the church are positively correlated. If you have any specific problems then please let me know.
I used to work for a brokerage and had to deal with Canadian unit trusts, similar to mutual funds. The way they reported tax info was by submitting a excel file. They often submitted multiple files with conflicting information, it was largely in the wrong format ( which was not validated by the Canadians ), and had conflicting internal information. And they wonder why they have problems. Needless to say, I was shocked with how poorly it was run.
Slashdot Mirror
I read a fascinating article in the Freeman comparing train security, mostly privately done, with airports security, done by the government. The key difference was that when it was done commercially the inconvenience to customers was quite minimal. On the other hand when the government runs it, it is very inconvenient for customers. Why do you think this is?
Actually the problem was really WWI. Americans were tricked into entering the war by federal government. The Zimmerman telegram was probably a fake. It didn't make sense for Mexico to attack the US. The Germans couldn't give them arms and the only person who had any to sell was the US. The Lusitania was a munitions boat and the Germans tried to publish in eastern newspapers that they would sink it but the State Department stepped in and wouldn't let the newspapers publish the warnings. It actually got published in a midwest paper. The reason I mention this is that we stayed had stayed out of Europe since the starting of the country and since this time we have had a very aggressive foreign policy.
There is no burden of proof on me. I know that God exists and I understand His characteristics and attributes. I do not have to prove it to you nor do I want to. That is not my role. Even when I consider myself a missionary it is to encourage others to learn about the characteristics and attributes of God and then seek Him out. He can choose to reveal Himself to you and then you will know of His existence. Perhaps there is evidence that many do not understand God or that He does not do what people want him to do but there is no evidence God does not exist. Because people from various religions have religious experience or even can be fooled to think they are having one does not prove that religious experiences are false. It doesn't prove a single thing. It might give strength to the argument that you do not understand religious experiences though. Just because you do not understand something or it doesn't work quite how you think it will does not mean the whole thing is false.
But my point is that if I have an experience then it happened regardless of if I can prove it to you. I have my own personal evidence that God exists through my own religious experiences. This shows me that God exists but doesn't show you. You need to have your own experience for you to know that God exists and that is up to you to seek. I am OK with this aspect of it. I personally feel that many have false religious experiences as the Devil is a great counterfeiter. But that does not mean that real ones cannot exist. You cannot prove that God is not real just as I cannot prove to you He is. You cannot prove that all religions are false. And, in reality, you cannot even prove your own existence. Man is a very fallible creature with a very limited understanding. Any other questions?
I don't base my testimony on others. I base it on my own very personal experiences. My faith, the LDS faith, is quite different than others. We teach that man should ask God if He is real and which church is His church. They shouldn't believe just because somebody else does. We also believe in continuing personal revelation. We do not believe the Bible to be the end but that God continues to reveal His word through prophets for the whole church but also will reveal to individuals more specific direction to their own lives. My religious experiences and beliefs are based on more evidence than most of my scientific understanding.
Something does not have to be proveable for it to have happened. At least it doesn't have to be proveable by somebodies current understanding. You can also observe the effects of religion. You can see how it has changed people's lives. They have been transformed. Perhaps scientists can replicate what some consider a spiritual experiences but there are some they cannot replicate. Can you prove my arguments are nonsensical or is that just your opinion?
5 people saw car accident happen. 100 people did not. The 5 who saw it state their claims but are not believed by the 100 because the 100 didn't see it themselves. Does this mean the car accident didn't happen? What if they can't explain it adequately? Religion is a deeply personal experience and it is very difficult to correctly explain an experience to somebody else, much like it is very difficult to explain what salt tastes like to one who has never experienced it. I personally know many good people from various religions and their religions make them better people. I also know those who claim they do not believe in a supreme being. But in almost every case I have looked at in depth I have found a very personal and quite illogical reason at the foundation of their disbelief.
I strongly disagree. There are very effective ways to keep teens away from porn. They involve teaching a kid to respect themselves and others. It involves talking to your kids about these things. It involves teaching your kids correct principles when they are young and being a good parent. Is it possible to have your child never see porn? Probably not as there are many conspiring men who have their hearts set on addicting as many as they can but you can teach your kid never to go looking for it and what to do if he accidentally finds it.
You mean a cruise missile?
If you see gnomes spending too much time at the mailbox then they are probably characters of government employees reading others mail.
I really enjoyed your explanation and the method you explain is much better than the one in the article. I do have major problems with the ACLU as I feel they have been bought and paid for by the pornography industry. Do they have legitimate points and concerns? Sure, but they have spent so much effort defending the vile filth called pornography and removing religious belief from public life that most conservatives take a default position against them.
Because it is their money. If they choose to donate then let them. If they choose not to then don't.
But they do it through taxes. Forced charity causes both resentment in the giver and the receiver.
There is what government can do and what government should do. Remember that everything the government does has to be paid for. And that money is taken by force. If government leaves private companies alone then their incompetence is punished by lack of prophet. Just look at Ford. Among other things they have really upset some very large family groups which are boycotting them and their sales continue to fall. Government is far less accountable for its actions. Let's say I am a senator who does something that my constituents hate. If it isn't right before the election then most people will forget. And even if they remember then it can still be sometime before something happens. Also, lets say I come from somewhere like Utah where the Republican almost always wins. If I'm the Republican then I can get away with a lot of stuff.
Do you really think the Democrats are better then the Republicans? As far as I am concerned they are largely the same party. The only candidate who voted against the war and will get us out is Ron Paul.
You don't have to keep everybody quiet about it. All you have to do is suitably make sure that no major conclusive evidence is taken out and make sure that you discredit all who try to link anything, or threaten and possibly kill them. Another option is to distract people and make them happy with their beer and television so they don't care anymore. Maybe even get them addicted to the system instead of being self-reliant. You also throw out a lot of wacky conspiracies out, like tinfoil hats, so anybody who believes that the government isn't telling the truth is labeled as a tinfoil hat wearing idiot. You can even do a pseudo investigation into things by people who are part of the conspiracy. Just look at the Oklahoma City Bombing and the 'suicide' of Kenny Trentadue. Just look at the invasion of Normandy. The mighty German army was fooled. Why couldn't similar tactics be used? There are plenty of conspiracies in the world. These people aren't stupid and are highly organized.
Honestly, it is stupid moves like this that has kept natives mostly poor and depressed. What are they going to do about it? Build a wall to block it?
Look at campaigns like Ron Paul which are seriously questioning those in power. These efforts are growing rather quickly. The Internet allows a much cheaper platform for these people to compete. Is this an effort to keep certain types of people in power?
The article has that problem too. "Second, the hard drive industry's definition of a megabyte differs from the rest of the PC business. One megabyte of hard drive space is 1,000,000 bytes: 106 bytes. Operating systems calculate one megabyte as 220 bytes, or 1,048,576 bytes. Once installed and set up, Hitachi's 1TB hard drive offers up an actual formatted capacity of about 935GB, as measured by the OS." Glad it was fixed on Slashdot.
Digital forensics is a very tough issue as laws are somewhat immature and judicial precedence over what is acceptable and what isn't, isn't set yet. What is considered in plain sight on a hard drive? These questions haven't been fully answered yet and it is going to take at least one high profile case before it is done. And always remember to use a write blocker when examining somebody else's hard drive. Even booting into Windows will change the timestamps on a lot of files which might allow the theory of the evidence being planted.
You can. There is only religion where the amount of education has a positive correlation to how active and faithful you are in your religion. That is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, also known as Mormons. They believe very strongly in a good education.
It appears you have a problem with LDS people based on your sig. I do not support Mitt in his run for president but I would not dare say that Mormons in general are morons. In fact it is the only major religion where the amount of education and how active one is in the church are positively correlated. If you have any specific problems then please let me know.
How can they be zero day if they are publicly known? Oh, I know, zero day sounds so much more 'dangerous'.
Was that comment to offset the cost of your Slashdot subscription?
I used to work for a brokerage and had to deal with Canadian unit trusts, similar to mutual funds. The way they reported tax info was by submitting a excel file. They often submitted multiple files with conflicting information, it was largely in the wrong format ( which was not validated by the Canadians ), and had conflicting internal information. And they wonder why they have problems. Needless to say, I was shocked with how poorly it was run.