the author shows by his very writing of the article just how bad science education is in the u.s. that is, he himself is a victim of the very low standards and the lack of teaching and emphasis on philosophy of science
That's actually kind of funny. The author is apparently French, lives in Paris, and was educated at the école des Hautes Etudes Commerciales de Paris.
Science is more than capable of contemplating the cause of anything. It may not be good at anthropomorphizing natural phenomena and giving it intent (like wondering why the universe was created), but that is simply because scientific reasoning easily dismisses such thought as not only irrelevant but ultimately incorrect.
. I do not believe that science can disprove the existence of God; I think that is impossible. And if it is impossible, is not a belief in science and in a God – an ordinary God of religion — a consistent possibility?
Yes, it is consistent. Despite the fact that I said that more than half of the scientists don't believe in God, many scientists do believe in both science and God, in a perfectly consistent way. But this consistency, although possible, is not easy to attain....
Why are you right, and he wrong? Why are you right and the many sciences that believe in God are wrong about that?
Perhaps the answer is here:
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
- Hamlet (1.5.167-8)
Being an atheist doesn't make you smarter any anyone else, it just makes you an atheist.
The new estimate comes a day after the French Parliament released a harshly worded report blaming the deaths on a complex health system, widespread failure among agencies and health services to coordinate efforts, and chronically insufficient care for the elderly
The US already has a system like "the rest of the world" with its Veterans Administration hospital system. Just like "the rest of the world" people die waiting for care, and the employees try gaming the system to make their stats look good. You see similar things going on in the NHS, and other similar systems.
And you're right, the Democrats did drag the US into a 19th century plan, unfortunately before that the US had a 20th/21st century system. The Democrats tried to "fix" what was at most a 15% problem by seizing control and screwing with 100% of it, and making a hash of it. But at least they own it.
Why do we need this? I've been in unix for over 20 years and never even heard of kill -1.
I'm in the same boat. Is linux so unreliable and prone to disaster that "kill -1" used on a regular basis? There seems to be so much whining about "systemd", you just can't work out how much is complete FUD and whats a genuine gripe. Most of the gripes seems to be neutered by the Myths page http://0pointer.de/blog/projec...
There is an old saying that Unix is user friendly, it is just particular about who it chooses for friends. Maybe the two of you have been hanging around *nix for years, but how well do you really know it? Kill -1 (aka kill -HUP) is pretty handing if you are running infrastructure that other people rely upon for uninterrupted service. Just rereading a config file for updates is generally better and easier than stopping and restarting daemons*, and plenty of standard daemons expect it. It also a handy command since at times it will kill things that other variations of the kill command won't, including kill -9. It also can be a good place to start since "gentle" kills give a process an opportunity to clean up after themselves.
If you take into account all of the standard utilities of Unix and its derivatives there is an enormous amount of functionality and multiple ways to accomplish the same task. I haven't met anyone yet that was fluent in every tool and facility in standard Unixland. That is part of what I like about it - there is so much you can learn and apply, and knowing which tools can scratch particular itches. Even "obsolete" tools can be useful.
* Although there are times when stopping and restarting is a good thing too.
You're deluded if you think that. The Progressive lobbyists and Democrats that wrote the bill are the ones that had to water it down and put state level bribes in it to get Democrats to vote for it. The Republicans couldn't be bribed, and knew better than to vote for it. It is a bill owned by Democrats, lock, stock, and barrel.
You mean the health care coverage businesses used to provide years ago, but scrapped in favor of a stock dividend and other profits?
That would be the health care coverage that was in place when "Obamacare" was deemed passed (remember that one?). Just kidding about the "deemed" part, it actually did pass on a party line vote. When a business fails the problem is even worse. Then there is no health insurance and no job.
And why we should not hold these businesses in moral contempt for callously skirting around the law so they can continue to abuse their employees?
Because it was the Democrats that passed Obamacare and forced bad choices on everyone?
If new "costs" are being incurred: It's because Life and the Pursuit of Happiness are expendable to American business.
Your life and pursuit of happiness (note: pursuit) are your responsibility, not your boss's.
Hard to have either when you're dying from lack of preventable treatment or sick.
I wouldn't worry too much about that, Obamacare is preventing a growing amount of treatment.
At least this is a simpler case than most for assigning responsibility. Obamacare was written and voted into law purely by Democrats, and a Democratic administration executed the law. The Republicans had no hand in it.
That the F-35 isn't a perfect warplane is well established. On the other hand the "Affordable Care Act" is absolutely useless against the latest Russian and Chinese combat aircraft. Even the elderly Iranian air force is more than a match for the ACA.
I see you have a very selective memory. Please read the original plan and then follow the idiotic path of compromises that Republicans forced onto it rendering it into the watered down ridiculous mess that it is.
Your memory isn't so good either. Obamacare was written by Democrats and "progressive" lobbyists*, voted for by Democrats, and implemented by a Democratic administration. They own it lock, stock, and barrel. The Republicans didn't vote for it, you can't blame the Obamacare debacle on them.
If you're going to create a massive new entitlement program grabbing control of 16% of the economy then you should have a broad consensus and support for doing it, and do it with care. The Democrats didn't have that but decided to force a badly written, ill conceived boondoggle on the country. We'll be paying the price for that for years, and I doubt that the Democrats will pay any real price at all.
I wouldn't worry about it. Once a Republican is back in the Oval Office the MSM will be interested in journalism again so there will be more places to find corroborating stories. Besides, the MSM won't have much choice, they'll need a break - carrying all that water wears on the arms and Obama has called for more than most. If only his presidency had turned out as well as Jimmy Carters. If only...
You forgot to include the economic costs of people having their hours cut so they no longer qualify for benefits and end up working two part time jobs without benefits to make ends meet. You left out the costs of businesses cutting jobs and locations, and refusing to expand, to avoid the fines, penalties, and costs associated with Obamacare. You left out the costs of people that had benefits but lost them due to companies being forced to drop benefits due to the unnecessary costs forced on them if they offer healthcare due to Obamacare. You left out the stifling of innovation due to the punitive costs and structure of the medical device tax. You forgot to include the cost of trying to force people to violate their conscience as Obamacare is doing.
And perhaps most important, you forgot to include the dangerous precedent of allowing the Federal government to directly force nearly everyone to go buy a very expensive service specified at the whim of the government and its bureaucrats.
What will you have to say if the next administration decides to enforce the militia clause by requiring every adult not convicted of a felony to purchase a $800 rifle and 200 rounds of ammunition and keep it locked in their homes, available for yearly inspection? Not much different than Obamacare, which is now enforced by the IRS. Well, actually that is probably a lot cheaper than most people's Obamacare bill.
. Most of the cost of Obamacare is recognizing costs that were, until now, hidden.
Obamacare is creating plenty of new costs all by itself. It is been a debacle and it has barely started. It will be inflicting plenty more damage on the economy and society in the years to come baring a repeal.
No person is "evil". Calling extremists evil is a lazy manipulation designed to stop you thinking about their motivations and grievances. I think we've had quite enough of that.
ISIS engages in rape, torture, beheadings, amputations, crucifixions, live burials, mass executions, and genocide.
Are they simply misguided? They desire to spread their civilization and form of government over all the earth. Is that wrong? Are you being "judgmental"?
It isn't rare for would-be "martyrs" to disapprove of dying when it isn't under their control, and they don't get to take large numbers of people with them to "earn" their spot in paradise.
Its classic misdirection to keep people distracted from the increasing unemployment, worsening economy, political infighting and other Abbott government failures.
So, preventing citizens from getting their heads chopped off or blown up by suicide bombings is calculated to gain the voters favor? Those clever bastards! One question - will the next government not do that? How do you think people will react to that? Are you suggesting that people in Australia are resigned to being slaughtered like so many cattle? How will that reflect upon Australia?
On July 14, 2003, Washington Post journalist Robert Novak, using information obtained from Richard Armitage at the US State Department, effectively ended Valerie Plame's career with the CIA
And no, "Richard Armitage" isn't an anagram for Richard Cheney.
I don't think they're idiots. I think that they think we are idiots.
When massive amounts of detailed information on intelligence programs and alliances is stolen and released to all comers and people try to claim that it doesn't cause any harm, as many here do, they might have a case to describe some of those people as "idiots."
This issue of Inspire, the first since the Edward Snowden affair, includes a focus on Internet security. Most significantly, it notes on the first page, in all-capital letters: "DUE TO TECHNICAL AND SECURITY REASONS, WE HAVE SUSPENDED OUR EMAIL ADDRESSES TEMPORARILY." Since, as mentioned, Inspire has always provided email addresses and encryption information for readers wishing to contact it, and, as a major part of its outreach efforts, urged readers to write in, its decision to suspend its email is meaningful.
It is worth noting that this issue includes praise for Snowden, as well as for other Western leakers such as Bradley/Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange. It notes under the heading "Questions We Should Be Asking": "If those making blasphemy against Islam have the right to express themselves, why aren't the actions of Assange, Snowden, Manning and Hammond considered freedom of expression?"
The cover story, "Shattered: A Story About Change," by Abu Abdillah Almoravid, who also authored an article in the previous issue of Inspire, focuses on the immoral nature of America and, in another mention of Edward Snowden, how he helped unmask it....
Praise for Snowden can also be found in Issue III of the English-language online Taliban magazine Azan, released August 26, 2013....
Also following the Snowden leaks, on August 30, 2013, Mula'ib Al-Assinnah, a senior member of the leading jihadi forum Shumoukh Al-Islam warned online jihadis not to use Google's Gmail because Google is part of the National Security Agency (NSA)....
Slashdot Mirror
Judaism reaches back at least two millennia prior to that, and Christianity is a branch of it.
That is interesting, please continue. Tell me s'more about these campfire activities.
the author shows by his very writing of the article just how bad science education is in the u.s. that is, he himself is a victim of the very low standards and the lack of teaching and emphasis on philosophy of science
That's actually kind of funny. The author is apparently French, lives in Paris, and was educated at the école des Hautes Etudes Commerciales de Paris.
Science is more than capable of contemplating the cause of anything. It may not be good at anthropomorphizing natural phenomena and giving it intent (like wondering why the universe was created), but that is simply because scientific reasoning easily dismisses such thought as not only irrelevant but ultimately incorrect.
So you're saying that Richard Fenyman was wrong?
THE RELATION OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION - Some fresh observations on an old problem, by RICHARD P. FEYNMAN
. I do not believe that science can disprove the existence of God; I think that is impossible. And if it is impossible, is not a belief in science and in a God – an ordinary God of religion — a consistent possibility?
Yes, it is consistent. Despite the fact that I said that more than half of the scientists don't believe in God, many scientists do believe in both science and God, in a perfectly consistent way. But this consistency, although possible, is not easy to attain....
Why are you right, and he wrong? Why are you right and the many sciences that believe in God are wrong about that?
Perhaps the answer is here:
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
- Hamlet (1.5.167-8)
Being an atheist doesn't make you smarter any anyone else, it just makes you an atheist.
It can be the perfect setting for morality plays.
This subject appears to be controversial.
Maybe you could look into this too.
France heat wave death toll set at 14,802
The new estimate comes a day after the French Parliament released a harshly worded report blaming the deaths on a complex health system, widespread failure among agencies and health services to coordinate efforts, and chronically insufficient care for the elderly
The US already has a system like "the rest of the world" with its Veterans Administration hospital system. Just like "the rest of the world" people die waiting for care, and the employees try gaming the system to make their stats look good. You see similar things going on in the NHS, and other similar systems.
Patients facing eight-hour waits in ambulances outside A&E departments
I don't think everyone wants that.
And you're right, the Democrats did drag the US into a 19th century plan, unfortunately before that the US had a 20th/21st century system. The Democrats tried to "fix" what was at most a 15% problem by seizing control and screwing with 100% of it, and making a hash of it. But at least they own it.
Why do we need this? I've been in unix for over 20 years and never even heard of kill -1.
I'm in the same boat. Is linux so unreliable and prone to disaster that "kill -1" used on a regular basis? There seems to be so much whining about "systemd", you just can't work out how much is complete FUD and whats a genuine gripe. Most of the gripes seems to be neutered by the Myths page http://0pointer.de/blog/projec...
There is an old saying that Unix is user friendly, it is just particular about who it chooses for friends. Maybe the two of you have been hanging around *nix for years, but how well do you really know it? Kill -1 (aka kill -HUP) is pretty handing if you are running infrastructure that other people rely upon for uninterrupted service. Just rereading a config file for updates is generally better and easier than stopping and restarting daemons*, and plenty of standard daemons expect it. It also a handy command since at times it will kill things that other variations of the kill command won't, including kill -9. It also can be a good place to start since "gentle" kills give a process an opportunity to clean up after themselves.
If you take into account all of the standard utilities of Unix and its derivatives there is an enormous amount of functionality and multiple ways to accomplish the same task. I haven't met anyone yet that was fluent in every tool and facility in standard Unixland. That is part of what I like about it - there is so much you can learn and apply, and knowing which tools can scratch particular itches. Even "obsolete" tools can be useful.
* Although there are times when stopping and restarting is a good thing too.
You're deluded if you think that. The Progressive lobbyists and Democrats that wrote the bill are the ones that had to water it down and put state level bribes in it to get Democrats to vote for it. The Republicans couldn't be bribed, and knew better than to vote for it. It is a bill owned by Democrats, lock, stock, and barrel.
You mean the health care coverage businesses used to provide years ago, but scrapped in favor of a stock dividend and other profits?
That would be the health care coverage that was in place when "Obamacare" was deemed passed (remember that one?). Just kidding about the "deemed" part, it actually did pass on a party line vote. When a business fails the problem is even worse. Then there is no health insurance and no job.
And why we should not hold these businesses in moral contempt for callously skirting around the law so they can continue to abuse their employees?
Because it was the Democrats that passed Obamacare and forced bad choices on everyone?
If new "costs" are being incurred: It's because Life and the Pursuit of Happiness are expendable to American business.
Your life and pursuit of happiness (note: pursuit) are your responsibility, not your boss's.
Hard to have either when you're dying from lack of preventable treatment or sick.
I wouldn't worry too much about that, Obamacare is preventing a growing amount of treatment.
At least this is a simpler case than most for assigning responsibility. Obamacare was written and voted into law purely by Democrats, and a Democratic administration executed the law. The Republicans had no hand in it.
That the F-35 isn't a perfect warplane is well established. On the other hand the "Affordable Care Act" is absolutely useless against the latest Russian and Chinese combat aircraft. Even the elderly Iranian air force is more than a match for the ACA.
I see you have a very selective memory. Please read the original plan and then follow the idiotic path of compromises that Republicans forced onto it rendering it into the watered down ridiculous mess that it is.
Your memory isn't so good either. Obamacare was written by Democrats and "progressive" lobbyists*, voted for by Democrats, and implemented by a Democratic administration. They own it lock, stock, and barrel. The Republicans didn't vote for it, you can't blame the Obamacare debacle on them.
If you're going to create a massive new entitlement program grabbing control of 16% of the economy then you should have a broad consensus and support for doing it, and do it with care. The Democrats didn't have that but decided to force a badly written, ill conceived boondoggle on the country. We'll be paying the price for that for years, and I doubt that the Democrats will pay any real price at all.
* Center For American Progress President Shares Part In Obamacare: "I Helped Write The Bill"
I wouldn't worry about it. Once a Republican is back in the Oval Office the MSM will be interested in journalism again so there will be more places to find corroborating stories. Besides, the MSM won't have much choice, they'll need a break - carrying all that water wears on the arms and Obama has called for more than most. If only his presidency had turned out as well as Jimmy Carters. If only ...
Forbes? Really? REALLY?
It's called "journalism." Maybe you've heard of it? There's a whole amendment to the Constitution devoted to protecting it.
You forgot to include the economic costs of people having their hours cut so they no longer qualify for benefits and end up working two part time jobs without benefits to make ends meet. You left out the costs of businesses cutting jobs and locations, and refusing to expand, to avoid the fines, penalties, and costs associated with Obamacare. You left out the costs of people that had benefits but lost them due to companies being forced to drop benefits due to the unnecessary costs forced on them if they offer healthcare due to Obamacare. You left out the stifling of innovation due to the punitive costs and structure of the medical device tax. You forgot to include the cost of trying to force people to violate their conscience as Obamacare is doing.
And perhaps most important, you forgot to include the dangerous precedent of allowing the Federal government to directly force nearly everyone to go buy a very expensive service specified at the whim of the government and its bureaucrats.
What will you have to say if the next administration decides to enforce the militia clause by requiring every adult not convicted of a felony to purchase a $800 rifle and 200 rounds of ammunition and keep it locked in their homes, available for yearly inspection? Not much different than Obamacare, which is now enforced by the IRS. Well, actually that is probably a lot cheaper than most people's Obamacare bill.
. Most of the cost of Obamacare is recognizing costs that were, until now, hidden.
Obamacare is creating plenty of new costs all by itself. It is been a debacle and it has barely started. It will be inflicting plenty more damage on the economy and society in the years to come baring a repeal.
I have little doubt you believe that, but it is complete nonsense, rubbish.
Even if you do believe it, and it would take little research to disprove it, you are still stuck with the question of what to do about ISIS.
Do you think there is a possibility you have a few things wrong?
If not, perhaps you should brace yourself.
No person is "evil". Calling extremists evil is a lazy manipulation designed to stop you thinking about their motivations and grievances. I think we've had quite enough of that.
ISIS engages in rape, torture, beheadings, amputations, crucifixions, live burials, mass executions, and genocide.
Are they simply misguided? They desire to spread their civilization and form of government over all the earth. Is that wrong? Are you being "judgmental"?
ISIS Attacks: “Religious Cleansing and Attempted Genocide”
Horrors Of ISIS: Children Buried Alive, Crucified Corpses
Iraq crisis: Islamic militants 'buried alive Yazidi women and children in attack that killed 500'
It isn't rare for would-be "martyrs" to disapprove of dying when it isn't under their control, and they don't get to take large numbers of people with them to "earn" their spot in paradise.
Its classic misdirection to keep people distracted from the increasing unemployment, worsening economy, political infighting and other Abbott government failures.
So, preventing citizens from getting their heads chopped off or blown up by suicide bombings is calculated to gain the voters favor? Those clever bastards! One question - will the next government not do that? How do you think people will react to that? Are you suggesting that people in Australia are resigned to being slaughtered like so many cattle? How will that reflect upon Australia?
Perhaps the fairy dust stole your memory?
If you think the Valerie Plame saga is worth flogging compared to Snowden you have a very serious gap in your judgment and sense of proportionality.
But if you want to continue, maybe you should get it right.
Valerie Plame
On July 14, 2003, Washington Post journalist Robert Novak, using information obtained from Richard Armitage at the US State Department, effectively ended Valerie Plame's career with the CIA
And no, "Richard Armitage" isn't an anagram for Richard Cheney.
I don't think they're idiots. I think that they think we are idiots.
When massive amounts of detailed information on intelligence programs and alliances is stolen and released to all comers and people try to claim that it doesn't cause any harm, as many here do, they might have a case to describe some of those people as "idiots."
Al-Qaeda's Embrace Of Encryption Technology - Part II: 2011-2014, And The Impact Of Edward Snowden
This issue of Inspire, the first since the Edward Snowden affair, includes a focus on Internet security. Most significantly, it notes on the first page, in all-capital letters: "DUE TO TECHNICAL AND SECURITY REASONS, WE HAVE SUSPENDED OUR EMAIL ADDRESSES TEMPORARILY." Since, as mentioned, Inspire has always provided email addresses and encryption information for readers wishing to contact it, and, as a major part of its outreach efforts, urged readers to write in, its decision to suspend its email is meaningful.
It is worth noting that this issue includes praise for Snowden, as well as for other Western leakers such as Bradley/Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange. It notes under the heading "Questions We Should Be Asking": "If those making blasphemy against Islam have the right to express themselves, why aren't the actions of Assange, Snowden, Manning and Hammond considered freedom of expression?"
The cover story, "Shattered: A Story About Change," by Abu Abdillah Almoravid, who also authored an article in the previous issue of Inspire, focuses on the immoral nature of America and, in another mention of Edward Snowden, how he helped unmask it. ...
Praise for Snowden can also be found in Issue III of the English-language online Taliban magazine Azan, released August 26, 2013 ....
Also following the Snowden leaks, on August 30, 2013, Mula'ib Al-Assinnah, a senior member of the leading jihadi forum Shumoukh Al-Islam warned online jihadis not to use Google's Gmail because Google is part of the National Security Agency (NSA). ...