Its always good tactic to simply insult those who question you. Nice job.
Dictionary.com gives me this for "theory" relative to "fact":
"a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact." or "A theory in technical use is a more or less verified or established explanation accounting for known facts or phenomena: the theory of relativity" or "A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena" or "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory" or "a tentative insight into the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in chemical practices"
There are more from other dictionaries cited on dictionary.com that all follow along the same lines. So you're claiming that a theory of evolution is a fact because it has survived experimental testing? When did that happen? Or its a fact because its "more or less verifiable"? Which definition are you claiming states that theory = fact? And on a tangent, I'm even open to an assertion that there are no facts to know: After all, its all 'relative';)
I would not join this Communist front group to save the world from "global warming".
But by all means,/. seems like a good community for them to recruit from.
Ok.
A FACT, eh? So we have genetic records going back how far showing change over time? I'd like a link if you've got one.
I don't recall ever using the term "wild-ass claim" which you put in quotes as if I used it.
I don't recall ever saying Creationism was a scientific theory. Its not.
And finally, I believe in evolution, but there seem to be alot of people here who have no room in their brains for any doubt of its veracity. ie: If you don't believe in evolution you must be a knuckle dragger. Is that a scientific theory as well?
If I were Romney I'd say that illegal enemy combatants are not covered by the Geneva Conventions. Look it up.
If I were Guiliani I'd say my record of cutting taxes and crime are not related to 9/11.
If I were McCain, I'd say that once Iraq can be safely turned over to the Iraqis, we're gone (for the most part). As far as invading Iran, I'd say sure: if need be, but hopefully lesser means will be necessary.
If I were Ron Paul, well... I'd drop out of the race (and I like Libertarianism for the most part, just not Ron Paul's 'defend our shores only' idea of National Security. 9/11 showed that no longer works.)
Ok, I'll bite: If it's a FACT, why is it called a THEORY? It may be a FACT that there is a THEORY of evolution, but that's hardly what you are arguing.
"Al Gore and others taking similar positions point to climate engines like this (though not this particular one in the past, since it wasn't known, but the North Atlantic Current has always been pointed to) as areas of sensitivity because human-produced effects can change the conditions which make these systems operate the way they do, thus causing them to change how they operate, thus producing greater climate change than the human actions do more directly."
Be that as it may, it seems to me that we keep discovering parts of the 'system' we never even knew existed. I cannot understand how we are supposed to take seriously those who advocate destroying our (US) economy (ie Kyoto) when no one can begin to model the climate with any accuracy at all. 1998 was the hottest year? Oops! Not really. The average temperature has gone up? Hmmm... Since when? The last mini ice-age? Imagine that. Where exactly are all those temperature sensors and have they never been moved since pre-1900? Certainly there are 'heat islands' created by cities. Is that all factored in? And of course, even if we take those temperatures at face value, those are just the temps on land where we have sensors. What happened to the temperature where we don't have senors like over the oceans (the other 75% of our planet)? Did it go up there too?
We don't know how this "brand new" current effects another current over there or how the sun effects the cloud cover or precipitation or or or... As far as I can tell, these "global warming" scientist guys think they know it all and that is the surest sign they know nothing.
Robot Wars? Program a robot to scan, move and/or shoot via an if-then chain. Then run the program - turn based - against another bot on the battlefield.
Also, whatever happened to Bilestoad?... never mind, google had the answer.
Sorry. I meant at Disneyland (Anaheim). I don't know about Disneyworld (Orlando). The "People Mover" was replaced by "Rocket Rods" in Anaheim - which never worked right when I was there and was subsequently closed down as well.
I, too, liked the "People Mover" as a "ride". It was relatively peaceful and a nice way to un-wind.
Slashdot Mirror
Its always good tactic to simply insult those who question you. Nice job. Dictionary.com gives me this for "theory" relative to "fact": "a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact." or "A theory in technical use is a more or less verified or established explanation accounting for known facts or phenomena: the theory of relativity" or "A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena" or "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory" or "a tentative insight into the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in chemical practices" There are more from other dictionaries cited on dictionary.com that all follow along the same lines. So you're claiming that a theory of evolution is a fact because it has survived experimental testing? When did that happen? Or its a fact because its "more or less verifiable"? Which definition are you claiming states that theory = fact? And on a tangent, I'm even open to an assertion that there are no facts to know: After all, its all 'relative' ;)
I would not join this Communist front group to save the world from "global warming". But by all means, /. seems like a good community for them to recruit from.
Ok. A FACT, eh? So we have genetic records going back how far showing change over time? I'd like a link if you've got one. I don't recall ever using the term "wild-ass claim" which you put in quotes as if I used it. I don't recall ever saying Creationism was a scientific theory. Its not. And finally, I believe in evolution, but there seem to be alot of people here who have no room in their brains for any doubt of its veracity. ie: If you don't believe in evolution you must be a knuckle dragger. Is that a scientific theory as well?
If I were Romney I'd say that illegal enemy combatants are not covered by the Geneva Conventions. Look it up. If I were Guiliani I'd say my record of cutting taxes and crime are not related to 9/11. If I were McCain, I'd say that once Iraq can be safely turned over to the Iraqis, we're gone (for the most part). As far as invading Iran, I'd say sure: if need be, but hopefully lesser means will be necessary. If I were Ron Paul, well... I'd drop out of the race (and I like Libertarianism for the most part, just not Ron Paul's 'defend our shores only' idea of National Security. 9/11 showed that no longer works.)
Ok, I'll bite: If it's a FACT, why is it called a THEORY? It may be a FACT that there is a THEORY of evolution, but that's hardly what you are arguing.
Remind me again ... what was the Senate vote on Kyoto? 95-0? Yeah, all 95 Republicans in the Senate voted against Kyoto.
Robot Wars? Program a robot to scan, move and/or shoot via an if-then chain. Then run the program - turn based - against another bot on the battlefield. Also, whatever happened to Bilestoad?... never mind, google had the answer.
Sorry. I meant at Disneyland (Anaheim). I don't know about Disneyworld (Orlando). The "People Mover" was replaced by "Rocket Rods" in Anaheim - which never worked right when I was there and was subsequently closed down as well. I, too, liked the "People Mover" as a "ride". It was relatively peaceful and a nice way to un-wind.
Sounds much like an upgrade of Disney's old "people mover" system that they un-installed a few years back