There was an entire film starring Ben Stein that was making that claim about evolutionary biology. Ah my, how the pseudo-skeptic community just recycles previous pseudo-scientific babble.
The sad part is that major newspapers like the Daily Telegraph are carrying this guy's rejection, and of course, will never print the other side of the story; that the paper was just shyte.
Nobody said the science is settled. But when the overwhelming majority of experts in any field are leaning in one direction, to claim that there isn't something to what they're saying, or worse, claiming that that large majority is an argument against what they're saying is anti-intellectual.
In other words. Grow the fuck up. The universe doesn't owe your ideology any favors.
Having used both Access and the Base program, I can say that Access is a lot better, particularly with forms and reports.
That being said, you're right, MS-Access sucks. The only thing I use it for is prototyping and quicky reports to my PostgresSQL and Mysql databases via ODBC. It can be handy if I'm dragging data from multiple sources like an Excel spreadsheet, CSV file and MySQL database, via ODBC connections and be able to build queries on all these sources (even if it can be as slow as a dog). But to actually implement any kind of customer or staff facing system via Access, Base or any of the similar products, forget it. In my younger days I did that, and regretted it deeply.
The irony of pointing out that consensus isn't some violation of scientific principles, and that it soeasnt a stop anyone from challenging consensus?
Oh but I get it, if you're confronted with a theory that you don't like, the proper form of attack isn't to critique the theory, but to claim it is invalid because it does have support? After all we know bug bang cosmology, evolution, plate tectonics and quantum mechanics must be false because they enjoy near universal acceptance in the scientific community.
Just remember, short term comfort ALWAYS trumps long term viability. We live in a world dominated by the next few fiscal quarters. It's a breeding ground for sociopaths and the mentally deficient dupes who follow them.
Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we shall day is literally the motto for so many people.
You can, however, blame ignorant fucktards who don't understand the data OR the theory who go around acting like self-righteous assholes when a scientific theory intrudes on their ideological leanings.
And what other choice is there? Even if AGW isn't happening (and all but the smallest fraction of experts in fields related to climatology say it is), sooner or later the economics of using a non-renewable energy source are going to kick us in the balls.
I was doing training today and had to help the new guy add our IT request mailbox to Outlook, and while it took me a few seconds to find where Account Settings in Outlook 2010 had been moves, once I got to the dialog, it was basically the same bloody window that had been there since at least Outlook 2000.
I agree. Westerners tend to exaggerate the misdeeds of their governments, perhaps because most of us have the freedom to do so loudly and frequently, with the horrendous behavior of truly despotic regimes. I've seen people proclaim the US and the UK are police states well on the way to North Korea-style despotism and tyranny. No one denies Western governments frequently overstep their bounds and that citizens unjustly get caught in those excesses, but the idea that you're average American or Frenchmen lives under the kind of despotism that you find even in Russia is absurd.
It's not an argument that we are perfect. Far far from it, but the mere fact that I, as a Canadian citizen, can openly criticize not just the government as a sort of oblique and anonymous entity, but actual members of that government, without fear of reprisal suggests that the bad behavior of my country and most other Western countries isn't even in the same category as Russia, China, or heck, even Venezuela.
The point of the system isn't that it works exactly the way you like, but rather there are mechanisms that offer the possibility of alteration. In countries like Russia or China, maybe, sometimes, mass anger can effect change, but, even if there is the pastiche of the rule of law (dubious in both countries), there are few meaningful checks and balances, so ultimately it's up purely to the powers that be whether your cries will be heard, be silenced, or you will be thrown into a dark hole never to be seen again.
And before you criticize the US for throwing people in jail, even undeservedly, there is still habeas corpus.
Slashdot Mirror
There was an entire film starring Ben Stein that was making that claim about evolutionary biology. Ah my, how the pseudo-skeptic community just recycles previous pseudo-scientific babble.
The sad part is that major newspapers like the Daily Telegraph are carrying this guy's rejection, and of course, will never print the other side of the story; that the paper was just shyte.
And what exactly was the poster's legitimate point? It was inflammatory and outright wrong.
Nobody said the science is settled. But when the overwhelming majority of experts in any field are leaning in one direction, to claim that there isn't something to what they're saying, or worse, claiming that that large majority is an argument against what they're saying is anti-intellectual.
In other words. Grow the fuck up. The universe doesn't owe your ideology any favors.
Having used both Access and the Base program, I can say that Access is a lot better, particularly with forms and reports.
That being said, you're right, MS-Access sucks. The only thing I use it for is prototyping and quicky reports to my PostgresSQL and Mysql databases via ODBC. It can be handy if I'm dragging data from multiple sources like an Excel spreadsheet, CSV file and MySQL database, via ODBC connections and be able to build queries on all these sources (even if it can be as slow as a dog). But to actually implement any kind of customer or staff facing system via Access, Base or any of the similar products, forget it. In my younger days I did that, and regretted it deeply.
You seem to invoke the word 'falsifiable", but appear to have no idea how it applies to science. It is you that is simply repeating mindless mantras.
Complaining about authorities on a subject and not even offering an actual critique suggests you are incapable of doing so.
The irony of pointing out that consensus isn't some violation of scientific principles, and that it soeasnt a stop anyone from challenging consensus?
Oh but I get it, if you're confronted with a theory that you don't like, the proper form of attack isn't to critique the theory, but to claim it is invalid because it does have support? After all we know bug bang cosmology, evolution, plate tectonics and quantum mechanics must be false because they enjoy near universal acceptance in the scientific community.
And the AGW pseudo skeptics come out of the woodwork to spin their strawmen of science.
By honest, you mean "does not intrude on my ideology".
I get my information from climatologists, and not from weathermen with an ax to grind.
Ah, nothing like quoting an anti-AGW blog as if it were the equivalent of a published article.
Tell me, do you get your biology information from Answers in Genesis as well?
Just remember, short term comfort ALWAYS trumps long term viability. We live in a world dominated by the next few fiscal quarters. It's a breeding ground for sociopaths and the mentally deficient dupes who follow them.
Eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we shall day is literally the motto for so many people.
Heaven forbid we ever wean ourselves of a harmful product.
I feel like ivcw just been pedanted by a Monty Python skit
No one watches Star Wars for dialogue. At least no one with a functioning Brocca's region.
And how when Jane came back as a mindless undead zombie, the team successfully decapitated her with only marginal losses to the secretarial pool.
I can't wait for phone books to be copyrighted.
You can, however, blame ignorant fucktards who don't understand the data OR the theory who go around acting like self-righteous assholes when a scientific theory intrudes on their ideological leanings.
And what other choice is there? Even if AGW isn't happening (and all but the smallest fraction of experts in fields related to climatology say it is), sooner or later the economics of using a non-renewable energy source are going to kick us in the balls.
Ending up being owned by Jeff Bezos?
Now somebody just needs to mention Nazis....
Shit
I was doing training today and had to help the new guy add our IT request mailbox to Outlook, and while it took me a few seconds to find where Account Settings in Outlook 2010 had been moves, once I got to the dialog, it was basically the same bloody window that had been there since at least Outlook 2000.
I agree. Westerners tend to exaggerate the misdeeds of their governments, perhaps because most of us have the freedom to do so loudly and frequently, with the horrendous behavior of truly despotic regimes. I've seen people proclaim the US and the UK are police states well on the way to North Korea-style despotism and tyranny. No one denies Western governments frequently overstep their bounds and that citizens unjustly get caught in those excesses, but the idea that you're average American or Frenchmen lives under the kind of despotism that you find even in Russia is absurd.
It's not an argument that we are perfect. Far far from it, but the mere fact that I, as a Canadian citizen, can openly criticize not just the government as a sort of oblique and anonymous entity, but actual members of that government, without fear of reprisal suggests that the bad behavior of my country and most other Western countries isn't even in the same category as Russia, China, or heck, even Venezuela.
The point of the system isn't that it works exactly the way you like, but rather there are mechanisms that offer the possibility of alteration. In countries like Russia or China, maybe, sometimes, mass anger can effect change, but, even if there is the pastiche of the rule of law (dubious in both countries), there are few meaningful checks and balances, so ultimately it's up purely to the powers that be whether your cries will be heard, be silenced, or you will be thrown into a dark hole never to be seen again.
And before you criticize the US for throwing people in jail, even undeservedly, there is still habeas corpus.
And yet the newspaper in the US that publish details from Snowden's leaks are not being hauled into court.
I'd say you're wasting your time in Russia, and worse probably endangering yourself in the process.