That's so wrong it's funny. The whole world didn't believe shit about WMDs. Your government made shit up and then our government (UK) got involved because they thought it was politically expedient.
And the Syria thing? Please. Bullshit to justify US actions in light of the complete clusterfuck that the Iraq thing became.
So 17 UN resolutions referencing WMDs represents what to you, moron?
Put the propaganda UK rags down, get some better medications, and go back to middle school and learn something before further poisoning the internet with your ignorance.
You must not pay much attention to anything but the mainstream news. The entire world was misled to a degree by Iraq's scientists, who knew that they'd be killed if Saddam found out. But the whole world believed that Iraq had WMDs, and it's not "lying" to have done so.
Further, anyone who's done a bit of looking knows that the WMDs that remained were moved to Syria right before the war - there was even a book written by an Iraqi general who knew it was happening.
I remember the episode. Their experts said that only older small planes were susceptible to electronic interference. Modern passenger jets should not even remotely be so.
If they were, wouldn't the tons of electronic noise around the airports cause far more problems than a low powered device in the plane?
You are kidding, right? You must have missed the quote by GORE that he intentionally LIED about Global Warming, justifying it by saying that it was necessary to engender the necessary degree of hysteria among the masses.
Obviously, you were too caught up in your stereotyping to notice.
As for Gore being in line with science, the vast amount of time it would take to list all of the websites that completely debunk An Inconvenient Truth tell me that you're intentionally ignorant, since the truth is available to us all.
Please tell AOL to revoke your internet account - it's obviously being wasted.
What a marshmallow post. All full of things that sound good, but that really reflect a calorically empty, simplistic and ignorant view of the world and our energy policy.
Any comment to the effect of "we have to do something NOW!" seems to always forget that doing the WRONG thing now is probably worse than doing nothing. I offer as evidence in support of that: Ethanol, which has done virtually nothing to help either the energy or environment, and has driven food prices higher.
There is no free lunch on energy. Even wind power has to be distributed at great cost to where the PEOPLE are, something the enviro-featherheads seem to not get.
As they have shifted more of their provision to governmental leaders, they have also shifted the burden of doing the intellectual heavy lifting on scientific issues like "Global Warming" to government. Unfortunately, government is no better at science than the average person - politicians are basically salespeople because they weren't good at science in the first place.
As a result, many are misled by those with ulterior motives and/or similar scientific disabilities.
Groupthink is definitely a player, but only because few care to do the research (which, ironically, is far easier than in the pre-internet age) to inform themselves and to understand WHY they believe WHAT they believe.
I cannot tell you how many times I have had to explain basic scientific concepts to people - it's like I'm teaching them something they've never heard of before. And I'm not even a professional scientist - just a guy who tries to read a lot and not be an idiot all that often.
Rather than the Big Seven, how about some of his other extremely funny bits?
1) Al Sleet, your Hippy Dippy Weatherman (an absolute classic that I still quote from memory) 2) Scott Lame, the BOSS jock with the BOSS sound on the BOSS station playing the BOSS records that my BOSS told me to play, on WINO radio. 3) The affair of the Hair (which won a grammy!) 4) Indian Sergeants.
If the first interest of the Democrats is to ensure tha they remained in power (which I agree with), it might help if people like Kucinich get a grip on reality. Or sanity.
Bush Derangement Syndrome is far too entrenched for either to happen, I'm afraid. The man is done in 6 months, and they still can't let the hate go.
There are also reports (see Red Star Rogue) that the Glomar Explorer was built by Howard Hughes as a cover to retrieve a Russian sub that allegedly fired a nuke missile at Hawaii in the 1960's (it is alleged to have blown up in the tube, thereby rendering the sub and its contents forever one with the sea).
There are as many books on Amazon on this type of topic as there are good sea stories about them. There's probably a grain of truth to many of them, but there's also some "embellishment", as is necessary with any good sea story.
I doubt that we'll decipher which is truth and which is embellishment, even on the mighty U.S.S. Slashdot.
Both your ignorance and your intolerance are showing here. Not a great combination to win converts to YOUR beliefs.
Actually, if you want your children to make sound choices regarding religious preferences, studies have shown that it's best to pick one (non-cult) religion and represent that to them during their childhood.
Even if they decide later to reject it, the experience will make them more able to understand the alternatives than if they grew up in an atheistic vacuum.
First, on matters of adherence to biblical doctrine, St. Francis said this: "In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity". This means that difference of opinion over worship style, dress, etc. should be unimportant, and shouldn't get in the way of focusing on the essentials of learning to follow God, and those differences don't define cults.
When defining a cult, Dr. Walter Martin (RIP) wrote the definitive work in the 1970's called "The Kingdom of the Cults". It is an exhaustive, massive reference book that simply points out where each and every religious group in the world differs from Biblical doctrine.
You know when you're in a cult when:
1) The group is led by a charismatic leader who demands obedience to his word above any others. 2) The leader insists on doing your thinking for you, i.e. arranged marriages, etc. 3) The group grants teachings that are not the Bible equal or greater standing than the Bible. 4) The leader teaches that all other churches/groups/whatever are missing it, and only HIS way is really hearing God. 5) The leader doesn't even attempt to live by his own principles.
Sounds like Scientology fits the definition to me.
I'm definitely crossing the U.K. off my travel list. They've gone completely 'round the bend.
There have been some references to Google being the competition, but what about Apple? Certainly the fact that Google AND Apple plan to introduce a new, more open model to devices puts pressure on Verizon to follow suit, doesn't it?
I'm a Verizon customer who also doesn't like the control-freak mentality there. They may be dragged into OS kicking and screaming, but I think they finally realized they don't have the option of not opening their devices if they want to remain one of the top-tier providers.
With the iPhone, they only had to worry about a small segment of customers possibly defecting to one other provider (AT&T). With the Google phone coming, all bets are off, and Verizon has to - HAS TO - follow a new model of openness. I'm more optimistic than I was before.
A queen bee is just a worker that is fed royal jelly, which is what allows her to reproduce. If the queen dies, another is chosen from among the workers.
You mean like Joseph Smith's "Golden Tablets"?
The ones no one else ever actually saw?
Compare that with how Biblical texts were meticulously maintained over many centuries, and then tell me again that Mormonism is based on something - or someone - spiritual.
Religion is, taken to its extreme, often what you say, because it is born from the hearts of men. Mormonism is a decent example of this - Scientology is a much more accurate one.
Relationship with a living God is *ALWAYS* cognizant that we have free will to explore and deepen that relationship to whatever degree we wish.
Jesus could be proven to be who he said he was, using the standards of a court of law, which is the proper standard. If that's not good enough for you, you are free to believe that and run your life accordingly. God's not going to twist anyone's arm to believe in Him. That He hasn't so far should be ample supporting evidence thereof.
Exactly right. If only the IPCC used such methods to investigate the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory, vs. the Gestapo tactics currently in place, there would be more knowledge of the truth among the populace, and lots less hysteria.
In Europe we are still reluctant to software patents, and we also still have a much saner view on copyright. SO FAR, the pro-software patent lobbying never ends.
While I agree with the bulk of your post, would you care to list the difference in scale of the level of innovation and patentable products produced between the U.S. and Europe? You can't take away the incentive to innovate and expect that everyone will still do so.
I am NO fan of the RIAA nazis, but your solution just isn't a very good one, I'm afraid.
I'm not saying that this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, BUT...
Those who think a thing to be impossible should shut up and get out of the way of those who are doing it.
You can waste your time cursing the darkness, but it's probably not going to be as productive as trying to light a candle. Or an LED.
I am both an amateur scientist (been working in high-tech for 30 years) and a Christian. I believe in Creation, but I also believe that if there is a Supreme Being that could create the earth and all in it in 6 days (though Genesis notes that TIME had not been created until after the 3rd day) that such a Being could also have made it look a lot older than it is.
So whether there were dinosaurs or when they lived or how they died, whether the Earth is 6000 years old or 6 Billion years old really isn't all that relevant to me or many Christians - it doesn't change the really important stuff about why Jesus came to live among us.
I'm totally with you, but I think we both know how Quixotic that dream is.
An objective look at all of the scientific data surrounding global warming would show that even the position that the Earth is warming could not be proven in court, using ALL of the evidence at hand. And yet some people want it "taught" like it was a given fact.
Slashdot Mirror
No.
Sorry. No.
That's so wrong it's funny. The whole world didn't believe shit about WMDs. Your government made shit up and then our government (UK) got involved because they thought it was politically expedient.
And the Syria thing? Please. Bullshit to justify US actions in light of the complete clusterfuck that the Iraq thing became.
So 17 UN resolutions referencing WMDs represents what to you, moron?
Put the propaganda UK rags down, get some better medications, and go back to middle school and learn something before further poisoning the internet with your ignorance.
You must not pay much attention to anything but the mainstream news. The entire world was misled to a degree by Iraq's scientists, who knew that they'd be killed if Saddam found out. But the whole world believed that Iraq had WMDs, and it's not "lying" to have done so.
Further, anyone who's done a bit of looking knows that the WMDs that remained were moved to Syria right before the war - there was even a book written by an Iraqi general who knew it was happening.
So maybe the military isn't as dumb as you are.
I remember the episode. Their experts said that only older small planes were susceptible to electronic interference. Modern passenger jets should not even remotely be so.
If they were, wouldn't the tons of electronic noise around the airports cause far more problems than a low powered device in the plane?
You are kidding, right? You must have missed the quote by GORE that he intentionally LIED about Global Warming, justifying it by saying that it was necessary to engender the necessary degree of hysteria among the masses.
Obviously, you were too caught up in your stereotyping to notice.
As for Gore being in line with science, the vast amount of time it would take to list all of the websites that completely debunk An Inconvenient Truth tell me that you're intentionally ignorant, since the truth is available to us all.
Please tell AOL to revoke your internet account - it's obviously being wasted.
What a marshmallow post. All full of things that sound good, but that really reflect a calorically empty, simplistic and ignorant view of the world and our energy policy.
Any comment to the effect of "we have to do something NOW!" seems to always forget that doing the WRONG thing now is probably worse than doing nothing. I offer as evidence in support of that: Ethanol, which has done virtually nothing to help either the energy or environment, and has driven food prices higher.
There is no free lunch on energy. Even wind power has to be distributed at great cost to where the PEOPLE are, something the enviro-featherheads seem to not get.
As they have shifted more of their provision to governmental leaders, they have also shifted the burden of doing the intellectual heavy lifting on scientific issues like "Global Warming" to government. Unfortunately, government is no better at science than the average person - politicians are basically salespeople because they weren't good at science in the first place.
As a result, many are misled by those with ulterior motives and/or similar scientific disabilities.
Groupthink is definitely a player, but only because few care to do the research (which, ironically, is far easier than in the pre-internet age) to inform themselves and to understand WHY they believe WHAT they believe.
I cannot tell you how many times I have had to explain basic scientific concepts to people - it's like I'm teaching them something they've never heard of before. And I'm not even a professional scientist - just a guy who tries to read a lot and not be an idiot all that often.
You must have forgotten how CBS made up a story about the Bush Guard memo, then defended it even after the blogosphere had totally debunked it.
And how Cronkite lied about Vietnam because he thought we shouldn't be there - I'm sure a couple million dead Cambodians will forgive him for that.
Dude, quoting Noam Chomsky is *not* the best way to win converts to the prospect that you're capable of rational thought.
This is a loony law and TSA is a joke, but Chomsky's said things just as loony.
Rather than the Big Seven, how about some of his other extremely funny bits?
1) Al Sleet, your Hippy Dippy Weatherman (an absolute classic that I still quote from memory)
2) Scott Lame, the BOSS jock with the BOSS sound on the BOSS station playing the BOSS records that my BOSS told me to play, on WINO radio.
3) The affair of the Hair (which won a grammy!)
4) Indian Sergeants.
What it says is that even the liberal press recognizes that Kucinich is a loon who should not be taken seriously.
If the first interest of the Democrats is to ensure tha they remained in power (which I agree with), it might help if people like Kucinich get a grip on reality. Or sanity.
Bush Derangement Syndrome is far too entrenched for either to happen, I'm afraid. The man is done in 6 months, and they still can't let the hate go.
There are also reports (see Red Star Rogue) that the Glomar Explorer was built by Howard Hughes as a cover to retrieve a Russian sub that allegedly fired a nuke missile at Hawaii in the 1960's (it is alleged to have blown up in the tube, thereby rendering the sub and its contents forever one with the sea).
There are as many books on Amazon on this type of topic as there are good sea stories about them. There's probably a grain of truth to many of them, but there's also some "embellishment", as is necessary with any good sea story.
I doubt that we'll decipher which is truth and which is embellishment, even on the mighty U.S.S. Slashdot.
Both your ignorance and your intolerance are showing here. Not a great combination to win converts to YOUR beliefs.
Actually, if you want your children to make sound choices regarding religious preferences, studies have shown that it's best to pick one (non-cult) religion and represent that to them during their childhood.
Even if they decide later to reject it, the experience will make them more able to understand the alternatives than if they grew up in an atheistic vacuum.
We had to write code without ones and zeros. Cheapskates made us bring our own from home.
And the code had to be formatted such as to be printed out as our Corporate Christmas Card.
You have cubical walls? That would impress me. Please post pictures.
I just have thin rectangular walls that combine to form a cubicle.
True, but there are objective definitions.
First, on matters of adherence to biblical doctrine, St. Francis said this: "In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity". This means that difference of opinion over worship style, dress, etc. should be unimportant, and shouldn't get in the way of focusing on the essentials of learning to follow God, and those differences don't define cults.
When defining a cult, Dr. Walter Martin (RIP) wrote the definitive work in the 1970's called "The Kingdom of the Cults". It is an exhaustive, massive reference book that simply points out where each and every religious group in the world differs from Biblical doctrine.
You know when you're in a cult when:
1) The group is led by a charismatic leader who demands obedience to his word above any others.
2) The leader insists on doing your thinking for you, i.e. arranged marriages, etc.
3) The group grants teachings that are not the Bible equal or greater standing than the Bible.
4) The leader teaches that all other churches/groups/whatever are missing it, and only HIS way is really hearing God.
5) The leader doesn't even attempt to live by his own principles.
Sounds like Scientology fits the definition to me.
I'm definitely crossing the U.K. off my travel list. They've gone completely 'round the bend.
There have been some references to Google being the competition, but what about Apple? Certainly the fact that Google AND Apple plan to introduce a new, more open model to devices puts pressure on Verizon to follow suit, doesn't it?
I'm a Verizon customer who also doesn't like the control-freak mentality there. They may be dragged into OS kicking and screaming, but I think they finally realized they don't have the option of not opening their devices if they want to remain one of the top-tier providers.
With the iPhone, they only had to worry about a small segment of customers possibly defecting to one other provider (AT&T). With the Google phone coming, all bets are off, and Verizon has to - HAS TO - follow a new model of openness. I'm more optimistic than I was before.
A queen bee is just a worker that is fed royal jelly, which is what allows her to reproduce. If the queen dies, another is chosen from among the workers.
You mean like Joseph Smith's "Golden Tablets"? The ones no one else ever actually saw? Compare that with how Biblical texts were meticulously maintained over many centuries, and then tell me again that Mormonism is based on something - or someone - spiritual.
Religion is, taken to its extreme, often what you say, because it is born from the hearts of men. Mormonism is a decent example of this - Scientology is a much more accurate one. Relationship with a living God is *ALWAYS* cognizant that we have free will to explore and deepen that relationship to whatever degree we wish. Jesus could be proven to be who he said he was, using the standards of a court of law, which is the proper standard. If that's not good enough for you, you are free to believe that and run your life accordingly. God's not going to twist anyone's arm to believe in Him. That He hasn't so far should be ample supporting evidence thereof.
Exactly right. If only the IPCC used such methods to investigate the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory, vs. the Gestapo tactics currently in place, there would be more knowledge of the truth among the populace, and lots less hysteria.
In Europe we are still reluctant to software patents, and we also still have a much saner view on copyright. SO FAR, the pro-software patent lobbying never ends.
While I agree with the bulk of your post, would you care to list the difference in scale of the level of innovation and patentable products produced between the U.S. and Europe? You can't take away the incentive to innovate and expect that everyone will still do so. I am NO fan of the RIAA nazis, but your solution just isn't a very good one, I'm afraid.
I'm not saying that this is the greatest thing since sliced bread, BUT... Those who think a thing to be impossible should shut up and get out of the way of those who are doing it. You can waste your time cursing the darkness, but it's probably not going to be as productive as trying to light a candle. Or an LED.
I am both an amateur scientist (been working in high-tech for 30 years) and a Christian. I believe in Creation, but I also believe that if there is a Supreme Being that could create the earth and all in it in 6 days (though Genesis notes that TIME had not been created until after the 3rd day) that such a Being could also have made it look a lot older than it is. So whether there were dinosaurs or when they lived or how they died, whether the Earth is 6000 years old or 6 Billion years old really isn't all that relevant to me or many Christians - it doesn't change the really important stuff about why Jesus came to live among us.
I'm totally with you, but I think we both know how Quixotic that dream is. An objective look at all of the scientific data surrounding global warming would show that even the position that the Earth is warming could not be proven in court, using ALL of the evidence at hand. And yet some people want it "taught" like it was a given fact.