Yes I do, and so do you if you want to. You see, there is this thing called google, it "runs around" and figures out what is on this "internet" thingy, and then you can use it to search. The cool thing is that when you have searched, you can click on a search result item and go directly, using this new cool technology called "hyper links", to the article in question. I didn't bother posting stats simply because I thought it was common knowledge among people who can actually read.
Since this internet clearly is a mystery to you, I have compiled some data from Pew research:
General population who believes in God: 81%
General population who believes not in God, but believes in a universal spirit: 12%
General population who believes neither: 4%.
Scientists who believe in God: 33%
Scientists who believe in a universal spirit, but not in God: 18%
Scientists who believe in neither: 41%
If you look at scientists from natural sciences only (physics, maths etc) the numbers are even stronger atheist, with significantly more than half being atheists. Compared to less than 5% of the general population (which includes the scientists).
Yes, there is a correlation between religiosity and education. I thought that was common knowledge.
The thing is, they did't actually land on the moon. They could do a lot better, so they landed on Mars. It's now colonized completely. The images from Curiosity are fake.
And I could argue that as atheists aren't smart enough to know they should believe in God
No, you could not. It's impossible to argue that someone should believe in something that most likely doesn't exist, since the supporting data of existence is non-existent.
We also know that with intelligence comes non-belief. With higher levels of education also comes non-belief. Intelligent people with a higher education simply do not believe in various superstitions to the level with which uneducated dumb-asses do. In the US, since you can get a higher degree with no scientific training whatsoever, the co-variation between belief and education, though strong, is weaker than in Europe for example. The more education you have in the sciences the lower the chance of you running around believing in mumbo-jumbo is however. The numbers are quite staggering, also in the US.
Rubbish. A movie can not have the intent to offend since a movie can not offend. The only person who decides who is offended is the person who gets offended at stuff. I can say whatever I want to you, if you get offended by it that is your problem, not mine. You can chose not to be offended by it. Adults generally do when children say offensive things. When retards say offensive things too.
In this case the "offender" and the "offendee" are equally retarded, and boom, you have a boom.
People supporting free speech should sponsor one such movie a week, hitting every major and minor religious figure in history, until these retards stops electing to be offended by something that is not offensive.
Why? When the US does, such as when they allow for free speech, people in the Middle East goes nuts and starts killing Americans. Democracy comes after free speech. You can't have democracy without free speech, and currently the demonstrators are demonstrating against democracy and free speech.
'cause atheists have brains, brains able to produce stuff better than this. It is obvious this was produced by someone suffering from some superstition or another. Christianity would be the prime suspected superstition.
there is no way in hell that israel didn't partially fund this.
The saying is that there is a, let's use the term "moron", born every minute. In terms of monronic additions to the human species, the minute you were born the number went through the roof. Have you seen this? We know for sure the Israeli didn't fund this, it's so bad it is obvious there were no funds available. I can make it better (even with better dubbing) using Premiere Pro on my PC.
The world is full of conspiracy nuts. Moon landing. 9/11. All that stuff. Every one of them are dumber than the shoes of the morons currently demonstrating against free speech.
Oh, and btw, it seems like the evacuation of the surrounding areas was not only unnessessary, it was worse than the accident it self. According to the Stanford report:
According to the model, the evacuation prevented at most 245 radiation-related deaths – meaning the evacuation process may have cost more lives [it cost 600 lives] than it saved.
Not really cold. When mobs go amok people die. In tens, hundreds even. Rarely it may go to thousands. When governments go amok hundreds of thousands dead is just "business as usual". Millions would be the norm. Comparatively, yes, the ramifications of banning such videos are significantly more troublesome than a bunch of ignorant nuts rioting.
Three reactor cores melted down and you think nothing will happen from that?
Not nothing. About 130 people may die eventually due to the disaster. Comparatively, 600 people died in the evacuation. Stanford says the number has a large uncertainty, from a low 15 to a high 1000. You are right, it is not nothing, but it is a very small number. Statistically insignificant would be the appropriate description.
I'd say it would be far more dangerous if gasoline prices dropped 30% in the US. Far more people would die in the ensuing increase in traffic. For a disaster, Fukushima is a bit of a dud.
Ultraconservative Christians who thinks any book from 2000 years ago can be used as a reliable source for anything. They are nuts. Bonkers. Lacking a significant number of marbles.
Yeah, biofuel. The greatest idea since the Holocaust. It will probably kill more people too. The people who are advocating we should power our cars using food should be put up against a wall and be dealt with. Morons.
when in 15 years the first people are dying from cancer caused by Fukushima
That won't happen. Read about it. There is lots of information out there, from credible sources. The most serious damage to a human from Fukushima is, and will continue to be, the dude that got a roof-beam dropped on him. Even the guys who bravely went in to the reactor got radiation doses that are quite manageable, about the equivalent of what a flight attendant working the London-New York route gets in her career.
It did go horribly wrong at Fukushima, and the most serious consequence was that someone died from getting a roof-beam dropped on his head. The first-responders and the "kamikaze" guys going in got as much radiation during those days as a flight attendant flying London-New York gets in her career.
They should be charged with inciting a riot and disturbing the peace, if not more.
For using free speech? Rest assured, I will not be there when they come for you, you fucking deserve it. For everybody else though, when they come (if they come) I'll be there and I'll be armed. Oh, and by "them" I don't mean some under-educated superstitious num-nut throwing Molotov cocktails at soldiers, I mean the soldiers. The religious nuts are not dangerous. Government is.
Censorship sucks.
People tearing each other apart sucks
On a scale of 1 to 100, censorship sucks 100. People tearing each other apart comparatively doesn't reach 20. Censorship means ultimately the government will be the one tearing us apart, and I am far more afraid of my government than I am of a bunch of un-educated superstitious lunatics who get their panties in a knot just because someone was not nice to a dude that has been dead for the best part of 1500 years. You should be too.
You are right, but Google has a motto "don't be evil", taking the video down would be "doing evil". The movie is crap. The lunatics who made it are, well, lunatics, but the people burning US flags and killing US ambassadors because of the actions of a tiny fringe group of lunatics with yet another superstition to defend are worse. Sadly, the demonstrations we currently see are (ironically, an irony the protesters do not have the capability of understanding) basically going a long way to proving the film makers right.
... google taking it down wouldn't help at this point.
Quite the opposite. It would show that we are willing to forego democracy whenever some superstitious lunatic goes hysterical over nothing and burns flags. If that is all that is needed to take down democracy, then we do not deserve democracy.
The appropriate response to the demonstrations in the world about this horrendous work of manure (the crappy movie that is) is to continue to publish one such movie a week until the lunatics grow tired of acting like put-upon five year olds with overdeveloped bodies and underdeveloped brains.
balance free speech with legal and ethical concerns in an age when social media can impact world events
Free speech is the most important weapon we have to protect against tyranny. You don't "balance" it. You have it or you don't (and please, no shouting "fire" in a theater discussions please. The problem here is that the idiots protesting now do not understand that free speech includes allowing people with opinions you hate having the right to express them. They can chose not to listen and ignore the speaker, or they can prove the fringe Christians who claim Islam is a violent religion right. Sadly, they have chosen to prove the film makers right. Sadly they do not posses the brain capacity to see the irony in their actions.
We can not, we must not and we have no intention of compromising our democracy just because some retards elect to be offended by some other retards. The problem most people have is the grasping of the fact that there is nothing anyone can say that can cause offence. To be offended is a choice the "offended one" makes, it is not caused by what was said or written, it is caused entirely by the person feeling offended. Adults do not get offended, they ignore morons who try to offend because the are childish, slightly retarded morons. As are those who get offended at stuff.
I have no problem with a neighbor following my fashion sense. That's just cool, and you know, I would probably not notice. I don't care enough about what people look like. I am also not at all worried about him fucking my wife? You know why?
Because he has refused to license my patented dick, that is why. He is as pretty as me, but he has no function. So, yes, Apple could be a bit creeped-out at Samsung copying the good looks (though there is plenty of prior art, Apple isn't innovative). Who cares? I'd pay more attention to the fact that Apple is trying to steal Samsung's dick to fuck Samsung's wife.
I agree that Anders has done an admirable job with C#. It started out as a language that wanted to be Java after then Microsoft/Sun java debacle. For quite a while it was the student following the master's (java) every move. Then the master got lazy. Stopped developing. The Java designers started doing some really stupid stuff (don't get me started on the retarded auto-boxing) and quickly C# jumped ahead. Today C# is what Java could have been if it was not for Death By Committee. Java is just another COBOL. Wanting to die, but is too stubborn to actually accomplish that.
Oh, and as a disclaimer, I was part of a small team that delivered excellent Java software back in the late 1990's. Java was great back then. It is the same today, and that isn't quite so great.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes I do, and so do you if you want to. You see, there is this thing called google, it "runs around" and figures out what is on this "internet" thingy, and then you can use it to search. The cool thing is that when you have searched, you can click on a search result item and go directly, using this new cool technology called "hyper links", to the article in question. I didn't bother posting stats simply because I thought it was common knowledge among people who can actually read.
Since this internet clearly is a mystery to you, I have compiled some data from Pew research:
General population who believes in God: 81%
General population who believes not in God, but believes in a universal spirit: 12%
General population who believes neither: 4%.
Scientists who believe in God: 33%
Scientists who believe in a universal spirit, but not in God: 18%
Scientists who believe in neither: 41%
If you look at scientists from natural sciences only (physics, maths etc) the numbers are even stronger atheist, with significantly more than half being atheists. Compared to less than 5% of the general population (which includes the scientists).
Yes, there is a correlation between religiosity and education. I thought that was common knowledge.
The thing is, they did't actually land on the moon. They could do a lot better, so they landed on Mars. It's now colonized completely. The images from Curiosity are fake.
And I could argue that as atheists aren't smart enough to know they should believe in God
No, you could not. It's impossible to argue that someone should believe in something that most likely doesn't exist, since the supporting data of existence is non-existent.
We also know that with intelligence comes non-belief. With higher levels of education also comes non-belief. Intelligent people with a higher education simply do not believe in various superstitions to the level with which uneducated dumb-asses do. In the US, since you can get a higher degree with no scientific training whatsoever, the co-variation between belief and education, though strong, is weaker than in Europe for example. The more education you have in the sciences the lower the chance of you running around believing in mumbo-jumbo is however. The numbers are quite staggering, also in the US.
Do you have any compelling evidence that demonstrats that atheists can't produce bad stuff?
Of course not. They just elect not to, on account of them having brains.
Rubbish. A movie can not have the intent to offend since a movie can not offend. The only person who decides who is offended is the person who gets offended at stuff. I can say whatever I want to you, if you get offended by it that is your problem, not mine. You can chose not to be offended by it. Adults generally do when children say offensive things. When retards say offensive things too.
In this case the "offender" and the "offendee" are equally retarded, and boom, you have a boom.
People supporting free speech should sponsor one such movie a week, hitting every major and minor religious figure in history, until these retards stops electing to be offended by something that is not offensive.
No One Murdered Because Of This Image
Why? When the US does, such as when they allow for free speech, people in the Middle East goes nuts and starts killing Americans. Democracy comes after free speech. You can't have democracy without free speech, and currently the demonstrators are demonstrating against democracy and free speech.
'cause atheists have brains, brains able to produce stuff better than this. It is obvious this was produced by someone suffering from some superstition or another. Christianity would be the prime suspected superstition.
there is no way in hell that israel didn't partially fund this.
The saying is that there is a, let's use the term "moron", born every minute. In terms of monronic additions to the human species, the minute you were born the number went through the roof. Have you seen this? We know for sure the Israeli didn't fund this, it's so bad it is obvious there were no funds available. I can make it better (even with better dubbing) using Premiere Pro on my PC.
The world is full of conspiracy nuts. Moon landing. 9/11. All that stuff. Every one of them are dumber than the shoes of the morons currently demonstrating against free speech.
So the people at Stanford, who did the work, are clueless? I bet you are far more clueless than they are.
Oh, and btw, it seems like the evacuation of the surrounding areas was not only unnessessary, it was worse than the accident it self. According to the Stanford report:
According to the model, the evacuation prevented at most 245 radiation-related deaths – meaning the evacuation process may have cost more lives [it cost 600 lives] than it saved.
Not really cold. When mobs go amok people die. In tens, hundreds even. Rarely it may go to thousands. When governments go amok hundreds of thousands dead is just "business as usual". Millions would be the norm. Comparatively, yes, the ramifications of banning such videos are significantly more troublesome than a bunch of ignorant nuts rioting.
Three reactor cores melted down and you think nothing will happen from that?
Not nothing. About 130 people may die eventually due to the disaster. Comparatively, 600 people died in the evacuation. Stanford says the number has a large uncertainty, from a low 15 to a high 1000. You are right, it is not nothing, but it is a very small number. Statistically insignificant would be the appropriate description.
I'd say it would be far more dangerous if gasoline prices dropped 30% in the US. Far more people would die in the ensuing increase in traffic. For a disaster, Fukushima is a bit of a dud.
Why are the people who made the movie lunatics?
Ultraconservative Christians who thinks any book from 2000 years ago can be used as a reliable source for anything. They are nuts. Bonkers. Lacking a significant number of marbles.
what would we gain
An end to the violence. They'd simply grow tired of the provocations and perhaps grow up in the process.
Yeah, biofuel. The greatest idea since the Holocaust. It will probably kill more people too. The people who are advocating we should power our cars using food should be put up against a wall and be dealt with. Morons.
how retarded are you?
Not as retarded as you.
when in 15 years the first people are dying from cancer caused by Fukushima
That won't happen. Read about it. There is lots of information out there, from credible sources. The most serious damage to a human from Fukushima is, and will continue to be, the dude that got a roof-beam dropped on him. Even the guys who bravely went in to the reactor got radiation doses that are quite manageable, about the equivalent of what a flight attendant working the London-New York route gets in her career.
It did go horribly wrong at Fukushima, and the most serious consequence was that someone died from getting a roof-beam dropped on his head. The first-responders and the "kamikaze" guys going in got as much radiation during those days as a flight attendant flying London-New York gets in her career.
Even when it goes wrong nuclear is quite safe.
and? They do not have the right of free speech do they? What's your point?
They should be charged with inciting a riot and disturbing the peace, if not more.
For using free speech? Rest assured, I will not be there when they come for you, you fucking deserve it. For everybody else though, when they come (if they come) I'll be there and I'll be armed. Oh, and by "them" I don't mean some under-educated superstitious num-nut throwing Molotov cocktails at soldiers, I mean the soldiers. The religious nuts are not dangerous. Government is.
Censorship sucks.
People tearing each other apart sucks
On a scale of 1 to 100, censorship sucks 100. People tearing each other apart comparatively doesn't reach 20. Censorship means ultimately the government will be the one tearing us apart, and I am far more afraid of my government than I am of a bunch of un-educated superstitious lunatics who get their panties in a knot just because someone was not nice to a dude that has been dead for the best part of 1500 years. You should be too.
You are right, but Google has a motto "don't be evil", taking the video down would be "doing evil". The movie is crap. The lunatics who made it are, well, lunatics, but the people burning US flags and killing US ambassadors because of the actions of a tiny fringe group of lunatics with yet another superstition to defend are worse. Sadly, the demonstrations we currently see are (ironically, an irony the protesters do not have the capability of understanding) basically going a long way to proving the film makers right.
... google taking it down wouldn't help at this point.
Quite the opposite. It would show that we are willing to forego democracy whenever some superstitious lunatic goes hysterical over nothing and burns flags. If that is all that is needed to take down democracy, then we do not deserve democracy.
The appropriate response to the demonstrations in the world about this horrendous work of manure (the crappy movie that is) is to continue to publish one such movie a week until the lunatics grow tired of acting like put-upon five year olds with overdeveloped bodies and underdeveloped brains.
balance free speech with legal and ethical concerns in an age when social media can impact world events
Free speech is the most important weapon we have to protect against tyranny. You don't "balance" it. You have it or you don't (and please, no shouting "fire" in a theater discussions please. The problem here is that the idiots protesting now do not understand that free speech includes allowing people with opinions you hate having the right to express them. They can chose not to listen and ignore the speaker, or they can prove the fringe Christians who claim Islam is a violent religion right. Sadly, they have chosen to prove the film makers right. Sadly they do not posses the brain capacity to see the irony in their actions.
We can not, we must not and we have no intention of compromising our democracy just because some retards elect to be offended by some other retards. The problem most people have is the grasping of the fact that there is nothing anyone can say that can cause offence. To be offended is a choice the "offended one" makes, it is not caused by what was said or written, it is caused entirely by the person feeling offended. Adults do not get offended, they ignore morons who try to offend because the are childish, slightly retarded morons. As are those who get offended at stuff.
I have no problem with a neighbor following my fashion sense. That's just cool, and you know, I would probably not notice. I don't care enough about what people look like. I am also not at all worried about him fucking my wife? You know why?
Because he has refused to license my patented dick, that is why. He is as pretty as me, but he has no function. So, yes, Apple could be a bit creeped-out at Samsung copying the good looks (though there is plenty of prior art, Apple isn't innovative). Who cares? I'd pay more attention to the fact that Apple is trying to steal Samsung's dick to fuck Samsung's wife.
I agree that Anders has done an admirable job with C#. It started out as a language that wanted to be Java after then Microsoft/Sun java debacle. For quite a while it was the student following the master's (java) every move. Then the master got lazy. Stopped developing. The Java designers started doing some really stupid stuff (don't get me started on the retarded auto-boxing) and quickly C# jumped ahead. Today C# is what Java could have been if it was not for Death By Committee. Java is just another COBOL. Wanting to die, but is too stubborn to actually accomplish that.
Oh, and as a disclaimer, I was part of a small team that delivered excellent Java software back in the late 1990's. Java was great back then. It is the same today, and that isn't quite so great.