The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
That's PERFECT! You mind if I use that language for the proposed amendment?
Come on, buying a tech item in a 3rd-world country is about as wise as buying your jewelry from some guy operating his store out of a beat-up van in a back alley. What, it turned out that it wasn't a real diamond?!?!? Shocking!
I had a similar experience in Alabama. There was evolution material in our biology textbooks, but it was deliberately skipped over. In one of the classes a student asked about it and the teacher told us directly that she didn't teach it because she didn't want to lose her job.
It would be delightfully ironic if this law were used to protect teachers wanting to teach evolution, but who are afraid to do so.
Considering the way the government is behaving today and the way the courts are acting, I don't think anything short of a Constitutional amendment is going to protect our property against unreasonable searches and seizures. But something like that would probably never get the 2/3 majority it would need in Congress.
I used to joke that Koalas evolved their cuteness as a survival mechanism. They're so cute that humans take them out of their hostile natural environment and put them in nice safe zoos, where all they have to do is sleep all day and occasionally make cute for the crowds. It's a kind of symbiotic relationship where being attractive really pays off (kind of like Hollywood).
I know it's not very politically-correct to say it, but I don't think we should be trying to save every species. The prevailing assumption today seems to be that mankind is causing every extinction on the planet and, as such, we should be working to save every species and variety of endangered animal. Even ignoring that fact that mankind is part of nature too, extinction is a natural process that was taking place long before we existed. It seems to me that a world where species DON'T go extinct (thanks to our efforts) would disrupt the natural processes of evolution. Our guilt complex could create a very unnatural world.
And for the record, I think Pandas are cute. But they're not exactly a hearty lot.
If just one teacher in each school would use it to fight against the bible-thumpers, and their attempt to hijack science for their own ends, it would be worth it. Because that would be enough to show them that these kind of cynical laws, passed by politicians only interested in pandering to their religious fanatic voters, can just as easily be turned and used against your beloved religious beliefs.
I pray that the day after this law passes, a biology teacher somewhere in the state walks into his classroom and spends the entire day showing how the fossil record contradicts the silly Genesis story in the Bible--knowing he's now protected by a law that says his principal and angry parents can't do jackshit to stop him.
The problem is that the Democratic party has no party discipline. The Republican party, by contrast, has extremely good party discipline. So even when the Democrats win, they still lose (because they can't hold their people together to actually take advantage of their majority). You almost never see a Republican defector on any party-line vote. But there are always at least a few Democrats who vote against their own party. And when a Republican defects, the party usually forces him/her out. When a Democrat defects, the Dems seem to just shrug their shoulders and say "Well, at least he calls himself a Democrat." It's pathetic.
Actually, I think he's down to a handful of black people. Pretty much everyone else in his party has seen one disappointment after another, and are sick of it. His health care plan is a joke. It would have been better to pass nothing at all than to pass that weak-tea glorified handout to the insurance companies.
Retardo is also a guy who thinks that comic books are a place to find serious science and engineering, in spite of the fact that most of them are set in universes where guys like the Flash and Superman can run/fly along the ground at near-light speed and not leave a path of destruction in their wake.
I actually think that is the more likely possibility. If humans are able to genetically mod themselves in the future, they could easily end up creating post-humans that are much more strange and bizarre than any alien we've ever conceived of.
The problem is that the results from tests in real-world science are often far from conclusive. There is debate about the results. Sometimes consensus can be reached, but sometimes the debate fractures into competing theories. That doesn't make it a "religion" but it does make it a lot less "hard" than many scientists contend (since it introduces human interpretation into the mix).
"Is your hypothesis testable?" doesn't always have a simple "yes" or "no" answer. Sometimes the answer is "Well...sorta."
Science is demonstrable, repeatable and self-correcting.
Ideally, yes. But it's also conducted by human beings. And some of those human beings are grant-whores, contractors, academics desperately seeking tenure, staffers at companies with their own agendas to push, etc.
Until there is a single, objective spokesperson for "science," we'll have to make do with the dirty business of accepting scores of flawed humans as its proxy representative. And skepticism is, and should always be, warranted when humans are involved.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds tasty. Stick a high price tag on it and market it as gourmet and I'll bet it will sell even better.
You mean something like:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
That's PERFECT! You mind if I use that language for the proposed amendment?
Come on, buying a tech item in a 3rd-world country is about as wise as buying your jewelry from some guy operating his store out of a beat-up van in a back alley. What, it turned out that it wasn't a real diamond?!?!? Shocking!
I had a similar experience in Alabama. There was evolution material in our biology textbooks, but it was deliberately skipped over. In one of the classes a student asked about it and the teacher told us directly that she didn't teach it because she didn't want to lose her job.
It would be delightfully ironic if this law were used to protect teachers wanting to teach evolution, but who are afraid to do so.
Must be true. My study proved it.
Considering the way the government is behaving today and the way the courts are acting, I don't think anything short of a Constitutional amendment is going to protect our property against unreasonable searches and seizures. But something like that would probably never get the 2/3 majority it would need in Congress.
a 22-year-old member of the staff
I recently did a similar study, using my girlfriend as my sample, to prove that 100% of humans have a vagina.
Once again there is a parallel to be drawn here with the pretty people in Hollywood.
Well, the state did name one of its towns Lynchburg.
I used to joke that Koalas evolved their cuteness as a survival mechanism. They're so cute that humans take them out of their hostile natural environment and put them in nice safe zoos, where all they have to do is sleep all day and occasionally make cute for the crowds. It's a kind of symbiotic relationship where being attractive really pays off (kind of like Hollywood).
As tired as politicians who pander to religious fundamentalist voters with cynical laws obviously aimed at promoting specific religious beliefs?
I know it's not very politically-correct to say it, but I don't think we should be trying to save every species. The prevailing assumption today seems to be that mankind is causing every extinction on the planet and, as such, we should be working to save every species and variety of endangered animal. Even ignoring that fact that mankind is part of nature too, extinction is a natural process that was taking place long before we existed. It seems to me that a world where species DON'T go extinct (thanks to our efforts) would disrupt the natural processes of evolution. Our guilt complex could create a very unnatural world.
And for the record, I think Pandas are cute. But they're not exactly a hearty lot.
could discuss that whites are genetically superior to blacks
Or vice versa.
If just one teacher in each school would use it to fight against the bible-thumpers, and their attempt to hijack science for their own ends, it would be worth it. Because that would be enough to show them that these kind of cynical laws, passed by politicians only interested in pandering to their religious fanatic voters, can just as easily be turned and used against your beloved religious beliefs.
To Zombie Jesus, of course.
not observable or repeatable
In that case, it's just like your religion.
I pray that the day after this law passes, a biology teacher somewhere in the state walks into his classroom and spends the entire day showing how the fossil record contradicts the silly Genesis story in the Bible--knowing he's now protected by a law that says his principal and angry parents can't do jackshit to stop him.
The problem is that the Democratic party has no party discipline. The Republican party, by contrast, has extremely good party discipline. So even when the Democrats win, they still lose (because they can't hold their people together to actually take advantage of their majority). You almost never see a Republican defector on any party-line vote. But there are always at least a few Democrats who vote against their own party. And when a Republican defects, the party usually forces him/her out. When a Democrat defects, the Dems seem to just shrug their shoulders and say "Well, at least he calls himself a Democrat." It's pathetic.
Actually, I think he's down to a handful of black people. Pretty much everyone else in his party has seen one disappointment after another, and are sick of it. His health care plan is a joke. It would have been better to pass nothing at all than to pass that weak-tea glorified handout to the insurance companies.
Retardo is also a guy who thinks that comic books are a place to find serious science and engineering, in spite of the fact that most of them are set in universes where guys like the Flash and Superman can run/fly along the ground at near-light speed and not leave a path of destruction in their wake.
It's like Karl Marx always said: "Dilbert is opium for the masses."
and ask
Silly rabbit, only big donors get to actually talk to the legislators (and have them actually listen, anyway).
I actually think that is the more likely possibility. If humans are able to genetically mod themselves in the future, they could easily end up creating post-humans that are much more strange and bizarre than any alien we've ever conceived of.
The problem is that the results from tests in real-world science are often far from conclusive. There is debate about the results. Sometimes consensus can be reached, but sometimes the debate fractures into competing theories. That doesn't make it a "religion" but it does make it a lot less "hard" than many scientists contend (since it introduces human interpretation into the mix).
"Is your hypothesis testable?" doesn't always have a simple "yes" or "no" answer. Sometimes the answer is "Well...sorta."
Science is demonstrable, repeatable and self-correcting.
Ideally, yes. But it's also conducted by human beings. And some of those human beings are grant-whores, contractors, academics desperately seeking tenure, staffers at companies with their own agendas to push, etc.
Until there is a single, objective spokesperson for "science," we'll have to make do with the dirty business of accepting scores of flawed humans as its proxy representative. And skepticism is, and should always be, warranted when humans are involved.