True, but if we compare the beauty of the painting to the beauty of the universe then it is obvious what the subject it. It's an axiom. Logical meaning brings about the conclusion that there was indeed a painter. Only illogical people would say that there wasn't. The same can be said for creation. In fact, Louis Pasteur said, "A little science estranges a man from God; a little more brings him back." I would think as a scientist, he would know this firsthand.
Btw, he's not the only mainstream scientist to conclude from science that there must be a creator.
Sir Isaac Newton - "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being."
Albert Einstein - "Everyone who is seriously interested in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in t he laws of the universe - a spirit vastly superior to man, and one in the face of which our modest powers must feel humble."
Stephen Hawking - "It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."
Stephen Hawking - "Then we shall... be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of God."
Sir Fred Hoyle, professor of astronomy at Cambridge - "The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in the way (evolution) is comparable to the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein. The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one out of 10 to the 40,000 power... It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence."
Either theory requires a creator. There had to have been something somewhere at some point in history that started it all. There being a creator, to me at least, is not what is the complex action. The complexity comes in the development of the rest of the universe. It requires no less faith to say that matter and antimatter just popped up out of nowhere to create the initial clouds of matter than it does to say there was a creator that popped up out of nowhere and created everything. There is no rational difference as they are both unexplainable.
Thanks for the links... I'd probably have to have a degree in astrophyics to be able to make something out of all of that so I say we can just be thankful for the ability to reason and debate.:) Anybody else able to explain the Black Hole Thermodynamic Theory in summary form?
Maybe, but the chance that those simple rules would align everything in such a way as to form a perfectly balanced, inter operating universe with universal governing laws is so slim it would be considered impossible; statistically speaking. Thus the simple aligning to create the infinitely complex is much more complicated than the existence of a creator.
Again, take all of the ingredients of a Rolex, a paper bag, and shake it for 200 million years. What are the chances that it will assemble itself into a working timepiece? Consider that the simplest bacterium has much more intricate and complex features than a Rolex.
Is evolution simpler than creation? Is the gradual change and adaptation of species by chance really a simpler theory than one that says that what is was created?
For example, say you have a painting of a beautiful landscape. You can exercise Occam's Razor if you wish and say that there are two equally predictive theories on how the painting came into being. One theory is there was a painter. Someone actually took paint and a paintbrush and created this work of art. The other theory is that there was no painter. The paint just happened to arrange itself on the canvas in a logical pattern to make a beautiful landscape. Which of the two is a simpler theory? I would choose the theory that someone painted it. The other would require millions of years, perfect conditions, chance, and the assumption that the pain and canvas were even near each other in order to interact. I venture to say that any rational mind would agree that a painting of a landscape, full of detail and harmony didn't just happen.
Creation is so much more complex than a painting yet many choose to believe that there isn't a creator. It's really fascinating to me.
True, but then in the same since your theory of gasses just appearing is just as illogical as the theory of God always existing. Where is end of the universe? Is there a wall and a sign that say's the end somewhere deep into space? No and I don't think anyone believes that. So it is not any more irrational to believe in a God with no beginning and no end than it is for you to believe in an infinite universe that just happened.
I am actually reading a very well written book called God doesn't believe in atheists by Ray Comfort... I highly recommend it. Ray Comfort has been a platform speaker at the National convention of American Atheists. I venture to say that as an atheist it would be near impossible to read this book and not have your "faith" shaken considerably. If you doubt my claim, I encourage you to grab a copy and read it.
I actually query for FKEY constraints for a living. I'm a MSCFCE (MySQL Certified FKEY Constraint Expert)...:) In my opinion, Google seems to be doing quite well for themselves with MySQL... Granted, I doubt they're using MySQL for internet indexing and for their search results, but I don't know that for sure. Any guess as to what they're using to do that?
I found this online, it's a list of CD's that have the DRM... don't remember where and I don't know if it's totally accurate but I think it serves as a good list of CD's to be suspicious of.
Foo Fighters - In Your Honour
Van Zant - Get Right with the Man
Ricky Martin - Life
Sarah McLachlan - Bloom Remix Album
Celine Dion - On Ne Change Pas
Neil Diamond - 12 Songs
Natasha Bedingfield - Unwritten
Kings of Leon - Aha Shake Heartbreak
Santana - All That I Am
Chris Botti - To Love Again
Switchfoot - Nothing Is Sound
Patty Loveless - Dreamin' My Dreams
Montgomery Gentry - Something To Be Proud Of: The Best of 1999-2005
Mary Mary - Mary Mary
My Morning Jacket - Z
David Gray - Life In Slow Motion
Bob Brookmeyer - Bob Brookmeyer & Friends
Shelly Fairchild - Ride
Kasabian - Kasbian
Pete Seeger - The Essential Pete Seeger
The Bad Plus - Suspicious Activity
Elkland - Golden
Susie Suh - Susie Suh
Buddy Jewel - Times Like These
Chayanne - Cautivo
A Static Lullaby - Faso Latido
Our Lady Peace - Healthy In Paranoid Times
The Coral - The Invisible Invasion
Dexter Gordon - Manhattan Symphonie
Acceptance - Phantoms
Dion - The Essential Dion
The Dead 60s - The Dead 60s
Goapele - Change It All
Los Lonely Boys - TBD
Life of Agony - Broken Valley
George Jones - My Very Special Guests
Horace Silver - Silver's Blue
Amici Forever - Defined
Ahmed Jamal - The Legendary Okeh and Epic Recordings
Anna Nalick - Wreck of the Day
Hitch - Soundtrack
Charlotte Martin - On Your Shore
Vivian Green - Vivian
Raheem DeVaughn - The Love Experience
Amerie - Touch
Nivea - Complicated
Mario - Turning Point
G3 - Live In Tokyo
Just another batch of evidence to show the need to research non-embryonic stem cells... embryonic stem cells have yet to yeild anything extra-ordinary.
The 360 is nothing more than an Xbox that has been modded up to what the original Xbox should have been. Go ahead and waste your money on this piece if you want to, personally I'll wait for Google to release their game console next year.:)
They should be slapped. I submitted a very interesting story about Google using MySQL a few days ago and they does it show up? No... but they dupe a very UNINTERESTING story... figures.
Personally I think blue-tape cassettes are a better idea. Why waste all of that recycled plastic when you could create billions of miles of blue-tape on small Volkswagen sized cartridges.:)
I had a chance to play Call of Duty 2 on the 360 a couple of day ago at Target and I was NOT impressed at all... my FX5900 video card renders graphics that look better for games. I will not be buying an xbox.
Slashdot Mirror
True, but if we compare the beauty of the painting to the beauty of the universe then it is obvious what the subject it. It's an axiom. Logical meaning brings about the conclusion that there was indeed a painter. Only illogical people would say that there wasn't. The same can be said for creation. In fact, Louis Pasteur said, "A little science estranges a man from God; a little more brings him back." I would think as a scientist, he would know this firsthand.
Btw, he's not the only mainstream scientist to conclude from science that there must be a creator.
Sir Isaac Newton - "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being."
Albert Einstein - "Everyone who is seriously interested in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in t he laws of the universe - a spirit vastly superior to man, and one in the face of which our modest powers must feel humble."
Stephen Hawking - "It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."
Stephen Hawking - "Then we shall... be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of God."
Sir Fred Hoyle, professor of astronomy at Cambridge - "The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in the way (evolution) is comparable to the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein. The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one out of 10 to the 40,000 power... It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence."
Either theory requires a creator. There had to have been something somewhere at some point in history that started it all. There being a creator, to me at least, is not what is the complex action. The complexity comes in the development of the rest of the universe. It requires no less faith to say that matter and antimatter just popped up out of nowhere to create the initial clouds of matter than it does to say there was a creator that popped up out of nowhere and created everything. There is no rational difference as they are both unexplainable.
This just in: Trade agreement reached... Google to trade Microsoft Gmail and Google Earth for one tough programmer.
Thanks for the links... I'd probably have to have a degree in astrophyics to be able to make something out of all of that so I say we can just be thankful for the ability to reason and debate. :) Anybody else able to explain the Black Hole Thermodynamic Theory in summary form?
Maybe, but the chance that those simple rules would align everything in such a way as to form a perfectly balanced, inter operating universe with universal governing laws is so slim it would be considered impossible; statistically speaking. Thus the simple aligning to create the infinitely complex is much more complicated than the existence of a creator.
Again, take all of the ingredients of a Rolex, a paper bag, and shake it for 200 million years. What are the chances that it will assemble itself into a working timepiece? Consider that the simplest bacterium has much more intricate and complex features than a Rolex.
I think no reconsideration is needed.
Is evolution simpler than creation? Is the gradual change and adaptation of species by chance really a simpler theory than one that says that what is was created?
For example, say you have a painting of a beautiful landscape. You can exercise Occam's Razor if you wish and say that there are two equally predictive theories on how the painting came into being. One theory is there was a painter. Someone actually took paint and a paintbrush and created this work of art. The other theory is that there was no painter. The paint just happened to arrange itself on the canvas in a logical pattern to make a beautiful landscape. Which of the two is a simpler theory? I would choose the theory that someone painted it. The other would require millions of years, perfect conditions, chance, and the assumption that the pain and canvas were even near each other in order to interact. I venture to say that any rational mind would agree that a painting of a landscape, full of detail and harmony didn't just happen.
Creation is so much more complex than a painting yet many choose to believe that there isn't a creator. It's really fascinating to me.
Doesn't the popping up of matter and antimatter negate the first law of thermodynamics?
True, but then in the same since your theory of gasses just appearing is just as illogical as the theory of God always existing. Where is end of the universe? Is there a wall and a sign that say's the end somewhere deep into space? No and I don't think anyone believes that. So it is not any more irrational to believe in a God with no beginning and no end than it is for you to believe in an infinite universe that just happened.
n -Atheists_W0QQtgZinfoQQprZ2743256/
I am actually reading a very well written book called God doesn't believe in atheists by Ray Comfort... I highly recommend it. Ray Comfort has been a platform speaker at the National convention of American Atheists. I venture to say that as an atheist it would be near impossible to read this book and not have your "faith" shaken considerably. If you doubt my claim, I encourage you to grab a copy and read it.
http://product.half.ebay.com/God-Doesnt-Believe-i
I actually query for FKEY constraints for a living. I'm a MSCFCE (MySQL Certified FKEY Constraint Expert)... :) In my opinion, Google seems to be doing quite well for themselves with MySQL... Granted, I doubt they're using MySQL for internet indexing and for their search results, but I don't know that for sure. Any guess as to what they're using to do that?
On http://xooglers.blogspot.com/ (ex google employees blog), it is mentioned that Google had started their adsense and adwords programs in MySQL. They moved to a "real" database and had so many problems that they decided to migrate back to MySQL, which they are still using to run Adsense and Adwords today. http://xooglers.blogspot.com/2005/12/lets-get-real -database.html
What crackhead MySQL developers have you been talking to?
I agree... The only artist on that whole list that is worth listening to is switchfoot... the rest are really lame.
Yea, well... that's what I get for being lazy and overconfident... :)
Here is the link to the site I found the list on... It is formatted more clearly there. http://www.idiotabroad.com/?p=58
haha, yea I forgot about formatting it... It was a list when I posted it, I swear! :)
I found this online, it's a list of CD's that have the DRM... don't remember where and I don't know if it's totally accurate but I think it serves as a good list of CD's to be suspicious of. Foo Fighters - In Your Honour Van Zant - Get Right with the Man Ricky Martin - Life Sarah McLachlan - Bloom Remix Album Celine Dion - On Ne Change Pas Neil Diamond - 12 Songs Natasha Bedingfield - Unwritten Kings of Leon - Aha Shake Heartbreak Santana - All That I Am Chris Botti - To Love Again Switchfoot - Nothing Is Sound Patty Loveless - Dreamin' My Dreams Montgomery Gentry - Something To Be Proud Of: The Best of 1999-2005 Mary Mary - Mary Mary My Morning Jacket - Z David Gray - Life In Slow Motion Bob Brookmeyer - Bob Brookmeyer & Friends Shelly Fairchild - Ride Kasabian - Kasbian Pete Seeger - The Essential Pete Seeger The Bad Plus - Suspicious Activity Elkland - Golden Susie Suh - Susie Suh Buddy Jewel - Times Like These Chayanne - Cautivo A Static Lullaby - Faso Latido Our Lady Peace - Healthy In Paranoid Times The Coral - The Invisible Invasion Dexter Gordon - Manhattan Symphonie Acceptance - Phantoms Dion - The Essential Dion The Dead 60s - The Dead 60s Goapele - Change It All Los Lonely Boys - TBD Life of Agony - Broken Valley George Jones - My Very Special Guests Horace Silver - Silver's Blue Amici Forever - Defined Ahmed Jamal - The Legendary Okeh and Epic Recordings Anna Nalick - Wreck of the Day Hitch - Soundtrack Charlotte Martin - On Your Shore Vivian Green - Vivian Raheem DeVaughn - The Love Experience Amerie - Touch Nivea - Complicated Mario - Turning Point G3 - Live In Tokyo
Good Job EU... At 2.4 million dollars a day it will only take 40 years (and some change) to deplete their funds entirely.
Just another batch of evidence to show the need to research non-embryonic stem cells... embryonic stem cells have yet to yeild anything extra-ordinary.
Why is this relevant?
The 360 is nothing more than an Xbox that has been modded up to what the original Xbox should have been. Go ahead and waste your money on this piece if you want to, personally I'll wait for Google to release their game console next year. :)
Google spent 1 Billion dollars to add smiley faces to Google Talk.
http://www.eonestudio.com/
They should be slapped. I submitted a very interesting story about Google using MySQL a few days ago and they does it show up? No... but they dupe a very UNINTERESTING story... figures.
Personally I think blue-tape cassettes are a better idea. Why waste all of that recycled plastic when you could create billions of miles of blue-tape on small Volkswagen sized cartridges. :)
I had a chance to play Call of Duty 2 on the 360 a couple of day ago at Target and I was NOT impressed at all... my FX5900 video card renders graphics that look better for games. I will not be buying an xbox.
Nope... just common knowledge... if you find anything disproving me please let me know.