Hypothetical: 95% of gross goes to subcontractors (run by studios). 5% (as guaranteed amount, i.e. 2 million) goes to people involved. That takes care of everything the movie grosses. There's no money left as profit, so anything based on net profit gets nothing.
What he is essentially saying is that religion is all about blind faith in certain propositions (God exists, he created the universe, he created humans in his image etc etc) even in the face of complete absence of evidence, actually even in the face of very strong evidence contradicting those propositions (such as the evidence for evolution).
Evolution doesn't mean God didn't guide it. It means it happened that way. If you decide to mention that it's over "6 days", get the fuck over that timeframe. God doesn't see time, needs to show it to a person to get shit out of the stone age, and shows it to him over time.
God made world. World had X rules. How do those statements contradict?
Now, I know you're gonna say "But the bible says the world has Y rules". Those books are metaphor. Not absolute truth. Anyone with half a brain realizes that. Also, in order to have both as influences, you have to have half a brain to do the amount of reading required.
Hrm, I hate to invoke Godwin's, but you forced it. You just decided to round up a bunch of people for their beliefs, and make them guinea pigs in medical trials, under the guise of a final solution while scapegoating them for all of the world's problems. Yet, somehow, you get modded up. WTF is wrong with/.?
Pick the letter n+1 (n is # of word) of each word in the sentence, put in reverse order, add in a 10-n after each occurrence of arbitrary letters (Maybe the ones in the person's name?). Granted, there's a small algorithm, but the sentence itself could easily be linked in someone's memory to how to use it. Also, after about 10-15 tries, they'll remember the password.
On a side note, anyone who can't do something like this can't remember 3 directions. Which is nobody. The real problem would be with people's willingness to learn it.
Actually, fears will never come to pass until the technology doesn't exist. Then, you have the problem of new technologies replacing it and the fears associated with it with new ones. This keeps going until the fears happen. So, it's probably wise to have the fears and keep them from becoming than to do nothing.
Wireless power, wireless headphones, wireless computer sync. Cell phones tend to lead the way in these wireless matters anyway, they have every reason to say these will all be plausible before this becomes mainstream.
What other source do you propose that can provide and heat at the same time?
It's not the growing of food that the problem. It's growing food with fertilizer which we use fossil fuels to make (usually), and fossil fuels to transport. If we grew food in cleared land, harvested by hand, and delivered by horse, your original argument would apply. That's not how it's done in this time period, though, negating your argument. I believe that was the point.
The population of earth has exploded in size in the last 400 years, making it less efficient to harvest things that way. However, we can't feed everyone past a certain point, the Earth won't sustain those population sizes. So, I would think going back to the old ways and getting really good at implementing them would be wise, as then we'll be better at proceeding in a green fashion when we do hit the limit. Also, I'd hope we learn that reproduction at an extreme rate is not good for anyone or the world.
Yeah, but that doesn't mean the average person in the dark ages ever knew it. We know that the people at the top knew it, but what about the 99% who were plowing fields every day? Did they have any clue what the aristocracy was thinking?
When you have a brainwashed kid in a free nation, they can think for themselves. When you have a nation telling you touching the pamphlets means hand will rot off, they'll have pictures of people that it's happened to. They'll have a woman with no hands (paid, of course) tell the rest how she lost them. Constant reinforcement via any and every channel is a much different situation than the "brainwashing" we're familiar with.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, and now he's 7.5 times the size of the original town!
Hypothetical: 95% of gross goes to subcontractors (run by studios). 5% (as guaranteed amount, i.e. 2 million) goes to people involved. That takes care of everything the movie grosses. There's no money left as profit, so anything based on net profit gets nothing.
For real. Who bothered to remember Superman 3?
$10000/oz means alot when the dollar is worth less than the paper...
I think we should trust the communists who defend the dictator of an authoritarian "communist" country. That absolutely makes the most sense.
If they're pushing the agenda to begin with. I believe. I'm not pushing you in that direction. All is a little strong, don't you think?
We hardly read articles. You think that when we do, we do it well?
You can't prove that something doesn't exist
You also can't prove that anything does exist.
Did they leave yet? What time are they coming over? Are you sure they got our message?
What he is essentially saying is that religion is all about blind faith in certain propositions (God exists, he created the universe, he created humans in his image etc etc) even in the face of complete absence of evidence, actually even in the face of very strong evidence contradicting those propositions (such as the evidence for evolution).
Evolution doesn't mean God didn't guide it. It means it happened that way. If you decide to mention that it's over "6 days", get the fuck over that timeframe. God doesn't see time, needs to show it to a person to get shit out of the stone age, and shows it to him over time.
Now, I know you're gonna say "But the bible says the world has Y rules". Those books are metaphor. Not absolute truth. Anyone with half a brain realizes that. Also, in order to have both as influences, you have to have half a brain to do the amount of reading required.
Hrm, I hate to invoke Godwin's, but you forced it. You just decided to round up a bunch of people for their beliefs, and make them guinea pigs in medical trials, under the guise of a final solution while scapegoating them for all of the world's problems. Yet, somehow, you get modded up. WTF is wrong with /.?
Also adding 15 seconds of mouse usage and hand movements.
On a side note, anyone who can't do something like this can't remember 3 directions. Which is nobody. The real problem would be with people's willingness to learn it.
Humor only evades the stupid...
Actually, fears will never come to pass until the technology doesn't exist. Then, you have the problem of new technologies replacing it and the fears associated with it with new ones. This keeps going until the fears happen. So, it's probably wise to have the fears and keep them from becoming than to do nothing.
And safety is really easy to come by in a hotel in Somalia.
Wireless power, wireless headphones, wireless computer sync. Cell phones tend to lead the way in these wireless matters anyway, they have every reason to say these will all be plausible before this becomes mainstream.
Then you have a massive population of bacteria that all die off the moment you stop, and the toxins begin....
It's not the growing of food that the problem. It's growing food with fertilizer which we use fossil fuels to make (usually), and fossil fuels to transport. If we grew food in cleared land, harvested by hand, and delivered by horse, your original argument would apply. That's not how it's done in this time period, though, negating your argument. I believe that was the point.
The population of earth has exploded in size in the last 400 years, making it less efficient to harvest things that way. However, we can't feed everyone past a certain point, the Earth won't sustain those population sizes. So, I would think going back to the old ways and getting really good at implementing them would be wise, as then we'll be better at proceeding in a green fashion when we do hit the limit. Also, I'd hope we learn that reproduction at an extreme rate is not good for anyone or the world.
It's the even better, mile-wide evil steak!
Yeah, but that doesn't mean the average person in the dark ages ever knew it. We know that the people at the top knew it, but what about the 99% who were plowing fields every day? Did they have any clue what the aristocracy was thinking?
Prove any of that. Now prove that you hand won't fall off after touching one of the pamphlets. See the difference?
When you have a brainwashed kid in a free nation, they can think for themselves. When you have a nation telling you touching the pamphlets means hand will rot off, they'll have pictures of people that it's happened to. They'll have a woman with no hands (paid, of course) tell the rest how she lost them. Constant reinforcement via any and every channel is a much different situation than the "brainwashing" we're familiar with.