Uhhh, what the fuck does any of that have to do with my comment? Nothing really. I posted my comment in the wrong thread. Can you please tell me who these "militant atheists" who are using violence in the name of spreading atheism? I don't interpret militancy that way. There are obviously atheists who propound their non-beliefs strongly enough to appear militant. Hitler was a militant athiest (disliked ALL religion) and so was Stalin's regime - religion got in the way of the State. Scientists with strange ideas is nothing like the religious people who are actually using violence and murder to push their particular sect. I'm not being pedantic here, but you must agree that WMDs are a product of science. Oppenheimer was one who was bivalent on the moral issues, quoting from religious sources regarding death and destruction of mankind, yet pursuing nuclear weapons at the same time.
If there were no God, there would be no Atheists. G.K. Chesterton
I can't believe how narrow minded the crop of the 'pro-science' slashdotters out there. There are many different sciences, all based on scientific methodology. But most forget the origins of science and the conundrum that science still prevails. Scientific Methodology is not perfect and will never be able to explain the universe (as Newton originally desired), because they only look for the cause. Or they see the effect and try to find the cause. How successful has that been? Not very. There has been no agreement about anything, but theory after theory, based on 'subjectively observable' hypotheses. There should be a continuum of understanding and an ability to accept a point of view. For example, Newton while head of the Royal Society had to contend with bizzare experiments like those scientists who wanted to store sunlight in cucumbers, or feed dye pigments to spiders. That was 'science' too. Rupert Sheldrake - a biologist of some repute, has theorised the concept of 'Morphic Resonance', which is detailed somewhat here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphic_resonance Paul Davies is another recognised scientist 'on the edge'. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Davies When you can't think of a scientific reason, there is always GOD or some kind of absolute or constant that helps the way. Science is a dynamic development of paradigm after paradigm and shouldn't shut out 'thoughts' because it is not scientific. A blind scientist is just as bad as the most dogmatic preacher.
Bill The Galactic Hero, (by Harry Harrison - one of the better sci-fi novels) had a bit where Bill was continually being harassed by a trooper to convert to his religion. Once or maybe twice, the trooper got out a cheap little pocket projector displaying how the apocalypse and heaven would look like for Bill in the future. I've read a lot of sci-fi, but that's the only book I can remember that uses a pocket projector. There's a great quote in it that goes something like this: "You are angry my Son. Anger is the first sign of doubt. And doubt is the first sign of belief!"
I'm forced to watch that and Emmerdale. I didn't know that 'Corrie Street' as my wife terms it was a Manchester based soap. I had no idea that personal relationships could get so convoluted in the UK. Here in Australia it's much, much simpler.:)
Thanks for the edification. No matter how many episodes of Eastenders I'm forced to watch, I can never work out what it really means except for something like 'grungy'.
Before we follow Alsace-Lorraine into the Black Hole, I should comment that: [Exodus] Sex before marriage: That just depends on what the Bride price is, doesn't it? Exodus speaks of law relating to the Israelites, those who wanted to keep their tribe homogeneous. ----------- A lot of the old testament was common sense advice. Virginity was prized as it was a clear indication of purity and health. Even in the Islamic traditions, a clean body before prayer is necessary. Many of your sources talk about adultery and not pre-marital sex (except for Timothy - who was referring to esoteric purity). Historically however, your point is taken. But to assume that it refers to pre-marital sex is mistaken somewhat. Don't confuse church dogma with the Bible. The Old Testament is that of historical principles. You can't take those and combine them with New Testament philosophies for validation. The validation we seek is that of our ethics and morals and our level of Being. Jesus however died for all of us and our sins, not just the Israelites. If you are going to preach, then preach the truth. Christianity is a path, and you should follow Christ's precepts to be a Christian. That may mean reading and understanding gnostic and Apostolic Christianity and not for relying solely on a 'made for consumer' Bible.
I recently purchased a 2 dvd set about the cosmos, ufos etc and there are 2 uncut interviews on it. 1 ex-astronaught and the other some retired guy from the military who was in charge of Area 51. Both claim that the US government is developing alien technology. Perhaps this is what the US should be concentrating on.
You are right. I point out that some of us need to evaluate any new software not just on UI and features, but on how well they run on older hardware which is still viable for other apps like FF and IE7 Chrome works well and is suited more for the dual and quad core machines with lots of memory. Running it on XP with 1GB Ram, thrashes the HD on occasson. I'd hate to run it on a laptop with 256mb ram for example.
Chrome isn't perfect and doesn't run all that well on a hyperthreaded P4 single core. I'm not about to throw away my computers just to run a beta Chrome which really isn't as functional as my Firefox. I doubt if it would ever be. A lot of us appreciate the work that FF dev. does and it can only improve. Thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
Uhhh, what the fuck does any of that have to do with my comment?
Nothing really. I posted my comment in the wrong thread.
Can you please tell me who these "militant atheists" who are using violence in the name of spreading atheism?
I don't interpret militancy that way. There are obviously atheists who propound their non-beliefs strongly enough to appear militant. Hitler was a militant athiest (disliked ALL religion) and so was Stalin's regime - religion got in the way of the State.
Scientists with strange ideas is nothing like the religious people who are actually using violence and murder to push their particular sect.
I'm not being pedantic here, but you must agree that WMDs are a product of science. Oppenheimer was one who was bivalent on the moral issues, quoting from religious sources regarding death and destruction of mankind, yet pursuing nuclear weapons at the same time.
If there were no God, there would be no Atheists.
G.K. Chesterton
I can't believe how narrow minded the crop of the 'pro-science' slashdotters out there.
There are many different sciences, all based on scientific methodology.
But most forget the origins of science and the conundrum that science still prevails. Scientific Methodology is not perfect and will never be able to explain the universe (as Newton originally desired), because they only look for the cause. Or they see the effect and try to find the cause. How successful has that been? Not very. There has been no agreement about anything, but theory after theory, based on 'subjectively observable' hypotheses.
There should be a continuum of understanding and an ability to accept a point of view.
For example, Newton while head of the Royal Society had to contend with bizzare experiments like those scientists who wanted to store sunlight in cucumbers, or feed dye pigments to spiders. That was 'science' too.
Rupert Sheldrake - a biologist of some repute, has theorised the concept of 'Morphic Resonance', which is detailed somewhat here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphic_resonance
Paul Davies is another recognised scientist 'on the edge'. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Davies
When you can't think of a scientific reason, there is always GOD or some kind of absolute or constant that helps the way.
Science is a dynamic development of paradigm after paradigm and shouldn't shut out 'thoughts' because it is not scientific.
A blind scientist is just as bad as the most dogmatic preacher.
Bill The Galactic Hero, (by Harry Harrison - one of the better sci-fi novels) had a bit where Bill was continually being harassed by a trooper to convert to his religion. Once or maybe twice, the trooper got out a cheap little pocket projector displaying how the apocalypse and heaven would look like for Bill in the future.
I've read a lot of sci-fi, but that's the only book I can remember that uses a pocket projector.
There's a great quote in it that goes something like this:
"You are angry my Son. Anger is the first sign of doubt. And doubt is the first sign of belief!"
lol 83,800,000 links!
hahahahahahahahaha!
You know, I suspected that the first time I saw the moon landing images back in '69....
Mind you the "artist's impressions" are pretty.
I've got an old Fujifilm 5000S digital camera which I'll donate to NASA so we can get some decent colour photos.
I'm sick of this B/W crap.
Ha ha! That's funny!
No Virginia, it's where you screw the mouse.
Naahhh, I think it's ok. It's just been slashdotted.
I'm forced to watch that and Emmerdale. I didn't know that 'Corrie Street' as my wife terms it was a Manchester based soap. :)
I had no idea that personal relationships could get so convoluted in the UK. Here in Australia it's much, much simpler.
Thanks for the edification. No matter how many episodes of Eastenders I'm forced to watch, I can never work out what it really means except for something like 'grungy'.
Picky.... I mean it's an English idiom of some parts of the United Kingdom.
Is that better?
The English (UK) have an adjective "Manky" as in a "Manky Slut" - perhaps that is what it refers to!
FYI: In 1650 the Archbishop of Armagh, James Ussher, published the Ussher chronology based on Bible history giving a date for Creation of 4004 BC.
http://www.simonkelk.co.uk/sizeofwales.html may help.
Already been done. The Black Hole explains it all.
The bad guys go to hell and the good guys survive.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078869/plotsummary
For those who don't know Kruszelnicki: He was the one who worked out why men only get lint in their belly buttons.
I think you've got to look at the moral of the movie if you want an answer to that.
Before we follow Alsace-Lorraine into the Black Hole, I should comment that:
[Exodus] Sex before marriage: That just depends on what the Bride price is, doesn't it?
Exodus speaks of law relating to the Israelites, those who wanted to keep their tribe homogeneous.
-----------
A lot of the old testament was common sense advice. Virginity was prized as it was a clear indication of purity and health. Even in the Islamic traditions, a clean body before prayer is necessary.
Many of your sources talk about adultery and not pre-marital sex (except for Timothy - who was referring to esoteric purity).
Historically however, your point is taken. But to assume that it refers to pre-marital sex is mistaken somewhat. Don't confuse church dogma with the Bible. The Old Testament is that of historical principles. You can't take those and combine them with New Testament philosophies for validation. The validation we seek is that of our ethics and morals and our level of Being.
Jesus however died for all of us and our sins, not just the Israelites. If you are going to preach, then preach the truth. Christianity is a path, and you should follow Christ's precepts to be a Christian. That may mean reading and understanding gnostic and Apostolic Christianity and not for relying solely on a 'made for consumer' Bible.
Hrumph! I can't use it in my PIII home server damn it! Only got IDE.....
Nothing like booting from a 128k eeprom!
Ahhh... Those were the days!
I think your comment was truly insightful.
No. According to the DVD it is 'Free Cosmic Energy that is all around us.'
I hope that clears it up for you.
I'm watching Part 2 tonight....
I recently purchased a 2 dvd set about the cosmos, ufos etc and there are 2 uncut interviews on it. 1 ex-astronaught and the other some retired guy from the military who was in charge of Area 51.
Both claim that the US government is developing alien technology. Perhaps this is what the US should be concentrating on.
You are right. I point out that some of us need to evaluate any new software not just on UI and features, but on how well they run on older hardware which is still viable for other apps like FF and IE7
Chrome works well and is suited more for the dual and quad core machines with lots of memory.
Running it on XP with 1GB Ram, thrashes the HD on occasson. I'd hate to run it on a laptop with 256mb ram for example.
Chrome isn't perfect and doesn't run all that well on a hyperthreaded P4 single core.
I'm not about to throw away my computers just to run a beta Chrome which really isn't as functional as my Firefox. I doubt if it would ever be.
A lot of us appreciate the work that FF dev. does and it can only improve.
Thanks.