I agree but come to a different conclusion. I am a trained historian with a science background. If I can yell from rofftops what I'm about to say then this whole debate will take an a different meaning:
The problem about damning ID is that ALL comments and arguments that I've read so far totally miss the point:
1. We are experiencing a paradigm change. In other words, Evolutionists are trying to explain how single celled organisms have attributes that DO NOT fit evolutionary theory; and instead of acceptance of that, they discount it! This is a crime.
2. In the historical past , as far as the history and philosophy of science states, that the evidence that doesn't support the accepted theory will, in fact either modify the accepted theory or lead to the creation of a new theory that accepts new evidence.
And that is not what is happening here.
ID has a value in that it challenges the Theory of Evolution. Note that it is not a Law, but a theory.
Like my friend who is a programmer who has ONE skill and that is writing Fortran 'bat' files to edit reports for banks. Great hey! He's still in a job 'cause they don't train anybody to maintain old software. He'll be there till he dies.
Otherwise, buy a shipping container, add power, an airconditioner, a few benches and write a killer app.
You're RIGHT!
I've been troubleshooting computers since they've become micro, and VIA/SIS and a few others have always caused no end of problems.
This report by ZONK is just a bit of undeserved PR for VIA.
Not that Intel make bug-free chipsets, but at least they work.
Also, VIA have never been able to outpace equivalent Intel chipset families. Simple Rule of Thumb?: Just go with Intel chipsets with Intel processors.
No comment about AMD and Nvidia (though Nvidia make stable 3D chips) as I'm not too familiar with them.
Everytime I work with a SIS card or chipset I cringe. Why bother with a cheap chipset? In the long run it is not worth it.
What I would like to see is an SIS processor with an SIS chipset. That would really be a dog!
And apart from that, and Apple developed? Wtf? Is rewriting history just considered acceptable nowadays or what? Xerox developed it. JUST Xerox. Apple stoled from Xerox and refined. MS stole from Apple and refined. Apple and Linux stole from Windows and refined. Ad nauseum. Xerox are probably the only people who didn't steal their ideas straight from someone else and tweak it just enough to avoid getting sued.
Apple didn't steal anything. They were looking for innovaton and they found it at Xerox with their Graphical User Interface including the Mouse!!!
That system was developed by Xerox and refined by Apple for their Lisa computer system, way before the Mac. The whole thing was above board. The only people who got shirty about the GUI and the mouse were the employee developers at Xerox who didn't like to see their baby sold off.
As for Bill Gates? Just check out a program he wrote called Multiplan for the Apple. It was the culmination of Visicalc operating in Apple DOS. It was (is) all tab and arrow key navigation.
As for MS stealing from Apple and refining..... Apple's user interface was far more convenient to use then Windows 3.1 or for that matter Win95's GUI. What amazes me is how MS could make a GUI version so crap and barely acceptable and yet caught on? Perhaps it was marginally better than CPM???
Discovery of Oxygen??? was not a single unique discovery by a chemist, but rather a collaboration of 'scientists' over decades. When a piece of evidence does not fit a theory or law (like Einstein's Theories vs Newton's Laws), then it gets convieniently put to one side as an anomaly. In time, other pieces of evidence get added until this collection of anomalies hits some kind of critical mass. When it does, the critical mass becomes more significant than the theory or law. So the paradigm changes or otherwise we'll still be thinking in terms of phlogiston and ether in space!
If Randall Mills and his hydrino theory is sunk, but the 'energy anomaly' still exists, then we're in for a milestone as the current paradigm changes.
But there are diehards (like me), who personally think that Einstein was wrong, and that Aristotle WAS RIGHT and that's why I don't fly in planes because we're not meant to!
After all, the whole Quantum physics schamozzle is really irrational and proponents of it should be burned at the steak:) Pehaps when we work at the boundaries of the universe on the microcosmic scale, and try and compare that to the far-sightedness of astronomical discoveries billions of years into the past, then maybe we're looking at different things.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree but come to a different conclusion.
I am a trained historian with a science background. If I can yell from rofftops what I'm about to say then this whole debate will take an a different meaning:
The problem about damning ID is that ALL comments and arguments that I've read so far totally miss the point:
1. We are experiencing a paradigm change. In other words, Evolutionists are trying to explain how single celled organisms have attributes that DO NOT fit evolutionary theory; and instead of acceptance of that, they discount it! This is a crime.
2. In the historical past , as far as the history and philosophy of science states, that the evidence that doesn't support the accepted theory will, in fact either modify the accepted theory or lead to the creation of a new theory that accepts new evidence.
And that is not what is happening here.
ID has a value in that it challenges the Theory of Evolution. Note that it is not a Law, but a theory.
ATI Tries hard, but Nvidia is better.
Like my friend who is a programmer who has ONE skill and that is writing Fortran 'bat' files to edit reports for banks. Great hey! He's still in a job 'cause they don't train anybody to maintain old software. He'll be there till he dies.
Otherwise, buy a shipping container, add power, an airconditioner, a few benches and write a killer app.
Hey My CPU gets really HOT!
So maybe a little mini tornado stuck inside my computer case would contribute to the power grid!
You're RIGHT! I've been troubleshooting computers since they've become micro, and VIA/SIS and a few others have always caused no end of problems. This report by ZONK is just a bit of undeserved PR for VIA. Not that Intel make bug-free chipsets, but at least they work. Also, VIA have never been able to outpace equivalent Intel chipset families. Simple Rule of Thumb?: Just go with Intel chipsets with Intel processors. No comment about AMD and Nvidia (though Nvidia make stable 3D chips) as I'm not too familiar with them. Everytime I work with a SIS card or chipset I cringe. Why bother with a cheap chipset? In the long run it is not worth it. What I would like to see is an SIS processor with an SIS chipset. That would really be a dog!
Apple didn't steal anything. They were looking for innovaton and they found it at Xerox with their Graphical User Interface including the Mouse!!!
That system was developed by Xerox and refined by Apple for their Lisa computer system, way before the Mac. The whole thing was above board. The only people who got shirty about the GUI and the mouse were the employee developers at Xerox who didn't like to see their baby sold off.
As for Bill Gates? Just check out a program he wrote called Multiplan for the Apple. It was the culmination of Visicalc operating in Apple DOS. It was (is) all tab and arrow key navigation.As for MS stealing from Apple and refining ..... Apple's user interface was far more convenient to use then Windows 3.1 or for that matter Win95's GUI. What amazes me is how MS could make a GUI version so crap and barely acceptable and yet caught on? Perhaps it was marginally better than CPM???
Yeah? Well it can't find my website as there is an inherent flaw in its search technique.
Discovery of Oxygen??? was not a single unique discovery by a chemist, but rather a collaboration of 'scientists' over decades.
:)
When a piece of evidence does not fit a theory or law (like Einstein's Theories vs Newton's Laws), then it gets convieniently put to one side as an anomaly. In time, other pieces of evidence get added until this collection of anomalies hits some kind of critical mass. When it does, the critical mass becomes more significant than the theory or law. So the paradigm changes or otherwise we'll still be thinking in terms of phlogiston and ether in space!
If Randall Mills and his hydrino theory is sunk, but the 'energy anomaly' still exists, then we're in for a milestone as the current paradigm changes.
But there are diehards (like me), who personally think that Einstein was wrong, and that Aristotle WAS RIGHT and that's why I don't fly in planes because we're not meant to!
After all, the whole Quantum physics schamozzle is really irrational and proponents of it should be burned at the steak
Pehaps when we work at the boundaries of the universe on the microcosmic scale, and try and compare that to the far-sightedness of astronomical discoveries billions of years into the past, then maybe we're looking at different things.
Green Women? Star Trek??? Wasn't that Lost in Space? I'm sure I had fantasies about that one
I thought the sonic boom travels with the plane!!? That means that your tunnel has got to be the same length as the distances from A to B !!!