He was considered a heretic because his book was written in Italian (the common language) rather than Latin. He was supposed to be pandering to the church and intellectuals, and we was talking straight to the people.
He was not condemned because of his beliefs, in fact, the pope wanted him to expound on his theories, just not in Italian.
The issue was Blappo calling Ogemaniac a liar for saying that "an embryo is a living human organism" is a scientific fact. I was merely pointing out that it is so.
You can put the rest of your troll in another forum.
I will use Stephen Gould's definition of scientific fact: "In science, 'fact' can only mean 'confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent.'"
No need to define life. We can agree by analog. If you agree that a bacterium has life, as I do, then we should both agree that a collection of embryonic cells have life as well.
I wasn't using the term "evolutionist" in a derogatory way. I was simply stating that there is a large group of scientists who consider a well though out theory a fact because it is well confirmed, even if large parts of the theory cannot be testing using the scientific method.
Thanks for the ad hominem attacks, it has been a while.
1) An embryo is a collection of cells and has life (as much life as a bacterium, which I doubt you would deny). 2) At conception, the genetic structure is uniquely human.
So I think that an embryo would count as human life.
Now, as to whether it is a person is a totally different issue.
In http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/doj122205.p df it states on page 2 (in paragraph 3) that, "All the other courts have decided the issue held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrentlass searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." It does differentiate between *purely* domestic and foreign; however, this is not considered purely domestic as it is a wiretap on domestic-to-foreign telephone calls. This comes from a review in 2002. It also references court decisions from 1967 and 1972.
Slashdot Mirror
Email is dead. Long live email!
Windows XP came out in October 2001. Vista in November 2006. That is little over 5 years, not 20.
However, I understand your sentiment.
He was considered a heretic because his book was written in Italian (the common language) rather than Latin. He was supposed to be pandering to the church and intellectuals, and we was talking straight to the people.
He was not condemned because of his beliefs, in fact, the pope wanted him to expound on his theories, just not in Italian.
That is funny.
CNN is not broadcast, therefore this law would not apply to them.
Don't call me Shirley.
The issue was Blappo calling Ogemaniac a liar for saying that "an embryo is a living human organism" is a scientific fact. I was merely pointing out that it is so.
You can put the rest of your troll in another forum.
I will use Stephen Gould's definition of scientific fact: "In science, 'fact' can only mean 'confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent.'"
No need to define life. We can agree by analog. If you agree that a bacterium has life, as I do, then we should both agree that a collection of embryonic cells have life as well.
I wasn't using the term "evolutionist" in a derogatory way. I was simply stating that there is a large group of scientists who consider a well though out theory a fact because it is well confirmed, even if large parts of the theory cannot be testing using the scientific method.
Thanks for the ad hominem attacks, it has been a while.
If you take the common view of what is considered "scientific fact" then, if you accept that:
1) An embryo is a collection of cells and has life (as much life as a bacterium, which I doubt you would deny).
2) At conception, the genetic structure is uniquely human.
Then you would accept it as fact that it is a living human.
I use the term "scientific fact" the same way evolutionists do. Evolution is a scientific fact.
It is not a philosophical debate.
1) An embryo is a collection of cells and has life (as much life as a bacterium, which I doubt you would deny).
2) At conception, the genetic structure is uniquely human.
So I think that an embryo would count as human life.
Now, as to whether it is a person is a totally different issue.
I have yet to use a brokerage that charges a per-share commission. Scotttrade, for example, charges a flat fee per transaction (buying and selling).
Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you are saying, but it was *against* IBM, Redhat, and Novell.
The little guy with no resources was suing them, not the other way around.
"...the Supreme Court has been stacked with Bush with supporters..."
I guess you forgot that it was the Supreme Court that ruled the program unlawful before, which is why Bush is pushing this legislation.
The only way I could justify getting it is if Metroid is available when it is released.
If it isn't, I may never buy one.
It doesn't matter what you consider it... It is still theft.
Theft is the act of stealing. Stealing is taking something without permission.
Even if 100% of the people in the world don't consider it theft, it is, by definition, theft.
Now, 100% of the people can say "It is theft, but we don't care" or "It is theft, but it is not wrong." That is a totally different story.
Yeah, but can it run Linux?
That is the real question.
"Innocent until proven guilty" is how the law is supposed to view someone, not the public.
O.J. Simpson is innocent in the eyes of the law, but not by most people.
Yeah, because there are so many routers out there running Windows. I actually cannot think of any.
Do you have a blog? I would love to read it.
Yeah! Like Lord of the Rings... oh wait.
Of course we are footing the bill. Unless the company is printing money... it has to come from somewhere.
I am confused... in what way would "structure of learning that allows ID" require astrology to be accepted?
Yeah! Trade Wars rocked/rocks!
I wish they would open the source to that in as much as they are probably not making much selling it at http://www.eisonline.com/TradeWars/ anymore.
That is an excellent point.
Computers and brains are physical devices. Minds are not physical.
According to http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/u sc_sup_01_50_10_36.html, physical searches have been covered by the FISA since 1978 (in the original draft).
p df it states on page 2 (in paragraph 3) that, "All the other courts have decided the issue held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrentlass searches to obtain foreign intelligence information." It does differentiate between *purely* domestic and foreign; however, this is not considered purely domestic as it is a wiretap on domestic-to-foreign telephone calls. This comes from a review in 2002. It also references court decisions from 1967 and 1972.
In http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/fisa/doj122205.