No Christian stampede here, just the mindless jawing of a second-rate Wired blogger. Does anybody here actually take Regina Lynn seriously? Any hands? Yeah, I thought so.
I think you need a little lesson in geopolitics (and some spelling wouldn't hurt either). Yes, Sudan has oil. So what? Unlike Iraq, it's geographically isolated and unindustrialized. Besides, Iraq is a financial drain and political and military nightmare for the US, and hasn't even paid off for the companies who got the oil contracts. The US isn't even thinking about invading Sudan right now, believed me. The post you quote is just an anti-semitic screed.
"Most holocaust institutions (not to mention Jewish institutions) have been taken over by a leadership that actively collaborates with American imperialism."?
Not wanting to be nasty or anything, but America is going through a bit of a religious experience at the moment, with people rejecting science by the million. Because religious people don't believe in microchips?
In no way is the US one of the most religious countries on earth. The most religious (Christian) ones are those in Africa and South America. Also, I'm challenging anyone to find a credible study drawing any correlation between faith and intelligence.
This is purely subjective and anecdotal (this being Slashdot), but haven't males always tended to be the ones who liked to play with complicated, shiny toys? Even in an era with scores of brilliant female scientists in many fields, the majority of inventors still seem to be male. I have no idea if this is cultural or a difference in the way male/female minds work. Any ideas?
We're really not. The bizarre prudishness and acceptance of violence is a phenomenon native to modern America, it's not in the bible or Christian tradition. The bible has a whole book devoted to love poetry, for goodness' sake. The garden of eden isn't related to the sex question, anyways. This is just a case of an overprotective parent confusing "innocent" and "naive".
You're being disingenuous. The modern UN doesn't have the military power to take on any nation. Its only function in nations like these would be to provide humanitarian support and peace keepers after there was a peace to keep. Speaking of which, in all these conflicts, where was the US?
This doesn't contradict anything about the previous theories. Only the very top courses were concrete, and the workers would have been needed to haul and pour the concrete anyways. The evidence of the workers and the timelines are pretty irrefutable. This doesn't contradict anything prior, it just expands on it.
On the contrary. Since when have grave robbers documented their findings or even bothered to mark their provenance? Even the worst treasure-hunting archaeologists (and there were worse than Budge) did that. The difference between a tomb robber and even the worst archaeologist is huge, to say nothing of the difference between them and highly cautious and meticulous normal ones.
I'm having trouble finding any accurate facts in that comment. Well, for United States citizens, I'd imagine that millions of soldiers who fought and most who died did so knowing that they were providing a future for their children in which the Bill of Rights would be upheld. The Revolutionary war was, in part, to protect ou privacy from English soldiers entering our homes and taking what they wanted.
The Revolutionary war had nothing to do with British troops doing anything. Some actions by them after fighting had started caused anger amongst colonists, but the causes of the war had more to do with taxation than anything else.
World War II saw the deaths of millions of Americans to protect our rights and privacy from the Third Reich.
First of all, millions of Americans didn't die in the Second World War. There has never been a war where a million Americans died. Secondly, America itself was never threatened by the Third Reich; that was Imperial Japan.
So what is Google really buying, aside from a brand name? Google Video loaded faster and had a cleaner interface. Unless they know something huge that we don't, I think they just paid 1.65 billion for a shiny icon and a library of teenage angst and people getting kicked in the balls.
How could it be that such a simple lowly creature has so many genes? Isn't more better? How could humans be beat? Blasphemy!
You make it sound as if this was some kneejerk antiscientific reaction. Most normal people would obviously assume that since humans appear to the layman to be far more complex than a fruitfly, they would have a similarly larger amount of genetic material. I think it's a bad idea to blame something on fundamentalism/antintellectualism when it's conterintuitive to most people, regardless of their beliefs. I think the reaction here is less "Blasphemy!" and more "Huh? I thought a single-celled organism would have less".
Slashdot Mirror
No Christian stampede here, just the mindless jawing of a second-rate Wired blogger. Does anybody here actually take Regina Lynn seriously? Any hands? Yeah, I thought so.
According to an article at New Scientist, DARPA is developing a plasma shield that would allow troops to stun and disorientate enemies
Not as much as I was disorientated by that spelling...
Simple question: how many times have armed citizens actually taken down a spree killer?
I think you need a little lesson in geopolitics (and some spelling wouldn't hurt either). Yes, Sudan has oil. So what? Unlike Iraq, it's geographically isolated and unindustrialized. Besides, Iraq is a financial drain and political and military nightmare for the US, and hasn't even paid off for the companies who got the oil contracts. The US isn't even thinking about invading Sudan right now, believed me. The post you quote is just an anti-semitic screed.
"Most holocaust institutions (not to mention Jewish institutions) have been taken over by a leadership that actively collaborates with American imperialism."?
...Seriously. Paging Hamas...
Pink insightful moderation!!!!1
... oh yeah Uhh, that wasn't what you meant, was it?
Not wanting to be nasty or anything, but America is going through a bit of a religious experience at the moment, with people rejecting science by the million. Because religious people don't believe in microchips?
Snoop Dogg!
In no way is the US one of the most religious countries on earth. The most religious (Christian) ones are those in Africa and South America. Also, I'm challenging anyone to find a credible study drawing any correlation between faith and intelligence.
This is purely subjective and anecdotal (this being Slashdot), but haven't males always tended to be the ones who liked to play with complicated, shiny toys? Even in an era with scores of brilliant female scientists in many fields, the majority of inventors still seem to be male. I have no idea if this is cultural or a difference in the way male/female minds work. Any ideas?
We're really not. The bizarre prudishness and acceptance of violence is a phenomenon native to modern America, it's not in the bible or Christian tradition. The bible has a whole book devoted to love poetry, for goodness' sake. The garden of eden isn't related to the sex question, anyways. This is just a case of an overprotective parent confusing "innocent" and "naive".
That's not political correctness, it just has its hands tied by large, powerful nations with veto powers.
And now he's been modded down as overrated and a troll. Hmm... methinks you spoke a little soon.
You're being disingenuous. The modern UN doesn't have the military power to take on any nation. Its only function in nations like these would be to provide humanitarian support and peace keepers after there was a peace to keep. Speaking of which, in all these conflicts, where was the US?
You assume you're right and Christians are wrong. Does that make you blind too?
I never thought I'd post saying this, but... mod parent up. That's the closest thing to genuine insightfulness that I've seen in a long time.
Okay guys, be honest. Was that modded up for the comment or for the porn link?
This doesn't contradict anything about the previous theories. Only the very top courses were concrete, and the workers would have been needed to haul and pour the concrete anyways. The evidence of the workers and the timelines are pretty irrefutable. This doesn't contradict anything prior, it just expands on it.
That's the scariest "Insightful" I've ever seen. Xenophobia, anyone?
HUH?
On the contrary. Since when have grave robbers documented their findings or even bothered to mark their provenance? Even the worst treasure-hunting archaeologists (and there were worse than Budge) did that. The difference between a tomb robber and even the worst archaeologist is huge, to say nothing of the difference between them and highly cautious and meticulous normal ones.
I'm having trouble finding any accurate facts in that comment.
Well, for United States citizens, I'd imagine that millions of soldiers who fought and most who died did so knowing that they were providing a future for their children in which the Bill of Rights would be upheld. The Revolutionary war was, in part, to protect ou privacy from English soldiers entering our homes and taking what they wanted.
The Revolutionary war had nothing to do with British troops doing anything. Some actions by them after fighting had started caused anger amongst colonists, but the causes of the war had more to do with taxation than anything else.
World War II saw the deaths of millions of Americans to protect our rights and privacy from the Third Reich.
First of all, millions of Americans didn't die in the Second World War. There has never been a war where a million Americans died. Secondly, America itself was never threatened by the Third Reich; that was Imperial Japan.
So what is Google really buying, aside from a brand name? Google Video loaded faster and had a cleaner interface. Unless they know something huge that we don't, I think they just paid 1.65 billion for a shiny icon and a library of teenage angst and people getting kicked in the balls.
How could it be that such a simple lowly creature has so many genes? Isn't more better? How could humans be beat? Blasphemy!
You make it sound as if this was some kneejerk antiscientific reaction. Most normal people would obviously assume that since humans appear to the layman to be far more complex than a fruitfly, they would have a similarly larger amount of genetic material. I think it's a bad idea to blame something on fundamentalism/antintellectualism when it's conterintuitive to most people, regardless of their beliefs. I think the reaction here is less "Blasphemy!" and more "Huh? I thought a single-celled organism would have less".