Let me be the first to welcome our new ethical robot overlords.
Sorry...had to do it.
Re:Did you have to be under 15 to vote?
on
Top 50 DVDs
·
· Score: 1
and don't you think they should remove the line "of all time"? Really.
Absolutely. The technology hasn't been out for the general public for even 10 years, and they're talking about the best disks of all time? They've got to get real. When someone comes up with a way to get a DVD to transport hot chicks bodily into my living room, then I'll consider it the best DVD of all time.
Ah yes, the usual knee-jerk anti-GL ravings as soon as anything Star Wars-related shows up on this board. If you don't like what he's doing, by all means don't go and see the film. It's unlikely that that all three slashdotters who actually boycott Episode III will have any effect on either GL's bottom line, or the number of people who actually go and see the film. Personally, I'm looking forward to seeing it.
I don't think it has anything to do with church/state separation, except so far as it has to do with teaching religion (i.e. creationism) in school. When you get polls that state that 50% or more of the population believes that the earth is less than 10,000 years old, you have a more fundamental issue than church/state. It's the same way with the large percentage of people that don't know that the earth revolves around the sun.
I think you've got a fundamental (no pun intended) misunderstanding of the issue here. No scientist is out there asking you to blindly believe him or her. All of the evidence that they are working from is available in any college or university library. Creationists, on the other hand, have no evidence for their position. I would have trouble believing any scientist is willing to accept 'mistruths', as you put it.
This is the typical 'reasoning' that creationists use to justify their attacks on evolution. The problems comes in places like Delaware, where people actually believe this line of reasoning. It comes from a terrible lack of real science education in this country. You don't see this sort of nonsense in Europe or the more develped countries in Asia, where they have better education systems.
There's also a theory that those larger dinosaurs spent the bulk (badum-TING) of their time in swamps and other shallow waters
This was disproved quite some time ago. The fact is that the mass of the water that would be displaced by an animal as large as a sauropod would prevent it from breathing.
Along these lines, you know a giraffe has valves in its neck to prevent blood flowing to its brain too fast? All evidence suggests that the brontosaurus and other similiar behemoths lacked these valves - so if they lifted their heads too fast, they'd at the/least/ black out.
Ref, please. AFAIK, there has not been one single recorded instance of a sauropod being discovered with fossilized arteries and veins present to make a claim either way.
But the fact is, that land animals larger than elephants have, in fact, existed. Mass does indeed go up as a cube of length, but land animals (dinosaurs included) aren't just cubes of flesh and bone. If you take the large amount of non-solid space in the lungs and gastro-intestinal system, you do reduce the density, and therefore the mass by an extent.
There is quite a bit of research going on in this area that relates to dinosaurs. I don't have any specific refs, but if you check out the recent literature, you should be able to find a number of current articles.
Let me guess. You're 25 years old and didn't see the original "Star Wars" when it came out in the theaters. This absolutely was considered to be a stunning piece of filmmaking...when it first came out in 1978. At the time, there had been nothing else like it.
No, I'm in my 30's, and saw it when it originally came out. I loved it then, and still love it. That being said, none of the Star Wars films are on the same level, as say, Kurosawa's works (which Lucas borrowed from), or The Godfather (1 and 2).
The question "Can Episode III be saved?" begs the question of whether it needs to be saved in the first place. People can be amazingly blind to the fact that the first three movies were not stunning pieces of filmmaking in the first place, and that Lucas really hasn't changed the formula for the prequels. Are there things that could have been done better in the prequels? Certainly, but the same could be said for the original trilogy, too. I've seen all five movies multiple times in theaters, and not once have I felt like I wasted my money. I also never felt like I saw a masterpiece, just a series of enjoyable movies.
Just your friendly, neighborhood Dark Lord of the Sith
As to your supposed lack of evidence, there's plenty. For example, note that the Universe exhibits intelligent design. Explain how you can get complex life and thought from time + chance. The law of entropy states otherwise. If the law of entropy holds true, order cannot come from disorder. And therefore, everything is random. Including your thoughts. Which completely invalidates any and all argument you may make, because they are naught but random noise. Before you go citing a logic FAQ, consider that a prerequisite to logic is the ability to reason
Ummm...clearly, you need to buy a clue. First of all, there is no evidence that the universe displays 'Intelligent Design'. I would love a mainstream reference from a refereed journal backing up your assertion.
Second of all, there is no 'Law of Entropy'. There are the Laws of Thermodynamics, especially the second law, but it only applies in a Closed System.
Unfortunately, your conclusion illustrates how you clearly do not understand what you are talking about.
Explain how random process managed to create life thousands, if not millions of times over. The scientific fact is that mutations are simply almost never beneficial. The harmful mutations would have eliminated the species before the helpful ones took over. Yes, I know about the moths. Adapting a characteristic is hardly the same as inter-species evolution. Last time I checked, they were still moths.
Again, your ignorance is amazing. The scientific fact is that most mutations are neutral, and not harmful. You've been watching too many 50's scifi movies.
Explain how scientests have never been able to create life in a laboratory, even with our intricate knowledge of biological systems.
Just because we can't do it now does not mean we can't do it ever. In any case, it's irrelevant.
Explain why the earth isn't stuffed full of trans-species fossils. If you've got millions of years of animals evolving, unless you have animals with the lifespan of several hundred millinnea, they're going to be dying and leaving traces. Given that amount of time, such fossils should be everywhere. But they're not.
Actually they are. Every species is an intermediate form, unless the species goes extinct before another species evolves from it. There is also the fact, which you completely overlook in your ignorance, that there are many factors that make it difficult for an organsim, especially on land, to become fossilized. You might want to read up on Taphonomy, which deals with this topic.
Explain sexual reproduction. It's irreducibly complex and logically unnecessary. Why do we have it then? Just for pr0n?
Unfortunately, there is no evidence that any function, including reproduction, is irreducibly complex.
Explain humanity. We think, we reason, we talk, we invent. No other animal exhibits these characteristics. Mentally, we're the highest life form on the face of the planet. Why not physically then? Does evolution decide to enhance one characteristic and not another?
How do you know no other animals think? Other animals clearly communicate, and some animal invent. We merely do it better. What does highest life form mean? Best? Strongest? You need to explain your terms. Evolution does not 'enhance' characteristics. Characters that improve an organism's chances of reproducing, and surviving to reproduce, are the ones that will be selected for.
Remember, it's random. Go roll a die 400 times and tell me with a straight face that you're going to get a certain non-uniform distribution of numbers.
So, you mean that if I roll a die six times, I'll always get a sequence of 1 2 3 4 5 6? You clearly need to learn some Statistics as well. No matter the probability, you have to come up with a result.
It points to a higher intelligence. But of course, that can't be possible because it means that you might actually have to adopt a little humility and acknowledge that there is a power higher than yourself.
Actually, it just points out that humans are good at pattern matching, even when there really is no pattern. There is no compelling evidence for any deity, but then again, the burden of proof is on you.
So much easier to just not believe it, huh? Gets rid of a lot of those ugly responsibilities and moral obligations.
So much easier to just not think, huh? Gets rid of all those nagging contradictions and doubts about your medieval beliefs.
Evil Overlord X Coming to a third world country near you
Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are not based on texts written and maintained over thousands of years, with more existing manuscripts than the Iliad.
But there is the same amount of evidence for them as there is for your 'god'. Just because lots of people believe something, does not make it true. You might want to check out The Logic FAQ.
Evil Overlord X Coming to a third world country near you
Mmmm...no. Anime was most definitely meant to be on DVD. The format is far superior in terms of picture quality, sound, multiple tracks, etc., etc., etc..
I'm actually surprised that LDs weren't stocked in stores... they're large enough that they would be hard to stick inside a coat and walk off with. I suppose that their asking $50 a disc probably is what killed them though.
Well, LDs were marketed towards videophiles with lots of money. DVDs have the benefit of appealing both to the videophile and the average consumer - high quality, letterbox, extras, along with being inexpensive.
Evil Overlord X Coming to a third world country near you
Re:What bookstore are you from?
on
Star In A Jar
·
· Score: 1
Of course, after two or more milennia, after everybody who saw or wrote about the supposed event is dead, it's fairly easy to arbitrarily believe or disbelieve anything.
Oh, very nice. Unfortunately for your argument, reputable scholars are not being 'arbitrary' when they are sceptical of what is written in the Torah/Old Testament. While I grant you that some of the events that are mentioned are essentially correct, many are clearly mythological.
The other problem is that eyewitness testimony is very unreliable, which has been known for some time in the legal profession (IANAL).
Evil Overlord X
Coming to a third world country near you
Re:What bookstore are you from?
on
Star In A Jar
·
· Score: 1
BTW, I hope you are not insulting roughly 40% of the world population by implying that the Torah (a.k.a. Old Testament), attested to by over three Hundred original copies and the writings of Babylonian, Persian, and Greek historians and record keepers, is 100% fiction
Well, let's see...if you take away the mythology, political propoganda, and various nuttiness, there really isn't much left that is historically accurate. Just because it names places that actually exist does not make it historically accurate.
You'll also find that just because original copies and writings agree with each other, that does not show that they are historically accurate.
Evil Overlord X
Coming to a third world country near you
Re:Anti-progress vs. anti-culture
on
Star In A Jar
·
· Score: 2
The fundamental idea that the behavior of everything in the Universe is determined and dictated by laws and principles falls directly from the philosophical assumption of Western religion that a purposeful, powerful, organized diety ordained such principles to govern the realm of nature.
Apparently you failed your history of science, because these ideas actually came from the Greeks, who did not believe in a single law-giving deity.
As for your examples, none of them were closed-minded fundamentalists. And your inclusion of Albert Einstein is disingenuous at best. He did not believe in a personal god, and stated that several times.
I would say that this latest attempt to blend science and religion is nothing more than uninformed philosophical sophistry.
Evil Overlord X
Coming to a third world country near you
Re:Curiosity killed the cat
on
Star In A Jar
·
· Score: 2
But there's a big difference between tinkering with transistors and unleashing natural forces that Man was never intended to experiment with. One thing I can guarantee you is this: Nobody ever unravelled the basic fabric of spacetime by studying Scripture.
Ahh yes. I just love anti-science fundie types. Fear, hubris, and a call for 'scripture'. Yes, instead of finding out how the *real* world works, let's just sit around and read bad middle-eastern fiction.
Evil Overlord X
Coming to a third world country near you
Re:It was to disguise the celebration in early tim
on
Children Turn On Santa
·
· Score: 1
Not even close. The decision to have Xmas be on December 25th was a purely political decision on the part of Constantine, the first christian emperor of Rome. He chose to have December 25th be xmas because a competing belief system, Mithraism, had its god's birthday as December 25th. Mithra was also said to have died and been reborn to save mankind, along with a lot of other thing that people attribute to Christ. Many Roman senators were followers of Mithra, so this was a way of taking power away from them.
Evil Overlord X. Coming to a third world country near you!
What a perfect example of the failure of science teaching today! Science and religion are in no way related. Science is a fact-based search for answers about how the world works. Through trial and error, and especially the *falsifiability* of hypotheses, science determines what we know about the world. Religion, on the other hand, is based on faith and dogma. It seeks to explain how things are by preconceived beliefs about why the world is the way it is. The two could not be more separate. Maybe this misunderstanding is the reason why we have all of this creationist nonsense going on today. Most of the other countries in the world think we are a joke for allowing creationism in our public schools.
Evil Overlord X. Coming to a third world country near you!
Evolution is centred around death , and organisms killing each other to allow their own genes to survive. It's like saying "I think war to control the population" is good. Evolution is not a beautiful thing to be involved in
Hmmm...Sounds like you don't really understand evolution either. Killing is only one way for organisms to compete. Not to mention the fact that sex has a rather large part in it as well.
I think Darwin said it best:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.
Evil Overlord X. Coming to a third world country near you!
Slashdot Mirror
Dang...I guess that means I won't be able to use my death ray/laser pointer to illuminate any more planes :(.
Let me be the first to welcome our new ethical robot overlords.
Sorry...had to do it.
and don't you think they should remove the line "of all time"? Really.
Absolutely. The technology hasn't been out for the general public for even 10 years, and they're talking about the best disks of all time? They've got to get real. When someone comes up with a way to get a DVD to transport hot chicks bodily into my living room, then I'll consider it the best DVD of all time.
He just hadn't had his morning beating yet.
What the heck is he using IIS for? I would've thought it would be Apache...
1) Whatever
2) There are many types of kneejerk reactions. Your response is one of them.
3A) Ok.
3B) It's called sarcasm.
4) Well, I'm worried now.
Ah yes, the usual knee-jerk anti-GL ravings as soon as anything Star Wars-related shows up on this board. If you don't like what he's doing, by all means don't go and see the film. It's unlikely that that all three slashdotters who actually boycott Episode III will have any effect on either GL's bottom line, or the number of people who actually go and see the film. Personally, I'm looking forward to seeing it.
I don't think it has anything to do with church/state separation, except so far as it has to do with teaching religion (i.e. creationism) in school. When you get polls that state that 50% or more of the population believes that the earth is less than 10,000 years old, you have a more fundamental issue than church/state. It's the same way with the large percentage of people that don't know that the earth revolves around the sun.
I think you've got a fundamental (no pun intended) misunderstanding of the issue here. No scientist is out there asking you to blindly believe him or her. All of the evidence that they are working from is available in any college or university library. Creationists, on the other hand, have no evidence for their position. I would have trouble believing any scientist is willing to accept 'mistruths', as you put it.
This is the typical 'reasoning' that creationists use to justify their attacks on evolution. The problems comes in places like Delaware, where people actually believe this line of reasoning. It comes from a terrible lack of real science education in this country. You don't see this sort of nonsense in Europe or the more develped countries in Asia, where they have better education systems.
There's also a theory that those larger dinosaurs spent the bulk (badum-TING) of their time in swamps and other shallow waters
/least/ black out.
This was disproved quite some time ago. The fact is that the mass of the water that would be displaced by an animal as large as a sauropod would prevent it from breathing.
Along these lines, you know a giraffe has valves in its neck to prevent blood flowing to its brain too fast? All evidence suggests that the brontosaurus and other similiar behemoths lacked these valves - so if they lifted their heads too fast, they'd at the
Ref, please. AFAIK, there has not been one single recorded instance of a sauropod being discovered with fossilized arteries and veins present to make a claim either way.
But the fact is, that land animals larger than elephants have, in fact, existed. Mass does indeed go up as a cube of length, but land animals (dinosaurs included) aren't just cubes of flesh and bone. If you take the large amount of non-solid space in the lungs and gastro-intestinal system, you do reduce the density, and therefore the mass by an extent.
There is quite a bit of research going on in this area that relates to dinosaurs. I don't have any specific refs, but if you check out the recent literature, you should be able to find a number of current articles.
Let me guess. You're 25 years old and didn't see the original "Star Wars" when it came out in the theaters. This absolutely was considered to be a stunning piece of filmmaking...when it first came out in 1978. At the time, there had been nothing else like it.
No, I'm in my 30's, and saw it when it originally came out. I loved it then, and still love it. That being said, none of the Star Wars films are on the same level, as say, Kurosawa's works (which Lucas borrowed from), or The Godfather (1 and 2).
The question "Can Episode III be saved?" begs the question of whether it needs to be saved in the first place. People can be amazingly blind to the fact that the first three movies were not stunning pieces of filmmaking in the first place, and that Lucas really hasn't changed the formula for the prequels. Are there things that could have been done better in the prequels? Certainly, but the same could be said for the original trilogy, too. I've seen all five movies multiple times in theaters, and not once have I felt like I wasted my money. I also never felt like I saw a masterpiece, just a series of enjoyable movies.
Just your friendly, neighborhood Dark Lord of the Sith
Do not underestimate the power of the dark, uh, energy?
As to your supposed lack of evidence, there's plenty. For example, note that the Universe exhibits intelligent design. Explain how you can get complex life and thought from time + chance. The law of entropy states otherwise. If the law of entropy holds true, order cannot come from disorder. And therefore, everything is random. Including your thoughts. Which completely invalidates any and all argument you may make, because they are naught but random noise. Before you go citing a logic FAQ, consider that a prerequisite to logic is the ability to reason
Ummm...clearly, you need to buy a clue. First of all, there is no evidence that the universe displays 'Intelligent Design'. I would love a mainstream reference from a refereed journal backing up your assertion.
Second of all, there is no 'Law of Entropy'. There are the Laws of Thermodynamics, especially the second law, but it only applies in a Closed System.
Unfortunately, your conclusion illustrates how you clearly do not understand what you are talking about.
Explain how random process managed to create life thousands, if not millions of times over. The scientific fact is that mutations are simply almost never beneficial. The harmful mutations would have eliminated the species before the helpful ones took over. Yes, I know about the moths. Adapting a characteristic is hardly the same as inter-species evolution. Last time I checked, they were still moths.
Again, your ignorance is amazing. The scientific fact is that most mutations are neutral, and not harmful. You've been watching too many 50's scifi movies.
Explain how scientests have never been able to create life in a laboratory, even with our intricate knowledge of biological systems.
Just because we can't do it now does not mean we can't do it ever. In any case, it's irrelevant.
Explain why the earth isn't stuffed full of trans-species fossils. If you've got millions of years of animals evolving, unless you have animals with the lifespan of several hundred millinnea, they're going to be dying and leaving traces. Given that amount of time, such fossils should be everywhere. But they're not.
Actually they are. Every species is an intermediate form, unless the species goes extinct before another species evolves from it. There is also the fact, which you completely overlook in your ignorance, that there are many factors that make it difficult for an organsim, especially on land, to become fossilized. You might want to read up on Taphonomy, which deals with this topic.
Explain sexual reproduction. It's irreducibly complex and logically unnecessary. Why do we have it then? Just for pr0n?
Unfortunately, there is no evidence that any function, including reproduction, is irreducibly complex.
Explain humanity. We think, we reason, we talk, we invent. No other animal exhibits these characteristics. Mentally, we're the highest life form on the face of the planet. Why not physically then? Does evolution decide to enhance one characteristic and not another?
How do you know no other animals think? Other animals clearly communicate, and some animal invent. We merely do it better. What does highest life form mean? Best? Strongest? You need to explain your terms. Evolution does not 'enhance' characteristics. Characters that improve an organism's chances of reproducing, and surviving to reproduce, are the ones that will be selected for.
Remember, it's random. Go roll a die 400 times and tell me with a straight face that you're going to get a certain non-uniform distribution of numbers.
So, you mean that if I roll a die six times, I'll always get a sequence of 1 2 3 4 5 6? You clearly need to learn some Statistics as well. No matter the probability, you have to come up with a result.
It points to a higher intelligence. But of course, that can't be possible because it means that you might actually have to adopt a little humility and acknowledge that there is a power higher than yourself.
Actually, it just points out that humans are good at pattern matching, even when there really is no pattern. There is no compelling evidence for any deity, but then again, the burden of proof is on you.
So much easier to just not believe it, huh? Gets rid of a lot of those ugly responsibilities and moral obligations.
So much easier to just not think, huh? Gets rid of all those nagging contradictions and doubts about your medieval beliefs.
Evil Overlord X
Coming to a third world country near you
Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are not based on texts written and maintained over thousands of years, with more existing manuscripts than the Iliad.
But there is the same amount of evidence for them as there is for your 'god'. Just because lots of people believe something, does not make it true. You might want to check out The Logic FAQ.
Evil Overlord X
Coming to a third world country near you
Anime was MEANT to be on Laserdisc!
Mmmm...no. Anime was most definitely meant to be on DVD. The format is far superior in terms of picture quality, sound, multiple tracks, etc., etc., etc..
I'm actually surprised that LDs weren't stocked in stores... they're large enough that they would be hard to stick inside a coat and walk off with. I suppose that their asking $50 a disc probably is what killed them though.
Well, LDs were marketed towards videophiles with lots of money. DVDs have the benefit of appealing both to the videophile and the average consumer - high quality, letterbox, extras, along with being inexpensive.
Evil Overlord X
Coming to a third world country near you
Of course, after two or more milennia, after everybody who saw or wrote about the supposed event is dead, it's fairly easy to arbitrarily believe or disbelieve anything.
Oh, very nice. Unfortunately for your argument, reputable scholars are not being 'arbitrary' when they are sceptical of what is written in the Torah/Old Testament. While I grant you that some of the events that are mentioned are essentially correct, many are clearly mythological.
The other problem is that eyewitness testimony is very unreliable, which has been known for some time in the legal profession (IANAL).
Evil Overlord X
Coming to a third world country near you
BTW, I hope you are not insulting roughly 40% of the world population by implying that the Torah (a.k.a. Old Testament), attested to by over three Hundred original copies and the writings of Babylonian, Persian, and Greek historians and record keepers, is 100% fiction
Well, let's see...if you take away the mythology, political propoganda, and various nuttiness, there really isn't much left that is historically accurate. Just because it names places that actually exist does not make it historically accurate.
You'll also find that just because original copies and writings agree with each other, that does not show that they are historically accurate.
Evil Overlord X
Coming to a third world country near you
The fundamental idea that the behavior of everything in the Universe is determined and dictated by laws and principles falls directly from the philosophical assumption of Western religion that a purposeful, powerful, organized diety ordained such principles to govern the realm of nature.
Apparently you failed your history of science, because these ideas actually came from the Greeks, who did not believe in a single law-giving deity.
As for your examples, none of them were closed-minded fundamentalists. And your inclusion of Albert Einstein is disingenuous at best. He did not believe in a personal god, and stated that several times.
I would say that this latest attempt to blend science and religion is nothing more than uninformed philosophical sophistry.
Evil Overlord X
Coming to a third world country near you
But there's a big difference between tinkering with transistors and unleashing natural forces that Man was never intended to experiment with. One thing I can guarantee you is this: Nobody ever unravelled the basic fabric of spacetime by studying Scripture.
Ahh yes. I just love anti-science fundie types. Fear, hubris, and a call for 'scripture'. Yes, instead of finding out how the *real* world works, let's just sit around and read bad middle-eastern fiction.
Evil Overlord X
Coming to a third world country near you
Not even close. The decision to have Xmas be on December 25th was a purely political decision on the part of Constantine, the first christian emperor of Rome. He chose to have December 25th be xmas because a competing belief system, Mithraism, had its god's birthday as December 25th. Mithra was also said to have died and been reborn to save mankind, along with a lot of other thing that people attribute to Christ. Many Roman senators were followers of Mithra, so this was a way of taking power away from them.
Evil Overlord X.
Coming to a third world country near you!
What a perfect example of the failure of science teaching today! Science and religion are in no way related. Science is a fact-based search for answers about how the world works. Through trial and error, and especially the *falsifiability* of hypotheses, science determines what we know about the world. Religion, on the other hand, is based on faith and dogma. It seeks to explain how things are by preconceived beliefs about why the world is the way it is. The two could not be more separate. Maybe this misunderstanding is the reason why we have all of this creationist nonsense going on today. Most of the other countries in the world think we are a joke for allowing creationism in our public schools.
Evil Overlord X.
Coming to a third world country near you!
Evolution is centred around death , and organisms killing each other to allow their own genes to survive. It's like saying "I think war to control the population" is good. Evolution is not a beautiful thing to be involved in
Hmmm...Sounds like you don't really understand evolution either. Killing is only one way for organisms to compete. Not to mention the fact that sex has a rather large part in it as well.
I think Darwin said it best:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.
Evil Overlord X.
Coming to a third world country near you!