Posts by GrimJack

Oh don't tell me these types of threads are still going on. *sigh* I guess it never ends.

Btw: Creationism.

Of course these types of questions are going on. They go on in the American population in general so Americans will post on this topic.

Btw: Creationism what?

Have you looked around in advanced mode and looked through the settings and tools to see if it has what you want - then check out spywareblaster which has about 11,ooo items in its protection db. -- is this what you might be looking for?

CARNIVORE has been vacuuming the internets since Homeland Security; some major providers have been inserting BitTorrent start and stop codes into the datastream to try and control bandwidth but that is being litigated in the DC Circuit which has a reputation as being a pro-industry anti-regulatory bunch of judicial activists who don't give a squat about actual case law. The RIAA and MPAA regard the internet as the worst mistake they ever let happen while the FBI want a built in backdoor to it.

Something times something else mathematically always depends on what the word "times" means and the units involved. Multiplying money is problematic because:

$1 = 100 cents
$2 = 200 cents

So if $1 x $2 = $2 and 100 cents x 200 cents = 20,000 cents = $200, we have a problem since $2 does not equal $200. So I guess you'd have to have some unit called "dollar squared" and "cent squared", which probably don't make sense.

The reason that that's not a probem with 1 ft x 1 ft compared to 12 in. x 12 in., is that we have concepts of what a square foot is and what a square inch is. We have no concept of a square dollar or a square cent, so I'd say that multiplication of money is meaningless and undefined until you have concepts of "dollar squared" and "cent squared". Hence you can't multiply one dollar times two dollars.

You can't multiply $1 by $2 any more than you can multiply 1 apple by 2 apples. Inches and feet are linear measures, apples and dollars are discrete, countable units.

If you remove all that wind energy with wind turbines, would there be no wind?

It is not really possible to remove all the wind energy for a number of reasons including turbulence, the noise from wind farms would drive the world crazy (symptoms include headaches, dizziness, nausea, exhaustion, anxiety, anger and irritability), the world's migrating bird population would be decimated long before we reached 10%, the property value crash would doom any funding, and don't forget how high into the atmosphere the different wind patterns are.

I have a twitter account and I only use it occasionally. Once the political season is over, I may get to it more often.

I find it interesting that I got more twitter followers after I stopped twitting.

Any of Dole's anti-Hagan adds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lf2vDk-4Ag
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5AsdYWtKLY&feature=related

What's all the fuss about god or no god! Evolution or creationism.
We are all chemical reactions! I must admit it is a complex chemical reaction.
What can a chemical reaction say about evolution?
We are by the fact that we are.
We need oxigen and other chemicals!
Stop delivering them so will stop our chemical reaction and we say we die!
Anyone out there ever survived 20 minutes under water? For example.
You can influence your chemical reaction by taking in a simple chemical compound : C2H5OH. Wich proves(no theory! anyone can do this, preferably at home) that you are chemical.

Hunh? You going to add to the discussion or waste space?

You know, my comment was very serious, and not directed to any one in particular. I was almost tented to enter in a discussion with you about it.
For someone that puts so much emphasis in the proper copy and past definition of scientific terminology, it is amusing the choosing of wording when left to your own devises.

Where's the insult? Can you recognize an insult when you read it?
How about this? Your brain is as narrow as a mosquito ass. Nope, it is not an insult to you, the only one with the right to get offended is the mosquito.
Oh, why bother...

Do not be insulting.

Yes or no - do you want me to argue against evolution?

Will you argue for evolution?

My definition of "fact" came straight from an english-language dictionary. I suppose I can't stop you questioning veracity of a dictionary to support your argument.

I do not like dictionary definitions in a discussion of science - they lack the nuance and focus needed.

wiki has it's value, but I would seek independent verification before treating anything there as fact.

The definition of "hypothesis" that I gave is is found in various standard texts on the philosophy or treatises on the scientific method. It is pretty easy to dig out references: there are many such texts, some predating relatively recent religions such as Christianity.

I tend to 'Popperian' when I discuss science

The "educated guess" is one form of hypothesis.

Yes, but it would not be a scientific hypothesis.

I could, after all, hypothesise that all members here, other than myself, are chimpanzees. It is a hypothesis as it can be used as a premise in any argument, and can be tested on the basis of evidence. An alternative hypothesis is that most members here are not chimpanzees. It is also a hypothesis as it can be used as a premise in any argument, and can be tested on the basis of evidence. The "educated guess" simply suggests that the alternative hypothesis is more likely to be supportable by evidence.

Schick and Vaughn are more concerned with encouraging critical thought among people who prefer to think in other manners (ie hands-on). To that end, they use definitions designed …

Should this threads be milestones or millstones? I do not code for a living but I did in my youth, now I am unemployed <whimper> because my machine was discontinued in the mid-nineties cyber-crush (it was a VAX running VMS - the first true real-time interactive computer/OS). I had a couple different Amigas from 1987 to 1998 - given a choice between C+ and Modula-2, I chose Modula-2 and that was such a boring language I gave it up and stuck with programming in DCL on my various VAXes.

Heh,heh - Roombas of the world unite!

Does this grandfather ever think what happens to a 6 year old child's mind when the child is forced to watch an animal being killed, blood all over, then the killed animal is cut open and gutted (field dressed)?

This sounded really familiar so I looked around in the local newsrag and came up with this article of a great grandfather/grandchild hunting experience. Though I doubt the hiker's family thought much of it. Oh, and the grandfather left them on the trail - a f*ing hiking trail - to hunt. I get a little hot when this kind of sh*t happens, sorry!

What is your point?
There should be an option for those that do not accept the basic premise of the poll.

If you care about it.
If you are completely convinced and totally in the boat for it, I suppose you will not have any thing to say against, which will render you a peon of whatever opinions and changes those driving the boat make.

If not one has anything against evolution except some form of prejudice that goes against "religion beliefs" and every one that are against "creationism" uses the "mighty power of evidence" to disassemble religious faith, then this is nothing more that another "God vs no God" thread; regardless how it is phrased.

Do not be insulting.

Yes or no - do you want me to argue against evolution?

Will you argue for evolution?

Alright, let's set definitions on the side, for the sake of sanity.
In what way is evolution flawed?

Do you want me to argue against evolution?

There is no fossil record that even supports evolution. If this were actually the case scientists would have found fossil records showing several variations between man and ape. What the fossil record does show is animals and plants appearing abruptly, not evolving.

Hunh? There are fossil records of several variations of paths from the common 'progenitor'. The fossil record does not show animals and plants appearing abruptly. If you have sources for your statements, I would like to see them.

Before we get too deep into this discussion, I need to know if you believe in a New Earth or Old Earth - if you believe in a New Earth, then there is not much room for discussion. Do you believe that everything was created exactly as it is in 7 days within the last 10-100,000 years? If so, how do you explain the various forms of finding the age of items (fossils, rocks, etc) using radio-active half-life?

For those interested in the pure topic of Evolution for/against. What concepts can you find against evolution in the current form? (Please, leave outside the bigotries begotten by the masses that evolution can not fit inside creation)

What I mean is, what do you know that is in shaking ground when it comes to evolution?

For those that are quick to jump to the keyboard to eagerly proclaim the "facts" and the "evidences":
Let me remind you that it is a theory after all, which indicates that things haven't been proved, neither has produced any laws. (e.g. Relativity, Gravity). Reason enough for questioning and pondering.

I will continue to argue against the use of the word 'LAWS' in science - it is not the accepted standard and has not been since Relativity modified Newton's work and Quantum Theory shook the world of science. There has never been a 'law' of Relativity and wonder what you mean by 'law' of Gravity (your examples not mine). Let me remind you that you are using the word 'theory' in the vernacular not with the rigors of scientific thought.

This is why I am willing to wander off into the world of definitions - if we do not use the same language, we will have some difficulty communicating and will end up talking past each other (which is part of the fun and frustration of these discussions).

A fact is something established beyond all doubt, on the basis of evidence and reasoning, to exist or have happened. To establish something beyond doubt, there must be some awareness of doubt. Which means some cognitive process that can objectively and completely examine the evidence and reasoning.

You give too much weight to what a fact is - a scientific fact is an objective and verifiable observation. I may have underplayed, but you have overplayed it.

Not really. A hypothesis is a proposition assumed as a premise in an argument, and tested on the basis of evidence. A hypothesis may be proposed as a means of organising facts into patterns, but need not be.

It is not necessary that a hypothesis predict something not yet known. It is required to predict something that can be tested through evidence, and falsifiable if conduct of the test yields a result that is not predicted.

A hypothesis is not required to be reproducible. For example, a hypothesis can be tested statistically. The samples, from which statistics are derived, provide a body of evidence and provides evidence to accept or reject a hypothesis to some specified level of confidence. However, given the same samples, derived statistical quantities, and level of confidence then the same conclusion will always be drawn. But given a different set of samples (eg by doing the same measurement process at a different time) a different conclusion may be drawn.

If the level of confidence is required to be 100% (probability …

Facts: Things that just are; examples are bones, DNA, rDNA, RNA, black holes, neutron stars, mitochondria, basalt, marble, leaves, stuff found in rocks that are not rocks. The universe is filled with facts.

hypotheses - a method to tentatively organize facts into patterns that can be understood; and, this is one of the important parts, the hypothesis must predict something that is not known yet; another important part is that it must be reproducible; and it must be falsifiable.

Theory - Once a hypotheses has been tested by many different, qualified scientists; papers have been written, submitted to journals of some repute to be juried, nits are picked, edits made, and the paper is published.

There is no higher calling in science than theory; the idea of 'LAWS OF NATURE' is outdated, no longer used. When someone starts an argument with the phrase, 'Only a theory', this shows a pretty basic lack of understanding of what science is and what science does and how science works.

What Darwin did with his "On the Origin of Species" was to detail the plant and animal life on the Galapagos Islands. What he noticed was that the same birds on one island were adapted to conditions on that island; nearly identical birds on another island right next door had differences in beak shape, wing shape, and physiology that allowed them to survive in a slightly different environment. Without going into detail about the differences between the islands that induced …

I wants a Roomba, I needs a Roomba! (have you seen the hacks? One guy added bluetooth controls, then mounted an Airsoft Gun and Laser Sight - cats really, really fear this 'toy'.

Modern witch's tee

Gianna Responds ad

"if Barack Obama had his way, I wouldn't be here." - this is a lie. Does not matter what you think about abortion or abortion laws - this statement is a lie.

"the case of Gianna Jessen may raise awareness about the sanctity of life. It may make a strong case for a ban on late term abortions. The one thing it doesn't do is prove the importance of the Born Alive bill. Obama's position was that viable fetuses should be protected - his disagreement was over non-viable and borderline fetuses"

They did not pay attention when they caught 2 guys in Denver during the convention with the same idea - do you think they will take this one seriously?

Well, while you are searching - listen to a dance re-mix here

English, radio, enough already.

You know in all my years I have never learned how to fly a broom properly!

Heh - originally, witches were shown flying a broom with the 'head' down so that s/he could sweep tracks from the sky; later, around the 17th century, witches often rode with the head forward with a candle in it to light the way. Often, male witches flew pitchforks.

Almost all the recipes for the salve used to make the broom fly contained hallucinogenic ingredients and witches almost always flew naked - this makes such flights more reasonable.

Standards:
No ad hominem attacks
No insults

An argument is, to quote the Monty Python sketch, "a connected series of statements to establish a definite proposition."

Please try to avoid the major logical fallacies.
Definition - Theory:
In science a theory is a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise verified through empirical observation.
Definition - Evolution:
Evolution is usually defined simply as changes in trait or gene frequency in a population of organisms from one generation to the next. However, "evolution" is often used to include the following additional claims:
1. Differences in trait composition between isolated populations over many generations may result in the origin of new species.
2. All living organisms alive today have descended from a common ancestor (or ancestral gene pool).

Various famous people say:

Judge a man by his questions rather than by his answers.
--Voltaire (1694-1778)
A definition is no proof.
--William Pinkney, American diplomat (1764-1822)
A theory is more impressive the greater the simplicity of its premises, the more different the kinds of things it relates and the more extended its range of applicability.
--Albert Einstein, 1949

If anyone wants to add anything to the definitions or rules, now is as good a time as any - or jump right …

A warning to witches everywhere, don't drink and fly!

No wonder she crashed - she was on the broom backwards.

Stop hijacking threads and start your own!

We got permission - are you revoking our permission?

On the other hand - I have been meaning to start a thread on this topic so I think I will.

Share your knowledge; keep your TRUTH to yourself.

I haven't come across two women who are friends in the true sense of the term.

You live a very sheltered life or know women who are really different from the ones I know.

I have been thinking about this topic for awhile so I would not just post a left wing anti-gun rant. I grew up in Montana; I went out into the wilderness (about 2 miles out of town) with my dad at age 12 and shot rocks as my intro 101 to guns; then I took an NRA gun safety class. I do not think that every who wants to should be able to own a gun and I have no idea how to divide 'good' gun owners from 'bad'.

The first group game I remember playing was British and MauMaus - I had no clue how that was different from cowboys and indians until about 40 years later and I still don't know how kids in Livingston MT ages 8-11 in 1956 even knew that story. We did not have toy guns to play with - we used sticks, and they were at least as accurate. I don't think buying kids toy guns is a problem, I think buying kids exact replicas of real guns is a problem.

It is our turn to gloat:

Eureka, I have reached my number 666 post at glorious Daniweb!

It's exactly 666 now, but will of course increase as I post more!

Time for you to step over to the dark side now, ZZ

See, I told you that Bush/McCain have something up their sleves to win the election! Maybe Osama is secretly hiding out or plans to hide out in Syria.

Congratulations on your 666.

I notice that Joe has started sucking up to the Dems again - he have just realized he is not going to get a job in the McCain administration.

Life gave up immortality for sex.

Well, there is good news for the warhawks

Countries that are not with us will suffer.
Enemies of the US better be worried.

We have officially entered Syria with a helicopter and commandos - is the October Surprise we have been waiting for?

Polls show that the Palin/McCain ticket is closing the gab rapidly and Obama is only a few percent ahead now. This is largely due to voters discovering that Sarah Palin has a heart of gold and means what she says.

She protects the unborn.
She will bring back family values.
Make sure that every child has a father.
She will not take away our guns.
She is pro Christianity.
She supports the all important creation approach.
She will ban witchcraft.
She will not tax away your wealth.
Enemies of the US better be worried.
Countries that are not with us will suffer.
She will get and kill Osama.
She will make hockey the true American sport it is.

ZZ, I am sorry - I just can't take you seriously and I am not sure that you want to be taken seriously. You keep making these serious right-wing comments and lists but keep slipping in something that sort of hints at a sardonic smile; and you are almost to your 666 post, way to go!

Fun test - liked it, had a brain fart and could only come up with 2 synonyms for each ? ah, well. Fun

Look, rape is rape; a 37 year old man having sex with an underage girl - a 37 year old woman having sex with an underage boy. It is violation.

Please - one of the rules of this discussion/argument is no ad hominem attacks, the other was no name calling. Please edit your content to match the rules of the game.

Dave, are you as bored with this as I am?

For others who cannot escape blind partisanship but would otherwise be decent people, allow me to quote the salient part:

No the salient quote would be this:

With word that Democratic officials are already attempting to disqualify votes cast by military personnel deployed overseas, I thought this e-mail I received today from one of my dearest friends might inspire some of you to help redress this wrong

This is what torqued me off - it is the Republicans who are trying to disqualify voters which is where my posts were pointed.

Nothing to see there. Move along.

You're right nothing to see here.

Talking Points Memo (or TPM) is a liberal web-based political journalism organization created and run by Josh Marshall.

and your point is?

If ya tell me it's slanted right, duh. If I believe that much of the "mainstream" is actually tilted left, why would I go there? Ain't that like looking for a virgin in a whorehouse?
]

No, actually it is not like looking for a virgin in a whorehouse.

Just to show you it is not all slanted left.

But seriously folks, lets talk about connections to fraudsters

:D :D

Major networks carry Obama's water for him and lob softballs ...

Please my sides are aching.

Nah, that is what Biden is for

Let's start with the word 'theory' - explain to me what you mean when you say 'just a theory', that seems pretty dismissive so I am not sure how to argue with that sentiment. The reason I ask is because relativity is just a theory, gravity is just a theory.

I do not think you can offer as much proof for Christianity as I can for evolution but that is not the argument - the argument is about evolution, whether it is a science or belief.