You never wrote a process scheduler in an Operating Systems class? Never wrote some sort of calender? You really don't understand how computer programs could keep track of the passage of time, estimate the time tasks will take and track those tasks in time?
Actually I've written multithreaded real-time machine controls using watchdog timers. But you know what? Those controls don't have the same continuous experience of time that humans have, with an awareness of a past and anticipation of the future, all happening in the present. As a programmer of industrial machines I am well aware of what computer controlled closed loop systems are capable and what they are not capable of. And they are far, far from what humans can do, not just in a quantitative sense but in a qualitative sense.
Maybe after working in a mine, a foundry, a power plant, a farm, a factory, and a retail store you could make such a statement but until then doing the laundry and vacuuming will always just be a waste of time. Bring on the robots and I'll do my best thinking with an activity of my choosing.
Growing up I harvested tobacco for 3 summers starting at aged 13. I've worked in a factory feeding an arbor saw painting machine. I've worked 3 years unloading trucks and stocking shelves in department stores. After harvesting the tobacco plants for the first couple hours it kinda surprised me that we had to keep on going for six more hours. And then come back the next day and do it again. It was a major motivator to get an education.
Blame the following issues on Obama's amateur hour policies:
1. Isis - directly resulted from Obama's premature pullout in Iraq and subsequent flip-flop on intervening in Syria 2. Benghazi 3. Gridlock - if he hadn't rammed through his healthcare bill without compromising with Republicans, they'd be much better at doing the political horse-trading it takes to work across party lines to get things done. By pushing it without any buy-in from the other party - something that has never been done for a law on this scale before - he inaugurated a new era of do-nothing politics. The Republicans have held a grudge ever since. Hopefully when Harry Reid is out of the Senate majority post next week, we'll finally get some bills to the White House, where they're sure to be vetoed. He's been protecting Obama for years, preventing him from taking a formal stance on so many bipartisan initiatives by preventing bills from coming to the senate floor for a vote. O's going to pay a political price for each veto, I'm sure. 4. Mexican drug cartels invading Texas and Arizona 5. Russia's return to cold war stance, thousands dead in Ukraine 6. China's emergence as a belligerent military power in the pacific region 7. Botched diplomacy with China, Brazil, India, Russia, Europe, Egypt, Israel, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the list goes on and on...
1. Iraq is a sovereign nation that requested that our troops leave. Do we want an Empire where we keep troops in nations where they are not wanted?
2. The way Republicans talk about Benghazi you'd think Obama was there launching RPGs into the compound himself.
3. If Obama had demanded a single payer plan rather than a conservative health care plan that included private insurance, spending months trying to compromise with the Republicans, you would be more believable in your statement.
4. How many counties, cities have they conquered?
5. A couple years ago Russia owned Ukraine. Their position in the world is much weaker now than when Obama came to office.
6. China is surrounded my American allies. Their army is mainly for containing their own population. Just look at Hong Kong.
7. Not specific enough for me to address.
IMHO, there are only two Genesis stories. One informs us of a Creator, the other starts with "In the Beginning there were particles
Just to be clear, you're saying that "there just happens to be a Being capable of creating universes" is more likely than "there just happens to be particles and laws of the universe that can eventually lead to intelligence". Well, at this point argument is really impossible.
For example, consider ring species: species A & B can breed and species B & C can breed, but species A & C cannot.
Good point. What if Neanderthals could create viable offspring with Homo Erectus but modern humans couldn't?
Life is messy.
Someday they'll figure out "Neanderthal" is a completely artificial distinction, like "White Aryan", and the scientific consensus will be that Neanderthals R Us.
If by "artificial distinction" you mean the classification of lifeforms into different groups based on physical and genetic characteristics, the boundaries of those classifications made by scientists, then you have a valid point. A species is generally understood as a population that can interbreed and produce viable offspring. Homo sapiens and homo neanderthalis obviously can do so, so they should be the same species. However, there is a valid argument for them being classified a subspecies, due to measurable physical and genetic differences.
May Euell Gibbons eat your only copy of the manual!