Wow, I thought this level of hatefulness on Slashdot was reserved only for Creationists, Right-Wingers, and "Global Warming Rejectionists". You've proven me wrong, Slashdot.
I think what you're trying to say, Mr. Romney, is "corporations are people."
all your presidents are belong to us
There was an article a while back that talked about how groups of people track down someone... http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/03/05/0253253/Chinas-Human-Flesh-Search-Engine?from=rss
I wonder how long till Intel starts marketing Petri dishes!
http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/11/17/tsa-defends-new-screening-procedures/ The TSA administrator declined to provide some details about the nature of the pat-downs, citing security concerns. But he tried to allay fears stoked by the media rumor-mill. Children under 12 are exempted from the pat-down process, he said. (A viral tale about a three-year old bursting into tears after being prodded by an officer is, in fact, from two-year-old footage of a three-year old crying after her teddy bear was taken from her at a security checkpoint. And that viral snapshot of the nun-frisking--which the Drudge Report headlined, in typically restrained fashion, "THE TERRORISTS HAVE WON"--is actually at least three years old.) Read more: http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/11/17/tsa-defends-new-screening-procedures/#ixzz15a9QfLOw
Still poor coverage out by me...
Merpy writes "China has broken the record for computing speed, creating a supercomputer that calculates at 2.57 petaflops. Now the U.S. is working on two 20 petaflop supercomputers. Is a digital cold war brewing? If so, it’s going to produce a lot of heat. China’s record-breaking 2.57 petaflop supercomputer, Tianhe-1A, officially broke the world record for computing speed Friday, and already the United States is working on something much larger. Two 20 petaflop supercomputers are in development in the States, reports Computerworld."
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
The madman's explanation of a thing is always complete, and often in a purely rational sense satisfactory. Or, to speak more strictly, the insane explanation, if not conclusive, is at least unanswerable; this may be observed specially in the two or three commonest kinds of madness. If a man says (for instance) that men have a conspiracy against him, you cannot dispute it except by saying that all the men deny that they are conspirators; which is exactly what conspirators would do. His explanation covers the facts as much as yours. Or if a man says that he is the rightful King of England, it is no complete answer to say that the existing authorities call him mad; for if he were King of England that might be the wisest thing for the existing authorities to do. Or if a man says that he is Jesus Christ,it is no answer to tell him that the world denies his divinity; for the world denied Christ's. -G.K. Chesterton
I feel that Christianity provides a better framework for research than does big bang theory, if only from the standpoint that Christianity posits a Creator and thereby a structure to be understood. Big Bang relies on randomness (time+chance) to such a degree, it seems as though having fixed "laws" of physics would be difficult to come by.
I think these guys would disagree: Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543) Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627) Johannes Kepler (1571-1630) Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) Rene Descartes (1596-1650) Isaac Newton (1642-1727) Robert Boyle (1791-1867) Michael Faraday (1791-1867) Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907) Max Planck (1858-1947)
What I find particularly interesting is that people are often willing to concede a god, but then somehow think creating the universe quickly would be a problem....
Am I the only person who read that on October 26th, 2000 - the sun went down, and hasn't come up since? Not that the population is 2000?
Google doesn't destroy the books, they've got a patent on "unbending" the pages. http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-10232931-76.html