Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Back for a limited time - Get 15% off sitewide on Slashdot Deals with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Re:If it's really a policy (Score 1) 301

Putting jediism on the census was for the same reasons as pastafarianism - neither were ever about mocking Dawkins, where would you get a dumb idea like that?

You are ascribing ideas to me that I've never expressed.


Believe that if you want. Put it in all caps if it helps reinforce the belief in your wavering mind. But if true, then your beliefs are also wrong - by definition.

Comment Re:If it's really a policy (Score 1) 301

Ah. So it comes down some random decision that Jediism is "not offensive" and the Christianity is "offensive". There goes the atheist meme that those 2 beliefs should be treated the same I guess.

If the church has to force anything, then they are doing it wrong.

I don't think the church is trying to force anything, rather expressing puzzlement at this inconsistency - even Richard Dawkins recognises that in a healthy society, it is not the job of businesses to shield people from information they might confronting/offensive, regardless of regulation or law.

Comment Re:If it's really a policy (Score 2) 301

I don't think anyone has ever been thinking of Richard Dawkins when they've put Jedi down as their religion. I'm sure that they're doing it as a middle finger to the Church.

If so, it's poorly aimed. I think the Church would be aware of the fact that there are people who hold to a different set of beliefs the contradict with theirs. Lot's of Christians die every week because of the simple fact that there are people who disagree with them.

From their perspective Jedism is just another crazy, discredited belief. Just like you, and the supposed Jedi's, Christians think that all such beliefs are wrong - expect their own. Why is Jedism an insult to Christianity but not yours? Because yours are right?

Comment Re:Before a human walks on Mars... (Score 1) 285

I dunno that I can speak to the level of dignity we posses as a whole, humans aren't that predictable. I do know for myself that I would rather die than live like an animal cowering underground. I suspect that this is what most people want - to die with a bit of dignity and not just out live everything and everyone we value just for the sake of a few more years eked out in the darkness and cold. I suspect that many people feel the same.

Why would the Universe have any desire for our cancerous ilk to spread beyond the particular rock we're on now?

I don't think the universe cares - it isn't conscious. Besides that fact Mars isn't "spreading out" in any sense of the word. On a galactic scale the distance between Earth and Mars is meaningless.

Comment Re:Yeah, I know, I'm probably a denier... (Score 1) 735

Did you mistake a discussion about greenhouse gases for a discussion about greenhouses? Did you think that an article entitled Global Temperature Set To Reach 1 Degree C Over Pre-Industrial Levels was actually a discussion page for the local horticultural society?

That moment of hilarity when a dimwit finally realizes he was barking up the wrong tree.

So you did mistake a discussion about greenhouse gases for a discussion about greenhouses.

Caught you.

You're not going to get any answers ...

Don't lie.

And don't kid yourself - you don't get to set terms. You've already answered 3 of my 4 questions, leaving only this one:

Do you think "thermodynamic" means the same as "exothermic"?

Comment Re:Before a human walks on Mars... (Score 1) 285

The earth is now middle aged. The actual instances of asteroid strikes (on a large scale) have diminished over time, and will continue to do so. That is because the asteroids themselves have settled into more stable orbits due to orbital interactions of the big guys like Jupiter and Saturn sweeping up the rogues and in effect, protecting the inner planets.

This doesn't rule out the possibility of a bad asteroid strike, but it remains unlikely (in the correct, statistical sense).

Mars will never serve as a lifeboat. For practical reasons and other reasons. But the main reason is that Mars is incompatible with long term survival, so much so that the events you are trying to mitigate against are more survivable than Mars on a good day.

To restore a sense of reality, I think Walt Disney should have a Hardluckland. -- Jack Paar