Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Renewable versus fossil - where is nuclear? (Score 1) 281 281

The USA built a working molten-salt reactor, which Nixon ordered abandoned because it wasn't useful for plutonium production.

the temperatures, pressures and the levels of radiation that occur in those designs.

It sounds like you're not at all familiar with the design that Sorensen is talking about. It operates at one atmosphere.


Comment: Re:Reconciling faith with science (Score 1) 305 305

Yes and no. Separation of sea and sky would be the final step if you interpret land forming to mean hardening. However, after the seas formed, there was a second period of dry land forming, in which it emerged from underneath the oceans. So depending on which dry land formation you're talking about, the order of those two could be correct.

The timing of the creation of day and night is, indeed, dubious, but... when did the moon actually collide with Earth and form what we know as the moon today, in terms of geological time?

Comment: Re:Moral Panic (Score 4, Insightful) 490 490

What happened to the feminist movement is typical for successful reform movements. Once they achieved their reasonable goals (equality before the law), the reasonable people in the movement went on to pursue other goals, leaving the dregs behind. That's why feminism today is lousy with witch-hunting and guilt-peddling.

Two other examples are the civil rights movement (it used to be MLK calling for an end to Jim Crow, today it's Jesse Jackson shaking down large corporations for not meeting racial hiring quotas), and the labor movement (used to be concerned with workplace safety and humane working conditions, now it's just a way for looters to take money from workers to buy hookers and blow for politicians and mobsters.)


Comment: Re:Reconciling faith with science (Score 1) 305 305

The reality is that most science is determined by revelation as well. Although it is possible to prove various scientific constants, equations, etc., most people never do that. Most people learn what they were taught and then grow from there. Thus, scientific understanding is very much built upon the shoulders of giants just as religious beliefs are.

And when a scientist discovers something by experimentation and observation, is it any less truth if that scientist believes that God chose that moment to reveal that truth through his or her experiment?

IMO, the only conflict between those two philosophies lies in the minds and hearts of those who reject religion. The fact that scientists are only slightly less religious (statistically) than the general population is, IMO, strong empirical evidence that treatises on such conflicts are grounded more in atheists' need for self-jusitification than in actual facts.

As of next Thursday, UNIX will be flushed in favor of TOPS-10. Please update your programs.