Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Oh God queue the fucking wingnuts (Score 1) 242

But I'm sure you knew that and aren't just spouting off some type of ignorant talking point (especially with the jab at original intent) picked up by some talking head with the goal of discrediting the founding fathers and the Constitution in the name of positivism, right?

No I was doing no such thing. I was just making fun of the idiotic notion that the intent of a hand-picked selection of the Founding Fathers (because there was no unanimous agreement between all of them on any one subject) is somehow the final statement on any constitutional subject. If this were true then blacks would have to be counted as 3/5ths of a person because to do otherwise goes against original intent!! zOMG!!!!!!11ELEVENTYONE

Comment Re:LGPL-3? (Score 5, Informative) 199

Actually, being BSD licensed, you can release a fork under a new license I believe since BSD is a permissive license.

The reverse, however, would not be true.

What you believe is wrong. The BSD doesn't let you change the license terms of the source code at your will. You must have permission from the copyright holder(s) to do so.

Comment Re:stifling progress (Score 1) 242

Gravity lensing and estimates of stellar and galactic age are both based on the idea that redshift is an inherent quality of distance. An alternate interpretation exists, that redshift is a quality of age.

That's fine and all but where is the evidence?

ttp://www.electric-cosmos.org/arp.htm This essay includes an example of a high redshift object that is physically connected to a low redshift object. This is totally impossible within the mainstream interpretation.

Why is it impossible? Specifics please.

Comment Re:stifling progress (Score 2, Informative) 242

Consider how little funding the Plasma Cosmologists have gotten, in comparison to the huge amount of money that has gone to astrophysicists who tell us that the universe is almost entirely invisible and virtually undetectable.

You mean except for the fact that dark matter was observed 8 years ago? Oh yeah and here too. Yeah other than these examples and others that can be shown that it's invisible and undetectable. *yawn*

This is like the medieval Catholic church funding mathematicians to produce increasingly elegant papers on epicycles while ignoring the research of heliocentrists. I, for one, would like to see the government out of science and Natural Philosophy returned to the realm of dilettantes and other assorted rabble who actually base their theories on observed data instead of mathematical conjecture.

Except for those people you berate against have their mathematical "conjecture" backed up by observed data.

Slashdot Top Deals

Software production is assumed to be a line function, but it is run like a staff function. -- Paul Licker

Working...