Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment "Christian apologist to masquerade as a scientist" (Score 1) 556

Isn't Krauss being ridiculous here?

1. The OP writer never claimed to be a scientist.
2. Why criticise a person with an agenda? Why is an 'agenda' something bad? Doesn't the article go against Krauss' own agenda anyway?
2. You don't need to be a "scientist" to have the right to analyze scientific knowledge. Journalists do it all the time.

Go cry in a corner, Krauss.

Comment Re:Packet radio (Score 1) 60

In principle it does. I checked this publication with a bit of awe because I'm currently developing a device system which can be pretty much described with this paper. You can use packet radio for sure, or other technology in order to send the signals. There are different things to take into account: how many of these will there be? Will they be deployed close to each other? Are you expecting 2 or 3 receivers to analyze 1000 signals of the same kind simultaneously? What kind of information will be send over the radio signal? In our case, we also came up with the p2p mesh network ( based on our idea of limited options for communications and the creation of a visualization platform to upload information to the cloud.

Comment Yeah, so? (Score 1) 725

Wasn't Richard Lewontin who said:

"Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door."

Now, call it what you want, but the quid of the matter here is that the denial of statements that may contradict our worldview is based on faith in the set of facts that we already believe in. Theists do it, non theists do it.

Slashdot Top Deals

The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the pavement is precisely 1 bananosecond.